LogFAQs > #881383598

The concept behind "White privilege" is real, but the perspective is poorly voiced and badly named.

It may be more appropriate to call this "majority bias". Case in point, a white person will hardly feel their "white privilege" in predominantly black/latino areas, or in foreign countries, where the same idea still applies.

At the same time, the people trying to raise attention to this, are doing so very badly, because it comes across as a bunch of finger-pointing and name-calling. For one thing, most people don't even really know what it even is (case in point, even TC had to explain it in detail by Post #10). Secondly, the whole argument is geared like white privilege is a "bad" thing. But no, white privilege is not bad, not having white privilege is bad--in a perfect world everyone would have "white privilege" (all minorities). If that doesn't make sense, that's because the name "white privilege" itself doesn't make sense. EVERYONE should feel enabled, unhindered, unpressured by their race--no bias for the majority. However, this has been dubbed "white privilege" and 'We don't like that people have it! Everything should suck for everyone!' It comes across accusatory and negative--pulling for change, instead of pushing.
---

- ThanatosMace