Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok. Let’s cancel overuse of “privileged” next.
This.
If you work for it, you aren’t privileged.
And, privilege shouldn’t become a scarlet letter.
It’s not a scarlet letter. So why not admit you have it?
It is in today's world. Calling someone privileged is a slam against them. It's saying they have something they don't deserve to have. It couldn't have been earned, it had to have been because of their "privilege".
You can earn things and still be cognizant that there are fewer barriers to clear. Privilege is a clearer, or at least less obstacle laden path. For example, we grew up poor but we could still afford the sugar for brand name Kool-Aid. We shopped at bulk food stores because my parents could afford the membership, and had a car to bring everything across the highway safely. We are also white so my parents had fewer obstacles to obtain a loan towards their townhome. We bought second hand everything and wore hand me downs, but the clerk didn’t keep an eye out for me stealing in the thrift store just because.
Your explanation doesn't change that it is a negative to be viewed as "priviliged".
The DMV is full of these Snowflakes who have an incredibly high standard of living, access to excellent schools, and a strong quality of life but shrivel into a shell as soon as anonymous person calls them privileged. Get over yourselves
+1
Yes, I am privileged. Saying this doesn’t undermine my sense of self. Why is that so hard?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok. Let’s cancel overuse of “privileged” next.
This.
If you work for it, you aren’t privileged.
And, privilege shouldn’t become a scarlet letter.
It’s not a scarlet letter. So why not admit you have it?
It is in today's world. Calling someone privileged is a slam against them. It's saying they have something they don't deserve to have. It couldn't have been earned, it had to have been because of their "privilege".
You can earn things and still be cognizant that there are fewer barriers to clear. Privilege is a clearer, or at least less obstacle laden path. For example, we grew up poor but we could still afford the sugar for brand name Kool-Aid. We shopped at bulk food stores because my parents could afford the membership, and had a car to bring everything across the highway safely. We are also white so my parents had fewer obstacles to obtain a loan towards their townhome. We bought second hand everything and wore hand me downs, but the clerk didn’t keep an eye out for me stealing in the thrift store just because.
Your explanation doesn't change that it is a negative to be viewed as "priviliged".
The DMV is full of these Snowflakes who have an incredibly high standard of living, access to excellent schools, and a strong quality of life but shrivel into a shell as soon as anonymous person calls them privileged. Get over yourselves
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok. Let’s cancel overuse of “privileged” next.
This.
If you work for it, you aren’t privileged.
And, privilege shouldn’t become a scarlet letter.
It’s not a scarlet letter. So why not admit you have it?
It is in today's world. Calling someone privileged is a slam against them. It's saying they have something they don't deserve to have. It couldn't have been earned, it had to have been because of their "privilege".
You can earn things and still be cognizant that there are fewer barriers to clear. Privilege is a clearer, or at least less obstacle laden path. For example, we grew up poor but we could still afford the sugar for brand name Kool-Aid. We shopped at bulk food stores because my parents could afford the membership, and had a car to bring everything across the highway safely. We are also white so my parents had fewer obstacles to obtain a loan towards their townhome. We bought second hand everything and wore hand me downs, but the clerk didn’t keep an eye out for me stealing in the thrift store just because.
Your explanation doesn't change that it is a negative to be viewed as "priviliged".
Anonymous wrote:That phrase makes me instantly know the #blessed person is completely devoid of any kind of human compassion. When I hear “so blessed” or see the hashtag, I instantly know what kind of person you are. Definitely not a person I want to spend time with.
You are not “blessed”. You are lucky.
Good for you for making such a great decision that benefits both of us!Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me posit this: for those of you who preach “personal responsibility” and believe it’s so feasible to pull oneself up by the bootstraps, why are you saving for your kids’ college? Why are you creating a trust fund for them? Why do you live in McLean? If it’s so simple to just work hard and make it no matter where you’re from, why bother with all of that? Can’t your kid just save up money themselves like you tell poor kids to?
Because poor kids who study and get good grades get their tuition paid for through a combination of taxpayer dollars and subsidies from college endowments. If there is a shortfall, they take out loans, just like most of us who are saving did. And then Elizabeth Warren will probably try to pay off those loans for them. UMC kids don't receive these freebies, so their parents have to save as well as pay the taxes.
Oh my goodness please leave your bubble.
What is your vast knowledge of the poor? I could put my street cred up against yours, I'm sure.
Anonymous wrote:Like OP, I role my eyes when rich people call themselves "blessed". Note: I am rich.
It's just silly because while I get what people are saying about being grateful, it implies that you have been singled out for this blessing above others, which is obviously silly. Maybe it's luck, maybe it's privilege, maybe it's actually hard work and dedication. But #blessed implies some kind of divine intervention, which is annoying because even if you are religious, I sincerely hope your g-d is not intervening on your behalf to get you a vacation to Mallorca. Please.
I think if someone I knew tagged some vacation/new house/new car/new clothes/etc. post on Instagram with #privileged, I would laugh really hard and like them a little more, because at least it's honest.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me posit this: for those of you who preach “personal responsibility” and believe it’s so feasible to pull oneself up by the bootstraps, why are you saving for your kids’ college? Why are you creating a trust fund for them? Why do you live in McLean? If it’s so simple to just work hard and make it no matter where you’re from, why bother with all of that? Can’t your kid just save up money themselves like you tell poor kids to?
Because poor kids who study and get good grades get their tuition paid for through a combination of taxpayer dollars and subsidies from college endowments. If there is a shortfall, they take out loans, just like most of us who are saving did. And then Elizabeth Warren will probably try to pay off those loans for them. UMC kids don't receive these freebies, so their parents have to save as well as pay the taxes.
Oh my goodness please leave your bubble.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me posit this: for those of you who preach “personal responsibility” and believe it’s so feasible to pull oneself up by the bootstraps, why are you saving for your kids’ college? Why are you creating a trust fund for them? Why do you live in McLean? If it’s so simple to just work hard and make it no matter where you’re from, why bother with all of that? Can’t your kid just save up money themselves like you tell poor kids to?
The idea that it is immoral or unethical for a parent to provide a better life for their child is flat-out inhuman. It also implicitly presumes that everything one family has really belongs to the collective and has been inequitably distributed. These are communist talking points.
Okay but don’t pretend a kid from Anascotia has the same chances in life or even close chances to a kid from McLean.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I suppose I am privileged, however that is defined. I've thought about it carefully with all these focuses on equity in the last two years, and I've concluded that I really don't care either.
It's apparent enough that most people whining about privilege or playing fields are obscuring personal failures and it's easier to blame it on systematic structural problems so you don't have to take personal responsibility for it. I can tell from the way they utterly and completely ignore the poverty and limited opportunities in rural areas and small towns because it doesn't fit the narrative, or that plenty of immigrants of all origins come to the US with nothing and achieve far more than most native born Americans.
Why so black and white? Of course there is personal responsibility and hard work and making good decisions are important factors in "success." AND ALSO, people are born into different conditions and some of them have more advantages than others in that regard. Why can't both be true?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me posit this: for those of you who preach “personal responsibility” and believe it’s so feasible to pull oneself up by the bootstraps, why are you saving for your kids’ college? Why are you creating a trust fund for them? Why do you live in McLean? If it’s so simple to just work hard and make it no matter where you’re from, why bother with all of that? Can’t your kid just save up money themselves like you tell poor kids to?
The idea that it is immoral or unethical for a parent to provide a better life for their child is flat-out inhuman. It also implicitly presumes that everything one family has really belongs to the collective and has been inequitably distributed. These are communist talking points.
Okay but don’t pretend a kid from Anascotia has the same chances in life or even close chances to a kid from McLean.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me posit this: for those of you who preach “personal responsibility” and believe it’s so feasible to pull oneself up by the bootstraps, why are you saving for your kids’ college? Why are you creating a trust fund for them? Why do you live in McLean? If it’s so simple to just work hard and make it no matter where you’re from, why bother with all of that? Can’t your kid just save up money themselves like you tell poor kids to?
The idea that it is immoral or unethical for a parent to provide a better life for their child is flat-out inhuman. It also implicitly presumes that everything one family has really belongs to the collective and has been inequitably distributed. These are communist talking points.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me posit this: for those of you who preach “personal responsibility” and believe it’s so feasible to pull oneself up by the bootstraps, why are you saving for your kids’ college? Why are you creating a trust fund for them? Why do you live in McLean? If it’s so simple to just work hard and make it no matter where you’re from, why bother with all of that? Can’t your kid just save up money themselves like you tell poor kids to?
Because poor kids who study and get good grades get their tuition paid for through a combination of taxpayer dollars and subsidies from college endowments. If there is a shortfall, they take out loans, just like most of us who are saving did. And then Elizabeth Warren will probably try to pay off those loans for them. UMC kids don't receive these freebies, so their parents have to save as well as pay the taxes.