3 ms·

1) I really don't say this to attack you personally, but frankly using the word "privileged" like that is whiny typical out if touch grad-student speak, it's di

by hoopla2013 13y ago

1) I really don't say this to attack you personally, but frankly using the word "privileged" like that is whiny typical out if touch grad-student speak, it's divorced from reality. People are not that helpless 2) Anyone who actually finds themselves under a gang injunction or might be hurt by bigoted family members ought to be smart and not post & overshare. 3) Self-censorship & under sharing is a wonderful strategy to make one's life easier. Publicly posting on ad-supported social networks isn't free speech or a crucial method of self-expression. If one is under threat, there are tons of ways to express oneself- all of which are low to zero cost: Go blog; make a fake twitter account; etc 4) The thing I'm genuinely scared of is "frictionless sharing" on social networks (Esp Linkedin) that can have real-life implications.

beatpanda 13y ago
I don't mean this personally either, but I think anyone who believes using the word "privileged" is "out-of-touch" probably needs to get more in touch with levels of society outside their own.
- hoopla2013 13y ago
  For sure- I hear that it's difficult to write what I wrote without sounding like a snobby d-bag- I just hate that phrase, the language & syntax of it (usually because it is abused so often by well-intentioned grad students) To be clear, I don't dispute the idea for one second that there are some ppl in US that no matter what they do or how hard they try it will be exceedingly difficult for them to get ahead. I also have no disagreement that aloof & sheltered (but perhaps well-meaning) say that all marginalized/overlooked people need to do is pull themselves up by their bootstraps. I'm not sure even where you & I agree "disagree" that much, but I figure that since there are a ton of options online that are super-easy for even zero-tech savvy people to find & use to express themselves & conceal their identity this isn't that big of a crisis
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - einhverfr 13y ago
    But part of the problem with "privilege" is that it attaches this to largely non-mutable characteristics of an individual and stops the discussion over what is happening regarding families and communities. For example, I am opposed to affirmative action but wouldn't want to see it go without a larger reform taking its place. I am opposed because I think that affirmative action is a bad solution to the wrong problem, that in seeking to help some blacks (particularly since they were the primary victims of segregation) escape the black inner city community, we are in essence helping token individuals and perpetuating the fundamental injustices of segregation. I think this leads not only to capital but also talent flight from such communities, and deepens rather than resolves the economic disparity. It would be different if we encouraged such people to go back into the inner city and start businesses, but instead we saddle them with big loans, and force them to go work for others. If you see segregation as a wealth pump sucking black communities dry, there isn't so much a problem of white privilege so much as there is one of systematic black disempowerment, of which things like affirmative action and social welfare programs are actually key components today (insofar as they heavily discourage people going out and getting involved in economic production on their own terms).
- einhverfr 13y ago
  IDK. I think the term is overly used, but having heard Clarence Thomas talk a bit about multiculturalism and the intersection of folks telling people what they should think based solely on race,[1] maybe there is a point. I do think though that the term often obscures more than it elucideates. Part of the problem is that there is the illusion that privilege can only work one way, so we can't talk about, for example, the fact that in terms of supporting children that we biologically have, that women are in a far privileged position relative to men in our culture (and that male privilege is necessarily a product of this, and that it has very few if any reasonable solutions[2]), so on the whole I think we are far better off just talking about problems and how they interrelate rather than forcing things into an overly simplistic narrative of privilege (yes all narratives are simplifications, but realizing this I think is the first step). But additionally I don't think it is a "privileged" viewpoint not to worry about what one posts. I think it is a foolish viewpoint. The fact is if you are in the most apparently privileged demographic (I say apparently because if privilege is a useful concept it only makes sense in specific contexts), you can still be ruined by indiscretions regarding sharing stuff on facebook. [1] http://www.scotusblog.com/media/conversation-with-justice-thomas/ http://www.scotusblog.com/media/conversation-with-justice-th... Truly mind-blowing interview about history, life, and race. [2] Any solution you can find to the problem of single mothers having all the rights regarding reproduction and single fathers only having secondary rights contingent on the mother's actions are far worse than the problem. But if you accept inequality here, in this fundamental aspect of life, it is necessarily impossible to expect that there will be full equality elsewhere, at least as long as work and family are expected to be separate. Additionally the contrary side is that if you make things uniform, asking a man to restrict paternity leave to two weeks is very different from asking a woman to do so.

beatpanda 13y ago

I don't mean this personally either, but I think anyone who believes using the word "privileged" is "out-of-touch" probably needs to get more in touch with levels of society outside their own.

hoopla2013 13y ago
For sure- I hear that it's difficult to write what I wrote without sounding like a snobby d-bag- I just hate that phrase, the language & syntax of it (usually because it is abused so often by well-intentioned grad students) To be clear, I don't dispute the idea for one second that there are some ppl in US that no matter what they do or how hard they try it will be exceedingly difficult for them to get ahead. I also have no disagreement that aloof & sheltered (but perhaps well-meaning) say that all marginalized/overlooked people need to do is pull themselves up by their bootstraps. I'm not sure even where you & I agree "disagree" that much, but I figure that since there are a ton of options online that are super-easy for even zero-tech savvy people to find & use to express themselves & conceal their identity this isn't that big of a crisis
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- einhverfr 13y ago
  But part of the problem with "privilege" is that it attaches this to largely non-mutable characteristics of an individual and stops the discussion over what is happening regarding families and communities. For example, I am opposed to affirmative action but wouldn't want to see it go without a larger reform taking its place. I am opposed because I think that affirmative action is a bad solution to the wrong problem, that in seeking to help some blacks (particularly since they were the primary victims of segregation) escape the black inner city community, we are in essence helping token individuals and perpetuating the fundamental injustices of segregation. I think this leads not only to capital but also talent flight from such communities, and deepens rather than resolves the economic disparity. It would be different if we encouraged such people to go back into the inner city and start businesses, but instead we saddle them with big loans, and force them to go work for others. If you see segregation as a wealth pump sucking black communities dry, there isn't so much a problem of white privilege so much as there is one of systematic black disempowerment, of which things like affirmative action and social welfare programs are actually key components today (insofar as they heavily discourage people going out and getting involved in economic production on their own terms).
einhverfr 13y ago
IDK. I think the term is overly used, but having heard Clarence Thomas talk a bit about multiculturalism and the intersection of folks telling people what they should think based solely on race,[1] maybe there is a point. I do think though that the term often obscures more than it elucideates. Part of the problem is that there is the illusion that privilege can only work one way, so we can't talk about, for example, the fact that in terms of supporting children that we biologically have, that women are in a far privileged position relative to men in our culture (and that male privilege is necessarily a product of this, and that it has very few if any reasonable solutions[2]), so on the whole I think we are far better off just talking about problems and how they interrelate rather than forcing things into an overly simplistic narrative of privilege (yes all narratives are simplifications, but realizing this I think is the first step). But additionally I don't think it is a "privileged" viewpoint not to worry about what one posts. I think it is a foolish viewpoint. The fact is if you are in the most apparently privileged demographic (I say apparently because if privilege is a useful concept it only makes sense in specific contexts), you can still be ruined by indiscretions regarding sharing stuff on facebook. [1] http://www.scotusblog.com/media/conversation-with-justice-thomas/ http://www.scotusblog.com/media/conversation-with-justice-th... Truly mind-blowing interview about history, life, and race. [2] Any solution you can find to the problem of single mothers having all the rights regarding reproduction and single fathers only having secondary rights contingent on the mother's actions are far worse than the problem. But if you accept inequality here, in this fundamental aspect of life, it is necessarily impossible to expect that there will be full equality elsewhere, at least as long as work and family are expected to be separate. Additionally the contrary side is that if you make things uniform, asking a man to restrict paternity leave to two weeks is very different from asking a woman to do so.