My privilege as a straight, white, cisgender, middle class thin male

[paulpablo]

It is because of the way your statements are formed, you don't say things like "In mainstream porn, often asian women are submissive."
You say things like.
"In porn asian women are always submissive."

By porn I meant mostly mainstream typical porn, not specific fetish porn - I thought that would be easy to understand.

The latter is invalidated quite easily because of how general the terms you use are and by the massive amounts of porn out there with dominant asian women in.

Yes but it's not mainstream intercourse porn, it's usually BDSM, foot fetish and other kinds of fetishized porn not everyone likes watching as much as common porn. Most males will probably watch intercourse regular porn and not BDSM specifically unless there's a fetish, and the image it creates is one of submission and fetishism with asian women.

The same goes if you say "In the area I live in, most of the time I'm quite sure I'm not identified by my race, I'm just a standard person identified by my personality."
Then I couldn't argue with you, I'd just assume you're telling the truth.

BUT when you say "Right here are the privileges I got from being white. I'm not identified by my race, I'm just seen as the standard person, whereas other races are seen as the exception."
Such a generalized statement immediately makes me puzzled and I feel the need to question such a statement. I'd want to ask, well how do you know you're never identified by groups of black people as being a white guy? Do you never go to areas where you're the minority race for being white and are more likely to be identified as being white rather than just seen as a standard person?
If these are privileges you get JUST for these things which you didn't choose then it doesn't work because it ceases to be a privilege once you enter an area where white people are no longer in the majority.

Actually no I've never been into such a place - But my point is that it's far more predominant for a black to walk into a white territory than the opposite - If you look at demographics, most if not all western countries are dominated by white population (or white latinos), not black hyspanic or latino or asian - This fact alone makes it more likely for a black to walk into a white urban area and get identified by the colour of his skin, than a black doing the same - Though I've already said it can happen, but even if it happens, it's still preferable to be white due to other factors I've showed you (like chances of imprisonment or the average wage of a black compared to a white) - And considering white families make more money than others, it's more likely a white family will live in a decent urban area and not in a poor one with people of colour where he/she might indeed face racism - I might as well tell you it has happened that to me but not with blacks, rather with gypsies, there's a gipsy neighbourhood in my city - However I also know that that racism towards me is insignificant compared to the stereotypes about gypsies that people (even me) have - Like all of them being criminals, or all of them stabbing people and hate going to school

But your original statement wasn't about likelihood, demographics, statistics, possibilities, how many black people go into an area populated by mainly white people, which race it's preferable to be identified as.

You simply made a statement that because you are white you will not be identified by your skin color like other races are because they are seen as the exceptions , you will just be seen as the standard guy.

I'm saying it's likely you will be considered the exception, and identified by your skin color if you encounter people of other races, which isn't an impossibility if you live in America.

It's like if I said being white means I'm privileged because bulls won't charge at me, don't live on a farm and I've never seen a bull.

Even if you're white and you have never been identified by your race, it isn't BECAUSE of your race, it's just because you haven't encountered races other than white people who do identify you by your race, or been in situations where you are the minority and then been identified for your race.

[Vosur]

Relevant: https://i.imgur.com/D9y8aq2.png

[Bad Wolf]

Now that was written by a mysoginist.

[Regina]

Just want to share my opinions on this thread before it really goes stale.

I find the word "privilege" to be the wrong word to use, let me explain why.

These third-wave feminists on the internet throw around this big word "privilege", in such a way that it suggests these things they are calling "privileges" shouldn't exist. To me, most of the things they describe as privileges are not privileges at all, they are rights. I feel like to call it a privilege suggests they are something that should be taken away from the people who have them, rather than given to the people who don't.

Let me give you an example, if you take the issue of catcalling in the street, which is harassment towards women. It's not a "privilege" to not be harassed, it's a right. Women should have that right too.

Being someone who is pretty middle-of-the-road on the almighty "privilege check" (I'm privileged as a white able-bodied male, but disadvantaged as a relatively poor gay person) I can kinda see both sides of the coin here. If I'm going to talk about the whole gay thing, for me the fight for gay rights shouldn't be about dragging straight people down to the level of "oppression" I face. It shouldn't be about making them feel bad for having rights which, as human beings, they are entitled to. It should be about trying to enjoy the same rights they do. By the same token though I can recognise that I'm not oppressed by the double whammy of both homophobia and racism that a black gay man may face, so that is a point for me to be considerate on.

Also if we're going to talk about every person who is in exactly the same level of "privilege" as me, that is to say a gay, white, poor, able-bodied male, we'd still have different experiences. A whole range of outside factors can influence how easy you have it in life. My parents may be a lot less accepting of my sexuality than the next gay person, but I may have some wealthy or influential contacts that the next poor person might not have.

It's all very wishy-washy and unrealistic to me. Intersectionality works on paper for pointing out the general trends, but the real world is more complex than "straight white male = easy life, black lesbian = struggle struggle struggle".

My point isn't to say that these people are wrong by any means, but I think we should change the use of the word "privilege". Think of these things as basic rights that everyone should have, not bonuses that should be taken away.

[Dystopia]

These third-wave feminists on the internet throw around this big word "privilege", in such a way that it suggests these things they are calling "privileges" shouldn't exist. To me, most of the things they describe as privileges are not privileges at all, they are rights. I feel like to call it a privilege suggests they are something that should be taken away from the people who have them, rather than given to the people who don't.

If you have more rights than people because of how you were born, you have privilege.

Remember in the middle ages when Clergymen and Nobles had more rights because they were born like that? How was it called? That's right, they were the privileged social groups

Rights is not equal legal rights, I'm talking more about having the same social dignity. These social justice warriors don't want to take away rights from white straight men, rather give them equally to other groups

Let me give you an example, if you take the issue of catcalling in the street, which is harassment towards women. It's not a "privilege" to not be harassed, it's a right. Women should have that right too.

Yes, it's a male privilege to not be catcalled regardless of what you wear, because you are not [rarely] catcalled simply because you were born a man. It's a privilege, what other name can you give it?

Being someone who is pretty middle-of-the-road on the almighty "privilege check" (I'm privileged as a white able-bodied male, but disadvantaged as a relatively poor gay person) I can kinda see both sides of the coin here. If I'm going to talk about the whole gay thing, for me the fight for gay rights shouldn't be about dragging straight people down to the level of "oppression" I face. It shouldn't be about making them feel bad for having rights which, as human beings, they are entitled to. It should be about trying to enjoy the same rights they do. By the same token though I can recognise that I'm not oppressed by the double whammy of both homophobia and racism that a black gay man may face, so that is a point for me to be considerate on.

Yes, but you should fight to make society aware that you should have equal treatment socially and legally, therefore you're fighting [indirectly] for straight people to lose the privilege as being seen as the standard

Also if we're going to talk about every person who is in exactly the same level of "privilege" as me, that is to say a gay, white, poor, able-bodied male, we'd still have different experiences. A whole range of outside factors can influence how easy you have it in life. My parents may be a lot less accepting of my sexuality than the next gay person, but I may have some wealthy or influential contacts that the next poor person might not have.

It's true, some people may have it easier than others. But we can measure this by the average person in society. How many people still see gay men as effeminate and "different"? And how many people still think being gay is disgusting?

It's all very wishy-washy and unrealistic to me. Intersectionality works on paper for pointing out the general trends, but the real world is more complex than "straight white male = easy life, black lesbian = struggle struggle struggle".

That's the opposite of insersectionality. But yeah, white male usually means easier life compared to out of the closet lesbian black woman, just tell me how many white men enter college, finish degrees and work in a good job compared to black lesbian women

My point isn't to say that these people are wrong by any means, but I think we should change the use of the word "privilege". Think of these things as basic rights that everyone should have, not bonuses that should be taken away.

Arguing on etymology doesn't change the problem. But you can use the word that pleases you the most.

I use the word privilege because it has more impact, it pisses some people off, but that's exactly my intention - To create an impact and make people realize that contrary to some think just because the law says so it doesn't mean everyone is treated equally.

[paulpablo]

Just want to share my opinions on this thread before it really goes stale.

I find the word "privilege" to be the wrong word to use, let me explain why.

These third-wave feminists on the internet throw around this big word "privilege", in such a way that it suggests these things they are calling "privileges" shouldn't exist. To me, most of the things they describe as privileges are not privileges at all, they are rights. I feel like to call it a privilege suggests they are something that should be taken away from the people who have them, rather than given to the people who don't.

Let me give you an example, if you take the issue of catcalling in the street, which is harassment towards women. It's not a "privilege" to not be harassed, it's a right. Women should have that right too.

Being someone who is pretty middle-of-the-road on the almighty "privilege check" (I'm privileged as a white able-bodied male, but disadvantaged as a relatively poor gay person) I can kinda see both sides of the coin here. If I'm going to talk about the whole gay thing, for me the fight for gay rights shouldn't be about dragging straight people down to the level of "oppression" I face. It shouldn't be about making them feel bad for having rights which, as human beings, they are entitled to. It should be about trying to enjoy the same rights they do. By the same token though I can recognise that I'm not oppressed by the double whammy of both homophobia and racism that a black gay man may face, so that is a point for me to be considerate on.

Also if we're going to talk about every person who is in exactly the same level of "privilege" as me, that is to say a gay, white, poor, able-bodied male, we'd still have different experiences. A whole range of outside factors can influence how easy you have it in life. My parents may be a lot less accepting of my sexuality than the next gay person, but I may have some wealthy or influential contacts that the next poor person might not have.

It's all very wishy-washy and unrealistic to me. Intersectionality works on paper for pointing out the general trends, but the real world is more complex than "straight white male = easy life, black lesbian = struggle struggle struggle".

My point isn't to say that these people are wrong by any means, but I think we should change the use of the word "privilege". Think of these things as basic rights that everyone should have, not bonuses that should be taken away.

I just agree with this "straight white male = easy life, black lesbian = struggle struggle struggle", that it is an oversimplification.

I don't agree with changing how the word privilege is used, a lot of the things mentioned on the first page aren't privileges of a specific race or sex anyway.

[Regina]

I use the word privilege because it has more impact, it pisses some people off, but that's exactly my intention - To create an impact

But do you not think that pissing people off has the opposite effect of getting people to listen though? This is part of the reason I think some people are struggling to take internet "SOCIAL JUSTICE!!!!" seriously.

"Pissing people off" isn't going to encourage people to listen to what you have to say, really it's just going to make them run a mile.

I can't see why we can't just discuss racism, sexism, homophobia and all other nasty-isms and phobias. They do need discussing, they haven't vanished and that was never my point. However, bloggers on these platforms seem incapable of going straight to the point on whatever the problem is. It has to go into this pissing contest of "I've had it more tragic than you". That's very difficult for any adult with good social skills to take seriously. It comes off self-pitiful, holier-than-thou and above all else petty. It's childish schoolyard mentality.

But it seems like whenever someone points this out, it's "oh this person is anti-feminist!" or "you are so privileged and you can't see your privilege!". I don't think seeing flaws in it is anti-feminist, I just think it's having your own opinion.

Otherwise I can generally agree with what you said. The concept of "privilege" and "intersectionality" are fine on paper like I said before, I just think there are flaws. It's an over-simplified view of the world, where two people with "identical" identities can have dramatically different experiences based on surroundings. These things don't happen in a vacuum.

[Dystopia]

Really? One of the known effects of privilege is that it's invisible to those who benefit from it. After all, I was a white straight male since birth, I obviously never noticed that I had it much easier than others.

Paulpablo, consider the demographics of western societies - That are, undeniably largely white, and this is true for America, despite the immigrant population, and the same applies to Europe - Vocal minorities like Muslims in France don't disprove the existence of largely white populations (regardless of the "kind" of white) and the fact whites are richer, have more education and hold the majority of important jobs from politics to CEO's and media.

Check out this. And I don't care about your personal situation, it's not evidence for anything, if we consider that the average person of colour is poorer than a white person, it becomes completely irrelevant because the only area people of colour don't suffer from lack of privilege is inside poor, segregated, highly criminal urban areas (exceptions don't defy the general rule btw) - For the purpose I consider anyone who is at least 51% white to be white.

You still haven't managed to disprove because I actually presented my case with reasons that favour groups over another. It's very easy to deny the existence of privilege when you're benefiting from it - In fact, it's a win win situation for privileged groups. There's also documented evidence for my case, if there's any subject you need evidence or clearing, ask me that I'll send you what you need.

Also on male privilege, check out this.

On gay and trans* people, I think it's so obvious that I don't need to dig further. Do you need anything on poor people or thin people?

---

But do you not think that pissing people off has the opposite effect of getting people to listen though? This is part of the reason I think some people are struggling to take internet "SOCIAL JUSTICE!!!!" seriously.

Atheism pisses people off as well. I don't care.

The fact people don't take it seriously doesn't mean it's not needed.

"Pissing people off" isn't going to encourage people to listen to what you have to say, really it's just going to make them run a mile.

They can shove their ignorance up their asses before running.

I can't see why we can't just discuss racism, sexism, homophobia and all other nasty-isms and phobias. They do need discussing, they haven't vanished and that was never my point. However, bloggers on these platforms seem incapable of going straight to the point on whatever the problem is. It has to go into this pissing contest of "I've had it more tragic than you". That's very difficult for any adult with good social skills to take seriously. It comes off self-pitiful, holier-than-thou and above all else petty. It's childish schoolyard mentality.

This is a biased illogical and wrong opinion. Most of those social justice warriors have full articles backed up by studies, facts, and don't use personal situations as an excuse. In fact some of them are white males

But it seems like whenever someone points this out, it's "oh this person is anti-feminist!" or "you are so privileged and you can't see your privilege!". I don't think seeing flaws in it is anti-feminist, I just think it's having your own opinion.

No but ignoring the other side and ignoring the fact you have social benefits isn't the solution either. Simply replying "I am white and have been discriminated against" doesn't justify discriminating blacks (people use this excuse) and doesn't erase the fact most discrimination is against blacks or people of colour.

Otherwise I can generally agree with what you said. The concept of "privilege" and "intersectionality" are fine on paper like I said before, I just think there are flaws. It's an over-simplified view of the world, where two people with "identical" identities can have dramatically difference experiences based on surroundings. These things don't happen in a vacuum.

Yes, but most likely one will have it better, it is statistically verifiable. The average white person is more likely to be born on a richer family, have better education, household, to be accepted into politics, as a CEO, to not be arrested unjustly or given a too harsh sentence, etc. Do you seem where I'm going? It's probability, I'm not saying it's always like this. But the probability is there and for a reason - It's called discrimination

[Regina]

Ok you're just gonna have to feel the way you feel on this



But just to clear things up before I move on, please don't twist my words. At no point did I explicitly say "I have been discriminated against for being white", which I haven't. Nor am I in any denial that I benefit from being male and/or white. In fact I think you have to be living under a rock not to see that.

[Dystopia]

Let me rephrase something - "White, straight cis male" doesn't equal automatically being better since birth in absolute terms. But it does indicate probability, that's the problem.