<p>alh - The parts of poetsheart’s post that resonate with me personally the most are:</p>
<h1>1 … minus the first and last sentences (which is important, so you don’t misread what I’m saying)</h1>
<h1>4 … minus the first part (I certainly don’t believe the playing field has miraculously been leveled)</h1>
<h1>8 … we’re all just struggling to get through this thing called life, and I think it’s ignorant to assume that “rich whitey” doesn’t have his or her own burdens to bear.</h1>
<p>Sure, however telling people to,“Check their privilege,” is not unifying. That’s the problem.</p>
<p>For me, #2 in not even close to accurate.</p>
<p>As I mentioned upthread, my D is on a campus where she does hear “check my privilege” and “heteronormative patriarchy” and all kinds of -isms. She sent me an email tonight in which she had gotten a free subscription to a magazine which came with a link that could be used on an iPad, which she doesn’t have but I do, so she was sending it to me thinking I’d enjoy the magazine.</p>
<p>The email read as follows: “So I got a free subscription to [magazine], and it also came with an online subscription.
Those classist bigots just assumed I had an ipad. Yet another oppression I must suffer through.” </p>
<p>She’s joking, of course, but that IS some of the kind of discourse that goes on at her campus – the least little thing is “oppressive” or a “micro-aggression.” And it does get wearying at times. I don’t blame her for being sick of it or for making fun of it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>PG: ^ you agree with that?</p>
<p>Exactly. “I can assume this about you, but don’t you dare assume anything about me.”</p>
<p>This is what I found so frustrating trying to work in my urban school district.
Administrators from the superintendent to principals were often minority. Oftentimes they came from generations of educators. So at least middle class & educated with advanced degrees.
I, as a white woman who didn’t graduate from high school was brushed off when I was trying to get the district to follow federal law when spending money intended for the education of students in special education because I was privileged and the kids I was working with were assumed to be white & " privileged" as well.</p>
<p>How can someone who qualifies for SPED be " privileged"? </p>
<p>Alh - Didn’t I say #4 minus the first part? </p>
<p>In any case, I’m not sure what’s so controversial or shocking. Am I supposed to be so liberal that I think doing drugs, not studying and not working are good things? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I work in a part of the television industry where women are in the minority. It’s tougher for women to get hired, they’re passed over for training opportunities, and they generally earn less than their male counterparts (even though they may have more education and experience). The extra training gives their male colleagues an advantage when applying for promotions, it helps them avoid layoffs more easily than the women who were denied that training, and it makes them more marketable if they do lose their job. I know women who’ve been told that their male counterparts are paid more because they have families to support and (the single ones) aren’t going to quit if they start a family. I know of employers who promised training but, while there never seemed to be a convenient time for the women to be scheduled, the men routinely were. Not every department of every company is that way, but they exist. It is disheartening to know that no matter how hard you work, your opportunities are limited by your gender. </p>
<p>If Fortgang had been an Asian-American male, would his piece have received as much backlash? </p>
<p>I think so. </p>
<p>@austinmshauri, that has been my experience too. I don’t think things will really change until all the dinosaurs running companies are gone.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just in case it is of any use in reading this post, my perspective is that of a judgy 58 yr old Southern WASP straight female. This is how I respond to #4:</p>
<p>Because the playing field has now been leveled (or almost entirely so),
The playing field has not been leveled.</p>
<p>the complainers and agitators need to take a good hard look in the mirror and stop playing the victim card.
“Complainers and agitators” are not all necessarily those disadvantaged by not having a level playing field. It is possible for those who benefit from the inequality to recognize that fact and want to do their part to solve the problem. If they possibly can. If someone will tell them what to do. Acknowledging the problem exists may be a start. It is the responsibility of all to level the playing field. It is not just the responsibility of those negatively impacted.</p>
<p>If the fact the playing field has not been leveled negatively impacts individuals, they not only have the right to point this out, it makes absolute sense they do so. Working to level the playing field by naming the problem needing to be solved is not playing the victim card. </p>
<p>It makes sense for people to point out the playing field has not been leveled. How can an unacknowledged problem be solved?</p>
<p>They need to stop having babies out of wedlock, take advantage of their educational opportunities, stop using/dealing drugs, and get a frickin’ job, for heaven’s sake! “They” is referring to those “playing the victim card.” I don’t think those “playing the victim care” that is, pointing out the playing field is not level are necessarily “using/dealing drugs, and get a frickin’ job, for heaven’s sake!” That could also be a description of those advantaged by the unequal playing field.</p>
<p>It’s an interesting exercise. The more I consider #4, the more ideas I consider. I am still thinking about the very last part and not really satisfied with my response.</p>
<p>I like poetsheart’s post. I think many white people, including myself, feel most, if not all of these things, at least sometimes, or a little bit–even if we also feel the opposite of them most of the time.</p>
<p>Another thought I had about this is that some people, especially young people like Fortgang, may have trouble recognizing “prestige” based on race as opposed to prestige based on wealth. And since a conservative guy like Fortgang tends to think that wealth (even inherited wealth) is earned, or at least deserved, he doesn’t need to apologize for it. After all, at Princeton, and probably in New Rochelle, he’s known well-off minority kids who don’t seem to have a lot of problems. I wonder whether a kid from a poorer background–or at least one who went to a high school that was both racially and economically diverse–might have a keener understanding of this. If you come from a small town in the South, like I do, you might be aware that some of the people most concerned about preserving “white prestige” were not rich whites, but poor ones.</p>
<p>Check your privilege promotes the victim mentality which damages the victims. The people who came up with this phrase are not the victims.</p>
<p>“4). Because the playing field has now been leveled (or almost entirely so), the complainers and agitators need to take a good hard look in the mirror and stop playing the victim card. They need to stop having babies out of wedlock, take advantage of their educational opportunities, stop using/dealing drugs, and get a frickin’ job, for heaven’s sake!”</p>
<p>Actually, alh, I think those are good words of advice for everyone. Men and women, any race. Perhaps said a little harshly.</p>
<p>I believe in a message of empowerment. Don’t let the misfortunes that have come upon you, or whatever you perceive as shortcomings or obstacles dictate your life. Don’t depend upon anyone else to make it happen for you, don’t waste time being angry and feeling powerless. Do not let victimhood define you. I know plenty of Caucasians who could use this advice and be much happier people.</p>
<p>STOP HAVING BABIES OUT OF WEDLOCK, especially while you are young. This is the number one path to poverty, they should be screaming this from the rooftops. This makes your life and your children’s so difficult. DO NOT DO IT!</p>
<p>Of course everyone should take advantage of their educational opportunities, nobody should use or deal drugs (even supposedly harmless marijuana can be responsible for paranoid schizophrenia), and of course people who can work should get a job if they need the money and have the capability.</p>
<p>Not quite sure how these things can be taken offensively, if in particular you take out the line, "Because the playing field has now been leveled (or almost entirely so), and apply it to everyone.</p>
<p>I agree that useful advice to almost everyone would be “get an education, don’t deal illegal drugs, and don’t have babies you can’t afford.” I am not too worried about “out of wedlock” and have mixed feelings about “using drugs” which is an incredibly broad topic imho.</p>
<p>Hunt’s post strikes a chord with me and maybe I’ll have time to respond later if the thread doesn’t move too quickly. </p>
<p>Hunt’s post is interesting but it really can work both ways. in other words, If you come from a more diverse background you have likely seen this scenario played out everyday. Thus, you are familiar with real people making very bad choices who end up in very bad situations. </p>
<p>“I am not too worried about “out of wedlock” and have mixed feelings about “using drugs” which is an incredibly broad topic imho.”</p>
<p>Some women are able to do a spectacular job of raising children on their own, though it is generally because they have a good family support network, or have children when they are older and can provide for them in both time and finances. But the most dangerous situation of having a child when you are young, no career or money, no father around, is common. I see these ladies working three jobs to support their kids, no husband in sight to help, worrying about what their kids are doing when they’re working, and it’s sad. Their lives would have been so much easier had they gotten an education, a career, married, and THEN had kids. Doesn’t matter what your ethnicity is.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Perhaps Fortgang does not think inherited wealth is earned or deserved. Perhaps he thinks it just “is.” And it “is” because his parents did all the things they were “supposed” to do, like make wise money decisions, like save for their kids’ college, their future and retirement. All those things everyone is excoriated for not doing. But when a white guy gets rich doing it and has some left over for his kids, his kids are then apparently expected to apologize for it.</p>
<p>The sentiments in the list aren’t all that different from long ago admonitions from Arthur Ashe and Bill Cosby, both of which were met with scorn from the victimhood industry.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is it in a nutshell. The divide is generally along lines of people who want to play a role in helping rectify inequality and people who only think of themselves. </p>