It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
I think it's pretty dangerous to ascribe notions of privilege due to race. I think that's the case regardless of the races. I wouldn't suggest a black person was privileged because they got a scholarship. I also wouldn't suggest that a white kid like me who was beaten with belts for their entire childhood was privileged just because of their skin colour. That kid is not going to feel privileged at all.
That's what the debate is about. Can you ascribe societal benefits and ailments to skin colour. I don't think you can.
It hasn't been my reality. No matter how much you want to tell me it is. I will the arbiter of what my reality has been, because I'm the one who has lived it.
If you don't want to have a thought provoking discussion (not debate) about it, then that's fine.
I can't be more thought provoking, unless you want me to be deliberately argumentative, like a Monty Python sketch.
Maybe that's overly simplistic, but the idea that (in the predominantly white West) if you're black/brown/not pinko-grey you automatically have a whole bunch of assumptions and shit to overcome in society which simply aren't there if you're white seems pretty supportable. I want to say self-evident, but that's probably an unhelpful term.
There's black chap I know who has lived a life of considerably more privilege than I'll ever know. His dad was a respected diplomat, he went to a posh school, has always mixed with movers and shakers, runs a very successful company, is minted, and is very much a successful man. He's also a lovely, generous, caring, thoughtful chap who invests a lot of time and energy in others. And yet he's still gone through life copping a load of aggro because he walks into a room, or down the street, and he's black.
I might not have the money, the big house, the fancy parties and the lifestyle, but I can walk down the street without casual abuse or one eye on it all kicking off (unless I'm walking through a particularly dodgy situation, obviously).
When you see people talking about white privilege online and in books, they don't address the possibility of it not existing. It seems to be a foregone conclusion that this phenomenon is ever-reaching and ever-lasting. Either in totality or in specific cases. So de facto reasoning would be that they think belt-boy (let's call him belt-boy) is privileged by virtue of his skin colour.
I think "privilege" itself is a multi-factorial phenomenon, and I don't know all the factors. But I think once you start bringing in some extra factors, it starts to look a lot less like "privilege" and a lot more like "the way things should be for everyone" - which I think is a nicer way to frame the debate because it doesn't rely on dehumanizing and generalising people in order to make them feel bad.
It's not that I think privilege doesn't exist. I just don't think it's predicated on race. Or even culture as such. I think a serving suggestion of relevant factors could be something like this:
- Whether you have two parents who are loving and nurturing
- Whether the house has two incomes (this is increasingly relevant as time goes on)
- Whether your parents beat you or abused you physically/emotionally
- Whether you're taught manners and politeness
- Whether you're taught to read at an early age
- Whether parents do some kind of schooling before you even enter the school system
- Whether you have a close-knit supportive extended family (aunts, uncles, etc)
- Whether you were breast-fed or not
- The age you were given independence (in the form of walking to school, making your own lunches, dressing yourself, those kinds of things)
- Whether you're taught about how to manage money
Off the top of my head that's stuff that isn't related to race or gender, that could affect a child in the first 10 years of it's life, and that could potentially give a child a leg-up in the world given a particular set of inputs across those kinds of vectors. I'm sure there are more, but my brain is too dumb to come up with a huge list right now.
How important do you think race is when talking about privilege and opportunity?
You're less likely to have 2 parents if you're black.
Less likely to have 2 household incomes if you're black.
The other factors you mention are unknowns or at least factors that I can't quantify but if you're black, the disadvantage of those factors I mentioned are enough to mean that others, that do not suffer those disadvantages are 'privileged' in comparison and that's the key word, by comparison. It's not a coin toss, privileged or not.
Those privileges are due to skin colour plus socioeconomic factors. If you're white your disadvantages are not predicated on skin colour, ever.
You say the factors you listed are not related to race or gender - I say they are wholly dependent on race and gender - and, if you are a black woman, it may be double jeopardy.
I don't think there is any overthinking here. I think it's such an important topic to the future of race relations and humanity in general that we really need to explore it as a society. Conversations like this should be happening worldwide.
You might challenge my assumption that white privilege means all white people to all people. But that's not what I said. I was talking in general terms (when you see people online, etc) but that doesn't mean that I think all people who believe in white privilege think this way. It's my observation of general trends and patterns. It's semantics, but it's important. This is the sort of stuff I see:
http://thebloggersden.com/time-white-people-pay-privilege-equality-tax/
One example to illustrate the point. When I see people online talking about white privilege, in general they talk in terms as if white skin is a privilege. There are rarely any provisos or limitations to this theory. It's most often used in a blanket statement kind of way. That's why people get their backs up. So it stands to reason that they mean to imply that it's something all white people have, regardless of their specific unique circumstances. So it's very easy for me to say that belt-boy is not privileged.
It's not a very good theory because it isn't multifactorial. It puts the onus on a single factor - skin colour - and then runs with it, other evidence and statistics be damned.
The factors I listed are not dependent on race or gender. Dependence means that there is a pre-requisite of a particular race and/or gender in order for those factors to come to the forefront. But we know from real world observation that those factors can affect literally anyone. Even the richest whitest kids on the planet.
So something is missing from the analysis here.
All of the "less likelies" you've listed are also not dependent on race. Again, dependence is a form of requirement, and not having two parents doesn't require black skin. There is more to it.
If something is a clumsy term, then people should stop using it. And find a more refined and inclusive term that all races can get behind in order to better the world. But I see no call for that - why?
Agreed.
I'm challenging the assumption that it matters to that many people. This is the only discussion I have seen on the subject and my Facebook echo chamber is fairly political and these subjects get done to death. However, my echo chamber is a bunch of effeminate, lefty snowflakes just like me :-)
You’re right, sematics matter. Having white skin isn’t a privilege but it ‘can’ and does lead to privilege. People get their backs up because that’s what people do when they feel they are being threatened or abused so I concede that the blanket term could serve as a term of abuse if you’re white skin has afforded you zero privilege what-so-ever but these aren’t the people getting their backs up about it. The people getting pissy are the ones that still spout ‘all lives matter’ without recognising the nuance in what BLM stands for. I mean, let’s not include the fuck-nuts that actually oppose BLM, I’m not discussing racists, they have no nuance, they only have the ability to see an issue from their purview. Of course it puts the onus on one single factor – it has to to be effective.
They aren't dependant on race but they can be. Our futures are not dependent on race and they never could be. None of those factors are wholly dependant on race but they are all more likely by massive percentages if your black and I dare say that if you're white you probably have a better chance of changing those aspects for the positive because that's how systemic racism works.
Thanks for the civil exchange btw.
"Black lives don't seem to matter as much as white lives at the moment, even though it shouldn't make a difference. Sure, lots of white people lose their lives unjustly, but there's very often other factors in that injustice, and the fact is that some black people lose their lives just because they are black. There's very few white people that lose their lives just because they are white"
Black lives matter because there is a point to saying it. White lives matter on it's own doesn't have a point to it. In society that's taken as read already
https://opentextbc.ca/socialpsychology/chapter/ingroup-favoritism-and-prejudice/
https://help.reverb.com/hc/en-us/articles/360050086333-Why-are-you-suspending-the-sale-of-new-Fulltone-products-
https://reverb.com/shop/fulltone
They've been pledging money to BLM so not really a surprise
How bout this?
https://www.facebook.com/scotty.smith.520
I could link you to another well known builder but he, wisely, removed his page a few mounths ago after being called out.
Also, Vertex. I hate that people I appreciate keep associating themselves to that guy who actually scamed other artists!
"You don't know what you've got till the whole thing's gone. The days are dark and the road is long."
"You don't know what you've got till the whole thing's gone. The days are dark and the road is long."