Poll: Privilege

[Frission]

For some reason this notion makes a lot of, well... privileged people reeeeaaally antsy. I've never quite understood why. For some reason the notion that one has had an easier time of life for reasons beyond their control, a little leg up in the societal scramble, just gets to people something fierce. Maybe it makes them feel guilty, or maybe we all prefer the comforting notion that what we have is purely the result of our own hard work and that anyone who doesn't have what we have just isn't trying hard enough. I dunno.

I am a 24 year old, recovering drug addict with no education, no job prospects, no money and very little social life.
I am also a straight, white, male.
I don't feel very privileged, if I am privileged I must be one of the biggest fucking failures on the planet seeing as I am surrounded by women and non-white people who have done a hell of a lot better with their lives than I have in every possible way.
Is it so hard to believe that this might make me "antsy?"

Privileged does not mean guaranteed to succeed in all things, just as disadvantaged does not mean guaranteed to fail at life. Some people are born with a silver spoon in their mouth and end up accomplishing little and dying alone, others are born into poverty and manage to build prosperous and happy lives.

Earnest question: If you were a 24 year old, recovering drug addict with no education, no job prospects, no money and very little social life who was also black and homosexual, do you think your life would be easier or harder than it currently is?

Just reading this, that felt very condescending especially since you just implied that he was an even bigger 'failure' because he was born 'with a silver spoon in the mouth'. The earnest question is probably of course 'harder', but damn.

OT: Of course there is privilege. I'm probably far more privileged than a recent immigrant from a war torn part of North Africa, especially in the current political climate. Frankly people should all be treated in an equal manner, but whether it's privileged or disadvantaged it's all semantics. There's still a different in ease of going through society.

Privileged is disliked however of the ways it has been used on the Internet.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Just reading this, that felt very condescending especially since you just implied that he was an even bigger 'failure' because he was born 'with a silver spoon in the mouth'. The earnest question is probably of course 'harder', but damn.

OT: Of course there is privilege. I'm probably far more privileged than a recent immigrant from a war torn part of North Africa, especially in the current political climate. Frankly people should all be treated in an equal manner, but whether it's privileged or disadvantaged it's all semantics. There's still a different in ease of going through society.

Privileged is disliked however of the ways it has been used on the Internet.

I disagree. The word isn't so much the issue, whatever you call it, people will still respond much the same way.

Like you said, many people find the sort of thing Zhukov said to be condescending, because the topic is one that always makes people uncomfortable. Nobody likes to hear about how society is unfairly being better to them than others, even if it's just in one aspect of their lives. Change the words, and people still don't want to hear it. This is one reason why the Oppression Olympics are a thing, nobody wants to hear about someone else's problems when they want people to listen to theirs.

 

[Zhukov]

For some reason this notion makes a lot of, well... privileged people reeeeaaally antsy. I've never quite understood why. For some reason the notion that one has had an easier time of life for reasons beyond their control, a little leg up in the societal scramble, just gets to people something fierce. Maybe it makes them feel guilty, or maybe we all prefer the comforting notion that what we have is purely the result of our own hard work and that anyone who doesn't have what we have just isn't trying hard enough. I dunno.

I am a 24 year old, recovering drug addict with no education, no job prospects, no money and very little social life.
I am also a straight, white, male.
I don't feel very privileged, if I am privileged I must be one of the biggest fucking failures on the planet seeing as I am surrounded by women and non-white people who have done a hell of a lot better with their lives than I have in every possible way.
Is it so hard to believe that this might make me "antsy?"

Privileged does not mean guaranteed to succeed in all things, just as disadvantaged does not mean guaranteed to fail at life. Some people are born with a silver spoon in their mouth and end up accomplishing little and dying alone, others are born into poverty and manage to build prosperous and happy lives.

Earnest question: If you were a 24 year old, recovering drug addict with no education, no job prospects, no money and very little social life who was also black and homosexual, do you think your life would be easier or harder than it currently is?

Just reading this, that felt very condescending especially since you just implied that he was an even bigger 'failure' because he was born 'with a silver spoon in the mouth'. The earnest question is probably of course 'harder', but damn.

Huh?

I said "some people" are born with a silver spoon in their mouth. Not "you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth". I have no idea what sort of circumstances the person I was replying to was born into and he did not specify.

Oh, and to be clear, "to be born with a silver spoon in one's mouth" means to be born into a wealthy family of high status. As far as I know, that phrase does not refer to gender, race or sexual orientation.

 

[carnex]

What would you consider a privilege, then, if being favoured over someone else isn't one?

Something you have that isn't considered human right and yet you are entitled to.

For example, free contraceptives. It's lifestyle enhancement, isn't necessary for normal human functioning and yet people feel entitled to receive it for free. That is basic definition of privilege.

Bad example there, birth control (contraceptives) is very necessary for my normal human functioning[footnote]I have a medical condition in which my adrenal glands do not function as they should[/footnote]. If I were to live in a state in which it were difficult to get, or outright banned, I would be SOL. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only person who depends on the benefits of contraceptives for a reason other than controlling birth.

Birth control is a vital component of HRT (Hormone replacement therapy).

You have a medical condition, you are exception to the rule. I'm not against free birth controll for people who have a valid medical reason for it.

However, people are pushing for contraceptives to be covered under basic health care and treated as any other medical drug for everyone, not just people who have real medical conditions that are best treated that way.

So, we don't have conflict of opinion, just lack of understatement and/or clarity.

 

[Frission]

I disagree. The word isn't so much the issue, whatever you call it, people will still respond much the same way.

Like you said, many people find the sort of thing Zhukov said to be condescending, because the topic is one that always makes people uncomfortable. Nobody likes to hear about how society is unfairly being better to them than others, even if it's just in one aspect of their lives. Change the words, and people still don't want to hear it. This is one reason why the Oppression Olympics are a thing, nobody wants to hear about someone else's problems when they want people to listen to theirs.

Good point. No matter how you phrase it, it will sound condescending to someone.

The topic always seems to circle on who has it worse really. It's one of the reasons why I don't like talking about this on the Internet, not because I'm not concerned about in real life, but because no matter what, one side will come across as condescending and one side as in denial and/or getting into a round of the 'oppression Olympics' (I love that term).

It's an issue, since discrimination exists, but I'm not sure we're on the right platform for this. I probably even jumped the gun on Zhukov.

Huh?

I said "some people" are born with a silver spoon in their mouth. Not "you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth". I have no idea what sort of circumstances the person I was replying to was born into and he did not specify.

Oh, and to be clear, "to be born with a silver spoon in one's mouth" means to be born into a wealthy family of high status. As far as I know, that phrase does not refer to gender, race or sexual orientation.

Of course being born with a silver spoon in your mouth is an expression for wealth and privilege, that was the original point. It's being born with tangible privilege that no one else has. I'm not daft. It just doesn't translate well when you try to make it apply to gender, race and etc...

Viewing the way you phrased the sentence, it just came off as passive-aggressive saying "some people" instead of you. My English skills are not top notch, but in the context of the sentence and argument, that's a reasonable reading. I mean you probably didn't mean it that way, but I wanted to point that out.

 

[nightmare_gorilla]

This is something I've kinda been aggravated with for a while. see there's this thing called life and it fucks with all of us regardless of gender, color, orientation, or anything else. the sticky part of the privilege debate is when people try to point at people they don't know and make judgments on how easy/difficult their life is. adversity doesn't discriminate and we all get screwed one way or another.

I am extremely lucky in my life. I'm "privileged" according to the sjw crowd. but on the other hand I'm also fucked. about 6-7 years ago I was diagnosed with a brain tumor and after the surgery to remove it I lost a lot. my hearing, the balance nerve on my right side, and my ability to get through the day without crippling headaches. I've worked off and on since the surgery but anything resembling full time employment shuts me down hardcore. I can't attend school full time and I can't work. If not for a very loving family who basically created a job for me that I could do while still missing 3-5 days a month to my headaches i'd be on disability or on the street.

No successful business owner I've ever met or heard from got successful by worrying about how good their competition has it. There's nothing to be gained from basing your own happiness on anyone else but you.

TLR
Life sucks for everyone, it's never a good idea to spend more time focusing on how good others might have it than on your own happiness. yes i'm lucky, also unlucky.

 

[Silvanus]

I don't think it's a particularly meaningful distinction between "x is privileged for enjoying z" and "y is disadvantaged for lacking z".

The only real issue with the former is that people misunderstand it, and take it to mean that people are saying they must have easier lives. That's not really the fault of the concept.

 

[MysticSlayer]

On the flip side, if people are having their rights taken away and you aren't having your rights taken away, you are privileged in that you get to enjoy something that others currently can't. In this case, though, you are recognizing that society has granted you an advantage over others and that it has granted you certain immunities that they don't have. Basically, it requires you to recognize your own place in society rather than just recognize other people's place.

Really, this just seems like a pointless thought exercise.

 

[Alleged_Alec]

I don't think it's a particularly meaningful distinction between "x is privileged for enjoying z" and "y is disadvantaged for lacking z".

The only real issue with the former is that people misunderstand it, and take it to mean that people are saying they must have easier lives. That's not really the fault of the concept.

There is a huge implied difference. What is the difference between these two?

1: Bennie is privileged for having a house
2: Janice is disadvantaged by not having a house

The first implies that the outlier from what should be the norm is Bennie, while the norm should obviously having a house. It's in fact Janice who has a disadvantage by not having a place to live. Furthermore, the feeling the sentences give off is completely different as well.

 

[wulf3n]

Like you said, many people find the sort of thing Zhukov said to be condescending, because the topic is one that always makes people uncomfortable. Nobody likes to hear about how society is unfairly being better to them than others, even if it's just in one aspect of their lives.

I think it goes deeper than that. I think people just don't like being generalised based on the colour of their skin, their gender or their sexuality.

 

[Belaam]

The OP is right, but I think missing the semantic issues can be problematic.

For instance: Women are disadvantaged compared to me. Let's make a movement trying to bring women up to that level. We'll call it Feminism as it's focus is on bringing women up to an equal standing. Great idea, we'll do the same thing for black people and call it a Black Power movement because it's trying to bring black people an equal level of power. . . . and then we have white males freaking the heck out over both movements and either intentionally or ignorantly misunderstanding them.

Also, there is a problem in that many people who are not disadvantaged don't see themselves as such and so the "privileged" tag gets used as a way to point out that they are unaware of the ways in which other groups are disadvantaged.

And finally, Privilege means Private Law and comes from the idea that there is one law for one group and another law for other groups. While technically this is not true in most democracies, in a practical sense, it is how it plays out for many groups of people. (i.e. If I am walking around a somewhat questionable neighborhood at night, I may worry about robbery, but I don't worry about rape).

 

[EternallyBored]

Like you said, many people find the sort of thing Zhukov said to be condescending, because the topic is one that always makes people uncomfortable. Nobody likes to hear about how society is unfairly being better to them than others, even if it's just in one aspect of their lives.

I think it goes deeper than that. I think people just don't like being generalised based on the colour of their skin, their gender or their sexuality.

That's not really going any deeper, it has about the same complexity as people not liking it because they are uncomfortable with confronting unearned advantage, it's not a deeper reason, just a different one.

In this case, the answer is likely, "all of the above", there are probably multiple simultaneous reasons that such proclamations can make people uncomfortable, because you can both dislike the idea that you have an advantage in life that you didn't earn, and feel like you are being unfairly generalized for your traits.

There are also probably elements of feeling like your own disandvantages are being minimized or trivialized, or that you are being dismissed for an uncontrolled aspect of your life, or that your accomplishments are being undermined by being proclaimed as not fully yours, or that they are lesser accomplishments because you didn't have the same disadvantages as someone else.

Of course the variation in response is going to depend on the specifics of what type of privilege is being talked about, and how it applies to the conversation at hand.

 

[Pyrian]

Can anyone be disadvantaged without someone else being advantaged in comparison? And vice-versa? I don't think this distinction has teeth. Sure, you can say they're disadvantaged, but that doesn't mean you're not privileged in comparison (and these are strictly comparative terms in the first place), and sure, you can call it a right, but when other people don't have that right, then when you do have that right, you're basically privileged. Having rights other people don't is certainly a privilege.

This all just sounds like semantic quibbling to get out of the primary guilt complex: that one's own success owes in some part to other people not having the opportunity to compete for the same position. Nothing you've said actually contests that root of the issue, however. It just draws a little semantic blanket over it, to hide it away. It's not like the primary guilt complex cannot be contested; I don't even think it's strictly true. Economics is not a zero sum game, and not disadvantaging qualifying individuals would almost certainly create more total value to go around. But that's a different discussion, and notably not a semantic one.

 

[Rude as HECK]

OP, summarized:

"Down exists, but up does not".

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

Maybe it's because privilege conveys a sort of "you don't deserve it" tone. Like, if you accomplish quite a bit in life, someone will go "yeah, because you're privileged" or something similar. I'm just guessing here, since I haven't accomplished much beyond finishing school. And like you said, the internet ran that right into the ground.

I like your thread. And I think you've unwillingly hit on the major point here, but in the reverse.

Privilege definitely conveys a "you don't deserve it" tone. But towards the Disadvantage.

Privilege is being able to benefit for being born a certain way, but also not having everything that might happen to your race, gender, or sexuality pinned on you. I can point out most people who go and do school or mass shootings are white... And that will never be focused on for you or any white male. No one will fear you walking around with a gun. And if you are, you might be questioned a bit more than me, a black man who will more likely be shot down on sight.

Because you deserve the benefit of the doubt. You deserve the chance to live, or if you ARE doing a crime, a chance to serve the rest of life in jail. You deserve that.

In the minds of a lot of people, I wouldn't. They would find pictures of me looking like a thug (spoilers, there are none) and believe that would justify everything. I do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. I do not deserve understanding that maybe I'm just a kid who wants to look cool and fit in... and no one's buying and marketing Pharrels any more, but they certainly will have a dozen of these fake thug rappers.

I do not deserve a jury or my time in jail if I did anything wrong. Read some of these comments on all these news stories about black men being shot. Really. Some are trolling, but a lot are real. The second a black man in America commits a crime, he very well forfeited his life. Whatever happened to the man now, the response will usually be "Well, if he didn't want to get shot, he shouldn't have stole that iPod/Mouthed off to the police/Been in an area that it would look suspicious that he's there".

It doesn't matter that states come out with studies that for the same crime and the same amount of violence, judges are more lenient with white criminals than they are blacks. Minorities do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. They do not deserve common sense thought.

If you target any group of people more, you'll find more of that group of people doing bad things. That doesn't mean that those group of people are just naturally dangerous. But if you search 75 black men, and 15 white guys, how shocked are you that you found 25 black guys doing something wrong and only 3 white guys? It's a self fulfilling prophecy.

I can point out that there are News Networks that are devoted to demonizing my gender and race mixture because it gets people going and they are very prone to accept that. Now that? That I somehow do deserve. No matter the court systems even admitting impropriety. No matter how many times cops are caught lying via video tape. No matter how many rich families can buy silence, and those families are usually rich... And this is due to one simple fact.

The Privileged have the privilege of what they can focus on and what they don't have to. They mete out what is deserved and what is not. And the rest have to accept it. Closed minded Privileged can read all those reports for various states, watch pure police cam footage of police abuse ... and they can choose to look at it a different way. They can choose to believe there might be extenuating circumstances.

I don't deserve that privilege. If I ever have a son, I have to teach him that any moment a police officer even approaches him, he has to go docile, he has to go prone, and if it ever comes to violence... he has to sit there and take it. More over, because of the color of his skin, the cop will be believed almost always more than his word. I will tell him that he probably has no recourse and will have to hope for the best, because if you even video tape or record police officers now they will arrest you on that if they didn't have a real crime before. He can be lied on, beaten to an inch of his life, and told he's going to jail for trying to protect his civil liberties.

Because a whole bunch of Privileged got together and said... he doesn't deserve that.

 

[bjj hero]

Its simple. Being a white middle class male in the west gives you lots of advantages most of the population of this planet dont have

You dont worry for your safety when you see the police, you do not worry about being passed over for someone less qualified whos face fits, youre not concerned about being sexually assaulted or raped.

In my early 20s I was unemployed looking for work. I look/sound white and the woman at the company i was enquiring with over the phone was very helpful. When I gave my muslim sounding name she checked and the vacancy was filled. I had my mother try to apply for the job with her very white christian name and they were accepting cvs. True story.

I could go on but theres lots of things straight white middle class males never see. Equally i flush my toilet with perfectly drinkable water and wars are fought over that shit.

Sometimes its about taking stock and realising how good you have it and wondering if you can give someone less privilaged a hand up.

I've been sitting on this for a while now.

Some people are discriminated against based on their skin colour, on their gender, on their sexuality. People are shot, rejected by their family, and are told they can't do certain jobs. Being a white heterosexual male, I've never faced any of this (might be different for someone else). However.

I'm not privileged.

You're disadvantaged.

Not being rejected for a job because of your gender isn't a privilege, it's a right. Not being stopped by police at a higher rate because of your skin colour isn't a privilege, it's a right. Not being thrown out of home, family, and community because of your sexuality isn't a privilege, it's a right.

These are all rights ALL people should have, but some are not afforded for whatever reason. These are not privileges, these are rights.
When you tell someone they are privileged, you're saying it's not something they are deserving of. But they do deserve it, and so does everyone else.

So; let's stop calling X people privileged, and start focusing on fixing the disadvantages of different groups, and give them the same rights afforded to everyone else.

To summarise what I'm saying (as if it hasn't gotten across already): These things aren't privileges, they are rights.

Rights are only rights if everyone agrees you should have them, including, most importantly, those with power over you.

 

[Dizchu]

"Privilege" is a concept that has been absolutely corrupted by so-called "Tumblr feminists" and the kinds of social justice types that expressed the same views before the site was founded.

It's used very spitefully to dismiss the opinions of people based on their gender, race, sexual orientation, gender identity and so on. At the root there is a genuine sentiment, it is harder for people of one demographic to relate to the problems of other demographics other than their own... but beyond that, it gets messy.

White Privilege is actually a thing (kinda) in the sense that non-whites get unfair disadvantages (this depends on the race, however blacks tend to get the raw deal in comparison to other minorities). However, I don't like calling it "white privilege" I like calling it... racism! Why demonise a group when you can call out the actual behaviour that causes the harm.

Cis Privilege I can understand too, though I wouldn't call it privilege to be born with the correct gender, I'd call it "the lack of shitty luck". I don't personally harbour resentment towards cisgender people because that kind of attitude helps nobody. Sure, they don't have to deal with my problems but I'm sure they have their own.

Straight Privilege Is actually the kind of "Tumblr privilege" I agree with most. Because heterosexuals are literally favoured by most societies. Check out their laws, which think straight people are the bee's knees and all those LGBTQLMNOPs are somehow inferior or "corrupted".

Male Privilege And last but not least, the most bullshit of all of them. The idea that men somehow have better lives and opportunities by default is ridiculous. Men consist of roughly half the planet, they are not all gonna uniformly have the upper hand based on their gender. This kind of mentality is highly toxic as it breeds misandry (yes, misandry) and in turn breeds misogyny (internalised or externalised) and basically strengthens the divide between the two binary genders rather than help close it.

So what's actual privilege? Living in a first-world country, having electricity, having internet access, being born into wealth, living in a good area... these things are statistically proven to improve people's quality of life.

 

[V da Mighty Taco]

Agree with the OP.

The entire notion of "check your privilege" has always rubbed me the wrong way both because of how aggressive and demeaning it inevitably comes across as well as how incredibly prejudiced the entire concept is. It removes the actual individual from the equation, instead viewing them only by their race, gender identity, sexual orientation, or what have you. What the person has actually gone through and where they are in life is not factored into the equation at all, which is something that CANNOT be ignored when telling someone that they're "privileged". The idea that a straight white man who was molested as a child; grew up with an abusive, drugged out mother; and is currently homeless is somehow privileged compared to a gay black woman born into a six-figure household and with a college scholarship comes across as incredibly disrespectful, condescending, and quite frankly racist / sexist / etc.

This isn't helped in the slightest by the fact that most people who talk about checking privilege live in a first world country and don't seem to realize how privileged they themselves are, making themselves come across as a bit hypocritical. I do apologize for pulling out the Gaza Defense there, but it's hard to take someone seriously who blanket-claims an entire race, gender, or sexual orientation as needing to "check their privilege" when they themselves aren't checking their own privileges.

 

[Maze1125]

As a mathematician I always find these discussions absurd.
One side is arguing "7 is 5 less than 12."
While the other is arguing "No, you're wrong, 12 is 5 more than 7!"

Both are true at the same time. It's just a matter of perspective.

 

[MrFalconfly]

"Privilege" is a concept that has been absolutely corrupted by so-called "Tumblr feminists" and the kinds of social justice types that expressed the same views before the site was founded.

It's used very spitefully to dismiss the opinions of people based on their gender, race, sexual orientation, gender identity and so on. At the root there is a genuine sentiment, it is harder for people of one demographic to relate to the problems of other demographics other than their own... but beyond that, it gets messy.

White Privilege is actually a thing (kinda) in the sense that non-whites get unfair disadvantages (this depends on the race, however blacks tend to get the raw deal in comparison to other minorities). However, I don't like calling it "white privilege" I like calling it... racism! Why demonise a group when you can call out the actual behaviour that causes the harm.

Cis Privilege I can understand too, though I wouldn't call it privilege to be born with the correct gender, I'd call it "the lack of shitty luck". I don't personally harbour resentment towards cisgender people because that kind of attitude helps nobody. Sure, they don't have to deal with my problems but I'm sure they have their own.

Straight Privilege Is actually the kind of "Tumblr privilege" I agree with most. Because heterosexuals are literally favoured by most societies. Check out their laws, which think straight people are the bee's knees and all those LGBTQLMNOPs are somehow inferior or "corrupted".

Male Privilege And last but not least, the most bullshit of all of them. The idea that men somehow have better lives and opportunities by default is ridiculous. Men consist of roughly half the planet, they are not all gonna uniformly have the upper hand based on their gender. This kind of mentality is highly toxic as it breeds misandry (yes, misandry) and in turn breeds misogyny (internalised or externalised) and basically strengthens the divide between the two binary genders rather than help close it.

So what's actual privilege? Living in a first-world country, having electricity, having internet access, being born into wealth, living in a good area... these things are statistically proven to improve people's quality of life.

Alright, let's look at my case then.

I'm Scandinavian (pale skin-tone, so people would call me white), my gender aligns with my sex (I never thought cis would be used to describe anything else than organic chemical compounds, but hey), I have XY-chromosomes, and I live in a Western country.

But I'll argue that it isn't because of those characteristics that I'm "privileged".

I'll agree that I'm privileged, but it isn't because I'm a "white, cis-gendered, straight, male". I'm privileged because I live in Denmark, and I'm a Danish citizen.

Now why would I be privileged? Simples. I am eligible (and do receive) what's called "SU" (or Educational Support, by the "State Educational Grant and Loan Scheme" of Denmark). That means I receive 5,400kr (that's roughly $982) each month just for pursuing an education. That's right. Not only is a University degree "free" in Denmark, but I actually get paid for pursuing a University Education (in my case that's a Cand. Polyt. on Geophysics and Space Science, and a job with ESA).

So yes, I am privileged, but it isn't because of gender, or race. It's because of nationality (every other Danish citizen have the same possibilities as me, whether they be male/female, trans, or an immigrant from Iran. They just need Danish citizenship, and they need to actively pursue an education).

EDIT:

Actually I'd argue that women have one more "privilege" than the men here in Denmark.

Here military service is sort of mandatory for men (it's a lottery, if you draw a number that's "low" enough, you don't have to. And there are so many who volunteer that, the risk of getting in without wanting to is basically non-existent), but for women, it's a choice. They can choose whether they want to serve or not (any function, in any branch, army, navy, or airforce, no restrictions).