But white people do benefit from white privilege. I’m sorry that makes some of you so god damn insecure but it’s true. It’s not the only type of privilege but for some reason (cough cough racism) that’s the one people get the most upset about.
There’s socioeconomic privilege but I don’t hear anyone claiming that’s not a thing. I just don’t get it. More than one thing can be true. You can benefit from white privilege and also experience hardships. That’s not what white privilege means. This is not a difficult concept.
I did not have an easy life because I was white. I would know, because I was there for all of it. I also know that despite my own obstacles in life, I still experienced white privilege.
Did you actually read and understood what I said, because based on your response, I don’t think you did. In my post, I very clearly stated that blacks face challenges that whites don’t, so why do you continue to insist that us white folks here refuse to accept that racism exists? Neither I nor anyone else has said that there is no racism or that racism isn’t a problem that should be addressed.
You seem to be so bent on having us all engage in public self-flagellation (thanks, @Ghazzu) that you’re incapable of recognizing any other kind of response, even those that suggest equally valid ways to get where we all want to go.
YOU are the one making it divisive and dismissive. Maybe you should explore why the idea of white privilege makes you feel that way. Why is that when somebody else talks about their struggles you feel it dismisses yours?
I find this very interesting as I did not spend much time learning about Appalacian people growing up, other than a brief overview of the region more than the people when discussing frontierism in the colonies. As @EventerAJ stated, most people that I speak with about the subject only know the “mountain man” and “cracker” jokes. I have never before heard of the movie you speak of. If it is the same one in your following post, it came out before I was born and was not something that my school thought to show. Interestingly, every year of junior high we did watch Towering Inferno and now I have a mild fear of elevators and tall buildings. We didn’t even watch to discuss, our teacher’s were just like randomly “don’t feel like working, let’s gather the entire grade and watch this horror show”.
EDIT: I started writing this paragraph then got distracted, then realized I never finished it
An interesting story. When a cousin was setting up a call center in Northern Florida/Southern Georgia area he and his colleague noticed a lot of people looking for work had poor hygiene and were seemingly overdressed for their interviews. They found out these people were coming out of the very rural areas. They were wearing the only non-ragged clothes, which was usually what they wore to their prom - so prom dresses and tuxedos/suits. They also did not have indoor plumbing. The owners set up “uniform” supply and put locker rooms in with showers that were stocked with soap/shampoo/etc. They found that these individuals did not eschew these ‘niceties’, rather they did not have access to them.
I have not heard of the book, either. Most of my knowledge of the Appalacian people are internet searches to studies and articles due to my personal interest. I cannot find the movie available right now. I did find the book, along with Appalacian Reckoning: A Region Responds to Hillbilly Elegy. Both are not in my book buying budget right now. Maybe one day I will actually get around to getting a library card and see what my local library has.
I bring up the Appalacian region because it is a good example of what is not in national or social media, as @EventerAJ explained.
As others have stated, it is not that racism doesn’t exist, it is more that this is not a simple issue, it is a complex issue. Race is not the only reason for poverty and lack of education and stubbornly adhering to the belief that this is the case is, in my opinion, a hindrance to true equality and true help/relief for those that need it.
It is not about someone else just discussing their troubles, it is about someone telling someone else their struggles don’t count. Going back to my personal experience post. I understand there is racism and it is wrong and I should do what I can to stamp it down where I see it. What bothers me is people literally telling me my ancestral trials do not count because they were not the black ancestral experiences in the USA.
Exactly! The term “white privilege” isn’t a problem because I don’t believe that racism is a real thing, it’s a problem because it’s dismissive of the very real trials and hardships experienced by many whites. The subtext of the term is that because you’re white, your challenges can’t possibly be as great as those of anyone who is black, which is ridiculous.
Recognizing one problem in society does not dispute the existence of others. It’s not zero sum. I can say heart disease is a huge medical problem and we need to do something about it and that says nothing about whether cancer is also a major problem.
Her writings on this thread indicate she is not interested in any sort of engaged dialog.
To bring this back on topic, I would say her way of thinking is representative of the attitude for why we lost Plantation Field.
This is the pompous, self-righteous attitude of a person who has discovered something by reading a book and now wants to impose their new-found enlightenment on others.
Oh….and Equkelly…… I don’t have to read a book. In the eyes of United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, I don’t qualify to check the box for “white” when filling out the EEOC’s Race & Ethnic Identification Category. https://www.eeoc.gov
As a matter of fact, in all those seminars that @Virginia Horse Mom talks about organizing in the corporate world, it was me who was involuntarily drafted to participate in meetings which were euphemistically called “Multicultural Workshops” so that I could share my “life experiences” with you folk… and then was expected to do it multiple times since we were the minority population.
Ajierene, vxf has it exactly right. At no point is anyone saying that white people don’t have problems, or that those problems don’t count. All @Equkelly is pointing out is that white people don’t have problems that exist simply because of the colour of their skin, and black people often do.
Your ancestors lived through difficult experiences, and struggled to make their way in this world. You may still be affected by the obstacles they had to overcome, and that may still affect your life today. No one is or should be dismissing that. But at the same time, if those ancestors were light-skinned, the chances are that when a police officer pulls you over for speeding, you might get a ticket. Because a black person’s ancestors were dark-skinned, when they are pulled over for speeding, statistics have shown that they may face a different set of consequences.
You likely have many things you struggle with today (as do we all). Those are real and very valid things that make your life more difficult. They absolutely count, and I doubt anyone envies you those challenges. But the colour of your skin isn’t one of the things that makes your life more difficult, and for that, you are fortunate.
Sure, but that’s irrelevant to the point I keep trying to make.
The language you use matters - which is at the heart of the dispute that prompted this discussion in the first place. “White privilege” is a loaded term that, to many whites, carries an implication of personal criticism and dismissive of their personal challenges.
My issue isn’t with the concept that racism exists or that blacks face challenges related solely to their skin color. Those things are true. My issue is the choice of language. Isn’t the ultimate goal to engage whites in addressing racism and the specific challenges faced by blacks and other people of color? Then why handicap yourself by using language that can create defensiveness and lead some people to disengage from the process?
I’ll also note that I find it a bit ironic that people who are adamant that “plantation,” should be eliminated from common usage because some people may find it offensive are so completely resistant to the suggestion that “white privilege” and “white fragility” may not be productive language because some people may find them offensive.
Then maybe I’m misunderstanding you. Because you seem to be saying that there are all sorts of privilege… and therefore we should not use the term “white privilege.” But that’s exactly the analogy I gave you with heart disease. That there is also cancer does not disprove that there is heart disease. In this society being white does come with it certain privileges. So does being male. So does being wealthy. Etc. Etc. But right now you’re at extremely high risk of being shot and killed in the street if you have Black skin. So that’s an area where there’s evidence of white privilege and so, in that context, we’re having a discussion in the country of white privilege. This does nothing to take away from other contexts where we have a major issue with sex, or socioeconomic status. But to say “white privilege” is a loaded term because there are other forms of privilege-- that makes no sense to me. There is ABSOLUTELY a privilege to being white in some contexts. There just IS. Regardless of whether in other contexts being male or rich is a privilege. Your focus on the language is like changing the subject from Black Lives Matter to All Lives Matter. It’s like if I tell you I had a heart attack and you change the subject to discuss cancer. Getting bent out of shape about the term “white privilege” is a form of denying it exists or a shift focus from it, IMHO.
@vxf111 and @Marigold I feel we are talking around each other without understanding. I am going attempt to use an analogy to make the point more clear. It may be a cultural issue, so please answer the question honestly as I am asking it honestly.
Let us use the cancer/heart attack analogy.
Say you are talking to a coworker/aquaintance/stranger who had a heart attack/has heart issues. To be clear, this is a person you do not know well.
If this person started talking to you about their issues, having to change the diet, having to find a cardiac specialist, etc.
Would you think it appropriate to reply that yes, all of that is bad and you are glad they are still here but aren’t they glad they don’t have cancer? The heart attack was bad but at least you are not in and out of hospitals and taking medication that makes you lose your hair. Even when in remission you would still potentially have to take that medication.
I think that may also be the case - thanks for asking honestly and I will try to be as honest in my reply as I can.
I would not think that was an appropriate response (and I suspect we are on the same page about that - please correct me if I’m wrong). I think where the misunderstanding may be coming from is that in this case, I perceive you to be the person receiving the news about your coworker’s heart attack and replying that at least you don’t have cancer.
I came to this perception because, in this case, people of colour have come to us and said that the name plantation makes them feel uncomfortable (let’s assume for a moment that Eventing Nation wasn’t lying about being approached by multiples people of colour about the issue). To then reply with the (very valid) struggles that your ancestors also faced reads to me as if you heard the news of someone’s heart problems and chose to redirect to someone else’s cancer news.
My understanding from your post is that you perceive me to be the person replying with the cancer comment, whereas I perceive it to be the other way around. Truly, I’m asking honestly: could you explain to me where that disconnect comes from? Because I think we’ve both agreed that it’s not desirable to be that person, and I’d like to avoid it in future.
Yes, I believe you are misunderstanding me because you seem to believe that I am saying things that I never said or intended to say. Unfortunately, at the moment I can’t think of any brilliant analogy that will make it all unambiguously clear. If I do, maybe I’ll try again.
I think we are getting somewhere. To your last paragraph, yes - in that example you are the one replying with the cancer comments.
Overall, I feel you and I are in agreement with the concept - telling someone “hey at least it’s not cancer!” can very much have an insulting or belittling effect, even if you do not intend it to.
OK, step 2 - the word “plantation”. Even though some people consider it innocuous, we can both agree that some people have a negative reaction to the word and in order to encourage inclusion, friendliness, and as much equity as possible it would be helpful to not use that word.
step 3 - change the word “plantation” with “privilege” or “fragility”… even though some people consider it innocuous, we can both agree that some people have a negative reaction to the word and in order to encourage inclusion, friendliness, and as much equity as possible it would be helpful to not use that word.
That’s the point I and I believe others are attempting to make. Do you see where I am going with this?
@OfCourseItsAnAlter Did you get a chance to read my posts and see if you and I are on the same page? Am I articulating at least in part what you are trying to say?
I think we are getting somewhere. To your last paragraph, yes - in that example you are the one replying with the cancer comments.
Overall, I feel you and I are in agreement with the concept - telling someone “hey at least it’s not cancer!” can very much have an insulting or belittling effect, even if you do not intend it to.
OK, step 2 - the word “plantation”. Even though some people consider it innocuous, we can both agree that some people have a negative reaction to the word and in order to encourage inclusion, friendliness, and as much equity as possible it would be helpful to not use that word.
step 3 - change the word “plantation” with “privilege” or “fragility”… even though some people consider it innocuous, we can both agree that some people have a negative reaction to the word and in order to encourage inclusion, friendliness, and as much equity as possible it would be helpful to not use that word.
That’s the point I and I believe others are attempting to make. Do you see where I am going with this?
@OfCourseItsAnAlter Did you get a chance to read my posts and see if you and I are on the same page? Am I articulating at least in part what you are trying to say?
I think we are getting somewhere. To your last paragraph, yes - in that example you are the one replying with the cancer comments.
Overall, I feel you and I are in agreement with the concept - telling someone “hey at least it’s not cancer!” can very much have an insulting or belittling effect, even if you do not intend it to.
OK, step 2 - the word “plantation”. Even though some people consider it innocuous, we can both agree that some people have a negative reaction to the word and in order to encourage inclusion, friendliness, and as much equity as possible it would be helpful to not use that word.
step 3 - change the word “plantation” with “privilege” or “fragility”… even though some people consider it innocuous, we can both agree that some people have a negative reaction to the word and in order to encourage inclusion, friendliness, and as much equity as possible it would be helpful to not use that word.
That’s the point I and I believe others are attempting to make. Do you see where I am going with this?
OfCourseItsAnAlter Did you get a chance to read my posts and see if you and I are on the same page? Am I articulating at least in part what you are trying to say?
Comparing the hurt that the word “plantation”causes to the ‘hurt’ the word “white privilege” causes is ridiculous.
You feel uncomfortable with the world “white privilege” because A) You don’t agree with the phrase. B) You are insecure. And C) You are a racist.
Many black people feel uncomfortable with the word “plantation” because of slavery.
There’s a difference. And you’re fooling nobody with your little “analogies” you use to dance around the topic. White privlege is a thing. Some white people are just too insecure and shallow-minded to see that.
Oh, I had tried to edit, then the post became unapproved, then there were issues so I copied and pasted and waited and reposted…and forgot my addition so here it is:
I just want to be clear that I think at times we are all the person with the heart condition and all the person making the cancer comments. I hope that was clear.
Second Edit: I just read Equkelly’s post and I feel like this individual is really just illustrating one part of my point.
If I do, maybe I’ll try again.