Today, I\u2019m going to try to expand on that statement some, and to fold in some practical suggestions for folks who might see themselves unpleasantly reflected in that statement. And, just so it\u2019s clear, I absolutely include myself in that number. I belong to some marginalized groups: I\u2019m a multiply-queer, nonbinary survivor of child abuse who grew up poor, and I belong to a minority religious group with a dubious reputation in much of American culture. However, I also belong to some highly privileged groups: I\u2019m a white, mostly able-bodied, university-educated American, semi-comfortably ensconced in the dwindling middle class of the U.S., who can pass for a cisgender, heterosexual male.<\/p>\n
I don\u2019t bring up my marginalizations to dismiss my privileges, but to put both categories in context with one another. I am directly subjected to some political developments, and largely insulated from others. Political movements targeting queer and trans people and legislation enforcing Christian religious doctrine in the public sphere have a direct impact on me, while political movements targeting people of color and legislation disempowering people with disabilities have less of an impact<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n To put it more viscerally: while in some ways, America hates me, in other ways I\u2019m as safe as houses. That\u2019s privilege.<\/p>\n Like politics, privilege is a loaded term in today\u2019s America, and many people have what I can only describe as an allergic reaction when it comes up in conversation. I will also note that, in my experience, the vast majority of those allergic folks are white Americans of European descent. As a possible treatment for these allergies\u2014which are deeply, inextricably related\u2014I\u2019d like to suggest a practical course of action, in two parts: education and contemplation. One of my mother\u2019s favorite saying when I was growing up was, \u201cI can deal with anything, as long as I know what\u2019s going on.\u201d The obvious corollary is that we can\u2019t deal with anything if we don\u2019t know what\u2019s going on. Those of us who\u2019ve engaged in social and political discourse around issues of privilege, especially where race or gender are concerned, may have encountered the phrase \u201ceducate yourself,\u201d sometimes spoken with rather more ire than we might be comfortable hearing. This can be an uncomfortable, even painful thing to hear, especially when we feel like we\u2019re trying to be allies, but it\u2019s often a necessary indicator that we\u2019ve missed something. People with privilege are told to educate ourselves because\u2026<\/p>\n Of course, when we don\u2019t even know what it is we don\u2019t know, being told to go educate ourselves can feel less than helpful, and can leave us feeling rejected, attacked, frustrated, and hurt when we\u2019re sincerely trying to do the right thing.<\/p>\n And that can really suck.<\/p>\n Fortunately, there are a lot of folks out here who\u2019ve taken on the task of educating people on these issues. Writers like Ta-Nehisi Coates<\/a>, Ijeoma Oluo<\/a>, and Damon Young<\/a> have made a breathtaking amount of work on race (and gender, sexuality, and politics) available in print and online. Similarly, writers like Julia Serano<\/a>, Emi Koyama<\/a>, and Lindy West<\/a> offer a breadth and depth of perspectives on feminism (and gender, sexuality, and politics), also in print and online. Any of these folks would be a marvelous place to begin your self-education on the issues they address. (And if you feel you\u2019ve gotten value from their work, I highly encourage you to buy their books, buy tickets to see them in person, and share their writings with others.)<\/p>\n How does that all intersect with politics?<\/p>\n In the post previous to the previous one<\/a>, I put forward the notion that politics doesn\u2019t mean \u201cwhat politicians do,\u201d but rather \u201cthe ways we negotiate power in community.\u201d I know this is a repellent notion for some folks, but I really do think it\u2019s an important point to get. Politics is about how we share (or don\u2019t share) power with each other, and if we consign it to the nether realms, we are literally giving away power, surrendering it to a professional political class which is more than happy to accept it. Can we honestly be surprised, then, when that political class acts in its own best interests, rather than ours? (Spoiler alert: no.)<\/p>\n The trouble is, we\u2019re responsible for what\u2019s done with our power, whether we claim it or deny it. If we claim it, or reclaim it, we accept that responsibility, but we also get to choose. We can decide how (or if) that power is used, and for whom. We can act in what we think are our own best interests, or on behalf of everyone in our community, for the greater good. That\u2019s the problem democracy was intended to solve, but all too often, democracy is derailed by that desire to advance our own status, usually at someone else\u2019s expense\u2026 and we\u2019re back to privilege, and power.<\/p>\n Philosopher John Rawls posited a solution for this question in his 1971 book A Theory of Justice<\/em>. Consider the following thought experiment: you have been appointed supreme legislator, occupying what Rawls calls the original position<\/a>. Starting tomorrow, society will be reordered to your wishes, and all laws, ethical standards, and cultural norms will be whatever you dictate. There\u2019s a catch, though: you don\u2019t get to know what position you\u2019ll hold in this new society.<\/em> You\u2019re behind the veil of ignorance<\/a>: you won\u2019t know your own skin color, your economic status, your sexual orientation or tastes, not even your gender, until the big reveal tomorrow. Do you construct a society where some groups of people are privileged over others, banking on the possibility that you\u2019ll get lucky\u2026 and risking the possibility of ending up at the bottom of the social hierarchy? Or do you try to make society as level as possible, out of enlightened self-interest<\/a>?<\/p>\n And if we know that the second answer is the best and wisest choice, why aren\u2019t we making it?<\/p>\n Stay safe, dear ones, until next time. \u2665<\/p>\n “…we’re responsible for what’s done with our power, whether we claim it or deny it. If we claim it, or reclaim it, we accept that responsibility, but we also get to choose. We can decide how or if that power is used, and for whom.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3023,"featured_media":465,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[116,22,119,120,19,114,118,122,123,121],"class_list":["post-443","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-apoliticality","tag-feminism","tag-john-rawls","tag-original-position","tag-politics","tag-power","tag-privilege","tag-racism","tag-sexism","tag-veil-of-ignorance"],"yoast_head":"\n
\n![\"Think](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/790\/2017\/11\/flower.jpg\")
Education, or, \u201cWhy Is Everyone So Mad at Me All The Time?\u201d<\/h3>\n
\n
Contemplation: A Thought Experiment in Politics, Privilege, and Power<\/h3>\n
\n\n