tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2925765946042638459.post2650265797055234080..comments2024-03-18T02:22:56.392-04:00Comments on Disgusted Beyond Belief: This Post is PrivilegedDBBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17805375811782552873noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2925765946042638459.post-52855485064189178682007-06-20T09:54:00.000-04:002007-06-20T09:54:00.000-04:00Thorne - Thanks. And And I agree, some people do ...Thorne - Thanks. And And I agree, some people do have advantages over some others in certain situations, but I reject the notion that they always apply and they can be based solely on a characterstic such as race or gender. <BR/><BR/>To answer your specific question, I think what you are talking about (correct me if I'm wrong) is that no matter how for down the totem pole someone is, they still might be "master of their own domain" - their family, for instance. And that's true enough, but again, that doesn't necessarily hold. <BR/><BR/>To use your example, it could be the case that Albert the floor sweeper, after being at a soul-draining job all day, where his boss yells at him all day long and he can't respond because he needs the job and can't get another because he is uneducated, then goes home, exhausted, after being kept late by his sadistic boss and then driving a two hour commute, and instead of being happy to see him, his children yell at him because they want new designer clothes and he can't afford them and his wife yells at him for not getting home sooner, ignoring his protestations about his boss with 'be a man and stand up to him', then she dumps the baby in his lap and tell she took care of the baby all day and now it is his turn... and then when he takes care of the baby, she hovers over him and critisizes him for not doing it "right" (which consists of doing it exactly the way she does it, regardless of whether or not what he was doing was ok), then yells at him about not having enough money, pushes him to get a raise, etc. etc. In other words, it could be the case for Albert that, like many millions of men, he feels helpless at work and then he feels helpless at home and not in control in either place. Sorta hard to find the 'privilege' in that. Especially when it is topped off by him dying probably ten years sooner than his wife (statistically speaking). <BR/><BR/>On the other hand, looking at Albert's wife, I'm not saying she has it easy either - but at least she has what you imply Albert might have had - she's at least master (mistress?) of her own domain. She runs the household. Even if Albert were attempt to be the one to do so, he's gone half the day, so truly, how could he? That's another benefit of being a stay-at-home parent - you are your own boss if for no other reason than there is no one looking over your shoulder all day - you do what you want, when you want - sure, you have lots of things that need to be done, but you get to decide when to do them, in what order, how to do them, and can watch TV while doing some of them or otherwise make the tasks as pleasant as possible. Yes, I speak from experience. Staying at home as a parent was a lot of hard work, but I really really really liked not having to answer to anyone. Sure, my wife could say something when she got home (and occasionaly she did), but that just isn't the same thing as having a boss looking over your shoulder who has the power to immediately terminate you. <BR/><BR/>So Albert can be a white male and pretty much have no priviliges of any kind at all. I think that point gets lost in the discussion on privileges and 'isms'. Sort of like how demographics of those in power (most of them white males) is emphasized while failing to note that there are far more poor white people than there are poor in any other demographic group (by the numbers). Which means that anyone of any minority who isn't poor is doing better than the largest population of poor - white people.DBBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17805375811782552873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2925765946042638459.post-25868513835994587692007-06-19T13:15:00.000-04:002007-06-19T13:15:00.000-04:00DBB, I like your exploration of the concept of pri...DBB, I like your exploration of the concept of priveledge, and agree that it can be a wishy washy sort of too-inclusive term,but I don't believe that it necessarily negates the concept completely. I read the article to which you refer above, and it seems to me that the author is using the term to come to terms with her own possible status as priveliged, which can only be a good thing to explore, no?? I find that using it as a term to shame or blame or silence (as you mention) is the problem. I hope I'm not just wasting space here, but did you happen to see the quoted text below from the "Thorne in my side" thread over at FC? I'd be interested in your reactions to my theoretical understanding of privilege in this example. <BR/><BR/><I> Just how this confers gender-privilege on Albert the floor-sweeper is rarely articulated, (and never coherently).<BR/><BR/>Hmm… It’s a good question, and I’m not sure I have an answer any more coherent than anyone else. Let me start by saying that it’s not terribly clear to me either, but for the sake of exploring the concept, I’ll give it a shot. (With the caveat that I am exploring, not explaining or justifying.)<BR/>My feeling is that even if “Albert to floor-sweeper” is not privileged in the greater arena of political or economic power, the chances that he is still priveliged within his community/family/cultural context is reasonably high. I have no doubt that there are many exceptions to this hypothesis, and have no idea whether or not this in any way reflects the justification of feminists in general for assigning gender-privilege to all men.<BR/>(here comes an offering of insight into part of my personal context) :) For instance, I live in a small desert community in So. Cali. that can be demographically described as primarily white/caucasian. It is far outside of the usual positive generalizations one can make about a Cali. town/community. If I take this community as my basis for making the above generalization, the majority of white males here, independent of being educationally, politically and economically privileged, are generally privileged within their families and this community.<BR/>This is obvious in their families, which they are the self styled “Heads” of, their behaviors in the community, the female slutshaming and male promiscuity, to name a few.<BR/>This is especially obvious as well as personally relevant in regards to my partner, who works as an experienced carpenter here and is paid less than less experienced white men she works with, as well as being personally undervalued or dismissed and belittled in a “friendly” sort of sexist categorization as “an alright gal (for a dyke)”, or “a good lil worker (for a woman)”.<BR/>*parentheses the implied text<BR/>I think there is a good chance that the local male immigrant population may suffer equally within the community, and am not really sure if their possible privilege within their family structure isn’t negligable, but that begs the question to how the immigrant women experience the possible priviledge of their men. And I digress, if we are staying with “white males”.<BR/>Similarily, we are often allowed to be the “exceptions” to the sort of community generalization of “dykes”. Even though for some strange reason (familiarity of perceived roles, perhaps?) it seems that our Butch/Femme dynamic makes us easier for these men to take. Rarely are we used as an awakening regarding their (white males) preconceptions. (Once, to date, to my knowledge.)<BR/>It has been our experience that we remain the friendly exception to the mysogynous rule until we assert ourselves in a social or business disagreement, at which time we revert to being “Those dykes (You know how “they” are)”.</I>Thornehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18017781098602577734noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2925765946042638459.post-37483784905012399352007-06-18T14:54:00.000-04:002007-06-18T14:54:00.000-04:00Many of the items you list are often false-to-fact...Many of the items you list are often false-to-fact or are subject to positive correction.<BR/><BR/>I can't, for instance, be "pretty sure" (24) that the person in charge is going to be of my race, sex, sexual orientation, or have similar religious beliefs. This is simply not true, I don't expect it, I'm not at all surprised when the person in charge is not a straight, white atheist male.<BR/><BR/>I'm an atheist, one of the most hated and underrepresented minorities in America. If I want to hang out with atheists, I go to the SF Atheists meeting; if I want to watch atheist TV, I turn on the Discovery channel.<BR/><BR/>There are certain items in the list, though, that deserve attention: We should, of course, talk about the contributions of <I>all</I> races in history and contemporary civics, and we should look honestly at our historical sins, notably the genocide of the American Indians, the WWII internment of American citizens of Japanese ancestry, and, of course, the centuries-long enslavement of black people.<BR/><BR/>At a party recently, some of my wifes cow-orkers were talking about race. They asked me what race I thought they were and I said, "I don't know; you all look like <I>Americans</I> to me." Unless I'm giving a physical description, choosing a pronoun or trying to play matchmaker, I just don't give a shit what anyone's race, sex, or sexual orientation is.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2925765946042638459.post-43039858342486719472007-06-18T08:12:00.000-04:002007-06-18T08:12:00.000-04:00I think a lot of the gender pay gap is more myth t...I think a lot of the gender pay gap is more myth than reality these days. As someone else pointed out, if you really could get a woman, equally skilled, for only 70% of the cost of a man, why the heck would anyone hire a man?<BR/><BR/>My work situation is, for the time being, unlike my previous corporate jobs, one where we all know each other's salaries because they are all set based on position and seniority, period. Interestingly, also, 63% of the attorneys in my office are female (a reduction from what it was almost 80%, though that perhaps a short statistical aberration).<BR/><BR/>So yes, at my current job, I know for a fact that everyone is paid exactly the same for position and seniority. But that is not the norm.DBBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17805375811782552873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2925765946042638459.post-5871754860030781792007-06-17T22:49:00.000-04:002007-06-17T22:49:00.000-04:00I question your assumption, "since I know my salar...I question your assumption, "since I know my salary is exactly identical to everyone with the same level of seniority", on the basis of your earlier post complaining that salary information should be transparent and is not. You may be correct; you may not. I do know that at one point in my career, I (a female engineer) was making probably $12,000 per year less than the "going rate" shown in salary surveys and "best job" articles. It is a valid assumption in the data processing industry that the gender of an average engineer is male.<BR/><BR/>My salary situation was rectified during the dot-com boom in 1999, when my management became terrified that I (and others) would run off and work for startup companies, and gave us all raises so we would stay around and deal with the Y2K bug. But my pay didn't reach parity due to anything but my management's fear of being left high and dry with a damaging bug (which didn't actually exist). <BR/><BR/>I can't speak for racial discrimination, being white myself; but I do tend to assume that women, on the whole, are paid less than men in the same jobs, except in unusual cases.hederahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01696592301686568456noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2925765946042638459.post-27867356539836334922007-06-17T21:34:00.000-04:002007-06-17T21:34:00.000-04:00These days I generally am just at work, where I am...These days I generally am just at work, where I am shut in an office by myself most of the day, or I'm at home, where I'm either with just my daughter or my wife and my daughter. And I see a handful of friends once or twice a week. <BR/><BR/>So I guess, to a great degree, demographics aside, I am generally just in the company of family or no one at all. But then this would be true no matter what my race was.DBBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17805375811782552873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2925765946042638459.post-48759808245751995922007-06-17T21:11:00.000-04:002007-06-17T21:11:00.000-04:00I perceive that Ms. MacIntosh teaches at Wellesley...I perceive that Ms. MacIntosh teaches at Wellesley. I live in Oakland, California, a city in which there is no clear majority - here are the stats from the 2000 Census: <BR/><BR/>The racial makeup of the city was 35.66 percent African American, 23.52 percent White, 0.66 percent Native American, 15.23 percent Asian American, 0.50 percent Pacific Islander, 11.66 percent from other races, and 4.98 percent from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 21.89 percent of the population.<BR/><BR/>My ability to choose companions of my own race in public is somewhat more limited than hers, I suspect. I also sometimes feel unwelcome in the company of the plurality black population. <BR/><BR/>It's all in your point of view.hederahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01696592301686568456noreply@blogger.com