What is white male privilege?

[Mass_Liberal]

I've never heard the term before, and was wondering if someone could explain it to me.

Thanks

[jeff30997]

1. A small penis..

[Mass_Liberal]

3. hahaha

I see.

[benburch]

2. Getting paid more for the same work for starters...

And getting preference in hiring, in apartment rental, in borrowing money, and many other things.

[Mass_Liberal]

4. are those just examples?

I was fishing for a general definition. Thanks, tho.

[benburch]

13. Yes...

But the examples pretty much sum it up...

[acmejack]

5. here is a good blurb on the subject

It is reasonably scholarly.

http://seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/~mcisaac/emc598ge/Unpacking.html

[Mass_Liberal]

8. not bad

I agree with most of those, although some of the effects do go both ways, not just white male stuff.

[NewHampshireDem]

6. Here's a good article to start with

http://www.augustana.ca/rdx/eng/activism/backpack.htm

White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack

by Peggy McIntosh

[malaise]

There's a great book

I read on the subject - The Racial Contract by Charles Mills.
The essential argument is that the Social Contract is really a contract between white males.

[noiretextatique]

16. "I was taught to see racism only in individual acts of meanness...

not in invisible systems conferring dominance on my group"

example: "everybody can be racist"...a fairly common answer in discussions of racism/privilege on DU.

[MountainLaurel]

24. Excellent reference

That gets to the heart of the matter.

Thanks NHD!

[beyurslf]

7. Never having to think about race as a factor in life. Never having to

think about gender.
White males are born into the upper power group in society and this creates an instant benefit for them. It is a "privelege."

[Mass_Liberal]

15. hmmm

I would definetly argue the legitimacy of that one. (I'm referring to the 'never having to think about race as a factor' part ). I go to a very diverse school where I do have to think about my race as a factor. I agree that I am afforded tons of privileges. But I would disagree that when white males are put into contact with other races that they don't have their own race to think about, especially when they want to socially interact with people of other races.

[beyurslf]

20. Going to a racially diverse school is the antidote to the white male

privelege. Being in seetings where other races are well represented helps to alleviate this. But, it is growing up and seeing his image everywhere that creates the privelege. When I say he doesn't have to think about it, I mean that.

[Eloriel]

143. And one way we see that play out in society is that

when some one --male or female -- is mentioned in the news, they're assumed to be white unless it's specified otherwise. And someone like "a doctor" is assumed to be MALE (and white) unless specified otherwise. Non-white and non-male are "other" categories, not the assumed ones, and are usually identified as such.

Edited: I see that that sort of thing is covered in the list.

[Kipepeo]

118. Part of privilege is being able to *not* have to deal with situations like

this. If you go to a diverse school and you think about your race when you interact with others that's one thing - but what about when you're not confronted with diversity or those that don't benefit from white privilege or male privilege? Part of white male privilege comes from the fact that most of our institutions in this country: political, educational, media, business, etc. have always been and are still controlled by the white male "norm."

If I walk into a boardroom made up almost entirely of white men there are unacknowledged assumptions made about me because of my race and gender. I am given a plus because of my white race (hey - it's safe to make racist jokes around her - she is one of the gang in that way - "in on the joke") and certain minuses because of my sex (wonder who she fucked to get here, is she lovable or oneathose ball-busting femi-nazis who can't take a joke or compliment). Every interaction any of us has (save possibly online discussions where we can mask the we of we) is preceded by our race, gender, and sometimes sexuality - and since we live in a world that is still sexist and racist and homophobic in its institutions of power and in its rewriting of history, we are constantly afforded open or closed doors based on the innate characteristics of race, gender or sexuality.

Take this for example - any time someone brings up the possibility of Barbara Boxer or Hillary Clinton running for office, the comment is always made that the US is not ready to elect a woman. It will never happen. Pipe dream, etc. Hillary Clinton has white privilege, CLASS privilege, connection privilege, etc. etc. but the mere fact that she is a woman means she is playing on a different field than say, her husband. She is held to different standards because of her sex. And that's ridiculous, but somehow our society accepts it because that's *just the way things are.* The same can be said for any gay or lesbian or politician of color, who granted might have class privilege - but they are playing on a different field. They'd have to meet additional standards. Does that make sense?

[whistle]

9. Penis privilege...

...actually there used to be a term back in the 1950s that went like this, "You have nothing to worry about son, if you are free, white and 21."

Well, I was only 10 at the time, and I was puzzled by that because even then I still believed that I had to work hard, get a good education and stay healthy. That phrase was told to me by others, my peers and their parents. It was observed that I having been born to eastern European Caucasian parents who may have had their own biases and fears, but my parents were not bigots or racists by any means.

My parents never suggested that there was anything privileged about us but that we were not different either. The term came from other white persons who looked upon my family and especially the family surname as intruders into their class and social circles. I don't believe I have ever experienced white male privilege at any level of my life. I've been quite content being average.

[Mass_Liberal]

18. that's very insightful

"Well, I was only 10 at the time, and I was puzzled by that because even then I still believed that I had to work hard, get a good education and stay healthy. That phrase was told to me by others, my peers and their parents. It was observed that I having been born to eastern European Caucasian parents who may have had their own biases and fears, but my parents were not bigots or racists by any means."

I think that this is what gets a lot of men angry and unreceptive towards feminist ideas. They feel that their accomplishments and their work is being devalued by the concept that they the societal dice are weighted in their favor.

Take note, female feminists: Keep in mind that this is an issue that fundamentally effects the way your arguments are thought about by men.

[beam me up scottie]

23. "Take note, female feminists:

...Keep in mind that this is an issue that fundamentally effects the way your arguments are thought about by men."

It should affect their perception.

Pretty much anyone who actually gives this some thought would understand the definition, recognize it and wouldn't become defensive.

As for the others, I doubt that they can be made aware of ANY issue if
they are not listening.

[CBHagman]

60. It's "affects," not "effects."

Language teacher mode is ON! :-)

[Sasha Undercover]

119. Excuse me

if I see this instruction about how my arguments are thought about by men more than a bit condescending.

[Eloriel]

144. Not only that, but the same old shit

We have to be careful about what MEN might think. Well fuck that. Time for them to be careful about what WE might think. Time for them to change their tune.

Let's be honest here. Few people are going to willingly give up white or male privilege. Just ain't gonna happen. AND, if we tiptoe around, walking on eggshells, asking oh-so-nicely for just a little less white male privilege, we'll come up pretty damned empty. Again.

I think -- no, I KNOW -- that Frederick Douglass had it right:

"Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has and never will.” -Frederick Douglass

[Solly Mack]

10. WMP: is the marriage of 2 beliefs, one racist, one sexist

that claims white men are somehow superior to all others.

Male privilege: the belief held by some men that men are somehow better than women.

White privilege: the belief held by some white people that white people are somehow better than non-white people.

Now combine the 2 and you get WMP.

The privilege is obvious....think slavery, think who got to vote, own land...who gets paid more..when you make the rules, you make the rules to favor yourself...and that's nothing but privilege.

[Mass_Liberal]

11. I thought

that it was the actually privileges that white males enjoy as a result of their race and gender...

[Solly Mack]

12. It is...but the privilege part is obvious :)

I added to the other post

[HockeyMom]

14. George W. Bush

His ENTIRE LIFE. Get it?

[Mass_Liberal]

17. true dat

n/t

[Branjor]

25. Yep....

born on third base, but thinks he hit a triple.

[beam me up scottie]

26. HA !

:rofl:

THanks for the laugh, I needed it!!!

[Nikia]

19. I think that it has to do with intial assumptions

People immediately start judging someone at first glance. I don't know whether this is somewhat instinctual or whether it is taught or both. Regardless, we all do this no matter how open minded we are. In our society, many people have been raised to associate a white male as someone who is more likely to be educated, intelligent, hard working, generally competent, assertive, responsible, strong, and many other traits, than a woman or minority male. As a result, a woman or minority male may lose out in situations like job interviews, business deals, loans, sales, and other interpersonal stranger interactions solely because of an intial impression based off of stereotypes. The interviewer doesn't even have to consciously decide to hire the white male or give him more money for the job. If everything else were equal, he would probably get hired or paid more money than the women or minorities men just because of the postive assumptions attributed to his gender and race.

[Withywindle]

21. I'm so glad this is being asked

I've seen a lot of potentially all-around great conversations getting derailed by defensiveness due to a misunderstanding of the terms being used. Because "white male privilege" can really be as simple as a white man dismissing the concerns of a black male friend who wants to leave a store because the sales clerk watched him distrustfully the whole time or a female friend who gets angry at someone talking to her breasts and not her face.

Enjoying "white male privilege" doesn't mean you're racist or sexist in the sense of actively disliking people of different ethnic groups or women and deliberately disrespecting them: it can be as simple as not recognizing that there are certain issues they've had to deal with their ENTIRE lives, every day, that you don't. It can be as complicated as realizing exactly how the system is stacked against them in ways it's not against you. It's not their/our responsibility to educate you about this, it's yours to learn if you're serious about being progressive. But I have seen a lot of caring, well-intentioned white men embittered by the way this conversation can get heated and by aforementioned misunderstanding. That makes me sad too.

[shaman]

22. mind and physical attributes

From the responses so far, some are pointing at the privilege coming from physical attributes. But when I read the descriptions I see the inner workings of the mind and logic having the impact, not the physicality. Seems the white males don't give it much thought, and the non-white males give it more thought.

I'm sure not every non-white male is effected by this privilege. Is WMP just a way the mind has been taught to see the world and the experience follows the expectations of this programming? Said another way, are white males different because they haven't added a piece of programming to their sense of self, whereas others have incorporated it into their very being?

If the answer is "yes", the next question is why would someone do this? It would have to be on the unconscious level, because no one would consciously belittle themselves.

[Scout]

27. search the old DU archives

for the Male Privilege Checklist I posted ...

[fleabert]

28. I highly recommend the book "Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together

In the Cafeteria?" http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/sim-explorer/explore-items/-/046509127X/0/101/1/none/purchase/ref%3Dpd%5Fsxp%5Fr0/002-1449621-6190435

she discusses white privilege at length.

I for one, have never had to even consider that someone at a hair salon might not know how to cut my hair...or that my race might be an issue for renting an apt. I also have never had to wonder if I was not hired because of my race...my gender? yes. that gives you Male White Privilege over White Privilege in general.

it's a controversial topic.

[IrishDemocrat]

29. What is with this hatred of white men?

It sounds like some people on here think just becuase someone's a white male means they can write their ticket anywhere. Some of you couldn't be any father from the truth. My family are descendants of Irish Potato Famine Immigrants, no they weren't landowners, but Catholics ("DNA" Catholic here). I didn't belong to a country club, I went to an elite university fr 2 years on scholarship and was the poorest person there and caught shit for it and subsequently left to a state school to be around people more like me. I'm not planning on an inheritance and I don't have a relative that can just open a door towards a great job. I'm just wondering what's the deal with some people here?

[lukasahero]

30. Did you even read any of the responses?

Cause it really sounds like you didn't.

"getting preference in hiring, in apartment rental, in borrowing money, and many other things."

"Never having to think about race as a factor in life. Never having to think about gender."

"Male privilege: the belief held by some men that men are somehow better than women.
White privilege: the belief held by some white people that white people are somehow better than non-white people."

"People immediately start judging someone at first glance ...many people have been raised to associate a white male as someone who is more likely to be educated, intelligent, hard working, generally competent, assertive, responsible, strong, and many other traits, than a woman or minority male."

"Enjoying "white male privilege" doesn't mean you're racist or sexist in the sense of actively disliking people of different ethnic groups or women and deliberately disrespecting them: it can be as simple as not recognizing that there are certain issues they've had to deal with their ENTIRE lives, every day, that you don't."

"I for one, have never had to even consider that someone at a hair salon might not know how to cut my hair...or that my race might be an issue for renting an apt. I also have never had to wonder if I was not hired because of my race."

And finally, "Pretty much anyone who actually gives this some thought would understand the definition, recognize it and wouldn't become defensive."

[Modem Butterfly]

31. Actually, that's pretty much what it means

A white man has all kinds of advantages the rest of us don't. Maybe most of them can't write their ticket anywhere anymore, but they still benefit from institutional racism.

[highlonesome]

32. class distinctions

I think the problem that he has is with the concept of white male privilege is the same one that I have (if I may speak for you):

It's the class distinction part of it -- which I;ve spoken about here before on many occasions.

In order to accept the concept of white male privilege, one has to first accept the concept that men and women or whites and minorities comprise distinct social classes. I don't accept this and it's where we usually agree to disagree since I'm not going to change my mind any time soon.

So unless one considers these groups to be distinct classes, what we're talking about is ADVANTAGE rather than PRIVILEGE.

Privileges are assigned to classes, advantages are assigned to individuals.

[highlonesome]

33. class is part of the definition

priv·i·lege ( P ) Pronunciation Key (prv-lj, prvlj)
n.

A special advantage, immunity, permission, right, or benefit granted to or enjoyed by an individual, class, or caste. See Synonyms at right.
Such an advantage, immunity, or right held as a prerogative of status or rank, and exercised to the exclusion or detriment of others.

ad·van·tage ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-vntj)
n.
A beneficial factor or combination of factors.
Benefit or profit; gain: It is to your advantage to invest wisely.
A relatively favorable position; superiority of means: A better education gave us the advantage.

[Sasha Undercover]

120. It is quite troubling

to find someone trivializing the issue by turning it into a semantics question. The concept matters, whether one calls it advantage or blurk.

[beam me up scottie]

34. Why are you still trying

to peddle that bullshit theory ?
There are a couple of other internet forums that like to discredit WMP.
Perhaps they might be more receptive to your "theory".

[highlonesome]

36. Just an observation

The difference between advantage and privilege is clearly an acceptance of class distincitons. That's why I posted the definitions.

The term privilege requires the term "class" in order to distinguish it from the term advantage.

I'm not trying to peddle anything (nor do I characterize anyone's theories as "bullshit"). It's simply an observation.

If I'm wrong then, what do you see as the difference between "privilege" and "advantage?"

[beam me up scottie]

37. I refuse to discuss this with someone

who ridicules women's issues as a hobby.

[highlonesome]

38. Where's....

....the ridicule? If you don't want to discuss it, that's your choice. I haven't ridiculed anyone's views -- you know, like calling them "bullshit."

[beam me up scottie]

39. You have got to be kidding me.

Do you really want to rehash your history of interest in women's issues?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=229x445#452

[FizzFuzz]

84. "privilege requires the term "class"..."

It does not.

The two definitions you give make it clear that the concept of class is not the key difference between the two words.

Def. for Priviledge said ..."individual, class OR caste"
...this means that the word applies to any or all, together or separately.

Advantage included no specific application to groups or individuals AT ALL. Thus, it too applies equally well to groups OR individuals.

Aside from the specious distinction you are trying to draw between two words, pivoting on the word "class", you seem to be trying to set the stage for some kind of argument intended to discredit the concept of WMP.

Actually, I think you're just trying to wave around words you don't fully understand (sad about that; they're not very sophisticated words, yet you are clearly confused about their meanings. After all, most people learn the meaning of "OR" at a pretty young age.), and pretending that the muddle you've created means something.

Your sophistry does not impress.

[highlonesome]

86. BAck up a bit

First, if we could keep this to a discussion of the ideas rather than a discussion of each other that would be nice. Of course I know the meaning of the word "or."

I guess maybe I'm not explaining myself well enough.

Historically speaking, it is my opinion that the origin of the use of "privilege" in the sort of contexts we're using here is very much an origin in a class distinction model. That is, it is analagous to -- but NOT identical with -- a Marxist sort of paradigm. Now before I get flamed for accusing people of being "commies" or whatever, please understand that's not what I mean. I'm not talking about Marxism as an economic paradigm, but as an intellectual, academic one which in fact does influence much of social science.

Maybe you disagree, but the historic provenance of the term "privilege" in this sort of context clearly comes form a class distinction model.

One jump people seem to make here is that I"m saying it's right or wrong or good or bad. I'm not saying that. I'm saying I disagree that it's that simple.

[Scout]

35. and chances are pretty darn good

that if you were going for a job, or housing, or whatever, up against another person with your exact same background, upbringing and opportunities--except they are not white and/or not male--you would "win" ... because so many of the people who grant those boons (good jobs, promotions, selling their house to you) are white men. Or they are white women who have bought into the patriarchy and think they will win if they just play by the rules.

That's what male privilege is to me ... it does not mean that we think all men are loaded with money and power. It means that all other things being equal, the woman or the minority will lose most of the time if up against a white man.

[IrishDemocrat]

41. The issues...

are really hard to pinpoint as black and white. Granted, in some more intolerant parts of the country, Affirmative Action may be needed. However there are also cases where minorities applying for a police test can score 20 points lower than a white candidate given equal fitness cores and get the job over him EVEN ON A CONCRETE BASIS SUCH AS THAT. I realize there is a lot of subjective factors in industry I'm unaware of. As Clinton said with Affirmative Action "Mend it, don't end it."

I do not feel I have a sudden "white male priviledge" nor do I feel race should be a factor in determining a hiring decision or a college admission. Ugh, I can't win here! I have to deal with white trash that automatically think when someone's black, has a nice car, and living in a nice house in Northeast Philly, they are receiving public assistance and are drug dealers. Is there any middle ground here? I swear I've actually talked to whites that thought their "hard earned tax dollars were being drained towards black programs" and "it's better to be black or female." Seriously, I laugh at some of these whites that feel they are somehow being oppressed by minorites.

[Warpy]

40. Why do you feel compelled to dismiss a critique of your own

sense of white male entitlement as hating men? Do you resent the fact that other people have noticed that you're due things purely due to your sex and race that people outside it have had to fight for?

What's needed is some self examination, as well as examination from outsiders. I doubt it will happen, though. Entitlement means never having to confront the fact that if you weren't born on third and think you hit a triple, you were at least born on first or second.

[Randers]

42. What's the deal with men in denial?

Example (blatant) of someone wanting to hold onto privilege (and keep women out):

Associated Press
Indianapolis

Patrick received a telephone call from Ecclestone last week during which he congratulated the IRL rookie for her performance at the Indianapolis 500, but also reiterated remarks he had made during an interview at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, where the United States Grand Prix was being held.

Among the comments Ecclestone made in the interview and to Patrick was that "women should be all dressed in white like all other domestic appliances."

[Ripley]

43. WHAT? MEN IN DENIAL???? ARE YOU NUTS?

Men aren't in denial, they're the damn victims! How the hell can they be expected to keep a roof over their wife and kids' heads if they let girls try to race cars for the big bucks and title???

I mean hell, they rightly so should be allowed to be nurses, cooks and babysitters. But to allow girls to race fast cars, become Generals or President ... ARE YOU MAD I SAY????

:sarcasm:

[IrishDemocrat]

44. EXCELLENT POINT!

I really don't mind women doing "historically" men's jobs for equal pay and there are men needed in the nursing field. However, don't expect us to be the breadwinners either. It seems like many of these young women today are looking at a guy's W-2 in order to date them.

[lukasahero]

45. Oh please

this BS has been making the rounds all over DU lately. What do they give you guys a book or something?

[beam me up scottie]

46. Nice use of a reichwing talking point.

Now where have I heard that before, .............

Oh, here it is...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=229&topic_id=1781&mesg_id=1944

Awwwwwwwwwwwwwww, look what happened...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=170115

:nopity:

[IrishDemocrat]

48. You have one nerve sweetheart!

To call what I said a "reichwing talking point". I also consider many of my points of view on the left side of the fence, have vehemently defended your right to choose and got ostracized for it. And no I am not on here to be a disrupter rather a compromiser or better yet help take some of the edges us Democrats have. Yeah, I also go on nonpartisan message boards where someone like you would be called a "Feminazi", but I won't go there because that's wrong to compare femimists to the Gestapo as well. I do realize however some women on here are extremely militant about their gender and how they should get preference over men for certain jobs.

My point was I do not believe in the concept of "White male priviledge". Maybe 100 years ago, I could see your point, but by and large not now. Let me ask you this.... What party should I belong to considering I:

- Favor the concept of labor unions
- Favor a separation of church and state
- Favor a progressive tax system
- Favor increasing funding for post-secondary education
- Am pro-choice
- Favor reduced FCC regulations
- Favor gay marriage
- Opposed the Iraq war
- Favor embryonic stem cell research
- Favor the UN
- Favor alternative energy sources
- Favor equality in hiring and pay for equal work, NOT PREFERENCE

NEWSFLASH: I AM A WHITE MALE!

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[highlonesome]

59. Here's the link you asked for:

You said:

"Give me one, just one link to a woman on here who is extremely militant about her gender"

Here's the link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=229&topic_id=2478&mesg_id=2601

[Bunny]

62. The link you posted makes absolutely no sense vis a vis your post.

But then, that seems to be par for the course.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[highlonesome]

58. Keep 'em coming!

I'm gonna go make some popcorn. Be back in a few.

In the meantime, please post some more vitriolic personal insults. That last one was pretty funny!

Pigsucker! I love that one.

[beam me up scottie]

69. Don't let the Oedipus wanna-be get to you Ripley.

Misogynists feel they have to lash out at not-the-momma's.

[Ripley]

70. Nah, he doesn't get to me.

I'm just in a "take no shit" mood and don't care if I get deleted or not. He seems to enjoy it tho, so I better stop.

[highlonesome]

71. Actually...

....if you'll notice, I haven't lashed out at anybody.

Nor do I play armchair psychologist and try to figure out the reasons why others lash out.

In fact, I'd love to return to discussing ideas if you'd like.

[beam me up scottie]

72. I looked up all of your "discussions" in this forum.

Guess what I found ?

[highlonesome]

73. disagreement?

And one bad day that I posted the "men are bad" stuff.

Anyway, lost my cool on that thread, but for the most part I do my best to confront ideas more than people.

But I'll bite. What did you find?

[beam me up scottie]

87. One bad day ?

What happened on this day ?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3826779

Your thread title and comment :

"TV station makes light of DV, sexual assault!"

"Please send your comments to this TV station regarding their callous and dismissive tone regarding domestic violence and sexual assault.

And the perp only got 30 days!"

and the article:
*****
Woman Gets Fiance's Attention

SUDBURY, ONTARIO-June 8, 2005 — Allyson Lace will have to serve 30 more days in jail for grabbing her fiance where it hurts.

Prosecutors in Sudbury, Ontario, charge Lace and her fiance got into an argument. After kicking, punching and scratching him, prosecutors say she grabbed him by the testicles.

According to authorities, the fiance had to whack Lace over the head with his arm cast to make her let go. Police say the woman also kicked the inside of a police cruiser and struck an officer in the eye.

She's pleaded guilty to a number of charges, after being jailed since the May Tenth incident. The judge sentenced Lace to an additional 30 days behind bars.

Before being led out of the courtroom, Lace turned to her victim and mouthed, "It's over, goodbye."
*****

Cute.
Did you get that one from men's net daily too ?

[highlonesome]

88. Did you read the headline?

"Woman gets Fiance's Attention" If you don't think that makes light of DV, then there's not much point to me arguing it.

I guess my question is then, is family violence a feminist issue or is it only a feminist issue when the perp is male?

[beam me up scottie]

89. Nice try, but we saw through it

when you first posted it.
Just like anybody who reads it now will see it for what it is, another example of your using this forum to get some laughs while you further your laughable theory that sexism and white male privilege do not exist.

Please, keep it up, eventually you will slip up.

How's that oppressed straight white christian male forum coming along ?

:rofl:

[highlonesome]

90. I didn't post it for laughs.

I posted it to challenge.

Now on the White Male Privilege part:
First, when I posted my theory that "privilege" inherently involves the acceptance of a class distinction model, that was in direct response to the question posed, "What is white male privilege?" For me, the class distinction is a necessary part of its definition and why I answered the way I did.

Now, don't take the fact that I don't find use of the term "privilege" to be accurate to mean that I don't fully understand that white men have "advantage" in many arenas of social power.

My view is that indeed men have advantage in many arenas while women have advantage in others. I simply disagree with the notion that men and women -- who commonly share goals, homes, families and lives with each other somehow comprise distinct social classes.

However, in terms of race I'm much more willing to consider that white people and African Americans could arguably comprise distinct social classes in America. History bears this out.

To me, much of the inequity that exists in terms of social power between men and women has been a result of the Industrial Revolution and how it changed the nature of the family and the resulting roles of men and women in society.

[beam me up scottie]

91. Please, stop.

Either you are just making this up as you go along or you're reading from your anne coulter book.

"To me, much of the inequity that exists in terms of social power between men and women has been a result of the Industrial Revolution and how it changed the nature of the family and the resulting roles of men and women in society."

Try reading your bible instead of mnd, which is the only other place I know of that would propagate that pseudo-history.

[highlonesome]

92. It's not pseudo-history

Prior to the Industrial Revolution men's and women's roles were much different and centered completely around their families.

The home was its own unit of production and provided absolute necessities like food and clothing under the direction of women -- industries that were replaced by factories after the IR. As a result, women's social power and social importance was diluted down into either being the whore or the madonna -- sex kitten or Mom.

Likewise, men were sent into daily exile from their families; ironically to produce in factories many the things that women provided before that. No matter what he did for a living -- craftsman, farmer or merchant -- it was all done from home.

As a most basic result, men's inherent human worth was squashed and truncated into his ability to produce economically and women's was truncated into her ability to create a comfortable atmosphere for her husband and children.

Even such things as child care changed. Before that men and women shared fairly equally in the raising of children -- with women rearing them from birth to pre-adolescence and men rearing them from that age until they were ready to move on. After that it was limited to "wait until your father gets home."

There's nothing pseudo about it -- it's just a different perspective than we're used to hearing.

[beam me up scottie]

93. Wrong.

Women were the property of men way before that.

Listen, it's not about YOU not wanting to believe women aren't treated equally, even though you keep trying to make it so by repeating it ad nauseum.

What you BELIEVE doesn't matter.
At all.
Got it ?

It's about how women have been considered inferior to men for thousands of years and how it didn't just disappear overnight when you entered the work force.

Your arguments are weak, invalid and have no basis in fact.

You use *'s tactics of repeating them in the hopes that someone will start to believe the reichwing propaganda.

And it IS reichwing propaganda, no matter how you dress it up as a liberal man's viewpoint of what the real issue is.

It is just as condescending, insulting and arrogant as if it spewed directly from the lips of whatever reichwing misogynistic shill happens to have the microphone at faux news for the moment.

This conversation is over.

[highlonesome]

94. If it's propaganda....

...then please feel free to deconstruct my previous post and point out to me what within it is not true.

[lukasahero]

95. "Whore or madonna"

Well, since that idea is biblical, suggesting it was a result of the Industrial Revolution disproves your theory before it even begins...

Theory deconstructed, per your request.

[highlonesome]

96. Lame....

....and you know it. That's nothing more than a literary device.

The challenge stands. Deconstruct that historical account of the change of Western culture as a result of the Industrial Revolution and rampant capitalism and show me what's not true about it.

[lukasahero]

97. Dude, it's deconstructed by proving that your basic premise is BS

The "historical account of the change of Western culture as a result of the IR"? Women were not the wonderful all powerful creators you suggest they are in any culture in history, let alone Western culture. Are you suggesting Western culture developed on it's own without influence from previous civilizations? That the cultures of Europe, Asian and the Middle East bore no relevance in history pre-IR?

Tell you what, you back up your assertions with some facts and maybe I'll bother to refute them.

[beam me up scottie]

99. .

:thumbsup:
He wants us to continue to argue.
Terribly boring and predictable, no ?
:boring:

They should really try to at least come up with new material.

[ExclamationPoint]

152. I just would like to know why you're fighting against a feminist

so determinedly when the republicans are underfunding anti-domestic violence programs by millions and millions of dollars (and yes, I know that's very vague and not really at all related to what you're saying but the point is that everyone is wasting their time fighting when their are more important issues)

not to sound insulting, but it really infuriated me when I read your post because the way you put up such effort to get all the information about that particular case reminded me for a flash of the uh, pachyderms. but on the other hand, I suppose that's what us democrats should be doing in order to win debates.

Oh whatever i'm conflicted.

[beam me up scottie]

154. Feminist ? BWAHAHAHAHA ! You think HE'S a feminist ?

Because if you had bothered to read all of the posts in this thread, and many others in this forum, you would notice that none of us share your conviction.

Just so you know, since you're "conflicted", feminists do not dispute the fact that sexism exists in the workplace.

I fight against the enemies of women, which are legion on the right and obviously not extinct on the left.

And I could care less if my post infuriates you.

Because as long as I'm around, maybe the trolls and benefiters from wmp will think twice about coming in here expecting to get slaps on the ass from their buddies when they use right-wing anti-feminist talking points.

Maybe they should stick to the lounge, they seem to have better luck there.

And if you don't like it, perhaps you should read up on the ignore feature DU provides for offendees.

[Bunny]

64. It's nice that you don't believe in White Male Privilege.

It's become so invisible to some that they just don't see it. Therefore, it doesn't exist. Apparently.

[beam me up scottie]

66. Question: What kind of person calls a woman "Sweetheart" during a debate?

Answer: One who is seriously threatened by women and feels incapable of arguing their point by using logic and reason.

Actually, this isn't even a debate.

It's the frantic thrashing of a giant dinosaur being sucked slowly into the tar pit, doomed to extinction by his own obscene bulk and inability to evolve and bellowing out his rage for the world to hear at the terrible injustice of it all.

Can you hear him ?

"BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAW ! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAW ! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAW !"




Wow, then you use the term Feminazi and still feel it necessary to post:

"NEWSFLASH: I AM A WHITE MALE! "

like anyone else would use that word. :eyes:

:rofl:

[ExclamationPoint]

153. yes that's what I was trying to say in post 152

thanks for articulating it

[beam me up scottie]

155. So then you agree with his misogynistic statement ?

"I do realize however some women on here are extremely militant about their gender and how they should get preference over men for certain jobs."

You know what ?

Even if you don't agree, the fact that you are sniping at me and coming to the defense of the person who posted it speaks volumes.

How's that for articulation ?

[FizzFuzz]

85. Hey guess what? You're a feminist.

And yet you don't mind being around people who refer to intelligent women as feminazis.

That's a problem. Usually that kind of compartmentalizing is referred to as cognitive dissonance.

The two other problems are 1) you keep insisting that feminists advocate PREFERENCE in hiring.

We do not. Feminists favor equality in hiring and pay for equal work. In the words of your very own self.

2) you don't believe in the concept of WMP.
...well, there are plenty of people who don't believe in things despite massive evidence demonstrating their existence.

WMP is not a religion, its a phenomenon.


I have one question for you.

Would you go on an African American's Rights and Issues board, and say you don't believe in White Male Priviledge?

You are clearly comfortable refering to us as militant about our gender and as feminazis. Would you enter that African American board and say, "I support equal pay, but you militant darkies want preference over white people for certain jobs."

Well? would you?

[Ripley]

47. Wowza, you don't make enough money to get a date?

Awww I feel so sorry for you.

Who expects you to be the breadwinner? Do you only date women without jobs? Are you blaming the "golddiggers" on feminists?

And what the fuck is historical about men being health care providers, leaders and cooks?

[IrishDemocrat]

49. I'm only saying men....

are still held to the standards of being the breadwinner despite the women's movement of the 1960s. I would have absolutely no problem at all if my future spouse makes more than I do, hell I'd like it, but apparently women still have it preprogrammed in them to look for material things. I have a college degree, I work for the government, yet it's still not good enough for some women. So no, I'm not "blaming goldiggers on feminsts."

[WildClarySage]

50. I don't think that's why you can't get a date.

you are giving off anti-female vibes here (esp. posting these things in the women's rights forum) and smart, attractive women dont like men who don't like women.

[highlonesome]

51. So.....

....if he disagrees with you, he doesn't like women?

Hey IrishDemocrat -- a piece of advice from a (probably)older IrishIndependent: try dating libertarian women. They're usually intelligent, independent and enjoy discussing ideas more than discussing people.

Most of them don't even need to resort to constant use of the word "bullshit" to make a point.

[Hello_Kitty]

75. Or Ann Coulter. I hear she's available. n/t

[chicaloca]

100. ummm....

He clearly thinks he's ENTITLED to a woman, and he makes up lies about what women have said and want. I doubt -- no, I'm certain -- that he won't find any woman anywhere on DU saying anything about wanting job preferences over men. If he has, he can post it. He makes generalizations about women, saying what he has/does/pukes up "isn't enough for women." To me, thinking you're entitled to a woman's body and slandering them is pretty damn anti-female.

Most of them don't even need to resort to constant use of the word "bullshit" to make a point.

Oh, so you don't like when women are vulgar? Or are you just offended when we call a spade a spade? Should we lie and be complacent just to spare your fragile ego?

[highlonesome]

106. Ego

"Oh, so you don't like when women are vulgar? Or are you just offended when we call a spade a spade? Should we lie and be complacent just to spare your fragile ego?"

It has nothing to do with ego. I just think that if the best someone can respond with is the word "bullshit" they either have no good argument to address the points or they're too lazy or intellectually incapable of formulating one.

I could care less if someone's vulgar or not. One's language speaks for oneself. So I could care less if someone else IS vulgar, but I wonder often why someone would want to BE vulgar.

[lukasahero]

109. I'm still waiting for your facts upthread... n/t

[highlonesome]

111. well....

The notion that most basic necessities were produced in the home is known as a -- FACT.

The notion that women were responsible for the production of these necessities is known as a -- FACT.

The notion that what they produced couldn't be lived without is known as a -- FACT.

The notion that after the Industrial Revolution, much of what they produced was now made in factories is known as a -- FACT.

The notion that men left home to be wage earners and to ironically produce much of what their wives USEd to make is known as a --FACT.

The notion that both men and women were reduced as a result to consumers and producers of money is also known as a -- FACT.

So I'm really not sure what other facts you're looking for. could you please be more specific? I mean, this is basic history -- no?

[lukasahero]

114. Actually, it is in indeed "basic" history - but it's not world history

So, you're suggesting that there were no cities prior to the IR? You're suggesting that there were no schools, no banks, no government, no churches, no retailers, no grocers, no clothiers, no reason to leave home to earn wages prior to the Industrial Revolution? Have you looked at the histories of China, Greece, Rome, South/Central America and the Middle East or does your history lesson only include your European ancestors?

So again, please present a study to "prove" these items you are trying to present as "fact".

[Zenlitened]

123. "... most basic necessities ... "

Examples? :shrug:

[highlonesome]

125. Sure

Wow. People are indeed very out of touch with basic history.

Examples of basic necessities once made from scratch or nearly from scratch in the home by women:

1. clothing
2. candles
3. soap
4. butter
5. basic medicines
6. Food. But I also mean different from today. They basically made everything mostly from scratch. If the family industry was farming she probably even made her own flour. Even if farming wasn't their livelihood, she likely kept a garden to grow vegetables and herbs -- which would then be canned for winter.
7. Services: she also provided basic services like education, basic doctoring, and was probably also a fairly skilled artisan/craftsperson who supplied nearly every aesthetic touch in the home.

[Zenlitened]

128. "People are indeed very out of touch with basic history. "

Statements like that reveal only that you have an axe to grind. It makes you sound whiny and defensive, not at all convincing.

But here's a question: How does one make flour from scratch? Is there anything along the lines of, say, sowing, weeding and harvesting involved? Or did women somehow conjure raw materials from thin air? How about butter? Care to explain the production cycle there?

Do you seriously maintain that men had no role in the acquisition or production of materials that women utilized? And, really, just what is your argument morphing into by now? That men were always unnecessary to the functioning of a household? This is just getting bizarre? :crazy:

[highlonesome]

131. Wow

Have you looked at some of your own posts?

[Zenlitened]

133. *sigh* The "I-know-you-are, but-what-am-I?" post. Inevitible, it seems.

Been lovely chatting with you. :eyes:

[lukasahero]

132. Oddly, it still seems to me that it is you who are out of touch

since your history only dates backs to the 1700's... Why no response to my post about how your little theory fits into world history?

BTW - you do realize you're espousing the virtues of a time where women were legally considered property, right?

[beam me up scottie]

110. The only time I feel the urge to use the word "bullshit"

is when I either see or smell it.

:hi:

[Bunny]

61. I'm going to agree with you on that.

I'm pretty sure it's NOT his bank account that is keeping him from getting dates! :rofl:

[Hello_Kitty]

76. No shit.

I know guys that are broke who have women throwing themselves at them and one guy who is very successful who can barely get a date online where he advertises the fact that he's a millionaire. It should surprise no one on this board that he's also a sexist asshole. 55 years old and refuses to date anyone over 40. Nice, huh?

But oh yeah, we're male bashers.

[Ripley]

53. So you think the 60's was it for women's rights huh?

That is a sexist statement to say women are preprogrammed to look for material things.

So you have a college degree...so do lots of women. So you work for the govenment, so do lots of women.

Maybe it's still not good enough for some women because you are a sexist asshole.

[highlonesome]

56. Maybe....

....what he should have said was culturally programmed, rather than pre-programmed.

I mean, to say that some men and women are culturally programmed for roles that many of us reject is really nothing short of a simple truism.

I think we all know that some women look at bank accounts and some men look at breasts as the top of their list of partner-seeking.

[beam me up scottie]

68. So you project your sexist views onto others ?

Interesting.

Down here the racists do the same thing.

[lukasahero]

65. Perhaps you could consider what type of women you appear to

find worth pursuing? (i.e. - Perhaps your choice in women is more at fault than women as a gender?)

Personally, I know a ton of great women who would love to meet a nice guy regardless of his income status but they are not buxom blondes wearing the latest fashions. And heaven forbid if they are remotely overweight. Of course some of them actually want to get married and have kids but are dumped quickly by guys who don't want to be "trapped" in a marriage.

[beam me up scottie]

67. Perhaps it does have more to do with personality.

HIS.

The stench of a man's hatred of women usually overpowers any of their other *cough*obvious charms.

Aftershave doesn't cover it either.

[IrishDemocrat]

78. It's not just the "buxom blondes"...

you're referring to. Even someone semi-decent looking, a brunette, and slightly overweight has been a bit of a goldigger towards me in the past. I am not looking for the airbrushed Barbie doll you may be thinking I am. Granted I know there are better women out there than what I've been trying to meet. And yes, I'm 5-10, 250 so I realize I have no room to talk when it comes to how much a woman weighs either.

What I am pissed of about are these women that come on here and bash white males behind our backs thinking we won't notice or say anything. Guess what? Many of you guessed wrong. I am a moderate liberal Democrat and have stated my views here. I am also going to be supporting 3 WOMEN for Congress in 2006 in my area- Allyson Schwartz, Lois Murphy, and possibly Robin Weissman.

[lukasahero]

79. In which case, I'll direct you back to my post # 30

Did you read the posts in this thread? I find very few women here who are "bashing" white males behind your back. For what it's worth, I'm married to a white male, who, by the way, acknowledges and understands the phrase "white male privilege".

I'm white. It gives me an advantage in getting jobs, getting housing, getting service. It also offers me the opportunity to never have to think about my race as a factor when I walk into a store or wonder how my neighbors will think about me moving in next to them. It offers me "privilege" that people of color don't have.

I don't understand why men think that women suggesting they have a similar privilege are "bashing" them. Let go of the defensiveness and try to see the world from someone else's perspective for a little while.

[IrishDemocrat]

80. Now you're making some sense

Albeit SOME. No I do not think about race or gender. However, I also don't think I am somehow better because I am white and a male. I also understand where you're coming from when you said about what the neighbors may think about someone because of their race. You are 100% right about that. I of course grew up in a racially transitioning part of NE Philly and some of my neighbors I've known and been friends with for over a decade can be a little too prejudice about African Americans moving in their neighborhood.

[lukasahero]

82. It's not about what you think of yourself

It's about how the rest of the world treats you based on those two identifying features that you never have to think about.

I'm glad you consider that "now" I'm making "some" sense. I thought I made some sense forty posts and a flame war ago when I suggested you read the responses to the thread in the first place. This is not about "hating" men as your first post in this thread claimed. Seems you can understand the concept in regards to race, might you be willing to consider gender could have face a similar scenario?

ETA: BTW, thanks for taking it down a notch and actually trying to talk about this. It's a refreshing change of pace on this board.

[Hello_Kitty]

81. Not all "golddiggers"

Have all the characteristics of the stereotype. But they will have at least some of them and I give you credit for at least admitting in your post that maybe your judgement isn't the best regarding the women you pursue. You are clearly not going after feminist identified women if you meeting women who are after your money. Of course, if you think women who identify as feminist are strident man-haters, then I guess you'd be more comfortable with seemingly more accomodating women. But those women tend to have more traditional views of relationships, including the belief that the man should be the primary provider. Sorry, can't have everything you want. Maybe you will meet a hottie who is independently wealthy but doesn't care what you earn and loves you for your inner beauty, but I doubt it. George Clooney isn't knocking on my door either.

As for commenting about a woman's weight, no one has any business disparaging anyone due to their size.

As for bashing white males behind your backs, no one is doing anything behind anyone's back here and a discussion of privelege isn't bashing. But if you think it is, I'll just tell you what sexists tell us whenever we complain of degrading and misogynistic commentary and imagery. Lighten up.

[Eloriel]

146. Lighten up.

:rofl:

I LOVE it.

I'll just tell you what sexists tell us whenever we complain of degrading and misogynistic commentary and imagery. Lighten up.

Perfect. I'll hve to remember that.

[beam me up scottie]

83. WHO BASHES WHITE MALES ON THIS BOARD ???

"What I am pissed of about are these women that come on here and bash white males behind our backs thinking we won't notice or say anything. Guess what? Many of you guessed wrong. I am a moderate liberal Democrat and have stated my views here. I am also going to be supporting 3 WOMEN for Congress in 2006 in my area- Allyson Schwartz, Lois Murphy, and possibly Robin Weissman."

This is a thread about white male priviledge, which, even though, surprisingly enough, it's invisible to white males, DOES IN FACT EXIST.

So get down from your faux cross if you want dialogue.

White straight christian males who cry persecution don't get much sympathy here, sorry- try men's net daily

Unbelievable.

I guess since some people never see raciscm it doesn't exist either ?

:eyes:

[Hello_Kitty]

74. Well yeah because those women who look at your bank statement

Are NOT feminists. If this is a problem for you then perhaps you need to take a look at the criteria YOU use to select potential partners. Here's a clue: Women who bat their eyes at you, act ditzy and helpless, downplay their intelligence, and devote an inordinate amount of time to their personal appearance in order to flatter mens' egos and be seen as a "hot babe" expect to be rewarded for that with financial security. And why shouldn't they? If I were going to turn myself into a trophy you bet your ass I'd be selling myself to the highest bidder.

Now, many men who complain bitterly about golddiggers will adamantly deny that they go after "trophy-ish" women but I really don't see how else they are encountering them. I mean, come on, it's not like you can't spot them a mile away. So if you want a trophy wife or girlfriend, quit your government job and get into something more lucrative. If you want a real woman, date real women.

[Bunny]

77. Yes!

:applause: :woohoo: :bounce:

[Eloriel]

147. And a second YES!! vote from me

Superb post.

[chicaloca]

101. good thing you're not blaming breadwinner syndrome on feminists....

Because the expectation that men should be breadwinners is the result of a patriarchal society, and MEN uphold it more than women do (as evidenced by the recent study showing that men would rather date someone who's their subordinate at work than someone who's equal or higher in rank to them.) Feminists would just as soon get rid of that expectation as would you.

[highlonesome]

105. Consumer society

The idea that men should be breadwinners is a myth created by a consumer society. Before everyone defined him/herself as a consumer first and foremost and before the Industrial Revolution as I described in an above post, breadwinning throughout most of American society was fairly minimal except for the upper classes and city dwellers who were a small fraction of the populace. Most necessities were created at home and only a small amount of income was required to buy some of the raw materials which couldn't be produced there.

The home production of clothing, food, medical care and education directed by women was at least of equal if not greater importance to the small amounts of income men generated from farming, trade or crafts.

The notion that a man provides and a woman maintains a pleasant space in which to store surplus consumer goods accumulated in the never-ending human pursuit of status is an artifact of the last 150 years.

[chicaloca]

112. so what's your point?

The notion that a man provides and a woman maintains a pleasant space in which to store surplus consumer goods accumulated in the never-ending human pursuit of status is an artifact of the last 150 years.

Um, yeah, and we've lived under patriarchy for the last 150+ years. What I'm saying is don't blame women as a whole or feminists for the principles of a society that men had the most say in inventing.

[Zenlitened]

124. "... the small amounts of income men generated from farming..."

Whah? Subsistence farming and animal 'husbandry' were hardly peripheral to a family's survival prior to industrialization.

And the men-as-breadwinners meme is hardly an "artifact of the past 150 years." Just look at the whole "men hunt, feed tribe" thing. Cartoonish, yes, when we realize that women's foraging was an important source of food for prehistoric peoples. But an old, old cartoon.

Really, your whole "ever since the Industrial Revolution" argument is completely unsupported by facts.

:crazy:

[highlonesome]

126. You misunderstand

There's a big difference between a family industry that feeds and supports the family and an economy based on wage earning.

Subsistence farming brought in very little in the way of MONEY, but it did feed and clothe the family quite well.

There's a huge cultural and societal change that occurs -- fundamental really -- when the mother and/or father of the family is basically forced into daily exile inorder to bring home MONEY. When it's a family industry, everyone does it together and both parents are fairly equally responsible for the care an raising of the children -- mostly divided according to the childrens' sex and age.

Yes in fact the "men as breadwinners" is an artifat of the last 150 years. You're just looking at history completely through the lens of the 21st century culture you live in.

I never said women's foraging wasn't important -- in fact I'm claiming the opposite. Read again.

[Zenlitened]

127. Repeating your weak arguments, directing me to "read again"...

... doesn't advance your case. Your whole premise is fatally flawed. Whether it's plowing a field, hunting a mastadon, or making a paycheck, men have always been "breadwinners," have always been away from the hearth for extended periods of time.

These are facts of long-standing, not merely a phenomenon of the past century-and-a-half. Your entire premise is based on a falsehood. Whether you're able to realize or admit that is a separate issue, but your adminitions about how to view history really are laughable, considering the weakness of the argument you've been clinging to throughout this thread.

[highlonesome]

129. Sure....and who was with them?

Let me ask you this:

When pre-industrial man was working his craft or minding his store, who was with him?

Answer: his kids depending on their age and intermittently throughout the day, his wife.

When the men were haying the field or plowing it, who was with them?

Answer: a whole pack of pre-adolescent kids getting direction and education from their dad.

When early man was "out hunting mastadon" (which was probably a fairly uncommon occurrence -- extended hunting trips probably occurred once per year. Routine hunting trips, as in daily, were probably on the order of just a few hours), who was with him?

Answer: a whole pack of pre-adolescent boys learning to hunt from their dad.

When modern man is out earning a paycheck, who's with him.

Answer: a bunch of other adults he could give two shits about.

And therein lies the big difference: before the IR there was no separation between home, work and family. It was all just one seemless existence.

My hypothesis is simply that with the advent of the IR and the consumer society, the basic human value of BOTH men and women was corrupted.

There's a huge difference between winning the bread and making the bread.

[Zenlitened]

130. So, what exactly is your point any more?

Men are breadwinners, men are not breadwinners?

Industrialization triggered white male privilege, industrialization robbed men of privilege?

Men are lonesome, men are being exploited? Women are magical, women won't date you?

Where are you going with all this? Are we to examine the archaeological and historical record now to refute or confirm your assertions about the family unit? Should we consult anthropological studies to determine the amount of time men, women and children of various ages spent together or apart throughout various cultures and points in history? Or shall we just accept your "that's the way it was" line of argument?

In which case, I ask again: this has what, exactly, to do the discussion of privilege? Are all your arguments simply to say that men are victims on some level, too? If that's your position, then all the more reason to join with feminists in dismantling patriarchal systems that insist on cramming everyone into a rigid compartment, and doling out benefits and opportunities based on which compartment one happens to be in.

[Eloriel]

148. I think you have a good point or two

right up until this comment:

My hypothesis is simply that with the advent of the IR and the consumer society, the basic human value of BOTH men and women was corrupted.

The IR did NOT cause women -- and their children -- to be considered little better than chattel, and treated in society and in law like the property they were.

The IR didn't even really create the consumer society (at least, not overnight), NOR (speaking of "overnight") did all those things you mentioned stop being largely created by families in their homes and on their farms. Those changes took place over basically 2 centuries, greaetly accelerating during the 20th Century.

Again, I think some of those points you've made are quite good, but NOT when you attribute women's problems to the Industrial Revolution. I doubt the IR "helped" women, but women's lowly status was well-entrenched well before the IR. See also The Burning Times.

See The Chalice and The Blade by Riane Eissler, for one. The Creation of Patriarchy by Gerda Lerner, for another. And no doubt many, many others.

[Kipepeo]

122. In my experience the type of men

who are the most sexist, the most blatant in their value of women only as empty-headed sex objects who they have to pay (either on a one-time basis or through long-term marriage), are the type of men who in turn attract empty-headed sex objects who value them for their money. If you have no respect for women, you won't ever be in the company of self-respecting women.

[Eloriel]

149. Bingo

Possibly the best post on the thread (altho there've been some excellent ones). This is so true. What self-respecting female would ALLOW themselves to spend any time with men who are disrespectful of them? They wouldn't. *I* certainly don't. I won't let those types of men near me, and they know it, too.

[Kipepeo]

121. Agreed, and not just denial but also defensiveness

Regardless of the intent of that kind of reaction the effect is to squash all discussion of institutionalized racism and sexism - and keep them defined in the individual realm.

Most people have no trouble talking about *individual* racists or sexists or racist/sexist actions...because they feel comfortable that those labels don't apply to them but to someone else. However, when engaged in a conversation about ubiquitous institutionalized racism or sexism people clam up and end discussion with defensiveness and denial.

[Eloriel]

145. You suffered from classism and perhaps

religious bigotry.

And now you're trying to hang on to and defend what little you have left: white male privilege. I understand.

I'm sorry you had a rough time. It shouldn't be that way. But you're still miles ahead of some of the rest of us -- and probably will be all your life -- simply because you're white, and male. Doors will be automatically open for you that some of the rest of us wouldn't be able to open for all the tea in China.

Edited: I just wanted to make it clear that my post is in response to Post #29, waaaaaaaaaaay upthread. Now to go back and read all the OTHER reponses to him.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

98. Some of the arguments on this thread are so pathetic, sad and small-minded

I'm at a loss for words...

[beam me up scottie]

103. The only thing more pathetic

is the fact that they felt the need to post them in a women's forum.

Must be the old boys' club revoked their memberships.

Not manly enough:rofl:

[IrishDemocrat]

104. Hehehe

NO I am not in the "old boys club." I must have had my membership revoked. All I'm saying is some people assume because a person is white and male, they have some kind of "priviledge." I guess after reading some of these posts I have an understanding that I'm not exactly in someone else's shoes either. I may be a little pissed that a college degree isn't exactly paying the bucks either as it used to be. That is an issue for EVERYONE nowadays. I don't mean to divide and conquer, but I just wanted to bring up a small point.

[beam me up scottie]

108. Nah, you're all right.

You are probably unaware of the history behind our strong reactions.

This forum has been used frequently as a convenient stage for men that either want to pick fights with feminists or want to minimize, ridicule or otherwise negate sexism.

We have also had way more than our fair share of trolls in the past couple of months. They usually use O'reilly and Coulter talking points when they crawl out from underneath their rocks.

Privilege has a different meaning when applied to white males in this context.

It doesn't mean that you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth, just that you have a built-in advantage over some of us based solely on what you are when you're born.

[chicaloca]

102. All the posts here from irate white men....

perfectly illustrate a point I once heard about privilege of all types. The essence of privilege is that you can be completely blind to the fact that you have it, and then take offense when somebody dares to point it out.

on edit: I just realized that my signature also explains this concept pretty well.

[highlonesome]

107. I love.....

....that you can say that without even a hint of irony!

[chicaloca]

113. um, I never claimed that I'm not privileged

Is something wrong with your reading comprehension? And FYI, I didn't "say" anything. I did, however, write a post.

[Eloriel]

150. Excellent, both of them

The sig quote is quite moving, actually.

Here's one of my favorite quotes about privilege (and I wish I knew where I got it): Failure to acknowledge (your) privilege is itself an abuse of privilege.

[Scout]

115. here is one view of what constitutes Male Privilege

It's been posted on the original DU, a long time ago. This is some years old, so there might have been progress in some areas....

let's see how long it takes to get, and how many, posts denying privilege because "*I* don't do that" or "one time a woman got promoted who wasn't as qualified as I was"

(bold emphasis mine)

------------------------
The Male Privilege Checklist
An Unabashed Imitation of an Article by Peggy McIntosh

by B. Deutsch

In 1990, Wellesley College professor Peggy McIntosh wrote an essay called White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack. McIntosh observes that whites in the U.S. are "taught to see racism only in individual acts of meanness, not in invisible systems conferring dominance on my group." To illustrate these invisible systems, McIntosh wrote a list of 26 invisible privileges whites benefit from.

As McIntosh points out, men also tend to be unaware of their own privileges as men. In the spirit of McIntosh's essay, I thought I'd compile a list similar to McIntosh's, focusing on the invisible privileges benefiting men.

Since I first compiled it, the list has been posted several times on internet discussion groups. Very helpfully, many people have suggested additions to the checklist. More commonly, of course, critics (usually, but not always, male) have pointed out men have disadvantages too - being drafted into the army, being expected to suppress emotions, and so on. These are indeed bad things - but I never claimed that life for men is all ice cream sundaes. Pointing out that men are privileged in no way denies that sometimes bad things happen to men.

In the end, however, it is men and not women who make the most money; men and not women who dominate the government and the corporate boards; men and not women who dominate virtually all of the most powerful positions of society. And it is women and not men who suffer the most from intimate violence and rape; who are the most likely to be poor; who are, on the whole, given the short end of patriarchy's stick. As Marilyn Frye has argued, while men are harmed by patriarchy, women are oppressed by it.

Several critics have also argued that the list somehow victimizes women. I disagree; pointing out problems is not the same as perpetuating them. It is not a "victimizing" position to fight against injustice; we can't fight injustice if we refuse to acknowledge it exists.

An internet acquaintance of mine once wrote, "The first big privilege which whites, males, people in upper economic classes, the able bodied, the straight (I think one or two of those will cover most of us) can work to alleviate is the privilege to be oblivious to privilege." This checklist is, I hope, a step towards helping men to give up the "first big privilege."

The Male Privilege Checklist

1. My odds of being hired for a job, when competing against female applicants, are probably skewed in my favor. The more prestigious the job, the larger the odds are skewed.
2. I can be confident that my co-workers won't think I got my job because of my sex - even though that might be true.
3. If I am never promoted, it's not because of my sex.
4. If I fail in my job or career, I can feel sure this won't be seen as a black mark against my entire sex's capabilities.
5. The odds of my encountering sexual harassment on the job are so low as to be negligible.
6. If I do the same task as a woman, and if the measurement is at all subjective, chances are people will think I did a better job.
7. If I'm a teen or adult, and if I can stay out of prison, my odds of being raped are so low as to be negligible.
8. I am not taught to fear walking alone after dark in average public spaces.
9. If I choose not to have children, my masculinity will not be called into question.
10. If I have children but do not provide primary care for them, my masculinity will not be called into question.
11. If I have children and provide primary care for them, I'll be praised for extraordinary parenting if I'm even marginally competent.
12. If I have children and pursue a career, no one will think I'm selfish for not staying at home.
13. If I seek political office, my relationship with my children, or who I hire to take care of them, will probably not be scrutinized by the press.
14. Chances are my elected representatives are mostly people of my own sex. The more prestigious and powerful the elected position, the more likely this is to be true.
15. I can be somewhat sure that if I ask to see "the person in charge," I will face a person of my own sex. The higher-up in the organization the person is, the surer I can be.
16. As a child, chances are I was encouraged to be more active and outgoing than my sisters.
17. As a child, I could choose from an almost infinite variety of children's media featuring positive, active, non-stereotyped heroes of my own sex. I never had to look for it; male heroes were the default.
18. As a child, chances are I got more teacher attention than girls who raised their hands just as often.
19. If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether or not it has sexist overtones.
20. I can turn on the television or glance at the front page of the newspaper and see people of my own sex widely represented, every day, without exception.
21. If I'm careless with my financial affairs it won't be attributed to my sex.
22. If I'm careless with my driving it won't be attributed to my sex.
23. I can speak in public to a large group without putting my sex on trial.
24. If I have sex with a lot of people, it won't make me an object of contempt or derision.
25. There are value-neutral clothing choices available to me; it is possible for me to choose clothing that doesn't send any particular message to the world.
26. My wardrobe and grooming are relatively cheap and consume little time.
27. If I buy a new car, chances are I'll be offered a better price than a woman buying the same car.
28. If I'm not conventionally attractive, the disadvantages are relatively small and easy to ignore.
29. I can be loud with no fear of being called a shrew. I can be aggressive with no fear of being called a bitch.
30. I can ask for legal protection from violence that happens mostly to men without being seen as a selfish special interest, since that kind of violence is called "crime" and is a general social concern. (Violence that happens mostly to women is usually called "domestic violence" or "acquaintance rape," and is seen as a special interest issue.)
31. I can be confident that the ordinary language of day-to-day existence will always include my sex. "All men are created equal…," mailman, chairman, freshman, he.
32. My ability to make important decisions and my capability in general will never be questioned depending on what time of the month it is.
33. I will never be expected to change my name upon marriage or questioned if i don't change my name.
34. The decision to hire me will never be based on assumptions about whether or not I might choose to have a family sometime soon.
35. Every major religion in the world is led primarily by people of my own sex. Even God, in most major religions, is usually pictured as being male.
36. Most major religions argue that I should be the head of my household, while my wife and children should be subservient to me.
37. If I have a wife or girlfriend, chances are we'll divide up household chores so that she does most of the labor, and in particular the most repetitive and unrewarding tasks.
38. If I have children with a wife or girlfriend, chances are she'll do most of the childrearing, and in particular the most dirty, repetitive and unrewarding parts of childrearing.
39. If I have children with a wife or girlfriend, and it turns out that one of us needs to make career sacrifices to raise the kids, chances are we'll both assume the career sacrificed should be hers.
40. Magazines, billboards, television, movies, pornography, and virtually all of media is filled with images of scantily-clad women intended to appeal to me sexually. Such images of men exist, but are much rarer.
41. I am not expected to spend my entire life 20-40 pounds underweight.
42. If I am heterosexual, it's incredibly unlikely that I'll ever be beaten up by a spouse or lover.
43. I have the privilege of being unaware of my male privilege.

[noamnety]

116. great post

44. If I'm the victim of a violent attack, the jury won't ask what I was wearing so they can figure out if I was asking to be attacked.

[bloom]

117. seen on a blog:

"Women are supposed to believe that men's sexuality is so powerfully animalistic that they can't be expected not to attack women, and we're supposed to believe that men are good guys. We're supposed to teach our daughters never to be alone with a boy, and yet we're not supposed to embitter them against men. We're supposed to constrict our lives so extremely that no man could ever perceive even the slightest hint of a sexual invitation, and we're supposed to be okay with it."


http://respectfulofotters.blogspot.com/2005_06_01_respectfulofotters_archive.html#111927836918572602

[IrishDemocrat]

134. I'd like to respond to a few of these if I may.

1. A good looking female with an equal GPA probably stands a better chance than I. Believe me male bosses are looking for that.

5. I personally had a woman torment me for my weight and told a better looking male co-worker my age how cute he was and how I shoule be more like him.

13. My Congressional race featured two women- Allyson Schwartz and Melissa Brown.

21. Men are held to MUCH higher standards on financial matters. Been told I didn't have high enough "career goals."

35. Ok, I disagree with the Catholic Church quite strongly on that.

40. Men are being placed to higher standards with body shape as well.

41. Myself being 5-10, 250, I will never hold a woman to those standards in fact 20-40 pounds underweight is too skinny. I want some meat!

[noamnety]

137. There are some exceptions

But most of what was posted was about the ODDS of it happening to you. For instance, I've been in a couple of situations where I was the only person who wasn't deaf. But even though it's happened to me a handful of times, well, you know, I recognize I have hearing person privilege.

As for #40, men are increasingly under stricter standards for being in shape, but still nothing like what women face when it comes to beauty standards. It's not just the being in shape issue. It's far more than weight. From the top down:

Must dye hair to cover gray
Thinning hair? Rarer for women, but 1000% less acceptable to go bald.
Must pluck eyebrows.
Face (eyelids, eyelashes, skin, lips) should have makeup.
Getting middle aged facial hair? Must have it removed, or go to the doctor for medicine. (If guys, on the other hand, DON'T grow facial hair, no big deal)
Must shave arm pits.
Arms can't be too hairy.
Nails should be manicured.
Must have bigger breasts. But not naturally large ones, because then they sag. Or have veins.
If they are too big and you get them reduced to avoid arthritis in your shoulders from bra strap pressure, guys will be repulsed by the scars.
Mustn't let nipples protrude at work.
Must ensure the color around the nipples isn't too large.
Genitals - must be shaved. Which exposes them, so you must get surgery if the inside parts are larger than the outer parts.
Legs must be shaved.
Feet - should be contorted to fit shoes, rather than having shoes made in the shape of our feet. Some women get toes surgically removed to accomodate their shoes.

Basically, the only area that we get to leave unaltered no matter how we look is our ears.

[lukasahero]

139. "the only area that we get to leave unaltered...is our ears"

Well, speaking as a woman who doesn't have peirced ears, I can assure you they like us to change that about our appearance as well. ;)

You make some interesting points, several of which I didn't know about and now understand why I'm not "attractive" by "men's" standards. LOL!

[noamnety]

142. I forgot about piered ears

Here's a discussion started this morning on another forum (in their loungelike area):

Title: Women with Ugly Feet/Toes make me queasy

Some of what he's complaining about is a coworker who wears sandals, whose "fugly feet" are "incredibly short, sqautty stubby toes. they look like when hot dogs come in an 8 pack and they are kinda square from being pressed together" and another coworker, also in sandals, with "super long feet with fingerlike toes. the big toe is like 2 inches away from the other ones and the second toe is longer than the big one by at least half an inch. definitely a feeler toe. super crusty dry ass heels with cracks and crevices in them. pinkie toe completely tucked under other toes."

So the one's toes are too short (disgusting!) and the other's are too long (disgusting!). Both have deformities, from what he describes, that may have been caused by wearing typically shaped enclosed women's shoes - which he wants them to go back to! And it's not enough that he just finds them unattractive, but he feels insulted and offended that the women dared to expose their feet in his presence, and feels the need to proclaim it to the world, I guess to make sure that other women get the message that if we have feet that don't meet his beauty standards, we should adjust our clothing to hide them.

[IrishDemocrat]

151. I understand

You have more beauty regimens to go through. It's also funny some guys say "so-and-so has too much/little makeup." Yes, we can be difficult, I know I can. Believe me I have arguments with my friends about what is attractive and what isn't. My one buddy dated this waifish girl that was no more than 90 lbs. yet she had boy cut hair that looked like she got electricuted and had no curves whatsoever. She basically looked like a 11 year old boy. He thought she was attractive, I disagreed. I found this brunette with long hair, decent face, bit overweight (180ish) attractive and the same guy thought I needed my glasses checked. With men- to each his own, what can I say.

I'm also sorry I like neatly trimmed genital areas as well. Hey, I trim to for *wink wink* as well! :)

[musical_soul]

135. Both whites and males are the majority.

Majority meaning that they have more privilege over others in society. That system bites, but that's how it currently is. A white woman does not have as much privilege as white man. A black man doesn't have as much privilege as a white man.

[IrishDemocrat]

136. Well,

Historically you are absolutely right, but the tides have turned in some cases. True equality is a tough thing to accomplish.

[highlonesome]

138. You forgot to mention....

....that a white woman has more privelege than a black man.

[Scout]

140. and that a black woman has less privilege than a black man

and a white woman and a white man...

in the whose the most oppressed game, the woman loses to a man of the same race, and they may or may not BOTH lose to a white male.

I think Yoko Ono expressed it well: "Woman is the nigger of the world."

[highlonesome]

141. Actually...

I think that if one was to examine the statistics across the board in terms of education, employment, incarceration and societal concern Black women arguably are more privileged than Black men.