[ SECRET POST #2392 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2392 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11. [repeat]


__________________________________________________



12.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 064 secrets from Secret Submission Post #342.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

Social Justice language is very confusing, especially when you are ESL.

I only just figured out what they mean by "privilege".

Usually, privilege means to have an advantage, but in social justice terms it means to NOT have a DIS-advantage.

It would be so much easier if someone just explained this at some point.

Re: Privilege

[dreemyweird]

Well, not having a disadvantage is having an advantage over those who do have a disadvantage. Lexically speaking, it's okay.

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

But when you are told having two working legs is an advantage, you get very confused. It's the norm. Usually, you don't count something as an advantage when almost everyone has it. Simply having two working legs doesn't help you get forwards in life, though in reverse, NOT having two working legs hinders you a lot. But there are not enough people with this disadvantage to make the theoretical advantage felt.

It's not even about numbers. Everyone SHOULD have the full use of their legs, it shouldn't be a privilege. Privilege, to me, implies something that isn't necessary, that is an extra. But most of the things called privilege in social justice terms ARE necessary, and should be a matter of course for everyone.

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

The thing is? Not everyone *does* have two working legs, so the fact that most buildings are only designed for those with those two legs? Creates a *really* big disadvantage.

Part of the thing with privilege in the terms of social justice is that the people talking about/on the side of SJ? They *are* arguing that the privilege should be for everyone. That's pretty much what they're going for. The reason there's even a fight over it is because it isn't something everyone has.

For example, people shouldn't be judged based on say...their skin tone or sexual orientation. But more often than not they are, and those judgement have a negative impact on their life. People who are white and straight don't have to deal with that - so they're *privileged* to not have to deal with it.

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm only saying I found the word "privilege" very confusing because it doesn't mean what it usually means and I wish someone had explained it at some point.

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

Except that having two working legs isn't strictly necessary in most situations and doesn't have to be as nearly much of a hindrance as it is.

In a world where things are designed and built with the full spectrum of human variations in mind (or at least, a broader slice of that spectrum), getting around on two legs vs. in a wheelchair vs. one leg and a prosthesis would be pretty much equal in terms of opportunity for work, entertainment, etc. The advantage there isn't one that has to exist.

(And your whole 'necessary as a matter of course' framework breaks down even worse regards to, say, sexism or homophobia- unless you're saying that everyone should be a heterosexual male?)

Re: Privilege

[dreemyweird]

You do have a point, I think, especially when we're talking specifically about the word "privilege", which differs from "advantage".

With "advantage" it's slightly different - you can have "advantage over someone", and then "advantage" is not necessarily a "privilege".

But yes, I understand the confusion in this case. Though it isn't incorrect to use "privilege", it is employed to emphasize the existence and hapless state of those deprived of it.

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

"baw i don't understand" is not an excuse for your disgusting ignorance

educate yourself

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

Troll harder.

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

She/he is trying to educate his/herself. Your comment is ironic. And not the fun, mustache and "put a bird on it" irony. Only the, "Are you that thick?" kind.

Re: Privilege

[making_excuses]

I am 86% you are trolling, but I will bite anyway because people are in general stupid...

Not understanding something in your second language is a valid excuse, in Norwegian Privilege is usually used like this: "It is a privilege not a right" as in it is a privilege to have internet it is not a right, and so on, it is not used when it comes to vital things, it is for example not a privilege to have a house or clothes (though designer clothes are a privilege), so I entirely understand the OPs confusion.

Though thinking of it we don't really use the word privilege that much in Norwegian, so it is basically a word I only use in English.

Also not understanding something is an excuse for ignorance, because lack of knowledge creates fear, knowledge is what takes that away. It is often I don't understand things and on those things I don't have an opinion until someone can explain it to me, be it an article, the dictionary or a person, when I get it explained I understand and can form an opinion. There are 1000 of things in this world that you have to be taught and a lot of those things goes under the Social Justice Umbrella...

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

Actually, privilege is commonly used that way in English too. That's why it can be confusing even if you *do* speak English as your first language.

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

different mother language = disgusting ignorance? God you have delicate sensibilities.

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

They're having trouble with more than just the lingo, fyi. I think they'd still be struggling even if the entire discussion was in their native tongue.

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

I think you need to check your English-speaking privilege.

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

Crawl back under your tumblerite rock.

[al28894]

Don't worry, I'm fluent in English and even I have trouble keeping up with them.

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

SJW also tend to pull stuff straight out of their ass, too. For example, there's this huge influx lately due to some high profile court cases, of "ohmygerd, white people are starting a race war! The injustice!". And then you look at the crime rates for the last decade, and you see 90% of the crimes in the past ten years (Murder, rape, assault, etc) done against African Americans was committed by other African Americans. And then you just roll your eyes and hope someone tries to fix the bigger issue at hand.

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

Sociological terms can be confusing even in English for people who haven't studied the subject. So I think you get a pass! :)

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought the term "privilege" referred to groups of people getting "special privileges" over other groups of people for what they are, rather than things they earned.

eg. upper-class people/white people/men/straight people getting treated better or getting particular perks and social advantages simply for being upper class/white/male/straight.

Is this correct?

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

Kind of. But how can the majority get "special perks"? When most people get something, then it's normal and a matter of course to have it. NOT having it is a disadvantage, but having it? Is just normal and nothing special.

Upper-class? Definitely a privilege, because that's not the majority. Being rich gives you advantages and privileges OVER the majority. They get treated differently than most people, the way they are treated is NOT the norm, is special. Thus, advantage and privilege.

Able-bodied people are the majority, as are straight people, as are white people in some countries - the way they get treated by society is the norm, because MOST people get treated like that. So it's not an advantage. Of course it is a BIG disadvantage for everyone not in that group - disabled people, homo/bi/pansexual people, people of other races all get disadvantages. But if 1 disabled person doesn't get a job because of their disability? That doesn't help the 1000 able-bodied job-seekers any, because it's not enough "advantage" to make a difference. So being able-bodied is not a privilege.

100 people. 99 get ice cream, 1 does not. Sucks for the one. But do the 99 really get "special treatment" or "special perks"? No. Because special means "more than normal", and "having ice cream" IS normal. So NOT having ice cream is a disadvantage, but having ice cream? Is nothing special. NOT privilege.(still sucks for the one and the one should definitely get ice cream too)

100 people. 10 get ice cream, 90 do not. MOST don't have ice cream. So? having ice cream is special. Is an advantage and a privilege. Not having ice cream is a disadvantage (the 90 should get ice cream too, but that's likely harder to do, since there's more).

Re: Privilege

[inkdust]

I think one reason the term privilege is often used is as part of an attempt to restructure the general perception of society as categories of either "normal" or "disadvantaged." Instead of looking at things from the majority perspective, where those with a disadvantage are simply seen as such, it's trying to include minority perspective, from which standpoint the majority exercises an unearned advantage (unearned meaning not given by merit) that it is often unaware of (see my other comment below). I think the word privilege is partly an attempt to increase majority awareness of their lack of disadvantage, and thereby increase their awareness of others' disadvantage. That's certainly how it was used at my college.

Re: Privilege

[inkdust]

I learned about that particular definition of privilege in college, where they did actually explain it well, and I agree that the definition doesn't always seem to match up with the term as it's generally understood. But one aspect I find helpful to keeping things straight mentally is that privilege among a majority group (white, male, straight, etc) usually also includes the privilege of not being aware of it, of being able to take their advantage for granted. Because it's sort of a negative advantage, in the sense of advantage-by-not-having-a-disadvantage, so on the one hand there's the privilege there in actual treatment by society, and on the other there's the privilege of not noticing that treatment - of perceiving their non-disadvantage as a given.

If that makes any sense?

Re: Privilege

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, that does make sense. And I did figure that out eventually - after 5 years. I still think it's a weird choice to use the word privilege that way. AND I think people should explain it occasionally, because it's really confusing and makes most social justice discussions hard to follow. (and it's nearly impossible to ask without getting accused of being bigotted or otherwise yelled at)

Re: Privilege

[inkdust]

Agreed 100%

Re: Privilege

[surferofdreams]

Language has a tendency to be fluid, especially when considering the connotation of a word, as opposed to the dictionary-definition of a word. This sometimes makes it difficult to know the exact meaning of a person's written language if you are not familiar with their manner of speaking, or if you don't know the entire context of what they are talking about.

My idea of what privilege means, in social justice language:

The assumption that some part or all parts of a person closely resembles the standard of worth to a particular society, whether this is explicitly stated or not.

In the southeast United States, a person is (generally) most valued by society if they are white, cis-male, protestant/christian, college-educated, and middle-to-upperclass, with a "good" job, a wife, and a few children. This is the embodiment of what is known as the "American Dream", and it excludes a whole hell of a lot of people.

Everyone else is judged against this standard, and if you fail on any counts, you have less privilege.

This is my definition of "privilege", as defined by social justice language. It could be something completely different to someone else, because that is how language works. A word has both a technical definition, as seen in dictionaries, and a contextual definition, which must be understood within the context of its use.