Study: White people react to evidence of white privilege by claiming greater personal hardships

Especially here. They must be mistaken.

Right?

But for many who should know better, I think that admitting that there is such a thing as White privilege is such an assault on their world view that rabid self denial and obfuscation are all they have to psychologically prop themselves up with.

Easier than admitting one has a problem.

Now it's a problem to have advantages?

It's a problem to not ADMIT that one has advantages.

Like millions of kids, Ahmed was subject to stupid zero tolerance school rules. In his case race may have played a significant role.
His story was published far and wide because his family has economic resources.
The right wing reaction has definitely been about bigotry.

My son was treated by his school and the police in a similar manner (including a suspension), for simply passing notes about a hypothetical airsoft gun team. I don't have the resources or support network to make a nationwide issue about it, but if I had, it would not have resulted in an invitation to the UN... but it would not have brought the wrath of GOP racists down on his shoulders either.

The differences between the two experiences illustrate the intersection of racial and wealth privilege. Both are real, neither negates the other.

and lack in critical thinking skills. Resorting to claiming personal hardships is a defense mechanism used by people who have difficulty perceiving the world around them honestly and objectively.

this phenomenon.

what it is like for those who do exist in those conditions.

Even when white people realize (and care), to the greatest degree they possibly can, that they exist in a condition of white privilege, they generally have no idea how to go about changing it. They often see the only option open to them for creating a more egalitarian condition for everyone in their environment as passing laws that they believe help equalize privilege in some way.

It generally takes a long time to change institutionalized cultural consciousness, and the process is slow.

Do you have any suggestions for how white liberals can correct the problem of white privilege in America, other than helping them recognize the degree to which they experience white privilege, and by passing laws to make the country more egalitarian?

Conservatives are very serious obstructions to leveling the playing field of cultural consciousness. Personally, I believe that limiting their power to control our conditions is a big step toward injecting cultural egalitarianism into the collective consciousness. Relatively soon, non-white minorities will become the dominant majority in the US.

White privilege may begin to wither more quickly soon after.

Heartfelt introspection is where it starts.
At what points have white privilege changed the directions in your life?
Can you think or incidents where you have un/consciously used privilege to achieve a goal, avoid an outcome, or taken some aspect of life for granted?
It won't be the same or equal for anyone, but if you are white it is there, underpinning your social interaction.

I should point out that this self awareness is not to create a self loathing of yourself.
Rather it is to understand who you are in your complexity.

For myself, it is a continual process and always will be.
It will be a truly great event in our society when some measure of equality is achieved.
To get there I think that those who understand themselves can reach out to those around them and attempt to impart lessons learned. Talk to your children, parents, friends, etc about the topic of inequality.
Listen to the African American and other minority communities either in person or media.
Keep it fresh on your mind.
And push back against the tide of racism.

Whew.

yes, overt form of racism is more a conservative than a liberal thing, but subtle forms of racism is very much a liberal thing. denying white privilege is a more subtle form of racism, and therefore equally found in liberals.

i think in this case pretending exists in other people and not in ourselves, is very much the core of the problem

Yeah. Okay.

and somehow this made a DUer feel "less privileged" than they. I shit you not.

Yeah, lots of examples here. And lots of examples among liberal people in general.

that was some seriously weird shit.

And I would venture to say that those that are examples are not liberals, but are conservatives.

position. i see this both on DU and in real life.

the word privilege annoys american overall because we like to believe everything we have achieved is based on our own merit.

any of the numerous trappings that exist in the privileged fast track? Why, walking into that sorority meeting in Uggs when the girls are into Jimmy Choos is grounds for automatic expulsion.

but hopefully catch myself doing it .

I think what is happening is the word "privilege" is more associated with wealthy people, so the assertion a person's life has been a breeze SIMPLY because of their skin color can feel highly offensive to people who have indeed struggled

and usually obvious that someone is using one meaning and not the other. strangely when some people talk about racism here (in an institutional context) many claim it has only one meaning- personal bigotry. same with privilege- the conversation gets intentionally derailed by someone not "liking" the word- or being loathe to admit there are different meanings. The "misunderstandings" are largely intentional and intended to disrupt. It's one thing not to like the word, it;s another to pretend it isn't widely used a certain way.

*NO ONE* likes to be stereotyped, and I see that going on a lot on DU

but I guess it's easily remedied by saying "some" first? it's something that is hard to remember to do, LOL.

I remember how rude it got when people were talking about touching the hair of POC. All my life I have been aware that it is a "thing" some white people do, have heard many people talk about how common it is. The hair touchers don't intend to be nrude, but it certainly is! (similar to touching a strange pregnant women's belly, just no!) Anyway, 1/3 of the conversation was about the word "some" being missing and 1/3 was denying it is at all a common thing- because they personally never heard about it.
All of that, to me was derailing and devaluing the conversation- even worse in a way, because it implied that POC were making up shit to "be offended". Seriously? There are like 1000,000 google hits on it, and it IS aggressive behavior.

And all those defensive reactions are pretty common here. I think people should take a step back and try not to make everything about them. YKWIM?

they would be minus a hand

described it to me were't angry but more like WTF is wrong with you (who touches my head)?!?
I remember someone saying they would put their hand up reflexively because they could NOT handle it, and people always thought SHE was the problem. Weird, right?

in my mind, you don't touch a person without their permission - I am completely freaked out by touchy-feely people - and yes, I wonder WTF is wrong with them

big shit out of it because the other kids "mean well". Fighting back is a more dangerous option for black kids.
And with women in particular it really doesn't totally stop when they grow up. People can be such assholes.
It doesn't help that people here will mock that shit and say hey it's not sharia law, or make jokes about micro aggressions, etc.

A black, one eyed, one limbed poor person with schizophrenia will have a harder time in life than a white, one eyed, one limbed, poor person with schizophrenia. Both will have major struggles. Unimaginable struggles. But the white person will still experience white privilege.

Maybe, for example, someone could do a study on who earns more money, white street beggars or black street beggars...

I am not saying privilege does not exist - I'm explaining why that word alienates so many people

we should call it white advantage.

But I think whatever we call it, some white people refuse to believe that it applies to them when they are going through hard times, or have health issues.

well we know racists will always deny they have any privilege or advantage, but I think most people understand when they have an advantage as opposed to the upper-crust association to the word "privilege"

in any of his many excellent speeches about race and racism.

Now that's kicking some you-know-what!

Many whites don't want to come out and say it, but they know that upper middle class and 1% whites have it good. The belief that society is purely meritocratic is a delusional mechanism they use to compartmentalize their positive self-image while holding elitist views.

The system will keep their kids going to Harvard, and keep good jobs accessible to them. "White privilege" is just a term to describe it here. In China it's Han privilege. In Arab countries, it's Arab privilege. Economic tribalism becomes structural in heterogeneous societies where one group is economically dominant.

but do recognize that few whites here have their kids go to Harvard.

White privilege is a little more subtle than that. It's being waited on first at the deli counter. It's being asked for your opinion first. It's being listened to. And it's having your neighborhood have faster police and fire department response times---and a lower risk of being shot or unfairly jailed when the cops do finally turn up because they don't listen to people at the scene.

Yes, I see it and I've benefited from it. I also wish it were not the case, because I've also seen the resentment it causes. I could live well without both.

Just realize that what's glaring privilege to a POC might be invisible to the white person who is benefiting at any given time. Most of them don't analyze stuff to death and walk through life half asleep. Do keep pointing it out, though. Some can be educated, although they'll resent the attempt at the time.

Rub our noses in it and don't worry about the rationalization. Those of us who are capable of getting the point will get it and that's the only way to get it out into the open.

Since breaking it only by race means "white people" lumps together white conservatives and white liberals. Since white conservatives are the vast majority of the Republican party, especially the insane parts, that makes it harder to see if it's an ideology problem, a "white people" problem, or both.

Anyone got a link to the actual paper to see if they have such crosstabs?

Which is why I stuck with the Raw Story link in the first place.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103115000852

There are no ideological identifiers in the paper. I don't think, however, that ideology has much to do with self-perceptions of privilege.

If every Republican is shouting about "welfare queens" and implying Real Americans™ are white, then the people open to that ideology are going to be far less likely to believe white privilege exists. They're also going to be much less receptive to any efforts to change the situation.

Basically, it could provide a hint on what remedies may be effective. If one sub-group thinks different than the other, then perhaps that would point to a different approach.

Kinda like other studies have shown the least racism in areas that are utterly dominated by one race. That pointed to where more work needed to be done.

And note I'm not saying it's impossible for white liberals to react as in the summary of the article. (Hi VanillaRhapsody! Thanks for the email stalking!)

privilege as much as any conservative could, and often that denial comes with even greater dismissiveness precisely because they see themselves as the "good guys" who believe in abstract notions of equality. Rather than being dismissive in their denials, conservatives just don't give a fuck.

Which is why I was hoping they'd have data.

Again, I don't believe 0 liberals behave as you describe. I'd like to know if it's 10% or 80% or some other number. Because if it's 10% of liberals and 90% of conservatives, it's more an ideological problem. If it's 60% of liberals and 90% of conservatives, it isn't.

you keep promoting a theory for which you have no data either. For example, there is no data to support this assertion: or this one:Intuitively. both sound true, but I know intuition is not the same as data, either.

And even the data I asked for wouldn't make those ideological assumptions "true" either.

Again, they found a result. I'd like to move from that result to doing something to change it. Figuring out what we have to do to change it requires knowing with more specificity what is causing it. I hope they get follow-on funding.

Our work suggests that privilege reduction efforts might need to focus not only on convincing or educating advantaged group members about privilege, but also on reducing the feelings of self-threat this information induces. Another approach may be to address cognitive fallacies and misunderstandings of privilege: privilege requires a comparison to someone of another group membership with the same life circumstances. The existence of hardships does not reduce racial privilege, since racial privilege entails comparison to someone of a different race with equivalent hardships. People may erroneously think privilege entails complete ease in life and that the presence of any hardships denotes an absence of privilege. Future work should explore ways to correct these fallacies.

Our work further reveals the motivated nature of hardship claims in response to evidence of privilege, as supported by the fact that self-affirmation reverses Whites' hardship claims. While we focus on threat to self here, it is also possible that threat to social structure, including the racial hierarchy, also motivates hardship claims. For instance, Whites may claim increased hardships to maintain not only a positive sense of self, but also the material benefits associated with racial privilege. Whites' claims of hardship might also serve to legitimize the racial advantages they enjoy, and thereby justify a system that benefits their group.

Our results suggest that people may distinguish between group and personal privilege. However, we found these variables to correlate; in fact, it seems a prerequisite to believe some existence of group-level privilege in order to believe that privilege extends to oneself. And, although people may be able to strategically separate group from personal privilege beliefs, it does not mean this is always the case. Future work should further explore the nature of this relationship, and how it manifests across outcomes, such as group versus personal hardships or support for group-relevant versus personally-relevant policies (cf. Crosby, 1984 and Taylor et al., 1990).

<...> The current work demonstrates that individuals exhibit a previously unknown response to evidence that they benefit from group inequity: people may accept that in-group privilege exists, but change their perceptions of their own lives in order to deny the role of systemic advantages in their success. In particular, when provided evidence that their group has benefitted from privilege, Whites suggest that they have instead suffered the hard-knock life by claiming increased personal life hardships. This may serve to bolster their sense of legitimacy and reduce the negative attributional implications of privilege (e.g., Feather, 1992 and Knowles and Lowery, 2012). Such a response has the potential to erode acknowledgement of racial inequity, and support for policies designed to reduce such inequity. To successfully address inequity, understanding the privileged is likely as important as understanding the underprivileged.<...>

I'd also say there's a great essay by law professor (and prominent Critical Race Theorist( Chery Harris called "Whiteness as Property" that explores this stuff in ways that are, to my mind, more fulfilling than this study. I'm almost positive you can find a pdf of it online.

Or are you among the people emailing me who think "More data/studies would be interesting" is the same as denying white privilege exists?

Hell no I'm not one of them...you're getting email about that also? Interesting. Has it always been like this or is this something new. I'd never received any email like that before.

I've received a few emails in the past from people wanting to talk a little more about something but not in public. One or two over years.

There's been a lot more recently. IMO, it's largely due to the number of people who can't manage to discuss an issue without being enough of a jerk to get a hide.

I'm not exactly a shrinking violet with my posts, and I've had 1 hide in my entire DU "career". You can argue without getting them.

It gets more interesting as we go along...

Thanks for your response.

And everyone saying it claimed some bit if Irish in them. Same thing here.

The Irish were treated horribly. Today, not so much. For African Americans, there has been some progress since slavery, of course, but it has been glacially slow by comparison.

He even LOOKS different. Don't you want to hate him more?!?

Good luck in the next lifetime

That's exactly what I was thinking when I read the OP.

The Irish in the US made their peace with their place in whiteness a long time ago. I saw some snotty comments from Irish on Irish Central about Black Lives Matter to the tune of "We never rioted or used violence to get rights!!11" Like fuck we didn't, lol. Some people have short memories.

I'M KIDDING!

I always that I was mostly Irish or Scotch-Irish but one of my aunts did a genealogy search and we are pretty much English white. My friends even joke about how "white" I am.

Anyway, about those nasty Irish hooligans......

I'm not Irish-American, but a lot of non-Anglo immigrants can point to a history of abuse...back when they first arrived. Now it's a different story, but not for PoC.

When my grandmother came from Ireland to Boston and wrote home to her sisters, "its a terrible thing to be a slave to the Yanks," okay. She could complain. Us, nope. Not one iota.

The whole monologue I used to get about walking to school in knee deep snow, uphill no less was really a lie?


Edit: this "I had it bad so I deserve xyz" is the same dynamic that happens when discussing and injury with someone. Very rarely can you tell a person you got hurt doing something with out hearing back " oh that's nothing you should have seen what happened to me" reply.

In other news... Water is wet...

Tonight at 11...

I can't imagine why.

It's almost impossible to know what other people go through until you have the same experience.

I tell them they obviously haven't taken advantage of it........

ever since Prop 209, promulgated by self-hating AA Ward Connerly, skewed the racial equation at UC.

Most white people hold the belief that there is no such thing as white privelege. And people, all people, do not change their beliefs.

I do, however, demand the SAME privilege for EVERYONE.

Being treated professionally and courteously by the police should be considered to be a right, not a "privilege".

is when a police office/judge treats white people better. Gently escorting them away when they commit crimes, giving them warnings instead of tickets, giving them the benefit of the doubt, saying "boys will be boys" when they are destructive or go on sexual rampages or gang rape girls... giving them community service or probation instead of time in jail....

Using the word "privilege" is an attempt to call attention to ways that white people get over.

It is undeniable that many cops are racists and that racism exists in the criminal justice system, and needs to be fought against. However, we have seen time and time again that the phrase "white privilege" is extremely unhelpful in terms of having a productive discussion and tends to annoy people (for example, white people who are poor, being evicted or unable to pay medical bills tend not to take kindly to being lectured to about their "privilege". It's interesting that in his many masterful speeches about race and racism, President Obama has never once used the term.

Not because it isn't true, and not even because he doesn't agree with it.

Many of those who throw the term "white privilege" around are more interested in provoking backlash than having a serious and productive discussion.

He can't talk about it because people would respond in petty, childish ways. However that doesn't mean no one should talk about it. People should get over their petty, childish responses.

Something doesn't become unproductive or untrue just because it is uncomfortable. And discomfort can lead to growth.

White privilege must be realized and accepted by White people.
Just because you have had to eat a shit sandwich at some point in your life doesn't mean it isn't there and you haven't benefited from it.

Some people are fucking clueless.

And you think other people are clueless.

That's cute.

It's understanding who you are.
Your privilege doesn't make you a bad person, it just means that you receive benefits from it in social interactions both large and small.
But it's what you do with that privilege when you become aware of it.
Change the culture.

I can't control it... I can only control my own actions... I treat people as they deserve based on their merit and regardless of skin color.

Good enough for me...

It's like telling me there's a little gremlin on my shoulder and he's the reason that I am how I am...

K... If you say so... moving on...

Reminds me of a Roseanne episode when Dan tells Chuck and Leon he's as discriminated against as they are

The greatest Republican accomplishment is to squeeze many to the point where it gets more difficult to be sensitive to the experiences of others.

I was a white kid brought up in the public schools in Mobile, AL. I've seen racism from almost every angle. From brawling with our racist neighbors who called our family "nigger lovers", to seeing my black friends busted, arrested, and generally fucked over for petty stuff that me and my white friends always got away with.

Reconnecting on Facebook with old friends from back home I've mentioned the racism that was a constant fact of life growing up -- and the weird thing is that most of these old classmates will say, "what racism?" My mind is fucking blown! For crying out loud -- the ugly in-your-face racism that was a constant fact of life in Mobile, Alabama! They are totally blind and/or delusional. I don't know.

Today I live in Tennessee -- Tea Party land. Like the racists in Alabama, before integration. The attitude here is "I worked for everything I got! I'm sick and tired of Al Sharpton playing the race card!"

The study perfectly captures all of this. Most of these people probably won't be reading it, though.

I still have a few friends there. I know exactly what you are talking about.

John Kennedy brother was appalled at the living conditions there and it is still going on.

Poor blacks and minorities are still suffering in the US. One day, a politician will come along and root for those people, the best we ever had was Edwards but he messed up!

And you can have difficulty in one or multiple areas and still have privilege in others. Someone in Appalachia who is able bodied has an easier time than someone in Appalachia who has a disability, for instance. So the able-bodied person from Appalachia has privilege in that he or she is able bodied.

I don't know how many African Americans live in Appalachia, but they would suffer what the white people from Appalachia suffer, and also be oppressed by our racist society.

And if both a white person from Appalachia and a black person from Appalachia moved elsewhere, the white person would have a much easier time getting a job, finding a place to live, etc.

but I know many that do.

It's not that whites don't face hardships of one kind or another; many do. They sure as hell aren't "greater" than institutionalized racism. And whatever hardships we face, PoC ALSO suffer from those, as well.

The phenomenon is real, obvious and undeniable, but referring to "white privilege" is 100% guaranteed to elicit a defensive response, rather than fostering a receptive attitude in the listener.

This, in turn, might predictably incline the listener to "claim greater personal hardships," rather than to hear and consider what's actually being said.

The phenonemon should certainly be discussed and addressed, but it's unfortunate that its description provides an obstacle to that discussion.

but actually want to provoke a backlash and stir the shit.

Of course saying "we need to work together to end racism" is a better way of framing the issue than "you have white privilege, don't deny it!" Which is why grown-ups who genuinely want to end racism (such as President Obama) do not use the term "white privilege", while up-and-coming bloggers desperate for pageviews and controversy love it.

This isn't simply a matter of white dudes not wanting their feelings hurt; it's a legitimate concern about the framing of a discussion as it pertains to the intent.

If the discussion starts by claiming that one party is "privileged," then it is reasonable to expect that the party will first respond to that claim, rather than immediately and openly considering the underlying issue. What is the value of using a term that predisposes the listener to reject the proposed discussion? Frankly, it seems as though the term was calculated to yield exactly that effect.

Proponents of the term might claim that the intent is not to belittle or harass, and this truly may not be their intent, but that's subordinate to the real-world reaction engendered by the term. Regardless of their intent, the term creates a barrier to discussion. To what beneficial end?

Alternatively, they might claim that the term is intended to provoke a strong response in hope of kick-starting the discussion. That's not an unreasonable expectation on their part, if indeed that's the case, but again it creates a barrier to discussion. To what beneficial end?

I recognize white privilege, and more specifically white male privilege or even white cis male privilege. Hell, off the top of my head I can list a dozen ways that I've benefited from it in the last 48 hours. But my own understanding of the concept was initially hindered by the term, and--as we've seen many times over--my reaction is far from unique.


I'm not sure that a quick soundbyte of a term is needed or appropriate here, especially if that term sabotages the subsequent discussion. But if we must have one, how about "institutional discrimination" as an alternative? Rather than inspiring defensiveness, that term would invite the question "what do you mean by institutional?" and the conversation will be off and running.

Tell white people this all day and only a few of them get it and accept it. It is damaging in that is causes more resentment and racism. Focus on something else. We want white people to treat others equally and feel the others are equal. Why do people think this "white privilege" thing will do that?

He has never used the term "white privilege" but his speeches have bedn highly acclaimed.

and deserve to be treated like equals by white people. Very few white people at this point don't accept that. (The ones who don't probably think white people ought to be privileged, or that it is due to their innate superiority they think exists)

Listen to people of color's stories about how they were followed in a store and question yourself - are you doing things like that in your daily life? Be aware of possible prejudice and don't just other people unthinkingly and maybe judging people of color more harshly than you do white people for the same things.

Integration was the focus at one time and I think there they had it right. If people don't know each other, it is easier to generalize. Try to have some black friends (I know that's unpopular too, but I really think it helps members of the privileged group see others as equals - I've even known of anti-gay people who once they know someone or someone in their family comes out - suddenly they are all gay rights supporters. People identify with the people they know).

It's not easy - and I don't have necessarily good answers. but I see the white privilege meme does not really convince white people and a lot of them do just what the OP article says.

Race, gender and wealth being but three of them.

A smart guy once likened privilege to video game difficulty settings and I think it's a very good analogy. In that analogy, straight white and male is the lowest difficulty setting (easiest to play) and it goes up from there.

http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/05/15/straight-white-male-the-lowest-difficulty-setting-there-is/

On edit:

I forgot to say that white men are basically the default human being. Women and people of color are basically not seen as people, or treated as such, in many areas. I think most people who object to the term "privilege" are white men. I know that I myself have had advantages because of my background that I might not have had otherwise. But as a woman, I also know that some avenues would be closed to me (or at least made much more difficult), no matter how hard I worked. But I can't entirely blame my failures on the "system"; some of them are personal failings.

This is where it gets tricky. People think they work hard and that hard work is rewarded, but it often isn't true. For anyone. People are excluded for a lot of reasons. Numerous studies have indicated that hiring is often biased. Older people certainly know this. It's insidious and I don't what the answer is. I don't know if anyone does.

But I think constantly asking people "to check their privilege" is kind of obnoxious and not really going to accomplish a lot. Maybe a less loaded way of talking about it would go further. I don't know.