bloodyrosemccoy | Hypocrisy in Motion

Welcome, folks, to Amelia's Political Blog. It's all part of my fascination with sociology, I swear.

This is Your Nation on White Privilege
By Tim Wise
September 13, 2008

For those who still can’t grasp the concept of white privilege, or who are constantly looking for an easy-to-understand example of it, perhaps this list will help.

White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you, or your parents, because “every family has challenges,” even as black and Latino families with similar “challenges” are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.

White privilege is when you can call yourself a “fuckin’ redneck,” like Bristol Palin’s boyfriend does, who likes to “kick ass” if people mess with you, and who likes to “shoot shit,” for fun, and still be viewed as a responsible, all-American boy (and a great son-in-law to be) rather than a thug.

White privilege is when you can attend four different colleges in six years like Sarah Palin did (one of which you basically failed out of, then returned to after making up some coursework at a community college), and no one questions your intelligence or commitment to achievement, whereas a person of color who did this would be viewed as unfit for college, and probably someone who only got in in the first place because of affirmative action. ...

It goes on ...

Tip o' the blog to

kittikattie .

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

REALLY great article.

But you use this as if it were the Palin's fault that some people feel this way about class and race differences.

One could also say that it's awful when a woman is subjected to strident accusations from one faction that she "has no experience because she was a stay-at-home mom until a couple of years ago" then on the other hand is criticized for pursuing her career when her family is going through a trying time.

You're right, privilege itself is not her fault. And it is more complex than race--white privilege interacts with male privilege, class privilege, economic privilege, etc.. This article focuses on one part of a pretty big problem.

I have tried to focus on political qualifications (or lack thereof) rather than the silly things people are judging her on, and I've been frustrated by some of the actual sexism directed at her--like the things you mentioned. But the things like familial situations are important in one aspect--they have been exposing hypocrisy on the part of the candidates. I would LIKE to think I do this for all the candidates, to see whether their pronouncements of their values jive with their actions, but I can't say how well I'm doing.

As for this article ... two things. First, I think racial privilege needs to be recognized, because it's a very real aspect of this political battle that not enough people are noticing. The accusations of sexism and male privilege have gotten much more media attention than the racial aspect lately ... which is partially due to my second point: whether consciously or subconsciously, her party is certainly exploiting and manipulating these prejudices on both sides, exercising all the white privilege detailed in this article while still screaming about sexism when legitimate questions are put to Palin. I want more people to see that happening.

Thanks for the input.

Neither party is above exploiting and manipulating. I won't bring a cloud of cynicism to your journal but it's a fact that politics has become all about winning at whatever cost. Neither party can escape the scrutiny of a fact check, and both parties have attack dogs. Goodness knows, the Clintons and their chief attack dog James Carville honed it to a razor edge in 1992 and the battle for the Democratic nomination this year had its share of nasty infighting also, it's not confined to mudslinging between the different parties. Really, politics turned ugly during the Clarence Thomas hearings in the '80's. The left mounted a smear campaign against Justice Thomas that would never have been tolerated if the right had been saying the same thing about an African American nominee. From that point onward, politics has been exceedingly ugly and personal, and it sickens me.

Actually, the complaints raised about Thomas were legitimate ones, no matter how often his supporters claim otherwise. Anita Hill was hardly the only woman that Thomas had subjected to sexual harassment under his employ.

Not unlike the 42nd President, but apparently that doesn't disqualify one for the job.

What made him unlike the 42nd President is that no woman who ever worked for Clinton ever suffered any negative effects to her career for telling him "no". Pity that's not the case where Thomas is concerned, now innit?

The ones who had their names and reputations publicly dragged through the mud during his many denials might have a different opinion.

If he was their boss at the time that happened, then you might have something remotely resembling a point.

Wait, wait, does anyone actually think that guy isn't a thug and a bit frightening? Except for people who are the same as him. The other two, yeah, I can see that.

Some of the examples, to me, though, just seem like points that are ignored by Palin's supporters because they support her and are hypocritical, not particularly to do with the opponent being black... but I don't pretend to have much of an understanding of how things like that play into American politics.

Relatedly, I never really understood this thing where people seem to vote for someone just because they're in the same demographic as them - black, female, old, whatever. Do people actually do this? How do they justify it?

I really don't understand what happens over there sometimes. All politics are ridiculous sometimes, but most other countries' make more sense to me.

Hypocrisy in Motion

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject