... to wonder why some people think there's no white privilege?

[IAmAnAlienHumansfrightenme]

Of course there is. Why do people correlate white privilege with economic opportunities and financial status?

Privilege is the same thing as 'Advantage'.

A white person is generally more privileged (at an advantage) than a black person and or person of ethnic minority.

A poor white person is generally more privileged (at an advantage) than a poor black/BAME person.

A rich white person is generally more privileged (at an advantage) than a rich black/BAME person.

A white person with disabilities or poor mental health is generally more privileged (at an advantage) than a BAME person with the same condition.

Having white privilege doesn't mean you have no other problems in life neither does it mean you're financially comfortable, it means your skin colour isn't one of your problems. It's not something you're conscious of.

My answer is this is why I've written "generally". Meaning, generally speaking a white person doesn't have to think about their whiteness in the world. Yes there are exceptions to every rule. You may be one...just like not every black person experiences (overt) racism but the majority do.

White privilege is similar to:

Male privilege. A man is generally more privileged (at an advantage) than a woman in many ways. It's a man's world for now.

Able-bodied privilege. An able bodied person is more privileged (at an advantage) than a person with a disability. It's an able bodied person's world (for now).

Financial privilege. A rich person is more privileged (at an advantage) than a poor person. It's a rich person's world (for now).

Extrovert privilege. An extrovert is generally more privileged (at an advantage in society) than an Introvert. It's an extrovert's world.

Those with privilege just means society caters much more to them and others are trying to be heard or noticed as equals or gain the understanding, acceptance, provisions, etc that those privileged in their category have.
Some who are underprivileged (in whatever category) can and do face serious issues with safety, violence, etc.

A person can be both financially privileged and underprivileged as a woman or a BAME person. A person can have white privilege and also be underprivileged as a person with disabilities. There's plenty of privileges and lack of to go round.

When people say "I can't have white privilege because I've never noticed being treated differently"...that's the point. A privileged person almost never notices that advantage till they face the opposite disadvantage. Ever heard of a person born rich never realising how privileged they were till they faced hardship or witnessed other people's financial hardship? Or rich people sending their children to poorer places so they can experience a different lifestyle and value their privilege?

Sometimes, knowing that others are suffering is different from empathising with/feeling the effects of their suffering. The latter is what gets you to understand and accept the privilege you have.

Oh and lastly (a different point), being underprivileged in one or more areas doesn't automatically make you a good person. There are good and bad people in every category.

I've deliberately not mentioned my race, sex, ability, etc because it doesn't matter, my argument stands regardless.

What do you think?

An example would be, I meet a BAME person who has a non-British accent, I am curious and interested to know about their life (not because of anything other than interest in human stories), yet apparently I could be accused of being racist if I ask about their origins. These are very human conversations that create connection and understanding, and are now being made off limits.

Although I don't think it should be seen as racist to ask people questions about their life, but isn't that some sort of (white) entitlement to think just because someone looks or sounds different from you, you get to ask them questions and they get to answer you? For all you know, some people don't enjoy being asked questions (usually more personal than one would ask another person they just met who happens to be the same race) by people they aren't comfortable enough with and it has nothing to do with them being ethnic minorities.

I doubt anyone likes to feel like a fish in a glass bowl and I can sense that's what it looks like when most of your initial interaction with anyone would be....oh your accent, oh your face, oh your so and so...where is it from? How did you get here?...It must be wearing after the first 20 conversations. As many have written here, you'll need to step outside your own pov to see it from others'.

So if it takes walking on egg shells to realise people don't have a "god-given" right to ask people for information they don't volunteer, then I'm happy it's come to that. Getting to know people also happens gradually and not by firing life history questions in otherwise casual chit chat settings or the first time someone speaks to you.

@Flapjak it quite rare though for migrants to be of the lower socioeconomic class. Even if they are they tend to be privileged in other ways (grittier, cleverer, more driven etc etc), there’s a reason why they clawed their way out of whatever shithole they found themselves in. I don’t know a single migrant family that hasn’t clawed it’s way into the socio-economic middle class at the very least within the space of one generation. My family did it three generation in a row. My husbands family did too. Of course they came from upper class origins in the first place so rose quicker and further than the average but even families who don’t necessarily have full university attendance or may come from a peasant background (I use this in the true toiling in the feilds from dawn till dusk sense of the word) have managed to obtain a reasonable quality of life. I’m not saying they never end up in entrenched poverty but the vast majority of my friends and all of my family are either migrants or children of migrants. Not one of them fits your description.

What I don't understand is how people can claim that black children are being adversely affected at school due to race yet when you point out that a group of white boys are doing worse, which suggests that black children aren't being discriminated against, then that is meant to be overlooked

"Doing worse" here, I believe to mean academically, correct? I do agree that there can be other factors at play when it comes to academics alone but I also believe there could be instances of racism or being marked down, as others have said. Humans are humans, I really cannot say if some are discriminated against or not academically just because the law has stated that it shouldn't be, when I'm not the rogue teacher or examiner or individual doing the downmarking.

Secondly, academics aside what about general school experience? What about the little snide racist comments here and there some have had to endure for years in school, the "little underhanded bullying" just for being different? Some from teachers, most from other children. Those things can affect mental health and in turn affect academics.

Being different from the norm (this could be by race, lifestyle, ability, age or sex) is more often than not, likely to attract a not-so-wholesome general experience among others of the same, especially when dealing with children. Even if it's only the feeling of being or looking different or feeling like the odd one out (from the person's pov, you don't get to invalidate that feeling because you don't feel the same or you don't think they should feel that way), even if it's feeling different because others are asked to be kind to you and treat you especially well, it contributes to the whole experience.

So when people are saying black or BAME people go through such and such in school, I'm not only looking at academic results but the whole experience from the classroom to the playground to the exam hall to the toilets to the teacher's lounge, to the head teacher's office, to classmates' birthday parties, to the parks with school or classmates, etc.

They're all part of the whole school experience which from a minorities' pov (race, ability, sex, etc) contributes to how they view that experience. There's no way one can see it using their own lens as an outsider looking in.

Although I don't think it should be seen as racist to ask people questions about their life, but isn't that some sort of (white) entitlement to think just because someone looks or sounds different from you, you get to ask them questions and they get to answer you

Why would you think that? Everywhere, all over the world, if you are from away, people ask you about it.

In this statement you've made, you've now made a barrier around someone starting a conversation with someone of a different race or ethnic background, or who is from some other place. Because asking a question is somehow an assertion of power and privilege.

And you think that is going to improve race relations?!

So I complied and listened, and the outcome we have got is that 2 people are limited in conversation

Of course not, c'mon. The answers to "where you're from" and the likes of it can and do come up in conversation as it progresses or even as soon as it starts but that doesn't mean it has to be a firing line question just because you think you can. People should get to decide what they want to answer or talk about, shouldn't they?

Imo, if one has no other conversation topic with someone who is perceived as different besides where one is from then you're either swimming in shallow waters (people are often more than where they're from) or you have nothing really to talk about. And that's the point. If it was someone else to whom you can't ask that question (because there's no perceived difference), will you think yourself limited in conversation? Apply the same.

You are creating a situation where people say, no, I can't talk about something obvious and interesting to most people because this person is "different" than me.

Emphasis on different.

The problem is that the UK is still majority white though isn't it? Over 80% with only 3% black so it's very unlikely that a company will be 50% white 50% BAME or black isn't it? How can you legislate for this? Of course interview panels should not allow race to factor into decision making but I'm referring to your point about lack of representation on interview panels. How could this be dealt with better?

I agree and tbh, I think it would be difficult for the foreseeable future to make this truly happen even if all the legislations are in place simply because there's still individual racism. Like I mentioned in school about the rogue teacher, etc.

Companies can have policies, laws can be put in place but individuals or a group of individuals can find loopholes and ways of going about things if they so wish.

In the recent past, there never seemed to be any BAME rep available or "qualified enough" to join panels before but since it's now become necessary for diversity, suddenly one or two BAME people have been magically found or seen as qualified to be part of the team or company? Are you telling me they got some shit person who isn't good enough just because they needed a BAME rep? No, I reckon they finally gave them the chance they should have in the first place.

I'm sure they can just as well "find" more "suddenly qualified" BAME people to hire or join teams again if they really looked.

I do agree that with the percentage of white over black, it's not going to be 50/50 but they can do better.

Look at some adverts, I was looking at a pamphlet sometime ago, there were about 8 families, 1 BAME and the other all white and this had nothing to do with region or representation stats, just general topic about children or families. Are you saying they couldn't have added 2 more to show a bit more diversity in the black or BAME community (or do we not realise even those communities are diverse as well?), while still maintaining the image of a majority of white families (because this seems to be so important)?

I see this almost all the time now because I've become aware of it: a lot more white people or couples or families to 1 black or BAME person or couples. You could atleast add one more, we know which race is the majority but this isn't about representing the majority but about including more of the minority and not letting only one represent the whole of the ethnic minority. You could add 1 or 2 or 3 more and still have the majority as white there but nope, we have to add the one BAME somewhere at the back or off to one side just to show we have one but in truth, it's not our concern.

These things are more subliminal than overt, they can be such tiny details and one has to pay attention to see it.

Because asking a question is somehow an assertion of power and privilege

No, it's the feeling that you should ask the question and you should get an answer otherwise conversation is limited, you're walking on eggshells if you can't and all those other melodramatic statements that shows some sort of assertion of power and privilege (albeit unintentionally by some and deliberately by others).

You are creating a situation where people say, no, I can't talk about something obvious and interesting to most people because this person is "different" than me.

Look I agree that asking questions in general isn't supposed to be seen as bad. It's human nature in general to be curious and want to satisfy that curiosity but I'm looking at it from a different POV also, where people can say no without someone making it about themselves and how they feel.

It's just like a man thinking a woman should be nice and polite when they're only saying hello and trying to start up a conversation (or whatever it is some men think just because [insert good intentions and social norms], a woman should [insert expectations of reciprocity or response].

Some people are okay with answering these questions and some aren't. Personal preference. That should be in mind before you ask away, it shouldn't be an expectation, without which there's nothing more left to be said is all I'm saying.

Op, you mentioned not only looking at school results but also at other things - bullying, comments, children's parties etc and I agree they are all potential opportunities for children to be singled out because of differences but that could be because of disability, size, behaviour etc as well as race so shouldn't any changes made to policies cover bullying/discrimination for all reasons rather than just skin colour?

You also talk about not asking personal questions, yet people ask personal questions about my disability all the time. I work with the public and a good few times a day I will be asked questions about why I wear splints, what's wrong, what do I have etc. My first holiday without parents and a lady at the hotel asked me "how did I get that bad scar on my leg". Yes, it's wearing. Yes it's nosey but people, on the whole, are just trying to have a conversation. Should I be outraged now every time someone asks me this?

Members of interview panels/ people on posters - you say that out of 8 families only 1 was BAME but that's roughly in line with % of the UK population isn't it? How many of those families had a person with a disability?

Is it discriminatory to show a reflection of what society looks like? I don't know the answer really. As a white person I'm really not fussed about it and it would be great to see diversity in all media, but in that case I want to see true diversity, so all races, religions, disabilities, sexes, body shapes and so on. This just seems to be boiling down to skin colour but I should think that the group of people discriminated against most in society, the people who are under represented the most are disabled people (and no, I'm not talking about myself at all) yet no one is rioting for their rights. So, yes, let's campaign to stamp out racism but why aren't we campaigning to stamp out all discrimination?

so shouldn't any changes made to policies cover bullying/discrimination for all reasons rather than just skin colour?

Yes all types but I don't think anyone has said rules against skin colour discrimination need to be upheld alone. I think the problem begins when others do not allow people to talk about skin colour discrimination alone without trying to add other types. People should be allowed to talk about what affects them. It shouldn't and doesn't take away from other types or causes.

You also talk about not asking personal questions, yet people ask personal questions about my disability all the time

One can ask personal questions but it isn't a right to do so and one must bear in mind they are personal and not everyone likes this, so if one is to be considerate, one must not expect the 'answerer' to respond or find it pleasant, regardless of intention. Different people see things and respond to them differently.

Should I be outraged now every time someone asks me this?

You can if that's how you feel, you can tell whoever's asking that you'd rather not be asked or you'd rather not answer that or something and any decent person should respect that (not feel that if they can't ask you about this one aspect of your life, then there's nothing more to talk about. I'm not referring to the PP who wrote this btw, just borrowing what was written as an example). Chances are if they get to spend more time with you, that conversation will come up again naturally (because you mentioned something about it) and you'll volunteer that information but as you say, you don't mind people asking you even if they just met you. That's okay.

The point is that some people do and that should be okay too.

Members of interview panels/ people on posters - you say that out of 8 families only 1 was BAME but that's roughly in line with % of the UK population isn't it? How many of those families had a person with a disability?

Is it discriminatory to show a reflection of what society looks like?

I dare to say most of these aren't about showing a reflection of what society looks like. If so, I could turn your question the other way round, where's the disabled person or the family with a disabled child? Aren't they in society at all?

I don't know the answer really. As a white person I'm really not fussed about it

I'll bet you're more fussed about provisions for disabled people or you as a disabled person? I'll bet many able-bodied people aren't fussed about that.

This isn't a bad thing, it's natural for people to focus on what affects them but the point is because you're not fussed, because it's not a big deal to you, because you don't see it doesn't mean others don't have this particular problem.

the people who are under represented the most are disabled people (and no, I'm not talking about myself at all) yet no one is rioting for their rights. So, yes, let's campaign to stamp out racism but why aren't we campaigning to stamp out all discrimination?

And this is the problem. Have disabled people organised a protest or riots and people said "shhh, not you"?

The question isn't why isn't anybody campaigning for them. It's why aren't they campaigning for their rights so that those who want to join can come along (They are btw albeit in a smaller scale)?

I didn't see anybody campaigning for BAME people until BAME people started campaigning for themselves. I didn't see anybody campaigning for women's rights until women started campaigning for themselves. BAME people are protesting for their own rights. The same people can also join more causes that are on but their own campaign should not be thwarted, just like anyother campaign.

If some cancer survivors are campaigning for cancer awareness, why should anyone say "Oi, no one has mentioned diabetes or stroke or other types of diseases. Who's campaigning for that?"

Errr...maybe those who want to? These people are campaigning for this disease. Have they stopped others from doing similar? Are those who're campaigning for cancer awareness expected to shut up just because nobody else is campaigning for all the other illnesses? Are they responsible for campaigning about all the other illnesses just because they dared campaign about a cause close to them?

It's really mind boggling that this seems to be the only area where people say such insensitive things. One wonders why and this is part of the privilege talked about. One cannot see past their own life when it comes to race, mostly. I suppose it's the same way some rich people cannot see past their life when it comes to poor people. "They should stop complaining and work harder, pack of leeches!"

The privileged about the underprivileged.

I dare to say most of these aren't about showing a reflection of what society looks like. If so, I could turn your question the other way round, where's the disabled person or the family with a disabled child? Aren't they in society at all?

That was my point though. You originally said that more than 1/8 families should have been BAME yet that 1 out of 8 does work out roughly in line with the UK population (if my maths is right). Yet you didn't question the fact that none of those 8 showed any disability.

It's why aren't they campaigning for their rights so that those who want to join can come along (They are btw albeit in a smaller scale)?

Can you not think why people with disabilities might not be in a position to march in London for their rights? People with disabilities are probably some of the most vulnerable and most marginalised people in our society. Even adjustments that they fought to get in order to help them participate in society are now appropriated by others - disabled toilets and wheelchair spaces on buses are just two examples. The fact they you straight away suggest that people with disabilities should organise a protest march shows that you don't have an understanding of the issues faced by disabled people (able bodied privilege?)

One wonders why and this is part of the privilege talked about. One cannot see past their own life when it comes to race,

And from the way you are saying that it's down to disabled people to campaign for themselves like BAME and women had to shows that you can't see past your privilege as an able bodied person. So the very thing you're lecturing us about - not seeing past our own privilege - is what you yourself are guilty of.

The truth is that everyone faces difficulties and we could all do with looking around and trying to recognise the difficulties that others are facing and do what we can to support them.

Many white people are not so privileged, so to them it seems more about class privilege than race as they're often in the same position, just without experiencing the racism.

Poor is poor, with or without the racism endemic in our society.

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras

OP didn't mention disability when making the original comment about the families because the main topic of this thread is RACISM (or well white privileges), not disability, the same way I am sure she didn't mention the lack of homosexual families or non-binary families etc... because while they do exist and their lack of representation is very much problematic and deserve their OWN threads, that is not what this thread is about, it's actually quite incredible that people cannot help but turn threads about Racism about other causes, like OP said, talking about Racism doesn't mean we don't care about other important issues, other issues all deserve their own threads and to be talked about in similar length but let's not derail threads to make them about things that are personal to you (and yes do matter) but have nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

You didn't talk about homosexuality in your response to the OP, should I assume you are homophobic? Or is it more logical to assume you didn't mention it because this thread isn't about homosexuality and that while you probably agree it is problematic as well it simply wasn't what was at the forefront of your mind when discussing the topic at hand?

As a queer woman of color, who have plenty of disable friends (some invisibly disabled others very visibly disable), I have absolutely ZERO issue acknowledging how privileged I am to be able-bodied, heck as a European-born citizen, I am also extremely privileged for being a European-holder passport and having access to things most of the world (including the UK now) don't necessarily have access to easily, therefore even as a queer POC I do have privileges associated to aspects of me that are unrelated to my race or sexuality, but while I would never pretend that I am not privileged for being abled-bodied or French-born, I absolutely cannot understand how people can struggle to acknowledge that they are privileged on other aspects (race if white and sexuality if straight) too. I am extremely grateful that every disable person I know and are close to me were amongst the first one to campaign and stand up for the BLM movement here in the US and acknowledge their white privilege (which we all understand is entirely different to their lack of privilege related to their disability).

You live in the UK (I assume), I live in the US and I and quite a lot of people where I live (San Francisco area) actually go in the streets regularly (I can think of at least a dozen time this year in SF) for disable rights, most of the people who show up to those protests are People of Color, obviously we understand that not every disable person has the ability to show up to protest but there are plenty of ways to bring awareness and protest that doesn't require marching down the streets, I will always happily march for you and every other disable and marginalized people who can't and/or aren't willing to march but what I can't do as an able-bodied person of color is talk for you though, I can go on the streets and require more disability friendly spaces and more protective rights for disable folks but I can't know as an able-bodied individual what you need and what struggles you are having and what changes you would benefit from if you don't speak up about them and relate it to your specific disability. We DO need disable people to SPEAK UP in any way they can physically/emotionally/energy-wise manage to do, whether by starting petitions online, sharing data online, posting articles, writing articles, making videos (if it's easier) and any other disable-friendly way etc... to bring awareness to their cause and their needs and the changes they desperately need to see happen.

Saying we need disable people to start their own movement isn't privilege, it's acknowledgement that able-bodied folks can only imagine and double-guess what disable could and might need and are much more likely to fuck up and end up doing something offensive and unnecessary than if we take a step back to LISTEN to disable people and act with and for them, it's the acknowledgement that disable people will always be the best advocate for disable rights the same way women were for women rights, LGBTQ folks for gay rights and black people and other minorities for their own fight to access equal rights.

@Notthefutureyet

Nobody said poor isn't poor but I would rather be poor and white than poor and black.

I think life in Western society is what you make of it. White working class boys leave school with least qualifications. To get on in life they have to knuckle down and work hard. Chinese and Asian males are at the top of the heap. Look how many go into medicine and top jobs. No one bangs on about their privaledge. In truth we all have to make what we can of ourselves.

@caringcarer

The fact that white boys are, the one leaving school with the least qualifications while women (and people of color then I suppose) out-beat and outperform them in class and results yet white men are usually the people you see in high-positions of power while women struggle to be acknowledged (let alone people of color), should indeed alarm you as to how privileges works and what it means and the opportunity it brings and how working hard doesn't really equal to anything (unless you feel women work less hard, since they have less recognition and usually much less power despite better academic achievements?). Asian folks (not all) are the same as everybody else, privileged in some aspects and not in others and yes, like everybody else, held accountable for it.

Your implied ''the world is what it is, and you just have to roll with it'' is a little bit concerning, knowing if your ancestors had been of this school of thinking you probably would live in a world where you would belong to your spouse and have as many kids as ''God requires'' and no personal rights to debate over or even have an opinion of.

We live in a system, the system is what determine how likely you are to thrive based on determined factors, yes some may be able to beat the system and obtain a result that would have been unlikely but why use those rare people as proof the system is ''okay'' instead of acknowledging the system is flawed and do something about it? It's not because things are a certain way that we should just let them be.
Again, as a woman (I assume) you surely appreciate that?

The fact that white boys are, the one leaving school with the least qualifications while women (and people of color then I suppose) out-beat and outperform them in class and results yet white men are usually the people you see in high-positions of power...

It’s not the same people, though. The white boys who leave school with few qualifications end up underemployed, in retail or other precarious employment, whilst the white boys who go to private school and elite universities, who score the highest qualifications, are those who end up in positions of power.

People with the same skin colour are not a fungible commodity...

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras You have no idea what my ability is and what I understand or not. Like I wrote in my OP, I've not (and will not) mention my race, sex, age, ability, etc because people like you will use it to make a point where there's none and it doesn't matter. I talk about every category of life as an outsider on this post because I want to focus on the topic, not myself.

Secondly you seem to think you've proved my "able-bodied privilege" when I've already mentioned there's able-bodied privilege and we are all blind to something and focused on others so even if what I'd written had shown me to be able-bodied privileged, that's one of my points being proven, not something you've happened to catch me out on as you seem to think you did.

Third, I used like for like when you mentioned who's protesting for the disabled. I used your words but it should be obvious (to someone who really wants to understand it) that I don't expect disabled people to riot and all disabled people to literally protest. However, some can and have done so. Some disabilities do allow for literal protest and since you seem to think every disabled person cannot literally go outside (some with help) and stand/sit in silent protest or with placards or something, are you being blind to other forms of disabilities? Do you realise some disabled people can and do speak and shout during protests? Do you realise that there are other types besides physical disabilities by the way? See, we can "catch each other out" all day. Some disabled people definitely can and do protest both for their cause and for others. Just google disabled protesters and click on "images", you'll see load of disabled people protesting. You seem to want people to join a cause with you or for you but you can't seem to spare that empathy for others, even in words alone.

@Linning has given a great answer to the other response. Again, you brought up the ever tired line about ads representing society (I disagree) and I ask you again, if they were representing what society looks like, where is the disabled then? Why aren't they represented too? Are they not part of what society looks like? Your question can be asked both ways but I guess you only want to ask it as another "caught your privilege", when no one is contesting other forms of privilege.

It certainly shows it is best to avoid any conversation topics that might upset the other person. I have always tried not to ask people where they are from as it is a danger area just as they tend to avoid that with me (I am from NE England and live in London). Bset to talk about the weather with new people. However once you get to know someone eg at work I don't think it is pushy or top dog-ish to chat to colleagues about their lives. Sometimes people don't want you to know a thing and others like to gossip about their childhood, home country, lifestyle. You just have to play it by ear. Eg in job interviews I always raised my childcare arrangements out of choice (as they were good and in my view relevant whereas a recruiter sensibly would not do so).

There is a specific black achievement issue in the UK for the 3% blacks, not Asian/Chinese issue - the latter do better than whites and indeed I think in law over represented as are Jewish people and good for them - they work hard, pass the exams etc. So I certainly have no problems in looking at why white working class boys and black children do so much worse in school exams - often qualifications are the key to getting on in life. My parents also paid for elocution lessons and then speech and drama lessons at school when I was in primary school and I suspect how we speak as well as how many As we get in exams helps too.

Linning

Thank you for your reply.

It's interesting that you suggest disabled people campaign in other ways ie petitions, writing articles and so on - I thought the reason why BLM protesters are marching, pulling down statues, rioting etc was because it's the only way to bring change and to be listened to - if petitions and other things work then why aren't BLM pushing for change using them?

You also say that it's for disabled people to identify what they need and what changes they need, that able bodied people can't do it for them because they don't know what they need - that's correct. But why are BLM saying it's up to white people to identify and make the changes for black people? I've asked on threads on here and been told that it's white people who have caused this and so it's up to white people to change it and it's not down to black people to identify what needs to change, but how do we, as white people, know what you need? So far, the only change I've heard the BLM movement call for is defunding/disbanding the police, I haven't heard any other changes that are needed.

Secondly you seem to think you've proved my "able-bodied privilege" when I've already mentioned there's able-bodied privilege and we are all blind to something and focused on others so even if what I'd written had shown me to be able-bodied privileged, that's one of my points being proven, not something you've happened to catch me out on as you seem to think you did.

I pointed it out to you because you're pointing out to white people how blind we are to our privilege and how we must change that and open our eyes to it. I was merely pointing out to you that before pointing fingers at others maybe you should look at your own privilege blindness.

since you seem to think every disabled person cannot literally go outside (some with help) and stand/sit in silent protest or with placards or something, are you being blind to other forms of disabilities? Do you realise some disabled people can and do speak and shout during protests? Do you realise that there are other types besides physical disabilities by the way? See, we can "catch each other out" all day. Some disabled people definitely can and do protest both for their cause and for others. Just google disabled protesters and click on "images", you'll see load of disabled people protesting. You seem to want people to join a cause with you or for you but you can't seem to spare that empathy for others, even in words alone.

Where did I say any of that? I said can you think why disabled people might find it difficult to go and protest, and riot and pull down statues, as apparently that's the only way to get your point across? Yes, many people with disabilities could protest but the fact that we have disabilities puts a barrier there that able bodied people don't have. It's much more difficult for people with disabilities to use their democratic right to protest because they have a disability. Some will find it easier than others, some won't be able to do it at all. Regardless of disability though, it's more difficult for a disabled person than it is for an able bodied person because living in a world built for able bodied people is more difficult if you have a disability, therefore protesting in that world is difficult.

if they were representing what society looks like, where is the disabled then? Why aren't they represented too? Are they not part of what society looks like?

And again, my point is that disabled people are not represented within mainstream media. You rarely see people with disabilities on TV, where disability isn't the reason they are there, you don't see disabled people presenting programmes, in adverts and so on but who's campaigning to change that? Able bodied people aren't trying to change it are they?

My point is, certainly in the case of disability, it's expected that disabled people should change things for themselves, should highlight issues, should identify what they need to be changed and then protest in whatever way they are able to given the challenges and difficulties our disabilities cause, yet the BLM movement is demanding that it's white people who must join them and fight for them and campaign for them. They are forcing people to say certain things, to take a knee etc - are you seeing disabled people doing this towards able bodied people? If disabled people don't need to compel speech or threaten able bodied in order to change things, why does the BLM movement need to do these things?

@JohnRokesmith

The fact that white boys are, the one leaving school with the least qualifications while women (and people of color then I suppose) out-beat and outperform them in class and results yet white men are usually the people you see in high-positions of power...

It’s not the same people, though. The white boys who leave school with few qualifications end up underemployed, in retail or other precarious employment, whilst the white boys who go to private school and elite universities, who score the highest qualifications, are those who end up in positions of power.

People with the same skin colour are not a fungible commodity...

Actually this is incorrect. White boys as a whole underperform white girls for example yet still they often end up in positions of power over those who they underperformed. This is the issue with people not actually looking at the data they want to use to prove their point.

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras

Secondly you seem to think you've proved my "able-bodied privilege" when I've already mentioned there's able-bodied privilege and we are all blind to something and focused on others so even if what I'd written had shown me to be able-bodied privileged, that's one of my points being proven, not something you've happened to catch me out on as you seem to think you did.

I pointed it out to you because you're pointing out to white people how blind we are to our privilege and how we must change that and open our eyes to it. I was merely pointing out to you that before pointing fingers at others maybe you should look at your own privilege blindness.

since you seem to think every disabled person cannot literally go outside (some with help) and stand/sit in silent protest or with placards or something, are you being blind to other forms of disabilities? Do you realise some disabled people can and do speak and shout during protests? Do you realise that there are other types besides physical disabilities by the way? See, we can "catch each other out" all day. Some disabled people definitely can and do protest both for their cause and for others. Just google disabled protesters and click on "images", you'll see load of disabled people protesting. You seem to want people to join a cause with you or for you but you can't seem to spare that empathy for others, even in words alone.

Where did I say any of that? I said can you think why disabled people might find it difficult to go and protest, and riot and pull down statues, as apparently that's the only way to get your point across? Yes, many people with disabilities could protest but the fact that we have disabilities puts a barrier there that able bodied people don't have. It's much more difficult for people with disabilities to use their democratic right to protest because they have a disability. Some will find it easier than others, some won't be able to do it at all. Regardless of disability though, it's more difficult for a disabled person than it is for an able bodied person because living in a world built for able bodied people is more difficult if you have a disability, therefore protesting in that world is difficult.

if they were representing what society looks like, where is the disabled then? Why aren't they represented too? Are they not part of what society looks like?

And again, my point is that disabled people are not represented within mainstream media. You rarely see people with disabilities on TV, where disability isn't the reason they are there, you don't see disabled people presenting programmes, in adverts and so on but who's campaigning to change that? Able bodied people aren't trying to change it are they?

My point is, certainly in the case of disability, it's expected that disabled people should change things for themselves, should highlight issues, should identify what they need to be changed and then protest in whatever way they are able to given the challenges and difficulties our disabilities cause, yet the BLM movement is demanding that it's white people who must join them and fight for them and campaign for them. They are forcing people to say certain things, to take a knee etc - are you seeing disabled people doing this towards able bodied people? If disabled people don't need to compel speech or threaten able bodied in order to change things, why does the BLM movement need to do these things?

So should feminism have been fought for poor men? You want BAME people to fight for you but you are unwilling to do the same. Or is it that you don’t personally see the benefit? I hazard that a more equal society will actually benefit all participants.

I pointed it out to you because you're pointing out to white people how blind we are to our privilege and how we must change that and open our eyes to it. I was merely pointing out to you that before pointing fingers at others maybe you should look at your own privilege blindness.

It doesn't make sense you pointing out to me what I've already pointed out right from my OP. It only looks like you're trying very hard to point out every other privilege (actually this one privilege because it affects you, see the irony) except white privilege. This is what black people are trying to get white people to do: accept that there's white privilege. That's all, recognise it. Those who can, then work with them to do something about levelling the playing field for the disadvantaged in this particular field.

Do you accept that there is? Or do you want to keep pointing out able bodied privilege when there's no need since everybody accepts this?

At this point, we're going round in circles and I find it hard to believe it's because you don't really get it. You do, you just don't want to admit it because you believe somehow this will take something away from you.

White boys as a whole underperform white girls for example yet still they often end up in positions of power over those who they underperformed.
This is the issue with people not actually looking at the data they want to use to prove their point.

White working class boys are a specific data set, looked at separately by schools, OFSTED, etc because they were identified as underperforming. You can't just lump all white boys together because specific groups within that are being failed.

We also look at other sub groups too - children with SEN, FSM and so on. We don't just include them within white girls or BAME boys because they have separate needs and separate vulnerabilities. It's not twisting data, it is using specific data groups as they were intended - to identify specific needs for specific groups.