DONATE NOW TO HELP UPGRADE LIBCOM.ORG

White privilege

132 posts / 0 new
Last post
madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 7 2006 19:22
Nate wrote:
Fair enough Mad. Graceful with words is not my number one trait.

Sorry, that was a bit harsh, I just think it's divisive as fuck to talk about "other sectors of the class".

The whole notion of White Privelege strikes me as a bit shaky, the oppression of black people or hispanic people does not confer any special privelege upon me as a white person, if anything, I suffer as a result of this oppression, merely to a lesser extent. Nobody benefits from racism except for the bosses.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Nov 7 2006 21:28
Quote:
The whole notion of White Privelege strikes me as a bit shaky, the oppression of black people or hispanic people does not confer any special privelege upon me as a white person,

Well, the point of white privilege is that folks like us should be aware of it and actually realize when that privilege is conferred upon us. In this way we can change our behaviour and not act according to that privilege. These can be very small things, e.g. not having your passport and luggage checked when traveling through Europe, faster service in restaurants, getting first in line etc. Obviously there are more examples that are not as petty as those. The same can be said for male privilege.

Quote:
if anything, I suffer as a result of this oppression, merely to a lesser extent. Nobody benefits from racism except for the bosses.

Spot on.

Thora
Offline
Joined: 17-06-04
Nov 7 2006 22:11
John. wrote:
"Hi, welcome to the NYMAA meeting, we're your facilitators, Ben and Dan* and we're two white guys, we apologise."

That's fucking ace! I think some people on here could do with apologising to me about their oppressiveness a bit more often tbh. Or maybe buying me gifts to make up for it.

georgestapleton's picture
georgestapleton
Offline
Joined: 4-08-05
Nov 7 2006 22:38

I haven't read the article yet printed it out though and I will, that discussion on aut-op-sy is bizarre.

However my instinct towards this kind of stuff is pretty negative.

In the last 3 years I've organised

A fundraiser for a Chilean comrade Francisco San Martín Soto who got fucked up in the allende coup comemoration demos.
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/72373
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/72576

In my college:
3 meetings on the Zapatistas or that kind of thing.
2 on allende's coup.
1 talk by a chilean economist, we had a translator.
1 info night about columbian indigenous.
1 social night about columbian indigenous.
and I'm sure I'm forgetting something.

And some comrades organised and 2 got arrested at a demo against the murder by the Colombian riot police of 15 year old anarchist Nicolás David Neira Alvares on the Bogota Mayday march.

This isn't boasting about my activism, but rather pointing out that if someone took me or any of my comrades to task for being a white supremacist/racist I'd be a bit peeved because it's bull shit.

All that said the struggle begins at home and the post important place to fight racism (in ireland anyway) is around the question of immigration, immigration controls and immigrant rights.

As somebody else said white don't benefit from racism only the bosses do.

It's like in the north, in the '60s the working class protestants were after working class catholics the worst off group in the UK. But because of the division, the north is still the worst off bit of the UK, and northern working class prods still have it shit. As someone said only the bosses win.

Finally revol:

Quote:
I'm sure i could relate to an yanqui prole a lot quicker than some activistoid indymedia journo.

This was really out of line. Cop yourself on.

Jason Cortez
Offline
Joined: 14-11-04
Nov 8 2006 00:50

The lot of you can just shut the fuck up, you are using your hair priviledge to render me invisible.That said the historical stuff by people associated with Race Traitor is very interesting. i think the difficulties come when trying to apply it as some sort of political lifestyle choice. i.e. is dressing and living like a 'black' person a cultral imperialist act of theft or an attempt at destroying white skin prilivege by opening yourslef up to some of the oppressive behaviour directed at blacks through identifricantion? In relation to the article (only read abit)will imdynedia's coverage despite it's 'priviledged' postion do more good for thiose struggling in Oaxca?

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 8 2006 07:52
atlemk wrote:
Well, the point of white privilege is that folks like us should be aware of it and actually realize when that privilege is conferred upon us. In this way we can change our behaviour and not act according to that privilege. These can be very small things, e.g. not having your passport and luggage checked when traveling through Europe, faster service in restaurants, getting first in line etc. Obviously there are more examples that are not as petty as those. The same can be said for male privilege.

None of the examples you've given are actually me benefitting from this so called 'privilege' though. By your logic, you might as well say I'm oppressing old people by being less likely to be mugged.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Nov 8 2006 14:18
Quote:
None of the examples you've given are actually me benefitting from this so called 'privilege' though. By your logic, you might as well say I'm oppressing old people by being less likely to be mugged.

Nowhere in my post did I say that you were oppressing anyone because of your privilege, I was merely pointing out the privileges that whities have and usually do not think of as privilege. That was all. Please read my post. If you do not understand what I mean at all, well then that is sad.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 8 2006 14:41
atlemk wrote:
Nowhere in my post did I say that you were oppressing anyone because of your privilege, I was merely pointing out the privileges that whities have and usually do not think of as privilege. That was all. Please read my post. If you do not understand what I mean at all, well then that is sad.

Exactly how is not being hassled by the police quite as much a 'privilege'?

Quote:
whities

roll eyes

Tacks's picture
Tacks
Offline
Joined: 8-11-05
Nov 8 2006 14:50
Jason Cortez wrote:
i think the difficulties come when trying to apply it as some sort of political lifestyle choice. i.e. is dressing and living like a 'black' person a cultral imperialist act of theft or an attempt at destroying white skin prilivege by opening yourself up to some of the oppressive behaviour directed at blacks through identifricantion?

Fucking hell i would run 500 miles from any discussion, nay, mention of such 'issues'! America is obsessed with this rubbish in a lot more than anarchism. I got given this book once called Bomb the Suburbs, about white ppl in hip hop. It was 200+ pages of people moaning about being white and 'being white', 'acting black'... urgh. Only marginally less disgusting than a klan website.

Like identitiperialism maan!

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Nov 8 2006 15:20
revol68 wrote:
I mean would a black kid working in Pizza Hut in Compton feel anymore comfortable talking to a middle class black kid who went to college, or the working class cracka who works in walmart?

It's not as simple as that either - what if one was a fundie christian and the other was a nihilist. Just pointing out that I think culture is more relevant than race here. A smart black woman in a suit is not going to get hassled by police as much as a young black - or white - guy in sportswear.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 8 2006 15:21
revol68 wrote:
this attitude that not getting harrassed by the police is a previlege is something that baffles me, or getting a shit job is a previlege. They aren't previleges and any politic that starts from such a stance is already beat, firstly because it's the kind of petty zero sum perspective that is jealous of others pay rises.

On the other hand the differences in experiance can't be just brushed aside and pretend they don't matter, it's important to understand your relative position within capitalism and not mistake your experiance for everyone elses. What i find funny though is how so many groups focus on their whiteness, maleness etc but seem to overlook their socio economic make up. I mean would a black kid working in Pizza Hut in Compton feel anymore comfortable talking to a middle class black kid who went to college, or the working class cracka who works in walmart?

Word, yo cool

Fuego Revolucinario
Offline
Joined: 1-11-06
Nov 8 2006 17:56

madashell

Quote:
None of the examples you've given are actually me benefitting from this so called 'privilege' though. By your logic, you might as well say I'm oppressing old people by being less likely to be mugged.

When I was going through the immigration process in 1996/1997, my then employer enquired on my behalf, apparently was told that I'd have no problems because I wasn't black. When I got to Home office Immigrations section, I can tell you that the process they dealt with my case was by far much shorter than by the immigrants who did not have the social privilege of a white colour. I have without any doubt benefited from social privilege my appearance bestowed upon me - whether I agreed with it or not.

Take the racial/ethno profiling of the detention camps, can't say HM government doesn't serve those and treat the people within it not on merits of the individual but of to what profile they match.

As much as male privilege - I'd say it's more apparent to those who are on the other side of the scale. Take the countries with anti-abortion legislation. To a first sight, what the hell has it got to do with male privilege? Well, if a woman has got no rights to choose about her own reproductive rights and has lost her biological autonomy, also many times voted and decided by males and pushed on by patriarchal religious morals - does it not mean a form of privilege for the males - regardless whether they were part of bringing it on or not.

Class rules all but that doesn't mean that there aren't other aspects of the picture as well. In fact, the inherent sexism and racism of the system feed and exacerbate the class war. The sexism and racism are part of the class war, not separate from it. They keep us fighting with each other, they keep us oppressing each other - actively or passively - instead of focusing on the true goal.

The answer to this is not to ignore or deny inherent racism and sexism, or to label them as 'distractions' - it is to fully recognize their role in the division of the lower class, and move past them and beyond the system that institutionalises them.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Nov 8 2006 17:57
Quote:
Exactly how is not being hassled by the police quite as much a 'privilege'?

ok, maybe my examples are a bit bad, but where did "getting a shit job as privilege" come from? I never mentioned it. What I am referring to is based on experience. I am white, and I never really have any problems with police, getting service in pubs, coffeshops etc. However, for my arab and african friends problems with police and denial of service is commonplace (at least in Norway and the Netherlands). Of course the same argument can be applied to class (in the sense of status). I am merely pointing something out, and my
politics do not start from such a stance. I seriously do not know where revol68 got that from. You're reading a bit too much into my posts.

I actually agree with both revol68 and madashell's analyses. Just focusing on privilege will not get you anywhere. Privilege based on race or gender has its roots in colonialism and the transition to capitalism.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 8 2006 18:02
Fuego Revolucinario wrote:
The answer to this is not to ignore or deny inherent racism and sexism, or to label them as 'distractions'

Where the fuck did I do that then? Just a suggestion, but you might want to try reading my posts before you attribute opinions to me that I don't hold.

Whether racism, sexism, etc. exist or not is not what is being discussed here, what I'm arguing against is the notion that the oppression of one group inherently bestows a "privilege" upon another group.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 8 2006 18:05
atlemk wrote:
ok, maybe my examples are a bit bad, but where did "getting a shit job as privilege" come from? I never mentioned it. What I am referring to is based on experience. I am white, and I never really have any problems with police, getting service in pubs, coffeshops etc. However, for my arab and african friends problems with police and denial of service is commonplace (at least in Norway and the Netherlands). Of course the same argument can be applied to class (in the sense of status). I am merely pointing something out, and my
politics do not start from such a stance. I seriously do not know where revol68 got that from. You're reading a bit too much into my posts.

My problem isn't with the examples being used, it's with this divisive crap where it is assumed that the oppression of other races is in the interests of white, working class people.

Fuego Revolucinario
Offline
Joined: 1-11-06
Nov 8 2006 18:26
Quote:
Where the fuck did I do that then? Just a suggestion, but you might want to try reading my posts before you attribute opinions to me that I don't hold.

Whether racism, sexism, etc. exist or not is not what is being discussed here, what I'm arguing against is the notion that the oppression of one group inherently bestows a "privilege" upon another group.

If you agree that racism and sexism exists, then I do not understand why you don't see how it results. It results in the said privilege. Cause and effect. Unless we move into superstition you cannot deny effects of racism and sexism.

Racism and sexism is divisive. But we must also recognise it's effects.

By definition - racism and sexism bring an unequality and unequal social treatment.

Quote:
My problem isn't with the examples being used, it's with this divisive crap where it is assumed that the oppression of other races is in the interests of white, working class people

Nobody said that such is in the interests of white, working class. Here you'll need to take your own medicine of not attributing opinions where not fitted.

It's a simple recognition of results of racist and sexist trends in the society. Of course it doesn't benefit the white wc - thats why the capitalist class encourage institutunalised racism and sexism - because it does not benefit the worker. Whether or not it is materially benefitial to the worker is a different discussion from that of whether white privilege exists.

It is detrimental to workers as a class but on individual level, white workers do receive privileges that other races do not.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 8 2006 18:32
Fuego Revolucinario wrote:
By definition - racism and sexism bring an unequality and unequal social treatment.

No shit, Sherlock.

Quote:
It is detrimental to workers as a class but on individual level, white workers do receive privileges that other races do not.

The concept of white privilege or male privilege implies some form of material advantage, some kind of benefit which all white people or all men derive from the oppression of non-whites or women.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Nov 8 2006 18:39
Quote:
My problem isn't with the examples being used, it's with this divisive crap where it is assumed that the oppression of other races is in the interests of white, working class people.

Ok, where the fuck have I assumed that? Nowhere did I say that it is in the interest of white working class people to oppress other races. (Btw, racism does occur in non-white societies as well). All I was saying is that being white or male will confer privileges on you; privileges that white males are (usually) unaware of.

Didn't I in my original reply to your post explicitly state that the oppression of of other races is part of the oppression of the working class?

Quote:
Where the fuck did I do that then? Just a suggestion, but you might want to try reading my posts before you attribute opinions to me that I don't hold.

Ditto. Re-read fuego's and my posts again.

Quote:
Whether racism, sexism, etc. exist or not is not what is being discussed here, what I'm arguing against is the notion that the oppression of one group inherently bestows a "privilege" upon another group.

Isn't that the whole point of oppression? One group of people fucking over someone else so that they will benefit. Are males not privileged in patriarchal society? Likewise with white-skinned people after centuries of colonialism and general demonization of "others"? The same applies to class as well.

I live in Egypt, which is an extremely racist, misogynist and classist society. If you're nubian or sudanese you're treated like shit. If you're a woman you will probably get harassed sometimes walking on the streets, sitting on a bus or taking a taxi. If it looks like you're a peasant you will be barred from cafes, restaurants, hotels etc.

I live here as a white male; I've been made painfully aware of the privileges I have. It is not in my interest and I don't want this, but I have these privileges anyway and it actually pisses me off. Being aware of privileges actually helps when organizing politically.

OliverTwister's picture
OliverTwister
Offline
Joined: 10-10-05
Nov 8 2006 18:46

It's a privilege not to be treated like shit?

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 8 2006 18:53
atlemk wrote:
Isn't that the whole point of oppression? One group of people fucking over someone else so that they will benefit.

Yes, but the question is who is oppressing who. For instance, I am not oppressing women just by being male (or if I am, feminism's pretty much fucked from the outset), I do not benefit from the prevelance of male on female rape.

Quote:
Are males not privileged in patriarchal society? Likewise with white-skinned people after centuries of colonialism and general demonization of "others"?

IN WHAT WAY?

Look, you keep on saying both:
1) White people are privileged as a result of racism and;
2) White people do not benefit from racism as a group

You can't have it both ways.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 8 2006 18:54
OliverTwister wrote:
It's a privilege not to be treated like shit?

Apparently so, and we should all feel very, very bad about it.

Fuego Revolucinario
Offline
Joined: 1-11-06
Nov 8 2006 19:00

revol68

Quote:
That is one of the worst examples you could have suggested, the suppoused previleging of males by religious morals is infact just the other side of womens oppression, it is a form of oppression that takes on the appearance of previlege and can be one if you accept and play by it's rules, just as many women accept and play by the rules of their own "role" and this can take on the form of previlege. I'm not sure of the figures exactly but I remember a survey showing that women are generally more religious and pro life than men (in northern ireland anyways), fundamentally patriarchy isn't so much the rule of men as opposed the rule of certain gender roles, roles that by and large police themselves. One only has to look at how womens magazines are far nastier and vicious about women who transgress than mens magazines, likewise the amount of girl i know who find it very hard to have female friends because they get on better with fellas. Likewise it's generally men who police other men in living up to certain roles. Obviously there is intergender policing but this generally comes in the form of reward than out policing eg they won't go out with you but they'll have a laugh.

If an anti-abortion law means that women loose the right of choice regarding their reproductive rights - they are the part of the populace that has lost its biological autonomy - not men - whether they agreed or disagreed with the legislation.

(not to mention that these anti-abotion laws discriminate poor women - rich women from can migrate to have abortion done in a country without those laws).

Sexism is oppression based on gender - whether women partake on upkeeping such trends in the society is not again in question here - it's the result of sexism that is.

atlemk

Quote:
Being aware of privileges actually helps when organizing politically.

Spot on! I agree with what you had said on the subject.

Jason Cortez
Offline
Joined: 14-11-04
Nov 8 2006 21:00

Did anyone else read the Chris Wright article? apart from his rather repetitive banging on about the Race Traitor needing to be more marxist it was thought provoking.

Quote:
Race gave a particular expression to certain conceptions of the world already contained in the Enlightenment. (By that, I am not claiming that the Enlightenment thinkers were 'white men'. They had no prior concept of race, as we know it, much less whiteness, which only developed in the 17th and 18th centuries.) Those 'conceptions of the world' developed as they did because capital founded itself on slavery (the first real working class, against-and-through whose opposition capital develops) and colonialism. In a connected way, race has been central to the organization of labor power for exploitation ever since. Race privilege has not only been a social control formation propagated from above, but a product of the working class itself (in whatever form, whether whiteness here or Zionism in Israel, etc.) In so far as working class people retreat from the overthrow of capital, in so far as we get beaten back, we will create new means of buffering ourselves that will at least partially depend on the suffering of other workers. That's how capital works. Race privilege happens to be one of those buffers, one which capital happily dangles in front of us. As such, the only way to destroy whiteness will be to destroy capital and vice versa. The very nature of whiteness and race privilege rotates around the creation of a cross-class or a non-class 'identity' that creates a sense of 'community' and 'shared interests' between one section of the working class and capital. Every rupture in whiteness certainly forms a major part of the challenge to capital's stability and ability to rule. However, I am not claiming that the momentary rupture of whiteness is by itself sufficient, but is a precondition for revolution. Nor do I want anyone to confuse the momentary rupture, a crisis, of whiteness with its actual overthrow.

Quote:
Finally, I offer no systematic theory of racial privilege to counter to RT at this time. I would like to sketch what I see as an outline to an approach. First, any approach to race has to start from the duality of race privilege and racial oppression as dual moments. Second, we have to tackle the process of racialization, so that we do not see race as something fixed or finalized. Third, we should tackle race through Marx's concepts of fetishization and alienation, which I have tried to do in laying out my critique. This allows us to see the particularity of the forms of racialization as they develop, while also avoiding dualisms. In this, I am taking the notion of form as "mode of existence", not as a genus-species relationship. That means that the form of the racialization is its actual existence, is its historical specificity. A number of people have pointed usefully in that direction, from David Roediger to Harry Cleaver to John Holloway, et al, to Selma James and Mariorosa Dalla Costa. Fourth, we have to ground the formation of race in historical particularity. Racial privilege, racial oppression, racialization, all mean nothing abstracted from practical social relations in history (slavery, colonialism, the conquest of the 'Americas' and various responses to the indigenous peoples, segregation, apartheid, Japanese pan-Asianism, etc.) The radical critics of whiteness have laid an invaluable groundwork here (Ignatiev, Roediger, Saxton, Ware, Allen, et al.) Fifth, only then can we grasp the particularity of 'race' to capitalist society, and understand the depth of connection. Sixth, this obviously asks us to understand racialization not simply in national terms, but in international terms, as connected to national chauvinism and nationalism, which leads us to the relationship between racialization and the capitalist state. In this, I do not think we should try to equate nationalism with racism, but to recognize that they overlap and interpenetrate each other. Seventh, we need to understand the ideological underpinnings of racialization in the problems of instrumental reason, bad infinity, the total animalization and taxonomic treatment of human beings. Adorno and Horkheimer, Postone and Sartre, began such a process in relation to anti-Semitism; Loren Goldner took a good stab at it regarding Africans and the Enlightenment. We need to follow up on it. Eighth, we need to understand not simply how capital gives rise to racialization, but how racialization cannot be separated from the production of class. If we take the idea that racialization is an example of a fetishized form of social relation that obscure class, we must also recognize it as one that forms class. As such, anti-racist struggles have the possibility of taking on an anti-capitalist character even while remaining within the boundaries of race, by threatening to explode one fetishized social relation. As such, we also need to consider the differential and autonomous organizing carried on by racially oppressed peoples as part and parcel of our common struggles, not as 'diversions from the real class struggle.' Ninth, the inversion of racialization does not come from simply starting with the oppressed, but from starting from the oppressor's denial of their own racialization, their 'normalization', if you will. RT makes a valuable contribution in this direction that I heartily welcome. We need to develop the fragility of racialization, as well as its strength. Finally, not only do we have to consider racialization as a process of fetishization springing from the capital-labor relation, we have to understand it in relation to other fetishized forms of human relations, especially patriarchy and sexuality. A merely adequate notion of racialization begins here, and a merely adequate understanding must become the basis of our action.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Nov 9 2006 03:30

Say a few people had gone over to France during the CPE events (http://libcom.org/blog/cpe-france) and one of them had been killed by the CRS. I think we'd have seen a fair bit of press coverage. I don't think that would've been anti-French/nationalist at all. What if it'd been a black American indymedia journo in Oaxaca? I reckon the response would've been the same.

Nate wrote:
So it seems like folks in the UK don't take this stuff seriously as much as folks in the US do, at least on here. Am I right in concluding then that the whole Race Traitor/white skin privilege/white supremacy thing never caught on over there in the way it did in some circles over here?

I've only ever heard about it from Americans.

Quote:
If so, that's interesting. I wonder why that is. I don't know much about this stuff in the US really, its history and such, so I don't know where it came from, why/when it caught on.

Maoism isn't anywhere near as big. Also we don't have the same history of slavery/segregation and the majority of non-white (and a lot of white) people in the UK are from successive patterns of immigration some of which are quite recent (Bangladesh, Poland). There's obviously racism and a history of racial tension, but it's very, very differently expressed than in the US.

Quote:
Is there anything analogous in the UK, maybe related to stuff on Ireland?

No. Well, tbh I think there are some parallels with Openly Classist in the way it guilt trips people for their sociological/cultural background.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 9 2006 03:42
Mike Harman wrote:
No. Well, tbh I think there are some parallels with Openly Classist in the way it guilt trips people for their sociological/cultural background.

To be fair, it's worth it for their incisive political analysis.

http://www.openlyclassist.org.uk/beresp.jpg

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Nov 9 2006 10:02

madashell, I know you're mad, please try to be a bit more polite though.

i think the people saying there's no white privelege and those saying there is are arguing at crossed purposes. madashell you seem to think these people are saying this means white people benefit from racism or sexism, no they're not.

They're pointing out that racism and sexism exist, and that white men don't suffer as many negative consequences as black people or women. For example, in our sexist society women are far more likely to be raped than men. So you being less likely to get raped say means that things aren't quite as bad for you. This is what some people are calling a "privilege". I don't think it's a very good term though, as it implies an actual positive benefit, as opposed to a less of a bad, negative thing.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Nov 9 2006 11:24
Quote:
it's not just the word previlege itself, which I don't find very useful, but how it is used, so we talk of white previlege and male previlege and in doing so we begin to see race and gender as unipolar rather than being extremely complex and interwoven,

Where do you get the idea that I view race and gender as unipolar? It is complex and interwoven, they are social constructs, they are dialectical or whatever you want to call it. Please try to define race and gender then, you haven't really done that.

Quote:
This is what some people are calling a "privilege". I don't think it's a very good term though, as it implies an actual positive benefit, as opposed to a less of a bad, negative thing.

I agree, the term is horrible but it is what quite a few feminists and anti-racists use often. It can be viewed as "freedom to" or "freedom from" whatever.

Quote:
i think the people saying there's no white privelege and those saying there is are arguing at crossed purposes.

To some degree we are doing just that...

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Nov 9 2006 12:52
Quote:
As for defining gender and race, are you on a wind up? The very point of these things are that they are fluid, contradicatary social constructs that tend to evade easy definition.

That "definiton" works for me. We agree actually. You can define things without using analytical categories. Just because phenomena are open ended does not meant that we cannot give it some content.

Quote:
we often talk about male previlege but overlook facts such as men are far more likely to be violently assaulted in the street, sent to war, imprisoned and so forth, because these things become almost naturalised.

Agree with you again. This is part of the social construction of gender, age, race, class etc.

Quote:
I mean do we say the fact women are less likely to be conscripted is an aspect of "female previlege" or do we understand that such a "previlege" is linked to a form of oppression eg patriarchial protection etc.

Nothing wrong in viewing it in both ways.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 9 2006 13:21
John. wrote:
madashell, I know you're mad, please try to be a bit more polite though.

Point taken, sorry.

Quote:
madashell you seem to think these people are saying this means white people benefit from racism or sexism, no they're not.

I get what they're trying to say, I just think it's hopelessly counter-productive to frame racism or sexism in terms of privilege precisely because it implies a benefit. You go to any white working class person in America and tell them that they are 'privileged' relative to Condoleeza Rice, see what they say.

If you're taking race traitor theory to its logical conclusion, racism is something that white people as a whole inflict upon non-white people, which is simplistic crap to be quite frank. What's worse is that it completely ignores how race and class interact with each other*, Colin Powell is not exactly likely to get pulled over by the LAPD and beaten to fuck in the near future, nobody on these boards, of whatever race, occupies a position of privilege relative to him.

*Particularly in the US, which is why the prevelance of this stuff over there is especially irritating, IMO.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Nov 9 2006 14:31
Quote:
I get what they're trying to say, I just think it's hopelessly counter-productive to frame racism or sexism in terms of privilege precisely because it implies a benefit.

How many times do I have to say this: I am not fucking framing racism or sexism in terms of "privilege as benefit". That has been ascribed to me by you and revol68.

Even though white working class people are relatively unprivileged compared to Condoleeza they are still relatively privileged compared to that of black working class men do not have, or white and black working class women. Race, class and gender cut across each other; this is why issues of class get confused as issues of race (expressed in sentiments such as "immigrants are taking all our jobs"). Ontologically they are related dialectically.