Privilegio

Da Wikisessualità.
Questa è la versione approvata di questa pagina, oltre ad essere la più recente.
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Il privilegio è un concetto chiave all'interno del contesto sociologico e di giustizia sociale. Descrive i benefici e i vantaggi di un gruppo rispetto a un altro, spesso derivanti dall'oppressione o stigmatizzazione di gruppi di minoranza. I benefici e i vantaggi non sono solitamente codificati come legge, ma derivano da aspetti culturali della società. Come tali, possono essere difficili da notare, e rimangono sconosciuti al pubblico noti se non vengono fatti notare. Questa cecità ai privilegi porta a volte persone che si definiscono supportive di uguali diritti a inavvertitamente marginalizzare gruppi meno privilegiati.

Esempi[modifica]

Il concetto di privilegio si può applicare a molti differenti contesti, incluse classe sociale e distribuzione della ricchezza, razzismo o sessismo. Il privilegio è essenzialmente l'immunità che alcune (solitamente la maggioranza, solitamente al) classe hanno rispetto ad alcune forme di discriminazione. Questi "vantaggi nascosti" riguardano anche i modi in cui si trattano gruppi di maggioranza/minoranza in termini di aspettative, preconcetti e stereotipizzazioni, come illustrato di seguito.

Tornare a casa la sera tardi[modifica]

La maggioranza dei casi di stupro sono uomo-su-donna, una ben qualificata asimmetria statistica. Il risultato è che la paura dello stupro, o la minaccia di stupro, è una cosa molto più concreta per le donne che per gli uomini. Generalmente, gli uomini hanno meno motivi (sia statistici che tangibili) per temere un assalto sessuale. Questo è ciò a cui ci si riferisce con "privilegio", in questo ambito. Gli uomini hanno il particolare privilegio di non essere soggetti a questa paura, o in altre parole le donne hanno il sotto-privilegio di essere soggette a questa paura.

Scambi di affetto in pubblico[modifica]

L'immaginario eterosessuale è usato nella vasta maggioranza della pubblicità e dei media (più comunque della sua seppur grande rilevanza statistica nel mondo reale), ed è mostrato costantemente, raramente messo in dubbio, ed effettivamente "normalizzato". Si consideri i casi in cui le persone sono per la completa uguaglianza delle persone LGBT (es. "Non ho niente contro ma…"), ma disapprovano il fatto che questa venga mostrata in maniera prominente e "infilata giù per le loro gole". Questo è un classico caso di privilegio e cecità al privilegio, perché messe in mostra ostentosamente evidenti di affetto tra persone dello stesso sesso non sono né più né meno ostentate di quelle tra eterosessuali. Un ragazzo e una ragazza che si tengono la mano non vengono nemmeno notate da molte persone, mentre combinazioni due-ragazzi o due-ragazze in strada, per la loro relativa rarità, producono facilmente un segnale molto più forte.

In breve, quelli che chiedono alle coppie omosessuali di mantenere "riservo" e non "gettarti in faccia" la loro omosessualità non si rendono semplicemente conto di quanto "gettate in faccia" le relazioni eterosessuali invece siano.

A proposito, per tutte le coppie LGBT: tenetevi pure mano nella mano per strada:

  • Contribuisce a dare visibilità alle persone LGBT e a normalizzare la cosa.
  • Dà quel bel gusto di fare indignare le vecchiette cattoliche.
  • Il medioevo è finito.
  • È piacevole ed è giusto poterlo fare. Haters gonna hate.

Profilo razziale[modifica]

Da completare: Tradurre. The Arizona bill "Arizona SB 1070"[1] attracted significant controversy because it encouraged racial profiling of suspected illegal immigrants. This appeared to attract broad support from Americans, with 60% backing the idea of racial profiling. However, the majority of people voting were (and still are, presumably) white and therefore would never have been the victims of any racial profiling. Being victimized for their skin color was never a foreseeable consequence for those people, and so they lacked any personal salience towards the issue.

This lack of salience is exactly what the "privilege" argument addresses. People make the assumption (often without realizing it) that because something is not an issue for them, it should not be an issue for others. This is clearly not going to be the case.

Riparare la macchina e fare altre cose viste come non femminili[modifica]

A common demonstration of privilege that most people will see is the occasional demonstration by TV news shows of what happens when women take cars into repair garages. Quite simply, dishonest mechanics are more likely to cheat women on repair costs than men.

Similarly, websites like Not Always Right[2] show stories of women being taken less seriously than men by customers in places like video game shops.

Non-standard dialects[modifica]

People who are native speakers of non-standard dialects such as African American Vernacular English or Cockney may be discriminated against as being somehow "inferior" or stupid because they supposedly speak "wrong" English. Of course, non-standard dialects are not "incorrect" forms of the standard language, but simply different things with different rules. Native speakers of non-standard dialects are inherently disadvantaged when it comes to learning the rules of the standard variety, but standard language speakers usually do not realize this. In almost all cases the standard is associated with the Metropolitan area dominating the country (e.g. Paris in France), the ruling class(es) (e.g. public school educated upper class twits in Britain) or both. Discrimination against non-standard dialects is thus a not-so-subtle form of classism and/or ethnic discrimination.

Non-majority first languages[modifica]

Most countries have more than one language in them. Be it indigenous to the area (e.g. Navajo to part of the Southeast of the United States) or the result of immigration (e.g. Romani[3] in big parts of Europe). However, most education systems have traditionally only accepted one language. Hence children whose parents only speak the language discriminated against have vastly different (i.e. worse) chances in school. If you are unable to see your native speaker privilege, imagine having to learn Quechua when you are six years old, being criticized for your accent while learning it (see the above point) and being unable to get anything from government and most businesses unless you do it in a language you are not as fully comfortable in as your mother tongue.

Privilege blindness[modifica]

What is so difficult about privilege, and is highlighted in the racial profiling case above, is that it is a concept that is very counter-intuitive to privileged groups. Privilege is, by the social justice definition, the advantages people have that they don't often think about because they never have to experience the oppressive side. Understanding it requires an active effort to see things from the perspective of other, underprivileged people. This can lead to problems both small-scale and the large, from a man's chronic inability to get women to talk to him to the imbalance in performance in English, math and science between the sexes and sexism in hiring in the hard sciences, computer sciences and nursing.[4][5][6][7]

Misconceptions[modifica]

The principal misconception of privilege is that it applies exclusively on, or scales evenly and perfectly down to, an individual level, and so that the existence of individuals from a class considered privileged (e.g. white males) within a class considered underprivileged (e.g. working class poor) or the reverse scenario disproves the concept. This isn't the case at all. "Privilege" in the social justice sense applies only to classes of people, as far as it could be quantified it is only a statistical average. On average, those in an ethnic majority experience privilege, and on average those in minority groups experience oppression. For example, the fact that Barack Obama is the President of the United States doesn't prove nor disprove anything to do with white privilege or racism within the United States. Barack Obama's presidency does not alter the vast and ever-expanding statistical evidence for the existence of white privilege.

The second major misconception is that privilege is a quantifiable set of experiences that add up. It is instead a qualitative thing relating to experiences of a specific kind. For instance, the particular "male privilege" of not feeling sexual discrimination at work, or being pressured into raising children exclusively, isn't offset by economic or wealth class - it might apply with slight qualitative differences across class boundaries, but overall it is not a number that is then mitigated by other factors.

Furthermore, the misconception that intersectional factors can "cancel out" privilege of one sort or another ("I don't have white privilege because I'm poor" or "I don't have male privilege because I'm not white") disregards that life would probably be different if that privileged intersection were to go away or stop being rewarded by society. Not all privileged groups benefit equally, depending on different social intersections, but benefit still exists in some way over some other demographic that doesn't enjoy the same invisible allowances. Basically, there is no linear scale of privilege you can move up and down on; instead, there are different types of privilege.

Further examples[modifica]

Basic examples of privileges talked about in this sense include:

  • The fact that sexual promiscuity is a socially desirable trait in men, but is often denigrated in women.
  • The ability of straight people not to worry about being attacked or insulted for their sexual orientation, and their ability to show romantic affection in public without raising eyebrows.
  • The ability of the dominant ethnic group in any given nation to avoid racial profiling and/or to secure more lenient prison sentences.
  • The ability of people "looking native" to get better rates and service in the tourist industry - sometimes this is even enforced as a law with different rates for citizens and non-citizens
  • The ability to use a gendered bathroom straightforwardly, when compared to the experiences of transgender or otherwise gender-nonconforming people.
  • The ability to effectively manage the workload of day-to-day life, when compared to the experience of chronically ill people.
  • The ability of the rich and powerful not to worry about the financial implications of an accident or unexpected illness, when compared to the poor - this is drastically exacerbated in jurisdictions with weak or non-existing social safety nets.
  • The ability of certain light-skinned people of color, "straight-acting" gay/bisexual people, and the like to pass as part of the privileged classes even though they're not members of it.
  • The fact that people will rarely question the illness of a person whose illness is openly visible, like a broken leg or cancer, and are looked down upon for doing so, but people will frequently question those with invisible illnesses, like Fibromyalgia or mental illnesses. This can get to the point where people have been attacked for parking with their handicapped placard or plates that they got because of an invisible illness, and is another form of passing privilege.
  • The ability of some transgender persons to be readily identified by others as the gender that they identify as. This is also called "passing privilege."
  • The availability and affordability of education, including parental financial support.
  • The coinciding of national holidays with Christian holidays such as Easter and Christmas, reducing the need for make-up exams and time off of work.
  • The fact that for a man to be in public without a top is often socially acceptable, while it seldom is for a woman.[8]
  • The fact that Christian schools and churches are hardly if ever attacked[9] yet synagogues and Jewish schools have to be protected by police almost constantly and receive almost as many (or more) bomb threats and actual attacks as government buildings in most European countries
  • The fact that when Christian churches are attacked, they are typically historically African-American churches.
  • The fact that people of color, especially African-Americans, are derided and called terms like "unprofessional" for their natural hair or their cultural garb, but when white people wear them, they are often praised for doing so.

External links[modifica]

Voci correlate[modifica]

Note[modifica]