Part 2—Genesis of a term: In its entry on “White privilege,” the world’s leading authority on the topic offers an interesting account of the concept, and a history of the term’s origins.
In a section called “History of the concept,” the authority seems to trace the term “white skin privilege” to the work of Theodore W. Allen, starting in 1965. We can’t tell you if this account is correct, but here you see the quick thumbnail sketch:
In 1965, ...inspired by the Civil Rights movement, Theodore W. Allen began a forty-year analysis of “white skin privilege,” ”white race” privilege, and “white” privilege in a call he drafted for a “John Brown Commemoration Committee” that urged “White Americans who want government of the people” and “by the people” to “begin by first repudiating their white skin privileges.” The pamphlet, "White Blindspot," containing one essay by Allen and one by Noel Ignatin (Noel Ignatiev), published in the late 1960s, focused on the struggle against "white skin privilege” and significantly influenced the Students for a Democratic Society and sectors of the New Left. By June 15, 1969, the New York Times was reporting that the National Office of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) was calling “for an all-out fight against ‘white skin privileges.’ ”There’s more, but that’s where the term got its start, according to this history. A bit later, one slightly discordant note is perhaps allowed to creep in:
Though Allen’s work influenced Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and sectors of the “new left” and paved the way for “white privilege” and “race as social construct” study, and though he appreciated much of the work that followed, he also raised important questions about developments in those areas.For the record, some of our best friends were in SDS at that time. We just thought we’d throw that in.
New terminology can sometimes help people see situations more clearly. (At some point, someone came up with “purple” to help us get past simple “blue.”)
On the other hand, careless use of mew political language can sometimes produce less helpful outcomes. Is there any possible way in which that is happening now?
In recent weeks, the concept of “privilege” has been extremely hot, thanks in part to the depredations of history’s most demonic college freshman. All week, we’ll look at some of the ways the concept of “privilege” is now being used.
That said, what is the concept of “privilege?” In the political context, can this basic concept ever be murky, unclear, overwrought, perhaps unwisely used?
Presumably, any such concept can be misused or overextended. In the following passage, the leading authority gives its basic account of the term, “white privilege.” Already, we see the possibility of a nagging conceptual problem:
White privilege (or white skin privilege) refers to the set of societal privileges that white people benefit from beyond those commonly experienced by people of color in the same social, political, or economic spaces (nation, community, workplace, income, etc.). The term denotes both obvious and less obvious unspoken advantages that white persons may not recognize they have, which distinguishes it from overt bias or prejudice. These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; presumed greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely. The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal. It can be compared to and/or combined with the concept of male privilege.Should white people be helped to see the advantages they may have as compared to others? Absolutely! Why not?
That said, we have a question: If someone is able to “love, buy, work, play, and speak freely,” why would you call that “privilege?”
That should be the normal state of affairs. Why not simply describe it as such? If someone isn’t permitted those freedoms, why not attack that state of affairs as “discrimination” or “oppression” (or “bias”)? Is it helpful to hang a term like “privilege” around everyone else’s heads?
Alas! This term, like any term, can be overextended, unwisely applied. For our money, the following passage describes one way the use of this term and concept can perhaps possibly start to drift in an unhelpful direction:
The concept of white privilege also came to be used within radical circles for purposes of self-criticism by anti-racist whites. For instance, a 1975 article in Lesbian Tide criticized the American feminist movement for exhibiting “class privilege” and “white privilege”. Weather Underground leader Bernadine Dohrn, in a 1977 Lesbian Tide article, wrote: “...by assuming that I was beyond white privilege or allying with male privilege because I understood it, I prepared and led the way for a totally opportunist direction which infected all of our work and betrayed revolutionary principles.” The term gained new popularity in academic circles and public discourse after Peggy McIntosh's 1987 essay "White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack". McIntosh suggests that anti-racist white people need to understand how racial inequality includes benefits to them as well as disadvantages to others.To our ear, Dohrn sounds a bit like a Chinese convict, arms pulled behind her back.
“Self-criticism” can be a good thing; it can also be carried to unhelpful lengths. Her fervor stoked by her self-criticism, chastened by her total opportunism, Dohrn and them turned to the bombs.
This probably wasn’t especially helpful. (Except to Nixon and Reagan?)
Should anti-racist white people understand how racial inequality includes benefits to them as well as disadvantages to others? Absolutely—why not? (Assuming your work makes sense.)
But everything can be overdone; critiques can always be overdrawn. Tomorrow, we’ll look at one case in which this concept, which is quite hot, is perhaps being used as some have described—as an ad hominem tool designed to stifle debate.
Tomorrow: Should Julia Fisher speak?
Musings on the mainstream press corps and the American discourse
ReplyDeletelead to the admission that some of our best friends were in SDS at the time. This is crucial to our understanding of the media treatment of the topic, none of which is mentioned in the post.
"These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; presumed greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely. The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal. "
ReplyDeleteThese are things that many women, white or otherwise, do not have. Can someone benefit from white privilege while having that privilege undermined by the requirement to conform to socially constructed expectations for women?
African American civil rights activism has avoided comparisons between the status of women and that of racial minorities. I think that is partly because such comparisons undermine these sorts of constructs of privilege and show that social status is more complex than such terms describe.
If none of us is free to behave as Somerby claims should be normal, then where does that leave movements that hinge on claiming freedoms that few others have.
Every person's life is an amalgam of advantages and disadvantages. Is there any sense to doing a kind of math where they cancel each other out? I don't think it works that way. I think these things hinge on aspects of identity that are salient to a child through social relationships. It presents an odd picture where someone like Oprah can carry a deep sense of having been wronged while being the country's richest and arguably most powerful woman. What do you suppose happens when she checks her privilege -- or do the circumstances of her youth and enduring skin color excuse her from ever doing that?
If someone is able to “love, buy, work, play, and speak freely,” why would you call that “privilege?”
ReplyDeleteThat should be the normal state of affairs. Why not simply describe it as such? If someone isn’t permitted those freedoms, why not attack that state of affairs as “discrimination” or “oppression” (or “bias”)
I think this question can best be answered from a marketing POV. Pundits and political organizations have to market themselves in order to stay in business, just as soft drink and soap companies do.
Here are some marketing advantages of the discussing "white privilege", rather than discrimination against blacks:
1. There are already other established organizations and pundits dealing with discrimination against blacks. "White privilege" is a new product to bring to market.
2. "White privilege" is a way of making white people wrong. That's appealing to many people for some psychological reason that I don't understand.
BTW the ambiguity of the term, "privilege" is good from a marketing POV. Marketers are advised to, "sell the sizzle, not the steak." Although we don't know precisely what the term "privilege" means, the word has a certain sizzle to it.
From a marketing point of view, "stupidity" has no sizzle to it.
DeleteCheck your check your privilege statement. Did the demonic freshman ever really hear the phrase used?
ReplyDeleteAs I note below, it is part of college courses to teach the concept of unconscious privilege. He is more likely to have heard the phrase than most people in everyday life.
DeleteFrom the NYTimes article cited in one of Bob's many, many, many, posts on this "freshamna" essay:
DeleteJosh Moskovits, also a freshman at Princeton, said the phrase was not commonly used and argued that Mr. Fortgang did not even understand what privilege meant.
“In my opinion, it’s sort of a manufactured right-wing idea that people are running around left wing colleges saying ‘Check your privilege,’ ” he said. “He would have to say, in my opinion, something incredibly outrageous to get someone to say ‘Check your privilege.’ ”
Mr. Fortgang, 20, said he often saw the phrase used on Facebook after he has voiced conservative opinions."
I am an academic and I can confirm that it is not a right-wing manufactured idea that people are being asked to check your privilege (or similar words) on campuses. The idea that there are "left wing" colleges is silly however. It occurs when you are discussing something with someone who is a member of a racial minority group. If you persist in disagreeing with them about something, they will pull rank eventually and tell you you are too clueless to understand minority experience and thus wrong because you cannot possibly hold a valid opinion without having lived their life.
DeleteCheck you generalizations.
DeleteWhen discussing something with a self proclaimed academic who makes broad assertions which are this poorly written, I chuckle at the freedom afforded to the intellectually challenged by the anonymity of the internet.
For what such anecdotal evidence is worth. As someone who teaches at an "elite" northeastern SLAC, I offer that I had never heard the term "check your privilege," ever. I recognize the idea contained in the phrase, I guess, but as one of many in the maelstrom of exchanges on campus. Not that journalists, when they occasionally venture into campus culture, care to bother with the complexities of that maelstrom. But I don't think bob should take some right-wing-media-and-moneyed-interest-supported adolescent's overplayed article as worthy of much attention. That Fox and others have decided at this moment to seize on this article -- now, there would be the story.
DeleteActually Somerby is complaining that the article received too much attention from other media sources. He clearly thought it was stupid to take the unfocused thoughts of a college Freshman so seriously. Salon seems to have focused on it, not just Fox.
DeleteI disagree. If somerby had any interest in actually analyzing journalism, he'd do more than go after a few (often marginal) liberal sources. He's interested in creating buzz, mayhem even. Or justifying his own reactionary responses, as a so-called liberal himself (he knew some people in SDS in college, even!). Or I don't know what his motives are. He's incoherent.
DeleteSo you're sure that TDH is trying to create buzz. Or mayhem. (How would that even work?) Or he's trying to justify his reactionary responses.
DeleteOr you don't know what his motives are.
But you're sure that he's incoherent. I'll be sending over the irony fairy to smack you with her wand. Let me know when she gets there.
Old White Guys Know No Privilege
ReplyDeleteBob is floating around in his once promising past and missing the point again.
"“Check Your Privilege” is an online expression used mainly by social justice bloggers to remind others that the body and life they are born into comes with specific privileges that do not apply to all arguments or situations. The phrase also suggests that when considering another person’s plight, one must acknowledge one’s own inherent privileges and put them aside in order to gain a better understanding of his or her situation.
Origin
The phrase “Check Your Privilege” was used as early as March 2006 on the social justice blog Shrub.com[1] in an article explaining how to accept one’s inherent privilege and understand situations that members of non-privileged groups are going through."
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/check-your-privilege
The concept of privilege is taught in college courses using the Invisible Knapsack article from 1987 that Somerby describes in his post. Discussing it is a standard exercise in social psychology and sociology courses. No doubt it carried over to social justice blogs from there.
DeleteIt is an obnoxious phrase. It invalidates an argument ad hominem without addressing the content of that argument. It is lazy and offers considerable invalidation to another person to tell them their opinion does not matter because of who they are. I cannot think of anything worse than doing this, socially speaking, except the practice of shunning, which operates on a similar principle of treating someone as if they were socially invisible or inconsequential.
There is an irony that people who supposedly care about others are employing this tactic in their interactions with other people.
It might be useful for people who have obvious privilege (e.g. white skin) were able to stop discussions saying "check your anger" because I think hurting others is part of the motivation for saying the phrase to another person. It may hurt to have someone say something socially insensitive to you (out of malice or ignorance) but hurting them back under cover of continuing the interaction is passive aggressive. People who feel unempowered (for whatever reason) may prefer passive aggressive tactics, but it is still aggressive behavior and destructive of mutual understanding.
Your comment exemplifies the rationale of those who frequently lose arguments.
DeleteInteresting that you think of discussions as arguments to be won or lost instead of conversations intended to reach mutual understanding.
DeleteYour follow up comment seems to indicate you are trying to hurt my feelings by mischaracterizing my comment as applying to all oral intercourse instead of just arguments. I made no reference to discussions or conversations.
DeleteYou are either related to KZ or 12 years old. My post refers to discussions, not arguments. That was your shift. Now you are trying to sound all pompous and precise. I vote for 12 -- no doubt you giggled as you typed the word "oral intercourse".
DeleteAnonymous @12:38P,
Delete"Check your privilege" is addressed to someone who has reached a conclusion by assuming that his good experience is universal. That's it.
For example, during the last Presidential election Willard claimed that a government plan for universal health care is unnecessary because everyone in the US already has access to health care because everyone can get treatment at an emergency room. You can bet that not only does Willard and his family have the best health insurance that buys the best health care in the world, but should he or his ever require emergency care, it will bear no resemblance to the care that the uninsured receive at the local ER.
You need to look up "argumentum ad hominem." It means that a person's argument is invalid by the very fact of who he is. That's different form saying that someone has drawn the wrong conclusion from the limited data that is his own experience.
If you can't think of anything worse "socially speaking," then you need to get out more. How about threatening or bullying? And I was almost ready to head for the fainting couch because white, heterosexual men were being treated as invisible and inconsequential. But then I remembered that we own everything.
Perhaps some people are motivated to hurt you by saying CYP, but wouldn't it be more effective to simply call you an asshole? You also need to check the definition of "passive aggressive." A passive aggressive response would be to say "Whatever." or "I'm sure that's a good argument." but continue to disagree with you. CYP says "Your too-small data set has led you to an erroneous conclusion."
Why is CYP so "destructive of mutual understanding"? If it's not apt, why not simply say, "OK, I've checked my privilege. I don't see how my experience in life affects those facts in evidence that are independent of me"?
That's easy for you to say, deadrat.
Deleteholy rat poop! deadrat wrote a good comment, I'm proud of you deady.
Delete627: even a blind pig can find a rose once in awhile.
DeleteAnonymous @4:33P, touché.
DeleteAnonymous @6:27P, Can you think of anything smaller than my joy at your approval? How good is your imagination?
Anonymous @7:11, I'll bet you find that the more you agree with someone, the smarter you think he is. And it's an acorn, not a rose.
Communication happens when the message sent is the message received. As long as you think CYP means something different than the people hearing it, you are not getting the message across.
Delete"If someone is able to “love, buy, work, play, and speak freely,” why would you call that “privilege?”
ReplyDeleteYou might want to add "or drink at any water fountain you want, or sit anywhere on the bus you want." Gee, Bob. Why on earth would that be considered "privilege"?
He is not arguing that these freedoms have never been restricted. He is saying there is something odd about naming the normal condition that should prevail for all people using a restrictive term like "privilege".
DeleteYour examples are pretty dated. Today, privilege is defined economically. I would like to see a society in which people can use a restroom without being a customer, sit in a restaurant without bribing someone or wearing a jacket and tie.
"He is saying there is something odd about naming the normal condition that should prevail for all people using a restrictive term like "privilege"."
DeleteIt becomes "privilege" when it is restricted to one race. Perhaps if you and Somerby both "checked your privilege" you wouldn't take for granted those "privileges" you find oh, so dated.
And by the way, his SDS reference was also rather dated, wouldn't you say? Not to mention pointless.
Which is another reason why it is so difficult to discuss race with a person who takes "privilege" for granted.
You actually think that the blood that was shed over gaining people who are not white the right to vote, speak, eat, drink, marry, ride, etc., the same as white people are just soooo yesterday, and should be forgotten, since it will never, ever happen again.
And this is why Somerby is making such an ass of himself over the resegregation of Tuscaloosa schools. His inabilty to empathize with those who do not share the privilege he now takes for granted prevents him from seeing how wrong this is.
Why, just look at all those happy PR pictures of white and black children playing together!
And by the way, I always appreciate it when a Bob sheep comes along to explain what he really, really, really said.
DeleteAnd a mea culpa on my part. I swore off coming here and responding to any more of Somerby's ignorant racebaiting the clicks. By the latest Alexa count, this blog is down to 399 visits a day, and here I am again, being one of the few.
@1:16 -- are you seriously saying there are still restricted water fountains?
DeleteAgain, I've got to ask, why is everyone so much more concerned about racial discrimination than about discrimination based on age or sex? Yes, slaves were beaten during slavery, but women are still being beaten. Yes, it may be harder for someone African American to get a job, but it is not as hard as for someone age 50 to get hired. Those people make up the long-term unemployed, the people who have been looking for YEARS without success in this economy. Why doesn't anyone care about that? Or does it seem normal to you that this should be the state of our society? We get all churned up over past racial atrocities without caring a bit about current ones affecting people who are not racial minorities.
White folks weren't allowed to sit in whatever part of the bus they liked or use whatever water fountain they liked. They had to ride in front and use the White fountain.
Delete"And a mea culpa on my part. I swore off coming here and responding to any more of Somerby's ignorant racebaiting the clicks. By the latest Alexa count, this blog is down to 399 visits a day, and here I am again, being one of the few."
DeleteOh, you poor troll! I suspected it was a mental disorder that compelled your like, but it's nice to have confirmation. You literally can't help yourself. Pitiable.
@1:18 -- I hate to tell you this, but nobody missed you.
Delete@ 1:44 --Or you either, for that matter.
DeleteIn the words of Dan Hicks: How can I miss you if you won't go away?
DeleteMatt in the Crown. Is "your like" really an approriate response to a troll? Wouldn't "your ilk" be better?
DeleteIn the 1970's a person of this category could not get a car or home loan without a co-signer, was systematically excluded from certain job categories, was rarely admitted to law school or medical school (around 2-5%), would not be served alone in a restaurant or be given a room alone in a hotel, would be yelled at on the street in daylight and likely assaulted if alone at night, could not make certain medical decisions without someone else's consent, and was routinely excluded from stories in newspapers and magazines except for ghettoized coverage on certain pages, and was way underrepresented in elected office.
DeleteThese people were called women. Why does no one care about those historical wrongs, much less worry about which ones have been corrected in the present?
Nice try 2:07. People do care. They just don't read TDH.
Delete"Presumably, any such concept can be misused or overextended."
ReplyDeleteAlas! That said.
Bob made a funny typo. He changed "move" to "love".
ReplyDeleteMany who rashly exercise their freedom to "love" often are ordered to "move."
DeleteSalon 8 - Howler 5 and counting.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteHow To Get Your husband Back & Avoid Divorce,Love Spells That Really Work Fast
My Name is Vicky Lorimer, I am From United Kingdom.i am hear to give testimony of how i got back my husband, we got married for more than 9 years and have gotten two kids. thing were going well with us and we are always happy. until one day my husband started to behave in a way i could not understand, i was very confused by the way he treat me and the kids. later that month he did not come home again and he called me that he want a divorce, i asked him what have i done wrong to deserve this from him, all he was saying is that he want a divorce that he hate me and do not want to see me again in his life, i was mad and also frustrated do not know what to do,i was sick for more than 2 weeks because of the divorce. i love him so much he was everything to me without him my life is incomplete. i told my sister and she told me to contact a spell caster, i never believe in all this spell casting of a thing. i just want to try if something will come out of it. i contacted Dr Brave for the return of my husband to me, they told me that my husband have been taken by another woman, that she cast a spell on him that is why he hate me and also want us to divorce. then they told me that they have to cast a spell on him that will make him return to me and the kids, they casted the spell and after a week my husband called me and he told me that i should forgive him, he started to apologize on phone and said that he still love me that he did not know what happen to him that he left me. it was the spell that Dr Brave casted on him that make him to come back to me today,me and my family are now happy again today. thank you Dr Brave for what you have done for me i would have been nothing today if not for your great spell. i want you my friends who are passing through all this kind of love problem of getting back their husband, wife , or ex boyfriend and girlfriend to contact bravespellcaster@gmail.com. and you will see that your problem will be solved without any delay.
Thank you for sharing valuable information. Nice post. I enjoyed reading this post. The whole blog is very nice found some good stuff and good information here Thanks..Also visit my page Good entrepreneurship If you want to win in life or poker, you must take risks and weigh out the odds of winning and losing.
ReplyDeleteHarvard's Kennedy School Adds 'Checking Your Privilege 101' to New Student Orientation
ReplyDeleteIf you plan to attend Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, better get oriented for your orientation; you may be privileged.
But don’t worry; there’s always room for spiritual growth. The school is adding a class titled “Checking Your Privilege 101” because of pressure from student activists, and that class will be part of your orientation!
I am speechless.
Well, if you call a session of unknown length and content claimed by one student to be planned for inclusion in an orientation program "a class" I guess you are rendered so speechless you had to cut a pasted the Breitbart story about it.
DeleteNot speechless. What's that other thing?
DeleteOh, yeah. Clueless.
Clueless is a classless ad hominy Stalinista response to DinC IMHO. That said, here at TDH comments on CYP
Deletesuggest many just don't know.
Have you read much of DAinCA? I don't say he's clueless because he's DAinCA; he's clueless because what he writes shows how little he understands.
DeleteThank you so much for your comment.Best skin specialist in delhi
ReplyDeletecheap ray ban sunglasses ray band ray ban polarized ray ban 3025 ray ban reading glasses ray ban wayfarer polarized http://www.ray-bansunglasseswarbyparker.com warby parker ray ban ray ban sunglasses ray-ban sunglasses ray ban glasses ray ban aviators ray ban clubmaster cheap ray bans ray bans sunglasses ray ban aviator
ReplyDeletemichael kors outlet online sale michael kors outlet michael kors outlet online michael kors 2015 michael kors outlet michael kors outlet stores mbt Shoes discount mbt Shoes mbt shoes sale mbt shoes online Buy mbt shoes online mbt shoes shopping mbt footwear new mbt mbt usa mbt canada coach outlet coach outlet stores coach outlet online coach factory coach factory outlet coach factory online coach outlet store online coach outlet online coach factory outlet coach outlet coach outlet stores coach outlet online coach outlet store online coach outlet online coach factory outlet
ReplyDeleteReally awesome blog. Thanks for sharing this informative blog
ReplyDeleteVestige Assure Deep Cleansing Shampoo
nike roshe run
ReplyDeletemichael kors handbags
michael kors outlet online
reebok shoes
skechers outlet
nike huarache
yeezys
cheap jordans
adidas superstar shoes
harden shoes