Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Perhaps. Here[1][2][3][4] is the first page of google results for 'privilege' (filtered from dictionary entries and google maps locations) for example. Keep in mind that this *is* the 1st page, the full extent of it, after filtering the irrelevant things mentioned, there is exactly 0 cases of the legitimate use.

[1] https://www.hivelearning.com/site/resource/diversity-inclusi...

[2] https://guides.rider.edu/privilege

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD5f8GuNuGQ

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ea5WudpEAs



[1] and [2] look fine and considered. I'm not watching a youtube video.


[1] and [2] contains the exact same attitude and wordings which you admitted isn't a fair use and claimed doesn't constitute the majority of uses of the word.

[1] :

>>White privilege

>>Gender privilege

>>Heterosexual privilege

[2] :

>>these privileged social identities—of people who have historically occupied positions of dominance over others—include whites, males, heterosexuals

>I'm not watching a youtube video.

They are 4 minutes and 5 minutes, respectively, and contains the same views expressed in [1] and [2] and the vast majority of other uses of the word.


I didn't make those admittances. There's nothing wrong with acknowledging privilege around race and gender.

I think that 'privilege' is _sometimes_ used in accusatory bad faith, but I don't think this is the majority.

I think in good faith it's a useful framework.


[flagged]


OK, I think we operate in very different epistemic and empathetic architectures -- so lets agree to disagree.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: