What Exactly Is an "Earned Privilege"?

[CapnAwesome]

Unearned privileges are the privileges that other people have.
Earned privileges are the privileges that you have.

[KUSA]

Why not? I think all these types of jobs should be filled with people that have an IQ of 85 or less.

Having trouble finding jobs?

That's a weak attempt to insult me. Actually I usually get recruited by companies that want to entice me over to them.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Why not? I think all these types of jobs should be filled with people that have an IQ of 85 or less.

Having trouble finding jobs?

eta: This is supposed to be an animated .gif, but it is obviously not functioning. It works fine on its home site, and works fine on my Tinypic account.

[Aroura]

Also, I don't think people should (or mostly even do) view unearned privilege as "bad". It's just something to try and recognize. Nobless Oblige, as my dad says. If you can recognize that you have some privilege, earned or unearned, you can try and confer some of it to those less privileged, instead of hoarding it entirely to yourself.

As a determinist, I see all privilege as unearned, anyway. We are all equally dependent on the luck of the draw for basically everything. If you recognize that you have more of any thing, including talent or intelligence, then it is your moral duty to do the best things for the most people that you can with it. Doesn't mean you can't do things for yourself (as a matter of fact, you must take care of yourself in order to care for others), you should just seek a balance.

Aka: Taoism.

[Anomalocaris]

An "earned privilege" is an incentive to encourage more people to elect to do more of the earning.

If there is no social justification to incentivize the action that "earned" the privilege, then there is no reason to allow the earning to result in privilege.

If the "earning" is a quality that can not be selectively imitated, hence the privilege incentivized nothing, then it is a waste of resource to lavish privileges on those that possesses it.

[paulpablo]

Also, I don't think people should (or mostly even do) view unearned privilege as "bad".  It's just something to try and recognize.  Nobless Oblige, as my dad says. If you can recognize that you have some privilege, earned or unearned, you can try and confer some of it to those less privileged, instead of hoarding it entirely to yourself.

As a determinist, I see all privilege as unearned, anyway.  We are all equally dependent on the luck of the draw for basically everything. If you recognize that you have more of any thing, including talent or intelligence, then it is your moral duty to do the best things for the most people that you can with it. Doesn't mean you can't do things for yourself (as a matter of fact, you must take care of yourself in order to care for others), you should just seek a balance.

Aka: Taoism.

I believe that it's possible everything may be predermined but to me that just means the earning of something was pretermined, not that it never was earned in the first place.

A person's behavior was pretermined to help them gain things.  People might be predermined to go through pain and sacrifice to achieve something but it doesn't mean that achievement was never earned.

[Ben Davis]

I'm really confused about this idea of "unearned privilege" that the SJWs like to throw around.

Firstly, you need to stop using the term 'SJWs'. It's a divisive term, created by the right wing to undermine efforts in developing social equality. Avoid the opinions of anyone who uses it and ensure you pull people up for using it.

Secondly, why? It's very simple: some people are provided with advantages, through no effort of their own, as a result of physical or social attributes afforded by chance. Now those are separate from the advantages earned in relation to those unearned. For example, good looks might make you more likely to get an acting job (unearned) but improving your acting skills would enhance that (earned). This is often referred to as 'coasting' (unearned) and 'paying your dues' (earned).

I'm especially confused about why three metrics that make a huge difference in a person's privilege - talent, intelligence, and good/bad looks - don't make the SJW list of metrics that determine a person's privilege.  

Why do you say that they're not? There are both 'direct' and 'indirect' causes of unearned privilege. Certainly 'Talent' isn't classified as unearned if personal effort is required to expose and practise that talent. No-one becomes a world class runner by accident. One may be fast, naturally (unearned) but the talent can't be recognised unless one deliberately prioritises time to running (earned). Likewise for intelligence: there's more nurture than nature involved there. That's why these are referred to as 'indirect' causes. Also privilege arises more from socio-economic systems than it does from genetics: if you're too poor for decent dentistry or to have that scar fixed, you're less able to maintain good looks.

According to the standard SJW worldview, the list of top metrics for determining a person's unearned privilege begins with race, gender, sexual orientation and trans/cis identity, religion, and able-body/disability.  But if talent, intelligence, and good/bad looks are mostly genetically determined, they why are they not parts of "unearned privilege"?

Who came up with this list? Why do you think that 'indirect' causes aren't as included as 'direct' causes? Is it because you don't see nuance?

And what exactly is an earned privilege?  Is it privilege earned through hard work?  That doesn't make sense, because being able to work hard is predicated on being able-bodied, or at least not being mentally dis-abled, which is a matter of unearned privilege.

...and you've just answered part of your own question about what's really important in terms of privilege.

Can someone explain to me why talent, intelligence, and good looks don't quality as "unearned privileges"?

And can someone explain to me what an "earned privilege" is?

I think your lack of understanding relates to your oversimplification and listening to sources that oppose equality. May I suggest that you start by challenging those?