Straight privilege is saying that all non-straight people should be fine with homophobic slurs and jokes because you found one non-straight person who says they weren’t bothered by that incident.
Straight privilege is thinking there’s no point to including other sexualities unless it’s to make a statement - “why’d they use a gay couple for that advert? There’s no point, it’s not about being gay. Using a straight couple would’ve worked just fine, why bother?”
"No one ever cares to ask women. Porn has become engineered for the male gaze. But it doesn’t have to be. In an ideal setting, we would have porn that represented all ethnicities, body types, sexualities and they would not be portrayed as fetish, but simply as casting of peoples. I can’t tell you how uncomfortable it makes me feel that my race is considered ‘fetish’ or subcategory. Yeah, I know that the norm in all media is white folks, but never is it more pronounced and awful than in porn. But the constant question of what will or won’t turn women on is so insulting. And Molly’s assertion, while attempting to say that women don’t need something separate or different in porn portrayals, manages to segregate women even more. And furthermore, reads like someone who doesn’t watch or appreciate porn.
Which is fine, but if no one wants to address the problems with it and only criticizes by putting it at arm’s length, while holding their nose, that ain’t no way to tackle the issue."
Privilege Speaks! (trigger warning for discussion of rape, violence, and talking to a privilege denying dick)
- Me: The amount of race-fail I have encountered today is astounding. I mean come on, straight cis white guys really shouldn't be trying to write novels about the experience of racism... because they suck at it
- Him: Is it perhaps a little ironic that you reference the gender, orientation, and race of someone to justify their ability to do something?
- Me: Privilege matters (unfortunately) if you have no experience of discrimination based upon immutable qualities you'll probably end up with a mighty whitey saves the day case of bullshit.
- Him: Privilege is a blanket term to throw over any entire gender, race, orientation, or any other group of people; it doesn't really do anything to resolve a specific point of contention and I don't think it adds a whole lot to any debate. It comes off more as a way to disqualify someone's opinion on the basis of things that should have nothing to do with it's validity.
- Me: No, that's not what privilege is. Privilege is a way of describing the fact that there are certain things certain groups just don't experience the same way others do (due to systemic oppression) cisgender men for example will never experience street harassment the same way women and people socially coded female do. So when some douchebag guy says "I'd love it if some girl yelled vulgarities at me from across the street" it fails to take into account the fear and threat inherently associated with being catcalled for women (and people read as women)
- Him: What privilege is depends on who I'm talking to and what point they're trying to make. In any case - let's use the example of fear of sexual assault - using the word "privilege" adds nothing to the point and risks alienating the group of people it's directed against.
- Saying that a "cisgender man will never experience harassment the way women do" excludes the experience (or potential experience) of someone on nothing other than the typical experiences of members of their social group. It stops treating them like a person and starts treating them a representation of their group, which is what I think we'd want to get around in the first place.
- Me: No, privilege is a defined piece of academic jargon that often gets misused, and you know what? I have never met a cisgender man who got street harassed the way women do. It's a big picture term, because in order to combat systemic oppression (systemic is when it's ingrained in the culture so deeply you can barely tease it out from what's inherent) you have to look at the big picture. Treating individuals as individuals on an... individual basis is all well and good, but we're not talking about that. We're talking about the fact that I earn .75 cents on a cisgender man's dollar, we're talking about the fact that thousands of women die from eating disorders every year, we're talking about how many times more likely it is I'll be raped than you, we're talking about how the average lifespan of a transgender person worldwide is 22 years, we're talking about the fact that you have a statistical advantage at pretty much everything. This doesn't make you a bad person, this doesn't mean you're not allowed to talk in debates about this shit, but you have to think before you speak and educate yourself because YOU DON'T FUCKING KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE. You have to take the time to imagine what it must be like to know X about the way the culture treats your group, and the way that effects your behavior and perception of things.
- Heeeeeeere doucheydoucheydoucheydouchey
If you don’t think there should be a fat, ugly, or gay princess you don’t really understand what Disney is all about. It’s about inspiring all people to love themselves and reach for their dreams, not about traditional values and good looks.”
you clearly don’t understand what Disney is about.
it’s a children’s entertainment company that teaches good morals.
Y’all gay people, fat people, ugly people don’t have good morals! We need to protect the children from them because only straight mostly white skinny princesses can teach good morals! The rest of you need to be hidden from society because you teach kids to be bad!
Right, so that racist ass depictions that Disney has had TOTALLY means that they push good morals. Peter Pan and it’s racist ass monolithic depictions of Native Americans, The RACIST AS FUCK pickaninny Sunflower the Centaur from Fantasia, The Song of the South? All in good moralistic fun, huh???? Quit PLAYIN.
^ reblogging for commentary by sourcedumal and feministslut.