Poll: Privilege

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

snip

You say I'm not using the words privilege and right, right, yet offer no definition of your own. Would you mind doing so.

You are missing the nuance again, I accused you of misusing the word rights and privilege, I accused you of not acknowledging the meanings of the words right and privilege.

I do have to say that it was purely intentional that I left out definitions in hopes you would look them up yourself, damn pie in the sky idealism. But okay here you go.

Privilege
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/privilege

With nuance:

6. an advantage or source of pleasure granted to a person.
This is the one you use.

7. the principle or condition of enjoying special rights or immunities.
This is the one you neglect. This is both misuse and lack of acknowledgment.


Right
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/civil%20rights

With Nuance: You should acknowledge that not only does right have broad scope but also that the plural form of right has an much broader meaning. In other words, you tell me what definition of this word you were using. My best guess was that you meant Liberty.http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberty

Rights
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rights?s=t
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/civil%20rights

With nuance: Liberties becomes a more concise word for the plurality of right. Being the misuse of the word rights for not acknowledging the word right.

So I'm not using the other definition of privilege, but I am using one, but I should also use the other(s)? What's the nuance here? Cos' I'm lost.

I guess going from the site I'd be meaning civil rights, but I think of it as more of a universal right, or something that should be.
I think.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

To paraphrase the words of the great George Carlin; "Rights are temporary privileges, they're imaginary, we made em up". So whilst being a white cismale does make me privileged they are also disadvantaged. It's like saying its not hot outside when it's cold.

Tomato, tomatoes, they both mean the same thing. Except one puts the "blame" on you.

 

[Itdoesthatsometimes]

So I'm not using the other definition of privilege, but I am using one, but I should also use the other(s)? What's the nuance here? Cos' I'm lost.

I advise rereading it. I am sorry, but I am having a hard time reexplaining this with out coming off rude.

I guess going from the site I'd be meaning civil rights, but I think of it as more of a universal right, or something that should be.
I think.

Look up liberty.

 

[Duster]

-cut, may have misread the op

I am not certain what he's implying

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

-cut, may have misread the op

I am not certain what he's implying

That certain things, such as not being shot in the face by a bigot because of the colour of your skin, is a right not a privilege. Hence me not being shot by a bigot doesn't make me privileged, but the person who is shot by a bigot because of the colour of their skin is having their rights taken from them.

Basically, not having to fear discrimination by bigots is a right, not a privilege.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Anyway, I had a mini-discussion about this topic just the other week, actually, because I don't really see what the benefit is in telling someone to "check their privilege".

95% of the time, it's basically the "there are children starving in Africa" argument redux. It's telling someone "you have it better than someone else, so shut up about everything".

 

[wulf3n]

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.

I agree. Deeper was a poor choice of word.

 

[RoonMian]

snip

But you are still privileged over other people by bigots not being bigoted against you.

 

[Silence]

YES

All what happens if you say privilege is:

- anti-reaction from the "privileged" person. Even worse if he belongs to the "privileged" class but never was privileged, like factory workers and the like.

- using it as a means to silence criticism. "Shut up, you are privileged."

--

It's not like it's not in some sense "true". But it gets you nowhere or worse, in the opposite direction you want.

If you want to talk disadvantages, there is not really an argument against it. AND people can't feel attacked, because it has nothing directly to do with them. Saying someone is privileged is like saying "Hey, we want you to LOSE your privileges." But the true goal should be: Get EVERYONE the BEST privileges.

So yes, you are right. 100%.

 

[TheMightyMeekling]

This is part of a larger issue I have with the way people argue on the internet. The two sides think that everyone is on the same level as them, so they don't try to explain what they mean when they use words. Here is a fact: HOW you say something is more important than what you say, and if you are trying to convince someone, stating something in a way that may be taken as an accusation will garner hostility and entrenchment.

As for the OP, the fact that some rights are not enforced for some people does not make the people whose rights are being enforced privileged, its a sign that the system is corrupt.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

I was hoping an option in the poll would be "Check it" and was sorely disappointed.
But other than that, yes. I started reading your post and was worried it would evolve into some "All white males need to sit down and make up for what they have done" sort of thing but I was pleasantly surprised.

 

[Silvanus]

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.

A difference in 'feeling', arguably. Not in content. I wouldn't infer what the norm is meant to be from the first statement: it's possible for the majority to be privileged.

 

[DataSnake]

So I'm not using the other definition of privilege, but I am using one, but I should also use the other(s)? What's the nuance here? Cos' I'm lost.

You're saying that we should only use the word in situations that fit one definition, not the other. A brief conversation for analogy:

Spoiler

Terry: We have a new policy: whenever you use the company car you to record your mileage in this log.
Gonad: That's not a log, it's a book. Logs are tree trunks.
Terry: "Log" can mean either a tree trunk or a book used to track activities.
Gonad: So I'm using the first definition. Why should I use the other?

While Gonad is right that "log" can refer to a building material, insisting that people only use it in that sense, and not to refer to recordkeeping, is still incorrect.

Anyway, I had a mini-discussion about this topic just the other week, actually, because I don't really see what the benefit is in telling someone to "check their privilege".

95% of the time, it's basically the "there are children starving in Africa" argument redux. It's telling someone "you have it better than someone else, so shut up about everything".

In most of the cases I've seen it used, it's more of a response to comments along the lines of "keep your politics out of my games" or "I don't see a problem here, so stop complaining", and the point is that you don't see the problem because you're privileged, not because there isn't a problem at all. It's not "you have it better so fuck you", it's "your perspective on this issue is limited, maybe you should listen to other people instead of just assuming you know everything".

 

[Senare]

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.

Meh. I see "privilege" as an academic concept which is a useful shorthand for something along the lines of "an invisible standard". This is a separate, secondary meaning apart from what "privilege" usually means.
"Rights" is a good word on its own, but I do not feel that it captures what I think of when the concept of privilege is brought up. The word "privilege" is not the perfect choice either. But now that the concept has been named "privilege" I do not see much use in redefining it to "rights". I suspect that it would cause more confusion than it is worth.

As for your call to action: I would like to focus on fixing things too. But if I had not gotten the concept of "privilege" explained to me then I would have lacked an important perspective - a perspective that is very useful for fixing some things.

 

[DANEgerous]

Yeah I could not agree with this more if I wrote it myself.

 

[carnex]

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.

Meh. I see "privilege" as an academic concept which is a useful shorthand for something along the lines of "an invisible standard". This is a separate, secondary meaning apart from what "privilege" usually means.
"Rights" is a good word on its own, but I do not feel that it captures what I think of when the concept of privilege is brought up. The word "privilege" is not the perfect choice either. But now that the concept has been named "privilege" I do not see much use in redefining it to "rights". I suspect that it would cause more confusion than it is worth.

As for your call to action: I would like to focus on fixing things too. But if I had not gotten the concept of "privilege" explained to me then I would have lacked an important perspective - a perspective that is very useful for fixing some things.

People who use the word "privilege" the most are used to using word with strong psychological impact on common human claiming it has different meaning. And, in my opinion, this is really cleverly calculated move. It has the effect of pushing their agenda in extreme manners while they can claim that they didn't mean any such thing. Privilege is just another example of it.

Jack having public health insurance is not a privilege where I live, it's a right.
Mack not having public health insurance is disadvantaged because his right to have it has been denied.

However since Jack can go to the doctors office ignoring the existing waiting line without having an emergency he is priviledged.

Difference being that public health insurance (access to public health institutions) is considered to be human right and cutting the line isn't.

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

I agree, as a straight white male nobody is helping me to suceed in life, I still need to work hard and im on my own. The only difference is there is nobody shitting on me.

 

[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.

Think of the negative numbers.
If x < y, they still can be:
- both below zero
- y below zero while x is at zero
- y below zero while x is above zero
- y at zero while x is above zero
- both above zero

Zero is the norm, the way the things should be. Now if someone kills people and gets away with it because of his social status and friends in government, that's high above zero.
If someone gets severe criminal punishment for a legal activity because of his or her political views that's pretty below zero.

Think of it this way:
What you define as 0 is down to your personal opinion and situation.
Someone starving in a African village will have a completely different 0 to the CEO of a major corporation.
As such there is no objective "0" only comparisons. Which still means the argument is the difference between "You've got 4 less than me." "No! You've got 4 more than me."

 

[Itdoesthatsometimes]

Let's pretend that it would not be a privilege for the privileged to use a different word for privilege that makes the privileged more comfortable.

What word should be used instead?

 

[Callate]

Sorry to get dictionary-y at you, but Merriam-Webster defines a "right" as "a moral or legal entitlement to have or obtain something or to act in a certain way."

White people (for example) aren't morally or legally entitled to be treated a certain way- at least, not on the officially, in America, any more. (Your mileage may vary depending on your country and the way you view de facto treatment's contrast with official policy.)

I think I understand the OP's underlying point that it might be more effective to try to bring people up rather than to go into ever-ongoing harangues about "privilege", especially as it has a tendency to trivialize many issues and create an atmosphere where only certain people are allowed the floor, possibly even creating a sense of a "race for the bottom"- after all, every person typing on a keyboard is, in a sense, privileged, as is everyone who knows where their next meal is coming from, and everyone who doesn't fear for their lives on a daily basis.

But sometimes, to really understand what others lack, we first need to understand what we have and take for granted.