You know, I thought the whole point of identifying privilege was to encourage people to identify theirs and try to do for others in gratitude. To me, it’s completely positive when someone sees their privilege, acknowledges it and then does great good in appreciation of that privilege. There are some people on those lists of both parties who have helped countless people in appreciation of their privilege. So what’s the problem? Should privilege not be allowed? Amputate the feet of everyone born white, male, financially off into stable homes? Banish them from society?
@Zoosermom Not banish them. I think the goal should be to encourage/help/provide a pathway for those not born into privilege to a life that is economically stable, professionally meaningful, and free of racial, gender or orientation bias. This can be done on a one-to-one basis (such as Mitt Romney’s personal generosity to particular families in need), on a national level through policies such as the Dream Act, or internationally as the Gates Foundation does, for example.
Hey I’m a Dem and I get tired of the reiteration of privilege :-). Everyone has different circumstances, talents, skills and work ethic. It’s what you do with it that counts. Some people wallow in misfortune, others rise above it.
It also strikes me that one privilege question is -
Take one step forward if you can make decisions about your job / business / career and know that the only people affected are your immediate family.
My H runs a small business with 20 employees. Sure, he makes more than they do - he’s the only income producer. But the fact remains that any of them can quit tomorrow and do what they want. He can’t quit without throwing 20 people out of work. That’s a huge burden. It’s a type of privilege that they have freedom he doesn’t.
Hey, aren’t some of the same people defending Romney here bashing Martin O’Malley for essentially the exact same kind of tone-deafness on a different thread? The “born on third base and thought he hit a triple” isn’t restricted to any political persuasion.
I think it should be pretty obvious to anybody that some kinds of privilege carry a lot more weight than others, and that they affect different people differently. But I’ve gotta tell you, being a middle-aged white male American who went to an Ivy League school and who has enough money to have status with Marriott and United is pretty sweet. It would be even sweeter, of course, if I had even more money and was better-looking, but everything is relative.
Those of you interesting in humorous depictions of this topic might enjoy the Tom the Dancing Bug cartoons about “Lucky Ducky.” Here’s an example: http://boingboing.net/2014/01/28/tom-the-dancing-bug-lucky-duc-4.html
The defending Romney only comes up in the context of bringing republican bashing into every possible thread, regardless of the topic. It seems to take enormous effort to find a way to do that so often and so unnecessarily. It would be fine to bash someone for being born on third base and thinking they hit a triple if the person actually thought they hit a triple. In the specific case of Mitt Romney, he is the first to say that he was born on third base. But the point is that the forum is supposed to be non-political now and it gets tiresome to see specific groups of people bashed all the time, whether it’s warranted or not and sometimes when it’s completely dishonest.
I work for a law firm. It’s a big, profitable law firm, but ultimately it’s a partnership among individuals who solicit and service clients. I make a very good living because these people have the talent, drive and ability for rainmaking and excellent client service. I don’t have the ability to do those things, but I appreciate those who do. The vast majority of those people are privileged beyond belief, but they still have to put the work in and take the risks, both personal and financial. They also do enormous amounts of pro bono work, as most lawyers do, and while privileged, do a lot of good for other people.
PG, for the umpteenth time, few if any people on this thread are talking about “wallowing in misfortune.”
Is it just me, or do there seem to be three or four people on this thread who either don’t understand or won’t accept that acknowledging privilege, and talking about what constitutes privilege, is a step towards opening doors to those who don’t yet have it? Not everyone has the skills or smarts of Oprah to move from very little, to being one of the most powerful people in the US media. In my own case, a fraternity brother’s father got me my first job out of college. That is the very definition of privilege.
If you get tired of the reiteration, PG, please just go to another thread.
At the risk of wading in here, I think the criticism comes when the following three points are true about a person:
- Has more privilege than average (white, grew up relatively well off, etc.)
- Plays the “I was poor once card” despite this (the “grad student exception” lol) and
- Criticizes others who are really poor, born with significantly less privilege, etc.
That trifecta tends to trigger criticism, no matter the party, because it’s disingenuous and rather tonedeaf.
I think people should recognize where they stand in life at the present moment and if it is a good place, then they are privileged and should be thankful and reach out and help others.
Where they came from is less important. And no one knows what the future will bring.
But I do know that I do not want to feel guilty if things are good. I know too many people who seemed to lead golden lives until their famies were devastated by illness.
And I also think about my husband’s family who felt they lived privleged lives in Europe (accepted, successful, well educated) until the Holocaust.
It may not be the politicians themselves; it may be the implied message where the main target for that party’s tax cuts in the previous decade was the estate tax, so that it would be easier to maintain an inherited-wealth aristocracy, which is seemingly counter to the ideal of the US being the land of opportunity for all.
I think this topic is contentious because it cuts against one of the basic American myths, the myth of the “self made man.” And by “myth,” I don’t mean something that isn’t true (necessarily), but rather in the sense of a foundational myth–you know, like the nobility of the Founding Fathers and the like. We like to think that in America, we’re more equal than people in other countries–and maybe we are, by and large. We like to think about Abe Lincoln being born in a log cabin, the immigrant who arrived with a dollar in his pocket, Oprah, etc. We don’t like to think about people who are blocked by obstacles that aren’t their fault–it’s uncomfortable, and it doesn’t fit with our national self-image.
And so, in another kind of typical American self-focused behavior, we tend to say, “Well, sure, I grew up white and rich, but I had obstacles to success, too, and I overcame them!”
Some of us find this thread contentious because of the gratuitous republican bashing.
As I said earlier, I’m all about gratitude and actually agree that there are a lot of people who should be a lot more grateful and self-aware. However, again, politics?
Or it could be the political turn that the thread has taken that is being complained about, not the wider world.
"Is it just me, or do there seem to be three or four people on this thread who either don’t understand or won’t accept that acknowledging privilege, and talking about what constitutes privilege, is a step towards opening doors to those who don’t yet have it? "
I don’t discount privilege. Didn’t I cite two glaring examples of white privilege? (the young black man in my neighborhood on whom cops were called, and the young black teen who had to consider the danger of participating in a fun shoot-em-up game when his white schoolmates didn’t have to think about that)
However, there are some forms of privilege that are serious - like those above - and some which are completely and utterly trivial. And I really dislike mixing the two. And I dislike the ignoring of other metaphorical crosses others may have to bear (abusive or alcoholic parent, etc.) that apparently are “invisible” because they aren’t as visible as the color of your skin or your gender.
“the gratuitous republican bashing.”
I’m sorry, @zoosermom, I just don’t see the gratuitious Republican bashing. If people question something that Mitt Romney said it is no more “Republican bashing” than criticizing something Nancy Pelosi said is “Democrat bashing” or criticizing something Bernie Sanders said would be (formerly) “Independent bashing.”
I think all anyone is saying is that when someone gets up on a platform, we expect them to “walk the walk,” whether it is Obama, Clinton, Clinton, Pelosi, Romney, Bush, Bush, Bush, Sanders, Cruz, Rubio, Fiorina, or [fill in the blank].
"At the risk of wading in here, I think the criticism comes when the following three points are true about a person:
- Has more privilege than average (white, grew up relatively well off, etc.)
- Plays the “I was poor once card” despite this (the “grad student exception” lol) and
- Criticizes others who are really poor, born with significantly less privilege, etc."
@garland, thank you! There is this automatic assumption that when you bring up privilege that somehow you are bashing accomplishments or bashing a political party or saying it isn’t okay to be well off, and I am not saying that, and I get a little tired of this turning into automatic cries of ‘class warfare’ and the like.
Garland hit the nail on the head with this, the point is simply acknowledging that others have paths that may be a lot more difficult than yours, that your success happens in part because of circumstances you had nothing to do with (note the word, part). It has nothing to do with Democrat or Republican, I have heard people who are dyed in the wool democrats who say stupid things about other people, who had benefits.
As far as using Mitt Romney I used him because of the 47% speech, and it is easy to say he didn’t mean it, etc, and maybe he didn’t…but he was pandering to a room of very well off people and that speech was tailored for the likes of those who really believe like they pay all the taxes and the 47% are moochers and such. I don’t know what Romney’s personal beliefs are, but I used that example because the people he was talking to ate up the 47% myth…
The unearned privilege argument is really aimed at the Ayn Rand mentality, that sadly has had a resurgance, the whole heroic capitalist who did everything by the sweat of his brow and never had help, etc, kind of mentality, and I have seen this across the board, with those who are well off, and those who are modestly so, and the real point of pointing out privilege is simply in realizing that those who struggle may not have had it as easy as you, that your successes had factors involve potentially that were because of things like luck, being the right age and in the right place, your race, your gender, your family’s economic situation, etc, that success is built on a lot of factors, as is failure.
Great points made by @MidwestDad3, @musicprnt, @garland, @HImom, @Hunt, @poetsheart, @uskoolfish, and @stugace. You guys have made excellent points whether it be providing examples of what privilege is or rephrasing what privilege is so comprehension can be achieved.
Privilege doesn’t mean you need to feel guilty for what you have accomplished or have been miraculously dealt by life, it’s just understanding you have either a trait or situation which puts you ahead of someone who doesn’t have it or have not experienced a situation which would put you behind someone else. Privilege is not just one thing. Each person can have a handle of set backs and push forwards within their life. It’s all about recognizing your blessings and being grateful for them through understanding how they have helped your life.
If anyone needs a song to feel great about their hard work and their accomplishments, feel free to listen to “Blessings” by Big Sean. 
"Privilege doesn’t mean you need to feel guilty for what you have accomplished or have been miraculously dealt by life, it’s jus understanding you have either a trait or situation which puts you ahead of someone who doesn’t have it or have not experienced a situation which would put you behind someone else. Privilege is not just one thing. Each person can have a handle of set backs and push forwards within their life. "
That’s not how it plays itself out in real life. In the game depicted on the video, the intent is very clear that you expect to see whites and males at the front, and people of color at the back, and we’re all supposed to be enlightened by that, as if we didn’t already know.
And we’re supposed to ignore other hardships that aren’t related to color/gender/SES, such as having an abusive or alcoholic parent, or losing a loved one to death /disease, etc.
Of course you don’t see it. It is bashing because (a) it isn’t true and (b) it is a pattern in thread after thread after thread to drag in republican public figures even though the forum is supposed to be non-political. What several of us are saying is that it’s tiresome.
And how in the world is that not political in the context of this thread? And are you unaware that you seek out such things in all sorts of threads? This may be the rare one where you can’t find a way to bring in Sarah Palin.