Trying to Figure Out My Own Privilege 
I was reading this blog about inclusive language, and came across this statement: “As a movement, feminism is primarily focused on issues which involve white, Western, able-bodied cis women.”
The blog, which talks about how all feminists need to reevaluate the language they use and eliminate language that perpetuates “racism, ableism, classism, cissexism, transmisogyny, transphobia, sexism, sizeism, and heterosexism,” went on to say this:
“At its core, feminism should be, to my mind, about justice. Justice for all women. Not just women who fit into a very narrow set of categories. And this is why we need to use inclusionary language. This is why we need to cultivate spaces which are truly safe for everyone. This is why we need to own our actions and apologize for them if they are hurtful. We cannot repair the damage we have done to other human beings, but we can work to prevent it in the future.
…
People who dislike being told that they should not use exclusionary language are often people who have something to lose if actual justice is achieved. If we ever live in a society where trans hatred doesn’t exist, everyone who is cis gendered will lose privilege, for example. As the old saying goes, “we all like to see our friends get ahead, but not too far ahead,” and this appears to apply to social justice issues as well, though you would be hard pressed to find someone who openly admits it. Being informed that you are hurting people with your actions threatens people when they have something to lose in this fight. This is why people push back so strongly when they are informed that their word usage is hurtful. This is why people become defensive when they are asked why they failed to include different perspectives in discussions. This is why people get angry when they are called on their privilege.”
Now, I match that earlier description of “white, Western, able-bodied cis women,” which this blog seems to convey means I have something called “privilege.” I’ve been told this before, in other discussions with other groups, and I’ve always wondered what this meant.
White privilege, at least, has been defined for me as the following:
“[A] way of conceptualizing racial inequalities that focuses as much on the advantages that white people accrue as on the disadvantages that people of color experience. Unlike theories of overt racism or prejudice, which suggest that people actively seek to oppress or demean other racial groups, theories of white privilege assert that the experience of whites is viewed by whites as normal rather than advantaged. This normative assumption causes all discussion of racial inequality to focus on the disadvantages of other racial groups, and on what can be done to bring them up to white (i.e. ‘normal’) standards, effectively making racial inequality an issue that does not involve whites. Researchers suggest that more equitable attitudes can be achieved by refocusing such discussions to include whites as a group which holds social advantages rather than experiencing a ‘normal’ state of existence.”
Extrapolating from this definition, I would then also have able-body privilege, Western society privilege, and cis women privilege. (For the record, I had to look up the definition of cis woman.) According to this theory then, being white, able-bodied, from a Western society, and comfortable in the gender I was assigned at birth does not make me normal; it makes me advantaged, in some very specific ways. However, as a feminist who has read The Mismeasure of Women, I also know that being born a woman comes with some decided disadvantages as well.
I have to say, s.e. smith’s blog entry made me very uncomfortable, and it has taken a lot of thought for me to try to figure out why. But when I read this bit here: “[t]his is why people push back so strongly when they are informed that their word usage is hurtful. This is why people become defensive when they are asked why they failed to include different perspectives in discussions. This is why people get angry when they are called on their privilege,” I can’t help but feel defensive. And yes, for the record, I am resisting the commandment to completely get rid of all exclusionary words from my vocabulary—I’m a writer. We always try to add in words, not take any away.
Continue reading →
National Review Online published an impossibly stupid article on the travails of one Herman Cain and the sexual assault and harassment allegations that are stacking up against him. It’s a rambly tl;dr piece that says nothing and makes no recognizable effort to try. It’s the literary equivalent of the tiny puffs of gas that my dog unwittingly excretes while he sleeps.
