[rabialam]

Very interesting take, especially at the end in enumerating privileges. I had a similar experience with my own Mom's Macintosh SE being the gateway to my life in tech, and I don't know what I would done if she didn't introduce me to that at such a young age. I have been so lucky. Born in the States (even though mom's a foreigner which was a blessing in a lot of ways on account of the work ethic she tried to bestow upon me), college educated male with tech skills that were developed sort of circumstantially but very intensely at a very early age -- I feel so lucky, as if I "had a winning lottery ticket" for sure. And now, even as I am finally able to enjoy the the excitement and passion of a career that is exactly what I want to be doing -- I find myself so often feeling so incredibly anxious about why I am not doing more to help others gain access to my world. Frankly, I think that it's rare that (and sad that it's rare that) we have open discussions in the tech community about that word "privilege" where there isn't an INTENSE amount of denial, apathy, minimization, skepticism and disbelief (which, sadly, are some of the most common results of such privilege). For me, this post was a breath of fresh air that adequately expressed a lot of what I feel everyday -- I feel so lucky, but I feel so torn. Yes, I think I worked really hard to make good on my skills and develop them. No, I do not think that makes the world even remotely fair. Yes, I still feel like it is so unfair that in a lot of respects it is almost CERTAINLY a lottery. Yes, it continues to bother me that I feel sort of powerless about that divide, but yes, I would like to bridge that. Perhaps part of that is to start blogging as you have. I think that's what I like so much about this post: you are really leading by example in a way that is rare and yet quite needed. Good on you, and I look forward to reading more.

[danilocampos]

> Frankly, I think that it's rare that (and sad that it's rare that) we have open discussions in the tech community about that word "privilege" where there isn't an INTENSE amount of denial, apathy, minimization, skepticism and disbelief (which, sadly, are some of the most common results of such privilege)

Thank you for your comment – I'm glad you appreciated it, and that you mentioned the hostility a lot of this conversation can breed.

Part of the problem, I think, is that it feels like an accusation to tell someone about their privileges. No one likes to be confronted, no one likes to feel like their hard work is being short-changed.

So I decided to try and turn the conversation around. Maybe it'll be better received.

[1123581321]

You and the author are looking for the word advantage, not privilege. A person wih an advantage plays by the same rules as others, but does better. An advantage is not necessarily earned. Privilege means to not have to follow the same rules as others and that's not what happened here.

I'm irked that you've set yourself up to call this proof of privilege to discredit any disagreement. If you want there to be more discussion of the role that luck plays in our lives, you should not do that.

[danilocampos]

Your word parsing isn't helping your case. According to AHED, privilege is defined as:

a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people

Believe me. These advantages were not universally available. I got lucky.

[1123581321]

A privilege is something like being Kim Jong Un instead of most other North Koreans. The advantage in that privilege definition is confusing here since it means an explicitly granted one but no rule-making power intervened in your life in that way.

An advantage is like having a secret television in North Korea or living near the northern Chinese border. The rules for escape and censure apply exactly the same as they do to others, but the situation one randomly finds oneself in makes beating the game easier. That's your situation.

[wpietri]

In this case privilege is a technical term. He is using it correctly.

You may not be intending to come across this way, but as one white guy to another, a common way people avoid recognizing these sorts of privileges and avoid discussing social inequity is to quibble about little details. Like, say, the definition of a word.

[1123581321]

It may be considered a technical term, but it actually isn't precise, and it carries over connotations of the real meaning of the word that cause further errors. I'm not saying Danilo has made an error, as he's just copying others' use of the word, but his use of it has made it possible for someone to see an injustice to correct by removing his exclusive rule where there is actually only a mother who seized random, but legitimate opportunity, and one we actually want more people to have. Do you see the difference?

And yes, I'm aware of the meme that I'm taking issue with something said about social justice so I'm privileged (so to speak) or racist, and I think it is a disgusting lie to propagate. I wish you would please stop trying to do that to people. Ironically, I have many straightforward and interesting conversations about this with the people who we want to obtain these advantages. As more economically disadvantaged move to the United States, I'm looking forward to having a larger supply of honest conversation partners.

[wpietri]

Most people who participate in these discussions have no problem understanding what the word means.

The fact that some people have an opportunity that others don't and that the distribution of those opportunities is unequal is definitely unjust. Is there some particular privilege Danilo has listed that you are thinking of?

Your last paragraph is not entirely coherent, so I'm not sure what you think the lie is. I have personally avoided paying attention to my privilege by quibbling about minor details. And I've seen others do it quite often. I'm not accusing you of doing that; I couldn't know. But I am saying that having your only contribution to this discussion be of that form makes it harder to take your point seriously.

And that goes double for your strong emotional reaction in the post above. E.g., accusing me of propagating disgusting lies and doing things to people. That's a lot of drama, and raising the drama level is a common derailing tactic.

[danilocampos]

I thank you for pointing this out. I was not in a position where I could do so credibly.

[ebf]

>An advantage is like having a secret television in North Korea or living near the northern Chinese border.

I think one could argue that your example is a privilege.

[wpietri]

Privilege is a technical term. In this sense, he is using it correctly.

[WildUtah]

I'd like to upvote this even more. The deliberate blurring of the distinction between privilege and advantage reduces our ability as a society to improve things for both the abused and the disadvantaged.

Privilege is latin for private law. It's a special set of rules that can only be offered to a minority like guaranteeing admission spots to top universities to legacies.

Privilege does not describe things that could be offered to everyone but are not out of sheer nastiness. If the state U prohibits blue eyed people from enrolling, that isn't a privilege for everyone else. It's just nasty prejudice against blue-eyes. Nobody is getting special private-law treatment; a minority is just getting shafted.

Advantage could be any number of things, including privilege, but could just be parents that care more about you. Everyone could have that; nobody threatened your parents to make them less caring. Not everybody does have it, though, so it's an advantage.