[clug] Open Source Software's Dirty Little Secret

[Daniel Pittman]

Sam Couter <sam at couter.id.au> writes:
> Jacinta Richardson <jarich at perltraining.com.au> wrote:
>
>> PS: Daniel mentioned some privileges.  Understanding the privileges you
>> have can be quite confronting, but I have certainly found the following
>> links to be helpful:
>>
>> * White privilege:
>> http://womenscreativecollective.org/blog/2009/01/white-privilege-unpacking-the-invisible-knapsack/
>>
>> * Male privilege:
>> http://www.amptoons.com/blog/the-male-privilege-checklist/
>>
>> * Heterosexual privilege
>> http://www.cs.earlham.edu/%7Ehyrax/personal/files/student_res/straightprivilege.htm
>
> The preamble in those links talk about whites/males/straights having
> privileges because blacks/women/homosexuals are discriminated against,
> and therefore whites/males/straights are better off in comparison.

That is a pretty reasonable summation of it, I think.  The dictionary
definition is a non-discriminatory version of the same, and in context it
refers to some specific privilege, or power imbalance, or discrimination
between two groups.

It is important to note, though, that you can benefit from privilege *without*
doing, saying, thinking, or even believing anything discriminatory.

It is also important to note that having privilege in some area does *not*
make it impossible for you to suffer in another, such as the case of a gay
man, or a disabled white person, who will have some (male, white) privileges,
but suffer in others (sexual, or "ableist"[1], discrimination).


Finally, privilege is *not* a binary state...

> But then I see the lists of supposed privileges, and when I read them I
> don't think most of them are privileges at all because they are pretty basic
> human rights that everybody should expect.

...because, yes, those points mostly come down to basic things like "treat
people equally without regard to gender/sexuality/whatever" at the end of the
day.

It also means that you don't have to have *every* checkbox on that list to
have privilege.


> It makes me sad and a bit angry that some classes of people still have to
> face the kind of discrimination in those lists, but I don't see that I, a
> member of all three privileged classes, have anything to lose by eliminating
> such discrimination.  Your freedom to exercise your basic human rights
> doesn't infringe my right to exercise mine.

I agree with this, mostly.  I know that as someone with a whole bunch of
privilege I probably /will/ lose a bit by eliminating that inequality, but
I feel comfortable enough that I can compete without a head start.[2] ;)

> I guess I disagree with this idea of privilege as I've seen it so far (just
> those three links).
>
> I don't see a zero-sum game when it comes to privilege and ending these
> kinds of discrimination. Am I doing it wrong?

I think so, but I can't quite tell where, so I can't say "just think
differently *here*" about it.

What I really don't quite follow is how you went from the discussion to a
zero-sum game being involved anywhere.  Perhaps if you explain that in a
little more detail it will become clear?


To risk a guess at what happened, though, let me address the most common
causes for similar sorts of jumps in the past, even though I know it may well
not be what /you/ thought:

The purpose of things like the "male privilege checklist" is to be a basic
tool that helps people go through the list and start to see where they should
pay attention to their lives in order to start seeing privilege.  It isn't
intended to be an exhaustive list, or anything beyond that.


The purpose of the discussion of privilege is to make people aware of how much
of this discrimination, positive or negative, goes on around them whatever
they do.

It isn't about eliminating a specific list of problems, or about taking away
rights from anyone.  Privilege itself isn't about changing anything, just
labeling things for easy identification and discussion.

It is often associated with discussions about change, naturally, because many
privileges are worth (IMO, obviously) eliminating, ideally by raising everyone
up to the same level *without* pushing anyone down at all.

Regards,
        Daniel

Footnotes: 
[1]  Not the nicest construction, but it seems to be the term that won.

[2]  For example, being male I have doubtless benefited from the assumption
     that I am better suited to IT work than women, and had an easier time
     competing against them for jobs.  Ditto, having the right skin tone.

-- 
✣ Daniel Pittman            ✉ daniel at rimspace.net            ☎ +61 401 155 707
               ♽ made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons
   Looking for work?  Love Perl?  In Melbourne, Australia?  We are hiring.