Every term used to describe social situations will become ideologically and politically loaded. Originally it was a word used to describe what I mentioned in t

Every term used to describe social situations will become ideologically and politically loaded. Originally it was a word used to describe what I mentioned in the other branch, social privilege, a general set of rules that affect you which enable concentration of means and power. It is not a result of these rules which was the main point of confusion. It's not an original sin then, the rules can be changed to be more equitable. (Though some changes done under this name are either ineffective or wrong in principle.) Then someone rightly decided to call whiteness a privilege (a complex of rules pertinent to people declared by society as white, by contrast with the opposite of them), and then somehow it was conflated with immutable characteristics. Yes, a person with light skin color might not actually be or act "white". Another example: age cannot be changed (at least without), but ageism can. Age is not a privilege, set of rules pertinent to may be. (Some positive, others negative, protective or harmful.) The opposite of privilege as sum total (which is beneficial rules) is mostly kyriarchy (set of oppressive rules, mostly hierarchies). Perhaps that is a better focus, at least for now.