miffy495 Posted March 11, 2013 EDIT: To be clear, since the wording in your post implies that you are a woman, I'm posting from that assumption. Original Post: Been encouraged to carry mace? To be extra careful walking downtown at night? Seen posters around campus (assuming uni/college experience) encouraging you to call the SafeWalk service if you're leaving the library after dark? Been repeatedly warned to never leave your drink unattended? Never? Really? Also, as I said, that "what was she wearing?" is a question that people even think about asking is symptomatic of this. It removes the blame for rape from the man and places it on the woman's fashion choice. The cultural belief implied by this is that the woman should have known better than to wear something that would get her raped, thereby removing some (or hell, sometimes all) of the blame from the man for being a fucking rapist. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faegbeard Posted March 11, 2013 The only one of those that as ever applied to me was being careful walking around less than desirable areas of town at night, and that's got more to do with being robbed/beaten/assaulted in general, guys avoid walking around there was often as possible too. Personally, I have never heard anyone make excuses like that for rape. If people imply that it's the woman's fault (and not in jest), they must be a very small and vocal minority, surely. Edit: This is getting somewhat tangential to video games (but I did ask, I guess). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miffy495 Posted March 11, 2013 Personally, I have never heard anyone make excuses like that for rape. If people imply that it's the woman's fault (and not in jest), they must be a very small and vocal minority, surely. I guess it depends on where you live. It's pretty common around North America from my experience. As progressive as Canada is supposed to be, I've heard it a lot around here. Depressingly often from politicians. If you haven't heard it and live in Canada or the US, I'd consider you incredibly lucky. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faegbeard Posted March 11, 2013 I live in Australia near a decent sized city. I guess sexism is less prevalent here, which is somewhat ironic because people here are known for using the word 'cunt' in every other sentence. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reyturner Posted March 11, 2013 What in the actual fuck? That seems completely insane to me; I've never been told not to get raped, literally or metaphorically. He means stuff like this the LAPD posting articles about "Protecting Yourself from Becoming a Victim of Date Rape" implying that it is "natural" to get raped if you fail to conform to those practices. I'm naive and would like to think that the majority of people have at least some basic common decency. I'll read the links in the mean time. Edit: Not doing much for me I'm afraid. The fozmeadows stuff to me seems extremely opinionated and subjective to me and at times completely silly bordering slightly insane. I still don't know what "rape culture" is supposed to be. The advertising stuff I mostly agree with, it is kinda gross, but for the for most part doesn't really exist inside a work of fiction and thus isn't entirely relevant. The science direct thing looked promising but I have to buy it to actually read it apparently, which is a shame. When problematic behavior is normalized, the people perpetuating it aren't necessarily doing it out of malice; they don't think anything of it precisely because it is normal. That's why otherwise reasonable people can say thing like "Affirmative Action is just reverse racism against white people" or "feminism is no longer relevant because women can vote"; from their perspective there isn't a problem and being told (or even asked) to change their behavior feels unwarranted. That's why it is common practice around social justice / gender politics to call out and publicly shame people for espousing and perpetuatng harmful or problematic ideas, operating on the theory that there is no such thing as a harmless sexism / racism / whatever-ism (see /r/ShitRedditSays). Of course, like all other things left leaning, everyone has their own idea of what is right and so there is no unified front; some flavors of feminism leads to pretty extreme trans-phobia for example. Personally, I think you catch more flies with honey; rubbing someone's face in their privilege just makes them defensive, especially when they don't even understand why they're getting confronted. To them, it just feels like an attack out of the blue and you don't end up reaching them (or end up pushing them further away). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faegbeard Posted March 11, 2013 He means stuff like this the LAPD posting articles about "Protecting Yourself from Becoming a Victim of Date Rape" implying that it is "natural" to get raped if you fail to conform to those practices. Huh. I didn't get that feeling from it at all. Perhaps a little condescending since it's mostly common sense, but no more than that. When problematic behavior is normalized, the people perpetuating it aren't necessarily doing it out of malice; they don't think anything of it precisely because it is normal. That's why otherwise reasonable people can say thing like "Affirmative Action is just reverse racism against white people" or "feminism is no longer relevant because women can vote"; from their perspective there isn't a problem and being told (or even asked) to change their behavior feels unwarranted. That's why it is common practice around social justice / gender politics to call out and publicly shame people for espousing and perpetuatng harmful or problematic ideas (see /r/ShitRedditSays). Of course, like all other things left leaning, everyone has their own idea of what is right and so there is no unified front; some flavors of feminism leads to pretty extreme trans-phobia for example. Personally, I think you catch more flies with honey; rubbing someone's face in their privilege just makes them defensive, especially when they don't even understand why they're getting confronted. To them, it just feels like an attack out of the blue and you don't end up reaching them (or end up pushing them further away). True. Especially that last part. I think it's important to point out though that people who are against things like Affirmative Action or feminism aren't necessarily perpetuating that behavior (racism, sexism etc), but are possibly just against their methods or are misinformed about them. Edit: The concept of "Privilege" is also a thing that doesn't really exist here. I'm lucky that I wasn't born into squalor and that's about it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TychoCelchuuu Posted March 11, 2013 Edit: The concept of "Privilege" is also a thing that doesn't really exist here. I'm lucky that I wasn't born into squalor and that's about it.? What about being born with the use of all your limbs? Without any mental disabilities? Being born with the same gender identity as your biological sex? Being born straight into a world that is much more tolerant of straight people? I'm sure that being friendly and opening and caring to everyone instead of rubbing their face in privilege is more helpful - I just don't have the effort for it. I don't like how it's suddenly on me not just to make people aware of the many ways their life goes well without them noticing, when really that ought to be their effort, because the information is out there already. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miffy495 Posted March 11, 2013 Yeah, I'm with getting people on your side nicely as well, but sometimes it takes something pretty extreme. It took getting my jaw fucked up by a guy who thought I was gay and therefore deserved to get the shit beaten out of me to finally realize how fortunate I am to usually feel so safe as a straight white guy. Knowing that my friend can't hold his husband's hand without worrying about that happening pretty much every day caused me to take a look at gender politics and eventually declare myself decidedly feminist. I actually owe that drunken homophobic redneck a thank you, in a perverse way. It's not like I was a raving sexist before, but I behaved in ways that I now recognize were, while not furthering sexism, at least implicitly reinforcing it as the norm. You need something to make you step outside yourself to notice that most of the time though, because it's really ingrained in society. Sometimes that's a really good talk, sometimes it's a sucker punch. Since, I've tried to talk to far more people than I've tried to sucker punch. Man if it isn't tempting sometimes though... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joewintergreen Posted March 11, 2013 I live in Australia near a decent sized city. I guess sexism is less prevalent here, which is somewhat ironic because people here are known for using the word 'cunt' in every other sentence. I live in Melbourne and I hear that shit all the time. You're just keeping good company. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reyturner Posted March 11, 2013 ? What about being born with the use of all your limbs? Without any mental disabilities? Being born with the same gender identity as your biological sex? Being born straight into a world that is much more tolerant of straight people? I'm sure that being friendly and opening and caring to everyone instead of rubbing their face in privilege is more helpful - I just don't have the effort for it. I don't like how it's suddenly on me not just to make people aware of the many ways their life goes well without them noticing, when really that ought to be their effort, because the information is out there already. It's a tough nut to crack. On one hand the Penny Arcade Dickwolves-gate Crisis brought the idea of rape-culture and the idea that you should be sensitive to other people's traumas (ie: trigger warnings) into common knowledge. On the other hand, it also turned rape-culture and trigger warnings into a punchline for a lot of people. But, at the risk of repeating myself, being right isn't enough when you want to change the status quo; you either need the buy-in of the privileged class or you need to totally destroy them. But hell, my attitude is informed by my privilege and situation like anyone else (and I have a natural bias against my total destruction). I'd like to think I'm an ally. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faegbeard Posted March 11, 2013 ? What about being born with the use of all your limbs? Without any mental disabilities? Being born with the same gender identity as your biological sex? Being born straight into a world that is much more tolerant of straight people? I'm sure that being friendly and opening and caring to everyone instead of rubbing their face in privilege is more helpful - I just don't have the effort for it. I don't like how it's suddenly on me not just to make people aware of the many ways their life goes well without them noticing, when really that ought to be their effort, because the information is out there already. To put it bluntly, and this is going to sound much meaner than I intend; It is not my problem. I try to treat everyone I meet with respect, I try not to discriminate based on anything, and so on. However, there is no onus on me to feel any better or worse about myself as a person just because someone else got the short end of the genetic stick or because they were born into riches or squalor. I can't speak about limbs, disabilities or gender identity, but being gay has not been that difficult for me and I would never ask other people to feel differently about being straight just because I exist. I live in Melbourne and I hear that shit all the time. You're just keeping good company. I heard Melbourne was full of Hipsters and really left wing people. Is there any truth to that? I was going to go to PAX and find out for myself but they sold out of 3 day passes really quickly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted March 11, 2013 To put it bluntly, and this is going to sound much meaner than I intend; It is not my problem. The ability to say just that is the concept of "privilege" in a nutshell. You been incredibly lucky, as have almost all of us here. I don't think it's too inconvenient to acknowledge that and incorporate it into our thoughts & actions. Actually, let me put it this way: as a straight, white, cis-gendered, middle-class male living in the richest and most powerful country on Earth, I can assure you that being asked to feel differently about myself because other people aren't me is not exactly going to put me out. Just the opposite, it's the least I can do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chummer Posted March 11, 2013 To put it bluntly, and this is going to sound much meaner than I intend; It is not my problem. ... However, there is no onus on me to feel any better or worse about myself as a person just because someone else got the short end of the genetic stick or because they were born into riches or squalor. I don't believe the point of making people aware of injustices is to make those unaffected feel bad, but rather to highlight the problems, create empathy and figure out ways to correct them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TychoCelchuuu Posted March 11, 2013 To put it bluntly, and this is going to sound much meaner than I intend; It is not my problem.Gormongous already said it, but it bears repeating again and again and again: you have given the definition of privilege. Privilege is not having to worry about things that make life hell for other people, simply because you are lucky enough not to have any of it influence your life. I'm glad that nothing bad has ever happened to you because you're gay, but you need to realize that there are parts of the world where homosexuality carries the death sentence, and it's not like you chose to be born in Australia rather than in any of those places. Your ability to be gay without really worrying about is a textbook example of privilege. Had you been born in another country, you'd have to hide in the closet, forever, and if people got suspicious, you'd be up for death. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faegbeard Posted March 11, 2013 The ability to say just that is the concept of "privilege" in a nutshell. You been incredibly lucky, as have almost all of us here. I don't think it's too inconvenient to acknowledge that and incorporate it into our thoughts & actions. Actually, let me put it this way: as a straight, white, cis-gendered, middle-class male living in the richest and most powerful country on Earth, I can assure you that being asked to feel differently about myself because other people aren't me is not exactly going to put me out. Just the opposite, it's the least I can do. Yes, and? If that's all 'privilege' is then it makes no sense to use it as a pejorative against people who were luckier than you. Just as it would make no sense for me to make fun of some starving African kid. I've done very little to earn my living thus far and they have probably done nothing to deserve to starve. Throwing the word privilege around does shit all compared to actually helping people; all it does is create another way divide people by class. Also being white and living in China isn't exactly a privilege. :3 Gormongous already said it, but it bears repeating again and again and again: you have given the definition of privilege. Privilege is not having to worry about things that make life hell for other people, simply because you are lucky enough not to have any of it influence your life. I'm glad that nothing bad has ever happened to you because you're gay, but you need to realize that there are parts of the world where homosexuality carries the death sentence, and it's not like you chose to be born in Australia rather than in any of those places. Your ability to be gay without really worrying about is a textbook example of privilege. Had you been born in another country, you'd have to hide in the closet, forever, and if people got suspicious, you'd be up for death. And if I had a way to change that for them I would but I can't so I don't let it bother me because if it did I would be sad all the time. That doesn't explain why people (often from other first world counties, mind you), use it as a pejorative. I don't believe the point of making people aware of injustices is to make those unaffected feel bad, but rather to highlight the problems, create empathy and figure out ways to correct them. None of which is accomplished by telling me that people have worse lives than mine. Everybody knows that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted March 11, 2013 It's not a zero-sum game, Faegbeard. You can help people with less privilege than you while educating people with more or equal privilege, even if you don't believe that identifying and understanding privilege, which has been at the root of pretty much every injustice ever perpetrated on this green earth, is as beneficial to the latter group as the former. Edit: Also, really? Being reminded of the many ways in which people have it worse than you doesn't highlight problems or create empathy for you? I wonder. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faegbeard Posted March 11, 2013 I doubt there's many people in the first world who don't know that there are lots of people whose lives are terrible compared to theirs. People don't need to be learn about that, they need to learn to give a shit. Furthermore, just because people have it worse than me isn't an excuse for me not to try to make my life better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TychoCelchuuu Posted March 11, 2013 If you could give some examples of when people use privilege as a pejorative, that would be helpful. Whenever I see it used like that, the idea is that the person saying it is implying that, as someone who is privileged, you aren't understanding the gravity of the situation, and thus by arguing against whatever solution is proposed, what you're really saying "as a privileged person, I don't really think what you're whining about is such a big deal." That's a problem because privilege by definition blinds you from seeing and feeling exactly how big a deal it is. So when people say, for instance, that women shouldn't complain about street harassment because it's actually a compliment for people to hit on them and make comments about their looks, those people are privileged in a way that women aren't - those people don't understand what kind of pressure women are under to constantly think about how they look, what kind of intrusion it is to have people constantly judging you and sexualizing you without your consent, how it feels to be worried about sexual assault, and so on. So privilege as a pejorative would be used in this case as shorthand for "look, you honestly don't understand what women go through, so really you need to learn more about the issue and until you do, shut up." If you think privilege is used as a pejorative in other ways I'm happy to get the examples and try to explain why it might be used like that. I mean it's possible people are just using it as a catchall term for asshole, but I'm sort of doubtful. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chummer Posted March 11, 2013 Yes, and? If that's all 'privilege' is then it makes no sense to use it as a pejorative against people who were luckier than you... Throwing the word privilege around does shit all compared to actually helping people; all it does is create another way divide people by class. Hmm. I think this might be a case where we're talking across each other. You seem to be taking issue with the word 'privilege' while some of us seem to be talking about why it's necessary to point out privilege and how it keeps us from empathizing with others. None of which is accomplished by telling me that people have worse lives than mine. Everybody knows that. I guess I should have added 'create allies' as a fourth step, which would enlist people to help solve the problems. Also, I was bothered by the 'everybody knows that' statement, as I don't think everybody does. The reason that raising awareness (whether it be about gender issues or economic inequality) is an important activity is specifically because not everybody knows. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted March 11, 2013 I doubt there's many people in the first world who don't know that there are lots of people whose lives are terrible compared to theirs. People don't need to be learn about that, they need to learn to give a shit. Furthermore, just because people have it worse than me isn't an excuse for me not to try to make my life better. I think you're underestimating the gap in most people's heads between the starving African child that parents teach as some platonic ideal of poverty and the many people in our lives who have it worse off in countless ways, both big and small, beyond anyone's control. Building self-awareness of these different circumstances, gathered under the heading of "privilege", makes us more empathetic people with better perspective and better ability to be allies to others in need. The difference you speak of between knowing what and knowing how isn't as wide as you think. And who says you're not allowed to make your life better? That has nothing to do with privilege. Privilege is just the difficulty setting on the game of life. Has anything like what you're saying been suggested at all in this thread? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faegbeard Posted March 11, 2013 If you could give some examples of when people use privilege as a pejorative, that would be helpful. Whenever I see it used like that, the idea is that the person saying it is implying that, as someone who is privileged, you aren't understanding the gravity of the situation, and thus by arguing against whatever solution is proposed, what you're really saying "as a privileged person, I don't really think what you're whining about is such a big deal." That's a problem because privilege by definition blinds you from seeing and feeling exactly how big a deal it is. That seems like a cop out. If the gravity was so great it would be explainable. So when people say, for instance, that women shouldn't complain about street harassment because it's actually a compliment for people to hit on them and make comments about their looks, those people are privileged in a way that women aren't - those people don't understand what kind of pressure women are under to constantly think about how they look, what kind of intrusion it is to have people constantly judging you and sexualizing you without your consent, how it feels to be worried about sexual assault, and so on. So privilege as a pejorative would be used in this case as shorthand for "look, you honestly don't understand what women go through, so really you need to learn more about the issue and until you do, shut up." See, like that. It's explainable why women don't like that and it's not particularly difficult to explain. Using the word privilege in that case is just a lazy substitute for a better explanation. As for examples, I feel like when people use it in the pejorative sense they use it as, "You're better off than me and I think I have problems, but you can't understand them so I won't even bother explaining." Heck, sometimes they even call me a straight white male as if it were an insult. I think you're underestimating the gap in most people's heads between the starving African child that parents teach as some kind of platonic ideal of poverty and the many people in our lives who have it worse off in countless ways, both big and small, beyond anyone's control. Building self-awareness of these different circumstances, gathered under the heading of "privilege", makes us more empathetic people with better perspective and better ability to help others in need. The difference you speak of between knowing what and knowing how isn't as wide as you think. And who says you're not allowed to make your life better? That has nothing to do with privilege. Privilege is just the difficulty setting on the game of life. Has anything like what you're saying been suggested at all in this thread? The African child was a an extreme example. My bad I guess. Privilege as you're describing it seems like a pointless label though. I don't need to know how 'privileged' someone is to want to help them, I don't need an imaginary banner-word to recognize that people are different to me. I don't see how that makes people more empathetic if they're thinking, "How well off is this person compared to me?" Assigning a value to a person like that seems like the opposite of understanding and compassion to me. Compiling the infinite complexities of another human's life under a single word like that just seems really, really, well... Silly, for lack of a better word. And who says you're not allowed to make your life better? I misread something. My mistake. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted March 11, 2013 Privilege as you're describing it seems like a pointless label though. I don't need to know how 'privileged' someone is to want to help them, I don't need an imaginary banner-word to recognize that people are different to me. I don't see how that makes people more empathetic if they're thinking, "How well off is this person compared to me?" Assigning a value to a person like that seems like the opposite of understanding and compassion to me. Compiling the infinite complexities of another human's life under a single word like that just seems really, really, well... Silly, for lack of a better word. All words are inherently reductive, so I'm not really sure why you would denigrate one for being especially so in your eyes. That said, I'm pleased to hear that you don't need a word like "privilege" as shorthand for the enormity of others' circumstances. You can't assume that of everyone, I assure you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faegbeard Posted March 11, 2013 All words are inherently reductive, so I'm not really sure why you would denigrate one for being especially so in your eyes. It seems counter intuitive to be that reductive about it when you're trying to get people to understand that it's a complex thing. That said, I'm pleased to hear that you don't need a word like "privilege" to describe the enormity of others' circumstances. You can't assume that of everyone, I assure you. Like I said, I'm naive and believe most people are inherently good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted March 11, 2013 It seems counter intuitive to be that reductive about it when you're trying to get people to understand that it's a complex thing. I think one can reduce the signifier without reducing the signified. When we talk about feudalism or the Renaissance or the Industrial Revolution, we don't lose grip of these vast, centuries-long processes just because the words that refer to them are short and convenient. In fact, having short and convenient words that refer to these vast, centuries-long processes aid in spreading understanding, because conversations happen much easier and quicker when we don't need to explain, say, the merging of civic and military commands in the former Roman Empire, the disintegration of public authority, the growth of affective power structures, and the ossification of the Germanic tribe into a system of vassalage whenever we want to talk about something involving feudalism. Anyone who knows the word will understand the significance and anyone who doesn't will benefit from an explanation. I don't see much difference here. When talking about race, gender, and class, a word like "privilege" that signifies the systemic advantages possessed by certain members of society allows for a greatly expanded dialogue on these social forces, just by reducing the verbiage common to all these subjects down into a single word. It's not meant as a label or an insult, which you seem to be concerned over, and anyone using it like that is doing it wrong. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chummer Posted March 11, 2013 It seems counter intuitive to be that reductive about it when you're trying to get people to understand that it's a complex thing. You're right. Using one term without explaining what it means would be a terrible way to get someone to understand something. I don't believe anyone is endorsing that though. Like I said, I'm naive and believe most people are inherently good. To use your own argument, it seems reductive to classify humans as either 'good' or 'evil' when they're much more varied than that. Someone might have good intentions towards others and still unknowingly participate in systems that hurt others. I think one can reduce the signifier without reducing the signified. Oh, shit. We're in the weeds people. WE'RE LOST IN THE WEEDS! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites