Over the last several months I have been exposed to a lot of statements regarding privilege. This concept of privilege has been used to cite “white privilege,” “straight privilege” and “neurotypical privilege,” just to name a few. These concepts seek to describe the discrepancy of treatment between individuals among a majority and a minority.
From the minority perspective, this language describes experienced differences. In other words, the discrepancy is real. However, this does not make the concept of privilege (as used in this context) real. It is this concept I seek to address.
Consider a few of the dictionary definitions of privilege:
- a right, immunity, or benefit enjoyed only by a person beyond the advantages of most
- a special right, immunity, or exemption granted to persons in authority or office to free them from certain obligations or liabilities
- any of the rights common to all citizens under a modern constitutional government
The dictionary definition of privilege does not support the use of the word in the context of a discrepancy between the majority and the minority. For example, men tend to be assumed competent in work situations whereas women are more likely to be assumed incompetent in the same situation. The men who are assumed competent are not privileged; the women who are assumed incompetent are disadvantaged. There is a subtle, but significant difference.
Consider a few of the dictionary definitions of disadvantage:
- absence or deprivation of advantage or equality
- to subject to disadvantage
The word disadvantage more accurately describes the discrepancy of treatment. Being privileged suggests that you are getting something you shouldn’t have, that you are being treated as special or above the norm. If you are assumed to be competent at your job, you are not being treated special and you are not being assessed as above the norm. You are being treated fairly. On the other hand, being disadvantaged suggests that you are being denied something you should have, that you are being treated as inferior, below the norm. If you are assumed to be incompetent at your job, you are being denied fair treatment.
The majority is not being given special rights above what most receive. The minority is being denied rights and privileges (3rd definition listed) that they are entitled to and put at a disadvantage.
So, the use of privilege to describe the discrepancy between the majority and the minority is linguistically and rhetorically incorrect. Perhaps more importantly, it’s also politically damaging. When you accuse someone of being privileged, you are saying they have a benefit they are not entitled to. This puts that person on the defensive. Unless they are highly sympathetic to your cause, they are going to resist your false accusation and miss your valid claim of discrepancy of treatment. You are discredited for making a false accusation; the real meat of your message isn’t even heard. On the other hand, if the person is highly sympathetic to your cause, they are going to feel guilty, because they’ve internalized your false accusation and will feel responsible for having a benefit they shouldn’t or, more accurately, for having the benefit you were denied through no fault of their own.
Whether the individual you accuse of being privileged is sympathetic or not, a statement regarding privilege implies that individual has done something wrong by being “privileged.” They’ve done nothing wrong (at least, not by accepting their “privilege”), because they are being treated fairly. The wrong is not in the majority having privileges (3rd definition again), but in the minority being denied these same privileges. Thus, the majority isn’t privileged (1st or 2nd definition), the minority is disadvantaged.
People need to understand the discrepancy of treatment between the majority and the minority. When you’re in the majority, it’s difficult to imagine that those ordinary, every-day benefits you take for granted are denied to others on the basis of spurious reasons like skin color, gender, sexual orientation, or neurological makeup. People need to learn about the real examples of these discrepancies. Listing the benefits they enjoy and take for granted that are denied to others is an effective way to make people aware of the real discrepancies minority groups experience. But calling them privileges is a mistake. It conveys the wrong message. It is inaccurate, because it is the wrong word. Leave privileged to the powerful few—the senators and CEOs, the princes and dictators, the celebrities and the tycoons—and stick to accurate words that describe the majority, like benefits, rights, and advantages. The difference may be subtle, but truth is powerful.
You asked if anyone cares to comment, and I do, care to comment, what is more I will.
However after I have commented, someone else might add “well he would say that wouldn’t he”
Well he won’t unless if he ever gets past the preliminaries to saying it, so here goes.
The premise of your blog supposes the absolute distintion between minorities and majorities.
However if one instead looks at society as a large set of intersecting Venn diagrams, notions of majority and minority tend to fall apart somewhat to be replaced by relativety.
In that depending upon the perspective, that is to say where one lies in this seething spaghetti of Venn borders the advantage of one majority can be the privilege of the same when they are viewed again in a particular minority.
No examples forthcoming as yet, this is a mathematical speculation.
But then he would say that out of sheer perversity wouldn’t he
“The premise of your blog supposes the absolute distintion between minorities and majorities.”
That was not my intent. I was referencing the perception of minority and majority groups. I would agree with the Venn diagram hypothesis.
“No examples forthcoming as yet, this is a mathematical speculation.”
Here’s two:
1) A white woman is going to have more advantages (at least, in the broader culture) in the US than a black woman, because of racial bias, but both will face gender bias.
2) A neurodiverse straight man is going to have different advantages than a neurotypical homosexual man (which has more advantages will depend very much on location and surrounding circumstances).
Of course, the problem with the majority/minority argument is that if you change the accoustomed location, then those with the majority advantage can be put at a sudden disadvantage. For example, a white woman who moves into a predominantly black neighborhood is not going to have the advantage, but nor would she be in the preceived majority any longer.
Yet, I would contend that whether you treat majorities and minorities as absolutes or the more flexible, situational reality that they are, differences in treatment still relate to advantages and disadvantages, not privileges.
My name is Piter Jankovich. oOnly want to tell, that your blog is really cool
And want to ask you: is this blog your hobby?
P.S. Sorry for my bad english
Hello Piter,
Sorry for the delayed response.
In regards to your question: No, this blog is not a hobby. I’m a professional writer and I do write about autism and neurodiversity a lot. This blog helps me to interact with people who are interested in similar issues and learn more about this topic through their responses.
Really superb blog post. I recently discovered your web blog and needed to say that I’ve genuinely really enjoyed checking your posts. In fact I will be subscribing to your rss feed.
I think most people who talk and write about ‘privilege’ know the original reference – an essay by Peggy McIntosh called “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack”: http://is.gd/ySttrW. It’s probably somewhat out of date now, but so well-known that there’s even a LOLCat version: http://is.gd/tVgBfG
Here’s an analogous Checklist of Neurotypical Privilege, developed at Square8: http://is.gd/TVpsv7. It includes linkage to several other adaptations of the Peggy McIntosh article, and some good discussion of privilege generally.
Maria,
I am familiar with the post by Square8 and have read many discussions derived from that post (and posts derived from those posts, and so on).
I had not read the essay by Peggy McIntosh.
Having now read it, my opinion remains the same: Privilege is the wrong word. Look at the list she created. What on that list would you deny to the so-called “privileged” people so that nobody has it? Or, would it be better that everyone had the opportunity to share in those “privileges?”