Privileges
I stayed up until 3am when I have to get up at 8am typing this because I had so many feels.
Sometimes I come across an article about one of the most controversial American discussions to date that I feel is bringing something new to the conversation (it's also international, but I'm going to focus on the country I live in). This is the first time I've had a combination of text and talk that triggered me to take on a heavy load of research.
The subject is Race.
I talk about race on the regular and sometimes I'm welcomed with open minds and ears. But several times I am confronted with denial, defensive talk and confusion. Of course everyone has to know this is common as it comes in the well-known trope of the Angry Black Person (or Lady in a case such as mine). Someone of color shows emotion when the topic is debated and the other participants dismiss everything they had said and will say with the Angry Black Person characterization. While this is frustrating I, and many, many others, refuse to give up on trying to explain institutionalized racism in hopes that we can do the impossible and negate the nearly 250 year old building blocks (slavery) for today's racial behavior and the 345 year old structure that stood because of it (combo of slavery and segregation, which only "ended" 51 years ago). And sometimes my reaction is clearly anger. But when, for example, my (self-proclaimed unbiased) white, cisgender, able-bodied boyfriend refutes my arguments with his personal anecdotes of how being white affords him no privileges, that it's actually a target on his back, I can't help but to get angry with his obvious dismissal. While I realize that what he says has truth, that does not mean he does not have white privilege. And this term is always the straw that breaks the camel's back. (why is it a camel?)
I've had several "sociopolitical" talks with him since he is open to it. In fact he loves to discuss controversies (he's into politics. Even ran for office once), but as soon as I argue privilege he's on a defensive stint until I'm talking in circles in a attempt to point out the nuances he's ignoring. Clearly a conversation goes nowhere from there.
Going back to the articles I mentioned, recently I read 2 complimentary pieces (as I see it) that try to unpack American white male privilege. These are I, Racist and Explaining White Privilege to a Broke White Person. Since I know this is the age of tl;dr I'll sum them up a little. I, Racist is an explanation of why the author, and most black people, are wary about holding a racial discussion with white people. Along with the Angry Black Person reason the premise is that black people see themselves as a collective whole, what happens to one black person could happen to any other black person, while white people see themselves as individuals, what happens to one white person was because of their own actions and is non-relational to another white person. And, this is touched on, every other race sees other races that way too. It's mentioned that black people can "talk about the Mexicans in this community". This makes it clear that each race, other than white, see themselves as a mutually affected unit along with the outside perception of every race, this time including white, as a correctly (stereotypical) generalized entity. Black people see Latinos as all the same while white people see Asians as all the same while any group of color see white as all the same, and the ways of connecting the dots are infinite.
Explaining White Privilege to a Broke White Person compliments this by digging into the nuance of the variables of privileges in our world. From what I've seen of reactions to something like I, Racist, a lot of defensive (white) people would benefit from the second article. This one takes the heat off of white people just enough, cushions the potentially vicious words of accusation white people feel, and informs them that the argument of "white privilege" does not mean everyone thinks you are privy to every good thing in the world just because you are white. "White Privilege" is not the same as "sexual privilege", is not the same as "ability privilege", is not the same as "class privilege". Each one is a different set of privileges based on the happenstance circumstances of your life. Consequently, having white privilege is not a "you get everything on a silver platter" argument. It's a "you have a set of benefits from your birth that others don't because of their birth." For example, two white men completely similar save for one is a handicapped and one is able bodied, the handicapped one will feel disadvantaged compared to an able bodied man. The able bodied white man does not have to consider the problems the handicapped white man faces for his entire life, problems that steer his decisions, opportunities and achievements forever. This difference is what everyone has named "privilege". And all people have varying levels of every type of privilege.
Between the lines of first article is where my boyfriend's argument rings true. Most people willing to discuss race will agree that white people feel attacked as a whole. Not that everyone is intentionally targeting white people in order to demoralize them, but that white people are pegged as the problem; racists, sexist, misogynistic, classist, ignorant bigots who wade blindly in their privileges. This is the target on my boyfriend's back, particularly in situations where he is the immediate minority. They feel it attached to their skin. And through that they feel the need to defend that they, the one or few white people in the discussion, are not like those other white people who are racist. It's not their fault. They, this living generation, had nothing to do with slavery and concentration camps and segregation and lynching and genocide, etc.. And this is possibly the one time in American history when white people are placed in the generalized group that no one will let them out of (unlike the histories of every other race in existence). As a side note: To be fair, what we consider white history, for those people who claim their Scottish, Irish, Italian, Spanish, French, etc. ancestry, has had a share of discrimination (slavery, rejections due to birth, derogatory terms). However this is predominately nationalistic in origin and not much of a problem in 21st century USA.
Now, maybe some have noticed that I use, and emphasize, the word "feel" to describe what some call "reverse racism" or "white racism". This is because no one in their right mind would accuse all white people of having the same life, same advantages and disadvantages, and so no one is actually generalizing them. Yes, we say "white people" with disgust when we're fed up, but anyone with common sense knows that those white people are not wholly identical to those other white people in every aspect. Ideally, just like these black people are not like these other black people. Every person has individuality. This is where article #2 comes in and serves as the reason why my boyfriend's defense is just dismissal of the problem. He grew up in Baltimore City, went to ratty, predominately black city schools, and was called out by his race with the stereotyped assumptions that he has access to all privileges. While the last part of that sentence is wrong on the accuser's part, it does not mean he is a victim of racism (no one has stripped him of national power or stated they are superior, enforcing their will upon him and establishing themselves as the correct, universal norm). What that was is a generalized lashing out from spite. Which, after 345 years (and counting) of oppression, there's bound to be backlash.
There's still another problem. The word "privilege." At least with him, no one will get a word in edge-wise if that's their word of choice. So these articles have helped me decide to dig into this word so that hopefully this term can be defused. I worry that privilege is too ambiguous between "extra" and "inherent", thus driving the defenses of hurt white people. Interestingly, I have heard the argument that minority races have racial privileges too. These come in the forms of diversity laws, minority only scholarships, and basically pity gifts for the less fortunate or minority groups trying to give equal footing against the white majority. In a way I can see these as "extra goodies" (privileges) marginalized races get that white people can't touch, but they wouldn't exist if there was true equality.
This is the beginning of a very large, inclusive project. I feel that it was planted when I was in college doing my multiracial thesis, but it's been silently growing since graduation 2 years ago. I invite all (de)constructive input because I do need as much help as possible to see all sides of this monstrosity. I want to learn and advance together. What is the word Privilege?
Sometimes I come across an article about one of the most controversial American discussions to date that I feel is bringing something new to the conversation (it's also international, but I'm going to focus on the country I live in). This is the first time I've had a combination of text and talk that triggered me to take on a heavy load of research.
The subject is Race.
I talk about race on the regular and sometimes I'm welcomed with open minds and ears. But several times I am confronted with denial, defensive talk and confusion. Of course everyone has to know this is common as it comes in the well-known trope of the Angry Black Person (or Lady in a case such as mine). Someone of color shows emotion when the topic is debated and the other participants dismiss everything they had said and will say with the Angry Black Person characterization. While this is frustrating I, and many, many others, refuse to give up on trying to explain institutionalized racism in hopes that we can do the impossible and negate the nearly 250 year old building blocks (slavery) for today's racial behavior and the 345 year old structure that stood because of it (combo of slavery and segregation, which only "ended" 51 years ago). And sometimes my reaction is clearly anger. But when, for example, my (self-proclaimed unbiased) white, cisgender, able-bodied boyfriend refutes my arguments with his personal anecdotes of how being white affords him no privileges, that it's actually a target on his back, I can't help but to get angry with his obvious dismissal. While I realize that what he says has truth, that does not mean he does not have white privilege. And this term is always the straw that breaks the camel's back. (why is it a camel?)
I've had several "sociopolitical" talks with him since he is open to it. In fact he loves to discuss controversies (he's into politics. Even ran for office once), but as soon as I argue privilege he's on a defensive stint until I'm talking in circles in a attempt to point out the nuances he's ignoring. Clearly a conversation goes nowhere from there.
Going back to the articles I mentioned, recently I read 2 complimentary pieces (as I see it) that try to unpack American white male privilege. These are I, Racist and Explaining White Privilege to a Broke White Person. Since I know this is the age of tl;dr I'll sum them up a little. I, Racist is an explanation of why the author, and most black people, are wary about holding a racial discussion with white people. Along with the Angry Black Person reason the premise is that black people see themselves as a collective whole, what happens to one black person could happen to any other black person, while white people see themselves as individuals, what happens to one white person was because of their own actions and is non-relational to another white person. And, this is touched on, every other race sees other races that way too. It's mentioned that black people can "talk about the Mexicans in this community". This makes it clear that each race, other than white, see themselves as a mutually affected unit along with the outside perception of every race, this time including white, as a correctly (stereotypical) generalized entity. Black people see Latinos as all the same while white people see Asians as all the same while any group of color see white as all the same, and the ways of connecting the dots are infinite.
Explaining White Privilege to a Broke White Person compliments this by digging into the nuance of the variables of privileges in our world. From what I've seen of reactions to something like I, Racist, a lot of defensive (white) people would benefit from the second article. This one takes the heat off of white people just enough, cushions the potentially vicious words of accusation white people feel, and informs them that the argument of "white privilege" does not mean everyone thinks you are privy to every good thing in the world just because you are white. "White Privilege" is not the same as "sexual privilege", is not the same as "ability privilege", is not the same as "class privilege". Each one is a different set of privileges based on the happenstance circumstances of your life. Consequently, having white privilege is not a "you get everything on a silver platter" argument. It's a "you have a set of benefits from your birth that others don't because of their birth." For example, two white men completely similar save for one is a handicapped and one is able bodied, the handicapped one will feel disadvantaged compared to an able bodied man. The able bodied white man does not have to consider the problems the handicapped white man faces for his entire life, problems that steer his decisions, opportunities and achievements forever. This difference is what everyone has named "privilege". And all people have varying levels of every type of privilege.
Between the lines of first article is where my boyfriend's argument rings true. Most people willing to discuss race will agree that white people feel attacked as a whole. Not that everyone is intentionally targeting white people in order to demoralize them, but that white people are pegged as the problem; racists, sexist, misogynistic, classist, ignorant bigots who wade blindly in their privileges. This is the target on my boyfriend's back, particularly in situations where he is the immediate minority. They feel it attached to their skin. And through that they feel the need to defend that they, the one or few white people in the discussion, are not like those other white people who are racist. It's not their fault. They, this living generation, had nothing to do with slavery and concentration camps and segregation and lynching and genocide, etc.. And this is possibly the one time in American history when white people are placed in the generalized group that no one will let them out of (unlike the histories of every other race in existence). As a side note: To be fair, what we consider white history, for those people who claim their Scottish, Irish, Italian, Spanish, French, etc. ancestry, has had a share of discrimination (slavery, rejections due to birth, derogatory terms). However this is predominately nationalistic in origin and not much of a problem in 21st century USA.
Now, maybe some have noticed that I use, and emphasize, the word "feel" to describe what some call "reverse racism" or "white racism". This is because no one in their right mind would accuse all white people of having the same life, same advantages and disadvantages, and so no one is actually generalizing them. Yes, we say "white people" with disgust when we're fed up, but anyone with common sense knows that those white people are not wholly identical to those other white people in every aspect. Ideally, just like these black people are not like these other black people. Every person has individuality. This is where article #2 comes in and serves as the reason why my boyfriend's defense is just dismissal of the problem. He grew up in Baltimore City, went to ratty, predominately black city schools, and was called out by his race with the stereotyped assumptions that he has access to all privileges. While the last part of that sentence is wrong on the accuser's part, it does not mean he is a victim of racism (no one has stripped him of national power or stated they are superior, enforcing their will upon him and establishing themselves as the correct, universal norm). What that was is a generalized lashing out from spite. Which, after 345 years (and counting) of oppression, there's bound to be backlash.
There's still another problem. The word "privilege." At least with him, no one will get a word in edge-wise if that's their word of choice. So these articles have helped me decide to dig into this word so that hopefully this term can be defused. I worry that privilege is too ambiguous between "extra" and "inherent", thus driving the defenses of hurt white people. Interestingly, I have heard the argument that minority races have racial privileges too. These come in the forms of diversity laws, minority only scholarships, and basically pity gifts for the less fortunate or minority groups trying to give equal footing against the white majority. In a way I can see these as "extra goodies" (privileges) marginalized races get that white people can't touch, but they wouldn't exist if there was true equality.
This is the beginning of a very large, inclusive project. I feel that it was planted when I was in college doing my multiracial thesis, but it's been silently growing since graduation 2 years ago. I invite all (de)constructive input because I do need as much help as possible to see all sides of this monstrosity. I want to learn and advance together. What is the word Privilege?