White Privilege

But I think you could benefit from realizing that not everyone starts out with the same chances in life. And if you don't start out with the same chance but put in the same amount of work, you're naturally going to end up in different places. And how much achievement is hard work and how much is good luck?

Bah! Everyone knows that it's only privilege when someone else benefits. When you benefit the term is "birthright", plebeian.

1) I've said before and I'll say again, if it's not about making people feel guilty, the term "privilege" has to be dropped. Being able to make a decent living if you work for it is not a privilege, it's a right. The fact that nonwhites don't have it is a travesty. That does not make it a privilege for white people.

2) It's always cool to look at things from other peoples' points of view, no doubt.

3) Most of these I'll say no to. I'm going to watch enjoyable movies, even if I disagree with their politics. I'm gonna keep cracking racist jokes, not just because they're funny, but because they express the absurdity in the ideas behind them.

4) I'd love to see some suggestions on how to change other than "use your allies."

5/Finally)I'm actually not sure what this is talking about. To me, leaders emerge naturally in a group of people. If they mean the discussion, sure, it'll probably happen that way because the one's whose rights are being infringed are probably in the best position to explain the problem. If they mean in general, you just have to see who emerges in a given situation to be a leader. If it's not me, I'll take my cues from the person that has what I think are the right attributes, and skin color or genitalia are probably not going to be high on my list.

I've recently discovered that privilege works much better if you think of it as more like a suit of armor than a basket of goodies. White privilege and male privilege (etc.) aren't really checklists, they're ways privileged people are protected against shit happening to them in a way that other people aren't.

E.g. a white person gets mugged, they can go straight to the cops. Black people can't do that, at least not naively, because the cops are likely to be just as bad as the robber. Men can walk around without people catcalling them, entirely because those people see they're men. And so on.

Right, and the reason people use, say, 'white privilege' rather than 'black disadvantage' is because white, straight cis men tend to be overwhelmingly advantaged over everyone else. Calling it, say, 'black, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, lesbian, bisexual, asexual, transgender, genderqueer, female disadvantage' (apologies to everyone I missed out) is not only clunky as hell, but only serves to further highlight the elephant in the living room - that whilst a bewildering variety of groups get oppressed in a bewildering variety of ways, one single, particular demographic tends to come out on top far more often than not.

Claiming that the changes you suggest are the result of common decency rather than someone else's oversensitivity is a claim that I ought to feel guilty about my behavior, or at the very least that I should prefer your suggested behavior to my own, and see it as superior to my old ways. If that isn't suggesting guilt, it's very close.

People who tell me racist, sexist, homophobic jokes are something I should remove from my humor pallete, or that I shouldn't watch films with female eye candy in them in favor of a "female perspective" are on a fool's errand.

I like those jokes, quite a bit. A lot of them are really funny and I see no reason to discontinue their manufacture just because they hurt the feelings of people who need to find something more important to be offended about.

I also like movies with hot women for their own sake in them, and that's something else I have no motivation to change about myself. I'd actually like it if Hollywood made more movies with hot, half-naked men I could oogle, too, but I'll take what I can get.

Don't get me wrong, nothing stops me from enjoying movies where women talk and do things, but there's nothing wrong with objectifying people.

Pfft, I'd sooner shoot myself in the foot. Same result.

The insinuation that people have to make that effort in the first place is kind of insulting. Yeah, I'm a white male from a middle class family. Some things do or do not happen to me that do or do not happen to other people of different human properties. Any change to that status quo lessens my advantage or costs me resources. We've also established that if you're a white male, you aren't responsible for being a white male(obviously).

So why the hell would I want to use resources or lessen my advantages because of something that is in no way my fault and involves absolutely no net gain? I'm not going to be a prick to other people who have issues I don't, but I'm certainly not going to go out of my way to make life any harder for myself.

Except everything is wrong with it. Mentally stripping away the emotions and personality of somebody and just making them just a thing in your eyes is awful.

Just because something isn't your fault doesn't mean that you shouldn't do something about it.

There's an analogy I liked (though it was used on the topic of taxing the rich more). It's as if you're the only tall person in the room and you're being asked to get something from a high shelf; it's not your fault you have the advantage, but since you're the only one in any position to help you ought to do so.

edited 29th Apr '12 12:34:13 PM by RTaco

Not really, there's just a time and a place for it.

If I'm hooking up with someone, I don't care about their hopes and dreams or who they are as a person, I'm only interested in one thing.

Nothing wrong with it at all. Doesn't mean I should do it in the workplace or in a relationship. But, when I go to the movies just as an example, it hurts no one at all to just oogle and enjoy myself.

edited 29th Apr '12 12:50:45 PM by Sarkastique

Well, if you really wanna go into it, watching those kinds of movies encourages the production of them, and those types of movies reinforce the perception of women as objects.

And objectification is a very bad thing. When you stop thinking of people as people, you're much more likely to treat them badly or not care about them. And this is pretty much the biggest problem with being a woman in modern society.

edited 29th Apr '12 1:17:48 PM by RTaco

There's nothing inherently wrong with objectification. People just have to choose what they do or do not care about when it comes to particular people.

I don't care what my waiter's personality, or my plumber's bad childhood, or the aspirations of my barber. It doesn't mean I'm going to treat them badly. They just aren't someone I have a need to care about.

I don't care about Megan Fox or Summer Glau, either. Their job is to look pretty. Doesn't mean I'm going to objectify them off the clock, but when they're on the job, they're getting paid to make men drool. Nothing wrong with that. People just have this false sense that the movies encourage treating women as objects in all contexts.

edited 29th Apr '12 1:26:30 PM by Sarkastique

If you're hooking up with someone, you are not objectifying them; you are in fact doing the exact opposite by allowing THEM to have sex THEY like. Just because you don't KNOW them doesn't mean you're denying their agency, which is what objectification means.

Similarly merely being sexually attracted to women is ALSO not objectification. Objectification is viewing women as eye candy instead of full people. If you have an honest belief women are full people it doesn't matter if you think they're sexy.

Objectification is really the wrong word, but I see your point.

Of course I think women are full people, and that's in no contradiction whatsoever with liking eyecandy. It doesn't mean I wouldn't treat some gorgeous celebrity female as a person if I were to, for some reason, meet them. It just means that I don't care about anything else about them when they're on screen. Nothing wrong with that.

People like to look at atractive people, and they can do that without feeling bad that they aren't also wondering what she's majoring in or if she's happy in her personal life.

edited 29th Apr '12 1:53:29 PM by Sarkastique

So why the hell would I want to use resources or lessen my advantages because of something that is in no way my fault and involves absolutely no net gain?

Uhh... basic human empathy?

Plus, there's the whole 'the patriarchy hurts men too' thing. You know all that stuff about men getting shafted by sexism? Very often, it's male sexism that's the problem. For instance, if you're unlucky enough to get raped, you're less likely to be believed because that only happens to weak, feeble women, amirite? Same thing applies for other forms of prejudice - fill in the specific examples yourself.

edited 29th Apr '12 2:41:27 PM by Iaculus

Sarquastique: But do you care about their acting or character beyond that they're pretty? 'Cause that would be a much worse problem.

An actor is paid to do one thing, act. Yes, sometimes that involves a particular appearance for verisimilitude and other reasons. But an actor is not a statue, they dynamically portray a story and character, and are judged on that quality as well. Plus, there's what you get out of the actual story, which will be different if you care nothing for the female characters except their looks. Which can carry over into real life since people do learn social things from fiction.

edited 29th Apr '12 2:46:32 PM by TheGirlWithPointyEars

I can see why Summer Glau wows the guys, but I don't think it's for any of the same reasons that Megan Fox does. One of the ways she differs from Megan Fox is she's there to play a character more than she is to look pretty. Correct me if I'm wrong?

edited 29th Apr '12 2:51:48 PM by DomaDoma

It depends on the movie.

Usually, I do care. But some movies you go to see specifically because they're big, dumb action movies where no one is really worth a shit with regards to acting.

In movies like those it's the responsibility of everyone in it to at least be hot, male and female, because the reason I'm buying the ticket is to watch attractive women stand around looking pretty, and watch attractive men kill things with no shirt on.

I very rarely watch this kind of film but I won't be called a misogynist for doing so.

Doma: I guess I have a less enthusiastic opinion of her acting chops.

edited 29th Apr '12 2:54:30 PM by Sarkastique

(Also, I personally think Glau is average in the looks department. But I know my guy friends disagree.)

Eh, yes, I see your point if you treat all the characters in the same type of film with the same level of consideration, male and female. Agreed, that's not mysogynist.

The trouble with watching movies that have women there only as eye candy or damsels in distress is that it tells the companies that make movies "Yes, this is what we like. Keep making movies with only male leads and eye-candy women. I don't want to see females doing important stuff". And that's what they'll make. And then you get people trying to make media with female leads without playing up their sexuality, and they won't be allowed to because 'people don't want to watch that, they want eye-candy prizes to be rescued'.

Yes, but I'm sticking up for straight men who just oogle the females. I don't think it's sexist to want to just watch a woman that stands around being hot anymore than I think it's sexist to watch porn or look at a woman's ass when she walks by.

Why is it sexist to just want to look at a hot person and not have to hear them talk? Men do it to men, women do it to men, men to do it to women, women do it to women. It's because we're sexual creatures who like to fantasize about getting Wild Kingdom with people we're attracted to. I don't have to hate women to oogle them. and oogle them while not really carry what they have to say.

I don't think it's sexist to want to just watch a woman that stands around being hot anymore than I think it's sexist to watch porn or look at a woman's ass when she walks by.

Problem with both of these is that porn can get highly exploitative, and is known for mistreating its actors, especially the women (ethically-produced porn exists, but is bloody difficult to track down, and a good percentage of it isn't as ethical as it likes to claim), and whilst a quick glance at someone's ass is fine (hey, we're all human), staring and drooling - or worse, cat-calling - is a good way to make the recipient very uncomfortable.

edited 29th Apr '12 3:15:53 PM by Iaculus

Also, Loni, the conservatism of major media outlets and the unwillingness to take risks in entertainment by the cartels that control the moving pictures industry is not my fault or porblem.

I have nothing to feel bad about, watching and enjoying that kind of movie. If you want variety in gender roles department or whatever, take it up with Hollywood. Obviously, if people were calling out for these kinds of movies, they would get made, and that would be just fine with me even though I probably wouldn't watch them because they smack of "Girls Need Role Models" most of the time.

Obviously, neither women or men care in large enough numbers to make it good business sense. Not my fault, or my problem. It's certainly not my duty to "take a stand" for movies I don't want to see anyway. Not that I don't enjoy movies where women are actually characters, because I do, quite a bit. There's nothing wrong with a female character in film, and it's often necessary to make a good movie. But I find most of the characters that feminist types praise as "good female characters that don't glorify the patriarchy" are just really men in women suits forced into the movie to force the point that "girls can do it too!" down my throat.

I'm not saying porn can't be a seedy industry that mistreats its members, because you'd have to be an ostrich to miss that, I'm saying that it's not an unethical endeavor on its own terms. I actually don't think this "unethical" porn is as widespread as you claim, but it's a secondary question.

As for staring, drooling, cat-calling, etc...

I'm not saying it isn't creepy to do those things, but with the exception of cat-calling, I don't think they're actually sexist even though I still wouldn't do them.

If I was a woman and saw a man drooling or staring at me, I might remind myself where I keep my rape whistle, but I don't know why I would think that he finds women inferior to men.

Cat-calling on the other hand is the sort of thing where the guy doing it is probably sexist. I mean, I'm sure a gay/bi man could cat call another man and not hate his own gender, so I guess the action itself isn't inherently sexist, but you know where the smart money is. Sort of like people who have Confederate flags in their house. I'm sure there are a few people who really are just that enthusiastic about states' rights, but I wouldn't bet money on it being any one particular example.

edited 29th Apr '12 3:22:27 PM by Sarkastique

Man, there is a lot of empathy-deficiency in this thread.