The Ultimate Backpack: Unpacking your own Male Privilege

[little man]

snipped, as this is the response i'm interested in....

Originally Posted by Linus

Hrmm.. I think I disagree with the idea that privilege cannot be returned. I think that if we remove it from ourselves and open the place up for someone else to have it, it helps. (and that someone else has to be someone who is normally robbed of a chance because they do not have WMP). It does mean giving up something -- and it may be a painful something but maybe it is time to start.

linus, i'd be interested in hearing how it is we can return privilege. this has troubled me for some time now and i've not been able to figure out how to give it back, or not take it at all. i have tried to use the privilege i get to help others, but haven't noodled out a way to give it back. could you elaborate on this, please?

i'm also curious about the "painful something" to give up.

thanks

[Linus]

Originally Posted by little man

snipped, as this is the response i'm interested in....


linus, i'd be interested in hearing how it is we can return privilege. this has troubled me for some time now and i've not been able to figure out how to give it back, or not take it at all. i have tried to use the privilege i get to help others, but haven't noodled out a way to give it back. could you elaborate on this, please?

i'm also curious about the "painful something" to give up.

thanks

Well, the painful will depend on your point of view. Imagine you apply for a job to do magic widgets and you are doing a group interview. You are excited about this because you've been out of work for over a year, are about to be evicted and this job could help put you back on track for life. In addition to you being interviewed, there is also a MOC, a WOC and a white woman. All four of you are up for this job. You are being interviewed by the CEO and Board of Directors, all white males. As you go through the interview, you slowly realize that you aren't really qualified for it and that the others are more qualified, particularly the POC woman.

But at the end of the interview the interviewers have decided and they offer the job to you. It pays $100,000 and you only work 8 hours a week. Do you take it, knowing that the only reason you got it was due to do WMP, or do you turn it down and strongly recommend that they hire the WOC? It would be painful to turn down and potentially damaging to your pride to turn this down but it is the right thing to do. Additionally, it would also be the right thing to point out that they really should hire WOC and that if they do not, that you will file a complaint about their discriminatory behaviour. You choose to do this path even knowing that you'll be on the street shortly. But further to this you continue to work towards ensure that the magic widget industry never continues this behaviour. It results in CEOs and BoD compositions change to represent more of a cross-section of the US rather than the "good ol' boys" club. Further, you ensure that a law is passed that enforces a moratorium on the hiring of white males. It, in facts, says that you must hire a POC period, regardless of anything else.

Although extreme in the example, the end result would be effectively removing the WMP and tilting the balance towards others. Does that help?



For reference:

WMP - White Male Privilege
MOC - Man of Color
WOC - Woman of Color
POC - Person of Color

[little man]

Originally Posted by Linus

Well, the painful will depend on your point of view. Imagine you apply for a job to do magic widgets and you are doing a group interview. You are excited about this because you've been out of work for over a year, are about to be evicted and this job could help put you back on track for life. In addition to you being interviewed, there is also a MOC, a WOC and a white woman. All four of you are up for this job. You are being interviewed by the CEO and Board of Directors, all white males. As you go through the interview, you slowly realize that you aren't really qualified for it and that the others are more qualified, particularly the POC woman.

But at the end of the interview the interviewers have decided and they offer the job to you. It pays $100,000 and you only work 8 hours a week. Do you take it, knowing that the only reason you got it was due to do WMP, or do you turn it down and strongly recommend that they hire the WOC? It would be painful to turn down and potentially damaging to your pride to turn this down but it is the right thing to do. Additionally, it would also be the right thing to point out that they really should hire WOC and that if they do not, that you will file a complaint about their discriminatory behaviour. You choose to do this path even knowing that you'll be on the street shortly. But further to this you continue to work towards ensure that the magic widget industry never continues this behaviour. It results in CEOs and BoD compositions change to represent more of a cross-section of the US rather than the "good ol' boys" club. Further, you ensure that a law is passed that enforces a moratorium on the hiring of white males. It, in facts, says that you must hire a POC period, regardless of anything else.

Although extreme in the example, the end result would be effectively removing the WMP and tilting the balance towards others. Does that help?



For reference:

WMP - White Male Privilege
MOC - Man of Color
WOC - Woman of Color
POC - Person of Color

in theory, yes, i understand. i was looking for a more realistic example, though. can you give me something that's a little closer to real life? i realize it's going to be more mundane that 100K for 8 hrs of work, but i'm looking for a starting point to work from.

as a side note, your example brings to mind some class issues. i also wonder if it is necessary to do oneself harm to help others? i'm not far enough into my coffee this morning to be more coherent. i can take another run at this later in the day, when the synapses are firing more efficiently, if that helps.

ETA: lest i sound unwilling to help affect change, i want to say that i don't mind making sacrifices or doing with less. i'm accustomed to that. and i'm willing to help pretty much anyone i can. i don't know if i would accept a job i'm not qualified for...i dislike personal failure quite a bit. am i willing to give up my seat at the table so someone else can eat? you bet. am i willing to starve myself to death? i dunno about that.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by little man

as a side note, your example brings to mind some class issues. i also wonder if it is necessary to do oneself harm to help others?

Well, and that's a good point. I'm inclined to find Linus' example of 'giving back privilege' a tad on the "Here I come to save the day for you, poor lil women of color!" side of the spectrum. Patronizing and condescending.

[Linus]

Originally Posted by Bob

Well, and that's a good point. I'm inclined to find Linus' example of 'giving back privilege' a tad on the "Here I come to save the day for you, poor lil women of color!" side of the spectrum. Patronizing and condescending.

That wasn't the intent or meaning of it. If that is how it appeared, then I apologize for a poor example. The intent and idea behind the example was more that a person should be chosen on ability and not because they are one of the good ol' boys. It's not to say that the WOC wouldn't be able to speak up or stand up for herself. If I said that the white male was told of the job offer after others left, then no one else would have been aware. In that instance, the offer is made based entirely on WMP and the rejection the offer is/would be a rejection of WMP.


little man: haven't forgotten your request. Just trying to see if I can think of a better example.

[evolveme]

Originally Posted by Linus

That wasn't the intent or meaning of it. If that is how it appeared, then I apologize for a poor example. The intent and idea behind the example was more that a person should be chosen on ability and not because they are one of the good ol' boys. It's not to say that the WOC wouldn't be able to speak up or stand up for herself. If I said that the white male was told of the job offer after others left, then no one else would have been aware. In that instance, the offer is made based entirely on WMP and the rejection the offer is/would be a rejection of WMP.


little man: haven't forgotten your request. Just trying to see if I can think of a better example.

I understand your intention wasn't to be demeaning in this way - that it is only positive. The intention of Affirmative Action was a positive one, as well, and in all the ways that it did and does work, it's still good, but a lot of people it is meant to serve come away with a very negative feeling. They do not ever wish to be seen as having merely been hired to meet a quota. Privileged groups and racist others will believe this is why, no matter what.

It feels good to say, "No, you accept the position because you are more qualified," but in a system that has, for so long, taught us that women and people of color, et al, cannot possibly be more qualified (and has ensured the unlikelihood they will be), it will continue to ring disingenuous.

What needs to happen, instead, is that the ground becomes more level. Not because individual men lie down and flatten themselves, but because everyone participates in the razing of the old institutions and thinking that has made the ground so steep in the past.

[Linus]

Little man: I've been rethinking this all day to see if I could come up with a more realistic example but have been unable. And considering as well the other comments, I've been reconsidering my comment. I'm beginning to think that the ability to remove WMP and give it to others may be too optimistic by me. So I apologize for the disagreement of privilege being returned. I think I'll be thinking about this more over the holidays to see if I can come to a better idea or concept of how to address this, particularly from a personal point of view.


Thank you to everyone for the comments and pointing out the patronizing attitude/idea I had come up with. It is, to me, a sign of my own privilege that comes through at times and a realization as to the amount of self-work I still need to yet do. I am very grateful that I am, at least, able to muddle my way through it and hopefully figure it out at some point.

And thank for participating in this thread.

[Thinker]

Originally Posted by evolveme

I understand your intention wasn't to be demeaning in this way - that it is only positive. The intention of Affirmative Action was a positive one, as well, and in all the ways that it did and does work, it's still good, but a lot of people it is meant to serve come away with a very negative feeling. They do not ever wish to be seen as having merely been hired to meet a quota. Privileged groups and racist others will believe this is why, no matter what.

It feels good to say, "No, you accept the position because you are more qualified," but in a system that has, for so long, taught us that women and people of color, et al, cannot possibly be more qualified (and has ensured the unlikelihood they will be), it will continue to ring disingenuous.

What needs to happen, instead, is that the ground becomes more level. Not because individual men lie down and flatten themselves, but because everyone participates in the razing of the old institutions and thinking that has made the ground so steep in the past.

Agreed.

It doesn't seem possible to "give back" or "reject" WMP without it appearing (maybe even really *being*) a pat-yourself-on-the-back action.........in the end, possibly self-serving.

The way I see it, we need to go about the business of building up all others and shining the light on those who are more deserving.

If you don't mind an analogy from the poker table... We see time and again, an aggressive player who has been betting at a big pot surrender in the end (before it's time to show the cards) and say, "I'm gonna let you have this one."

The player would have one believe that he holds a good hand.......maybe even the best hand.......but he is going to fold it and "let the other person have it" as if he is doing that player a favor.

It takes a big person to lay down the cards and say, "I'm beat. Good hand."

[evolveme]

Originally Posted by little man

am i willing to give up my seat at the table so someone else can eat? you bet. am i willing to starve myself to death? i dunno about that.

Thank you, as ever, for your thoughtfulness as much as your sincerity, Wil.

What troubles me in your scenario, Linus, is that, were I the woman on the receiving end of this "giving back privilege" exercise (and as a woman, I might be), it would be important to me that any "privilege" handed down to me were wiped clean of well, privilege. It could only and necessarily be about merit in order that I feel you were honest in your efforts to level the field. I don't want your hand out. Nor do I want you doing a personal disservice to yourself in order that I might get what is rightfully mine. Stop agreeing to lie down in puddles so that my feet stay dry. I don't need a white knight. What I need is for you to speak frankly about systems of inequality when you see them, and to engage in right action when you find yourself working from within those systems by joining your voice with my voice whenever and however you can.

Originally Posted by Bob

Well, and that's a good point. I'm inclined to find Linus' example of 'giving back privilege' a tad on the "Here I come to save the day for you, poor lil women of color!" side of the spectrum. Patronizing and condescending.

Case in point.

[Sweet_Amor_Taino]

Originally Posted by little man

in theory, yes, i understand. i was looking for a more realistic example, though. can you give me something that's a little closer to real life? i realize it's going to be more mundane that 100K for 8 hrs of work, but i'm looking for a starting point to work from.

as a side note, your example brings to mind some class issues. i also wonder if it is necessary to do oneself harm to help others? i'm not far enough into my coffee this morning to be more coherent. i can take another run at this later in the day, when the synapses are firing more efficiently, if that helps.

ETA: lest i sound unwilling to help affect change, i want to say that i don't mind making sacrifices or doing with less. i'm accustomed to that. and i'm willing to help pretty much anyone i can. i don't know if i would accept a job i'm not qualified for...i dislike personal failure quite a bit. am i willing to give up my seat at the table so someone else can eat? you bet. am i willing to starve myself to death? i dunno about that.

I am a clinical Social Worker that has worked in the Social Service field for over 35 years on different capacities in RI, Boston California and Austin. I am well qualified in my field. I was once hire for a position that required a degree higher them what I had to offer. I took the job I was not willing to turn my head away from a better paying position. I know that the need to fill a quota is a reason some companies hire but I also know they look for the best qualified individual that will meet the requirement of the job and help fill their hiring requirement. I am not will to go without if I could help it.

I will say that I had to deal with coworkers that resented me and made me feel less and unqualified. I did not have the paper requirement but I bought far more hands on the job experience.

[Medusa]

Thanks Dapper!

Yanno, I think that privilege is almost always contextual and that is a huge reason I am not a fan of the blanket "Men have privilege all the time = Tmen have privilege all the time = Men and Tmen have privilege over women all the time = Men/Tmen need to do x, y, z in order to correct/raise awareness of/ingest that privilege properly all the time" sort of statements.

I try to think of what it might look like if there were a group job interview and let's say 4 people were being interviewed:

A White woman
A Latina woman
A Native American man
A White Trans man (and only using Trans as an identifier for illustration purposes, not necessarily to differentiate)

Who has the privilege here?

What if one of them was fat?

What if one of them was in a wheelchair?

What if one of them was wearing clothing that might indicate a lower financial status?

What if one of them had a college degree from Harvard?


I know we've all talked dozens of times about how privilege can be situational and the above is only one way I see this happening. Even on this site, privilege is situational. I might have privilege over a Trans woman. AJ might have privilege over someone who isn't as articulate.

For me, privilege isn't necessarily defined by genetics or gender, because that puts the institutionalism on the person who exists, and not necessarily on the person who GIVES/Assigns the privilege based on their own institutionalization.
I'm not saying that Men/TMen/White People/Rich People don't exist in a privileged context, because I think they do...just that I don't believe the burden of privilege lies 100% in the existence of the person. I think that we are ALL culpable in that privilege.

And what Im about to say next might be wildly unpopular, but I believe that we as women are just as culpable in male privilege if we consistently buy into the idea that we are the "victims" of that privilege.

I'm not saying that it doesn't exist. I'm not saying that it doesn't need to be dismantled. I am saying that *everyone*, has privilege and that any person who believes that Men/TMen have 100%, absolute, unadulterated privilege all the time, every day, for their entire lives is not only full of shit but is guilty of supporting the very hierarchy they rail against.

I think I got off on a tangent, so let me try to redirect myself.

One of the things Im turning over in my head is that male privilege can often feel *worse* when exerted by a Transman. Maybe it's because I hope that Transmen, who have a female context ( in the way of being socialized as children as females) will be an ally to me as a woman who still lives in a female context in helping to dismantle that oppressive system of Men = up there, Women = down there. And maybe that hope isn't fair because I do think that people who are finally able to live in a body that fits who they are inside should get to explore that body and everything that comes with it. I think the exploration of that can be a positive factor or negative factor depending on who that person is inside, what their politics are, etc.
Because let's face it, not every Transman or Transwoman is going to have the same political context. And that is OK!

For me, it boils down to dismissing the idea that Transmen are buying into a system of oppression and that automatically makes them "the enemy" and rather, embracing the idea that someone who is my Queer family member will get to go on a public beach and be shirtless.

Some might call that "privilege".

I call that a fucking celebration.

[AtLast]

On context- considering the example Medusa brought up (I think this can illustrate quite a bit):

If a Transman takes off his shirt at a regular public beach and looks at me and says "nanner, nanner"- my reaction would be about his exercising male privilege.

On the other hand, if a transman says "Let's find a nude beach to hang at so we both can be shirtless and comfortable"- my reaction would be one of his recognizing how male privilege can and does hinder me as a woman.

Another example that goes to how I understand what might be important to a transman simply in the context of his personal comfort with elements of his transition-Celebrating his taking off his shirt in public for the first time by being there for him in a supportive manner. I have certainly done this at Pride events with a transman friend. Didn't have one thing to do with male privilege.

LOL- one more- the context of my late mother about anyone being shirtless around her in a public (or our home, aimed at my Pop and brother). The personal modesty or boundary context.