[zaqokm]

> "Through work to bring materials and perspectives from Women's Studies into the rest of the curriculum, I have often noticed men's unwillingness to grant that they are overprivileged in the curriculum, even though they may grant that women are disadvantaged. Denials that amount to taboos surround the subject of advantages that men gain from women's disadvantages. These denials protect male privilege from being fully recognized, acknowledged, lessened, or ended."

Ok I read this then stopped. The word "overprivileged" is shockingly biased and ridiculous, and most of all deceptive.

[seanccox]

It's a personal account and you, of course, are under no compunction to consider it. So why comment? I mean, you didn't even read the article far enough to comprehend its context or understand what the author meant by using that word, or how it extends, by analogy, to her experience as a white woman.

It is your privilege that you can reject the article in its entirety after the first sentence, because you are not living any of the oppressive experiences described therein. I just don't see how doing so is less "shockingly biased" than the word itself. It seems like a sort of tu quoque fallacy to avoid engaging either the text or the arguments it might contain.