Can individuals have privilege? How much do you have?

[Kapalika]

Note: I'm open to a real debate here, if anyone will have it. Yes, I am arguing for my point but f anyone can refute me and show me good reason and evidence I'm willing to adapt or change my view.​

Introduction​

So I heard it argued here as well as privately with some RF members that one can not have privilege that only groups can. Which flies in the face of everything I've ever heard about the debate in the last 2 years. It seems to me that if one can make any generalization about a group necessarily that has to apply to some individuals about the group, or else it wouldn't be possible to make the generalization in the first place.​

If privilege isn't something someone can have, why do I feel that I'm really disadvantaged in my own life and see others with advantages I don't have or never could given preferential treatment?

Preferential treatment, bias, bigotry, and double standards is really what comprises what people call "privilege". Those things are very real on the level of an individual person, measurable even to a degree, so why would someone argue that privilege is just a statistical thing that only applies to groups?

Privilege in everyday life​

According to Every Day Feminism: http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/07/what-checking-privilege-means

Because we all carry around privilege of some kind.

Simply put, this means that we may, unknowingly, have certain advantages over others. And this is only because there are aspects of our identity that society values over others.

For example, growing up, I came from a middle-class background. I never experienced food or financial insecurity. I didn’t have a job while I was in high school, and I was able to attain a good education. It was assumed, by default, that I would be high-achieving. As a result, my teachers invested a lot in my success.

In contrast, poorer classmates that I knew experienced near-constant food and financial insecurity. As a result, this impacted their focus, their emotional wellbeing, and their grades. Teachers simply assumed that they were “lost causes” that didn’t care about their schooling. Consequently, they didn’t spend as much time mentoring those classmates as they did mentoring me.

(Disclaimer: I don't usually agree with this site but it hit the head on the nail in terms of how people do, in my opinion, have privilege individually.)

So here we have a story of very real advantages someone had in life due to socio-economic status. I could give examples in my own life, in the lives of people I've known, many of you probably know of others in similar situations ect. The fact is, privilege is something that everyone has some of...

The Scholar who popularized the term privilege says individuals can have
privilege​

Hey look, it's The Atlantic: What the Origin of 'Check Your Privilege' Tells Us About Today's Privilege Debates

Maybe the arguments haven't changed, but the mode of debate has. Privilege is still the idea that society grants unearned rewards to certain people based on their race, gender, sexuality, etc — checking your privilege means acknowledging the role those rewards play in your life and the lives of less privileged people.

Basically the article is about the woman who wrote a 1988 paper that brought the terminology mainstream. She goes on to point out that everyone has some form of privilege:

"When Tal Fortgang was told, 'Check your privilege' — which is a flip, get-with-it kind of statement — it infuriated him, because he didn’t want to see himself systematically," MacIntosh said. "But what I believe is that everybody has a combination of unearned advantage and unearned disadvantage in life." That's the key: "everyone" benefits from and is a victim of privilege.

So Peggy MacIntosh, the Woman's Studies Scholar who popularized the term, says individuals can have privilege. I'm gonna trust her over any of ya'll unless you can provide a thorough refutation of what she said in that article.

How much privilege do you have?​

I found many quizzes, charts ect on google that told me what they thought.

One example: How Privileged Are You?

You live with 30 out of 100 points of privilege.

You're not privileged at all. You grew up with an intersectional, complicated identity, and life never let you forget it. You've had your fair share of struggles, and you've worked hard to overcome them. We do not live in an ideal world and you had to learn that the hard way. It is not your responsibility to educate those with more advantages than you, but if you decide you want to, go ahead and send them this quiz. Hopefully it will help.

There are a lot more and ya, none really look scientific. But from taking 2 or 3 different quizzes and adding up by a chart all said I was pretty disadvantaged in life when I answered honestly. This is gonna sound crazy but I think the Buzzfeed one was probably the best thought out of them all, not that that is saying much.

Anyways I don't really know how one could measure privilege but given how widespread "check your privilege" is now... surely everyone has their own idea. I personally think I'm disadvantaged for some private reasons I won't get into, but I don't ever really talk about it. I just do the best I can to deal with it and improve my quality of life.

 

[Curious George]

Note: I'm open to a real debate here, if anyone will have it. Yes, I am arguing for my point but f anyone can refute me and show me good reason and evidence I'm willing to adapt or change my view.​

Introduction​

So I heard it argued here as well as privately with some RF members that one can not have privilege that only groups can. Which flies in the face of everything I've ever heard about the debate in the last 2 years. It seems to me that if one can make any generalization about a group necessarily that has to apply to some individuals about the group, or else it wouldn't be possible to make the generalization in the first place.​

If privilege isn't something someone can have, why do I feel that I'm really disadvantaged in my own life and see others with advantages I don't have or never could given preferential treatment?

Preferential treatment, bias, bigotry, and double standards is really what comprises what people call "privilege". Those things are very real on the level of an individual person, measurable even to a degree, so why would someone argue that privilege is just a statistical thing that only applies to groups?

Privilege in everyday life​

According to Every Day Feminism: http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/07/what-checking-privilege-means


(Disclaimer: I don't usually agree with this site but it hit the head on the nail in terms of how people do, in my opinion, have privilege individually.)

So here we have a story of very real advantages someone had in life due to socio-economic status. I could give examples in my own life, in the lives of people I've known, many of you probably know of others in similar situations ect. The fact is, privilege is something that everyone has some of...

The Scholar who popularized the term privilege says individuals can have
privilege​

Hey look, it's The Atlantic: What the Origin of 'Check Your Privilege' Tells Us About Today's Privilege Debates



Basically the article is about the woman who wrote a 1988 paper that brought the terminology mainstream. She goes on to point out that everyone has some form of privilege:



So Peggy MacIntosh, the Woman's Studies Scholar who popularized the term, says individuals can have privilege. I'm gonna trust her over any of ya'll unless you can provide a thorough refutation of what she said in that article.

How much privilege do you have?​

I found many quizzes, charts ect on google that told me what they thought.

One example: How Privileged Are You?

You live with 30 out of 100 points of privilege.

You're not privileged at all. You grew up with an intersectional, complicated identity, and life never let you forget it. You've had your fair share of struggles, and you've worked hard to overcome them. We do not live in an ideal world and you had to learn that the hard way. It is not your responsibility to educate those with more advantages than you, but if you decide you want to, go ahead and send them this quiz. Hopefully it will help.

There are a lot more and ya, none really look scientific. But from taking 2 or 3 different quizzes and adding up by a chart all said I was pretty disadvantaged in life when I answered honestly. This is gonna sound crazy but I think the Buzzfeed one was probably the best thought out of them all, not that that is saying much.

Anyways I don't really know how one could measure privilege but given how widespread "check your privilege" is now... surely everyone has their own idea. I personally think I'm disadvantaged for some private reasons I won't get into, but I don't ever really talk about it. I just do the best I can to deal with it and improve my quality of life.

Reflection is a good. It is good to think how aspects of your life have advantages over others. But to assert that an individual has a privilege based on there membership to a group is an instance of the ecological fallacy.

Now that certainly does not prohibit an individual from claiming privilge. It is not something toward which you can point.

Let us use food insecurity as an example. This is something which i experienced growing up do to my socio-economic class at the time (to a degree that still rattles my core to this day). It is true of the group as a whole that they are more likely to experience this. But i cannot say that an individual has had this disadvantage or not based on their membership to any group. This is something for individuals to reflect upon. To what degree this privilege or lack thereof has effected their life is pure speculation. There are far too many other factors to consider when dealing with an individual as opposed to a group. The group has the privilege, the individuals do not necessarily. What of the wealthier kid whose family locked away the food and refused to give him any. What of children who came from middle class backgrounds who decided to join a cult. It is fallacious to say someone has privilege because of group membership or lack thereof. What is more, i cannot ultimately say how this one point affected me. It is speculation. There are too many other aspects to my individuality.

As I said before, it is unlikely, and i would even say impossible, for a person not to be affected by privilege in some fashion. However, we can only reflect to gain perspective. At the end of the day, even our reflections are speculation.

 

[Jumi]

It looks like a misleading collection of questions. Attractive for one's race for example was the one where I stopped at, what if you are considered "unattractive" by surrounding culture because of a deformity or such? Same with religion. Of course some major religions discriminate people who are not as they teach everyone should be. Furthermore it seems specific to culture in the US. Many of the behaviors listed already in the beginning are such that they don't apply in many parts of the world.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I found many quizzes, charts ect on google that told me what they thought.

One example: How Privileged Are You?

It will be a sad day when social justice activism is replaced by comparisons of battle scars for the mere sake of comparisons of battle scars. Furthermore, I find it mostly pointless to say that "everyone is privileged" as if it were some sort of meaningful statement. Everyone has positives and negatives in their lives, but why that is the case is what I think matters most.

If most people in a given country have their basic needs, they're not "privileged"; they just have basic needs. They're only "privileged" compared to a disenfranchised minority, and I think pointing out that the minority is disenfranchised and emphasizing that is both more useful and productive than trying to show who is or isn't "privileged" by any means necessary.

On the other hand, someone who has something only a tiny minority have by virtue of something he or she can't control and hasn't earned is privileged. A man who has legal guardianship over a woman in a place like Saudi Arabia just because of his gender is privileged. By contrast, labeling a rich person who has worked his or her butt off for years to make their wealth "privileged" as if it were some sort of stigma strikes me as counterproductive at best and unjustifiably spiteful at worst.

It just seems to me that a lot of people miss the forest for the trees in debates about social justice. Instead of focusing on things like economic inequality, homophobia, and sexism, some people spend so much time and effort trying to determine who is more "privileged" to the point where they seemingly make that the primary issue. The "quiz" you posted seems to me to be a prime product of a developer who has such a mentality; I just wonder what the person or people who came up with that were thinking or what they thought it would accomplish.

Yeah, individuals can be privileged, and groups can be privileged. As someone who has lived in countries where my religious identity has put me in a group that the majority believes should be killed and where a lot of lawmakers think lack of belief is a crime, I care far less about spending a lot of time picking out every single "privilege" the majority has than I care about having my own rights and seeing the rule of (reasonable) law enforced well.

 

[Kapalika]

It will be a sad day when social justice activism is replaced by comparisons of battle scars for the mere sake of comparisons of battle scars. Furthermore, I find it mostly pointless to say that "everyone is privileged" as if it were some sort of meaningful statement. Everyone has positives and negatives in their lives, but why that is the case is what I think matters most.

It's already like that for some.

Also why is it pointless? The woman who made "privilege" mainstream herself said we all have it as I noted.

Perhaps my intent here wasn't clear. I asked "how much do you have" as more of a rhetorical. Ya, I gave some crappy quiz, but it was only to prove further that there are those invested in that sort of thing. There are many more on the net like that.

If most people in a given country have their basic needs, they're not "privileged"; they just have basic needs. They're only "privileged" compared to a disenfranchised minority, and I think pointing out that the minority is disenfranchised and emphasizing that is both more useful and productive than trying to show who is or isn't "privileged" by any means necessary.

On the other hand, someone who has something only a tiny minority have by virtue of something he or she can't control and hasn't earned is privileged. A man who has legal guardianship over a woman in a place like Saudi Arabia just because of his gender is privileged. By contrast, labeling a rich person who has worked his or her butt off for years to make their wealth "privileged" as if it were some sort of stigma strikes me as counterproductive at best and unjustifiably spiteful at worst.

I hadn't thought of that, that's actually a really good point... but some might argue that they had an easier time at becoming rich because of being, oh say, white.

It just seems to me that a lot of people miss the forest for the trees in debates about social justice. Instead of focusing on things like economic inequality, homophobia, and sexism, some people spend so much time and effort trying to determine who is more "privileged" to the point where they seemingly make that the primary issue. The "quiz" you posted seems to me to be a prime product of a developer who has such a mentality; I just wonder what the person or people who came up with that were thinking or what they thought it would accomplish.

Ya, the regressive left sucks and makes its harder for actual liberals.

Yeah, individuals can be privileged, and groups can be privileged. As someone who has lived in countries where my religious identity has put me in a group that the majority believes should be killed and where a lot of lawmakers think lack of belief is a crime, I care far less about spending a lot of time picking out every single "privilege" the majority has than I care about having my own rights and seeing the rule of (reasonable) law enforced well.

I think your perspective might be more level headed because you live in a place where it's very real. A lot of these people you describe, using privilege in that way have never actually had to deal with anything too serious. Many are just people who stay home all the time posting online even.

 

[LuisDantas]

Of course individuals can have privilege. It arises from social and political systems who, following a strong directive of human psychology, create artificial distinctions among groups of people and insists on giving them favor and disfavor.

It also works on small scales, even inside nuclear families - as most anyone who has a sibling will tell you.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I am nearly 75 years old. I have the privilege of being served first at a ticket or bank window window at some places (though I have never utilized that privilege). The government also grants me the privilege of earning an interest of 8.3% per year in a recent pension scheme if I choose to invest in that.

 

[Curious George]

If most people in a given country have their basic needs, they're not "privileged"; they just have basic needs. They're only "privileged" compared to a disenfranchised minority, and I think pointing out that the minority is disenfranchised and emphasizing that is both more useful and productive than trying to show who is or isn't "privileged" by any means necessary.

That is possible. However, focusing on privilege instead of disadvantage is an effort to bring awareness to those who do not experience the disadvantage have benefited from that. Further, looking at disadvantage alone doesn't give you the complete picture. It is a two sided coin. And yes, if one group is having their basic needs met and another is not then it very much is a privilege. Because there are benefits and disadvantages that cascade from the respective positions.

On the other hand, someone who has something only a tiny minority have by virtue of something he or she can't control and hasn't earned is privileged. A man who has legal guardianship over a woman in a place like Saudi Arabia just because of his gender is privileged. By contrast, labeling a rich person who has worked his or her butt off for years to make their wealth "privileged" as if it were some sort of stigma strikes me as counterproductive at best and unjustifiably spiteful at worst.

Perhaps this comes from trying to label individuals as priveledged.

It just seems to me that a lot of people miss the forest for the trees in debates about social justice. Instead of focusing on things like economic inequality, homophobia, and sexism, some people spend so much time and effort trying to determine who is more "privileged" to the point where they seemingly make that the primary issue.

And the urinating contest will continue while people are focused on which individual has the most or least privilege.
Nevermind the gaping hole in their logic of trying to apply statistics to individuals.

Yeah, individuals can be privileged, and groups can be privileged.

Groups can have privilege. Regarding individuals, this is speculation. While reflecting on how membership to a groups or groups may have benefitted you can serve as a positive force and help with your understanding. It is, and always will be speculation.

As someone who has lived in countries where my religious identity has put me in a group that the majority believes should be killed and where a lot of lawmakers think lack of belief is a crime, I care far less about spending a lot of time picking out every single "privilege" the majority has than I care about having my own rights and seeing the rule of (reasonable) law enforced well.

And the concept of privilege might help to bridge that gap if people were less focused on who has more and what privilege an individual possesses and more on changing the way benefits and disadvantages conferred.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Here's a video on the side of Kapalika. It has to be put in spoilers because it contains some rough language and crude humor:

Spoiler: Diana Davison on the subject of SJW Lingo

After watching this video I have to say I'd be pretty intimidated to take up the opposing position. I certainly think the right to free speech is and should be a negative right, not a positive right.

 

[Curious George]

Here's a video on the side of Kapalika. It has to be put in spoilers because it contains some rough language and crude humor:

Spoiler: Diana Davison on the subject of SJW Lingo

After watching this video I have to say I'd be pretty intimidated to take up the opposing position. I certainly think the right to free speech is and should be a negative right, not a positive right.

Lol, trying to decide what that actually had to do with the topic at hand.

Is freedom of speech a negative right? Yes. That aside, her definition of a poaitive right is awful. And, I imagine designed to confuse people as to what a positive right is.

 

[Kapalika]

Here's a video on the side of Kapalika. It has to be put in spoilers because it contains some rough language and crude humor:

Spoiler: Diana Davison on the subject of SJW Lingo

After watching this video I have to say I'd be pretty intimidated to take up the opposing position. I certainly think the right to free speech is and should be a negative right, not a positive right.

I do not agree with that video and it is NOT on my side.

It's exactly the kind of channel that cherry picks and gives power to another side as radically stupid as it is.

I hate **** like that, and it's crap like that that is the reason I hate this "debate" that's been going on for the last few years online. It's kind of become self-fulling in a way, and the two just grow off each other.

I only got half way through the video before realizing it's not worth my time.

 

[Karl R]

So I heard it argued here as well as privately with some RF members that one can not have privilege that only groups can. Which flies in the face of everything I've ever heard about the debate in the last 2 years.

I would say individuals can have privilege, even if there's no associated group that has the same privilege.

Anybody, regardless of race, sex, ethnicity, class, sexuality or religion can work at the same company and in the same position that I do. However, according to the rules that Human Resources sends out annually, I lack the education to hold the positions I have excelled at over the last dozen years.

Despite lacking the normal educational background, I have another privilege that allowed me to get, keep, and excel at my job ... I'm gifted at math. I drew a genetic long straw. As far as I know, there isn't an identifiable group of math geniuses reaping the "math genius privilege". However, since I was at the right place, at the right time, I ended up having my career suddenly take off ... for no other reason.

That seems extremely individual to me.

If privilege isn't something someone can have, why do I feel that I'm really disadvantaged in my own life and see others with advantages I don't have or never could given preferential treatment?

Personally, I would say that you fail to recognize the privileges you have, and that you instead focus on the privileges you lack.

I've taken dance classes and danced socially since 1999. If you take a class of beginners, the people with an innate sense of the beat and a good ear for music will quickly outperform their classmates, even if they spend a little less time and effort learning how. And on the social dance floor, they will be rewarded with attention and admiration based on how well they do, not according to the amount of time or effort they've expended getting there. (They'll probably get more respect if they've put in less effort achieving that higher level of competence.)

Trevor Noah on privilege
I wish I could find a transcript of Trevor Noah's interview on NPR. I heard a rerun of it recently. He is a biracial man, born and raised in apartheid South Africa. His autobiographical book is titled, "Born a Crime," because it was a crime for his white father and black mother to have sex and procreate.

In the interview, Trevor mentioned getting in trouble with his two cousins. Even though Trevor was the main instigator, his black grandmother beat his black cousins, rather than him ... because she couldn't bring herself to hit "a white child". Trevor cheerfully admitted that rather than insisting he deserved the same punishment as his black cousins, he was happy to benefit from "white privilege".

It is easy for the Trevor Noahs of this world to focus on the privileges that other people have and they lack. It's far more insightful to examine the privileges we each have ... and that other people lack.