4 ms·

It's not feeling guilty of who you are, it's being aware of who you are.

by lghh 6y ago

pb7 6y ago
I would believe that except for the “white” part. It is used to make people feel guilty for advantages that they may not even benefit from purely because they fall into a certain group.
- Pfhreak 6y ago
  It's used to make people aware of the advantages they often have because they fall into a certain group. The goal isn't to make someone feel guilty, it's to make them conscious of their advantages in hopes they help to dismantle them.
  - pb7 6y ago
    It's used to attribute individual excellence to generalized advantages of a certain group of people. If these advantages were as powerful and prevalent as you suggest, there wouldn't be more millions of white people in poverty. They certainly have some effect but it is often exaggerated to diminish the accomplishments of all people in the group. It is more fruitful to highlight the disadvantages that a group of people experience so that we may fix them and bring everyone up.
    - Pfhreak 6y ago
      > It is more fruitful to highlight the disadvantages that a group of people experience so that we may fix them and bring everyone up. I see it as the same. It's one thing to say, "I don't have to worry about X because I am white" and basically the same to say, "They do have to worry about X because they are non-white". > If these advantages were as powerful and prevalent as you suggest, there wouldn't be more millions of white people in poverty. I don't think anyone who believes in white privilege believes that it is a monolithic escalator to success. It makes some things easier. But there also exists privilege due to class, health, access to education, gender, climate, family support, etc. There are many, many types of privilege, and being white is just one of them that has an interaction with the others. (e.g. is it more advantageous to be white and able bodied or white and not able bodied? Is it more advantageous to be white and poor or black and poor? etc.) > It's used to attribute individual excellence to generalized advantages of a certain group of people. If you believe that individual excellence is the only factor, then how would you explain the demographic data about fortune 500 CEOs? One hypothesis is that privilege played a role -- that they had advantages due to race, class, gender, health, etc. that combined with their individual achievement resulted in their success. If privilege didn't play a role in their success, is it just a coincidence that the demographics overwhelmingly skew white male?

It's not feeling guilty of who you are, it's being aware of who you are.

by lghh 6y ago

It's not feeling guilty of who you are, it's being aware of who you are.

pb7 6y ago

I would believe that except for the “white” part. It is used to make people feel guilty for advantages that they may not even benefit from purely because they fall into a certain group.

Pfhreak 6y ago
It's used to make people aware of the advantages they often have because they fall into a certain group. The goal isn't to make someone feel guilty, it's to make them conscious of their advantages in hopes they help to dismantle them.
- pb7 6y ago
  It's used to attribute individual excellence to generalized advantages of a certain group of people. If these advantages were as powerful and prevalent as you suggest, there wouldn't be more millions of white people in poverty. They certainly have some effect but it is often exaggerated to diminish the accomplishments of all people in the group. It is more fruitful to highlight the disadvantages that a group of people experience so that we may fix them and bring everyone up.
  - Pfhreak 6y ago
    > It is more fruitful to highlight the disadvantages that a group of people experience so that we may fix them and bring everyone up. I see it as the same. It's one thing to say, "I don't have to worry about X because I am white" and basically the same to say, "They do have to worry about X because they are non-white". > If these advantages were as powerful and prevalent as you suggest, there wouldn't be more millions of white people in poverty. I don't think anyone who believes in white privilege believes that it is a monolithic escalator to success. It makes some things easier. But there also exists privilege due to class, health, access to education, gender, climate, family support, etc. There are many, many types of privilege, and being white is just one of them that has an interaction with the others. (e.g. is it more advantageous to be white and able bodied or white and not able bodied? Is it more advantageous to be white and poor or black and poor? etc.) > It's used to attribute individual excellence to generalized advantages of a certain group of people. If you believe that individual excellence is the only factor, then how would you explain the demographic data about fortune 500 CEOs? One hypothesis is that privilege played a role -- that they had advantages due to race, class, gender, health, etc. that combined with their individual achievement resulted in their success. If privilege didn't play a role in their success, is it just a coincidence that the demographics overwhelmingly skew white male?