Tuesday, July 5, 2011

No, Seriously, What About Teh "Privilege"?

Today's post is on No, Seriously, What About Teh Menz, a group blog on men's issues written by a bunch of people who are woman-friendly and mostly feminist-friendly, but critical of society's treatment of men.

I get what they're saying about privilege being antagonizing that whatnot, but . . . isn't that what the privileged do? Is not a part of privilege the ability to determine what is and is not upsetting and to set the tone and language used in discourse?

I mean, if I allow the privileged to determine what words I can use to discuss the privileges of privilege, I can guarantee you I will never be discussing privilege.

And, btw, I am privileged. I am white, cis, het and mono. That's a whole lotta privilege right there, and when people tell me to check my privilege I fucking do it.

Personal Failure - Is not a part of privilege the ability to determine what is and is not upsetting and to set the tone and language used in discourse?I don't think most people do this deliberately. While there are some assholes who will pull the "you can't say that, that upsets me" card on purpose, most people who say it are genuinely upset.

I mean, if I allow the privileged to determine what words I can use to discuss the privileges of privilege, I can guarantee you I will never be discussing privilege.Everyone is privileged in some way or another, and everyone is oppressed in some way or another. There's no group that can be identified as "the privileged."

"If I allow the privileged to determine what words I can use to discuss the privileges of privilege, I can guarantee you I will never be discussing privilege." I think the problem is that privilege is genuinely a misleading term, that someone could justifiably take offense to. It implies that someone doesn't deserve their privilege of being financially secure, or going through life free from harassment and fear, or whatever. And it can be cumbersome to explain that that's not what was intended.

Whereas if you take a couple of sentences to point out what that person is failing to grasp, maybe link to a book or blog that elaborates on what they're missing -- and they STILL take offense -- then you are justified in telling them to fuck off.

Part of the problem is that "privilege", while an accurate and useful concept in many ways, has become a shibboleth in (mostly online) progressive circles. As a result it gets massively overused. Some folks insert "privilege" between every other word mainly to signal that they're a member of the tribe.

*applauds wildly* This, this is sense. Thank you for this incredibly reasonable, practical, and, as Bruno said, insightful post. I'd been struggling with my perception of the implications of the word "privilege" by myself for a little while (I figured my own discomfort had to do with the fact that I'm relatively new to the whole feminist "scene") but it's comforting to see my exact discomforts and issues with "privilege" articulated so eloquently. Thank you again for writing this!

Personal Failure has just demonstrated why I agree with Holly that privilege is a less-than-awesome word. Who is "the privileged", anyway? There's no big group somewhere of Privileged People who are all the same and all agree with each other, who are controlling things. There are so many different ways that people can be privileged that almost everyone belongs to some privileged groups and some oppressed groups. For instance, I'm white, and my parents are fairly well-off and are helping pay my college tuition, which is a huge privilege. On the other hand, I'm a woman who's in love with a woman. In most of the United States, my girlfriend and I can't get married. In some of the US, it's legal to discriminate against me in a variety of other ways.Am I part of "the privileged"? I don't know. It depends. There are definitely some things that the idea of privilege is good for, but dividing everybody into two groups based on whether they seem to have it is not a worthwhile endeavor, I think.

If you don't like the word "privilege," what word do you use for the rather common phenomenon both in the Blogosphere and in Real Life(tm) of people simply refusing to see that what they do and how they live might be causing problems for others?

Maybe I'm just old and cynical, but my experience is that most of the people who turn off their ears when you call them on their privilege aren't going to listen no matter how you put it. The problem isn't that you're using the wrong words, the problem is that taking in what you are trying to say would make them uncomfortable, and most people aren't willing to move from a place of comfort to a place of discomfort if they have a choice. Especially since most of their world is willing to tell them they're just fine.

The same thing applies to various corners of the blogosphere, including a number of feminist territories: there are communities of feminists who have a worldview that they're comfortable with (yes, people can get comfortable with getting outraged on a regular basis, too), and aren't willing to reexamine their own beliefs and attitudes.

Most people don't respond to argument or persuasion, anyway. The only thing I've seen that sometimes works is simply listening to them and being, as bishop somebody-or-other once described "witness", a human mystery.

To me, "check your privilege" seems to be only ever useful when people are in fact recognizing their *own* privilege, unpacking their *own* invisible knapsack. Unfortunately it's a lot easier to tell *others* how privileged they are, or to post long lists of privileges enjoyed by *others* on the internet, and thereby indulging in the privilege of not having to recognize one's own privileges.

In other words, there's a way in which "check your privilege" becomes all about refusing to acknowledge one's own privileges...

great post, holly, and I think it's even better because it's pre-shared to other parts of the internet. on a related note, I am constantly frustrated that I can't reblog stuff from your blog onto my tumblr. But just so you know you have some fans over there in tumble-land.

I have read articles and such that point to men having less emotional support, less ability to communicate effectively, less likely to seek psychological help and so on. It might be bad for a girl not to be "ladylike", but it's fairly acceptable to be a "tom-boy." However on the other side, boys are often called "girly" or "gay" and it is one of the worst insults they can receive. In my readings as an Education student, I came across stats stating that school-age boys fear being called "gay" more than they fear physical bullying. (I THINK I got that info from an article from the AAUW called "Beyond the Gender Wars").

From a young age, boys often feel that certain paths are cut off for them because of these expectations. Why are we STILL scoffing at men who want to be in the role of caregiver, server, helper, anyway? Fields like languages and nursing for example are still dominated by women, even as women grow in areas more traditionally male such as science and math and medicine - so when are we going to start letting boys into those roles and even encouraging them to do so? It might help solve a lot of problems because in those positions people learn empathy, understanding, communication skills and so on. It really shouldn't be taking us this long to accept that one's gender or sexuality are not directly correlated to one's career or interests, and that the traditionally "feminine" careers are NOT "sissy" or "lame" or "only for girls." They are NOT less valuable, and MEN (and women) who want to do those jobs are NOT less valuable as a result. It's annoying that women wanting to be successful still have to kind of take on a bit of a "male" persona, which is a "status upgrade" for them, but the opposite seems almost laughable....a man becoming more feminine in order to, say, go into early childhood education? Why the heck not? How much gain would we get from having male role models in those areas.

Ah well, I continue to dream...maybe some day. If I have sons of my own all I can do is TRY to let them know to follow their heart, not what everyone else tells them to do.

@AAM - How about "blind spot to seeing another's perspective", even "ignorance" would be more accurate. You've got the privilege of knowing what we mean by the word, and thus the privilege of not knowing what it must be like to hear a discussion of privilege for the first time without the context of understanding what is meant by "privilege".

My understanding of "privilege" is not as a synonym of "asshole", but a description that our individual life circumstances give us blind spots to seeing the challenges faced by others.

Saying "check your privilege" is really saying "try to understand it from ___'s perspective, but because you're not ____, you probably haven't noticed everything that happens in ___'s life. You probably don't know all the things that are important to imagine ___'s perspective because it was easy for you to not notice them, so you need to be careful to learn them".

"Privilege" is hiking an easy mountain pass, then where two trails join, meeting a person weary and hungry who's come up the other trail. You wonder, "how could this person be so exhausted? The trail was easy and the air was cool" because you could not see the twisted and scorched gully the other had climbed from.

"Privilege" is hiking an easy mountain pass, then where two trails join, meeting a person weary and hungry who's come up the other trail. You wonder, "how could this person be so exhausted? The trail was easy and the air was cool" because you could not see the twisted and scorched gully the other had climbed from. - Rowdy

I'm reminded of a (true?) story about a team of SAS soldiers who went on a mountain training exercise; a very challenging ascent of Snowdon. Exhausted and elated, they finally reached the summit and posed for a group photo - which was only slightly spoiled by the party of Girl Guides trooping up the tourist trail behind them...

Anyway, I agree that "privilege" is not the most useful of words, especially as it seems to be used with a very specific meaning that's so far removed from the word's usual definition that only "insiders" get it. Basically, it's jargon. If the person you're talking to understands it, chances are they're already aware of the issue. So why is it needed?

Rowdy - "Privilege" is hiking an easy mountain pass, then where two trails join, meeting a person weary and hungry who's come up the other trail. You wonder, "how could this person be so exhausted? The trail was easy and the air was cool" because you could not see the twisted and scorched gully the other had climbed from.

This is one of my problems with using the word, though. Because what if the pass wasn't easy for you? What if you're sweaty and you have big scratches from brambles and you turned your ankle on the way up? If someone tells you "you don't know how hard it is to climb that pass, you took the easy way!", you're going to be pissed the fuck off. You're going to point out--correctly--that if it weren't for hours of blood and sweat you'd still be at the bottom.

And yet there are still routes harder than the one you took that you don't even know about.

Because no one really is "the privileged." People vary in how hard their lives are, but (almost) no one's is super easy. It's important to acknowledge this, to say "you don't understand what I deal with," rather than saying "you don't understand what I deal with, because you never had to deal with anything."

I think saying "you don't understand because you have privilege" comes far too close to the latter.

I appreciate this. Having been the (white, het, disabled but not visibly, child of steelworkers who won a scholarship to private school) I got shut up rich boy a lot. It was amusing, right up until I was worried about having to live under a bridge during a long strike. That's when it got real annoying.

When the person who says "you don't understand what I deal with" clearly has no interest in understanding what I deal with, or even acknowledge that I could possibly have to deal with anything, it doesn't exactly motivate me to make an effort to see things from their perspective.

@Anon 3:02 - exactly, which is why we really need to acknowledge that everybody has blind spots for what other people deal with... it's really a given... and we need a much better way to facilitate that acknowledgement and the essential discussions to fill in our own blind spots while constructively helping others fill in theirs.

Ugh. I thought that blog sounded pretty cool, and figured I would check it out... then I read the comments. X( That whole 'female privilege' thing is so wrong, and so exhausting to read.. props to Holly for being able to trawl through it. For the record, I gave up when somebody started going on about how women have the privilege of being taken seriously when they're raped. FUCK. RIGHT. OFF.

Sorry about that. The actual post, I can see your point, but I still think privilege is at the very least useful shorthand, especially in non-101 and feminists-talking-to-feminists spaces, like Shaksville etc.

I came to Feminist Critics from I Blame The Patriarchy - so my journey has been an odd one.

I just want to say to Holly and the commenters here: THANK YOU, THANK YOU THANK YOU FOR EXISTING. If my first "experience" with Feminism had been at this site rather than at I Blame The Patriarchy then I think my initial experience with Feminism wouldn't have been so sour.

Also, I really like the term "blind spot." I fully support the rebranding of terms like "Patriarchy" and "rape culture" and "privilege" because I think the layman's understanding of the terms tend to taint conversations with the people whose hearts and minds we should be winning.

I thought the blog looked promising until some of the members started accusing me of domestic abuse because I had participated in consensual non-BDSM violence with a bunch of guys of which one was my boyfriend.

Recently, a moderator accused me of not acknowledging I have privilege, and when I linked to a recent post in which I mentioned my own privilege, and said that I simply didn't agree that the gender roles he mentioned was a privilege for any sex, he deleted it for being 'repetitive' but let his own accusation stand. NSWATM just proved itself to be on par with Jezebel when it comes to not listening.

I wonder, perhaps instead of, "You have privilege!", persons of an oppressed group could instead say, "I have obstacles in life that you don't have to deal with." And then direct them toward the 101 if the time/inclination isn't there to give examples. Less accusatory/inflammatory, more, "Hey, try to see it from the oppressed point of view."

As a person with a disability, I have had to find ways to explain my obstacles to people in terms they would understand (and as a teacher, I seem to do pretty well at this). One of them, for example, is, "You know that achy feeling you have when you've got the flu? That's my baseline. That's how I feel on a normal day. Many days, it's worse than that, but it's never better than that."

I like the idea of reframing it so there isn't this codeword that requires a bibliography and multiple pages of reading just to get the recipient's hackles down. I wish those who are arguing against your post would understand that you aren't saying privilege as a concept doesn't work--but that the language used to communicate to people new to the concept could be retooled to become more effective in initial introductions.

Also, with some of the examples given, such as not getting stopped by police for "driving while not white", and my own example of being in pain all the time, I wonder if, when we tell people they are privileged because they don't have these things, they think we're suggesting that we want them to have the same obstacles that we do.

Re-framing it as "obstacles to be removed from the oppressed persons' lives" might make it sound a lot less like "privileges to be taken away from the privileged persons".

Most of us can identify with being punished by having privileges removed, and I would imagine that being told, "You have privilege," especially in a stern tone, would cause many people to, in their minds, finish that sentence with, "And you're going to have them taken away because you've been bad."

Rio - exactly! That's actually one that's bugged me for a while. I have privilege? Good! I like my privilege! I think you should have it too!

I'm not saying that privilege doesn't make it harder to see where the non-privileged are coming from - it does. In the areas where I have it easy, I have to remind myself that not everyone does, and sometimes it's really easy to forget. In that sense, it's good to be aware of privilege, and yes, a lot of people only use the term in that sense. But others don't. Since I became interested in political/activist/feminist blogs, I've seen the word used almost like a weapon. The undercurrent, in many cases, is that the privileged should feel guilty for being privileged. I don't. The fact that someone else is being denied a privilege I enjoy, that's a bad thing. That's something that needs to be corrected, and I feel very strongly about that. But the privilege itself is not the bad thing.

I think the word could still be useful if one were to qualify it as "privilege to do" something, eg. privilege to vote (formerly belonging only to men), privilege to wear female clothing (still mostly exclusive to women). The origins of these privileges are important, but the origin is not what defines the privilege as a privilege, and should therefore be given less emphasis than what the privilege allows one to do.

As you note, Holly, framing it as "male privilege" makes it sound an awful lot like you're talking about a person's gender as such, and even if you're careful to put it in a way that can't be construed as an insult, it still starts a conversation about a man's gender and not about a person's privilege as a man.

Thank you for this article. I have had a really hard time putting in to words why I find the term 'privilege' awkward. I read a lot of feminist blogs, and it feels like a lot of times (especially in the comments) they just degenerate into measuring who has the most oppression. Like, if person A says something that person B disagrees with, person B often responds with, "You're talking from a position of privilege!" and person A says, "No I'm not, I'm queer/trans/disabled/a person of colour/poor/insert other marginalised group here!" And it quickly devolves into, "Well *I* am more disempowered than you because I'm queer and a person of colour and disabled!" As if the only people who can legitimately discuss disempowerment and inequality are people who've been ID checked as marginalised at the door, and the more marginalised groups you belong to, the bigger a prize you win!

And all that happens in the end is people that don't belong to [insert marginalised group under discussion] end up feeling unheard, and the people of the group end up feeling even more oppressed and disempowered and victimised than before.

And also I feel like the whole concept of 'privilege' is very much a product of American feminism, but has disseminated through the blogosphere more widely. The term isn't (or wasn't I should say, because it is now) used in other countries or discourses until recently. And I have the same misgivings about *how* it is being used.