Checking My Privilege: Character as the Basis of Privilege - a freshman perspective

awcntdb · May 17, 2014, 12:20am

Gangs, drugs, crime etc. are not limited to poor Blacks, as posters have pointed out, e.g., asian gangs do exist. And a visit to central Iowa or West Virginia shows the scourge of the meth problem in the mid-west and South. No one race or group owns these problems.

Please take note that I stated “MANY Asians” not “ALL Asians.” I also never stated that asian gangs do not exist or that some asians do not have it tough.

Also please note the preceding qualifier was the quote above re many, not all, Asians. Many does not mean all. Therefore, there were no blanket statements made. However, I cannot control interpretation.

What I point out is, for some reason, the gangs and other negatives are not the same impediment to many poor Asians who succeed at rates FAR beyond that of poor american-born Blacks. That is just a fact; nothing fabricated or taken out of context. And these Asians are not white; they are poor; often speak limited English; and, they have no discernible privilege to check.

It is also a fact that of Blacks at the top and second tier schools about 50% are Caribbean or African even though those sub-groups are a minuscule percentage of the Black population in the US. That is just a fact; nothing fabricated or taken out of context. And they are also are not white; they are poor; and they have no discernible privilege to check. I also assume they get followed, frisked, and discriminated against just like any other Blacks who post about such incidents, yet they succeed in major demographic ways.

I agree with this, even if you were being sarcastic.

The question is how is it that poor Asians and Blacks from other countries are more resourceful at getting a minimum wage job, at getting to the library, at getting to community college, going on to four-year schools and graduating at rates that are FAR greater than native-born poor minorities? Those avenues are open to native-born minorities as well.

I am curious as to what explains this outcome:

With no privilege in their bag of tricks, the success rate of poor Asians and foreign-born Blacks belies that white privilege is some necessary component to success or that they are being held back in some under-handed way by people with white privilege. They do great regardless.

In fact, these two groups, in particular, even do better than native-born whites. White privilege be damned.

So, motivation and self-help effectively trump the white privilege thing in these groups. So why in the world are native non-white minorities not wisely following these obviously successful examples of how to get ahead? The roadmap seems rather well-outlined, and the road well-travelled by others.

What it is beginning to look like:

It seems that the “check your privilege” mantra is now just a way to explain away having less of something or not having the same access as someone else, more than it is a testament that someone has some huge unseen advantage.

ucbalumnus · May 17, 2014, 12:26am

Not necessarily completely. Would similar white immigrants as the Asian and black immigrants in question have been more successful, due to fewer racial-discrimination-type barriers for them to get over?

actingmt · May 17, 2014, 1:10am

More successful? Who ever knows why or why not someone might have been more successful? Successful is plenty without looking for some societal reason why you are not more successful. Good grief. These are college students at elite universities. They will be fine. And, if the goal is to be self-appointed spokespeople for the underprivileged a better attitude would be helpful.

awcntdb · May 17, 2014, 4:28am

I wrote that my kids say the below to people who use vapid phrases to enter conversations:

The response:

I can see how it can be taken that way IF it is used as standard operating procedure. As SOP, it would definitely be rude. But, it is a response to something very specific that deserves such a response.

It is real super easy to avoid. Do not approach my kids with any stupid statements such as “check your privilege” or anything else of that kind of sort and no one would ever hear that line.

That line is reserved solely for people who use derogatory empty phrases to refute something they do not like. It is amazing that such people can dish it out, but when the world drops in on their heads faster than they can think, they cry how you are not being nice. Typical bully tactic.

I suggest they try this approach - be nice and civil from the start, logically question why what my kids or I say may be inaccurate, and we will be nice and civil right back and engage in friendly debate. But be rude and stupid from the start, and we will take you out right then and there.

Appeasement of such behavior is the purview of suckers and soon-to-be losers; we are neither. We do not debate or exchange ideas with people who enter a conversation or when in a conversation use phrases such as “check your privilege” etc. It clear that person is not thinking critically and thus no need to continue talking unless he returns to civil, critical debate. We have much better things to do with our time than to engage the already intellectually disengaged.

I also understand not everyone agrees with the list of rules, but life is very enjoyable when people learn real fast you do not take their nonsense. Word gets around and all the negative souls, bully types and angry people just avoid you and you never have to deal with their nonsense ever again. Peaceful is term I would use for the end result. We like peaceful.

Bay · May 17, 2014, 10:01am

Except I wasn’t arguing that white privilege doesn’t exist. I was arguing that since some white men are also followed in stores, it is inappropriate to apply the blanket generalization that white males have the privilege of shopping without being followed to any particular white male because he may have been followed in stores. I was trying to give an example of why it is never appropriate to tell a person to “check your privilege” without knowing their background. I suppose if you first ask the white male if he has ever been followed, and he says no, then you could say it, but that is probably not what happens.

Bay · May 17, 2014, 10:33am

Magnetron,

Milken’s fine was $600 million in 1989, which calculates to $1.147 billion in today’s dollars.

Correction: per Wikipedia, he paid $1.1 billion in fines and compensation to investors, which equates to over $2 billion in today’s dollars.

jym626 · May 17, 2014, 11:39am

So on the one hand you indicate you want to live your life by avoiding getting into conflicts with the politically correct unenlightened people, but then you/your sons will engage them with a like-minded rude response. And the way to avoid this is for these other people to avoid interacting with your s’s? And “word gets around” that this should be the SOP for these other people? Um… ok then.

momofmusician17 · May 17, 2014, 11:55am

@ucbalumnus‌ ACK!!! How embarrassing to have a biracial son and spell it incorrectly on CC! I must have been having a senior moment.

awcntdb · May 17, 2014, 2:24pm

@jym626 - Actually, no. Specifically, we avoid conflicts with politically-correct people who do not offer anything of substance to a conversation.

We talk to liberal people all the time, but they actually present aruguments, not silly phrases that add nothing intellectually. That is a huge qualitative difference.

The word that gets around is if you are going to engage us make sure to bring your A game, not some political propaganda, fad phrases, or hollow platitudes. We have zero time for that stuff, as life is too short and should be enjoyed rather than wasted.

That is why we enjoy symposiums between people such as Robbie George and Cornell West. Could not get more different and polar in views, but neither of them say silly, vapid things to the other; it is always a substantive response directed at the argument in question. Those are the kind of engagements we have all the time with liberals and others; it is the nonsense we shut down.

Here is a link to such a symposium and debate. It is worth watching, as both men are brilliant and enjoyable to watch, even when one’s disagrees with what is being said.

<a href=“Watch: Cornel West and Robert George '77 Hold Collection on Campus :: News & Events :: Swarthmore College”>http://www.swarthmore.edu/robert-george-77-and-cornel-west-hold-collection-on-campus.xml</a>

Bay · May 17, 2014, 2:35pm

momofmusician,

Now that you are back, I have a question for you. You wrote:

If “privilege” is evaluated on the basis of racial counterparts (age and SES) then how does one conclude that Fortgang was deserving of being told to “check his privilege” from classmates with respect to comments about welfare? Granted, we don’t know exactly what he said, but it must have been along the lines that more people should be working.

Is there an assumption that it is easier for poor, uneducated whites to get jobs than poor, uneducated blacks? We probably have stats on how many whites vs. blacks are working, but are there stats on how many poor, uneducated whites vs. blacks were denied jobs? Perhaps the premise is true, but are there stats on that? If there aren’t, then it is just an assumption.

awcntdb · May 17, 2014, 3:06pm

A while back, a poster noted that he doubted “check your privilege” was ever heard by the original article’s author. In an effort to add some depth to my understanding, I asked my DS at college for the rundown of this phrase, his personal experience with it, and how it is used on his campus. Here is what he said - direct from one college freshman.

“Check your privilege” is a symbolic phrase that takes many forms. My DS has never heard that specific phrase directed at him, but many other phrases, which take the same form and tone have been. He has heard the “check your privilege” phrase, but used in broader debates in class, as a catch-all phrase to mean those with some perceived advantage in some arena. For example, “X needs to check their privilege because not everyone can do that.”

My DS gave me some examples of phrases directed at him in conversation. A couple I knew already because he was told them in high school. The key aspect of these phrases is they offer nothing of substance to any conversation, just like the “check your privilege” phrase, and they go after what others see as an excess or a special leg up. They are meant only to try and marginalize the speaker, not challenge any argument presented.

My DS has been told: (Quotation marks omitted)

How would you know?

That would not work where I live.

Your Dad has a car no one really needs.

Why does your Dad have a car worth more than my house? He should donate that money to the poor.

Your mom went to an elite school and wasted it by never working. She should have given her spot to someone else.

And his favorite is, “That is not fair. I never got to do that.”

As stated in earlier posts, when such phrases are used, we just get out of the discussion because at that point it is clearly no longer an intellectual one.

emeraldkity4 · May 17, 2014, 3:48pm

I agree that there are societal advantages to being a middle aged white woman as opposed to a young black man.
Vice versa is true as well, depends on situation.
There are certainly more structures in place to help a young teen of color succeed as opposed to a a teen who may be low income, learning disabled with uneducated parents but white.
You know how often I was told by both minority and white educators that my kid would be fine because we were white? That it wasnt so important that her IEP was not being followed?
Even though she had an IEP, we had to pay for outside tutoring. Incidentally, we couldnt afford it, but it was important enough that we took out a loan to do so.
If she had been of color, that wouldnt have been necessary.
Some job and education programs dont even have income as a criteria for selection, just skin color.

awcntdb · May 17, 2014, 7:54pm

^^ What you say about societal advantages is not a racial issue or even a gender issue, it is borne out by stats and common sense. The least crime, the least assaults, and the least insurance claims are done by middle-aged white women. That is just a demographic fact. Therefore, a middle-aged white woman, in a beat-up car in a fancy neighborhood would draw much less attention and warrant much less attention than any other cohort.

Even the vaulted Jesse Jackson has admitted this. There is a point where common sense meets the survivability instinct and not everyone should be treated the same in every situation.

RE: My previous post. Just realized not allowed to put links to blogposts, but the relevant link is still in the post.

jym626 · May 17, 2014, 11:05pm

As an aside, its often been said that people think others spend more time thinking about them than they really do.

Nrdsb4 · May 19, 2014, 3:05pm

^^^^Yeah, I have heard it phrased “You wouldn’t worry so much about what others think about you if you knew how rarely they actually do.”

MaineLonghorn · May 19, 2014, 3:13pm

What I heard was:

"In my 20s, I used to worry a lot about what other people think of me.

In my 30s, I learned to not let it bother me what other people think.

In my 40s, I realized that PEOPLE ARE NOT THINKING ABOUT ME!"

I love that. I wish I could get my kids to understand this.

Hunt · May 19, 2014, 4:24pm

I’ve suggested before that Fortgang, and those like him, prefer to make us believe that those calling him down on his privilege are addressing his race and gender, rather than his wealth, because it’s much more appealing to complain that you’re being stereotyped by race than by the fact that you are the rich son of an investment banker (attending Princeton). As this thread demonstrates, people don’t like to think that there is still significant racial bias in this country, and thus they can give all sorts of explanations of apparently biased behavior. Reasonable minds can disagree, I suppose, on just how much racial (and gender) bias there still is in this country, and how much difference it makes to individual people. But NOBODY can argue that rich people don’t have it much better than poor people, in general–and that’s why Fortgang whines about “white male” privilege, without dwelling much on the financial part.

HarvestMoon1 · May 19, 2014, 4:45pm

^^^^
Yes, but despite the differences that might exist socioeconomically, both Fontgang and whomever uttered the phrase both found themselves at Princeton. So if it turns out they both value making money, then they are on equal footing when they embark on careers.

jym626 · May 19, 2014, 5:01pm

Thanks for wording it so much better than I, nrdsb4 and ML. One has to wonder the likelihood that “word gets around” about how people will discuss, or in some cases debate, issues, and the need to somehow be prepared, or plan in advance in order to have a discussion. Some might find that off-putting.

Hunt · May 19, 2014, 5:07pm

I just went back and re-read Fortgang’s original piece (<a href=“Checking My Privilege: Character as the Basis of Privilege - Princeton Tory”>http://theprincetontory.com/main/checking-my-privilege-character-as-the-basis-of-privilege/</a>) to make sure I’m not unfairly characterizing what he said there. It’s worth another look. Note how he makes the whole issue of “check your privilege” about being white and male. But is it? He doesn’t give any example in the article of when this term might have been used (I couldn’t find a reference to comments about welfare–either I missed it, or it’s from some other source). As I mentioned before, he fudges just how rich he is–he implies that his father, like his grandfather, is in the wicker business, but I don’t think that’s the case.

So my conclusion is that Fortgang has led us all, and many more, in a merry chase. He can laugh about it at the country club this summer.

Checking My Privilege: Character as the Basis of Privilege - a freshman perspective

CONNECT WITH US