'Straight White Male' is the Real World's easiest difficulty setting

Demyx wrote:

If you're aware that there are important differences between men and women, then you haven't abandoned maleness as part of your personal self-image.

EDIT: And yes, tact is an absolutely essential part of the equation that sadly many people, including myself, lack. Very few people like being told that they, or their society, is racist or sexist, especially if they are doing it accidentally, and it's the people who are being accidentally racist or sexist that are theoretically the most receptive to the message that they should change.

Yep. I think Ulairi's post was honest and insightful: many people assume that acknowledging the existence of privilege entails accepting responsibility for a boatload of bad stuff that no individual should assume responsibility for. Explaining that privilege does not require atonement is really difficult.

Or maybe i'm doing it wrong. *should* acknowledgement of privilege entail atonement?

Seth wrote:
Demyx wrote:

If you're aware that there are important differences between men and women, then you haven't abandoned maleness as part of your personal self-image.

EDIT: And yes, tact is an absolutely essential part of the equation that sadly many people, including myself, lack. Very few people like being told that they, or their society, is racist or sexist, especially if they are doing it accidentally, and it's the people who are being accidentally racist or sexist that are theoretically the most receptive to the message that they should change.

Yep. I think Ulairi's post was honest and insightful: many people assume that acknowledging the existence of privilege entails accepting responsibility for a boatload of bad stuff that no individual should assume responsibility for. Explaining that privilege does not require atonement is really difficult.

Or maybe i'm doing it wrong. *should* acknowledgement of privilege entail atonement?

No, because then we get into weird "apologizing for my race" areas. And I will not tread there.

I think people need to atone if they're furthering the problem, but I agree that white male privilege is not necessarily something that is the recipient's "fault".

Seth wrote:

Or maybe i'm doing it wrong. *should* acknowledgement of privilege entail atonement?

I'd settle for not having people sticking fingers in their ears and going "Nuhnuhnuhnuhnuh does not does not does not!" every time it comes up, but based on this thread, I don't see that happening.

OK, Larry, that last one was you jumping the shark, mate!

Bloo Driver wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

Maybe there's another group in these discussions: the Lurker. The Lurker just sits there, watching this stuff play out, not nearly as convinced as the Talkers of which side is right. When the Talkers on one side are made to look like fools by the Talkers on the other side--or even when the Lurker just encounters an argument they had never seen before--the Lurker's mind can be changed. Ulairi had a really good point: you can be a well-traveled, well-read, well-educated person and still not have heard of this kind of stuff. Like he asked: "is this how you liberal arts guys actually talk to each other?" Or "I feel like you guys live in a completely different planet than I do."

Sure, but I am strongly willing to bet that through their experience in life, they have already formed an opinion on if such a pervasive social force exists or not, and won't be swayed either way by a few anecdotes or a blog post. People may not call it "white male privilege" when they think about it, but when posed with the question "Do you think a white man is going to have an easier time getting an office job than a latino woman," they'll definitely have an opinion.

I guess I disagree. I think people are often swayed by a good analogy. In fact, irrationally so because people use analogies incorrectly quite often, but even when an analogy is being used properly, it gives people a new lens to understand the way they feel. Or a way to dismiss something that's been bothering them and has been keeping them from having a stronger, more well-defined opinion. Like the person you described here.

Maybe an anecdote is in order! : D

Hate crime legislation always made me uneasy. It does seem a little like thoughtcrime, a little like inequality of victims under the law. Then I started thinking about how we protect cops from being murdered more than we protect the average person. Or how we protect the bank teller from getting robbed more than the average shopkeeper. Or the bus driver from being assaulted more than the average driver. Once I figured that out I no longer had an issue with hate crime legislation. Sometimes having the right paradigm to organize the facts is as important as the facts themselves.

spider_j wrote:

OK, Larry, that last one was you jumping the shark, mate!

Haha. It may seem that way. I was looking for something fairly obvious but also true, and I can't say limbs since limbs are a part of most people's self-image.

I do have some hopes. I have introduced concepts in this site that have later been taken up and advanced by people who are, er, more popular than I and who may be able to express it better idiomatically. I felt that it was important to introduce the concept, at least - the main thrust is to get people to know about it, even if it seems to them to be unrealistic and weird.

It wasn't so long ago that interracial marriages were considered unrealistic and weird, too.

I'm a pragmatist, so I don't think along lines of what's right, who deserves what, and what's owed. What's important to me is to effect a sea change in reality, and I believe in the power of changing the self to change the world, since I have myself used this very effectively in my locality.

So, maybe it's just me, but I didn't read the article as Scalzi trying to persuade his audience that straight white male privilege exists, or to score points for being humbled and enlightened. I read it as him showing his readers another way to approach the subject with others. To paraphrase what I took away from it: "You know how some people tune out the second you start talking about privilege? Next time try explaining it as a difficulty setting, and you might actually get through to them. Recognizing one's own privilege can be hard to do, and putting it in terms they might understand better could have better results."

CheezePavilion wrote:

I guess I disagree. I think people are often swayed by a good analogy. In fact, irrationally so because people use analogies incorrectly quite often, but even when an analogy is being used properly, it gives people a new lens to understand the way they feel. Or a way to dismiss something that's been bothering them and has been keeping them from having a stronger, more well-defined opinion. Like the person you described here.

Maybe an anecdote is in order! : D

To be clear, I'm not saying what I said as a broad bit of logic to apply to people's thinking patterns in general. I mean it about this very particular topic. The situation I described in that link (and again above) is one where people already have an opinion about it, but just haven't really thought it through enough to define it in such rigid terms. Not that they have an opinion that will be swayed.

Is it possible that Americans have a harder time with this because we have certain ideas about individual responsibility and expect that life is fair?

As I think about this, a big problem is that it is really hard to introduce the concept of privilege without putting the privileged people on the defensive or feeling picked on. This may be because if I say: "White straight males receive implicit and explicit preferential treatment in mainstream American society." People tend to hear: "you are a racist, sexist, and homophobe" even when that isn't the point. American culture's assumptions about the world make it hard to say "You personally benefit from injustice even when you are not individually at fault for perpetrating the injustice."

If we assume that life is fair and people get what they deserve, then it is hard to accept that what we get is not what we necessarily deserve, but it isn't our fault.

I'm wondering if cultures that are more fatalistic and less likely to expect life to be fair have the some trouble with this.

In the end, I'd like the take away message to be: "Life's not fair kid, but always do the best that you can. Work hard when you're on the bottom and try not to be too much of an asshole when you're on top."

Bloo Driver wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

I guess I disagree. I think people are often swayed by a good analogy. In fact, irrationally so because people use analogies incorrectly quite often, but even when an analogy is being used properly, it gives people a new lens to understand the way they feel. Or a way to dismiss something that's been bothering them and has been keeping them from having a stronger, more well-defined opinion. Like the person you described here.

Maybe an anecdote is in order! : D

To be clear, I'm not saying what I said as a broad bit of logic to apply to people's thinking patterns in general. I mean it about this very particular topic. The situation I described in that link (and again above) is one where people already have an opinion about it, but just haven't really thought it through enough to define it in such rigid terms. Not that they have an opinion that will be swayed.

I guess I see more value in an opinion that's been thought through, especially on a topic like this. I agree that if you ask "Do you think a white man is going to have an easier time getting an office job than a latino woman," they'll definitely have an opinion. But *why* do they have that opinion? Is it because of a belief in the world being divided into racists and non-racists or male chauvinist pigs and everybody else? Or is it an opinion that comes from realizing prejudice doesn't just work through evil individuals? I think it's a difference that's not just about semantics.

CheezePavilion wrote:

I guess I see more value in an opinion that's been thought through, especially on a topic like this. I agree that if you ask "Do you think a white man is going to have an easier time getting an office job than a latino woman," they'll definitely have an opinion. But *why* do they have that opinion? Is it because of a belief in the world being divided into racists and non-racists or male chauvinist pigs and everybody else? Or is it an opinion that comes from realizing prejudice doesn't just work through evil individuals? I think it's a difference that's not just about semantics.

I'm not sure what I said that indicated that I don't value opinions that are thought through or that I'm discussing semantics here.

Oso wrote:

Is it possible that Americans have a harder time with this because we have certain ideas about individual responsibility and expect that life is fair?

I think so! In fact, I think an entire other thread could be made about the just world hypothesis and its effects on American culture -- everything from our views on welfare and medical care to our support of wars has some roots in this.

As I think about this, a big problem is that it is really hard to introduce the concept of privilege without putting the privileged people on the defensive or feeling picked on. This may be because if I say: "White straight males receive implicit and explicit preferential treatment in mainstream American society." People tend to hear: "you are a racist, sexist, and homophobe" even when that isn't the point. American culture's assumptions about the world make it hard to say "You personally benefit from injustice even when you are not individually at fault for perpetrating the injustice."

I couldn't agree more.

Bloo Driver wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

I guess I see more value in an opinion that's been thought through, especially on a topic like this. I agree that if you ask "Do you think a white man is going to have an easier time getting an office job than a latino woman," they'll definitely have an opinion. But *why* do they have that opinion? Is it because of a belief in the world being divided into racists and non-racists or male chauvinist pigs and everybody else? Or is it an opinion that comes from realizing prejudice doesn't just work through evil individuals? I think it's a difference that's not just about semantics.

I'm not sure what I said that indicated that I don't value opinions that are thought through or that I'm discussing semantics here.

When you said: "My main contention though is that people who can empathize decently aren't the folks that we're having to convince white male privilege exists." I think they are. I think there are people out there who can empathize decently, but their opinions aren't thought through to the point of understanding it's not just about "I hate those people!" racism.

Is it possible that Americans have a harder time with this because we have certain ideas about individual responsibility and expect that life is fair?

I got to thinking about this yesterday when doing some research on concepts of fate and destiny across different cultures.

The ancient Greeks believed in a concept called moira, which translates to one's allotment in life, and is derived somewhat from the concept of dividing up booty by social rank and caste after battle. They believed that trying to exceed one's moira would only lead to ruin. Many works of ancient Greek literature explicitly or implicitly evoke the idea of characters being killed or otherwise brought to downfall when they attempt to get more than their moira from life. Even characters who were the beloved of the gods would be struck down by those same gods if they tried to get more than they were allowed to have.

The idea was pervasive in their artwork and literature, both high and low, and has to have influenced the ancient Greek worldview in some profound ways. Likewise, there are certain American concepts that are so pervasive in our society that they've become an internalized framework for how the world operates. What immediately sprang to mind in the context of my research is that every person is responsible for their own destiny and that the direction of their lives is the culmination of the choices they've made to that point. Implicit in this is the assumption that one's life is infinitely malleable and that there isn't ever a position from which it becomes impossible to change one's fate.

Our stories, ads, songs, and so forth are heavily laced with the idea that it's never too late to change your life, that success is often the product of inner strength, and that confidence in one's self is the key to overcoming life's obstacles. Many, maybe even most, of our movies have as the central crux of character development the idea of a hero who changes and triumphs against the odds by digging deep and becoming the person they ought to be. Ours is a society obsessed with persistence in the face of opposition and the metamorphosis of a flawed person into one capable of succeeding.

This not only sets up the idea that people who don't succeed are somehow responsible for their failures, but it creates an inherent opposition to the idea that those people who did succeed began from a more advantageous position than others. When you discuss concepts like privilege, even if you don't broach the subject of guilt and responsibility, you're still undercutting many people's sense of self worth by suggesting their successes, which are a measure of a person's actualization and fortitude, might not have been entirely the product of their own will and mastery. It can be insulting, especially for people who feel that what they've earned is entirely the result of their own actions. (Which isn't to say that success doesn't derive from one's own actions, but that one can have a head start that makes those successes easier to obtain.)

Lacking a good entry point on this discussion, I'd like to present what addressing my privilege has meant to me.

Primarily, it's a matter of not taking the paradigm of my life and painting it onto the lives of others as the template for what should or shouldn't be "proper" in their lives. When people mock others for their missteps, I back up and consider that I have no idea what their lives were like before I got the offending snapshot of their reality. I have no idea what the financial situation of that guy with the fancy tattoo was when he got it, so insinuating he's freeloading detritus because he's on medicaid now is unjust. There are circumstances on this planet beyond my own, and just because my path in life has worked for me... there is no guarantee it was the path someone else should have followed.

I also try to ensure that I recognize the benefits I have received without doing any work to deserve them. On the whole, I have more wealth, influence, and opportunity just for being white and male. With that in mind, looking at marginalized groups with disdain for "negative trends" in their demographic shows willful ignorance of my own privilege. These stereotypes that get put onto the "other" may sometimes have some objective truth, but moralizing the results of those statistics into some karmic justice system is an act of astonishing privilege.

Lastly, I try and remember that my opinion, even when in the majority, is highly related to the results of living a privileged life. My sense of morality, my sense of justice, and my sense of fairness are all based on measurements taken in my body and within my community. When others who are marginalized try to relate their experiences to me, it is unjust for me to dismiss them, as SpacePPoliceman said, by insisting those aren't "real" issues. I need to listen and try to contemplate new ways to address my worldview with this new input included.

I don't feel guilt for being white and male. I don't feel I owe anyone anything because of the color of my skin. But I'd be remiss if I pretended everything I have ever earned was completely independent of my status... and I should be willing to recognize the speed of my particular sailboat owes to both the speed of the wind, and the strength of the tide.

CheezePavilion wrote:
Bloo Driver wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

I guess I see more value in an opinion that's been thought through, especially on a topic like this. I agree that if you ask "Do you think a white man is going to have an easier time getting an office job than a latino woman," they'll definitely have an opinion. But *why* do they have that opinion? Is it because of a belief in the world being divided into racists and non-racists or male chauvinist pigs and everybody else? Or is it an opinion that comes from realizing prejudice doesn't just work through evil individuals? I think it's a difference that's not just about semantics.

I'm not sure what I said that indicated that I don't value opinions that are thought through or that I'm discussing semantics here.

When you said: "My main contention though is that people who can empathize decently aren't the folks that we're having to convince white male privilege exists." I think they are. I think there are people out there who can empathize decently, but their opinions aren't thought through to the point of understanding it's not just about "I hate those people!" racism.

I guess I'm lost, here. I never made a comparative value statement here. Yes of course it's better people think things through, I never said anything contrary to that. People who empathize decently enough already don't need to be convinced in the sense there's really no argument and work to be done. It becomes a matter of taking these people and their existing thought patterns and just bringing them some more information and reasoning it out. I pointed this out because the context was talking about denying white male privilege exists or not, and people who can empathize and look around at their fellow human being aren't likely to deny that.

Ok, here's my gamer reaction to that article:

Lulz. Everyone knows straight white males are getting the nerf bat to the head. Hot bi-curious white females are the new OP class, and I'm hearing next patch straight Chinese males will be the new l33tness.

Oh, and you gotta spec your white male right. Spec jock with great hair and you're good to go. Even if you don't join a hardcore pro athlete raiding guild, there's always marketing or sales. Spec nerdy fat white kid and you won't get laid till end-game, and your job will probably be outsourced.

-----------------

I'm only part kidding btw about white females overtaking white males. The recession has hit men worse than women, and more women are pursuing college degrees than men. There's still a pay gap, but a lot of that has to do with taking time off for children or choosing less dangerous or time-consuming jobs. Career women who stay in the workforce aren't paid less than their male counterparts.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/bu...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...

Bloo Driver wrote:
Ulairi wrote:
Bloo Driver wrote:

Well, I'm just saying it's not all liberal arts "we have nothing else in our skillset than to talk about feelings" stuff.

I didn't mean it that way at all but I can see how it comes across that way. There is a bias among the EMS fields but I think that mainly comes from the experience of how school is so different between the colleges.

Sorry I didn't mean to imply you were trying to be insulting or dismissive. I get that you're saying "look some people go study topics where examining social interaction is a big deal, but I missed out on this and it confounds me." My counterpoint was just that it expands to other spheres!

kazooka wrote:

Then why isn't is just an essay that it failed at what it set out to do? (Which is what I thought when I read it.) Why does it have to be pandering?

Because... I thought it was both of those things? If I said melting ice felt wet and cold, I don't know if someone would ask me why I didn't just say I thought it was cold.

I've been reading the objections as a weird cause and effect thing. If it were effective, it would not just be playing to the crowd, and therefore it wouldn't be pandering. That means that his motives were entirely based on his abilities. I think I'm being weirdly sensitive about all this in the wake of Tycho's smug denounciations of China Mieville's smugness.

Bloo Driver wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
Bloo Driver wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

I guess I see more value in an opinion that's been thought through, especially on a topic like this. I agree that if you ask "Do you think a white man is going to have an easier time getting an office job than a latino woman," they'll definitely have an opinion. But *why* do they have that opinion? Is it because of a belief in the world being divided into racists and non-racists or male chauvinist pigs and everybody else? Or is it an opinion that comes from realizing prejudice doesn't just work through evil individuals? I think it's a difference that's not just about semantics.

I'm not sure what I said that indicated that I don't value opinions that are thought through or that I'm discussing semantics here.

When you said: "My main contention though is that people who can empathize decently aren't the folks that we're having to convince white male privilege exists." I think they are. I think there are people out there who can empathize decently, but their opinions aren't thought through to the point of understanding it's not just about "I hate those people!" racism.

I guess I'm lost, here. I never made a comparative value statement here. Yes of course it's better people think things through, I never said anything contrary to that. People who empathize decently enough already don't need to be convinced in the sense there's really no argument and work to be done. It becomes a matter of taking these people and their existing thought patterns and just bringing them some more information and reasoning it out. I pointed this out because the context was talking about denying white male privilege exists or not, and people who can empathize and look around at their fellow human being aren't likely to deny that.

I guess I am lost too, because isn't "reasoning it out" "work to be done"? It feels like your one sentence is contradicting what your next sentence is saying. Why can't a good analogy--particularly one that engages them on an emotional and intuitive level like 'the easy mode in gaming'--be the thing that makes it click for them?

I personally would have went with a game like Ninja Gaiden or Catherine from what I've heard about them because life ain't easy just because you're white, but that's a matter of polishing and perfecting what I feel isn't a bad idea.

Stephen_Clarke wrote:

Problem with discussions on "priveledge" is it severe belittles people who face real problems.

I'm gonna be straight up honest here, I'm a 34 year old man who works about 12 to 20 hours a week gathering carts in a parking lot. I don't have a lot going on in my life. I grew up learning to hang drywall, working with my father who did the same. We didn't have the money to send me to a college (Maybe if I was black, I could have gotten a scholarship. Just saying), and hell, in grade school and high school I grew up going without food some days, relying on welfare programs like school lunches. I live with my mom now, and my sister and her husband. Every day, I feel like a burden to them, because while I contribute, I don't give as much as I take. I know it. Sometimes I sit up at night and think about walking in to a Walmart with a shell in my pocket, asking to look at a shotgun, and just ending it there. I've had two teeth rot out, and have a re-occuring blister on the roof of my mouth I can't do anything about. Sometimes it swells up so big I can't talk, then it pops and the old blood and the pus and a bit... Lump falls out and I have this flappy skin on the roof of my mouth for a month, then it heals up and starts all over. I brush my teeth lots, I floss whenever I can. I got the pointy tooth on the top left, the tooth behind that and then half a shattered tooth behind that on my upper left side. Behind that are just gums, and they hurt when I try to eat. I just can't afford to see a dentist, haven't for over 15 years. I wear clothes that are basically rotting away on me. Last bought some from Good Will in 2010. With my free time, I'm out there fishing to eat this summer. Winter was hard, thank God it was warm.

My dad doesn't work anymore. His back is shot. He's had years of problems getting on disability, and because he had to compete with Mexicans for work, he had to work under the table so he hasn't got a pension, and gets very little in the way of SS. He's got a drinking problem, he uses it to cope with his back. I don't do construction anymore because the housing economy collapsed. There's no work out there. I can't get a better job than what I do now, and I have absolutely no shot at education.

So when I read some rich guy who's probably got a masters' degree sitting here telling me how easy I've got it in life because I'm white? f*ck you. Just f*ck you.

So yeah. I don't have the articulation to hold up an argument about it. But it's how I feel. And I feel justified in my anger regarding this. You want to talk about privledge, and "You can't understand the disadvantages of his life"? How do you f*cking judge me then? My life sure doesn't feel f*cking privledged. A lot of the times I want to die. So don't tell me how I'm on "easy mode", you pretentious dick.

The concept isn't just linked to race. Are you privileged because you're white? Well, honestly, yeah, but personal economics is another big chunk of it. Gender. Sexuality. Culture. This is exactly what people are talking about above. As a concept, privilege is more of a gradient than a sharp line. And it can be situational as well.

In other words, Scalzi's not really talking about you.

Problem with discussions on "priveledge" is it severe belittles people who face real problems.

I'm gonna be straight up honest here, I'm a 34 year old man who works about 12 to 20 hours a week gathering carts in a parking lot. I don't have a lot going on in my life. I grew up learning to hang drywall, working with my father who did the same. We didn't have the money to send me to a college (Maybe if I was black, I could have gotten a scholarship. Just saying), and hell, in grade school and high school I grew up going without food some days, relying on welfare programs like school lunches. I live with my mom now, and my sister and her husband. Every day, I feel like a burden to them, because while I contribute, I don't give as much as I take. I know it. Sometimes I sit up at night and think about walking in to a Walmart with a shell in my pocket, asking to look at a shotgun, and just ending it there. I've had two teeth rot out, and have a re-occuring blister on the roof of my mouth I can't do anything about. Sometimes it swells up so big I can't talk, then it pops and the old blood and the pus and a bit... Lump falls out and I have this flappy skin on the roof of my mouth for a month, then it heals up and starts all over. I brush my teeth lots, I floss whenever I can. I got the pointy tooth on the top left, the tooth behind that and then half a shattered tooth behind that on my upper left side. Behind that are just gums, and they hurt when I try to eat. I just can't afford to see a dentist, haven't for over 15 years. I wear clothes that are basically rotting away on me. Last bought some from Good Will in 2010. With my free time, I'm out there fishing to eat this summer. Winter was hard, thank God it was warm.

My dad doesn't work anymore. His back is shot. He's had years of problems getting on disability, and because he had to compete with Mexicans for work, he had to work under the table so he hasn't got a pension, and gets very little in the way of SS. He's got a drinking problem, he uses it to cope with his back. He hustled hard his whole life, started working before he was 13 with his own dad. He wasn't around much, if he wasn't staying in a motel or work barracks out of state working on a site, he was working 14, 16 hours a day, 6 days a week.

I don't do construction anymore because the housing economy collapsed. There's no work out there. I can't get a better job than what I do now, and I have absolutely no shot at education.
People at work call me "Bicycle Bob" (My name's Stephen -- I don't get the reference/insult, but I just ignore it because what am I going to say back?) because the only way I get around town is a 17 year old mountain bike. Sometimes I haul scrap on it down to the city dump for a few dollars a day when I don't go in to work or fish. Pipes, old wire, broken down old aluminum doors, cans, whatever I can get. Anymore, I've got no shame digging through a dumpster and taking what I can, and eating what still looks okay. About the only thing I really got going on for me is I'm in great shape.

So when I read some rich guy who's probably got a masters' degree sitting here telling me how easy I've got it in life because I'm white? f*ck you. Just f*ck you.

So yeah. I don't have the articulation to hold up an argument about it. But it's how I feel. And I feel justified in my anger regarding this. You want to talk about privledge, and "You can't understand the disadvantages of his life"? How do you f*cking judge me then? My life sure doesn't feel f*cking privledged. A lot of the times I want to die. So don't tell me how I'm on "easy mode", you pretentious dick.

Only way I'm even here is an old laptop I got when things were better in 2004, I pirate games and stolen wifi from my elderly neighbor who don't know how to lock it.

Oh yeah? What great privileged has being white given me?

When I get caught stealing food from a dumpster, I still gotta run, they still call the cops, they still look at me the same damn way if I were Jewish or Mexican or black. Don't tell me about my life. Don't pretend like I got it so easily.

And this is why people shouldn't toss around "privileged" and call people that, or demand people "admit" to being privileged. You haven't lived a day in my life.

Stephen_Clarke wrote:

Oh yeah? What great privileged has being white given me?

When I get caught stealing food from a dumpster, I still gotta run, they still call the cops, they still look at me the same damn way if I were Jewish or Mexican or black. Don't tell me about my life. Don't pretend like I got it so easily.

And this is why people shouldn't toss around "privileged" and call people that, or demand people "admit" to being privileged. You haven't lived a day in my life.

I feel like I'm being baited here, but honestly there's a good chance they do look at you differently than if you were black in the same situation. You don't have it easy but you likely have it easier than a black person in the exact same situation.

SixteenBlue wrote:
Stephen_Clarke wrote:

Oh yeah? What great privileged has being white given me?

When I get caught stealing food from a dumpster, I still gotta run, they still call the cops, they still look at me the same damn way if I were Jewish or Mexican or black. Don't tell me about my life. Don't pretend like I got it so easily.

And this is why people shouldn't toss around "privileged" and call people that, or demand people "admit" to being privileged. You haven't lived a day in my life.

I feel like I'm being baited here, but honestly there's a good chance they do look at you differently than if you were black in the same situation. You don't have it easy but you likely have it easier than a black person in the exact same situation.

I don't know. If you're at the economic point where you're stealing food out of the dumpster, I'd suggest that whatever privilege you might get from being white is minimal. That's part of what I was trying to say in the previous post. I agree with him. I haven't walked in his shoes. That's part of privilege.

kazooka wrote:
SixteenBlue wrote:
Stephen_Clarke wrote:

Oh yeah? What great privileged has being white given me?

When I get caught stealing food from a dumpster, I still gotta run, they still call the cops, they still look at me the same damn way if I were Jewish or Mexican or black. Don't tell me about my life. Don't pretend like I got it so easily.

And this is why people shouldn't toss around "privileged" and call people that, or demand people "admit" to being privileged. You haven't lived a day in my life.

I feel like I'm being baited here, but honestly there's a good chance they do look at you differently than if you were black in the same situation. You don't have it easy but you likely have it easier than a black person in the exact same situation.

I don't know. If you're at the economic point where you're stealing food out of the dumpster, I'd suggest that whatever privilege you might get from being white is minimal. That's part of what I was trying to say in the previous post. I agree with him. I haven't walked in his shoes. That's part of privilege.

I've never literally dived in a dumpster for food. I once worked at a grocery story in the summer between years at college and subsisted almost solely on food my manager at the grocery store let me take home. Bread that was stale, deli food that was getting thrown out anyway. So I suppose I can speak with a little authority on growing up white and poor. I had government cheese, free lunches and my family received charity when I was a kid.

But once I got to college I realized this. If I somehow managed to overcome my background, get an education and enter the workforce relatively polished I wouldn't have other artificial barriers to entry going forward. Just knowing this made me feel better. Definitely made me feel lucky and privileged.

SixteenBlue wrote:
Stephen_Clarke wrote:

Oh yeah? What great privileged has being white given me?

When I get caught stealing food from a dumpster, I still gotta run, they still call the cops, they still look at me the same damn way if I were Jewish or Mexican or black. Don't tell me about my life. Don't pretend like I got it so easily.

And this is why people shouldn't toss around "privileged" and call people that, or demand people "admit" to being privileged. You haven't lived a day in my life.

I feel like I'm being baited here, but honestly there's a good chance they do look at you differently than if you were black in the same situation. You don't have it easy but you likely have it easier than a black person in the exact same situation.

Similar with being male. I'm a dude, and rape has never figured into my life concerns, even in the most random, distant way. It's not something i've ever even been passingly concerned with. For women, that is completely different.

Calling being a Straight White Male the "easy" setting was always going to be inflammatory, but I know there are hurdles that say, a Transgender person has to hop that I simply do not face and never will have to. Noone will ever question whether or not my sexuality or identity is a "choice" or call it deranged. Noone will ever attempt to legislate against my sexuality. And noone will ever accuse me of "asking for it" if I go out to a party dressed however I like and get sexually assaulted (in the incredibly, spectacularly unlikely event that such a thing happens).

EDIT: As a sidenote, I don't think Scalzi's article is a pure example of "puffy liberal arts buffonery". The dude who does XKCD has a background in the hard sciences, and has also addressed topics like these. Concepts like patriarchy, "privilege" and the like are not simply the domain of long-haired hippies sitting in "Why Everyone in Literature is Gay 301" classes.

That said, one of the major issues in any of these discussions is that once the word "privilege" comes out, people always shut down defensively. Every time. Because the gut reaction to the word brings people to a mindset that they somehow have it on easy street, while X Minority is the plebian class, crushed underfoot. "Privilege" is a word that I wish stayed away from these discussions, because it's like Al Sharpton. Once it appears, the discussion is going to do nothing but regress into mud-slinging.

I know my increasing frustration is that it feels more and more like any time you call out these disparities and problems, whether you use the word "privilege" or not, people immediately shut down defensively, as can be seen in any number of places on the internet where comment threads have devolved into people screaming at each other, because one group feels that the very act of asking for or demanding diversity or better treatment of minority groups is immediately akin to calling another person a racist/sexist/what-have-you. More and more, I feel like people conceive the real offense is to be called a racist/whatever, rather than to do something racist/whatever. A lot of those -isms we've turned into ridiculous Disney villains, oversized stereotypes that normal people could not possibly do and how could you say such a thing I don't hate women I just think they lie about rape all the time!

So I admit, I do get tired of the notion that I have to be nicer and kinder, and excise infinite patience to educate. I'm human. I simply don't have it. Increasingly when it comes to issues of race and rape and the like, where the people who are so frequently willing to make themselves martyrs and die on that wall for their right to make insensitive rape jokes without fear of repercussion, are almost never the people who said issue actually affects.

I'm often left wondering, how do we educate then, if we cannot be stringent, if we cannot be angry, if we cannot even seem to be patting each other on the back (which is a criticism i've seen of every single one of these kind of discussions)? Why are the people affected by said -isms or inequalities expected to expend the time and energy to drag people to what are, by my estimation, frequently issues of basic humanity?

I am so confused right now and I went to one of the squishiest liberal schools in the US.

Ok, here's a couple of disjointed things:

Ulairi wrote:

I know I'm going to get attacked for this, and I mean this in a respectful way, but is this how you liberal arts guys actually talk to each other? I went to 4 years of university, and have two graduate degrees and none of the time have any of the people I hang out with and that includes gay people, women, minorities and all of that ever had any conversation like this at all. I didn't even know what " hetero-normative" was until Oso said it... ...My assumption that in college you guys on that side of the fence had to take classes that covered this sort of material and it just suck with you. I think boogle and I need to get some controversial topics going.

I'm not sure I know a gay and/or queer person who doesn't know what that term means, I picked up that term and long, long time ago and I'm a career hard sciences person. It's regular/wider use comes out of queer/feminist analysis.

Ulairi wrote:

EDIT: Maybe it's an empathy issue? When I hear this stuff, I am like "So? What am I supposed to do?" and maybe I'm not supposed to do "anything" but just understand? It's not that people like me are uncaring or anything it's just our minds think of trying to solve things. I am not a good writer so maybe this point isn't coming through well and doesn't make any sense.

What you're supposed to do is not take undue and/or unfair advantage of the privileges that life has given you. And if you're feeling particularly compassionate donate some of the extra you have been afforded to those less privileged than you. And these of course can take many, many forms depending on the specific situation and/or privilege you may be talking about. None of which is to say that you shouldn't benefit from the hand that life dealt you.

Prederick wrote:

That said, one of the major issues in any of these discussions is that once the word "privilege" comes out, people always shut down defensively. Every time. Because the gut reaction to the word brings people to a mindset that they somehow have it on easy street, while X Minority is the plebian class, crushed underfoot. "Privilege" is a word that I wish stayed away from these discussions, because it's like Al Sharpton. Once it appears, the discussion is going to do nothing but regress into mud-slinging.

Totally. I think the benefits of Scalzi's analogy is that allows for the notion that even on easy mode the difficulty curve may be precipitously sharp and also that just because you're on easy mode doesn't mean that you can't fail (strictly I think society fails people rather than people fail at life).

And lastly, I'm fairly sure that LarryC is right that people typically work on the basis that their personal experience is normal. I think that there is a reasonably large body of psychology literature about just this issue. It's one thing to know that lots of people have lots of different life experience, quite another to internalise that and change your behaviours and assumptions.

I think everyone here needs to read bell hooks.

Stephen Clark's posts illustrate the difficulty of separating privilege from guilt, because he still doesn't seem to understand it mere moments after it was discussed in the same thread. And I though several of us did a passable job explaining it.

Prederick's complaint about the frustration of treating members of privilege with kid gloves because of their ubiquitous and often hostile aversion to the concept is a sound one. We have a whole thread talking about the distaste people harbor for treating schoolyard bullies with infinite patience vs just getting even.

(revulsion at comparing straight white male privilege to bullies in 3, 2, 1...)