I find your insinuations unattractive, but will answer anyway. If I thought the black person’s cluelessness was based on privilege (i.e., if she were wealthy), I would say the exact same thing: in other words, it’s easy for YOU to say that welfare recipients are lazy, when you’ve never been poor a day in your life. See, you are the one who thinks “check your privilege” in the context of a statement about welfare has to do with race: I think it has to do with unearned wealth, which Fortgang has. Note: if a poor person whose family had been on welfare made this statement about welfare recipients, no sensible person would say “check your privilege” whether the speaker was black or white. Fortgang might have had a good argument if he were actually poor, but he isn’t.</p>
<p>Agree with actingmt. Wasn’t there a thread about minimum wage recently where this was discussed? In some areas, and I know of someone who experienced this, they couldn’t get anyone to come work for them for the highest wage they were able to financially offer for a salesclerk position in a small store, because the people made more money from entitlements. That is a sad state of affairs all the way around. </p>
<p>I’m not going to tell you. I’m going to let you figure out on your own, a courteous and effective response to use in that situation, because I know you are smart and educated and can do it. And by the way, it has never been asserted anywhere I have seen (other than by posters <em>assuming it</em> on this thread), that Fortgang did this, so why do we waste time on it?</p>
<p>Well, Bay, you are assuming that the person who said “check your privilege” to Fortgang when he opined about welfare was talking about his privilege as a white male. I guess Fortgang claims this, but what’s the evidence? He’s also rich, which he sort of glides over in his screed. It’s actually a clever approach, because it got a lot of people hyped up on the idea of anti-white reverse racism, etc., when that may not have been what was going on at all.</p>
<p>My insinuations absolutely ARE unattractive, because bigoted statements are unattractive!</p>
<p>I noticed that the black woman gets a pass unless she indicates to you that she is wealthy, but the white man doesn’t. That is a dangerous path. How are you going to know?</p>
<p>Give me a break, Bay. If somebody makes statements about welfare, I don’t think their race matters, but their wealth certainly does. If it’s a statement about affirmative action, it’s a different story. In the case of affirmative action, race is a key element of the issue. For welfare, it isn’t. Or do you think it is?</p>
<p>Yes, apparently we are back to that line of thinking: “If somebody makes statements about welfare, I don’t think their race matters, but their wealth certainly does.” Only poor or formerly poor people can criticize the welfare system.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would never use the phrase “check your privilege,” so the question is irrelevant to me. Is it to you?</p>
As an aside, the term “schmuck” is pejorative, given its origins. But I digress.</p>
<p>Being originally from the same area as the author of that article, the common response would be something along the lines of : “what are you- a wise guy?”</p>
<p>Let me make this simple for you: when a rich person expresses opinions about welfare, it is entirely fair to wonder, and to ask, whether he knows what he’s talking about when he talks about poor people and their problems. Maybe he does, and maybe he doesn’t. It’s possible he’s clueless because he hasn’t had that experience. A poor person may also have plenty of information gaps, but at least they know what it’s like to be poor. Similarly, when a white person expresses an opinion on whether black or white customers are more likely to be followed in stores, it is entirely fair to ask about the source of his knowledge on the subject. If it’s just that nobody ever followed him around, he doesn’t really have much to contribute. If he did a study of the topic, or something like that, it’s a different story.</p>
<p>Okay it’s fair to wonder. But, “Check you privilege,” is a shut-down comment assuming he is clueless. Not all wealthy people are clueless. Not all white people are as unfamiliar with black people as some of the posters on this thread seem to think. Some of us don’t need a study to understand human behavior because we live in a diverse world where we see all of this stuff everyday. The good and the bad.</p>
<p>“Work is better than welfare” is one comment. Probably most of us would agree.</p>
<p>“There are jobs available for people who try to get jobs” is a second comment. It’s ignorant. It ignores reality. And I’m surprised that anyone on this site would say it. If you look at longtime posters, you see that some of them have college-educated children who are taking jobs that might otherwise have gone to people without college educations, because the jobs don’t require a college education. If young people with degrees in English are baristas and warehouse workers, where does that leave people without college degrees? Unemployed, that’s where. If there are not enough jobs, then some people who want jobs and are qualified for jobs will not have jobs.</p>
<p>When I hear that unemployed high school graduates should just go out and get jobs, it makes me angry, because I know the jobs just aren’t there. Yeah, your kid who is heading to Princeton can get a summer job at McDonald’s, but what about the kid who isn’t heading to Princeton? No job for them.</p>
<p>Good point, actingmt. Some people are not informed. Like some might simply not know that a certain word is a swear word in another language. Perhaps giving them the benefit of the doubt or using it as a delicate teaching moment might be indicated, depending on the circumstances.</p>
<p>We are in agreement here. It is entirely fair to ask. It is entirely unfair to assume and respond without asking, “check your privilege.” </p>
<p>I do not think Fortgang would have raised the issue, if he had been asked to explain his position. Because if his response had been something like, “I have no idea, it is just what I think from seeing the low-life around me,” he would not have written about it, because he would have been crucified by those who heard him say that.</p>
I don’t favor shut-down comments unless it’s addressed to the clueless guy who keeps saying the same insensitive stuff over and over. In the beginning, I would certainly say something more neutral like, “Explain to me why you think that about welfare recipients.” There may be some people around who throw around shut-down comments to well-meaning people on first encounters–that isn’t very polite. But I repeat, going back to Fortgang, that he doesn’t really make a strong case that this has ever happened to him.</p>
<p>CF - I have two 20-year old kids with jobs. One is super unskilled and makes $10.00 an hour as a receptionist and has just been hired to work in a fancy chocolate shop this summer tying bows and smiling for an additional $9.45. Also, no car. The mall requires a bus ride. The other got himself trained as an EMT at a CC during high school and is now a $16hr lifeguard. Neither is at Princeton. </p>
<p>So, do you think it is a “privilege” to have the kind of job where having an unobtrusive bandaid that approximately matches your skin tone is needed? Or is it a “privilege” to have the kind of job where that doesn’t matter? Or does the “privileged” status of band-aid colors reverse multiple times as you go up the socio-economic scale?</p>
<p>Personally, I wear fluorescent green band-aids, fluorescent purple band-aids, Mickey Mouse band-aids, and something is suspect is Dora the Explorer band-aids, as well as clear and sort-of-yucky-peachier-than-ecru band-aids. I can readily sympathize with people who cannot find an unobtrusive band-aid, however. That has to be annoying, on some level.</p>
<p>I am surprised that no one has mentioned the white-shoe law firms.</p>
<p>On a serious note, I am genuinely concerned about the use of the term “privilege” when it runs the risk of undermining rights that everyone should insist on (as discussed in my long post of about 2 hours ago).</p>
<p>Perhaps I am being ignored because I come in at 52 on the privilege-o-meter. (This part is a joke. The score is real, though.)</p>
<p>@Bay How is it offensive if EVERYONE whether black or white or gay or straight or jewish or Muslim has a level of privilege? Can you at least try to make sense?</p>
<p>Unemployment rates differ across the nation, and even within states. This is another example of something that a person may not get if rates are low in their own area. In a respectful conversation, this would be pointed out.</p>