For the Privileged

A few days ago I transitioned from my old-new-home back down to my new-home-in-my-old-city. I lugged boxes around in 100-degree weather like the wonder woman I tend to be, and when I got down for a break, I reviewed a message from a concerned male acquaintance asking how he as a recipient of privilege (as a male) could move beyond that privilege to aide in change and revolution.

Instantly, with much sincerity and love, I applauded his efforts at acknowledging himself as a recipient of privilege on the basis of his maleness - and in comparison with Black females alone. It has been my experience that getting men of color to acknowledge privilege is a difficult task. The thing that is important to remember is that we are not only one thing; we do not only have to be one thing. The problem that a lot of people have with Black women and feminism/womanism/women's rights is that these ideas are centred around the oppression faced as women, versus the oppression on fronts of our color. Unfortunately for women of color, racial and gender-based oppression can come both separately and together. Also, while men of color (among other classifications) are discriminated against as a result of their color, they are often give special bias as a result of their maleness - hence, "privilege." My answer to moving beyond privilege is that acknowledging it is the best way to start. I mean, if you know you're in a privileged class in our shitty socially constructed hierarchy, then the best thing you can do initially is to acknowledge the privilege and educate other members of your group who don't identify as privileged understand what privilege is and the role that it plays in our society - both historically and in a contemporary context.

The next question, though, was this: if he (and others) know and can acknowledge that there is a disparity in the treatment of men and women, white people and persons of color, the rich and the poor -- what is their incentive for evening out the playing field?

This question always reminds me of those using-religion-to-justify-morality statements; surely someone who is able to acknowledge and fully understand how they have benefited by privilege, in a society that allows the construction of social and systemic inequality on the basis of any characteristic they do not control, should feel for the disadvantaged on want to change it just on that basis, right? Surely there should be no incentive for doing the right thing beyond their own conscience and consciousness, right? I don't know the answer. I don't know that there is an incentive beyond feeling for the those who are disadvantaged and oppressed in a modern and allegedly intellectually advanced era.

Be Righteous.

Also, for more posts on privilege, click here to a post I wrote a while back. It has links to some good work done on acknowledging male privilege in the Black community.

Hey, kiddies! School's Out - Time to Dumpster Dive!

I probably would not have caught wind of this post if not for my good friend's utter amusement at conservative talk radio. Check out his blog!

Good old Rush Limbaugh. Good old Rush Limbaugh and his anti-poverty (or, better stated - anti-impoverished) warped sense of being. Good old elitist Rush Limbaugh who grew up in a family filled with lawyers (and money), who has no experience relying on school lunches or even the slightest concept of what it is like to be impoverished. I wonder if he has ever met a poor person in his life? Yes, good old Rush.

We know he has a problem with social groups that are not like him: upper-mid to wealthy, well-fed, white, conservative, Parkinson-free, men. You see, folks, in 1993, Rush Limbaugh did a little commentary about homeless people and an organization called Project Dignity, a homeless advocacy group that serves the homeless population in several ways - including teaching them the safest way to pick food from a dumpster. Limbaugh has an issue with this because, instead of seeing it as a reality and necessity for the impoverished, he thinks that it perpetuates and maintains homelessness. And boy did he show his true colors then:

Here we are, only 17 years later, and he's extended his reach to cover the impoverished children who rely on reduced lunches. With talks of increasing food stamp benefits for the unemployed through the summer - because their children rely on free or reduced lunches - Rush Limbaugh got his panties in a bunch and expects that these children dumpster dive for survival. Because who gives a what-what about poor, hungry children not eating? Why should he care when there are soooooooooo many ways to eat?

It just kills me that the conservative right-wingers can begin to say that liberal progressives are the problem with America when it's clear that we are focused on advancing social programs for the advancement of populations that are traditionally (and currently, obviously) not given equal treatment or assistance in moving forward and succeeding. It angers me to hear the complete disregard for the youth of the poor; and it's upsetting that people like Rush Limbaugh aren't affected by seeing their fellow Americans in the slums of the country, hurting and starving.

It isn't hard to believe that this guy, one of a few quacks, argued against sending aid to Haiti after the earthquakes; I wouldn't mind seeing him become completely irrelevant. Just disappear already!

On another note, if the benefits aren't enough for children to eat, or you know children that are in need of meals, there are several organizations that give free meals to children over the summer. I'm not sure who may be out there reading, but my hope is that if you know (or don't know personally) a person in need, you'll be inspired to help.

Be Righteous.

For the full recent commentary on "dumpster diving" sans Ed Schultz, click here.