Defining "White Privilege"

[sheshe2]

snip

Why is it important to define “white privilege” so carefully? Because, in part, many people want to deny that it exists at all, especially in response to other people’s assertions that it is at work in some particular situation, that it exists unjustly and so should be dismantled. This pattern of assertion and denial is itself racialized: for the most part, people of color say white people enjoy white privilege, while white people for the most part deny not only that they have it, but that such a thing even exists. I have been assured countless times by white people that there is no such thing as white privilege and that the very idea is nonsensical.

(For example, among the objections to the idea of white privilege, there is one which deserves some consideration here. Given the fact of a systematically unjust society, such as is the case in the U.S., the differential possession of basic human and political rights becomes a privilege. Yes, every person by virtue of being a person has the right to enjoy and possess certain rights. But, in fact, over the long course of U.S. history only white people have enjoyed and possessed the rights which they loudly proclaimed were fundamentally human rights. I think it is fitting and accurate, in such an unjust situation, to call the racially differential possession and enjoyment of human rights a privilege arising out of particular social relations.)

In studying historical examples and theories of oppression, it becomes clear that social (in)visibility is an important strategy. Early feminists make this point over and over. If men and women equally believe, for example, that women are by their very nature subordinate to men, then gender oppression seems natural, inevitable, timeless. If you can design structures of oppression which are invisibile, which seem natural, they will be more effective than structures which are visible. If you can convince everyone, but especially members of the oppressed group itself, that the way things are is natural or inevitable or unavoidable, people will be less likely to challenge the way things are.

If that idea is correct, then we should expect the very idea of racialized social privilege—that is, social privilege which attaches to a group or groups which are identified racially (whether one understands ‘races’ culturally or scientifically)—to be invisible socially. We should expect that members of the dominant group, the one which has the privilege, to deny that it exists or that it could exist. Which is precisely what we white folks do (for the most part) when faced with claims by people of color that we enjoy social privilege by virtue of the social fact that we are taken to be white.

snip

We define it in order to make it a problem for white people, to show that it is an unjust, historical creation. Whatever has been made by human hands can be unmade by others.

http://academic.udayton.edu/race/01race/whiteness05.htm

[Nye Bevan]

1. So, was "males need to acknowledge their privilege" a big part of the Suffragettes' campaigning?

Or was it more generally something more practical and straightforward, like, for example, "Votes for Women!"

[sheshe2]

4. There were many men that supported the movement.

Yet, many opposed it. They were male and white, they already had the privilege to vote. Women did not.

Also women were being tossed in jail and force fed when they went on a hunger strike. All they wanted was to be treated as equals.

[el_bryanto]

2. Interesting argument; well worth considering

I agree with the assertion that defining white privilege clearly is important - as once it is understood it is hard to deny (unless people really are of a somewhat racist mindset or have a zero-sum game attitude towards racism (i.e. if blacks have more rights than whites have less rights).

Bryant

[Harmony Blue]

3. Different rights doesn't mean privilege

Basic human rights can't be easily take away (rights as a citizen). A privilege on the other hand can be taken away easily (eg Driver's License). The fight for equality is about equal rights not about exposing privileges and trying to re-balance. That is why the ACLU fights for rights and why it is called the Civil Rights Movement.

Our English language often uses words poorly because our current lexicon is based on using hyperbole to try to convey a state of emotion, being or feeling (eg I am hungry) when in fact that such word usage is misleading. That is why the term white privilege has no place in our modern society.

[sheshe2]

5. "Basic human rights can't be easily take away"

Sure they can. Think voter suppression. Who do you thing they are taking the votes away from?

"The fight for equality is about equal rights not about exposing privileges and trying to re-balance."

Equality will never happen until privilege is acknowledged. Yes it does indeed exist. And yes we do need to re-balance.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

8. You must've missed the centuries of racism in this country, of women having little or no rights, of

white males being the highest level of caste within each of the American social classes. That's our American caste system. No, it hasn't been for India alone.

[sheshe2]

9. It's not just equal rights it's about HUMAN rights.

Given the fact of a systematically unjust society, such as is the case in the U.S., the differential possession of basic human and political rights becomes a privilege. Yes, every person by virtue of being a person has the right to enjoy and possess certain rights. But, in fact, over the long course of U.S. history only white people have enjoyed and possessed the rights which they loudly proclaimed were fundamentally human rights.

And
What exactly do you mean by,

"Different rights doesn't mean privilege"

Different rights? All rights should be the same. You want us to assigning different rights to different people? What? On a sliding scale of their importance.

[brush]

11. You're kidding right? Basic human rights have been denied (not just taken away) . . .

historically from many groups of people. Ever heard of slavery and Jim Crow?

Hell Arizona was trying to take away gay right just last week. And all the voter suppression movements in states are designed to take away voting rights from blacks and browns.

Sure you don't want to rephrase your first sentence?

[Sarah Ibarruri]

6. Excellent article. I'm going to pass it on. Thank you. nt

[sheshe2]

7. Thanks Sarah. nt

[TreasonousBastard]

10. I'll never argue that white privilege never existed, or even that it doesn't exist now...

but whatever it is now is nothing compared to what it was earlier even in in my lifetime.

Older Southern blacks might remember how they had to do the shuffle and keep their heads down and their mouths shut to avoid a random beating, or even a lynching. Whites freely walked down the street while blacks got out of the way.

That was "privilege"-- owning the street and deciding who could walk on it. I was just listening to a Hamden Rice piece about how it wasn't separate water fountains or lunch at Woolworth's that was the problem, but the assumption that that is the way it should be.

That type of "privilege" assumes the non-privileged have no business being there and exist solely at the discretion of their betters.

Has that attitude disappeared? Not entirely, but we really have come a long way to where, outside of some neanderthals, blacks, along with other "minorities" are at least acknowledged to have a place at the table by most of us. Just how we deal with that place is problematic, but we seem to be working toward a solution.

My 2 cents is that we would be better off if we didn't dredge up the horrors of the past as if they were still the problem and better spend our time on present problems to make a better future for our kids. From what I've seen, they're often doing that better than we are.

[sheshe2]

12. Yet...

The pasted is intertwined with today and our future. It is not something that can be separated. It is what makes us who we are and it gives us choices of who we want to be.

Many of us do believe in changing the past to make a better future. Yet the setbacks are enormous and the horrors of the past are revisited, time and time again. Yet the "privilege" of owning a street has not gone away. Trayvon and Justin found that out. Sadly they forgot to shuffle their feet and keep their heads down. They forgot that they should not speak.

Our children are the most important aspect of our future. They are our hope and must be nurtured and protected at all costs.