Politely Sharing Ideas About Social Justice Without Arguing

@vocalcannibal: (I'm only roping you in because you brought up the cultural stuff and I think that's the more interesting debate here. The Katy Perry video is a little ridiculous yeah but I still defend her basic ability as an artist to take inspiration from anything she wants and combine it how she likes)

It's interesting to see a debate about cultural appropriation, it's at least refreshing compared to some other debates here. I have some pretty strong personal feelings about this because I couldn't exist without it. My parents came from two different cultures to meet in a third and then raised me with that. I am the result of free cultural exchange between North America and Europe and so for me cultural appropriation simply doesn't exist.

When I create art, I mix things from all kinds of cultures all over the world. I got taiko drums and 808s, I got accordions and african rhythms, I'm mixing all that shit into one thing. I've always thought of culture and art with a global perspective and can't see myself thinking any other way. As a real world citizen I consider it my responsibility to be a cultural bridge and to try and contribute to a global culture that everyone can enjoy. I take offence at being told to think differently, or that I can only make "western" or "white" art. Especially when the only people saying that tend to be fellow whites.

I wrote all this wearing a Jamaican track team shirt as a White/French/Kentuckian/Canadian, and that sums up my views on the globalization of culture quite nicely.

@groverat: I think the word you are looking for is liberal. I consider myself a liberal. But I'm also at a point where I think most liberals have failed society. Liberals need to stand up for the principles they're supposed to believe in. Liberal principles like freedom of speech, freedom to practice any religion and the freedom to leave that religion, equality for women, equality for minorities including homosexuals. All that good stuff.

Still, nowadays it seems you get shunned by your fellow liberals for wanting the same things from muslims, feminists and other groups that traditionally earn a lot of sympathy from the liberal movement. If you can't criticize a feminist because she's a feminist, that a big issue. We're at a point in our society where everything needs to be just so and so, and you can't say this or that or you'll offend him or her. People in general need to do two things:

1. Get a little thicker skin.
2. Talk about issues without entrenching themselves in their views, shouting wolf at every opportunity they get to victimize themselves.

I think a lot of the women speaking out about women in the games industry right now, aren't doing themselves any favors by victimizing themselves. Again, I must point out that I am a liberal, and I support their cause. Just, don't make yourself look so weak. Just talk about like normal people. And don't make every white male a villain.

@groverat: Kyriarchy allows for some interesting perspective on representation in creative mediums (if I understand the notion correctly). Especially in terms of cultural differences, which tends to be easily forgotten when mediums try to represent different viewpoints.

For example, even though I'm an Irish white male, I'd associate with an Irish female easier than a Southern US white male.

If I had a magic wand I would " Wingardium Levioso"

I believe that it can be very difficult to separate one's personal self-worth based on the labels they apply to themselves from discussion of those labels in a broader societal context. I think that it's very common for people to see criticism toward large groups they belong to as an attack on their personal self-worth when no such thing was intended. I think that this is at the heart of a lot of the biggest misunderstandings and most vitriolic arguments that take place surrounding social issues.

@vocalcannibal: I would honestly like to talk to someone about this. Quite frankly, I don't understand the argument at all. Obviously there is a case by case basis at work here. But I don't see like... any problem. In fact, it kind of makes me upset that people are upset. I really question if some group can OWN culture in our increasingly connected world.

But basically, this is how I feel. Black face is NOT cultural appropriation. It is cultural and racial mockery. It has little basis in actual culture and the cultural basis it does have was a direct result of slavery. Blackface is wrong. It represents and mocks essentially a racial straw man.

But like... I don't understand the problem dressing up as a geisha, for example. As far as I understand it, Geisha are real people that actually existed. I think they still exist to some degree. How could that be insensitive? Should I get upset if an non American dresses up as a cowboy? I think I'm really missing something here.

Also, on a unrelated note, I've found that 9/10 times, when someone starts their comment with "I'm not a feminist", they usually seem to not understand what being a feminist is. Folks, it is equality for women AND men. Unless you literally think that women cannot/should not do anything a guy can do, you are a feminist.

@bargainben: get your point but still consider myself an Egalitarian. the argument could be made that are two sides to feminist left side who are a kin to equality and right minority who are much more extreme in there methods and approach and believe men to be inferior which harms equality in long run.

feminist extremist are what stops me from calling myself feminist but then again there are probly extremist in Egalitarianism as well so in end of day its all swings and roundabouts.

I'd argue that Chinese culture has been spread across so much of Asia (the Chinese sojourner has been around for centuries) that trying to point out the distinctions in the costume and effects of a musical performance as cultural appropriation is a bit of a stretch. It's uninformed and lazy, but not inherently racist. Ink wash painting is of a Chinese origin, but it shows up all over Asia, and I don't think anybody is demonizing the Vietnamese for that. Maybe for beating the Chinese military, but not for that. You don't have to look very far to see all sorts of misused cultural aspects from all over the place (and plenty of stuff like Samurai Champloo exist, which plays fast and loose with Japanese history and culture) in Japanese pop culture but how much of that gets hand waved as Japan being "weird" or "just being Japan"?

It's no Big Trouble in Little China, and looking at the tweets they embedded in the article, you'd think this was on par with Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffany's.

A comment from the article: "I am Asian (of Chinese heritage) and i do not, for one moment think KP and her show was offensive. As I've mentioned before it is an 'Asian inspired' theme- if there's anything remotely wrong about her show it could be maybe she has too many Asian things going on; Japanese flowers, Chinese dress and the parasol (which is widely used in Asian culture from Japan to Cambodia) etc etc but hey, would it make a difference if she coined the theme specifically like 'Japanese inspired' or 'Chinese influenced'? I have no idea how this article is news."

@milkman: I liked your post here because your point about most women in the business being white is sort of a great example of why the idea of "intersectional feminism" has come about; it is an attempt to address the (perceived?) problem that all of the women on the front lines of feminism are white and thus not equipped to address the concerns of black women, Hispanic women, etc.

Frankly, I think the lack of black folks in games (which I'll speak on as a black person) is really an issue of how we fund and administer education in this country more than a specific failing of the video game industry.

@koolaid: I wish I could give you a larger argument, but I just don't think it's my place to do so! One of my very good friends is from China. She was born and raised there, and came to the United States for college. When she talks about offensive portrayals of Asian culture in western society, I take her word for it. I'm white and can't genuinely put myself in her position, no matter how hard I try. The points I brought up about Katy Perry were all things I heard directly from her and other Asian writers/bloggers. If you can't take their word for it, I'm not sure I can say anything else to convince you.

(I don't trust the internet to convey my tone properly, so I swear this was all meant to be genuinely polite, just in case any of it sounded like sass.)

@reverendk: And that reply more or less applies to you as well. I said my piece and I know enough to be positive that I'm in no position to do more than relay sentiments of people that are more qualified to speak about it than I am. Consider that plenty of people think/do not think certain things are offensive, and that you're never obligated to agree with someone on that. You don't have to silently nod along, but nothing bad will ever come from listening and thinking about what you hear.

(And come on, that commenter should know better. It's news because everything in pop culture is news! That's just a fact, man.)

@vocalcannibal: I think one of the important lessons we can learn from discussions like these is that I can't choose if someone is offended or not. If someone says they are offended, they are. When you say you have a Chinese friend who is offended, I can't tell her that she isn't. I believe her.

But.

There are some people who are offended that Breaking Bad celebrates a drug dealer. There are some people who think a war movie should NEVER portray an American soldier in a negative light. There are some people that are offended that violent video games still exist in this world even after all the school shootings. Folks can be offended, but we still gotta parse through the criticism and see how we should change our behavior going forward.

Like I said, I'd love to know more. But so far, it seems to me the argument is that we should put up more culture barriers instead of less, and that seems strange to me.

@vocalcannibal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiaYDPRedWQ

Gwen Stefani had(has?) some major pulls from japanese culture too

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qecNL1266ms

Although arguably she does it more as a love letter to Harajuku fashion than as much of a melting pot mess that Avril Lavigne's or hot mess of Katy Perry's.

That sounds a lot like "Unless you literally think that the press should be unethical, you are a supporter of a certain recent hashtag movement." If you wouldn't agree with being told that, you should probably reconsider telling people that they are a feminist when that movement isn't something that they personally identify with. There are many people--men and women alike--who don't personally identify with feminism, and resent being told "you might not consider yourself a feminist, but you are one."

The hashtag movement I refer to above is an ideology, and so is feminism. I can speak my mind on ethics issues and and women's issues without considering myself a member of either of those ideologies.

At the same time, I feel it's important not to generalize feminists or women who don't self-identify as feminists. It's not a good idea to put anyone in a box and say "well THOSE people believe [insert generalization here]," but it happens all the time, which is why I typically choose to distance myself from ideologies.

@koolaid: I get where you're coming from, but I think people should have the freedom to label themselves whatever they choose. It's not really up to other people to decide what you want to identify as, right?

I'm with you on the concept of cultural appropriation in general, though I think that dress (like Halloween dress) usually emphasizes stereotypes to conform to the idea of the culture it is aping, which can definitely be bothersome to people who feel like they always get tagged with stereotypes. On the other hand, with stuff like Nerdcore (as one example), that's just an example of culture being shared and lovingly melded with other cultures, creating cultural links where there weren't any before. People might be bothered by that, but I'm not. I think it's beautiful.

Sometimes, the issue is not the appropriation itself, but that people present the appropriated version of some things as the original, kinda like some people who think that Rock 'n Roll started with the Beatles or bands in the '70s or whatever and forget that originally, it was mostly black artists like Chuck Berry and Little Richard. That's frustrating, but it's also an issue of mere ignorance and not malice, and education is the best way to attack ignorance!

@spaceinsomniac: well said

people need stop trying force people into feminism camp when they don't identify with all feminist views. not all feminists views are about equality there are fair right people in feminism movement that more a kin to extremist and hate men there are a minority but do exist and is the main reason must people prefer to be seen as a Egalitarian or not to be defined as anything.

plz people of internet do not use "well you believe in equality so must be a feminist" its not your right to define people into groups if they wish to remain individual in there beliefs.

@voysa_reezun: I guess my problem with it is:

A. Trying to figure out the correct labels for everything (feminist, equality-ist or whatever) is distracting from the real issues and ultimately pointless.

B. Too many people use those labels to backdoor into straw man arguments. And it's getting freakin' old ("I'm not a feminist! I believe we should all be equal, not that women should be better!" )

Getting a little too into "Here's why I'm mad at other people" territory. Frustrations are good, but they should be shared from the perspective of seeking to get further understanding, not just vent.

As for the lock, I think (HOPE!) GB is starting to realize that simply pushing this type of discussion off the site hasn't helped, and that the smart move is to encourage this discussion but in a way that is non-toxic/non-argumentative.

I've been reading The Story of Civilization by Will Durant, and he spends a short amount of time speaking about how pre-property tribal societies are largely matriarchal. The men hunted and did little else, while the women performed most of the economic tasks. It's only when individual property became entrenched did men toil and create provision and ultimately, capital.

That's not a promotion of women as the superior worker or some diagram of the future, that's just our sociological history. We do have property now, and we see some advantages to having it, so we should probably figure out something that works for us today, while we're alive.

Agreed. I would hope that if the thread is moderated, posts that go against your requests for the general direction of the thread are removed, and the rest is allowed to continue.

Here's a question for anyone who cares to answer: If you agree that women and men can explain their frustrations with various gender issues while not identifying as feminists, how necessary is feminism to this discussion, and do you think this would be a less divisive issue without putting a focus on feminism?

For example:

I am offended by the Hatred video game because it encourages the killing of innocent civilians, and that offends me.

I am offended by the Hatred video game because it encourages the killing of innocent civilians, and that offends me as a Christian.

I think the second statement is more likely to cause a knee-jerk reaction, and make people feel that someone is pushing their social views on others. Is that also perhaps true for feminism, or does that analogy seem inaccurate to you? Obviously the feminist movement does go hand and hand with this discussion, and it will always be a part of this discussion, but I do wonder how much the reaction to it contributes to the frequently hostile nature of these conversations.

@koolaid: Fair points. Re: Your second point, faulty analysis is a part of discussing a topic. We all do it sometimes. That sort of misrepresentation of the general ideas behind feminism is going to happen, and it doesn't help that to a very small amount of people in the Solanas/SCUM Manifesto mode, feminism might actually mean something like that common misrepresentation that you mention, which allows the arguer to portray the few as a whole.

Maybe the trick to not derailing discussion is just to leave the labels at home and try to talk as much as possible without falling back on using labeling vocabulary that might be lazy or incomplete in discussing these issues.

I'm a straight white male and am constantly being told I'm "privileged" on the Internet. Guess what? I live in a country where I am in the vast minority race-wise and face racism on a daily basis. Am I still privileged?

@spaceinsomniac: I don't have an answer for this really, but in thinking about it I started wondering if the more successful feminism is in achieving gender equality wouldn't regular people feel like they have less use for feminism because gender equality would closer to the norm? Would people stop calling themselves feminists? I don't know.

As a lame cop-out: I guess I'd have to wonder why putting that identifying tidbit on the end of the statement is important to that person.

@midjet: I actually considered bringing up Gwen, but I wasn't sure how well the L.A.M.B. reference would go over, haha. Her Harajuku phase is actually one of the examples I tend to disagree with people on, too! I really, genuinely get the impression that she just had a love for that type of fashion and wanted to be authentic. People say that having 'Harajuku Girls' as a posse was using Japanese women as a decoration, but they were always the same four girls who were successful professional dancers before Gwen ever met them. If she were going to adopt a Harajuku aesthetic, I think it's infinitely less offensive to use the same four Japanese women than it would have been to dress up four other white girls like them. That's where the difference between Katy and Gwen (and yes, Avril, haha) starts to become clearer. To me, at least!

Usually we're talking about issues in north america but colonialism pretty much fucked up most of the world and the remnants of that still exist, often is the favour of white individuals. In terms of gender, yeah you do have privileged. I mean all it means is that your experience isn't the same as someone else's and that because of that some things may be easier and that your perspective may not be completely relevant. Privilege gets used as an attack way to often and forces people to become defensive.

If that were the case it wouldn't be called privilege. Of course my experience is different depending on my race and gender, and that makes some things easier for me. It also makes some things harder. The same could be said for every single person on the face of the planet. Where I take issue with this whole argument is when people start insinuating that being of one specific race or gender is somehow easy mode for life all in the name of 'equality'.

I hate to be controversial, but I feel the need to add my opinions to this topic. I hope I don't step on any toes.

The pay gap and income inequality between men and women is bullshit. Equal pay for equal work.

Women (and human beings in general) should never suffer death threats just for expressing political beliefs. That includes people who make silly Youtube videos about videogames.

Sexual assault and harassment in our armed services is a national disgrace. Women should not have to fear career suicide or worse reporting predators wearing officer's uniforms.

Educational opportunities for women is a global issue.

Have I become one of those SJW's I've heard so much about?

I saw an interview with her where the interviewer tried to ask one of the four girls a question and Stefani said the interviewer couldn't talk to them.

It was fucking weeeeeeiiirrrddd.

@jerseyscum:

Hi,

I'd like to address a couple of your points by sharing some videos with you.

Pay gap - A couple of videos for this one, detailing how an individuals pay is determined and why the statistics you see thrown around so often is false, surely if the gap is that large then wouldn't the majority of companies fire as many men as possible to hire women instead?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwogDPh-Sow

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58arQIr882w

Education - Globally, women are doing worse as there are a lot of nations that reject the influences of the western societies and tend to favor males, but if we're talking strictly the US, according to the US Department Of Education, women are the majority graduates of Doctorates, Masters, Bachelors and Associates Degrees:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sKBMcLzRHY

The other points are completely agreeables.

@korlic: I kind of wish those videos took into account the traditional notion that a woman is the primary caregiver for children and how that influences a woman's career choices (perhaps taking a job with lower pay and less hours but with more time to spend caring for children, and so on), or how that influences employers (not hiring a woman because, god forbid, she might one day want to have children and work less or even quit).

Why wouldn't it be called privilege...? That's the definition of the word. You just said some things are easier for you based on your race and gender. You have the privilege of these things being easier for you for no fault of your own.

Forgive me, but I can't decipher what this sentence means: "Where I take issue with this whole argument is when people start insinuating that being of one specific race or gender is somehow easy mode for life all in the name of 'equality'."

I think... I think what you're trying to say here is that people have said you generally have an easier life than those without your privilege and that understanding that is part of having equality in society. I think maybe that's what you've heard? It's all about understanding context and that, because of how society treats people, we're generally not going to share the same experiences. Learning why those privileges might exist might help us to treat individuals more equally.

Generally in many places being white means you won't have to deal with racism in your society and media, because of your gender more people with encourage you to be empowered. That doesn't mean everything in you society is catered to you but generally, you and I get the long end of the stick. If I were to say, as a white, straight, male that I never see racism, sexism, or homophobia in my daily life and therefore I don't think it exists, my opinion would be one of privilege because I, personally have not had to deal with that.

I mean there's of course plenty of statistics to show that we do have privilege. In north america, you and a black friend of the same qualifications could apply for the same job and you're more likely to get that same job because you're white. Now that's not your fault, of course, but it is how society seems to work at the moment.

I understand why people are very resistant to this idea, everyone likes to think of themselves as the victim of society and often people take the idea of privilege as an attack. But, like I said many people use it like an attack.

And I think what you were trying to say is right. People, even minorities and women have privileges others don't have. This isn't to say that those privileges are generally equal or is an excuse to dismiss the issues that have been brought up, but we should be allowed to have a conversations about how society treats all of us and willing to admit some things are easier for some people than others.

No... you're just a decent human being with fairly uncontroversial beliefs and somewhat of an understanding of the world around you. Wait, I think that's the definition they use to mark people as "SJWs"

@gaff:

I can't really speak about the impact potential child bearing could have on a womans choice of education or career goal. I am not a woman.

I wouldn't say it's necessarily the job they chose to pursue, a female leaving university looking to become a high school math teacher should be paid the same as a male leaving university looking to become a high school math teacher, given their qualifications and experience are a match.

If these two math teachers were to make a baby, the first highly variable factor in the lives of these two teachers that will have an impact on pay is paternity leave. How many weeks or months to take before and after birth. What time a woman may arrive at work if they're ferrying children to a daycare centre, a nursery or school. How early a woman might leave each day to collect their children. It's all these highly variable factors that impacts a womans pay and her overall income.

On the employers side of things, discrimination is another variable factor, whether it's promotions, pay rises or to employ or reject. It happens frequently, not in all cases, but it would be naïve to think it doesn't. It's very difficult, if not impossible, to prevent discrimination. We have laws against it, there are punishments as deterrents, we are taught that it's wrong and yet still it exists. Heck there's even laws to encourage discrimination. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_quota)

I don't live in North America. Where I live, there are maybe 20 straight, white guys in my city of 220'000 people. Telling me that I 'generally' get the long end of the stick because I'm a straight, white guy is just that: a generalization. I feel like this conversation - and indeed the entire dialog - will go nowhere as long as people are clinging to generalizations to make points.

I understand the concept of privilege, and I understand how it can be an effective argument used properly against those who truly aren't aware of aspects of their lives that are made easier by their identity. I just don't think it's a productive idea to cling to when dealing with discrimination because far too often it's used to make it seem like someone's opinions are somehow irrelevant or their entire life is somehow easier based on their gender or race. It is at its root a discriminatory idea. I'm 100% sure there are some straight, white, North American guys out there who have had as hard a life as, or been discriminated against just as much as your average minority, LGBTQ or woman. There are many other factors at play. What if in your hypothetical situation, the white guy is fat and ugly and the black man is incredibly handsome? Saying someone is privileged due to their race or gender is trying to make black and white out of a bajillion shades of gray.

@sinusoidal, I hear what you're saying and it's something I addressed in post #42. If you haven't gotten a chance to read it, maybe you could and see that a lot of us have the same reservations you do. (Also, you're reading a North American website full of North Americans from an outside perspective, which is tougher for you.)

I would bet that a lot of resentful feelings come from simplistic approaches to the ideas of patriarchy and power and privilege. Our own experiences, whatever they are, offer contradictory evidence to a simple "white male power" narrative.

Here's what I've found: I don't like incomplete answers, and some other people don't mind them. And that's OK.

A group of feminists (with me, because I'm one of them) can sit around and talk about these ideas and be simplistic, and my ears will ring when someone makes a generalization or makes a "man tears" joke.

I get it (brain), but I don't get it (gut). It goes back to the "they're attacking ME" paranoia. The lizard brain reacts to a perceived threat that doesn't actually exist. I know (brain) that these people do not hate men and they do not literally believe that ALL white people have more overall privilege than ALL black people, but my gut reacts to the surface level meaning of the words in a way that theirs doesn't.

I really don't want to get too Internet-psychiatrist, but many of us are just concrete thinkers. We're nerdy, and a feature of nerddom is difficulty with abstract thinking. Others can play much more comfortably in the world of half-true/half-defined metaphor and our mind are trying to build castles of hard stone at all times. Press button quickly, get result. Do it again. And again. And again. Our brains are wired to reward that. Some people find that boring, even depressing.

Also, we're supremely conflict-averse. Small inter-personal problems become large interpersonal problems and perceived insults turn us into Montresor from The Cask of Amontillado.

So then I get to challenging my presumptions, and challenging myself is always far more satisfying to me than challenging others. (You can tell I've thought a lot about this stuff over the years. I've had to.)

I think it would be a very hard argument to make that a straight person has to face less discrimination than a gay person, or that a society limits men as much as women.

Listen I'm a chubby white guy, I was walking with my (incredibly handsome friend) down the street one night. A cop car rolled up next to me and asked if i was okay. I was confused and responded with a confused "Yeah....?" The cop car rolled on by. I asked my friend what that was about and he told me that the cops thought he was mugging me and that it happens quite a lot to him. He was wearing a damn sweater vest!

Like yeah, he can probably flirt with women better but I never get harassed by the police on my way home.

Yes, handsomeness is a privilege but it doesn't negate the white privilege I have.

You fear generalization, the problem is you're confusing who is doing the generalization. Privilege is about generalization, society generalizes me as a white straight male and tries to pander to what they expect me to be. It uses women as objects to try and get me to buy products, it encourages me into a majority of business, and it generally thinks I'm smarter than women or minorities. You're upset because you think people are generalizing you into privilege, well the society we live in, unfortunately generalizes us, that's what privilege is trying to address.

I mean you can be a poor, fat, ugly white guy and you still have the privilege of people not being racist towards you at least in a good majority of the world. I mean I lived in Hong Kong for two years and they were super racist to me, but they wouldn't be nearly as racist towards me if I was black. (no, not saying all people in Hong Kong are racists)

But that said, I'm interested in where you're living and what your experience has been.

Exactly. The idea of privilege is addressing the problem of generalization by introducing more generalizations. That seems to me to be the opposite of what we should be doing.

I find issues in their pure ideological approach on issues, over the top emotional investment, somewhat ironic obsession with self-victimhood and labeling anyone who disagrees with them a rapist and misogynist.

Any person who labels themselves SJW and doesn't do any of the above is fine with me though.

I'm pretty sure that just about no one labels themselves an "SWJ." You also might consider not focusing on the worst qualities that are only true of some of the people you disagree with. If you don't generalize people yourself, you won't be a hypocrite if you ask others to stop generalizing you.

I did the opposite of generalizing, that's why I said that any person under the movement who does not share the characteristics I mentioned is fine with me.

SJW didn't always come with negative connotations and there was a time people actually labeled themselves as such but you're right, nobody labels themselves as such anymore but people sure identify with it without using the name, so I'm referring to that portion of people.

I'm also not focusing on those qualities when I speak about SJW, I'm just expressing my opinion that any person who adheres to them does not sync with me.

You seem to be spinning my argument some weird way.

It really wasn't my intent to spin your argument. To me it read as if you were suggesting that social justice advocates who don't share those qualities are few and far between, and that would be generalizing. If that wasn't what you were suggesting, then I take back what I said. These are heated issues lately, it never helps to misrepresent anyone's feelings or opinions, and I'm sorry if I mistakenly did that with you.

@spaceinsomniac: No issue mate.

Yeah, but it also doesn't mean that those generalizations we have in society do not exist. They do, the more aware of them we are the better we will be at addressing them. I mean I can generally assume that if you're straight, you've never had to deal with actual homophobia in your life, that's a privilege. I don't think by stating things like that, we're adding to the damage caused by things like stereotypes.

I appreciate what you're trying to say, all I would recommend is to make sure your first instinct when somebody brings up privilege is to not act defensively and listen to what someone is trying to say about different experiences.

A huge problem with talking about these kinds of issues on the internet at large is that the people most often engaging with them are often unequipped to do so. Sociology is a massive, multi-disciplinary science that people can spend close to a decade or more studying for degrees. Most universities offer doctorates in the field. And yet we have a huge number of people who feel qualified to speak on the matter as an authority after a few Wikipedia articles and YouTube videos. It's Pop-Sociology, and it's become just as rampant and damaging as Pop-Psychology was and in many was still is.

There's also the issue of the language being used. Sociology, like all sciences (no matter how soft you may think it is) has it's own specific vocabulary, and using that vocabulary can cause unnecessary confusion. We see this most often with the term "racism." There's been a huge push recently for the sociological definition (prejudice plus power) to supersede the common definition (prejudice). What has resulted is unnecessary confusion and derailment of discussions over the definition of terms.

Honestly, if people want these topics to be taken seriously and for discussions to start being fruitful, we need to start being honest about what we know and don't know, and stop acting like having access to the internet is a shortcut to expertise.

To better understand the suffering caused by generalizing about privilege, I'd like to know what the suffering involves.

i.e., How do white males suffer in North America based on people believing in white/male privilege?

Does it impact employment? Social mobility? Educational opportunities?

Examining my own life, the suffering I have experienced with regard to belief in white/male privilege are all interpersonal/personal feelings. I have been made to feel (as opposed to simply feeling for my own internal reasons) uncomfortable for being white/male in a very tiny handful of spaces (feminist spaces during college, primarily).

I, personally, have not experienced any meaningful harm or suffering due to other people believing me to be privileged, but my experiences are only mine and I would like to hear other people share their direct, concrete (as possible) experiences.

Yeah that's just a rant against people you don't like. Let's not do that here, please.

@blastprocessing: That doesn't sound like sunshine or smiles.

@blastprocessing: That was fairly impolite.