A definition of "white male privilege"

[xiphias]

White male privilege is simply the condition of being treated the way that people are supposed to be treated, by default.

The reason that so many people with it don't see it is because there's nothing to see. It's the condition of LACKING the problems of NOT having it.

This has all sorts of ramifications -- people who say that they're humanists rather than feminists, because they just want equal treatment for everybody; people who consider affirmative action to be reverse racism.

In effect, what everybody WANTS to do is to extend the benefits that white male privilege confers to everybody. But if you don't realize that white male privilege exists, and is something that white males have, you don't realize that, in order to extend those benefits to everybody, you actually DO have to focus on people who AREN'T white males. And just declaring the playing field level doesn't do that. Which is why you DO need things like affirmative action and feminism, rather than just declaring that you are just beyond all that sexism and racism stuff.

(Also -- if you're a "humanist", it means that you are an ethical atheist who derives their morals and ethics from humanity, rather than from a supernatural/spiritual source. The term already exists. So you CAN'T say that you're a "humanist instead of a feminist.")

Comments

[zdenka]

Can you say that you're a humanist instead of a feminist if you know what "humanist" means?

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Only if you believe that being an ethical atheist precludes feminism.

Otherwise, it'd be the same thing as saying that you were a rhubarb plant instead of a feminist. You could claim that "rhubarb plant" meant someone who believed in equality for all beings, but it actually means, y'know, a rhubarb plant.

[ailbhe]

I like you a *whole lot* more.

[linenoise.livejournal.com]

Only if you believe that being an ethical atheist precludes feminism.

Or if you're the sort of One-True-Wayist who thinks that you can only belong to one kind of -ism at a time, and that it is all-defining and completely rules everything you ever do or say or think.

Seems to me to be somewhat limiting, but I've certainly encountered it often enough.

[zdenka]

I suppose if I used the phrase I would say something like "I'm a humanist, not a feminist" and avoid the "instead of". Though I probably wouldn't.

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Sure, but that would be like saying, "I'm a tap-dancer, not a Catholic." The two phrases would have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

[zdenka]

Ya see, if I used that phrase, it would be a joke, based on a false similarity of derivation and the assumption that my audience knows what a humanist is. You know, one of those things that are sometimes funny when xiphias isn't wittily making similes about vegetables.

I have also heard "humanist" used in a college setting, where context makes it clear what is meant, to indicate someone who is interested in/majoring in the humanities. But clearly we can't do that, since xiphias is in charge of what words mean.

Ooh, I wonder what I'll be compared to next!

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

But clearly we can't do that, since xiphias is in charge of what words mean.

That's true; I am. That's one of my specific forms of pedantry.

[ailbhe]

I read two women today saying that they are egalitarians and weren't interested in making things better for women as a whole.

I like you more.

[voltplay.livejournal.com]

That's different from Eagleitarians, who are fighting for equal rights for raptors everywhere.

[elynne.livejournal.com]

I'm a proud Velociraptorian.

... what. >.>

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

Me too.

Thank you for blogging this

[cheshyre]

FWIW, here's the quote I was trying to recall, by Jeff Fecke:

Privilege is inextricably woven with a blindness to one's privilege. To be privileged is to be blissfully unaware of the many ways in which privilege helps one to advance through society.

Also, two possibly relevant cartoons by Barry Deutch:

• Denial: It's a White thing (March 2008)
• Nonspecial Privileges (May 2000)

Re: Thank you for blogging this

[linenoise.livejournal.com]

With regards to the first quote, it would seem that the logical consequence is to render priviledged people into a state where they can never be anything else *but* priviledged and ignorant. If it really is inextricably linked with this blindness then how can I, as a priviledged individual, ever contribute anything to solving the problem?

I'd like to believe that it's possible to *acknowledge* one's own priviledge. Further, I kinda think it's a requisite first step in being able to *do* anything about equality.

I can't really works towards equality for all persons without first acknowledging my own position as a White Male. I *know* that I have it easier than a lot of people by virtue of an accident of birth. I think that it's important, on some level, to keep that always firmly in mind. Never forget that I *do* have this advantage, and I am grateful for it, while at the same time trying to bring everyone else up to the same playing field, so that it ceases to *be* an advantage.

I like xiphias's way of putting it, that White Male Priviledge is something that, in an ideal world wouldn't be *reduced* in any way. It's not that we need to be brought down, it's that everyone else needs to be brought *up*. The priviledged get treated in the manner that *everyone* should be treated, and those who aren't White Males get shorted.

(I have phrased that poorly, I am sure. "Higher/lower" terminology isn't the best, here, but I can't properly think of an alternative at the moment, being as I've been staring at spreadsheets for a few hours.)

Re: Thank you for blogging this

[aquaeri.livejournal.com]

I don't think privilege is bound up with blindness. For example, I have white privilege. I am aware of many situations where I'd be treated differently if I was black and the many ways in which I probably wouldn't be where I am if my ancestors hadn't been white. That doesn't change the fact that I'm privileged in the slightest, as far as I can see.

Re: Thank you for blogging this

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Perhaps it would be better to say that privilege is bound up with the opportunity for blindness. You have to choose to learn to pay attention to what's going on in order to avoid the blindness -- it's an active process.

By default, I could ignore the whole thing. After all, I am treated as expected. There's nothing to pay attention TO. I have to make a conscious effort to notice that the state of being treated normally is an abnormal state.

[nextian.livejournal.com]

I've actually been wondering about this specific issue more and more lately. There's a great deal of anger in the feminist blogosphere right now because white women are framing the debate in terms of wanting to be treated like white men -- which means being allowed to look down on people who are not white, and participate in imperialist, ethnocentric frameworks.

I'm having trouble working out which privileges should be conferrable and which should not... eta: with the debate over marriage being a particularly interesting example. I've seen the opinion expressed that marriage is in itself a token of oppression, so why should gay people work towards getting it for themselves?

However I think by and large you have a hell of a point here. <3

[supergee.livejournal.com]

That's a good point, and it's why I prefer to say "advantage," rather than "privilege."

Re: A definition of "white male privilege"

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

White male privilege is simply the condition of being treated the way that people are supposed to be treated, by default

white male privilege encompasses a whole lot of behaviours that i don't want _anyone_ to exhibit.

So you CAN'T say that you're a "humanist instead of a feminist.

i have this amazing new concept for you: words can mean more than one thing!

Re: A definition of "white male privilege"

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

white male privilege encompasses a whole lot of behaviours that i don't want _anyone_ to exhibit.

Such as?

Re: A definition of "white male privilege"

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

To be a little more specific: white male privilege has nothing to do with behaviors.

It is something that one has because one is a white male in a culture that has white male privilege. Whatever I do or do not do, I have white male privilege.

Re: A definition of "white male privilege"

[happybat.livejournal.com]

"words can mean more than one thing!"

True - but if I assign a word a meaning that is not generally recognised by my linguistic community, then I had better prepare myself for a lot of explaining what I mean, and also for the fact that my linguistic community may choose not to incorporate my 'new' meaning into their discourse.

Re: A definition of "white male privilege"

[dancing-kiralee.livejournal.com]

Yes...

... but there is a good chance that the linguistic community in question has incorporated several meanings for "humanist"... one meaning is "an ethical atheist who derives their morals and ethics from humanity"... another meaning is "someone who is interested in/majoring in the humanities"... and a third meaning might be "someone who fights for human rights in the same way a feminist fights for women's rights"

The fact that xiphias has to make this complaint is a good indication that the word in question has become, or is becoming, associated with that meaning - whether or not he wants it to be.

The fact that xiphias can make this complaint, and that people respond by expressing similar frustration about the definition, is an indication that he is right, and that the linguistic community will ultimately reject this definition.

Personally, I'm with xiphias... I need to have a word for "ethical atheist..." and that's clearly a humanist; but that doesn't mean I'm going to bury my head in the sand if people really insist on using it the other way.

I also think a word that is the equivalent of feminist, but for all people who aren't white men and not just for women, would be useful; but, for several reasons, I don't think humanist is the right word to use.

Kiralee

Re: A definition of "white male privilege"

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

of course.

however, i can't say that i've seen a single instance yet of somebody actually misunderstanding "i am not a feminist but a humanist".

there are sometimes people who make some {snarky} remark as if those of us using the word somehow were linguistically inferior and they had to teach us (guess what, xiphias, you sounded like "that guy" to me just then). *shrug*. water off this duck's back.

[phantom_wolfboy]

(Also -- if you're a "humanist", it means that you are an ethical atheist who derives their morals and ethics from humanity, rather than from a supernatural/spiritual source. The term already exists. So you CAN'T say that you're a "humanist instead of a feminist.")

Thank you for posting this. I sometimes wonder if I'm the only one I know who thinks this.

[sev]

White male privilege is simply the condition of being treated the way that people are supposed to be treated, by default.

While I mostly agree with you, that definition is subtly shaded in ways that make me itch a little.

The shape of social privilege includes the assumption that the way the privileged are treated is normal, and any way other people might be treated is an exception. [*] I think that it's not a huge leap to "well, the way the privileged are treated is the way everyone should be treated" but it is a bit of a leap, and it requires ignoring the part of privilege that includes being given preference over the less-privileged.

But your statement is way more accessible. :)

A problem with trying to co-opt "humanist" into "like a feminist, only I prefer not to acknowledge that there is a gendered axis of oppression" is that, well, there's a gendered axis of oppression. We need to publicly, explicitly identify with oppressed groups to counter the ongoing societal bias toward privileged groups; otherwise, the best we can do is maintain the status quo. Which, y'know, is better than letting things get worse. But only slightly.

[*] contrast between "are treated" and "might be treated" is intentional, there. As a privileged person I would not have to be aware whether or not others were treated differently, and would have to expend effort finding out. Which probably contributes to the sense that mistreatment due to lack of privilege is an "exception" instead of terribly, horribly common.

[fitfool.livejournal.com]

That reminds me of one long debate with Brian when we were just getting to know each other. I suggested he had a bit of an entitled attitude and he eventually convinced me of his counter-argument that everyone should feel entitled to white male privilege.

[redbird]

Yes, a lot of white male privilege (and able-bodied and straight privilege, for that matter) is as you describe. But not all. Everyone deserves to have their ideas listened to. Nobody should get away with having a coworker's idea literally ignored, then restating it to approval and praise.

White male privilege, in some contexts, means that if a white man gropes someone against her will, she's not expected or (socially, sometimes legally) allowed to retaliate or even tell people about it. The world would not be improved if everyone had the right to grope women without our consent (or if everyone had the right to grope anyone, regardless of gender, without consent).

[deerdancer22.livejournal.com]

I think that's the distinction that xiphias makes between behavior and privilege . Groping is bad behavior that takes advantage of the privilege.

But I can see how you could be saying that part of the privilege is to get away with bad behavior. That we wouldn't want for everyone!

[rebmommy.livejournal.com]

my head hurts- duzzy