I use "white privilege" as it was taught to me by non whites. I draw correlations between "white privilege" and the actual negative effects/affects(personal injury) that systemic racism has had and continues to have upon non white individuals. We language users who employ "white privilege" in such a way are not saying that white people should feel guilty. We are most certainly not demonizing white people when discussing white privilege.
Discussions about white privilege can be focused upon uplifting people who are being oppressed. Discussion about white privilege do not require shaming bystanders who are not actually voluntarily participating in the oppression. Discussions of white privilege do not require trying to make the case that whites are somehow 'wrong' by virtue of benefitting from systemic racism. — creativesoul
What's 'wrong', if you insist upon talking like this, is not acknowledging that whites born in America are exempt from the liabilities of being non white in America — creativesoul
...On the one hand, we have the assertion that an important step in changing matters of discrimination, whether on the basis of race or gender or similar ideas, is to acknowledge that there is a privileged group that is immune(ish) to that discrimination (let's set aside the conversation of height or beauty discrimination, as these really aren't relevant to the discussion). — Pro Hominem
My problem with the first position is that I think it improperly places the focus on some perceived misconduct by a given group(all white people)... — Pro Hominem
...instead of placing the focus where it should be, on the targeted misconduct AGAINST a different group (people of color). In other words, the movement must and should be BLACK Lives Matter, not WHITE Lives Don't Matter As Much As You Think They Do, which is the subtext of this need to make white privilege a conspicuous part of this discussion.
The problem is NOT that white people have generally safe(r) neighborhoods, more access to education and higher paying jobs, and a general lack of suspicion directed at them as they go about their daily lives. The problem IS that people of color shouldn't have less of those things for the simple reason that they are people of color. Systemic racism doesn't spring from the general public's attitude that white people deserve to have advantages (taking out the case of white supremacists, who are just awful people), it springs from a deep seated fear that has been woven into the culture over a long period of time with varying degrees of intent and aimed at people of color. Calling attention to that phenomenon and actively trying to root it out is placing the focus on the problem - trying to shame people for a state of affairs that they did not create and in most cases are not even conscious of is not. — Pro Hominem
I completely understand what you're saying. I swear. Let me see if I can reframe this so we can get somewhere.
I say that BLM is the way to go. It highlights the problem of detrimental treatment of people of color.
You say white privilege is the way to go. — Pro Hominem
Mike Cole at UEL a few years ago produced a seminal study on this. Unsurprisingly students on such courses (I think he studies both race and gender studies) generally showed more sympathetic language use and policy leanings than before the courses, but he noted the opposite effect with a minority of 'resistant' students. It depends on your target audience. There's also a paper (not out yet) which claims to show positive relationships between perspective taking and system justification behaviour - so people who are shown other perspectives tend to justify existing systems less. Again this is generally positive as far as 'white privilege' discourse is concerned, but again the effect was switched around when system justification preceded the perspective-taking. — Isaac
Yes, I think The Naomi Zack article could even go further. The fact that white people have paths open to them which people of colour do not have have is a privilege and that cannot really be denied, and shouldn't be lost in any talk of the effect of 'white privilege' discourse, but any attempt to broadcast or use that undeniable fact in political society becomes discourse, we cannot avoid it and we cannot be mindless to its consequences — Isaac
I ask only that you - at the very least - look into the box I've presented. — creativesoul
The information you've provided demonstrates that the form of that message is perhaps even more important that its substance, in terms of being accepted and perhaps acted upon by the audience. Have I missed something? — Pro Hominem
White privilege is the direct, demonstrable, and inevitable result of systemic and/or institutional racism. Put simply, it is what white people do not have to deal with on a daily basis that non whites do. It is the injury because one is non white that white people avoid suffering because they are not. The negative effects/affects that racist people, policies, belief systems, and social practices created remain extant in American society. They continue to directly impact the lives and livelihoods of the people that they were originally designed to discriminate against. — creativesoul
White privilege is the direct, demonstrable, and inevitable result of systemic and/or institutional racism. Put simply, it is what white people do not have to deal with on a daily basis that non whites do. It is the injury because one is non white that white people avoid suffering because they are not. — creativesoul
How can you tell if someone who extremely dislikes the concept of white privilege is doing so for system justification/self palliative reasons or not? I'm not saying don't be critical of it, I'm saying that the very idea inspires so much vitriol in some people and pages and pages of text. Often, after the pages and pages the person who says they hate the concept of white privilege actually agrees with all of the substantive content it criticises, but feels either personally attacked by it or that (generic white person) will be turned off by it. Projecting personal discomfort onto the absent other, maybe. Regardless, they dislike the present because of the package. Complicity should never feel comfortable, and self flagellating doesn't make any difference.
I've got a personal wager that people who get super animated about it being a hard sell to some white people to begin with more often than not are duckspeaking system justification in an academic dialect. But that's neither here not there I suppose. — fdrake
Can you please explain to me how you see my assertions differing from the information you've presented here? My tone here is sincere, not argumentative. — Pro Hominem
The information you've provided demonstrates that the form of that message is perhaps even more important that its substance, in terms of being accepted and perhaps acted upon by the audience. Have I missed something?
— Pro Hominem
How can you tell if someone who extremely dislikes the concept of white privilege is doing so for system justification/self palliative reasons or not? I'm not saying don't be critical of it, I'm saying that the very idea inspires so much vitriol in some people and pages and pages of text. Often, after the pages and pages the person who says they hate the concept of white privilege actually agrees with all of the substantive content it criticises, but feels either personally attacked by it or that (generic white person) will be turned off by it. Projecting personal discomfort onto the absent other, maybe. Regardless, they dislike the present because of the package. Complicity should never feel comfortable, and self flagellating doesn't make any difference.
I've got a personal wager that people who get super animated about it being a hard sell to some white people to begin with more often than not are duckspeaking system justification in an academic dialect. But that's neither here not there I suppose. — fdrake
I think you've misunderstood my responses to you... — Judaka
"White privilege" when used in the best way, puts a white in the shoes of non whites...
Is that what's meant - or close at least - to perspective-taking? — creativesoul
How can you tell if someone who extremely dislikes the concept of white privilege is doing so for system justification/self palliative reasons or not? I'm not saying don't be critical of it, I'm saying that the very idea inspires so much vitriol in some people and pages and pages of text. Often, after the pages and pages the person who says they hate the concept of white privilege actually agrees with all of the substantive content it criticises, but feels either personally attacked by it or that (generic white person) will be turned off by it. Projecting personal discomfort onto the absent other, maybe. Regardless, they dislike the present because of the package. Complicity should never feel comfortable, and self flagellating doesn't make any difference.
I've got a personal wager that people who get super animated about it being a hard sell to some white people to begin with more often than not are duckspeaking system justification in an academic dialect. But that's neither here not there I suppose.
The information I've presented shows that there is limited and as yet un-replicated experimental support for the idea that the term might have undesirable consequences in specific circumstances. I do have reservations about its use, but as the Xi paper shows (and as Streetlight and Banno have corroborated anecdotally), it clearly does have some positive impact in other circumstances. I've not followed your posts closely, but it seems you might possibly be more condemnatory of the net use than I am? My concern is mostly about the use of the term to distract from the real issues, which I see as the systemic necessity for an oppressed underclass. Where it's not used for that purpose, I've no issue with it. — Isaac
The point StreetlightX made about how it is necessary to respond to the toxifying of discourse by being firm about the meaning of terms is important here. If there is some use to the term, and also some risk, we need to take care not to allow right-wing exaggeration of that risk diminish the use. I've not personally found much use, and I have academically seen some misuse, but I'm not about to dismiss people's experiences of having been positively affected by the concept. — Isaac
"White privilege" when used in the best way, puts a white in the shoes of non whites...
Is that what's meant - or close at least - to perspective-taking? — creativesoul
White privilege is the direct, demonstrable, and inevitable result of systemic and/or institutional racism. Put simply, it is what white people do not have to deal with on a daily basis that non whites do. It is the injury because one is non white that white people avoid suffering because they are not.
— creativesoul
↪Pro Hominem
That's it.
:smile: — creativesoul
PS - you said "duckspeaking" and your name is drake. That's hilarious. Well done. — Pro Hominem
Yeah, its basically saying that you can't be trusted to make up your own mind. — ChatteringMonkey
Perhaps, but belief it or not, some people are actually concerned with precision in the words they use. Like, don't try to convince me by manipulating the meaning of words, just give me accurate facts and let me decide. — ChatteringMonkey
Yet, it is quite common now to define systemic racism as a set of
institutional practises that function to favour certain racial groups over others:
— Number2018
I understand that this is common, but that doesn't make it correct. — Pro Hominem
You may insist that your understanding is correct, appropriate, making sense, and you may bring the best arguments in favour of your version. However, in our environment, public discourse's agenda and content are not shaped due to academic or intellectual discussion. It is primarily formed and controlled by the coherent actions of the media, the leading groups of political, cultural, academic elites, corporations, and the most active political activists. Only the singular conjuncture of the acute political and ideological struggle could bring such heterogeneous forces together to impose the discussion of the "white privilege" as a vehicle for social change.Systematic racism is maintained for the perceived benefit of racists and elites, not all whites. — Pro Hominem
To the extent that ordinary middle-class whites receive a "benefit" from it, it is a byproduct (although I still say characterizing freedom from abuse as a benefit or privilege and not a norm that all should expect and receive is a terrible conceptual precedent to set). — Pro Hominem
It is the only factual basis for claiming a causal correlation between institutional racism and white privilege. Likely, given the complexity of the contemporary society, it is impossible to show that there is a kind of cause and effect relation here. Yet, there is almost no need for such research. The processes of the creation of dominant public opinion utilize facts and researches as secondary and subordinate means.I acknowledge that there is inequity between both the opportunities and outcomes of generally all whites versus generally all blacks. — Pro Hominem
if someone can demonstrate the efficacy of the "white privilege" concept as a vehicle for positive social change, then I'm on board. Ultimately, the goal is the destruction of race (not culture) as a meaningful category in public thought. — Pro Hominem
and even generated an increased use of individualist language regardless of race (ie, talk of privilege merely ressurects ideas of assessing achievement by comparison with origin rather than as a indicator of it). — Isaac
Behind my painted smile is the most painful grimace
This mental prison I live in cause I am so conditioned
By my privilege, what a strange contradiction
To grow up brown in Britain and know that your living
Was paid for by a carcass that resembles yours
Born in the heart of the empire
You're worth more than others just like you
But less then the native ones, raised by my mum but in this world I am a father's son
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.