White Privilege Vs Majority Privilege

[Bumpitybumper]

I want to start this thread by stating that white privilege undeniably exists and I'm not intending to deny it's existence or the advantage it bestows on white people.

I have noticed recently a number of BLM posts on social media centred around everyday white privilege. They include things like:

• a child going to a white friend's house, having an accident and the parents only being unable to offer a plaster of the correct skin tone
• a black child not having the experience of having a black teacher or other black classmates

In my region of the UK less than 1% of the population in black and the demographics of my child's school represents this. I imagine the majority of parents buy plasters that match their children's skin tone and the teachers, parents and children are overwhelmingly white.

When these kinds of examples are used to explain white privilege I wonder how protesters think these kinds of scenarios should be tackled? Surely we should be looking to (for example) make sure that the teaching staff of a school are representative of their local population rather than suggest that all schools should have at least one teacher of each minority group? AIBU therefore to suggest that tackling white privilege is sometimes (not always) a different issue than tacking majority privilege?

I grew up in a mining village and there wasnt anyone who lived there that was black. So if the local chemist stocked make up for black skin tones it would have been completely pointless due to lack of customer base. Is this wrong?

Lots of people talking about the special themed plasters they've bought for their children.

If children's cartoon character/whatever plasters were the only plasters available, would you, as an adult, feel comfortable wearing them for the full length of time necessary at work? Because someone has already explained that mortality rates from skin infections differ across ethnicities and related it to plasters.

I grew up in a mining village and there wasnt anyone who lived there that was black. So if the local chemist stocked make up for black skin tones it would have been completely pointless due to lack of customer base. Is this wrong?

Believe it or not, it is still unusual to see a black person in some towns. We have a university, and a large hospital local to us, lots of Europeans, Asians and Arabs, very, very few Africans or Afro Caribbeans. There were none in my dd's primary, and only two families in their current secondary school.

Go 15 miles up the road, and the picture is completely different.

I've never really been thought about time of plasters. I buy the ones I need for whatever injury we have at home! I have pure white, transparent, dark drown material and beige shiny.

[quote ASandwichNamedKevin]@Hearhoovesthinkzebras
I understand the concept of white privilege. I'm just not sure how you can differentiate between white privilege, wealth privilege, class privilege.

Well if you have two equally wealthy upper class people, and they're out for a run in their gym clothes, which one is more likely to be on the receiving end of any racist comments.
Or which is more likely to be stopped by the police?

If you have two equally poor people struggling as single parents, which one is more likely to be judged.[/quote]
But when do we have two people where everything else is equal apart from skin colour, to test this argument?

I don't think single parents of any colour are treated well tbh.

Compare school children - for a very long time (maybe still are I haven't looked at data for a few years) the group underachieving the most was white working class boys.

What are the common denominators for inequalities in society - I would say poverty.

How can you separate out all issues of under privilege/privilege and blame just one?

a child going to a white friend's house, having an accident and the parents only being unable to offer a plaster of the correct skin tone

So instead of buying one pack of plasters for my family I’m supposed to buy multiple packs of plasters in all skin tones to keep on stand by on the off chance that my DS friend gets a cut?
I’m a firm supporter of BLM and I absolutely believe that white privilege is a problem - and that that problem is much more significant than white people not keeping darker coloured plasters for ‘just incase’. I thought the issues at hand, the reasons for marching and making a stand, were more profound than that

If children's cartoon character/whatever plasters were the only plasters available, would you, as an adult, feel comfortable wearing them for the full length of time necessary at work? Because someone has already explained that mortality rates from skin infections differ across ethnicities and related it to plasters.

I wouldn't care and I doubt anyone would notice. In fact those are the only ones we have so I usually end up with Mr Bump

@1stbabs

Then write to them and ask why. No business is going to stock products that don't appeal to their customers taking up valuable shelf space if there is a demand. They don't do it to piss you off. If they thought they could sell it it would be in the shelves!

Its blue plasters in catering environments like restaurant kitchens

@Raaaa I've heard it all now plasters ffs people will look for anything to be offended

I think it's a good point actually, and I'm not offended in the slightest.
It's something that I've never really thought about before, but then again being white it hasn't affected me so why would it occur to me?
As someone on the thread said - things are described as natural and flesh coloured.
It's coming from a start point "white skin is the default norm" and that seems a bit wrong and othering
It's something that's made me think anyway,

Yes to this OP

black people quite rightly want some focus on their specific struggles right now, but any attempt to fix the problems will have to involve some wider discussions otherwise the solutions are going to be very piecemeal and risk alienating or detrimenting other disadvantaged groups

We can all enjoy and benefit from a range of privileges in our lives, and this is fluid. It can change during the course of our life, if we move to another country, if we lose our job.

Discussion of and acknowledging white privilege is helpful in drawing attention to the struggles of non-whites in majority white society, but it's part of a wider conversation that needs to happen.

"The patents owned to create non-white skin toned products are owned by companies owned by white people. Countries in Africa / Asia won’t get access to these products until the white people who own them decide to make them available. And they often don’t / won’t unless they can make money for them."
Don't patents on all and any products only last for 17 years after which time anyone can create their own versions? It is probably coincidental that patents for non-white products are owned by companies owned by white people. It is extremely enterprising of them and surely anyone who was that concerned could have developed these products and patented them? Why would you expect them to give access to anyone else during the patent period? Whoever developed the product will have invested a lot of money in research and development of the product so they have to recoup that over the years the patent is in force. Sounds reasonable to me. They cannot refuse access after that period.

"plasters don't match anyone's skin tone"
I don't think tights do either. They don't match my skin colour anyway. The nearest is nude or natural tan which are still nowhere near my skin colour. Black tights have been around for many years (and they don't match others' skin tone either). Plasters and tights are both poor examples as the majority of people will not find a match to their skin tone, irrespecive of their body colour.

Do people nor buy clear plasters anymore then?

YMMV, but I find clear plastic ones peel off within an hour and the central white square to go over the wound is really visible.

The only ones that stay on well are the ones with fabric for the adhesive part and I've only ever seen them in beige.

This is really thought-provoking. It’s interesting that lots of posters come on to defend their plaster-buying habits.
I think the idea of White Default makes sense (I haven’t read the Times article). It’s like how things are set up for men, not women. Things are set up for white people. And the people in whose favour things are set up rarely notice it, because for them it’s the norm, and they feel entitled to have things that way. Then when it’s pointed out to them they often feel they are being attacked. But really they are just being asked to adjust the way they see things.

Those saying the plaster thing is ridiculous, well it's easy to say when you are white and have always had options similar to your own colour available, of course you won't look for them because you take for granted they are gurenteed. When you don't even have the option, you notice it.

There's lots of this stuff I don't understand.

I used to like in Japan. I almost decided to live there permanently and have children. I would never have expected the school to employ white, blond teachers so my child could feel he/she fitted in. Id never have expected the school books to have pictures of white blond kids with English names. I would not have expected anything other that the Japanese experience.

I think this country is quite good at trying to accommodate everyone and move forward. Sometimes I think we go over board.

Sorry 'live in' not 'like' - though i did like it!!

@GreytExpectations
Those saying the plaster thing is ridiculous, well it's easy to say when you are white and have always had options similar to your own colour available, of course you won't look for them because you take for granted they are gurenteed. When you don't even have the option, you notice it
I disagree. I think the plaster debate has actually become more centred on the belief by many that you don't need plasters that are the same colour as your skin. People are happy to use different colour plasters, cartoon plasters or clear plasters and genuinely don't care. It's obviously going to be hard for these people to accept that they are privileged for having beige coloured plasters that they don't particularly want or necessarily ever use. Maybe the best solution is just to get rid of any plasters that attempt to be "skin coloured".

Those saying the plaster thing is ridiculous, well it's easy to say when you are white and have always had options similar to your own colour available

I don’t think the plaster thing is ridiculous thing at all, it something I’ve been aware of since I was a teenager - there’s a scene in the book Naughts and Crosses that refers to this and I certainly had a bit of a lightbulb moment when I read it. I think shops should certainly stock plasters to match darker skin, so should schools and workplaces where they may often be needed by people of various ethnicities. But the point about a friend of a child’s family not having the right kind of plaster to hand in their bathroom cupboard just in case - that’s crossing the line into the ridiculous and petty.

Those saying the plaster thing is ridiculous, well it's easy to say when you are white and have always had options similar to your own colour available, of course you won't look for them because you take for granted they are gurenteed. When you don't even have the option, you notice it.

I think a lot of people struggle to understand the concept though when an example such as plaster colour is used.

Plasters always were, and some still are, a strange red brown brick colour. That's all that we had when I was growing up so if you now say that I've always had plasters that match my skin colour I am very bemused. There never has been a plaster that matched my skin colour so it's a bit of a strange example, in my opinion.

Plasters always were, and some still are, a strange red brown brick colour. That's all that we had when I was growing up so if you now say that I've always had plasters that match my skin colour I am very bemused

People will be referring to the "flesh coloured" ones, which are beige in tone.
I was anyway

People are happy to use different colour plasters, cartoon plasters or clear plasters and genuinely don't care

I think this is where the privaledge comes it. If you are white then you have the choice to chose cartoon, clear, bright or skin toned ones. When you aren't white, you don't get much of a choice. That's the difference

People will be referring to the "flesh coloured" ones, which are beige in tone.
I was anyway

A) we didn't have them growing up
B) whose skin is "beige"?

I think this is where the privaledge comes it. If you are white then you have the choice to chose cartoon, clear, bright or skin toned ones. When you aren't white, you don't get much of a choice. That's the difference

Some of these arguments are really belittling the issue.

Why do you think we have privilege because we can use cartoon plasters? Seriously?

What plasters do you think are skin colour?