The present article dwells upon the role of race and gender in the American society. The author argues that there is a privileged group in the USA. One of the major findings of the author is that everyone (contrasted to minorities) is affected by disproportions which exist in the society.
Peggy McIntosh points out that she, just like any other white individual, i.e. representative of the class of privileged, was taught to enjoy the privileges without even noticing it (79). The author draws a parallel between the privileged position and wearing a special knapsack which contains everything the privileged individual might need (79).
Interestingly, the author also notes that privileged people also live in terms of certain morality which presupposes that these people live ideal lives or at least morally neutral lives while trying to benefit others which is regarded as attempts to allow others to be more like those privileged individuals (McIntosh 80).
Thus, having acknowledged this disproportion the author attempts to realize what it means to be in the other camp. The author points out particular everyday situations where the disproportion is manifested.
Therefore, McIntosh concludes that in spite of the fact that the American society is regarded as democratic, it is overwhelmed with various kinds of inequality and oppression. Interestingly, the author does not simply reveal the problem. McIntosh also suggests a particular solution.
Thus, the author claims that even though she is in the class of privileged, when it comes to race, she is, at the same time, in the class of oppressed since she is a woman living in the mens world. This enables the author to draw certain parallels and come up with a particular decision.
Thus, McIntosh claims that it is possible to diminish the disproportion when the privileged class lessens their privileges. Admittedly, the present article can help to address the problem as the first step to its solving is in-depth analysis of the roots of the problem. McIntosh manages to provide insights into the issue concerning race and gender.
It goes without saying that issues concerning equality, race and identity have been discussed throughout decades. For instance, Nakayama also pays much attention to constraints that Asian people have to endure in the American society (32). Gonzalez and Willis-Riviera also focus on ethnic identity while considering peculiarities of Hispanic peoples lives in the USA (245).
Gordon also deals with issues concerning identity when it comes to Hispanic people (261). These four works focus on similar issues, i.e. they dwell upon constraints ethnic minorities face in the American society. However, McIntosh reveals quite close ties between two types of oppression, the one based on ethnicity and the other one based on gender.
McIntosh also suggests a particular solution to the problem providing strong arguments to support her conclusions. Admittedly, these sources contribute greatly to the discourse which is analyzed in Communication Studies as these sources reveal constraints that exist in the American society.
Admittedly, to analyze the origins of these cross-cultural constraints is one of the major objectives to address for those who are involved in the field of Communication Studies.
Discussion Question
Based on McIntoshs conclusions, do you think privileged people will be able to lessen their privileges? What can be done to make these people lessen their privileges?
Works Cited
Gonzalez, Alberto and Jennifer Willis-Rivera. Hispanic Heritage Month: Not for Members Only. Our Voices: Essays in Culture, Ethnicity, and Communication. Eds. Alberto Gonzalez, Marsha Houston, and Victoria Chen. New York, NY: Roxbury Publishing Company, 2011. 243-248. Print.
Gordon, Dexter D. Identity and Struggle in Jamaican Talk. Our Voices: Essays in Culture, Ethnicity, and Communication. Eds. Alberto Gonzalez, Marsha Houston, and Victoria Chen. New York, NY: Roxbury Publishing Company, 2011. 259-264. Print.
McIntosh, Peggy. White Privilege and Male Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack. The Kaleidoscope of Gender: Prisms, Patterns, and Possibilities. Eds. Joan Z. Spade and Catherine Valentine. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth, 2004. 79-82. Print.
Nakayama, Thomas. Dis/orienting Identities: Asian Americans, History, and Intercultural Communication. Our Voices: Essays in Culture, Ethnicity, and Communication. Eds. Alberto Gonzalez, Marsha Houston, and Victoria Chen. New York, NY: Roxbury Publishing Company, 2011. 31-36. Print.
The Idea of the Middle Class: White Collar Workers and Peruvian Society, 1900-1950 is a 266-page book authored by D. S. Parker and published in University Park, Pennsylvania by Pennsylvania State University Press in 1998. The book gives a detailed history of Limas middle class in the period between 1900 and 1950.
Parker gives a reflectively inventive and comfortably familiar assessment of the Latin American Society, specifically the Peruvians. His clear account follows the creation of the middle-class, its economic and cultural aspects, its political activity, and the way in which it evolved as Limas demographic and economic growth changed the citys labor structure. For these grounds, The Idea of the Middle Class enjoys a wide audience from diverse population groups: economists, social historians, among others.
Parker analyses Perus middle class community by combining the techniques of social historians with interest on language as he examines the factors that led Perus white-collar employees to identify themselves as members of a special middle class. He follows the foundations of this new class identity and demonstrates the long-term effect that the phenomenon had on Peruvian economy, politics, and customs.
Summary
The Idea of the Middle Class centers on the intricate interaction between ideas and structure, between the personality of white-collar employees and how state mechanisms strengthened and articulated that personality. White-collar employees, locally known as empleados, viewed themselves as privileged members of the society, separate and superior to the blue-collar masses, known as obreros.
The beliefs of this middle class was not a universal idea aimed at restoring Perus image in a democratic bourgeois revolution, instead, the middle-class aim was to guard their privileges and hence their social dissimilarity through political means. Therefore, the middle-class plan led to a struggle to employ state mechanisms to strengthen, articulate, and guard their priviledge, instead of creating an alliance with the lower-ranked members of the society to depose the oligarchy.
The distinction between the privileged and unwashed masses had been created by the colonialists to indicate a disparity in moral worth (Parker 24). Superior status was demonstrated through a distinguished family legacy, an excellent education, a light skin tone, and correct dressing code. Parker informs us of the vagueness of using race to define ones social position among the Peruvians (Parker 26), in this system, whites and mestizo (of Indian and white descent) occupied the highest level (42).
The separation between the empleados and obreros is initiated with their relationship to the nobilities. Empleados were the permanent employees in firms that were dominant in Perus economy. Their jobs demanded that one be literate and have elementary mathematical capabilities, as well as a reputable conduct for interaction with the public. On the contrary, obreros were temporary, unskilled employees, and had no direct contact with the business bosses.
To maintain ones status as an empleado, one had to dress and eat appropriately, and live in prescribed locations, besides, the spouse should not have been employed and the children ought to have attended private schools. These social demands meant that the empleados suffered from inflation more than the obreros. These expectations were later changed and political demands were used to identify empleados (Parker 18).
Political demands used to categorize Peruvians were stated as law 4916 in 1924. In these laws, only empleados were assured of a 3-month severance in cases where one was fired without notice, and a payment of two months wages for every year in which one was employed. Besides, the employees were to be given life insurance and disability allowances (Parker 105).
Parker mentions that these labor policies led some obreros to reclassify their status as an empleado, while the new status did not come with material gains, it improved ones status in the society. In the Peruvian society, status mattered more than material wealth, and the author corroborates this statement by informing us of students unwillingness to take up blue-collar jobs regardless of the pay (132).
Politically, the social and economic pressure felt by the empleados turned into support for Alianza Popular Revolucionaria Americana (APRA), the leading political party. Empleados were attracted to ARPA due to two factors: nationalism and racism. Through APRA, empleados felt their jobs were secure since the party campaigned against employment of foreigners, besides, APRA denounced firms that either underpaid or exploited empleados, thereby strengthening their support among the middle class (Parker 173).
Critical Evaluation
Overall, The Idea of the Middle Class gives an intriguing outlook of the creation of a different type of middle class; one based on retaining difference rather than conquering inequality. However, the weakness of Parkers work is found on its lack of wider theoretical connections, from being drawn on historiography rather than on political science or sociology.
Parkers explanation of the consumption patterns of the empleados could have been easily comprehended had he used Webers comprehension of a status group rather than from Marxs idea of class. Webers theory states that an individuals association to the ownership of the means of production is normally the foundation of group identity. The status group recognition of the empleados would have been further strengthened by the Latin American tradition of conexiones (connections).
In the Peruvian system, the probability of success is determined by who you know, such acquaintances will assist you in acquiring material wealth, jobs, and even a spouse. Under such circumstances, the empleados close connection with their bosses appears as less an outdated desire for status and pride, than a practical defense of their life success.
Therefore, in building his assessment, Parker challenges a generation of intellectuals to reconsider their thoughts on the formation and classification of social groups.
While The Idea of the Middle Class explains empleado identity, it also brings up vital questions for dependency theory. The author observes that small-scale businessmen did not define the values of the empleados because the petit bourgeoisie were foreign and hence not easy to organize.
The Wider Latin American Community
Social historians contend that no social class has bred more debate than the middle class, and nowhere has the debate been felt than in Latin America. This class is blamed for failing to steer the Latin American economy to greater strides, a role that the same group has carried out in other regions.
Besides, the group is also blamed for failing to instill democracy and progressive ideas in the region, for example, in Peru, the empleados sought government support instead of monitoring it activities. This failure can be attributed to the social pressures placed on them because of being members of the empleado.
Primary Sources
Parker provides a rich account of the lifestyle, values, and customs of this upcoming class and the persistence in seeking economic stability, propriety, and revolution in the Peruvian system. Using skillfully written biographical profiles based on a number of archival articles, Parker achieves success in enlivening the empleados in a way that creates an urgency to flip through the pages by using primary sources to support his statements.
Parker also utilizes a number of records drawn from data collected during the period between 1900 to1950, for example, on page 136, he gives unemployment statistics for selected occupations drawn from the 1931 statistics. These records indicate that unemployment percentage for masons was the highest, followed by carpenters, while farm workers were the least employed persons.
On page 77, he gives the reported occupations of ARPA members from the 1931 to 1945. Again, he gives empleado marriages in Lima by race from 1932 to 1947, records that clearly indicate that a higher percentage of empleados belonged to white/white and mestizo/mestizo marriages as compared to mixed marriages.
Parker also gives a typical empleados (Rodrigo Gonzalez) household budget in 1949, Rodrigo earned 600 soles (described as a meager amount in 1949), his monthly budget adds to 572 soles. Other primary sources include the composition of Lima-based employees of a Peruvian company (1930) and a table on the Distribution of empleados by Sector and Gender, 1940 (Parker 212).
Conclusion
Parker provides a careful assessment of how the 20th century invention became an essential part of the Peruvian culture. This brilliant and painstaking examination of Peruvian white-collar employees gives a near-perfect mix of the material, cultural, and political elements of class formation.
Work Cited
Parker, David Stuart. The Idea of the Middle Class: White Collar Workers and Peruvian Society, 1900-1950. University Park, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998.
The world is full of people of different races, tribes and skin colors. Indeed, this is not a weakness, but a show of diversity. However, some individuals and groups have used their sociological status to oppress others. So far, racism remains the most common form of oppression. The white people have always believed that they are superior as compared to other people of different racial backgrounds. Undeniably, the notion of white supremacy, which is a belief in white dominance, is a reality, at least for those who have experienced it.
The notion of white supremacy advocates, and promotes the social and political supremacy of the white people over the rest. White supremacy bases its foundation in ethnocentrism and craving for racial hegemony. Consequently, this has resulted into oppression, social prejudice, anti-black sadism and anti-Semitic hostility. Astonishingly, very many supremacist groups have come up, each with its own conception.
For example, in United States of America, the emergence of white supremacist groups such as Ku Klux Klan, skinheads, and church of Creator have caused so much uproar and racial segregation in America. These groups are the common enemies of the state and those who vehemently stand to oppose them, put their lives at risk. For instance, these groups have managed to introduce white supremacist dogmas into the social fabric of American politics and key institutions resulting into unprecedented intolerance. Hitherto, United States has moved into a new-fangled era- an era of white preeminence (Wildman, 1996, pp.86-87).
Introduction
Many Americans believe that the emergence of White Supremacist groups occurred after the end of the American civil war. At first, these groups run their affairs clandestinely in order to circumvent the attention of the media and government institutions responsible for maintenance of law and order.
Traditionally, the white supremacist groups relied principally on the tittle-tattle notoriety to overawe their intended victims. However, as time went by, the groups increased its membership, and widened their territories. Interestingly, 25,000 white Americans seemed to support the ideologies of the white supremacist groups.
However, it is important to note that this is indeed a tiny faction as compared to the population of white people in United States of America at that particular time and even the present. The paper will discuss the strategies and ideologies employed by white supremacist groups to carry out their mission. The paper will also examine the liaison between three congregating and vastly expanding white supremacist groups- religious fundamentalists, the far right and the ultra-conservatives.
It is important to note that these white supremacist groups use various antagonist mechanisms of human rights desecrations such as racism, violence on women, religion and political leanings to fulfill their egoism. The paper will also examine and perhaps make lucid explanations on the correlation between gender disparity, homophobia, racial discrimination and anti-Semitism, under the umbrella of social structures and institutions (Adams & Roscigno, 2005, pp. 759-788).
White supremacist groups
History indicates that there are over three hundred white supremacist groups in America, and that no more than two groups resemble. Each group has its own way of operation that stretches from ostensibly inoffensive religious sects or levy dissenters to overtly confrontational, even brutal factions such as the Ku Klux Klan Klaverns (KKK) and the neo-Nazi skinheads.
It is vital to note that these white supremacist groups emanate as religious factions, who later recruit survivalists, anarchists and paramilitary operational mechanisms to achieve their mission. While some groups such as the Ku Klux Klan are on the decline now, some Hitler-inspired factions for example, Church of Creator and National Alliance are gaining momentum to replace the falling Ku Klux Klan.
History also records that some groups are adopting new named to replace the old ones for example, the hoods are now Swastikas. Likewise, the historical crosses group has changed its name to Uzis. Research shows that over two hundred thousand Americans not only support the operations of these groups, but also, make sure that they avail themselves whenever a group has a meeting or a rally.
These people have increasingly become too loyal to the point of donating money in order to support the activities of their groups. Additionally, each group has its own operational call network, with succinctly recorded messages that inform members on the venue and date of their next meeting.
The recorder messages are full of hate-motivated discourses that later initiate disharmony between the white and other people of different racial backgrounds for example, the Jews and the black people. Other intended targets include the gay persons, lesbians and women. The development of sophisticated technology has even made these supremacist groups to open their own racist radio and television shows, which appeal to white people to join their groups (Adams & Roscigno, 2005, pp. 759-788).
Ku Klux Klan
History asserts that although the American Civil war was a great success towards the realization of human rights, it cultivated hostility between the whites and blacks. In those days, the whites hated the blacks so much, and could go as far as beating and even killing them. In 1866, general Nathan Bedford Forrest founded the famous Ku Klux Klan whose members were mainly rich white business merchants who dressed differently from the rest by wearing white robes, pointed hats and masks.
The group targeted black men and women. Whenever they caught the victim, they will beat and finally kill him or her. Three years later, the architect of this group, Nathan Forrest, demanded the demobilization of the Ku Klux Klan. Although this happened, it gave members an opportunity to establish small Klans. In 1876, the Ku Klux Klan completely fished out due to the enactment of Jim Crow laws.
However, in 1915, Joseph Simmons founded the next Ku Klux Klan. The new group became so popular; the reason being, a film star by the name Griffith released a film that praised and instituted a renewed hope and apparition to the emerging new KKK. Joseph Simmons appointed Hiram Wesley as the head of the group, something he did up to 1939. Five years later from this time, the new Ku Klux Klan disintegrated.
However, the rise of civil rights movements in America in 1950s provides yet another opportunity for the emergence of another Ku Klux Klan- one that will perhaps continue to present time. It emerged that the group was far ruthless and had a special message from that of the foremost and subsequent Ku Klux Klans (Kronenwetter, 1992, pp. 19-23).
The first Ku Klux Klan founded by Nathan Bedford performed the roles of coercing rascals, carpetbaggers, and those imprisoned. In addition, this period saw the emergence of other groups based religion rater than racism and ready to perform hazing rituals.
Reasonably, these people wore differently to masquerade their identities. Initially, this first Ku Klux Klan used to flee slaves. However, as time went by, they realized that the freed slaves imposed danger to the Southern lifestyle. They therefore decided to manage the social and political status of the freed persons.
Additionally, they instituted new mechanisms aimed at blocking the African Americans from achieving education, advancing economically or take positions of leadership. The number of recruits kept on increasing, and the Klansmen sought to violent acts to perfect their mission. However, in 1867, a significant thing happened in America. The congress passed established ne law, Reconstruction Laws, aimed at wiping out this secular group.
The laws allowed black Americans to vote, and hold various positions in the government. However, these laws elicited anger among the Southerners who were mainly white-they themselves did enjoy these rights. The southern region constituted five military districts. Thus, some African Americans headed some of these military districts. The white residents under the administration of the African American leader felt mortified and mistreated. They could not stand any more shortchanging (William, 2002, pp. 23-27).
Now, the Klan felt that this was the best opportunity to fight the Reconstruction Laws and anything contained therein. Secretly, in 1867, the leaders of Ku Klux Klan called for a meeting at Nashville, Tennessee to derive their agenda. In the meeting, the members agreed to protect their interests and protect their fellow whites from any oppression instituted by the blacks.
Nonetheless, if any white American opposed the activities of Ku Klux Klan, the authority stripped his membership immediately. Soon, the Klansmen started destroying properties owned by blacks, lynching mutilating and whipping them.
Fire became the most common weapon of mass destruction. Whoever stood in their way, whether black or white, they would kill him or her. Although the Reconstruction Laws outlawed the killing of blacks, the Ku Klux Klan had little to care. Soon, America held elections and President Grant assumed power. With the assistance of congress, President Grant introduced new laws to curb the rising violence on black people of the south.
President Grant ordered the disbandment and arrest of Ku Klux Klan members. However, the arrested members did not receive any punishment. Later on, the group faded away following the election of Rutherford Hayes in 1876 (McClymer, 2006, pp. 19-37).
In 1915, something peculiar happened that revamped the forgotten group. A film star, Griffith D.W. released a film that praised the actions of the Ku Klux Klan. After watching the film, a Methodist Episcopal Church pastor, Joseph Simmons opted to establish a supremacist group resembling the one portrayed in the film, The Birth of a Nation.
He managed to recruit 34 members at the start, two of whom had served in the first Klan. However, unlike the first Klan, this clan majorly focused on anti-immigrant and opposition of religious groupings such as Catholicm and Jewish Culture. Five years later, the second Klan had managed to control many political and social institutions of America.
The Klan now enjoyed government protection. In a little while, the Klansmen attacked black and white Americans who dared to stand on their way. Nonetheless, in 1940, the leadership structure of Klan sank in rape and corruption where the courts found David Stephenson, one of the powerful Klan leaders, guilty of rape and murder. Later on, the popularity of the Ku Klux Klan fritters away hastily (Grant, 1916, pp. 13-37).
However, there came the period of civil rights movement in United States. By 1960, Jim Crow had managed to create the third and more violent Ku Klux Klan whose main mandate was to resist the ongoing civil rights movement in United States. In addition to whipping, mutilation, and hazing, the group also resorted to bombing of African Americans and white civil rights activists. The Klan had expanded expansively in all states of America.
They continued their violence acts of pulling activists out of their cars, beating them ostensibly, before setting fire on the bodies and the cars. Racial discrimination was at the peak. White parents refused to take their children to schools where black children also schooled.
They could go as far as yelling at the parents and even throwing stones to vehicles carrying black children. White teachers refused to teach black children. In 1980, two Ku Klux Klan attacked and killed Michael Donald-black American- and in 2005, Ku Klux Klan members burned a house in Ohio belonging to a Hispanic man on grounds of raping a white girl. Clearly, nobody can deny that the current Ku Klux Klan is the most violent of the three (Kronenwetter, 1992, p. 47-49).
Church of Creator
Another white supremacist group is the Church of Creator. This group started as a religious faction in 1973. The architects of this particular group engaged in what they termed a racial holy war . They engaged in violent acts aimed at separating the virulent white Americans (pure Aryan Races) from the African Americans. Perhaps in an attempt meant to fish out and wipe out the group, the government of United States through FBI is carrying out a number of arrests in order to stop the group.
For instance, in 1993, some member of this group developed a failed plot to bomb a Church based in Los Angeles. In addition, the Federal Bureau of Investigations links member of this group with several and mysterious murders, bank robberies and retaliatory attacks. Members of this supremacist group also believe that they car stir a vituperative race war in United States by attacking Jews and African Americans (Kronenwetter, 1992, pp. 49-58).
Neo-Nazi Skinhead Movement
So far, this group is the fastest growing white supremacist group in United States today. Currently, the group has a membership population of 3,500 people aged between thirteen and twenty-five. This group ardently complies with the Hitler worship and members move into a higher rank after consigning a racial crime.
Interestingly, even girls are members of this hate crime faction, and like their counterpart boys, they also engage in gang activities-activities that act as a gang initiation in order to ascend the leadership ladder. Adult skinheads are busy recruiting young adults to commit crimes on behalf of them. According to reports from FBI, the group has committed serious race crimes targeting African Americans, Jews, gays and lesbians.
Some of them have been involved in terror crimes targeting buildings and uniformed police officers. It is also worrying to note that the leaders of this group are busy planning and strategizing various ways of thinning out information that could spark hate and bigotry. The rising opposition to assimilation, interracial marriages and welfare tells much of this group. Members of this group have also been fiercest critics of affirmative actions and educational funding of minority groups.
However, due to leadership combats and interior wrangles, the group has lost some of its members. Indeed, this has threatened the operations of this group. If the squabbles and wrangles persist, then the group will finally fall. In another twist, members of this group have failed to agree on whether to use either violence or politics, or politics and violence in order to attain white supremacy (Dobratz & Shanks-Meile, 2000, pp. 19-31).
Conclusion
Indeed, it is true, the emergence of white supremacist groups has cause more harm than good in United States of America. Historically, these groups have resorted to violence, mutilation, hate crime and torture in their fight for white supremacy. Consequently, many African Americans, white civil rights activists, gay persons and lesbians have all suffered in their hands.
At one point, the unity of the group has made it augment powerfully. On the other hand, internal squabbles, leadership wrangle, congress legislations, and counter attacks have made these groups fall. The truth is these groups still exist-much stronger than in the past. It is now up to the American Congress and government to enact legislations and deal with these miscreant racial gangs.
Reference List
Adams, J. & Roscigno, V. (2005). White Supremacists, Oppositional Culture and the World Wide Web. Journal Storage, University on North Carolina Press, 84(2005), 759-788.
Dobratz, B. & Shanks-Meile, S. (2000). White power, white pride! The white separatist movement in the United States. John Hopkins University Press.
Grant, M. (1916). The Passing of the Great Race. New York: Charles Scribners Sons.
Kronenwetter, M. (1992). United they hate, white supremacist groups in America. New York: Walker Publishing Company.
McClymer, J. (2006). Race riots, lynching, and other forms of racism in the 1920s. Worcester, Massachusetts: Assumption College Press.
Wildman, M. (1996). Privilege Revealed: How Invisible Preference Undermines America. New York University Press.
Williams, M. (2002). The white separatist Movement. San Diego, California: Greenhaven Press.
According to the Metropolitan Policy Program, in the year 2045, the white race will become a minority taking up only 49.7% of the United States population (Frey). For years, white privilege has been at the forefront of social hypocrisy. From owning slaves in the 1700s to everyday racial slurs, white people have been labeled as discriminatory and supremacists. The idea that white people have a certain ranking in the hierarchy that is America is an outgrown ideology and the concept of white privilege should be redefined to adequately match our constantly changing society. Our culture has morphed into a system that is so frightened of labels that they actually discriminate against the majority. White privilege has been transformed through the ages into an embarrassment, a setback, and a barrier. Contrary to what society has deemed it as white privilege is a hindrance for those whom it consumes and burdens future opportunities in life.
One of these instances is prominent through the process of college admission. Seniors all over the country are currently or already have been starting their college applications and the countless hours it takes to settle on the school of their choosing; However, this process is biased and discriminatory. During the application process, students have endless opportunities for financial aid whether it be scholarships, grants, or the infamous FAFSA application. All of these are supposedly accessible to all students; consequently, students of racial backgrounds are offered many more financial aid opportunities than those with white skin. In an interview with a student of a racial minority, she revealed that she has “received over $4,000 in scholarships for identifying with a racial ethnicity,” (Smith). While students should be rewarded for taking pride in their racial heritage, few scholarships are offered for students that identify as Caucasian. Smith went on further explaining that “It can be taken the wrong way in some cases, especially since [she is] adopted,” (Smith). While there are occasional strictly white scholarships, they are often closed after a short time as they are not always seen as ethically right. According to Mark Kantrowitz, “most Caucasian-restricted scholarship programs do not survive for more than a few years,” (Kantrowitz 2). White students should be rewarded for being proud of their race just as much as any other racial student is.
Another instance in the discrimination of whites in the college admission process is the presence of a racial minority percentage for admitted students. In today’s society, this is just one of many occurrences where humanity is so fearful to be discriminatory, that they only focus on those of a minority and they actually disregard the majority altogether. Colleges and universities alike have a minority percentage in their admission process. This first started after Brown v. Board of Education in 1954 in efforts to increase the diversity on college campuses. While this idea had good intentions, universities in the mid-1980s found themselves struggling with this idea, since “fewer than 4,200 black high-school graduates had grade-point averages of 3.75 or better,” (Bunzel 50). Colleges were so intentional about being diversified that “‘special consideration’ [was] shown to certain ethnic minority groups, and that membership in such a minority group [could] be an important factor in whether a candidate is chosen over others who may have better academic credentials,” (Bunzel 50). While this may not still be the case 40 years later, the desire for diversification on college campuses is still present. In the 2003 court case, Grutter v. Bollinger, a Caucasian female student was denied acceptance into the University of Michigan Law School and she claimed that this was a result of their new admission process; The school admitted that its admission process favored certain minority groups in efforts to maintain diversity. The Court ruled it unconstitutional for a points-based admissions system that awarded an automatic bonus to the admissions scores of minority applicants, (Grutter v. Bollinger). This, however, is not nationwide criteria. It is still constitutional for colleges to use race when considering applicants in their admission process and is therefore discriminatory to caucasian students.
Those who do not believe in reverse racism or the belief that whites cannot be discriminated against typically result back to the age of slavery. Many will say that it is impossible to be racist against white people because of the oppression they provoked on racial minorities due to their elite social ranking. There are many claims that whites did not and still do not have to work hard to obtain success, and that this success was cultivated purely because of the color of their skin. The antithetical idea that privilege creates an immunity to the hardships in life is an aged, ignorant concept. All people, regardless of race, are not resistant to adversity. “A Lady of Reason” brings up the point that many minorities forget about white history: “Many white Americans came from impoverished immigrants who came [to America] with nothing. They faced prejudice from the people already [in America], and had to build themselves up from the ground,” (“The White Man’s Burden: White Privilege,” 2018). She further goes on to explain that they had “No handouts, no welfare, no leg up in society to achieve. However, many did through their own determination and grit, not crying victim and demanding to be accommodated . . .” and that the “‘privileges’ their descendants have were earned through honest hard work and sweat,” (“The White Man’s Burden: White Privilege,” 2018.) Today’s society must end this idea that skin color determines how successful one can be in life.
In society alone, white people are censored in their words, their actions, and their beliefs; “Being white means you can’t tell certain jokes, say certain things, do certain things, wear certain things, etc… You can only have the “right” opinions, or else you’re labeled a bigot and a racist, or even white supremacist,” (“The White Man’s Burden: White Privilege,” 2018). History has made it difficult for Caucasians to live with their race and has forced them to explain the actions of their ancestors. It has made them live with the constant shadow of racism that they have to be cautious in the way that they talk just to be sure that they are not being racist. According to a poll taken from NPR, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, “More than half of white Americans say they believe discrimination against white people exists in the U.S. today,” (Gonyea). This topic is not very talked-about due to its sensitivity among citizens; however, it should be surfaced more to show the public that white privilege is not what minorities make it out to be.
By no means should white people be pitied for the challenges they face in life because of their race, as others have faced many more difficulties; however, those other races should also not disregard the troubles that whites had to face many years ago and even into today. Many have defined white privilege to be an immunity to the many hardships that come with life, and that the successes that white people receive are solely connected to their social ranking. Society is changing every day as should the definitions of words that have historical significance. Racism is the discrimination of any race regardless of social rank. Caucasian is a race and can, therefore, be a victim to prejudice. In the college admission process, racism is predominantly present through available scholarships as well as the use of a minority percentage for admitted students. White privilege should not be seen as a gift or an exemption to misfortunes, rather, it should be seen as a burden to those who fall under the title.
Works cited:
A Lady of Reason. “The White Man’s Burden: White Privilege.” A Lady of Reason, 2 July 2018,aladyofreason.wordpress.com/2018/07/02/the-white-mans-burden-white-privilege/.
Bhopal, Kalwant. “White Privilege.” Google Books, Google, 2018, books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=2v9oDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR1&dq=white%2Bprivilege%2Bis%2Ba%2Bmyth&ots=m8ZIJ9dhah&sig=qZBv5vHsjv3jy4-zkTpF7CJYutA#v=onepage&q=white%20privilege%20is%20a%20myth&f=false.
Bunzel, J.H. “Black and White at Stanford.” Public interest, no. 105, Fall 1991, pp. 61-77. EBSCOhost, www.search.ebscohost.com/login.aspz?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,custuid&custid=infohio&db=aph&AN=9201200849&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Bunzel, John H. “Race and College Admissions.” Public Interest, no. 122, Winter 1996, pp. 49–58. EBSCOhost, www.search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,custuid&custid=infohio&db=aph&AN=9605024252&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Frey, William H. “The US Will Become ‘Minority White’ in 2045, Census Projects.” Brookings, Brookings, 10 Sept. 2018,www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2018/03/14/the-us-will-become-minority-white-in-2045-census-projects/.
Gonyea, Don. “Majority Of White Americans Say They Believe Whites Face Discrimination.” NPR, NPR, 24 Oct. 2017,www.npr.org/2017/10/24/559604836/majority-of-white-americans-think-theyre-discriminated-against.
Kantrowitz, Mark. “The Distribution of Grants and Scholarships by Race.” Racialequitytools.org, 2 Sept. 2011, www.racialequitytools.org/resourcefiles/Distributionracescholarships.pdf.
White privilege in accordance to Peggy McIntosh’s “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” is “unseen and unconscious advantages that whites are taught not to recognise”. White privilege is a legacy and root to racism with an ability to influence systemic decisions in an often unbeknownst nature (Collins 2018). Quite frequently, white privilege brings airs of entitlement that is subliminal to the individual; this is due to what McIntosh explains as whites being taught to think of their lives as average, yet ideal resulting in racial bias and entitlement. It is this notion of white privilege that lies at the core of cultural appropriation in music, most prominently in genres with African American origins such as rap and hip-hop. Artist, Iggy Azalea is a prominent focal point of offensive and unapologetic white privilege in her culturally appropriated rap music. This is paralleled against other white artists such as Katy Perry, who has demonstrated acknowledgement of offensive sentiments in her culturally appropriated music. Emphasising the salience of Iggy Azalea as an example of white hegemony.
Literature Review
Rap and hip-hop originates from urban African American experiences, predominantly in the 1960’s. The vernacular of African American English (AAE) is laced throughout the lyrical properties of the genre, to express inherent identities (Eberhardt et. al). Iggy Azalea is a white Australian rapper, singer and songwriter who emerged onto the musical scene in 2011, with an overzealous incorporation of AAE in her compositions. It is argued by Eberhardt et. al. that Iggy Azalea’s success is a combination of African American cultural appropriation and privilege that is associated with being white. In Azalea’s case, there is extensive use of general AAE vernacular features such as multiple negation “I don’t want none” and the preterite ‘ain’t’ “I ain’t even graduate”. There is extensive evidence of the African American lexicon in Azalea’s lyrics, relying heavily on AAE slang to hold up her renditions of the rap genre. This is exemplified through her use of the AAE inherent word “thick”, describing a curvaceous female; “Damn she is too thick” (Azalea – New Bitch).
Azalea’s use of this language draws attention to the issue of white privilege in music. The word “thick” is used to grant prerogative to a body type not commonly idolised and desired in mainstream media, and relating to African American women (Eberhardt et. al). Thick is AAE vernacular that sexualises a woman’s rear with implied desirability. Iggy Azalea uses this word in the same context to place desirability on herself, which is an offensive expression to adopt as a white female. Black women use “thick” to empower themselves from a position of historical oppression, undesirability and seldom representation in the media. Azalea’s adoption of this term displays her air of ignorance to the African American experience, and in turn becomes a focal point of white privilege by doing so. This is evident in an interview for the British times ‘what was the biggest obstacle to becoming rap’s next big thing: being white, being female or from Australia?’, Azalea responds ‘Being from Australia, by far…Everybody loves a pretty white girl. This clearly demonstrates her stance on white rap but cannot analyse what whiteness mean in the rap world, missing crucial opportunity to engage in dialogue about race in the U.S (Ware).
One of the most extreme examples of Iggy Azalea’s blatant disregard for the African American experience and racial tensions in the U.S is in her lyrics “When it really starts I’m a runaway slave master” (Azalea – D.R.U.G.S). This horrific reference to the salve trade brought waves of criticism, and brought serious attention to her place in the hip-hop industry. Let this instance stand for all other cases of insensitivity toward African African culture, Azalea failed to reconcile or show any form of concern for the effect of her actions. Her lack of understanding for the permanent scar the slave trade has left on the country emphasises her “Figurative Blackface”; a means of simulating black culture (Finegan) as a stage aesthetic to contribute to her success. Eberhart et. al states “Everybody wants to be back until it’s time to be black’, this encapsulates the essence of white privilege and Iggy Azalea. When 18 year old African American Michale Brown was shot by a white police officer, high profile musicians including Azalea, who incorporate “Figurative blackface” into their image we’re silent throughout the protest. When a brutal reality in the African American experience emerges “whites shed such behaviours when it suits them… Whites do not suffer the oppression of systemic racism in the U.S., but rather benefit from its … structures” (Smitherman).
Katy Perry is a white, American, singer-songwriter and has been caught in the cultural appropriation cross fire in regards to outfit choices associated with her stage aesthetic. Her music video “This how we do”, received backlash for the use of cornrows in her hair, inherent to African American culture. During the 19th century following the abolition of slavery in the U.S, African American women felt the pressure to adjust themselves cosmetically to fit into the mainstream cosmetic ideals, ‘Black people felt compelled to smoothen their hair … camouflage almost,” (Lynch). In the 60’s, the afro became a symbol of rebellion and black pride “an assertion of black identity” (Jahangir). Perry, in a polarising fashion to Azalea accepted her insensitivity and potential effect on the Black community in a public apology and reconciliation “I was told about the power of Black women’s hair, and how beautiful it is, and the struggle. And I listened, and I heard, and I didn’t know. And I will never understand some of those things because of who I am. But I can educate myself, and that’s what I’m trying to do along the way,”. This shows Perry disabling her historical white hegemony to show respect for integrity and depth of other cultures.
Perry was accused of repeat offending when in 2013, she performed “Unconditionally” dressed as a Japanese Geisha. She borrowed Japanese culture to express an aesthetic of submissive love (Oh). Perry is quoted as saying, “I was thinking about unconditional love, and I was thinking: Geishas are basically, like, the masters of loving unconditionally”. The costume was a hybridisation of the traditional Geisha kimono, with Perry’s sporting thigh high slits on both sides, an extremely synched obi, and a cut out above her breast to accentuate her breasts. Oh suggests the image is reminiscent of Suzie Wong, a submissive prostitute. The hybridised costume was not only insensitive, she as a white woman looked ‘unnatural’ in it, bordering on a parody (Oh). In response to this backlash Perry repented “I will never understand some of those things because of who I am. But I can educate myself, and that’s what I’m trying to do along the way.” While Perry thought she was appreciating Japanese culture, her lack of understanding for the origins of her chosen performance theme spilled into white privilege. She acknowledged this is response to a BuzzFeed reporter questioning whether she understood the implications of her actions and peoples anger, “Yes, I have lots of white privilege” (Perry).
When the two words “white privilege” is uttered, I immediately resort to thinking derogatory thoughts of those who have a special immunity based on being a white person. White privilege has been oppressive dating back to the 1600s until the 1800s when slavery was formally abolished by the thirteenth amendment, to the present day. The obstacle is faced by persons of color to be subjected to unjust hardships and constraints whether it be under social, political, or economic circumstances. As McIntosh says, “I can think over many options, social, political, imaginative or professional, without asking whether a person of my race would be accepted or allowed to do what I want to do.” This is an example of how domineering white privilege can be. As a white person, Mcintosh said this has turned out to be the opposite of privilege and instead “an elusive and fugitive subject” creating this burden to avoid it at all costs. Although white privilege affects those of the minority race, this unearned power also has negative drawbacks to those who recognize the oppressive reality and want to separate themselves. These two examples are a small percentage of the bigger piece that contributes to white privilege oppression.
A positive daily effect of white privilege that I experience is being recognized as a model minority where it’s perceived that members of these demographics have higher education leading to socioeconomic success and a chance low criminality. It can be borderline stereotyping, however, this action can result less of a chance that my financial responsibility will be questioned whether I use checks, credit cards, or cash as a form of payment, a higher probability that my neighbors will be more pleasant towards me or that I can be sure that I will not be followed or harassed while shopping alone. A negative daily effect of white privilege that affects me is going to the local grocery store and not finding staple foods that fit with my cultural traditions or find a hairstylist that can work with my type of hair. Most grocery stores have a small section dedicated to ethnic foods, but it’s not comparable to the full selection at the supermarkets in Orange County where there’s a larger population of people of my culture. My natural hair is very dark, thick, and the process of coloring is not easy so I cannot walk into any salon and instead need to travel to a hairstylist that specializes in Asian hair. Grocery stores and hair salons are in essence, a few items amongst many in the invisible knapsack. These are micro advantages that do not apply to all, thus creating a larger gap and allowing white privilege to prevail.
The idea of earned strength is more or less similar to getting a college degree by working hard to receive that merit to open up a larger pool of career opportunities. Unearned power can range from being a far more favorable applicant being white as opposed to an African American applicant by employers or getting relocated to work the front desk versus the back based on the lighter complexion of your skin tone. As McIntosh said “power from unearned privilege can look like strength when it is in fact permission to escape or dominate” lays out how you can get away with surpassing whether it be in education or workplace.
Although white privilege is an undisclosed and transparent preference that is often difficult to recognize, it needs to be learned about, discussed and address starting in the education system. With this new knowledge on white privilege and the extremities, I plan on educating not only myself, but expand my knowledge to others around me that there are two sides just like for McIntosh. The side where you’re reaping the advantages of white privilege and fighting the oppression that following follows with the benefits. I want to eliminate the power of bashing white privilege that we (a person of color) may feel entitled to since we’re only committing the same offense. Moving forward, mindful reframing is a technique I will utilize on navigating white privilege.
You’re on your way to work, going over your notes in your head. You’ve been planning this presentation for weeks, and you feel the utmost prepared. You wore your lucky socks just for the added luck, but you really don’t need it. You got this. But in reality, you don’t. You will not get the job. You definitely won’t get the raise. You will never be fully respected by your boss. You will never be the face of the company. You will never amount to your colleagues and competitors. Simply because you will never be White. White privilege is something that can no longer be avoided in our American society. It is real and quite prevalent. White privilege is a feeling, an ideology, a social status, and for some, a gift. It is used to segregate Whites from other races, but not in the way African Americans were segregated from Whites. White privilege allows oneself to “move up” financially, politically, academically, and socially. It is a form of power that has developed into the oppression described as classism, and it is dividing our nation not only in the workforce but in classrooms as well. We teach children to strive to do their best and we discourage them from working at McDonald’s, collecting welfare, having a baby with a good for nothing baby daddy. We engrave this classist mindset and groom them to think they need to be the best just based off their social status. If we have white privilege, why don’t we refer to “ black privilege” or “asian privilege”? If “White trash” is the best we can come up with, why do other races have much more offensive derogatory terms? Contrary to popular belief, white privilege is very real in today’s society and allows white Americans to have a leg up financially, politically, and academically, as well as how there is a divide amongst the privileged white community and the so-called white trash, and how we’re grooming the future generations to become severely classist.
Regardless if you’re white and homeless, or white and on the cover of Forbes Magazine, you’ve experienced white privilege. Think of when you walk into a store and all the products have pictures of white models and are targeted to white males and females, when you go to ask for a bandaid and it clearly doesn’t match your skin color even though the box says “flesh toned”, or how when you turn on your tv you don’t say to yourself, wow look, there’s a white man on tv! This privilege is like an invisible cloak that shields white people from seeing the very obvious, but hardly recognized, day to day life advantages that White male and females experience.
In the course of my research journey, delving into white privilege essays, I’ve come to a clearer understanding. There is something to be clarified. Pointing out white privilege, is not racist. However, white privilege exists due to a long history of racial bias. Matthew Clair and Jeffrey S. Denis help define racism and white privilege. “They believe racial bias is a belief, and racism is what happens when that belief is turned to action”(Collins, Teaching Tolerance). For example, a person who crosses the street simply because they won’t want to walk next to a group of black men, someone calling 911 reporting a black person when they are clearly causing no harm, or a federal agency investigating black and Latino activists rather than our very own KKK. On the other hand, white privilege is a tricky two word situation. The word privilege is suggesting one has never struggled, which is why many poor white Americans argue they haven’t experienced such a thing. It needs to be viewed as a “built in” advantage, not based on one’s level of income and effort (Collins). It has been argued that white privilege is a complicated truth. It’s unconsciously being enjoyed, and also criticized. It is important to recognize and acknowledge that even if you’re white and trying to bring attention to the subject matter to prove the minds of the ignorant wrong, you’re still experiencing white privilege.
The ability to become rich has been a privilege that white folks have experienced since the beginning of history. “In 2014, the Pew Research Center released a report that revealed the median net worth of a white household was $141,900; for black and Hispanic households, that dropped to $11,000 and $13,700, respectively. The gap is huge, and the great “equalizers” don’t narrow it”(Collins). This gap however, relies on inheritance- wealth passed down to their future generations. “When white families are able to accumulate wealth because of their earning power or home value, they are more likely to support their children into early adulthood, helping with expenses such as a college education, first cars and first homes. The cycle continues”(Collins). This is a privilege denied to many families of color. After World War II, when the G.I. Bill provided white veterans with a “straight shot” to the middle class, racist zoning laws segregated towns and cities with sizeable populations of people of color—from Baltimore to Birmingham, from New York to St. Louis, from Louisville to Oklahoma City, to Chicago, to Austin, and in cities beyond and in between.(Collins).
Not only are we seeing that white privilege gives White Americans a leg up financially, and academically, but we most definitely see it in our political system. For instance, you would think if a man got caught raping a woman regardless of his skin color and ethnicity, he would get the proper and rightful punishment. Sadly, that was not the case with Brock Turner, the Stanford racist. Brock Turner was released from prison on Sept. 2, 2016, three months into his six-month sentence for three counts of sexual assault (Sojo). In 2015, Turner was at a frat party when he was caught by two graduate students sexually assaulting an unconscious woman behind a dumpster. His case caught major headlines due to the incredible amount of leniency given to him. His father at one point said that any jail time “was a steep price to pay for twenty minutes of action”(Sojo). Hearing that is actually unbelievable and quite repulsive. Turner faced up to fourteen years, the DA wanted six years, he was only sentenced to six months, but ended up walking out in three. In media, they kept referring to Turner as an athlete due to his competitive swimming record. In 2016, Asian American college freshman Kyle Vo, had a similar situation and was given six years in prison, Cory Batey, a black college freshman, faced three counts of sexual assault and recieved the “mandatory” mininum sentence to fifteen to twenty five years(Sojo). In fact, the same judge in Turner’s case who decided a six month sentence was enough in order to not ruin his future and athletic career, issued a three year sentence to Raul Ramirez, a Latino immigrant with an almost identical case. Brock Turner’s case has white privilege written all over it. Another court case that blatantly pulled the “white card” dealt with Felicity Huffman, former Desperate Housewives star. Huffman was involved in the college admissions scandal, and paid $15,000 to increase her daughter’s SAT score. She received the whooping sentence of fourteen days in prison, a $30,000 fine, and 250 hours of community service(CNN). Huffman committed a serious crime and got a “slap on the wrist”. What does that say about our judicial system? That it is racially corrupt and biased.
Some may ask how white privilege can be prominent in classrooms. In an interview with Terry Jess, an anti-racist, white educator, who is wanting to spread social justice and racial justice within the classrooms says, “it’s not about who is more or less racist. It’s understanding we are all impacted by a racialized society. We have been conditioned to believe and behave in certain ways. It’s not your fault you grew up in the system, but it is your responsibility to challenge that system and overcome that implicit bias yourself”(Jess). He explains that this work needs to be done and that we’re in the next wave of the civil rights movement. We have a chance to rectify centuries of systemic oppression in education. Most importantly, anyone who believes in this work needs to put in the effort. However, some ask should we be educating students about white privilege? Sometimes teachers feel reluctant to discuss the topic of race, especially if they are teaching in an all or mainly white community. Teachers may fear pushback from administrators and parents who feel they shouldn’t talk about it at all. The term “white privilege” can make students feel uncomfortable and anxious due to the lack of understanding. However, if students are going to engage in conversations about race, privilege needs to be a key point. The goal of addressing white privilege is not to make students feel guilty for who they are or defensive about what they’re not, but the goal should be to help students understand and analyze issues of power and privilege as they relate to racism (ADL). One way to start the conversation is to talk with students about the ways bias exists in everyday life. Explain that bias can impact people in two ways: by discriminating against some or advantaging others, depending on race or other aspects of identity(ADL).
A popular reaction to white privilege arguments includes claims such as , if you don’t talk about racism it’ll go away, I’ve never experienced it so it must not be true, and the classic response, aren’t there more important things to worry about? Talking about race can make one feel uncomfortable, especially if they themselves are white but yet they’ve never had slaves or used the ‘N’ word. Not talking about it or acknowledging it can make one feel more content. We all have different lives and choose different paths to take so how can your oppression be true if I’ve never experienced it? Just because you don’t believe in white privilege doesn’t mean your a bad person. You could donate to charities, volunteer, and be a law abiding citizen. It doesn’t matter if you don’t believe in the inequity among our country because you’re doing other things that matter, you’re not considered a bad person. We’ve dealt with race since the beginning of civilization and the U.S. has done several things to make sure everyone is considered equal such as abolishing slavery, allowing anyone regardless of race and color to vote, and implied the civil rights act. It’s time to move on to bigger issues that haven’t been solved yet, we’ve already taken care of the race issue in America(Johnson). While one may bring up these claims, and relate to them, they don’t make sense. For example, if you find out your partner has been having scandalous affairs, do you not confront them and hope they just stop being unfaithful? Let me know how that works out for you in the long run. I’ll never understand why people like to cliff dive. I don’t understand the thrill and would never do it myself, but that doesn’t mean if someone told me their experience with cliff diving, that I would say, “ I don’t understand how you would like such a thing, so you’re lying”. This is a common retaliation towards the topic of race.
You may be asking yourself, how can someone use their white privilege to benefit all races? First of all, don’t feel guilt or take on this feeling of needing to defend yourself. It’s counterproductive. When other races use their voices to speak up about their oppressions, we as white people, as hard as it may be, need to zip it and listen. Use your privilege to help get their voices heard. Share their work and give credit to fellow races on social media. If you hear someone being racist, regardless of the race, speak up, and if the opportunity arises to educate a white male or female about race, then do so. Most importantly, you need to be educating yourself. We have more access than ever before that allows oneself to get a reality check and to self educate. It is time to stop being ignorant and ignoring the fact that white privilege does exist, whether you believe it is a good ideology or not. We need to do a better job at teaching the younger generation that yes, terrible, racist things were done in the past, but how can we create a more equal tomorrow? How can we treat everyone fairly and with the same opportunities regardless of race and skin color? We need to acknowledge that there is a form of privilege that oppresses other races financially, academically, politically, and throughout everyday life. When we can walk into a store and see a variety of products targeted to all types of people, see ads with more inclusivity, see more diversity on TV, feel like you did get the job not based on your skin color or race, is when we can stop talking about the oppression other races face. Until then, we have a lot of work to do.
Through my research and examination of white privilege essay examples, I’ve come to realize that to decide whether White privilege is useful as a concept, requires an understanding of the term. Kendall (2002) defines white privilege as an ‘institutional (rather than personal) set of benefits granted to those of us who, by race, resemble the people who dominate the powerful positions in our institutions.’ This definition takes into account several aspects of white privilege which can help us determine its usefulness. White privilege is typically viewed as a progressive phenomenon as it explicitly acknowledges the unearned benefits granted to White people based on a hierarchy of racism, but arguably has only just sustained the racism. From my research, I have found a lack of positive response post-exposure to privilege, which begs the question, who is it useful for? On the one hand, the concept is useful for everyone to identify that there are wider structures responsible for racial inequalities in western society. On the other hand, it is useless for white people, if used to make themselves appear self-reflective and egalitarian, without constructively reforming the structures that create and maintain the privilege. After all, the concept of white privilege was mentioned in earlier works from Black scholars such as W.E.B Du Bois’ ‘Black Reconstruction in America’ (1935), but only rose to the surface when a White person, Peggy McIntosh wrote about it in ‘White Privilege and Male Privilege: A Personal Account of Coming to See Correspondences Through Work in Women’s Studies.’ This in itself is a privilege of white people to have a voice valued more than the voices of people from ethnic minority backgrounds, especially when it directly affects them the most. The fact that most of the popular works were written by White people, and will subsequently be discussed in my essay, is a perpetuation of this. The issue of positionality is crucial to the discourse of white privilege. I will explore these aspects in this essay.
White privilege is useful to an extent for providing a label to express that white people have advantages over non-whites. Kendall’s use of the word ‘granted’ in her definition certifies the myth of meritocracy, indicating that success is not based on talent, rather it is based on race. The ‘American Dream’ (Adams 1931) promotes individualism and personal responsibility, perpetuating the belief that those who succeed in the socio-economic hierarchy rightfully deserve their place there. This is a disillusioned explanation as it ignores structural factors, which Bourgois highlights in the conclusion of his ethnographic study ‘In Search of Respect’, in the context of Puerto Ricans in New York. Internalising the idea that privilege is institutional, rather than personal, is one way that white privilege can be used effectively, as it acknowledges that there are wider issues to consider, working beyond an interpersonal level. Acknowledgement is one step, but the progress comes from activism.
A crucial element to disabling White privilege, insinuated in Kendall’s definition, is representation. The overwhelming over-representation of White people in political positions is pivotal to the prolonging of White privilege. Not only because they are predominantly the decision-makers, implementing policies and laws that best reflect and protect the interests of themselves, Romano (2017) additionally points out that, ‘In a society that sees casual racism among its most powerful leaders, white people can ignore the power of racism all around, or they can choose to acknowledge and confront it.’ This statement argues that the concept of white privilege is targeted towards an audience of white people, as they are the ones with the power to change it. Whether they actually do this is something I will discuss more thoroughly later in this essay. Moreover, many of the examples in McIntosh’s ‘Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack’ involve this idea of racial belonging. Another example she gives is, ‘I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.’ White actors were even granted opportunities to play characters from ethnic minority backgrounds, such as Mickey Rooney and his excruciating performance in Breakfast at Tiffany’s (1961). What makes me question the usefulness of white privilege as a concept is that, even in attempts to reduce its power, it emerges in other forms. For example, the rise of tokenism in the media is, in my opinion, another variant of white privilege. White directors can choose to throw in non-White actors wherever they please to appear more ‘diverse’, however this feels more like commoditisation/fetishisation than inclusivity. The view that the slow recognition of people of colour in valued positions is an indicator to the end of white privilege, is a rose-tinted one.
White privilege is rooted in colonialism and imperialism; from the Trans-Atlantic slave trade to the expansion of the British Empire. The argument that white privilege ended along with postcolonialism, is a wishful, hollow point of view. The control asserted upon oppressed minority groups by White people today, as a continuation of imperialist ideologies, is known as neo-colonialism. ‘When I am told about our national heritage or about ‘civilization,’ I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.’ (McIntosh 1988), is relevant to the ethnocentrism of the curriculum, teaching children biased histories where the British and Americans are painted as heroes. The philosophy of the ‘Manifest Destiny’ (O’Sullivan 1845), that White Americans have a God-given right to that land, is still deeply embedded in some minds, justifying white privilege. The dismissal of colonialism in education is a privilege that White people have not to teach. Meanwhile, groups like the Native Americans see their history told in a diluted, distorted and inaccurate manner. This is also reflected in the ‘well-documented attempts to ‘white-ify’ people of colour through the assigning and promotion of ‘white’ names.(e.g. changing Latonya to Tonya)’ (Kinloch 2007; Souto-Manning 2011). Miller (2014) says that this is done to suit the comfort and convenience of the teachers. Now that the concept of white privilege is fairly distributed in western societies, why is this same comfort still not being given to the students whose cultures have been butchered by their teachers and other supposed role models? A simple change of the curriculum to provide multiple perspectives for children to then be able to decide for themselves and not be decided for is a major step towards dismantling white privilege.
It is counterproductive to acknowledge white privilege without following up with action (Hobbs 2018). For White people, their actions are rarely attributed to their whole race, rather they are taken as personal traits (McIntosh). The assumption that there is such a thing as a ‘racial’ trait, implies some kind of involuntary, genetic explanation for behaviour. Although much less common now, race science was used to discuss why Black people were ‘scientifically less developed’ than White people. Firmin’s ‘The Equality of the Races’, written as a rebuttal to De Gobineau’s ‘The Inequality of the Races’ removes the myth that there is a biological distinction between races, especially seeing as race is a social construct. One reason to explain why these distinctions were made, is the concept of ‘Normative Whiteness’ (McIntosh). Normative Whiteness is the existence of White people being seen as the ‘default’, it is normal to be White and everyone else is different. The White race is non-raced (Dyer), it is not seen as a racial identity (McIntosh). An ethnographic example of the invisibility of Whiteness is exhibited in Miller’s (2014) research on her children’s responses to learning about race. Her daughter Ella reported that the skin colour of the character in the book she was reading was white – ‘[The book] would have told us if she were not white.’ Miller sees this an automatic default to whiteness. Normative whiteness is even advertised in the commercial world, where the colour of plasters, for example, vastly caters to the skin tones of White people, whereas a darker-skinned person may have to request products to match theirs. This concept links to DiAngelo’s argument on universalism. White people see themselves outside of culture and as objective beings. They see themselves as representative of the entire human race. This is particularly problematic in societal institutions such as healthcare and education, because the development of certain medicines, diagnoses or assessments are not necessarily applicable to people from other cultures. Though there has been some change, like the widened range of darker-coloured makeup products, this understanding could have been used to implement a number of policies in public sectors, to accommodate a wider range of people. Hobbs argues, ‘Actions should attempt to not only mitigate personal racism and racial insensitivities, but be the catalyst to address the impact of this privilege gap…..Failure to follow recognition with action in the personal exploration of concepts such as white privilege can inadvertently support assumptions that these advantages are only cast upon you and not in some part of your own making’. The lingering question is, what have White people done to sacrifice their privilege, if at all?
Harry Brod states, ‘One is always in the system. The only question is whether one is part of the system in a way that challenges or strengthens the status quo. Privilege is not something I take and which therefore have the option of not taking.’ I have found that, on the whole, white people tend to strengthen the status quo, as opposed to challenging it, whether it is intentional or not. ‘[We participate] in the purposeful construction of a system that deflates the value of one people’s culture while inflating the value of another’s’ (Kendall 2002). Jilani (2019) notes that teaching social liberals about white privilege does not always have the desired effect, according to Cooley’s research. The discovery of White privilege and its consequences often trigger a fear in White people of eliminating racism, as if it is a matter of life or death – ‘We will always be here.’ This in itself is complicit in extending the elevated position of Whites. The most common response is cloaking their privilege by denying it is advantageous (Phillips and Lowery). Murdoch and McAloney‑Kocaman found that exposure to white privilege among UK residents has shown they report greater levels of personal hardships, deeming it useless as a concept as they victimise themselves instead. Through my research, this appeared to be a recurring response – the downplaying of the power of White privilege. White privilege has become a norm for many Caucasians, to just be accepted. Kendall (2002) writes, ‘Once a particular perspective is built into law, it becomes part of “the way things are.”’ This is usually the idea that the law is fair and therefore should be abided by, except that, in actuality, the law has a hidden agenda which favours the rights of Whites over everyone else. Harvey Cox’s statement in The Secular City, “Not to decide is to decide”. By not taking a stance, one automatically becomes complicit in allowing these ideologies to continue. This statement also invokes the saying ‘ignorance is bliss.’ Starkey (2017) argues that ignorance becomes a tool of racial domination. ‘By denying the unfairness, white folk never have to confront it.’ Phillips 2016 conducted a set of experiments to see if participants, when given the chance, would sacrifice their advantages after privilege had been exposed. He found that participants instead continued to use their advantages to achieve success. If they instead used their advantages to close racial inequality gaps, I would argue white privilege was a useful concept. However, DiAngelo writes about a concept called ‘White Fragility’ which is ‘a state in which even a minimum amount of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves.’ Defence mechanisms are yet another example of victimisation, instead of recognising the hardships faced by people of colour. DiAngelo expands saying, ‘Whites have not had to build tolerance for racial discomfort and thus when racial discomfort arises, whites typically respond as if something is “wrong,” and blame the person or event that triggered the discomfort (usually a person of color).’ This avoidance of accountability diverts attention away from the deeper issue at hand.
Even in attempts to alleviate racial tensions, models like the ‘White Saviour’ complex argue that it is more for validation than to help the less fortunate. This is inadvertent racism because White volunteers will often see themselves as heroic, and others will praise them rather than focussing on the actual work being done. Kendall (2002) captured this ideology in her article, ‘We expect and often receive appreciation for showing up at “their” functions…If we aren’t thanked profusely by people of color, we give up because we feel unappreciated’. This quote perfectly encapsulates the idea that White people tend to help disadvantaged ethnic minority groups to feel good about themselves and emit this angelic image to their inner circles. If they do not receive the desired response, their work feels unworthy. In Arlie Hochschild’s book ‘Strangers in Their Own Land’, a majority of the White-middle class were hostile towards ‘black folk, other minorities, immigrants and refugees’ for ‘cutting ahead of them in line’ (Starkey 2017). However, ‘they never question why they should occupy the first position. That implicit assumption — I should be tended to before all others — encapsulates how they view white privilege as natural and invisible’ (Starkey 2017). DiAngelo’s article cites Collins (2000) who says that, due to segregation, ‘white interests and perspectives are almost always central. An inability to see or consider significance in the perspectives of people of color results.’ A common response is that ‘white privilege’ is too broad and doesn’t take into account the working-class, gender differences and so on. Bourgois addresses this through the differences between Black and White heroin users in acquiring jobs in ‘In Search of Respect’. Despite living on the same streets, they are practically in different worlds. Throughout my essay, the emphasised centrality of white people in western societies has been revealed and therefore this must be one of the main factors to address in order to eliminate white privilege. But this is a contradiction in and of itself, because the notion of a ‘White’ privilege further places white people in the centre of these discussions.
Whilst researching this topic, I noticed a lack of research concerning privileges given to people who ‘pass’ as white but are not ethnically Caucasian. The complication of phenotype is an idea that interests me but seems to be neglected. It brings into question, ‘what is whiteness?’ Zeus Leonardo defines whiteness as ‘a racial discourse, whereas the category ‘white people’ represents a socially constructed identity, usually based on skin color.’ Colourism is yet another, more complex, phenomenon to be discussed, as privilege was given based off of a ‘one-drop’ policy. This broadens the spectrum of ‘whiteness’ and privilege, and therefore my essay is not a holistic view of how privilege operates.
The umbrella question here is, should white privilege be eliminated if it can be used to eradicate racial inequality? Some may argue yes because it still contributes to the cyclical nature of White racial power/domination. Others may argue no because, when a person of colour brings up race as an issue, white people tend to feel personally attacked, whereas, White people ‘can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking’ (McIntosh). It is seen as more valid, because it supposedly does not affect them, therefore it must be objective and worth listening to. This is a tale as old as time, where issues have been addressed by people of colour and all of a sudden a White person relays the message and it suddenly becomes important. The silencing of dialogue prevents the social change needed to reform these racial structures. It starts with White people, not only because they are the ones who created this privilege, or because they are in a position of power to amend these wrongdoings, but because they must sacrifice their privileges for real progress to occur. It is not my job as a person of colour, to decide how they can do this. This assumption that, to criticise, one must have a solution, just adds to the burden that ethnic minorities already carry, when it is not us who need to put in the work to repair what has been broken. After all, people of colour are rarely heard by the people who should be listening. Brod made clear that, no matter how noble his intentions are as a White person, he will continue to have this privilege unless he changes the institutions which gave it to him. The same can be said for the authors of these articles, most of whom are Caucasian. What is the purpose of their articles? How did they contribute to reforming the structures that sustain white privilege? In conclusion, White privilege is only useful as a concept, depending on what is done with it. It is not enough to simply recognise White Privilege. From what has been debated in my essay, I would not deem White privilege very useful as a concept, as there has evidently been more denial and victimisation, than reform as a result.
White privilege impacts the education system in many ways. It is known that colleges are mostly attended by white race. Colleges don’t want to be seen to discriminate so they allow a small percentage of their students be minority this includes black and hispanic students. Colleges often don’t spend time in enrolling any other race minorities and just focus on white students because they will get through graduation and focus in school. Education should be open to everyone equally and not have restrictions to those of other races. This essay will inform the reader how white privilege runs the education system giving those of a minority race be left behind without the same opportunities.
White Privilege in Education
When people talk about the United States societies instant thought is everyone is equal regardless of their race. Society runs under this belief knowing that not everyone has the same opportunities and minorities are the only ones facing this issue most importantly in the education system. Some people are born with privilege and some have to work for it even though it’s not the same. White people that already have privilege think that just because everyone has equal rights that “White privilege” isn’t an issue. In today’s society everyone thinks that race is not an issue anymore but this is all just being pushed behind and it’s referred to as color blindness.
White privilege is a really controversial issue and has two sides. The two sides of this issue are people think that they are at a disadvantage because of their race even culture and the other side is where white people get attacked because it’s not something they choose but something they were born with. White privilege is “the societal privilege that benefits white people over non-white people, particularly if they are otherwise under the same social, political, or economic circumstances”(dictionary). This privilege is not earned but already born with and is only to white people because of their skin color. This is not only a privilege but also the way people treat you and it puts everyone of color at a disadvantage in every situation.
The privilege of going to college or at least having an education is something everyone migrates to the United States for. Having the opportunity to have an education is everyone’s dream. The problem that comes in the education system is when only a certain amount of students get a higher privilege educating themselves. Being of color in this country is a disadvantage because schools are not looking at the students because of their skills and intelligence but most of the time they are looking for only of those white white skin making white privilege an argumental topic in the education system. Some of the issues that come towards white privilege is higher education for white students, academic courses, and an opportunity of graduating.
Racism is an influence in oppression in areas such as cultural, beliefs, and social structures that are disadvantages in privilege for those of color. “Much of the United States history embeds privilege for whites in access to higher education,” according to Smith(p.10, 2015). Making this affect the education process of admitting students of color into schools based on how they look and not about their passion to continue having an education. Colored people are at a disadvantage when racism and white privilege are combined. This is happening in institutions with higher education and its known of whites having the advantage to be successful academically compared to those of color.
“Race often remains invisible to the privileged white majority in academia, and racism in this setting is characteristically shrouded in rational discourse,” stated by Johnson Bailey and Cervero(p. 19, 2002). White privilege is so invisible to those who have this privilege and don’t acknowledge it and see how hard it is to those without it. People of color struggle on a daily basis to fit in a country that discriminates them everyday and having to deal with education stop them from their goals to become something better. Education should be available with the same equal opportunity no matter what you look like. It is thought that people with white skin have a better life and an easier way to reach their goals without them having to fight to get what they deserve. Having the idea that white students are more successful and have higher graduation rates just makes this topic even more of an issue because if everyone had the same privilege of an education it would show results that not only whites can be wealthy but people of color can do it to. A recent study found, “children whose parents are in the top 1 percentof earners are 77 times more likely to attend an Ivy League college than those whose parents are in the bottom income quintile”.
It is very important to examine this concept because we are supposed to be in a generation/ era where everyone is treated equal and has rights. With white privilege still happening on a daily basis, not just in education but in everything else puts everyone that does not fit the criteria to be in a disadvantage towards their futures. Everyone is always judging people of colored because they don’t have a decent job or because they are always asking for help from the government but they have no other option when they can’t even get a good education. They don’t get a good shot of a good education because colleges only take a certain number of colored students to attend colleges and the other ones are left out to figure it out themselves. No color person would ever have a chance to go to college when there is white students trying to get in the same college. Colleges are always trying to have their colleges be represented by whites.
If it’s not a college not accepting them it will always be a discrimination towards the minority. Let’s say they get accepted into a good college in most of the cases they will end up dropping off because of the privilege the white students have over them. If the professor is white then there will always be a preference towards the white students. This whole white privilege isn’t the problem but the way they take advantage of the system to get what they want and leaving the ones that are not like them behind to fail.
The education system should be using the opportunity to have a more diverse community between the school. As students of color try to fit in and adjust to this corrupt education system they are seen as not important. Their voices are not being heard, not because they are wrong but only because they don’t look a certain way and making it seem like contrary to education.
This then leads to the question “Is college worth it?”. When it comes to family it does because parents always want their kids to have the best education out there and if that’s going to the most expensive college parents will send their kids there. But on the other hand, for those that don’t have the money of that luxury to send their kids to an expensive college aren’t left to deal with is it worth it. Sometimes the students are the ones dropping off because there minds are on the side just because im not white then no college would accept me or because of my color I will get treated different. If you take a look at today’s society you would see minorities working in a fast food restaurant or a job that doesn’t require them to have a degree because they are just trying to adjust to this unfair life.
Structural racism is “The most prevalent form of racism because of how it pervades every level of society by incorporating the institutional, historical, cultural, and interpersonal practices within a society that perpetuate racial inequalities therefore evaluating society as a whole” (dictionary). White privilege is a great example of structural racism because it gives whites privilege while putting everyone of color in adverse outcomes. This started with laws in education system that created unequal rights. Higher education is offered to those that have the money and privilege to go to an expensive college where those who don’t have to deal with not having the same education and having less programs offered. Nothing should determine what classes or what education students get but the determination of the school. But this problem is just being faced with students of color and not having the opportunity the white skin students have in having an education.
In conclusion white privilege has been a big issue for years. Having privilege just because of the color of your skin has affected the minorities with opportunities. It leaves everyone but whites to try making a living with the leftovers. Colleges have to change the way their system works and making it an even platform for everyone to get admitted into the college of the students choice. White privilege has been an issue in the education system because it gives white students a better opportunity to have a brighter future while leaving those of color behind.
Baumgartner, L. M., & Johnson‐Bailey, J. (2010). Racism and white privilege in adult education graduate programs: Admissions, retention, and curricula. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2010(125), 27-40.
Smith, D. G. (2015). Diversity’s promise for higher education: Making it work. JHU Press
Have you ever heard of the term white privilege? In case you haven’t, or if you’re not sure what it is exactly, white privilege is all of the societal privileges that benefit white people and that non-white people do not experience. If you are white, your first thought might be to say, “Well, that’s not real. I don’t experience any special benefits that non-white people do not.” But it is real and you do. When you are watching a film, you are able to relate more to the people you are watching because you will share the same characteristics as most of them, such as having the same skin color. According to Racial Studies, it says “recent study showed that, out of 100 films made in 2012, white people accounted for about 76% of all speaking characters while people of color, put together, only accounted for about 23%.” When you fail at something in life, like getting a job or getting into college, you don’t stop and think, “Is it because of my race?” White privilege isn’t something that you enjoy having, or that you can necessarily control, but it is important to understand what white privilege is because it most definitely comes into play in our everyday life, including, and especially, news and other forms of media.
The media has, for as long as it’s existed, upheld white privilege while at the same time stereotyping people of color. The biggest way that the media, specifically the news, does this is how they advocate white people’s accomplishments the same way that they advocate alleged crimes by people of color. White people have the privilege of being treated as individual whose actions are not a reflection of their whiteness. In the book it talks about White privilege involves media treatment of terrorist or mass murderers. It says “When a white Norwegian man, Anders Behring Breivik, murdered seventy-seven people on July 22, 2011, the media immediately declared him a “lone wolf” (Fitzgerald, 37). The media pretty much said the act was committed by evil intentions and the guy was not a part of any terrorist group. Many white people were not hurt by his actions. On the other hand if the same act was committed by a different race, they would label it as a terrorist attack. If a guy from different race committed that same address, his whole community would have to pay for his actions. When we hear the word “thug” we automatically assume to African Americans. There has been a lot of cases in the history, where the white people have committed some terrorist attacks. White people did the school shootings and they were labeled as mental problems.
Many white Americans are living with the fear that they didn’t really deserve their success, and that maybe luck and privilege had more to do with it, than brains and hard work. There are numerous reasons for the widespread discrimination at all levels, but the main reason for the existence of discrimination is a privilege to certain groups of people, and widespread social prejudice towards certain groups of people. Differences between people have always existed, but they gain in importance only when are different importance given to certain differences, so it creates privileges. People who are privileged in one society are often not aware of their privilege. It is very easy to be oblivious to the privilege. The problem of discrimination is very complex and there is no unique formula that would solve it. There are general patterns in a white supremacist culture, that all white people have privilege, whether or not they are racist themselves.
White privilege are privileges that are given to white people who they do not earn, it’s an asset they get; on daily basis just because of their skin color. I believe that the white privilege is the same as racism because the word white privilege itself explains it. It is privilege given and offered towards only the white people. If someone is given a special privilege because they are white then that is racism. I was born and brought up in India for almost 10 years of my life, so grew up around Indians. Growing up I never witnessed any white privilege. However, I was told to judge someone not by their skin but their behavior and action rather. Although, now that I know that the recognition of white privilege it definitely makes it better for me to understand my life here in the United States. America has had plenty of racial unrest, and what’s shocking is how we continue to ignore its side effects. Many people believe white privilege does not exist or it’s not a real thing even though America was built by white people, with a foundation for whites. White privilege is prevalent in America. They believe there is no way the color of someone’s skin, gives them a privilege. In reality, it does. No matter how much we ignore the fact, that the color of your skin can change the way you live, it’s true. It’s not fair, but it’s true.
To completely understand white privilege you first need to understand what white privilege can do. White privilege can show immunities that white people benefit from on a daily basis beyond those common to all others. White privilege can exist without white people’s conscious knowledge of its presence and it helps to maintain the racial hierarchy in this country. There are many examples of white privilege. They range from people’s thoughts to people’s court cases, to actions. Basically to sum that up you have more privileges and fewer assumptions get made because you’re white. When majority of individuals hear the term privilege one thinks about the thought of something that is earned through hard work and respect, but is that the case for all privileges? White privilege is an advantage that white people have in society that is unearned and usually unrecognized. A decent amount of white people in today’s society do not even realize that they are born with this privilege. Throughout their lifetime they are taught to ignore the fact that there is an extensive separation between them and the minority communities. Until educated about the simple fact, the topic of white privilege is often viewed as the norm and brushed aside causing itself to repeat in history and putting whites as a superiority. Whites gain a countless number of unknown advantages through this privilege. All in all, their skin color does not work against them.
As a minority I am often talked down upon or looked over because of my skin color. I have witnessed many people compare minorities to animals and other offensive things that no human should ever be called or compared to. From what I have viewed of white privilege white people are not treated like they are white, they are treated like they are humans. In history the minorities have been hanged, beaten, and disrespected as if they are not human beings and whites in most cases view themselves as better than everyone else.
Whites also have the advantage of being able to love themselves and value their skin from birth and throughout their lives. Society, social media, television, books, etc. have always placed white women as beautiful over all other races. Media teaches women at a young age that fair skin, blue eyes, and European hair are the characteristic one needs to possess to. White supremacy and white privilege have existed for decades, because people have a mindset that one race is better than another. Both are associated with Whites, because years ago and today they are still seen as the dominant group in society, so they often have privileges that are based off the color of their skin. For instance, better career opportunities, better homes, more education opportunities, and more resources. In other words, Whites have more benefits, because of their race. Therefore, white privilege and white supremacy are similar, because they both allow races to believe they are superior to others based on their power, resources, and opportunities they can access based on their skin color.
White supremacist consist of people who have more power, so they believe they are superior to other race. White supremacy is a belief that people who are white are better than other races. White supremacy consist of people who believe they are better than others, because they are a particular race. For instance, wealthy Whites believe they are superior to poor Whites and minorities. Whites who are in powerful positions, have more resources, connections, and they have access to power, so they believe they are better than others who do not have the same opportunities and privileges. In addition, white supremacist believe they keep structural functionalism going. White supremacist believe without them society would not function properly, because they have all the resources and power. In other words, white supremacist believe minorities and other race groups do not have access to power, so they are not seen as people who contribute to dysfunction, so they need whites to come with their resources to keep society functioning properly.