Rights and privileges are two entirely different things.
Rights are the standard of treatment that must be given to everybody by law. It is not optional, it is required. It is illegal to discriminate against members of designated minority groups, or to deny them equal treatment under the law.
For the most part, what people refer to as white privilege or male privilege, is the standard of rights that all are entitled to. It is not something special, or extra. It is the way all are supposed to be treated.
Privilege (by this I mean social privilege, not legal privilege such as attorney client privilege etc.) is in addition to that. It is often arbitrary and subjective. Privileges are not something that can be demanded or enforced. They do not have to be fair, and in fact by definition, they never are fair. They are exceptions to the rules, not the rules themselves. Equal treatment is exactly what privileges are NOT. Today, privilege is largely based on wealth, rather than race or gender: things such as country clubs, private schools, VIP treatment of various kinds, even driving a car is a privilege, not a right. Privileges can also be based simply on preferences: such as who you choose to give a gift to. There's nothing wrong with that, and there's nothing that civil society can do about it.
Racism is the belief that a given race is superior or inferior to another, which I think is obvious nonsense. (At the bottom line of it, I think it comes from people being far too obsessed with comparing themselves to each other, which is a habit of mind that I have low regard for to begin with.)
But I acknowledge that racism exists and that the rights of PoC are violated on a routine basis, such as for instance, within the law enforcement and justice system. I am four-square against that, and support any efforts to end those practices. Ending institutional racism (and sexism, and other abuses of civil rights) is usually a matter of either enforcing the laws that already exist, or changing them. I'm all for helping to do that.
There are rights, and there are privileges, and the two do not overlap. Privilege has nothing to do with attaining equality or equal rights. It is an entirely different subject. That's why I completely reject the use of the term privilege in discussing minority issues. The term is both misleading (in confusing basic concepts) and counterproductive (it focuses attention away from corrective action), two very good reasons for rejecting it.
Where racism exists in society, there should be legal and/or political action to correct it; where racism exists on DU, it should be alerted on. There shouldn't be a big, nebulous, unaddressed racism (or minority rights) problem on DU. That's mostly what I see claimed, that I question.
What I do see, when these issues come up, is about 8 out of 10 people agreeing 100%, and maybe 1 or 2 out of 10 raising an indirect point such as I have here. That is not racism, or sexism, or whatever.
People can disagree with me, they can think I'm wrong about this or anything else of course, that's fine. But this is how I see it. And what I want them to understand is that I'm just as entitled to my opinion as they are. I am not going to change my mind because a couple of people on here don't like it and think they can throw their weight around.
Maligning people's character is something I see done every time one of these issues is brought up, and it is not a legitimate way to discuss anything. To those few who I'm sure will continue to do it anyway... attempting to smear others with intentional lies is just as abusive and just as wrong as being a racist or a sexist.
= new reply since forum marked as read
My academic and professional backgrounds are in psychology, philosophy, and religion. I am quite familiar with academia, thank you.
A simple answer to your question is that not everything new is necessarily better or more useful.
http://publicautonomy.org/2014/01/27/the-rise-of-the-post-new-left-political-vocabulary/
If we were both professors at a college in the same department with different views, this would be no issue. We would debate with research, scholarship, and civility. Our positions might never change, and that would be just fine.
DU is a social networking culture which is very different. The accepted meme here of 'privilege theory' can not be challenged either civilly, rationally, or intellectually. I disagree with the theory and its current usage.
I won't, however, get into a protracted and emotional debate about it with you as obviously due to the fact that we are discussing it here at DU, we do agree on much when it comes to politics, policy, and the way we would like to see this country governed.
My apologies. This little side thread has had some odd communication blunders.
I think we are clear now. Again, sorry. 
I think too many people like to derail conversations here by whatever means they can use. Nit picking on terminology- refusing to accept what another person is saying even when given the context- becomes the whole conversation. Instead of accepting that the definition one person pull out of websters today is not the only one and conversing in good faith, they focus on that nit. You see way too much of this here, and mostly from people who do lack empathy. It's great for those whose only problem with racism is hurt feelings on a meesage board. They get to engage and pat themseves on the back for being "correct" when all they are doing is disrupting a good faith conversation.
Speaking of disrupting- where's our friend with the gas can? LOL. He's going to be disppointed we actually continued a civil conversation! 
with you that there are definitely those who will acts as you describe. I am sadly seeing it all to well, yet I know it is not unique to DU. It is a sad byproduct of the social networking age.
It would be nice to be able to discuss terms and theories without the emotional rancor and worries that someone is just doing as you describe, or being intellectually lazy, or just unemphatic.
While we may disagree on terms and theories, I do appreciate the civil conversation. Thank you.
it at DU. Thanks for the links and explaination, hope I have given you some understanding why the nit picking feels like nay saying sometimes. Ugh, maybe that's not the right word. Too rushed to find it, but I think you understand pretty well now.
Thanks again!
