Tumblr

The problem isn't, of course, that SJ Ws talk about/make a reference to a pre-existing concept and then try to educate people about it.

The issue is that many of them tend to pick a pre-existing term, twist it so it can fit their own warped worldview & when someone calls them out on this, they try to deflect criticism by saying: " But it's a pre-existing concept that has literally been around and discussed in both academic and real world circles for decades!." and such.

edited 1st Feb '15 6:21:26 AM by LogoP

Privilege theory is intended and best used for analyzing large populations, not individuals. It can be useful for us to think how we're placed in those groups. However, reverse dick size wars of "who's the least privileged?" are just fucking stupid. Different axes of privilege are different and the degree to which they have played parts in peoples' lives differ as well.

Privilege is not a measure of personal worth. It's not the SJ version of Original Sin. It pisses me off when I see it used that way.

Privilege theory annoys me, somewhat, because it implies the problem is what the people with privilege and power get is the problem. But it's not. The problem is the powerlessness of the oppressed, and the imbalance that is necessarily implied by that. This is why I prefer the focus on oppression.

Indeed, oppression also brings together rather than apart. Like, you can say, "Well, I have oppression, and you have oppression, so lets team up!" while, with privilege, you're saying, "Well, I'm black, and white people have privilege, and you're gay, and straight people have privilege. But I'm also straight and you're also white. I guess we have two different struggles."

So I don't think privilege is the best way to conceive of things. It's not exactly wrong, but it's not the best way to conceive of things.

Good point; it encourages division.

Also, quite a lot of the time 'privilege' means 'gets treated as people should be treated' and I have issues with that definition. 'Privilege' means an unearned advantage, and a lot of the world's problems seem to me to be more of unearned disadvantage. Calling proper treatment 'privilege' implies nobody should have it, not everyone.

Which is another problem, while oppression is entirely about unfair treatment, so there's not that same problem. Just a simple recontextualizing things from one perspective to the other makes all the difference.

I suspect that's the issue, though I don't see it as a problem. A lot of people have no problem thinking of oppression and such because that's other people, but privilege is about ourselves. It's less about privilege not being a valid or useful way to describe human interaction (because it is) but more about instinctive reaction against something that makes us feel bad about ourselves, or force us to think about ways in which we have unfair advantage.

Self-reflection can be difficult, but, I think, worthwhile.

Yeah, well that's their problem. Oppression is what's directly harming me in my life. I don't honestly give a shit if others have privilege as long as people are being oppressed. And, if we spend our time trying to get the privileged to focus on how they're privileged rather than on how we are oppressed, we get social movements fighting for the liberation of oppressed groups made up of people who aren't oppressed but feel so fucking guilty about that that they'll take over a movement to do the little things that don't actually help the oppressed out because they're what the people with privilege can do for the oppressed without giving up anything.

And it's also a problem to conceive of oppression as some sort of "other". This is why so many people who are most certainly in oppressed economic classes insist that, no, they're not poor or a worker, they're middle class and they aren't experiencing oppression. Well, they are, but they've become so convinced that oppression is something that happens to someone else that they won't fucking admit it to themselves.

I don't disagree with that, neither what's important (ending oppression) or the pitfalls of guilt (taking over a SJ movement, basically the "bad ally" thing). But there are plenty of people who don't see oppression (of others, or of themselves) because they are unaware of their privilege. That's when "they're taking it too far" and such usually comes into play. And sadly, unexamined, entrenched privilege is a huge obstacle in combatting injustice.

Nothing wrong with having an "unfair advantage", so long it's not at the expense of others. Lets say, there's this well-off guy, and when he goes to a nightclub, he can "tip" the bouncer to let me in right away instead of having to wait on the line.

Sure it's unfair to me & the rest of the folks waiting but it's not like he steals our spot or anything. He just has the ability to use another, quicker way to get inside & have fun. I'd do the same if I were him.

edited 1st Feb '15 9:15:11 AM by LogoP

That's true, but changing things won't happen because they suddenly realize that they have privilege and all the poor and disenfranchised in the world have it rough. That will just lead to them tweaking the status quo so that it seems like they have less privilege and the oppressed are less oppressed without eliminating the fundamental mechanics by which the oppression is instituted.

Change happens when the oppressed rise up and seize it, not when the privileged self-examine and give it to the oppressed.

I think we agree more than disagree here. I think I'm a bit jaded in that most critics of privilege I've encountered seem to approach it from the opposite angle.

Logo P: That's not the issue though. The issue is when that guy acts like he never tipped the bouncer in the first place, or like everyone did the exact same thing. That's where the problem comes out. In this very thread whenever I try and say "hey this group of people suffers X oppression" I've often gotten disbelieving responses.

Starky: Thanks starky! I could not find those pictures for the life of me!

Oh, I can agree that most critics of privilege theory are idiotic. Most criticism of privilege theory come from the right with people criticizing it because they think privilege doesn't exist, while I'm taking it on from the left (the far, far, far left where Rosa Luxemburg, Mikhail Bakunin, and Alfredo Bonnano have green tea, since proper tea is theft).

If he truly did, then yes, he should own it up. Not apologetically, though. Remember that this guy isn't truly hurting anyone. If he paid the bouncer to kick the guy in front of the line out & put him in his place, that's an entirely different matter.

If he didn't, however, and people are accusing him of tipping just because he happens to be well-off, then he has every right to tell these people to sod off.

As for the negative responses you've gotten for saying that X group is opressed, while i'm not familiar with the cases you're referring to, I have no reason not to believe you. This thread, just like its topic, is frequented by opinionated people, who sometimes have extreme positions and tend to be willfully blind.

Correct. Most people dislike it when folks are like "As a white person I am SORRY for enslaving you guys D:::"

It's mostly proving the existence that's a bitch and a half.

It's like...it's like if everyone ignored the existence of tropes. And so you kept trying to point to the most obvious ones, which were the clichés and the bad ones. And you try REALLY hard to explain it, and time and time again people disbelieve it. You really CAN'T get into the more nuanced issues about it, because you're still trying to argue that it's a thing in the first place.

Tumblr has rendered me painfully apathetic to so much shit I used to care about because I just went "I can't please you people, so screw it".

Of course. People need to realize that there's a difference between acknowledging that you benefit from privilege/ oppression and acting like you're personally responsible for it. No, nobody chooses to be white or straight or cisgender or neurotypical, but it's important to realize that your status gives you more advantages than nonwhite/ gay/ transgender/ disabled people.

But in that respect, I take issue with labeling groups of people as "oppressors", because that does make it sound like you're blaming them for the entire system, which has existed for hundreds of years predating their birth. That's why I hate it when SJ types say things like, "You don't have to be nice to your oppressors." By labeling them like that, you're implying that they did something to hurt you, so any retaliation on your part is totally justified.

Not mention that by labelling an entire X group as "oppressors", you're bound to make some pretty sweeping generalizations.

I mean, how on Earth do descendants of Irish and/Italian immigrants whose grandparents came to the US during the '20s and worked their ass off while getting treated like dirt have anything to do with slavery, systemic discrimination or privilege?

edited 1st Feb '15 2:14:32 PM by LogoP

http://katblaque.tumblr.com/post/106234657079/when-you-say-white-people-you-are-generalising

"Whiteness construct" "Earned their whiteness"

Sweet Jesus, I don't even drink and I want to ask for booze.

Like, while you're busy snarking you're not actually addressing any of the rest of that?

Or, like, the essay from the guy with the Ph.D who is also a social advocacy director?

edited 1st Feb '15 3:18:51 PM by unnoun

...Wait, are you implying that whiteness isn't a construct?

Everything is a social construct.

It's a thing we do. Sort things into categories. We assign labels.

It's not necessarily a bad thing. It helps us understand the world around us in some respects.

There's more of a problem when we start doing it to each other though.

So I finally got a solid look at what I think is the rest of the update features. It's definitely an interesting setup.

The way it's worded just sounds so stupid.