Note: Due to the highly charged nature of the subject matter, and likelihood of readers already having strongly entrenched positions, I realize that it will be anywhere from difficult to impossible for some people to 'hear' me on this. All I can ask is that you keep an open mind, and try to see it from the other side.
There's a negative and a positive way to approach the diversity problem, and unfortunately, the "uh guys, you might be privileged" camp have decided to run with the negative way, hence the (quite understandable) backlash.
Don't get me wrong, I understand and share the sentiment, but the inescapable fact is that saying "you're privileged" is not only inherently accusatory, but does more to emphasize (and reinforce) that which divides, rather than that which unites.
On the other hand, I've been very fortunate to be involved in advocacy groups like PHPWomen, which provide mentorship opportunities for female (PHP) developers, and connects them with conference organizers and major Open Source projects. They've been doing this for years (i.e. well before hating white male privilege was en vogue in the tech community), and they've been tremendously successful.
Guilt-tripping and divisiveness are toxic. If this is a problem you genuinely care about, the above might be a model to follow. Don't be reactive, be proactive.
It unequivocally is not. It is pointing out a fact: I am a white, upper-middle-class, English-speaking, computer-literate, straight, cisgendered, first-world male with a supportive family unit. These are all descriptors which lend me advantages--on average and in the long run--that people exhibiting other available descriptors do not have. No one has ever told me that I am a bad person for having them (or if they did, I probably brushed it off as a ridiculous notion), but they have asked me to recognize that it is so, and incorporate that understanding into my critical view of our culture.
That some take offense to facts would seem to me to be out of the hands of those pointing them out.
'Hey nollidge, the sky is blue.' Seems silly to point out, no?
That's because nobody points out facts in a vacuum; people point out facts because of things like meaning and implication. The purpose of communicating new knowledge, or old knowledge put into a new context, is to produce a change in thoughts, actions, or behavior. This is not a complicated idea.
As an individual, operating under my own idea of what it means to be a 'good' person, I try to do my best to judge people on their character, not on superficial characteristics. Also, I feel like as a person, I have fairly healthy boundaries.
So, when someone communicates to me through implication, by emphasizing a series of facts, that I have a duty to violate my own sense of fairness and morality to rectify a broad, amorphous social problem of arbitrary criteria, yes, I consider that an attempt to violate my boundaries.
> people point out facts because of things like meaning and implication.
Yes, great, thanks. Now please explain how that meaning and implication is "inherently accusatory", rather than pointing out non-obvious facts to people who don't seem to believe them (cf. evolution, the big bang, etc.).
What is it that you think is being implicitly asked of you?
> What is it that you think is being implicitly asked of you?
Well, that's the real trick, since it's been hard to pin down to any level of precision.
But then, I'm not one of the people going around, sanctimoniously passing judgement on those who don't conform to my personal moral code.
But if you can find one of them, and get them to give you an unambiguous, noncontradictory explanation for exactly what they expect of everyone, I'd consider it a favor if you passed it along. :-)
So you can't even define what it is people are "implicitly" asking of you, and yet you're convinced it's "inherently accusatory", would "violate your own sense of fairness and morality", would "violate your boundaries", and the asker is being sanctimonious.
Pardon me if I do not take your Real Important Concerns seriously.
I am incredibly privileged. Both my parents are EECS professors, which means there were a lot of computers, a lot of computer knowledge, and a lot of computer books around the house when I was growing up; we had plenty of funding for me to go to a good college; and the university where my dad taught gave an incredibly deep discount on me taking classes there (three CS classes and one math class) my senior year of high school.
I've never seen this as an accusation. I don't even feel particularly guilty about it by itself -- but I do feel guilty when I see myself acting as if I have more aptitude or inherent capability than other folks who probably do but didn't have those opportunities. I think that's all anyone's asking for.
>but the inescapable fact is that saying "you're privileged" is not only inherently accusatory, but does more to emphasize (and reinforce) that which divides, rather than that which unites.
Sigh. I'm privileged. Saying that white men in the USA are privileged isn't an accusation, it's an observed fact. The fact that the response to it is "NUH UH, you're calling me names", is the reason that we can't have an educated discussion about privilege in our culture.
Calling out specific groups of people is confrontational, because it makes it about us-vs.-them. This should not be a controversial statement.
That's the reason you can't have an education discussion about it. Again, the better approach is to be proactive and promote inclusiveness, rather than re-summoning the ghost of white guilt, dressed up in new clothes.
Saying that someone has privilege is not "calling them out". Jesus, quit being so defensive and putting words in my mouth. This is how every conversation goes with people who don't understand what the word "privilege" means. How else can I possibly say that?
I'm a white male, I have privilege. I'm also gay, so in that sense, I lose out on privilege that all straight people have. It's not a zero sum game. It's not something to feel guilty about. It's not an accusation. It's not anyone blaming anyone else.
Comments
Note: Due to the highly charged nature of the subject matter, and likelihood of readers already having strongly entrenched positions, I realize that it will be anywhere from difficult to impossible for some people to 'hear' me on this. All I can ask is that you keep an open mind, and try to see it from the other side.
There's a negative and a positive way to approach the diversity problem, and unfortunately, the "uh guys, you might be privileged" camp have decided to run with the negative way, hence the (quite understandable) backlash.
Don't get me wrong, I understand and share the sentiment, but the inescapable fact is that saying "you're privileged" is not only inherently accusatory, but does more to emphasize (and reinforce) that which divides, rather than that which unites.
On the other hand, I've been very fortunate to be involved in advocacy groups like PHPWomen, which provide mentorship opportunities for female (PHP) developers, and connects them with conference organizers and major Open Source projects. They've been doing this for years (i.e. well before hating white male privilege was en vogue in the tech community), and they've been tremendously successful.
Guilt-tripping and divisiveness are toxic. If this is a problem you genuinely care about, the above might be a model to follow. Don't be reactive, be proactive.
> inherently accusatory
It unequivocally is not. It is pointing out a fact: I am a white, upper-middle-class, English-speaking, computer-literate, straight, cisgendered, first-world male with a supportive family unit. These are all descriptors which lend me advantages--on average and in the long run--that people exhibiting other available descriptors do not have. No one has ever told me that I am a bad person for having them (or if they did, I probably brushed it off as a ridiculous notion), but they have asked me to recognize that it is so, and incorporate that understanding into my critical view of our culture.
That some take offense to facts would seem to me to be out of the hands of those pointing them out.
'Hey nollidge, the sky is blue.' Seems silly to point out, no?
That's because nobody points out facts in a vacuum; people point out facts because of things like meaning and implication. The purpose of communicating new knowledge, or old knowledge put into a new context, is to produce a change in thoughts, actions, or behavior. This is not a complicated idea.
As an individual, operating under my own idea of what it means to be a 'good' person, I try to do my best to judge people on their character, not on superficial characteristics. Also, I feel like as a person, I have fairly healthy boundaries.
So, when someone communicates to me through implication, by emphasizing a series of facts, that I have a duty to violate my own sense of fairness and morality to rectify a broad, amorphous social problem of arbitrary criteria, yes, I consider that an attempt to violate my boundaries.
> people point out facts because of things like meaning and implication.
Yes, great, thanks. Now please explain how that meaning and implication is "inherently accusatory", rather than pointing out non-obvious facts to people who don't seem to believe them (cf. evolution, the big bang, etc.).
What is it that you think is being implicitly asked of you?
> What is it that you think is being implicitly asked of you?
Well, that's the real trick, since it's been hard to pin down to any level of precision.
But then, I'm not one of the people going around, sanctimoniously passing judgement on those who don't conform to my personal moral code.
But if you can find one of them, and get them to give you an unambiguous, noncontradictory explanation for exactly what they expect of everyone, I'd consider it a favor if you passed it along. :-)
So you can't even define what it is people are "implicitly" asking of you, and yet you're convinced it's "inherently accusatory", would "violate your own sense of fairness and morality", would "violate your boundaries", and the asker is being sanctimonious.
Pardon me if I do not take your Real Important Concerns seriously.
My apologies, I can see you don't appreciate being toyed with. ;-)
I am incredibly privileged. Both my parents are EECS professors, which means there were a lot of computers, a lot of computer knowledge, and a lot of computer books around the house when I was growing up; we had plenty of funding for me to go to a good college; and the university where my dad taught gave an incredibly deep discount on me taking classes there (three CS classes and one math class) my senior year of high school.
I've never seen this as an accusation. I don't even feel particularly guilty about it by itself -- but I do feel guilty when I see myself acting as if I have more aptitude or inherent capability than other folks who probably do but didn't have those opportunities. I think that's all anyone's asking for.
>but the inescapable fact is that saying "you're privileged" is not only inherently accusatory, but does more to emphasize (and reinforce) that which divides, rather than that which unites.
Sigh. I'm privileged. Saying that white men in the USA are privileged isn't an accusation, it's an observed fact. The fact that the response to it is "NUH UH, you're calling me names", is the reason that we can't have an educated discussion about privilege in our culture.
Calling out specific groups of people is confrontational, because it makes it about us-vs.-them. This should not be a controversial statement.
That's the reason you can't have an education discussion about it. Again, the better approach is to be proactive and promote inclusiveness, rather than re-summoning the ghost of white guilt, dressed up in new clothes.
Saying that someone has privilege is not "calling them out". Jesus, quit being so defensive and putting words in my mouth. This is how every conversation goes with people who don't understand what the word "privilege" means. How else can I possibly say that?
I'm a white male, I have privilege. I'm also gay, so in that sense, I lose out on privilege that all straight people have. It's not a zero sum game. It's not something to feel guilty about. It's not an accusation. It's not anyone blaming anyone else.
Please learn what the discussion is about.