Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Kansa]

Maybe you just smeared blood on yourself though, maybe you are lying about the pain.

Like I said this is the situation where privilege is a problem, if you ask legitimate questions I don't think you should be silenced. If they deny you have a gunshot wound however they are never going to take you to a hospital no matter how much you plead to them.

They can offer good points but if they just repeat there is no global warming despite the evidence and say that we don't need a fix it's not really going to help the problem

[Neonivek]

Maybe you just smeared blood on yourself though, maybe you are lying about the pain.

Like I said this is the situation where privilege is a problem, if you ask legitimate questions I don't think you should be silenced. If they deny you have a gunshot wound however they are never going to take you to a hospital no matter how much you plead to them

Except that even if "Only I" had a valid opinion, If everyone around me was an idiot and doesn't believe me I am not going to the hospital anyway.

As well they can still deny I have a gunshot wound and still take me to the hospital for emergency treatment.

Creating a mob mentality in order to ensure I am taken to the hospital isn't going to help anyone. To suggest privilege on its own is a barrier is not to understand what privilege is.

They can offer good points but if they just repeat there is no global warming despite the evidence and say that we don't need a fix it's not really going to help the problem

Yes, unhelpful people are not helpful.

Yet that is a quality that they are not helpful or that they won't stop interjecting. It isn't a quality of them not believing in Global Warming.

A cultish attitude towards Global Warming doesn't help anyone and it genuinely stops criticisms that help aim it correctly. Remember that a lot of information about Global Warming was outright fictitious which outright hindered its adoption and continues to, to this day (some of it intentionally spread).

Heck global warming has been commoditized with many fixes and cures that are outright scams. Yet criticism of them is taken as criticism of Global Warming which is linked directly to how you are handling the subject.

Which... given the subject you are opening a LOT of unfortunate implications.

[Kansa]

No you aren't but if you move on to people who actually listen instead of continuing to plead to the people who aren't even trying then you might get to the hospital. It's not about people being idiots it's about them not even trying to understand.

Privilege is a barrier in understanding, it's one you can overcome though. If you are actually trying I don't think you should be silenced, I don't think it's helpful in a conversation though to have people just deny it.

It would be like in this conversation instead of talking about what it means to both of us just me saying again and again no one misuses the word privilege and you are an idiot for saying so. That doesn't help at all and isn't going to lead to new understanding when I don't even listen to what you have to say.

What I'm saying is exactly that, unhelpful people are unhelpful.

[Neonivek]

No you aren't but if you move on to people who actually listen instead of continuing to plead to the people who aren't even trying then you might get to the hospital. It's not about people being idiots it's about them not even trying to understand.

Privilege is a barrier in understanding, it's one you can overcome though. If you are actually trying I don't think you should be silenced, I don't think it's helpful in a conversation though to have people just deny it.

It would be like in this conversation instead of talking about what it means to both of us just me saying again and again no one misuses the word privilege and you are an idiot for saying so. That doesn't help at all and isn't going to lead to new understanding when I don't even listen to what you have to say.

Privilege is privilege. It is fluid, very specific, but doesn't necessarily impair empathy or understanding. Someone who has money hasn't always had money, and someone with no money doesn't necessarily have problems with money. Yet even within that there are shared common experiences. IF I took what you said at face value then explaining my injury would be pointless altogether regardless of what cult you created to help me.

Yet when you are suggesting is that outright "Denial" should be shut down. Which is set up to mean "Wholly denial" but actually means "Any contradiction" because any part of what someone says and what they mean can be contradicted.

This is what creates the ideological cult.

This "Conversation" is what it important. Don't contradict the "Conversation" it isn't helpful to do so. If you contradict the "Conversation" Then you are against it.

If your point is so important and so worthy of attention then why does this contradiction scare it?

[Kansa]

That's exactly what I'm saying it doesn't have to impair understanding but it takes effort just as it takes effort to understand what someone going through a breakup is going through when you haven't ever had one. That's exactly why it's important to realise in these types of conversations so it doesn't impair that.

Saying that a black man doesn't face discrimination because you are a white woman and only women face discrimination is a problem too and does happen. You only really realise the similarities between your situations if you take some time to understand them.

I'm not really sure why you are putting this cult stuff on me though. My only problem is the denial with no attempt to understand and never even really meaning to have a conversation. It's not even solely about privilege, that's just one of the factors that can cause someone to act like that.

Like I said before if you listen and try I don't think you should be silenced, there are ways to disagree on details while still trying to understand. I'm sure there are some people who do use it that way, but there are people like that for every term in existence. I'm arguing that the concept of privilege is important to understand and apply rather than argue that everyone who is using it is using it correctly.

Just because some people use it poorly doesn't mean the entire concept is flawed.

Also of course it's not the only factor, there are thousands upon thousands of things that make you up as a person and shape your worldview. But just because it's not the only factor doesn't mean that you should just ignore it, it's important to understand as much about the things that make you as possible.

I think this is kind of edging out of the purpose of this thread though, so this is probably going to be my last post on it. If you want to continue I'm fine with responding over pms

[Sheb]

Privilege is privilege. It is fluid, very specific, but doesn't necessarily impair empathy or understanding. Someone who has money hasn't always had money, and someone with no money doesn't necessarily have problems with money. Yet even within that there are shared common experiences. IF I took what you said at face value then explaining my injury would be pointless altogether regardless of what cult you created to help me.

That fluidity doesn't readily apply to race, gender, disability or lack of thereof, etc though.

[hops]

Goodness you REALLY cannot unhinge mother and fatherhood from biology so easily...

I mean for example the mother's cooing and oscillation during the early years actually trains the babies ability to distinguish pitches. Though I guess that is biological (though I guess a guy could REALLY pitch his voice up)

The mother and the father also the first informants of femininity and masculinity. Deprivation of this has WAAAY exaggerated results mind you, but it is still important.

But even if that role is biologically informed, it is still a gender role nonetheless.

TIL children of gay men are tone deaf.

[Neonivek]

Privilege is privilege. It is fluid, very specific, but doesn't necessarily impair empathy or understanding. Someone who has money hasn't always had money, and someone with no money doesn't necessarily have problems with money. Yet even within that there are shared common experiences. IF I took what you said at face value then explaining my injury would be pointless altogether regardless of what cult you created to help me.

That fluidity doesn't readily apply to race, gender, disability or lack of thereof, etc though.

Yes it does. Lets ignore the racism and sexism involved with this line of thinking and instead just go with someone in a Wheelchair.

One person who is in a Wheel Chair might not suffer the hindrances that another person does. They might not perpetually be confronted by the same limitations or the same benefits of being in a wheelchair. Ramps might be more available in one town, not available in others, people might be more helpful in one place, or it might not be in another, one person might be good at working their wheel hair, another might have weak arms. As well there are benefits to being in a wheelchair as well that not everyone in a wheelchair might have access to.

Privilege is only the same if everyone has the same experiences and same life.

You really should ask separated twins if their lives were exactly the same.

Just because some people use it poorly doesn't mean the entire concept is flawed.

It is never used correctly. NEVER! You cannot tell someone to check their privilege without creating that flaw. This is because it can only be used correctly on yourself and not other people, but it is created to be used on others.

And some other stuff you posted but I just woke up...

TIL children of gay men are tone deaf.

Nah. Men oscillate too and not all women oscillate (In fact there was a fad a while ago that told women not to oscillate or baby talk at all).

If there is an effect developmentally it would probably only be that they don't have perfect pitch... But only like what? 30% of people have perfect pitch?

[Sheb]

That fluidity doesn't readily apply to race, gender, disability or lack of thereof, etc though.

Yes it does. Lets ignore the racism and sexism involved with this line of thinking and instead just go with someone in a Wheelchair.

One person who is in a Wheel Chair might not suffer the hindrances that another person does. They might not perpetually be confronted by the same limitations or the same benefits of being in a wheelchair. Ramps might be more available in one town, not available in others, people might be more helpful in one place, or it might not be in another, one person might be good at working their wheel hair, another might have weak arms. As well there are benefits to being in a wheelchair as well that not everyone in a wheelchair might have access to.

Privilege is only the same if everyone has the same experiences and same life.
[/quote]

That's really pushing it too far. Yes, of course, no two persons face exactly 100% the same life. But that doesn't mean that some group don't have it better than others. In your exemple, the wheelchair guy in town A might have it better than the wheelchair guy in town B, but that's not really relevant. The point is that being stuch in a wheelchair will put them at a disadvantage vs. people that aren't stuck in a wheelchair.

It just sounds like you're trying to split the problem to have a good excuse to ignore it, TBH. Just imagine if you used the same approach to other field of policy (Do we need food stamp? Let's not generalize, every poor person is unique, we shouldn't force a solution on all!)

Just because some people use it poorly doesn't mean the entire concept is flawed.

It is never used correctly. NEVER!^{[citation needed]} You cannot tell someone to check their privilege without creating that flaw. This is because it can only be used correctly on yourself and not other people, but it is created to be used on others.

...

More seriously, I don't get how that argument even make sense. Why can't you tell people that they should try to realize the ways in which their life can be privileged compared to others?

[Neonivek]

OHHH citation needed Sheb? Ok... This is fun!

How many sources DO you need here? I can find all the sources you need (though I assume it will never be enough)

No really. 36 Questions Women have for Men a good enough video?

"Why do men hate when you tell them to check their privilege? Just check it, AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT" (Which by the "Do something about it" is the immediate... misuse. Then again "Just check it" also assumes the conclusion as well.)

Why can't you tell people that they should try to realize the ways in which their life can be privileged compared to others?

-1) Because you are making assumptions about their privilege based on superficial characteristics.
-2)You are making judgements based on the privilege to create a heigharchy (Dang spell check, I give up!) of validity and need. Hmm... A line of thinking where some people are better than others based on the color of their skin... hmm...
-3) You aren't asking someone to understand someone elses POV and through that lens understand what they truly have. You are asking someone to come to vague conclusions about their privilege based on vague notions that often cannot be defined, quantified, or don't even apply.

[Sheb]

OHHH citation needed Sheb? Ok... This is fun!

How many sources DO you need here?

No really. 36 Questions Women have for Men a good enough video?

"Why do men hate when you tell them to check their privilege? Just check it, AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT" (Which by the "Do something about it" is the immediate... misuse)

1) You said it was NEVER (emphasis yours) used properly. Now, you can't prove a negative, so in fact you can't prove that statement, I was being tongue in cheek. More seriously, the way to go would be to find some authority in the field and see what definition they use and how they use it, but I'm not sure who to consider one.

2) How is the "Do something about it" misuse? I mean, if for exemple you are white and live in Western Europe and the US, you do have some race-related privilege (like my ability to talk myself out of minor offense easily, which I know for sure my browner friend finds impossible). It makes sense to me that I should, when possible, try to dispel racists stereotypes and the like that lead to those advantage.

Why can't you tell people that they should try to realize the ways in which their life can be privileged compared to others?

-1) Because you are making assumptions about their privilege based on superficial characteristics.
-2)You are making judgements based on the privilege to create a heigharchy (Dang spell check, I give up!) of validity and need. Hmm... A line of thinking where some people are better than others based on the color of their skin... hmm...
-3) You aren't asking someone to understand someone elses POV and through that lens understand what they truly have. You are asking someone to come to vague conclusions about their privilege based on vague notions that often cannot be defined, quantified, or don't even apply.

1) Well, mate, I'm sorry to break it to you, but if you're a man, it makes sense to assume that you don't suffer from everyday sexism the way a woman does.
2)  I totally don't see how that follows from the first, at all. Like, I'll just tell you that you should check your privilege, right now. You really should given the way you seem unable to understand that some forms of systemic prejudice exists in our societies.

Now, where did I create a race-based hierarchy (You're welcome for the spelling) of need?

3) I simply don't get that statement. Are you again complaining that we attempt to draw more general conclusions relating to power relations?

[Neonivek]

1) Well, mate, I'm sorry to break it to you, but if you're a man, it makes sense to assume that you don't suffer from everyday sexism the way a woman does

Now you just made an assumption based on the experiences of all women and all men. So you are talking for all women and men and are delegating out traits that will apply in all situations.

Goodness is checking your privilege just the overflowing font of equality in that: It is equally sexist to both genders.

But how about you list those Privileges that a MAN has? Not "Men", a Man.

I mean let me think of things I experienced: I've been objectified, I've been cat called, I've been sexually harassed, sexually assaulted, I've been denied consent, I am scared to go outside at night, I have to dress and act a certain way if I want to be taken seriously, things built for the majority do not suit my needs, the media doesn't represent me.

 

How is the "Do something about it" misuse?

I have a chocolate bar, I should do something about it. I am homeless, but I am a man... I should do something about it.

The way it is positioned is hilarious! Because she says you aren't a bad person for being privileged, but goes on to essentially say that your privilege should be dealt with as if it is a disease or some mortal sin.

At BEST it could be that you should use your advantages to help others. Yet that isn't the way it is positioned, because it is an accusation.

---

Which I guess is the ultimate problem with "Check your Privilege" as you proven... it isn't an exercise it is an accusation, and assumption.

Perhaps it can't be used correctly period.

[Sheb]

I have a chocolate bar, I should do something about it. I am homeless, but I am a man... I should do something about it.

The way it is positioned is hilarious! Because she says you aren't a bad person for being privileged, but goes on to essentially say that your privilege should be dealt with as if it is a disease or some mortal sin.

Well, yeah, that's the entire point. The underlying system that means that some group have privileges over other should be dismantled, but that doesn't mean that you are a bad person for being in one of the category that benefits. It's not like you chose to be part of them most of the time.

Surely the distinction isn't hard to understand? To take an exemple of blatant race privilege, think of white people in the Deep South in the 50's. Sure they have privilege over black folks. And sure, they're privileges over black folks were unjust and had to be dealt with. That doesn't mean that you're a bad person for being born white in Mississipi in the early 20th century.

Now you just made an assumption based on the experiences of all women and all men. So you are talking for all women and men.

Goodness is checking your privilege just the overflowing font of equality in that: It is equally sexist to both genders.

But how about you list those Privileges that a MAN has? Not "Men", a Man.

I really, really don't understand your point. Can you try to rephrase it?

[Neonivek]

Ok let me rephrase it.

You are making an assumption based on the life experiences of all men and all women and deeming it is true in all situations.

So what privileges does a man have?

Not "Men" so you can point out that CEOs are mostly male (something that benefits only a fraction of a fraction of men... Men who are sociopaths)

The underlying system that means that some group have privileges over other should be dismantled

I am smart, I have a privilege over dumb people. I should have my intelligence dismantled.

That is why that assumption doesn't work wholesale.

IN FACT IT HAS A DOUBLE ASSUMPTION!

I am smart, therefor I am the only person or group who is smart.

WAIT! Triple assumption

I am smart, therefor I am purely advantaged over people who are dumb.

It isn't like smart people have higher rates of depression than people who are dumb and thus we cannot look at it as purely advantage or disadvantage.

WAIT!!! FOURTH assumption

They are dumb, therefor they are purely disadvantaged over people who are smart.

[Sheb]

Just checking, but you're still arguing in good faith and not being purposefully obtuse, right? Or maybe it's just your style of writing I have trouble understanding.