|
|
Through work to bring materials and perspectives from Women's
Studies into the rest of the curriculum, I have often noticed men's unwillingness to grant
that they are overprivileged in the curriculum, even though they may grant that women are
disadvantaged. Denials that amount to taboos surround the subject of advantages that men
gain from women's disadvantages. These denials protect male privilege from being fully
recognized, acknowledged, lessened, or ended. Thinking through unacknowledged male privilege as a phenomenon with
a life of its own, I realized that since hierarchies in our society are interlocking,
there was most likely a phenomenon of white privilege that was similarly denied and
protected, but alive and real in its effects. As a white person, I realized I had been
taught about racism as something that puts others at a disadvantage, but had been taught
not to see one of its corollary aspects, white privilege, which puts me at an advantage. I think whites are carefully taught not to recognize white
privilege, as males are taught not to recognize male privilege. So I have begun in an
untutored way to ask what it is like to have white privilege. This paper is a partial
record of my personal observations and not a scholarly analysis. It is based on my daily
experiences within my particular circumstances. I have come to see white privilege as an invisible package of
unearned assets that I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was
"meant" to remain oblivious. White privilege is like an invisible weightless
knapsack of special provisions, assurances, tools, maps, guides, codebooks, passports,
visas, clothes, compass, emergency gear, and blank checks. Since I have had trouble facing white privilege, and describing its
results in my life, I saw parallels here with men's reluctance to acknowledge male
privilege. Only rarely will a man go beyond acknowledging that women are disadvantaged to
acknowledging that men have unearned advantage, or that unearned privilege has not been
good for men's development as human beings, or for society's development, or that
privilege systems might ever be challenged and changed. I will review here several types or layers of denial that I see at
work protecting, and preventing awareness about, entrenched male privilege. Then I will
draw parallels, from my own experience, with the denials that veil the facts of white
privilege. Finally, I will list fortysix ordinary and daily ways in which I experience
having white privilege, by contrast with my African American colleagues in the same
building. This list is not intended to be generalizable. Others can make their own lists
from within their own life circumstances. Writing this paper has been difficult, despite warm receptions for
the talks on which it is based. 1 For describing white privilege makes one newly
accountable. As we in Women's Studies work reveal male privilege and ask men to give up
some of their power, so one who writes about having white privilege must ask, "Having
described it, what will I do to lessen or end it?" The denial of men's overprivileged state takes many forms in
discussions of curriculum change work. Some claim that men must be central in the
curriculum because they have done most of what is important or distinctive in life or in
civilization. Some recognize sexism in the curriculum but deny that it makes male students
seem unduly important in life. Others agree that certain individual thinkers are
male oriented but deny that there is any systemic tendency in disciplinary
frameworks or epistemology to overempower men as a group. Those men who do grant that male
privilege takes institutionalized and embedded forms are still likely to deny that male
hegemony has opened doors for them personally. Virtually all men deny that male overreward
alone can explain men's centrality in all the inner sanctums of our most powerful
institutions. Moreover, those few who will acknowledge that male privilege systems have
overempowered them usually end up doubting that we could dismantle these privilege
systems. They may say they will work to improve women's status, in the society or in the
university, but they can't or won't support the idea of lessening men's. In curricular
terms, this is the point at which they say that they regret they cannot use any of the
interesting new scholarship on women because of the syllabus is full. When the talk turns
to giving men less cultural room, even the most thoughtful and fair-minded of the men I
know will tend to reflect, or fall back on, conservative assumptions about the
inevitability of present gender relations and distributions of power, calling on precedent
or sociobiology and pshychobiology to demonstrate that male domination is natural and
follows inevitably from evolutionary pressures. Others resort to arguments from
"experience" or religion or social responsibility or wishing and dreaming. After I realized, through faculty development work in Women's
Studies, the extent to which men work from a base of unacknowledged privilege, I
understood that much of their oppressiveness was unconscious. Then I remembered the
frequent charges from women of color that white women whom they encounter are oppressive.
I began to understand why we are justly seen as oppressive, even when we don't see
ourselves that way. At the very least, obliviousness of one's privileged state can make a
person or group irritating to be with. I began to count the ways in which I enjoy unearned
skin privilege and have been conditioned into oblivion about its existence, unable to see
that it put me "ahead" in any way, or put my people ahead, overrewarding us an
yet also paradoxically damaging us, or that it could or should be changed. My schooling gave me no training in seeing myself as an oppressor,
as an unfairly advantaged person, or as a participant in a damaged culture. I was taught
to see myself as an individual whose moral state depended on her individual moral will. At
school, we were not taught about slavery in any depth; we were not taught to see
slaveholders as damaged people. Slaves were seen as the only group at risk of being
dehumanized. My schooling followed the pattern which Elizabeth Minnich has point our:
whites are taught to think of their lives as morally neutral, normative, and average, and
also ideal, so that when we work to benefit others, this seen as work that will allow
"them" to be more like "us." I think many of us know how obnoxious
this attitude can be in men. After frustration with men who would not recognize male privilege, I
decided to try to work on myself at least by identifying some of the daily effects of
white privilege in my life. It is crude work, at this stage, but I will give here a list
of special circumstances and conditions I experience that I did not earn but that I have
been made to feel are mine by birth, by citizenship, and by virtue of being a
conscientious law-abiding "normal" person of goodwill. I have chosen those
conditions that I think in my case attach somewhat more to skin-color privilege than
to class, religion, ethnic status, or geographic location, though these other privileging
factors are intricately intertwined. As far as I can see, my Afro-American co-workers,
friends, and acquaintances with whom I come into daily or frequent contact in this
particular time, place, and line of work cannot count on most of these conditions. 1. I can, if I wish, arrange to be in the company of people of my
race most of the time. 2. I can avoid spending time with people whom I was trained to
mistrust and who have learned to mistrust my kind or me. 3. If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or
purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live. 4. I can be reasonably sure that my neighbors in such a location
will be neutral or pleasant to me. 5. I can go shopping alone most of the time, fairly well assured
that I will not be followed or harassed b y store detectives. 6. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the
paper and see people of my race widely and positively represented. 7. When I am told about our national heritage or about
"civilization," I am shown that people of my color made it what it is. 8. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials
that testify to the existence of their race. 9. If I want to, I can be pretty sure of finding a publisher for
this piece on white privilege. 10. I can be fairly sure of having my voice heard in a group in
which I am the only member of my race. 11. I can be casual about whether or not to listen to another
woman's voice in a group in which she is the only member of her race. 12. I can go into a book shop and count on finding the writing of my
race, represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods that fit with my cultural
traditions, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can deal with my hair. 13. Whether I use checks, credit cards, or cash, I can count on my
skin color not to work against the appearance that I am financially reliable. 14. I could arrange to protect our young children most of the time
from people who might not like them. 15. I did not have to educate our children to be aware of systemic
racism for their own daily physical protection. 16. I can be pretty sure that my children's teachers and employers
will tolerate them if they fit school and workplace norms; my chief worries about them do
not concern others' attitudes toward their race. 17. I can talk with my mouth full and not have people put this down
to my color. 18. I can swear, or dress in secondhand clothes, or not answer
letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty, or
the illiteracy of my race. 19. I can speak in public to a powerful male group without putting
my race on trial. 20. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a
credit to my race. 21. I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group. 22. I can remain oblivious to the language and customs of persons of
color who constitute the world's majority without feeling in my culture any penalty for
such oblivion. 2 3. I can criticize our government and talk about how much I fear
its policies and behavior without being seen as a cultural outsider. 24. I can be reasonably sure that if I ask to talk to "the
person in charge," I will be facing a person of my race. 25. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax
return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race. 26. I can easily buy posters, postcards, picture books, greeting
cards, dolls, toys, and children's magazines featuring people of my race. 27. I can go home from most meetings of organizations I belong to
feeling somewhat tied in, rather than isolated, out of place, outnumbered, unheard, held
at a distance, or feared. 2 8. I can be pretty sure that an argument with a colleague of
another race is more likely to jeopardize her chances for advancement than to jeopardize
mine. 29. I can be fairly sure that if I argue for the promotion of a
person of another race, or a program centering on race, this is not likely to cost me
heavily within my present setting, even if my colleagues disagree with me. If I declare there is a racial issue at hand, or there isn't a
racial issue at hand, my race will lend me more credibility for either position than a
person of color will have. 31. I can choose to ignore developments in minority writing and
minority activist programs, or disparage them, or learn from them, but in any case, I can
find ways to be more or less protected from negative consequences of any of these choices. 32. My culture gives me little fear about ignoring the perspectives
and powers of people of other races. 33. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing, or body odor
will be taken as a reflection on my race. 34. I can worry about racism without being seen as selfinterested
or selfseeking. 35. I can take a job with an affirmative action employer without
having my coworkers on the job suspect that I got it because of my race. 36. If my day, week, or year is going badly, I need not ask of each
negative episode or situation whether it has racial overtones. 37. I can be pretty sure of finding people who would be willing to
talk with me and advise me about my next steps, professionally. 38. I can think over many options, social, political, imaginative,
or professional, without asking whether a person of my race would be accepted or allowed
to do what I want to do. 39. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect
on my race. 40. I can choose public accommodation without fearing that people of
my race cannot get in or will be mistreated in the places I have chosen. 41. I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help, my race will
not work against me. 42. I can arrange my activities so that I will never have to
experience feelings of rejection owing to my race. 43. If I have low credibility as a leader, I can be sure that my
race is not the problem. 44. I can easily find academic courses and institutions that give
attention only to people of my race. 45. I can expect figurative language and imagery in all of the arts
to testify to experiences of my race. 46. I can choose blemish cover or bandages in "flesh"
color and have them more or less match my skin. I repeatedly forgot each of the realizations on this list until I wrote it down. For me, white privilege has turned out to be an elusive and fugitive subject. The pressure to avoid it is great, for in facing it I must give up the myth of meritocracy. If these things are true, this is not such a free country; one's life is not what one makes it; many doors open for certain people through no virtues of their own. These perceptions mean also that my moral condition is not what I had been led to believe. The appearance of being a good citizen rather than a troublemaker comes in large part from having all sorts of doors open automatically because of my color. A further paralysis of nerve comes from literary silence protecting privilege. My clearest memories of finding such analysis are in Lillian Smith's unparalleled Killers of the Dream and Margaret Andersen's review of Karen and Mamie Fields' Lemon Swamp. Smith, for example, wrote about
walking toward black children on the street and knowing they would step into the gutter;
Andersen contrasted the pleasure that she, as a white child, took on summer driving trips
to the south with Karen Fields' memories of driving in a closed car stocked with all
necessities lest, in stopping, her black family should suffer "insult, or
worse." Adrienne Rich also recognizes and writes about daily experiences of
privilege, but in my observation, white women's writing in this area is far more often on
systemic racism than on our daily lives as light-skinned women.2 In unpacking this invisible knapsack of white privilege, I have
listed conditions of daily experience that I once took for granted, as neutral, normal,
and universally available to everybody, just as I once thought of a malefocused
curriculum as the neutral or accurate account that can speak for all. Nor did I think of
any of these perquisites as bad for the holder. I now think that we need a more finely
differentiated taxonomy of privilege, for some of these varieties are only what one would
want for everyone in a just society, and others give license to be ignorant, oblivious,
arrogant, and destructive. Before proposing some more finely tuned categorization, I will
make some observations about the general effects of these conditions on my life and
expectations. In this potpourri of examples, some privileges make me feel at home
in the world. Others allow me to escape penalties or dangers that others suffer. Through
some, I escape fear, anxiety, insult, injury, or a sense of not being welcome, not being
real. Some keep me from having to hide, to be in disguise, to feel sick or crazy, to
negotiate each transaction from the position of being an outsider or, within my group, a
person who is suspected of having too close links with a dominant culture. Most keep me
from having to be angry. I see a pattern running through the matrix of white privilege, a
pattern of assumptions that were passed on to me as a white person. There was one main
piece of cultural turf; it was my own turf, and I was among those who could control the
turf. I could measure up to the cultural standards and take advantage of the many options
I saw around me to make what the culture would call a success of my life. My skin color
was an asset for any move I was educated to want to make. I could think of myself as
"belonging" in major ways and of making social systems work for me. I could
freely disparage, fear, neglect, or be oblivious to anything outside of the dominant
cultural forms. Being of the main culture, I could also criticize it fairly freely. My
life was reflected back to me frequently enough so that I felt, with regard to my race, if
not to my sex, like one of the real people. Whether through the curriculum or in the newspaper, the television,
the economic system, or the general look of people in the streets, I received daily
signals and indications that my people counted and that others either didn't exist or
must be trying, not very successfully, to be like people of my race. I was given
cultural permission not to hear voices of people of other races or a tepid cultural
tolerance for hearing or acting on such voices. I was also raised not to suffer seriously
from anything that darkerskinned people might say about my group, "protected,"
though perhaps I should more accurately say prohibited, through the habits of my
economic class and social group, from living in racially mixed groups or being reflective
about interactions between people of differing races. In proportion as my racial group was being made confident,
comfortable, and oblivious, other groups were likely being made unconfident,
uncomfortable, and alienated. Whiteness protected me from many kinds of hostility,
distress, and violence, which I was being subtly trained to visit in turn upon people of
color. For this reason, the word "privilege" now seems to me
misleading. Its connotations are too positive to fit the conditions and behaviors which
"privilege systems" produce. We usually think of privilege as being a favored
state, whether earned, or conferred by birth or luck. School graduates are reminded they
are privileged and urged to use their (enviable) assets well. The word
"privilege" carries the connotation of being something everyone must want. Yet
some of the conditions I have described here work to systemically overempower certain
groups. Such privilege simply confers dominance, gives permission to control,
because of one's race or sex. The kind of privilege that gives license to some people to
be, at best, thoughtless and, at worst, murderous should not continue to be referred to as
a desirable attribute. Such "privilege" may be widely desired without being in
any way beneficial to the whole society. Moreover, though "privilege" may confer power, it does not
confer moral strength. Those who do not depend on conferred dominance have traits and
qualities that may never develop in those who do. Just as Women's Studies courses indicate
that women survive their political circumstances to lead lives that hold the human race
together, so "underprivileged" people of color who are the world's majority have
survived their oppression and lived survivors' lives from which the white global minority
can and must learn. In some groups, those dominated have actually become strong through not
having all of these unearned advantages, and this gives them a great deal to teach the
others. Members of socalled privileged groups can seem foolish, ridiculous, infantile,
or dangerous by contrast. I want, then, to distinguish between earned strength and unearned
power conferred systemically. Power from unearned privilege can look like strength when it
is, in fact, permission to escape or to dominate. But not all of the privileges on my list
are inevitably damaging. Some, like the expectation that neighbors will be decent to you,
or that your race will not count against you in court, should be the norm in a just
society and should be considered as the entitlement of everyone. Others, like the
privilege not to listen to less powerful people, distort the humanity of the holders as
well as the ignored groups. Still others, like finding one's staple food everywhere, may
be a function of being a member of a numerical majority in the population. Others have to
do with not pervasive-negative stereotyping and mythology. We might at least start by distinguishing between positive
advantages that we can work to spread, to the point where they are not advantages at all
but simply part of the normal civic and social fabric, and negative types of advantage
that unless rejected will always reinforce our present hierarchies. For example, the
positive "privilege" of belonging, the feeling that one belongs within the human
circle, as Native Americans say, fosters development and should not be seen as privilege
for a few. It is, let us say, an entitlement that none of us should have to earn; ideally
it is an unearned entitlement. At present, since only a few have it, it is an unearned
advantage for them. The negative "privilege" that gave me cultural
permission not to take darkerskinned Others seriously can be seen as arbitrarily
conferred dominance and should not be desirable for anyone. This paper results from a
process of coming to see that some of the power that I originally saw as attendant on
being a human being in the United States consisted in unearned advantage and confirmed
dominance, as well as other kinds of special circumstance not universally taken for
granted. In writing this paper I have also realized that white identity and
status (as well as class identity and status) give me considerable power to choose whether
to broach this subject and its trouble. I can pretty well decide whether to disappear and
avoid and not listen and escape the dislike I may engender in other people through this
essay, or interrupt, answer, interpret, preach, correct, criticize, and control to some
extent what goes on in reaction to it. Being white, I am given considerable power to
escape many kinds of danger or penalty as well as to choose which risks I want to take. There is an analogy here, once again, with Women's Studies. Our male
colleagues do not have a great deal to lose in supporting Women's Studies, but they do not
have a great deal to lose if they oppose it either. They simply have the power to decide
whether to commit themselves to more equitable distributions of power. They will probably
feel few penalties whatever choice they make; they do not seem, in any obvious shortterm
sense, the ones at risk, though they and we are all at risk because of the behaviors that
have been Through Women's Studies work I have met very few men who are truly
distressed about systemic, unearned male and confirmed dominance. And so one question for
me and others like me is whether we will be like them, or whether we will get truly
distressed, even outraged, about unearned race advantage and conferred dominance and if
so, what we will do to lessen them. In any case, we need to do more work in identifying
how they actually affect our daily lives. We need more down-toearth writing by people
about these taboo subjects. We need more understanding of the ways in which white
"privilege" damages white people, for these are not the same ways in which it
damages the victimized. Skewed white psyches are an inseparable part of the picture,
though I do not want to confuse the kinds of damage done to the holders of special assets
and to those who suffer the deficits. Many, perhaps most, of our white students in the
United States think that racism doesn't affect them because they are not people of color;
they do not see "whiteness" as a racial identity. Many men likewise think that
Women's Studies does not bear on their own existences because they are not female; they do
not see themselves as having gendered identities. Insisting on the universal
"effects" of "privilege" systems, then, becomes one of our chief
tasks, and being more explicit about the particular effects in particular contexts is
another. Men need to join us in this work. In addition, since race and sex are not the only advantaging systems
at work, we need to similarly examine the daily experience of having age advantage, or
ethnic advantage, or physical ability, or advantage related to nationality, religion, or
sexual orientation. Professor Marnie Evans suggested to me that in many ways the list I
made also applies directly to heterosexual privilege. This is a still more taboo subject
than race privilege: the daily ways in which heterosexual privilege makes some persons
comfortable or powerful, providing supports, assets, approvals, and rewards to those who
live or expect to live in heterosexual pairs. Unpacking that content is still more
difficult, owing to the deeper imbeddedness of heterosexual advantage and dominance and
stricter taboos surrounding these. But to start such an analysis I would put this observation from my
own experience: The fact that I live under the same roof with a man triggers all kinds of
societal assumptions about my worth, politics, life, and values and triggers a host of
unearned advantages and powers. After recasting many elements from the original list I
would add further observations like these: 1. My children do not have to answer questions about why I live with
my partner (my husband). 2. I have no difficulty finding neighborhoods where people approve
of our household. 3. Our children are given texts and classes that implicitly support
our kind of family unit and do not turn them against my choice of domestic partnership. 4. I can travel alone or with my husband without expecting
embarrassment or hostility in those who deal with us. 5. Most people I meet will see my marital arrangements as an asset
to my life or as a favorable comment on my likability, my competence, or my mental health. 6. I can talk about the social events of a weekend without fearing
most listeners, reactions. 7. I will feel welcomed and "normal" in the usual walks of
public life, institutional and social. 8. In many contexts, I am seen as "all right" in daily
work on women because I do not live chiefly with women. Difficulties and dangers surrounding the task of finding parallels
are many. Since racism, sexism, and heterosexism are not the same, the advantages
associated with them should not be seen as the same. In addition, it is hard to isolate
aspects of unearned advantage that derive chiefly from social class, economic class, race,
religion, region, sex, or ethnic identity. The oppressions are both distinct and
interlocking, as the Combahee River Collective statement of 1977 continues to remind us
eloquently.3 One factor seems clear about all of the interlocking oppressions.
They take both active forms that we can see and embedded forms that members of the
dominant group are taught not to see. In my class and place, I did not see myself as
racist because I was taught to recognize racism only in individual acts of meanness by
members of my group, never in invisible systems conferring racial dominance on my group
from birth. Likewise, we are taught to think that sexism or heterosexism is carried on
only through intentional, individual acts of discrimination, meanness, or cruelty, rather
than in invisible systems conferring unsought dominance on certain groups. Disapproving of
the systems won't be enough to change them. I was taught to think that racism could end if
white individuals changed their attitudes; many men think sexism can be ended by
individual changes in daily behavior toward women. But a man's sex provides advantage for
him whether or not he approves of the way in which dominance has been conferred on his
group. A "white" skin in the United States opens many doors for whites whether
or not we approve of the way dominance has been conferred on us. Individual acts can
palliate, but cannot end, these problems. To redesign social systems, we need first to
acknowledge their colossal unseen dimensions. The silences and denials surrounding
privilege are the key political tool here. They keep the thinking about equality or equity
incomplete, protecting unearned advantage and conferred dominance by making these taboo
subjects. Most talk by whites about equal opportunity seems to me now to be about equal
opportunity to try to get into a position of dominance while denying that systems of
dominance exist. Obliviousness about white advantage, like obliviousness about male
advantage, is kept strongly inculturated in the United States so as to maintain the myth
of meritocracy, the myth that democratic choice is equally available to all. Keeping most
people unaware that freedom of confident action is there for just a small number of people
props up those in power and serves to keep power in the hands of the same groups that have
most of it already. Though systemic change takes many decades, there are pressing
questions for me and I imagine for some others like me if we raise our daily consciousness
on the perquisites of being lightskinned. What will we do with such knowledge? As we
know from watching men, it is an open question whether we will choose to use unearned
advantage to weaken invisible privilege systems and whether we will use any to our
arbitrarily awarded power to try to reconstruct power systems on a broader base. **I have appreciated commentary on this paper from the Working
Papers Committee of the Wellesley College Center for Research on Women, from members of
the Dodge seminar, and from many individuals, including Margaret Andersen, Sorel Berman,
Joanne Braxton, Johnnella Butler, Sandra Dickerson, Marnie Evans, Beverly GuySheftall,
Sandra Harding, Eleanor Hinton Hoytt, Pauline Houston, Paul Lauter, Joyce Miller, Mary
Norris, Gloria Oden, Beverly Smith, and John Walter. 1. This paper was presented at the Virginia Women's Studies
Association conference in Richmond in April, 1986, and the American Educational Research
Association conference in Boston in October, 1986, and discussed with two groups of
participants in the Dodge seminars for Secondary School Teachers in New York and Boston in
the spring of 1987. 2. Andersen, Margaret, "Race and the Social Science Curriculum:
A Teaching and Learning Discussion." Radical Teacher, November, 1984, pp.
1720. Smith, Lillian, Killers of the Dream, 3. "A Black Feminist Statement," The Combahee River
Collective, pp. 13 22 in G. Hull, P. Scott, B. Smith, Eds., All the Women Are White, All
the Blacks Are Men, But Some of Us Are Brave: Black Women's Studies, Old Westbury, N.Y.:
The Feminist Press, 1982 |
Last modified February 23, 1998.
|