Entitlement and Privilege

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Note:  Please let's not turn this into another feminist argument.  We have 3 of those already.  This is more about the very idea of privilege/entitlement, as demonstrated by the state of Arizona.  Yes, some of the examples will involve feminism, some will involve race, but most will involve class and some basic assumptions by people who aspire to a higher economic class.

Part1
Definitions

Since a lot of the word used with regard to this subject have become loaded terms, first priority must be to define the terms, to avoid miscommunication.  The definitions below are not meant to be a definitive, end-of-story description, but rather a basic overview of the terms for purposes of this discussion.

1. Privilege:  Literally meaning "private law", privilege is the state in which certain societal and/or restrictions do not apply to the individuals with said privilege.  Essentially, the privileged individual is being given a head start by the system to one degree or another.  There are two important facts that must be known about privilege:

1.  Privilege, by definition, isn't something you do or achieve, it's something that happens to you.  If you created the situation, it isn't privilege, as it was earned (for good or for ill).  It CAN, however, help you earn the situation, so there can still be some element of privilege in the situation.

2.  There are multiple levels of privilege, which are based on things like gender, age, enthnic background, race, sexual orientation, wealth or status as accident of birth, etc.  A person may have multiple privileges; very few people have none at all.  Nobody in Western society has none, as being in this society automatically counts as a form of privilege (as opposed to being born in Darfur, for example).

2.  Entitlement:  Entitlement is the perception of privilege, and can be (and usually is) unrecognized by the person in question.  This can include things like government assistance, but in more general terms indicates where you perceive yourself "in line"...That is to say, where you view yourself in the pecking order.  Interestingly enough, the more privilege you have, the more you perceive your sense of entitlement to be violated or denigrated.  In other words, the more privileges you have, the more downtrodden you assume yourself to be.

3.  Racism:  The act of judging people based on their ethnic background.  Yes, this includes the poorly worded "reverse racism", but it also includes the assumption of "reverse racism".  I say that "reverse racism" is badly worded, because it is merely racism.  The act of using the term "reverse racism" automatically indicates racism at one level or another by the person using the term, because while "racism" implies a single person or act, "reverse racism" implies that an entire ethnic group or groups are conspiring as a whole to commit racism upon the dominant race.

4.  Gender:  For our purposes, gender will mean the sex of the person in question.

5.  Gender identity:  Gender identity indicates the gender a person percieves him or herself to be.  IE, CIS vs Transgender.  Will also for the purposes of this discussion include transvestites.

6.  Sexual orientation:  This can be many things, but for the purposes of this discussion, it will be limited to Straight/Gay/Bisexual, which are sufficient for the demonstration of privilege.

7.  Oppression:  The exertion of privilege on those with less privilege (ie, women being paid less for the same work, Gays not being allowed to marry, etc).

[navkat]

Where I get stuck is in the definition of Privilege which amalgamates all the factors. I think lack of privilege secondary to say, direct government oppression (The government dictates your rights) versus societal privilege based on socioeconomic factors should be further defined.

Life in Darfur isn't underprivileged simply because the people don't have squat, it's also because the separate issue of not being allowed to do shit about that.

So maybe we ought define Oppression, is what I mean?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Part 2
Privilege

Privilege comes in many levels in America.  For this discussion, Arizona will be the example.  There is a general ranking of privilege that a person can be born with.  In Arizona, the ranking is, with 1 being the greatest privilege and

1.  Economic class.  How much money do you make?
2.  Race.  Whites are the top of the heap with respect to this, being followed by Asians, then Blacks, then Native Americans, then Hispanics at the very bottom (this is a result of fear for entitlements on the part of Whites, which will be discussed later).
3.  Gender.  Males have a distinct privilege over females.  The lessening of this privilege has caused a fear reaction that leads many to believe that females somehow have the advantage, because males can't oppress women quite as badly as they used to.
4.  Sexual orientation.  Straights are on top, followed by Gays, followed by Bisexuals.  Fear of loss of privilege (Gay marriage, etc) has gotten fairly ridiculous concerning sexual orientation, with people making straight-faced claims that Gays (bisexuals especially) are out to "recruit" straights, as if it were some sort of conscious decision.
5.  Gender Identity.  CIS always holds the cards here.
6.  Age.  In most areas of America, the dominant age is 30-50, as these are the people most likely to have amassed enough wealth to have an impact on how they are treated.  In Arizona, however, the majority of decision makers are at retirement age, with the level of privilege enjoyed being indirectly proportional to the age of the person in question.

Give the above, in Arizona, a rich woman in Arizona has more privilege than a poor man, and a White woman has far more privilege than a Hispanic male.

The maximum privilege would be:  Rich, White, Male, Straight, CIS, 55+ years old.

The minimum privilege would be:  Poor, Hispanic, Female, Gay, Transgender, ~ 18 years old.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Where I get stuck is in the definition of Privilege which amalgamates all the factors. I think lack of privilege secondary to say, direct government oppression (The government dictates your rights) versus societal privilege based on socioeconomic factors should be further defined.

Life in Darfur isn't underprivileged simply because the people don't have squat, it's also because the separate issue of not being allowed to do shit about that.

So maybe we ought define Oppression, is what I mean?

Defined oppression, but this is fucking NOT turning into a thread about government and liberatarian bullshit.  END OF STORY.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

FUCKING RAH!

This board, and all its earlier hashings-out about privilege, has been REALLY fucking instrumental in helping me identify my own privileges, which I think is really important for a variety of reasons:

1. Where I can recognize my own privilege, I have empowerment.
2. Where I can recognize my own sense of power, I can see where I have entitlement.
3. Where I can recognize my own entitlement, I can recognize what areas make me feel defensive if I perceive them as  threatened.

In other words, recognizing my privileges makes me not only a better person, it also makes me a more effective person, and better able to achieve my goals.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Also I'd like to point out, only because just now I almost made a post that goes in the wrong direction, that oppression should never be allowed simply because of "demographics."

For example, I have heard the argument before that apparently government-sanctioned public displays of religion are admissible because "there are just so many Christians, so obviously the nature and appearance of society is going to take on a Christian tone." As if at a certain percentage of the population, oppression is inevitable or something.

This, of course, is bullshit. Take economic status for example: how many rich people are there? How many poor people are there? So, society should inherently take on a distinct tone of condoning poverty, then. What's that? It doesn't? Well, then, I guess it doesn't matter how many of you there are, or how few; it's never okay to exert the force of your privilege on anyone else.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I also think that there are certain factors, like age, which work differently depending on your economic class. A rich old person has more power (slightly distinct from privilege) than a rich young person, but a poor old person has less power than a poor young person, especially if they are also female.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

It goes ALL THE WAY BACK here. The founding fathers had white male land owners in mind.
It's been addressed with things like the Civil Rights Act, but WAY TOO FUCKING SLOWLY.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Part 3
Entitlement

Entitlement is the perception of privilege by a member of a privileged group.  Entitlement is, in other words, the reaction to one's privilege, or the reaction to a threat against that privilege.  In the case of Arizona, the primary demonstration of entitlement is the reaction of White persons in Phoenix with respect to Hispanics.

To begin with, White people in Arizona have always been first in line for everything.  This is due to 2 factors...First, Whites have historically outnumbered everyone else, and second, almost all the wealth is concentrated in Phoenix, in the hands of the Whites that live there.  However, White people can do math just like anyone else, and the math demonstrates quite clearly that this may not be the case much longer, as shown by the chart in "Race and Ethnicity" at the following link (their source is the census bureau).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Arizona

Fear Response:  Needless to say, this scares the pants off of the mostly-conservative White population of Arizona, who can clearly see that they will no longer be the most numerous group, sooner rather than later.  This leads to support for people like Sheriff Joe Arpiao, and legislation such as SB1072, that more or less criminalizes brown skin.

Aggrieved Entitlement Response:  The number one complaint among poor Whites with respect to race is that "the Hispanics/Blacks/etc have used up or are using up all available Department of Economic Security resources."  This is patently not true, as DES has no tests for eligibility other than the economic situation of the applicant, with children factoring highest in the decision making.

When people say the above, they generally mean: "I am White, therefore I should have first access to DES resources, and other groups can have what's left when I am done."

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I also think that there are certain factors, like age, which work differently depending on your economic class. A rich old person has more power (slightly distinct from privilege) than a rich young person, but a poor old person has less power than a poor young person, especially if they are also female.

I covered that in part 2, but I was speaking from Arizona, where things are slightly different on a cultural level.

[navkat]

Where I get stuck is in the definition of Privilege which amalgamates all the factors. I think lack of privilege secondary to say, direct government oppression (The government dictates your rights) versus societal privilege based on socioeconomic factors should be further defined.

Life in Darfur isn't underprivileged simply because the people don't have squat, it's also because the separate issue of not being allowed to do shit about that.

So maybe we ought define Oppression, is what I mean?

Defined oppression, but this is fucking NOT turning into a thread about government and liberatarian bullshit.  END OF STORY.

It's not my intent to try to strap you down, shove a Toblerone in your mouth and take you on another tour of Ron Paul's Libertarian Candyland but we'd be fools if we didn't at least look at the travel brochure to make comparisons to the other vacation spots the advertisers like to shove down people's throats here and abroad.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Where I get stuck is in the definition of Privilege which amalgamates all the factors. I think lack of privilege secondary to say, direct government oppression (The government dictates your rights) versus societal privilege based on socioeconomic factors should be further defined.

Life in Darfur isn't underprivileged simply because the people don't have squat, it's also because the separate issue of not being allowed to do shit about that.

So maybe we ought define Oppression, is what I mean?

Defined oppression, but this is fucking NOT turning into a thread about government and liberatarian bullshit.  END OF STORY.

It's not my intent to try to strap you down, shove a Toblerone in your mouth and take you on another tour of Ron Paul's Libertarian Candyland but we'd be fools if we didn't at least look at the travel brochure to make comparisons to the other vacation spots the advertisers like to shove down people's throats here and abroad.

If you have something oppression-related to say about entitlement and privilege, say it, but don't tell Roger that HE needs to say it for you.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I also think that there are certain factors, like age, which work differently depending on your economic class. A rich old person has more power (slightly distinct from privilege) than a rich young person, but a poor old person has less power than a poor young person, especially if they are also female.

I covered that in part 2, but I was speaking from Arizona, where things are slightly different on a cultural level.

I do agree that culture affects the entitlements of aging quite a lot.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

You know, I'm just going to walk away for a little while and cool off.

I just spent two hours reading and writing to cover a very specific topic.  Now I am told that this isn't what I was supposed to be fucking doing.

I am angrier than I should be, I guess.  I have no clue whatsoever WHY I would think that a topic like this would stay on track past the first reponse.

I'll be back to write part 4 in a while.

Navvie, you want to talk about government oppression, you go start a thread and do it.  It's NOT what this thread is about.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I also think that there are certain factors, like age, which work differently depending on your economic class. A rich old person has more power (slightly distinct from privilege) than a rich young person, but a poor old person has less power than a poor young person, especially if they are also female.

I covered that in part 2, but I was speaking from Arizona, where things are slightly different on a cultural level.

I do agree that culture affects the entitlements of aging quite a lot.

Yeah, here it's the White retired crowd that carries the most punch, both economically and at the voting booth.