Talking Points #1

White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack
Peggy MacIntosh

Premise:

-Advantage vs Disadvantage
- (Male) Privilege
-Unwilligness to discuss or admit privilege/power dynamics
-Race
-Whiteness
-Connectedness of oppressions

Author's Argument:
MacIntosh argues that different forms of oppression are individual in the specific advantages and disadvantages they bestow on the two sides of the power dynamic, but they are all similar and connected by the fact that as forms of oppression they are both pervasive in the culture of power, and take on visible forms.

Evidence:
1. "Since racism, sexism, and heterosexism are not the same, the advantages associated with them should not be seen as the same. In addition, it is hard to disentangle aspects of unearned advantage that rest more on social class,economic class, race, religion, sex and ethnic identity than on other factors."
2." They take both active forms, which we can see, and embedded forms, which as a member of the dominant groups one is taught not to see."
3. " The silences and denials surrounding privilege are the key political tool here. They keep the thinking about equality or equity incomplete, protecting unearned advantage and conferred dominance by making these subject taboo."

Points to share:

MacIntosh raises points similar to both Delpit, and Johnson in terms of the importance of conversation, silence, and language. I find that she supports Delpit in regard to where the responsability for these issues needs to lay, and Johnson in the idea that one needs to take accountability for their position in the culture of power in order to help affect change in the system. However, I think she does a good job of filling in the gaps of the previous two authors. When reading her piece it came across as though she connected the two previous authors points all in one place, and in a way that may not be entirely obvious if one were to read the pieces independantly. I find that it was in some ways clearer and more direct than Delpit while raising the same issues with equal impact. I enjoyed reading her style, and found it similarly user friendly in comparrrison to Johnson. Her points are valid, strong, and supported, and I am again in agreement. I only hope that in some way, either through a class discussion, or a future author, a solution to HOW these conversations should be started and had is posed. I am in support of the problems, and the suppossed solutions but am slighly frustrated that no one has presented HOW to get there.