![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
xiphiasSo, elsewhere on LiveJournal, I'm in an argument about the term "privilege". And I unfortunately finally lost my cool about it. Oops.
But it gives me an opportunity to see if I can't lay out my understanding of the concept, and get your comments on it.
First, I'd like to make a distinction between "ordinary privilege" and "extraordinary privilege". Because I think that's one of the first hangups that people get into.
There are people who never break the law, because, if they want to do something that's illegal, they can just go to the lawmakers, and change the laws to allow them to do whatever they want. I'm going to call that "extraordinary privilege". If a person has extraordinary privilege, they have the ability to do clearly unjust things without consequences. And I think when people start hearing discussions about privilege, that's what they're imagining. So, if a person is told that they are benefiting from privilege, they might imagine THIS sort of privilege, and be offended because they neither take unambiguously unjust actions, nor have the ability to do so.
However, in discussions of privilege, we're generally talking about what we might call "ordinary privilege". "Ordinary privilege" isn't the ability to act unjustly: it's the ability to be treated justly. So, when I say "privilege", THAT'S what I'm talking about.
Privilege is the state in which:
1. Official systems, such as the law and businesses, treat you justly, respecting your rights, and treating you as a being with full self-determination. The systems allow you full access to their use and benefits, without undue or unnecessary restriction or hindrance.
2. In unofficial systems, such as social interactions, you are treated with ordinary respect and reasonable benefit of the doubt. In interpersonal interactions, your ideas and actions are judged on their own merits.
3. You personally have internalized points 1 and 2. You have every expectation that you will be taken on your own merits in informal interactions, and in formal interactions. You have every belief that systems will work as designed to your benefit, or, at least, NOT to your detriment.
Privilege is the inverse of discrimination. In any situation in which there is any form of discrimination or prejudice, all people who are NOT subject to that specific form of discrimination or prejudice have corresponding privilege.
"Discrimination" refers to formal, institutional situations; "prejudice" refers to informal, interpersonal situations. Privilege exists in BOTH types of situations. Anti-discrimination laws can help mitigate the problems of discrimination, but do not help against prejudice. They are therefore useful, but not full solutions.
Privilege is multi-axis, and not unitary. EVERY form of discrimination or prejudice creates a corresponding privilege. You have separate privilege for each form of discrimination which exists to which you are NOT subject.
Privilege is exactly as situational, contextual, and societal as discrimination and prejudice. Moving from one situation to another changes your privilege based on what forms of discrimination exist in each situation. Privilege is not universal.
This doesn't mean that all forms of privilege are equally beneficial. Certainly some forms of discrimination are more widespread than others; some come with more serious sanctions than others. The worse the discrimination, the more beneficial the corresponding privilege. The more widespread the discrimination, the more widely-useful the corresponding privilege.
"Privilege" and "discrimination/prejudice" are the same situation: it's just that one term refers to ONE group of people in the situation, and the other term to the OTHER group.
Fighting discrimination and prejudice inherently fights problems with privilege.
"Privilege" is not, in itself, the problem -- rather, unequal distribution of privilege is. We use the term "privilege" to talk about situations in which some people have it, and some people don't. Once EVERYBODY has it, then the problem is solved. The idea isn't actually to get rid of privilege -- rather, it's to expand privilege until EVERYBODY has it, at which point, it ceases to be a thing that needs to be considered.
In a situation of justice, we could say that there is no privilege, but we can also think of it as a situation in which EVERYBODY has privilege.
It is extremely difficult to perceive privilege from a privileged position, because privilege is the state of things working properly for you. From your own point of view, you are receiving no unusual benefits, because all the benefits you're receiving are ones that you deserve. Because everything works for you, you assume that everything works in general -- and that therefore, people who are working WITHOUT that privilege must deserve it somehow. In YOUR situation, you would only lack those benefits if you DESERVED to lack those benefits; therefore, you assume that the group who lacks those benefits must DESERVE it.
It is not possible to give up privilege. Privilege is inherent to your position and characteristics.
What am I missing, what have I gotten wrong?
But it gives me an opportunity to see if I can't lay out my understanding of the concept, and get your comments on it.
First, I'd like to make a distinction between "ordinary privilege" and "extraordinary privilege". Because I think that's one of the first hangups that people get into.
There are people who never break the law, because, if they want to do something that's illegal, they can just go to the lawmakers, and change the laws to allow them to do whatever they want. I'm going to call that "extraordinary privilege". If a person has extraordinary privilege, they have the ability to do clearly unjust things without consequences. And I think when people start hearing discussions about privilege, that's what they're imagining. So, if a person is told that they are benefiting from privilege, they might imagine THIS sort of privilege, and be offended because they neither take unambiguously unjust actions, nor have the ability to do so.
However, in discussions of privilege, we're generally talking about what we might call "ordinary privilege". "Ordinary privilege" isn't the ability to act unjustly: it's the ability to be treated justly. So, when I say "privilege", THAT'S what I'm talking about.
Privilege is the state in which:
1. Official systems, such as the law and businesses, treat you justly, respecting your rights, and treating you as a being with full self-determination. The systems allow you full access to their use and benefits, without undue or unnecessary restriction or hindrance.
2. In unofficial systems, such as social interactions, you are treated with ordinary respect and reasonable benefit of the doubt. In interpersonal interactions, your ideas and actions are judged on their own merits.
3. You personally have internalized points 1 and 2. You have every expectation that you will be taken on your own merits in informal interactions, and in formal interactions. You have every belief that systems will work as designed to your benefit, or, at least, NOT to your detriment.
Privilege is the inverse of discrimination. In any situation in which there is any form of discrimination or prejudice, all people who are NOT subject to that specific form of discrimination or prejudice have corresponding privilege.
"Discrimination" refers to formal, institutional situations; "prejudice" refers to informal, interpersonal situations. Privilege exists in BOTH types of situations. Anti-discrimination laws can help mitigate the problems of discrimination, but do not help against prejudice. They are therefore useful, but not full solutions.
Privilege is multi-axis, and not unitary. EVERY form of discrimination or prejudice creates a corresponding privilege. You have separate privilege for each form of discrimination which exists to which you are NOT subject.
Privilege is exactly as situational, contextual, and societal as discrimination and prejudice. Moving from one situation to another changes your privilege based on what forms of discrimination exist in each situation. Privilege is not universal.
This doesn't mean that all forms of privilege are equally beneficial. Certainly some forms of discrimination are more widespread than others; some come with more serious sanctions than others. The worse the discrimination, the more beneficial the corresponding privilege. The more widespread the discrimination, the more widely-useful the corresponding privilege.
"Privilege" and "discrimination/prejudice" are the same situation: it's just that one term refers to ONE group of people in the situation, and the other term to the OTHER group.
Fighting discrimination and prejudice inherently fights problems with privilege.
"Privilege" is not, in itself, the problem -- rather, unequal distribution of privilege is. We use the term "privilege" to talk about situations in which some people have it, and some people don't. Once EVERYBODY has it, then the problem is solved. The idea isn't actually to get rid of privilege -- rather, it's to expand privilege until EVERYBODY has it, at which point, it ceases to be a thing that needs to be considered.
In a situation of justice, we could say that there is no privilege, but we can also think of it as a situation in which EVERYBODY has privilege.
It is extremely difficult to perceive privilege from a privileged position, because privilege is the state of things working properly for you. From your own point of view, you are receiving no unusual benefits, because all the benefits you're receiving are ones that you deserve. Because everything works for you, you assume that everything works in general -- and that therefore, people who are working WITHOUT that privilege must deserve it somehow. In YOUR situation, you would only lack those benefits if you DESERVED to lack those benefits; therefore, you assume that the group who lacks those benefits must DESERVE it.
It is not possible to give up privilege. Privilege is inherent to your position and characteristics.
What am I missing, what have I gotten wrong?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-26 03:04 pm (UTC)