White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack

WHITE PRIVILEGE: UNPACKING THE INVISIBLE KNAPSACK by PEGGY McINTOSH

(Introduced by Marilyn Gilmore) (Edited by Pat Schenck)

Peggy McIntosh, a White feminist scholar, identified a long list of societal privileges that she received simply because she was White. She did not ask for them, and it is important to note that she hadn’t always noticed that she was receiving them. They included major and minor advantages.

It’s one thing to have enough awareness of racism to describe the ways that people of color are disadvantaged by it. But a new understanding of racism is more elusive. In very concrete terms, it means that if a person of color is the victim of housing discrimination, the apartment that would otherwise have been rented to that person of color is still available for a White person. The White tenant is, knowingly or unknowingly, the beneficiary of racism, a system of advantage based on race. The unsuspecting tenant is not to blame for the prior discrimination, but she benefits from it anyway.

For many Whites, this new awareness of the benefits of a racist system elicits considerable pain, often accompanied by feelings of anger and guilt. These uncomfortable emotions can hinder further discussion of race and racism. We all like to think that we deserve the good things we have received, and that others, too, get what they deserve. Social psychologists call this tendency a “belief in a just world.” Racism directly contradicts such notions of justice.

Understanding racism as a system of advantage based on race is contrary to traditional notions of an American meritocracy. For those who have internalized this myth, this definition generates considerable discomfort. It is more comfortable simply to think of racism as a particular form of prejudice. Notions of power or privilege do not have to be addressed when our understanding of racism is constructed that way.

It is important to understand that the system of advantage is perpetuated when we do not acknowledge its existence. And now, on to Peggy’s paper.

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 over-privileged in the curriculum, even though they may grant that women are disadvantaged. Denials which amount to taboos surround the subject of advantages which men gain from women’s disadvantages. These denials protect male privilege from being fully recognized, acknowledged, lessened, or ended. Thinking through unacknowledged male privilege as a phenomenon with a life of its own, I realized that since hierarchies in our society are interlocking, there was most likely a phenomenon of white privilege which was similarly denied and protected, but alive and real in its effects. As a

2

white person, I realized I had been taught about racism as something which puts others at a disadvantage, but had been taught not to see one of its corollary aspects, white privilege, which puts me at an advantage.

I think whites are carefully taught not to recognize white privilege, as males are taught not to recognize male privilege. So I have begun in an untutored way to ask what it is like to have white privilege. This paper is a partial record of my personal observations, and not a scholarly analysis. It is based on my daily experiences within my particular circumstances.

I have come to see white privilege as an invisible package of unearned assets which I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was “meant” to remain oblivious. White privilege is like an invisible, weightless knapsack of special provisions, assurances, tools, maps, codes, code books, passports, visas, clothes, compasses, emergency gear, and blank checks.

My schooling gave me no training in seeing myself as an oppressor, as an unfairly advantaged person, or as a participant in a damaged culture. I was taught to see myself as an individual whose moral state depended on her individual moral will. At school, we were not taught about slavery in any depth; we were not taught to see slaveholders as damaged people. Slaves were seen as the only group at risk of being dehumanized. My schooling followed the pattern which Elizabeth Minnich pointed out: whites are taught to think of their lives as morally neutral, normative, average, and also ideal, so that when we work to benefit others, this is seen as work which will allow “them” to be more like “us.”

After frustration with men who would not recognize male privilege, I decided to try to work on myself at least by identifying some of the daily effects of white privilege in my life. It is crude work, at this stage, but I will give here a list of special circumstances and conditions I experience which I did not earn but which I have been made to feel are mine by birth, by citizenship, and by virtue of being a conscientious law-abiding “normal” person of good will. I have chosen those conditions which I think in my case attach somewhat more to skin-color privilege than to class, religion, ethnic status, or geographical location, though of course all these other factors are intricately intertwined. As far as I can see, my African-American co-workers, friends, and acquaintances with whom I come into daily or frequent contact at this particular time, place and line of work cannot count on most of these conditions.

  1. I can, if I wish, arrange to be in the company of people of my own race most of the time.
  2. I can avoid spending time with people whom I was trained to mistrust and who have learned to mistrust my kind, or me.
  3. If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live.
  4. I can be pretty sure that my neighbors in such a location will be neutral or pleasant to me.
  5. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.

3

  1. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.
  2. When I am told about our national heritage or about “civilization,” I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.
  3. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.
  4. If I want to, I can be pretty sure of finding a publisher for this piece on white privilege.
  5. I can be pretty sure of having my voice heard in a group in which I am the only member of my race.
  6. I can be casual about whether or not to listen to another woman’s voice in a group in which she is the only member of her race.
  7. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods which fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser’s shop and find someone who can cut my hair.
  8. Whether I use checks, credit cards, or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial reliability.
  9. I can arrange to protect my children most the time from people who might not like them.
  10. I do not have to educate my children to be aware of systemic racism for their own daily physical protection.
  11. I can be pretty sure that my children’s teachers and employers will tolerate them if they fit school and workplace norms; my chief worries about them do not concern others’ attitudes toward their race.
  12. I can talk with my mouth full and not have people put this down to my color.
  13. I can swear, or dress in second-hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty, or the illiteracy of my race.
  14. I can speak in public to a powerful male group without putting my race on trial.
  15. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.
  16. I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group.

4

  1. I can remain oblivious of the language and customs of persons of color who constitute the world’s majority without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.
  2. I can criticize our government and talk about how much I fear its policies and behavior without being seen as a cultural outsider.
  3. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk to “the person in charge,” I will be facing a person of my race.
  4. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure that I haven’t been singled out because of my race.
  5. I can easily buy posters, post-cards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys, and children’s magazines featuring people of my race.
  6. I can go home from most meetings of organizations I belong to feeling somewhat tied in, rather than isolated, out-of-place, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance, or feared.
  7. I can be pretty sure that an argument with a colleague of another race is more likely to jeopardize her chances for advancement than to jeopardize mine.
  8. I can be pretty sure that if I argue for the promotion of a person of another race, or a program centering on race, this is not likely to cost me heavily within my present setting, even if my colleagues disagree with me.
  9. If I declare there is a racial issue at hand, or there isn’t a racial issue at hand, my race will lend me more credibility for either position than a person of color will have.
  10. I can choose to ignore developments in minority writing and minority activist programs, or disparage them, or learn from them, but in any case, I can find ways to be more or less protected from negative consequences of any of these choices.
  11. My culture gives me little fear about ignoring the perspectives and powers of people of other races.
  12. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing, or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.
  13. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.
  14. I can take a job with an affirmative action employer without having my co-workers on the job suspect that I got it because of my race.
  15. If my day, week, or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it has racial overtones.

5

  1. I can be pretty sure of finding people who would be willing to talk with me and advise me about my next steps, professionally.
  2. I can think over many options, social, political, imaginative, or professional, without asking whether a person of my race would be accepted or allowed to do what I want to do.
  3. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.
  4. I can choose public accommodation without fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated in the places I have chosen.
  5. I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help, my race will not work against me.
  6. I can arrange my activities so that I will never have to experience feelings of rejection owing to my race.
  7. If I have low credibility as a leader, I can be sure that my race is not the problem.
  8. I can easily find academic courses and institutions which give attention only to people of my race.
  9. I can expect figurative language and imagery in all of the arts to testify to experiences of my race.
  10. I can choose blemish cover or bandages in “flesh” color and have them more or less match my skin.

I repeatedly forgot each of the realizations on this list until I wrote it down. For me, white privilege has turned out to be an elusive and fugitive subject. The pressure to avoid it is great, for in facing it I must give up the myth of meritocracy. If these things are true, this is not such a free country; one’s life is not what one makes it; many doors open for certain people through no virtues of their own. These perceptions mean also that my moral condition is not what I had been led to believe. The appearance of being a good citizen rather than a troublemaker comes in large part from having all sorts of doors open automatically because of my color.

In this potpourri of examples, some privileges make me feel at home in the world. Others allow me to escape penalties or dangers which others suffer. Through some, I escape fear, anxiety, or a sense of not being welcome or not being real. Some keep me from having to hide, to be in disguise, to feel sick or crazy, to negotiate each transaction from the position of being an outsider, or, within my group, a person who is suspected of having too close links with a dominant culture. Most keep me from having to be angry.

I see a pattern running through the matrix of white privilege, a pattern of assumptions which were passed on to me as a white person. There was one main piece of cultural turn; it was my own turf, and I was among those who could control the turf. I could measure up to the cultural standards and take advantage of the many options I saw around me to make what the culture would call a success

6

of my life. My skin color was an asset for any move I was educated to want to make. I could think of myself as “belonging” in major ways, and of making social systems work for me. I could freely disparage, fear, neglect, or be oblivious to anything outside of the dominant cultural forms. Being of the main culture, I could also criticize it fairly freely. My life was reflected back to me frequently enough so that I felt, with regard to my race, if not my sex, like one of the real people.

Whether through the curriculum or in the newspaper, the television, the economic system, or the general look of people in the streets, we receive daily signals and indications that my people counted, and that others either didn’t exist or must be trying, not very successfully, to be like people of my race. We were given cultural permission not to hear voices of people of other races, or a tepid cultural tolerance if we did happen to hear them.

In proportion, as my racial group was being made confident, comfortable, and oblivious, other groups were likely being made to lack confidence, comfort, and to feel alienated. Whiteness protected me from many kinds of hostility, distress and violence, which I was being subtly trained to visit in turn upon people of color.

It seems to me that obliviousness about white advantage is kept strongly enculturated in the United States so as to maintain the myth of meritocracy, the myth that democratic choice is equally available to all. Keeping most people unaware that freedom of confident action is there for just a small number of people props up those in power, and serves to keep power in the hands of the same groups that have most of it already.

Though systematic change takes many decades, there are pressing questions for me and I imagine for some others like me if we raise our daily consciousness on the dividends of being light-skinned. What will we do with such knowledge? …(I)t is an open question whether we will choose to use unearned advantage to weaken hidden systems of advantage, and whether we will use any of our arbitrarily-awarded power to try to reconstruct power systems on a broader base.

Friends, Unitive Justice, Ending Mass Incarceration

On June 1, Sylvia Clute gave a talk at RFM on “Friends, Unitive Justice, Ending Mass Incarceration.” Below is a brief introduction to her talk and a description of unitive justice.

 

Common phrases, like “the punishment must fit the crime,” “I want to get even,” or “an eye for an eye” actually describe proportional revenge, the moral principle that underpins the punitive western model of justice. Answering harm with more harm is deemed moral, so long as the harm you do is proportional to the harm done to you. Two moral standards are required for proportional revenge to work, one that says the harm done by us, the “good” people, is moral, while condemning the harm done by those whom we have deemed “evil” or “immoral”—even when both are doing essentially the same thing, giving rise to complexity and inconsistency. But as Quakers know, there is another way. The work Sylvia Clute is doing involves implementing another way that she calls unitive justice. Unitive justice is based on the moral principle of loving kindness. Whatever the circumstances, harm to another is not condoned as moral. The power of unitive justice lies in this internal moral consistency, a power demonstrated in the movements led by Gandhi, King and Mandela. This discussion will consider the differences between punitive and unitive justice, and the ways in which unitive justice is presently being implemented as an answer to the broken punitive system and the mass incarceration that now pervades the U.S. criminal system. Sylvia Clute, Program Coordinator for the Alliance for Unitive Justice, is a former trial attorney and author. For over twenty five years she has been researching and developing “unitive justice” as a parallel model of justice and a structure for community organization. Recently, she spent two years implementing a restorative justice program based on unitive justice principles at a Richmond, Va. high school, and is now implementing the program in a middle school. She is drawn to the Friends because of their application of these principles to a spiritual community.

Disaster Relief groups

For a number of years, groups of mostly RFM members and attenders have spent one-week in the spring working at sites affected by natural disasters, including the gulf coast (Hurricane Katrina), Ider, Alabama (tornadoes), and Crisfield, Maryland (Hurricane Sandy).

The following policy governing the oversight and financial support for disaster-relief groups was approved at the 11th month 2011 meeting for worship with a concern for business.

RFM policy governing the oversight and financial support for disaster-relief groups

Groups desiring to go on disaster relief missions as representatives of Richmond Friends Meeting will receive permission by writing to Peace and Social Concerns expressing their purpose, the dates of the trip, how the finances will be developed and a list of expected attendees.  Disaster Relief groups will provide aid to the needy via labor to redevelop lost or damaged property, feed the hungry and serve the harmed following the principles of Quakerism.  With the blessing of Richmond Friends Meeting, Peace and Social Concerns approval will allow the disaster mission to go as a Quaker group and allow them to hold fundraisers at Meeting. P&SC would request a short, written description of the work performed after their return.  A separate line item will be included in the Richmond Friends Meeting budget and each group will have the authority to collect donations that will be posted on this line item of Richmond Friends  Meeting financial statements.

Presented at Meeting for Worship for Business, Nov.  20, 2011, by Martha Foster, Co-clerk P&SC

Living Out the Peace Testimony

Friends affirm a Biblical basis for the peace testimony. A Prince of Peace was prophesied who would bring in a Peaceable Kingdom. “Thou shalt not kill” is one of the Ten Commandments. Jesus taught and lived peacemaking and love of enemy. George Fox similarly counseled his followers “to live in the life and power which does away with the occasion for war.”

The material below was prepared earlier by Mary Fran Hughes-McIntyre and is excerpted from her History of Richmond Friends Meeting, 1795-1962, available in the Meeting Library. (or here:THE HISTORY OF RICHMOND FRIENDS MEETING 1795-1962)

Living Out the Peace Testimony

Friends affirm a Biblical basis for the peace testimony. A Prince of Peace was prophesied who would bring in a Peaceable Kingdom. “Thou shalt not kill” is one of the Ten Commandments. Jesus taught and lived peacemaking and love of enemy. George Fox similarly counseled his followers “to live in the life and power which does away with the occasion for war.”

Early Richmond Friends were firm pacifists, disowning from membership those who bore arms. Doubtless knowing Friends from Cedar Creek Meeting who had firmly refused to fight during the Revolutionary War, Friends in Richmond affirmed a pacifist stand in the War of 1812. Friends suffered payment of muster fines rather than fight. As part of Virginia Yearly Meeting, they concurred with the following statement:

While we view with sorrow the awful progress of war spreading desolation and Misery in the human family, let us endeavor to guard our Minds from mixing in the politics of the times, which will insensibly leven into the spirit, and will lead if not to the practice at least to the promotion of that destructive evil.

During the War between the States, some Richmond Friends chose to fight, and some were conscientious objectors. Cedar Creek Monthly Meeting (of which Richmond Friends became a part in 1841) accepted the resignation of three persons who chose to fight, but “earnestly hopes that the day is not distant when those with many others aroused by the awful juncture of war now presented to our view may be enabled to renounce principles which lead to such results and enlist under the banner of the Prince of Peace.”

In the period from 1914-1920 the Peace Committee of Richmond Friends meeting was particularly active workingfor peace and reconciliation in the period of the Great War. Peace literature was distributed in the schools, and prizes were offered in 1916 for the best essays on “Why We Do Not Need a Large Increase in our Army and Navy”: $15 first prize to a boys’ school, $10 first prize to a girls’ school. (Editor: Friends have not been free from societal sexism and racism.) Money was donated for Belgian relief in 1914, for English and Armenian relief in 1916, for French orphans in 1917, and for feeding the German children in 1920. Letters were sent to Senators and Representatives in 1916 urging opposition to the so-called “preparedness” for war. The Friends Peace Committee ran two advertisements in the newspapers, including the following:

PEACE OR WAR?

            To our fellow-citizens:

In this time of crisis when our country’s highest good is the common aim of all, we voice this deep conviction of patriotic duty.

The causes for which men fight—liberty, justice, and peace—are noble and Christian causes. But war itself violates law, justice, liberty and peace, the very ends for which alone its tragic costs might be justified…

 In World War II, Friends were again active in peace-making. Member Hoge Ricks met at homes in 1940 with young Friends to think through their stands on the peace testimony in anticipation of their being faced with conscription. After the war opposition to conscription continued, with visits to Congressional Representative, and a firm stand against the Selective Service Act of 1948.

 A change in Friends’ custom of disowning those who bear arms in evident in 1943. A member wrote saying that he had joined the Armed Forces as a result of personal conviction, and that he doubted the Meeting wanted his membership. The Meeting decided to stay in touch with him, since “to encourage him would do more that to ostracize him.”

(Richmond) Friends were proud of having several members, who were conscientious objectors, serving in Civilian Public Service Camps. Their peace testimony was affirmed.

 Thus, Richmond Friends stood consistently against war, and dealt in increasingly lenient ways with Friends who chose to fight.

*      *      *     *

(Editor: During World War II, some 12,000 men who were conscientious objectors to war, served in non-military occupations across the U.S. Under the leadership of Mennonite, Quaker and Church of the Brethren agencies, they were engaged in mental health care and medical experiments, in forestry and diary farming, and in other important civic projects.)

 

1802 Quaker Petition Against Slavery

[Below a transcription of the 1802 Quaker petition against slavery presented to the Virginia legislature.  Among those signing this petition are Samuel Parsons (the father of Samuel Pleasants Parsons, whose house survives at 601 Spring Street in Oregon Hill) and James Ladd (the uncle of Elizabeth Ladd, who married Samuel Pleasants Parsons).]

(Source: Miscellaneous Petitions to the Virginia Legislature, December 17, 1802.  Archives of the Virginia State Library.)

 To the speaker and House of Representatives of Virginia.

            The memorial and petition of the religious Society of Friends.

Respectfully shew:

                        That your memorialists, estimating the importance of those concerns, which must necessarily engage the Legislature – feel no disposition to intrude upon your valuable time, or request your attention to subjects of a trivial nature but where grievances affecting any class of the community, arise from a partial construction of the laws, or exist because the laws have provided no remedy, we conceive it to be a duty, congenial with the spirit of legislation, and due to the House, faithfully to represent the same – and solicit such redress, as justice and equity require.  Impressed with these sentiments- and feeling moreover the impulse of Religious duty, on behalf of the helpless, and unprotected – your memorialist beg leave to represent, certain cases of suffering, for which (in the opinion of some of the Courts) the laws have provided no effectual relief.

* Such we apprehend is the case of minor slaves, left free by will, but committed during their minority to the care of legatees – such minors notwithstanding their undoubted rights – and a clear conviction in the Courts of their claim to freedom – merely for the want of a legal prohibition – and on a ground of a temporary claim to their service – have been carried out of the State, and beyond the reach of testimony establishing their title – with the evident risk of being forever deprived of their freedom.

II Your memorialist beg leave further to represent that the practice of steeling, and selling free people of Color, continues to be carried on in some parts of the State; encouraged, we believe, by the little danger of conviction the law appearing to require evidence that free persons were stolen, or sold with a Knowledge of their being such.  The difficulty, or rather their impossibility of adducing such evidence, we trust, will be sufficiently apparent, as well as the necessity of effectually restraining a practice which operates directly against the dignity of the Government – and contrary to the interest and spirit of the law, violates the first principles of justice with impunity.  Your memorialist represent these subjects – with a full confidence that the justice, humanity, and sound policy of the Legislature will meet them with approbation.  It cannot be supposed that the Representatives of a free, and enlightened people, can fail to appreciate the value of liberty, to whatever description of persons it may legally belong, or that they will not extend the barriers of the law around this inestimable privilege.

Interested as men and Christians, in the sufferings of our injured fellow creatures, and on behalf of numbers, who stand exposed to the same dangers – and may be involved in the same calamity – we therefore respectfully petition – That the law providing for the emancipation of slaves by will, and the law, respecting the stealing and selling free persons may be revised and amended – or that the legislature may make such provision for these cases as in their wisdom shall seem just and expedient.

Signed by order, and on behalf of the Representatives of the aforesaid Society

                                                             by        James Ladd

                                                                        Micajah Crew

                                                                        Samuel Parsons

                                                                        Jesse Copeland

                                                                        Benjamin Bates Jr.

 * See proviso to the law allowing emancipation. Abridgm’t of the permanent public laws, page 281.

II “If any person shall hereafter be guilty of stealing or selling any free person for a slave, knowing the said person so sold to be free, and thereof shall be lawfully convicted , the person so convicted, shall suffer death without benefit of Clergy.”  Abridgment of the laws, page 280.

Friends Memorial.  Mem. of L. to Riddick, Dupree, Dulaney, Allen, Sheffey, Shackelford, Aylett, Dunton, Jennings, Gee, Sebull, Blow, Josiah Riddick