The Male Privilege Scam and How to Defeat It by TIM PATTEN
The 2012 killing of Trayvon Martin and the subsequent shootings of unarmed young black men by white police officers have inspired humanities departments in many colleges around the U.S. and elsewhere to give greater prominence to the theoretical model of male privilege, specifically white male privilege, espoused by third-wave alt-left feminists.
By the same token, the Black Lives Matter movement has garnered increasing support from the alt-left [editor’s correction, feminism is an integral part of the left whereas leftist white males are now the “alt” component] feminist community, demanding that white men check their “privileges.”
This now widely-used term was first coined by feminist Peggy McIntosh, author of a 1988 essay, “White Privilege and Male Privilege,” featuring forty-six observations proving, in her view, that white males systematically oppress women and people of color.
She argued that the oppressors needed to understand this so it could be stopped, while also maintaining that this would be difficult because white men are problematic.
They are taught not to recognize their privilege and are oblivious to it; when it is brought to their attention, they are reluctant to accept it. She characterizes such attitudes as obnoxious because she essentially sees it as a denial of the social license they own.
Since then, the combination of McIntosh’s perspectives and third-wave feminist propaganda has effectively morphed into a kind of government condoned and sponsored hate speech: sexist and racist, it dehumanizes a substantial cohort of white, mainly heterosexual men based upon unproven or false assertions about their behavior and intrinsic nature.
Suddenly, it has become acceptable for social justice warriors to call for the oppression of white men in retaliation against patriarchy and to rid the world of systemic racism.
On college campuses around the country, in fact, the ideologies of the feminist and Black Lives Matter movements have formed the basis of a misguided and dangerous anti-white male dogma, expanding a twisted worldview of misogyny, oppression and violence toward women into one that also includes people of color and other “marginalized” individuals, such as trans-persons and the disabled. In effect, white heterosexual men are being blamed for the poverty, racism, misogyny, oppression and violence that exist in our society.
There is no doubt that racism is real [editor, it would not be if the media were not actively attempting to foment it] but there are better ways of addressing this problem than by seeking to turn the tables on the alleged oppressors.
The fact is that self-serving and misguided feminist thinking is leading black culture in the wrong direction. Helping the downtrodden and those who have suffered find dignity and accomplishment is almost certainly a better way forward.
Before doing that, however, it is important to explore the roots of the popular ideology. After in-depth analysis, Ms. McIntosh’s observations leave much to be desired: they lack the concreteness–measurements, weights, quantities or time frames–that would allow for a systematic evaluation of her claims.
Take her first “proof,” for instance: “I can if I wish be in the company of my race most of the time.” On its face, it is either baseless or untrue.
Among other things, it assumes that people of color cannot make the same choice. While there are exceptions, those individuals–or any of us, for that matter–are generally free to hang out with who we like. As with the rest of the arguments, it is opinion rather than fact.
In reality, it makes sense to use evidenced-based approaches to identify the issues associated with discrimination and oppression before jumping to conclusions about bigotry and the need for patriarchy-smashing solutions.
The idea that white people make choices that others don’t, for example, was largely refuted in an episode of the Morgan Freeman-hosted series, Through the Wormhole, called “Are We All Bigots?”
Using various scientific experiments, they showed how our minds constantly rely on stereotypes and how we are naturally drawn to socialize with those who are like us in some fashion or another.
Looking around, it’s not hard to witness myriad examples of people from similar races, nationalities, cultures, economic circumstances and backgrounds congregating with each other in various gatherings and locales. The well-known film comedy, La Cage aux Folles–“birds of a feather flock together”–included an assortment of gay folk who hung out together in clubs and neighborhoods with others like them.
Even in the animal kingdom, it is apparent that species favor their own, suggesting that this preference is a hard-wired biological urge, rather than a form of racial discrimination–or privilege.
That said, admitting there is a measure of privilege accorded to white males is a micro-step forward in helping to resolve a racial divide, but there are other powerful actions that can be taken and initiatives that can be introduced to heal scars and improve lives.
While the radical alt-left feminists may be given some credit for broadening the discussion and debate on some superficial level, it’s time for a real change in the narrative.
The solution is not to encourage disdain toward white heterosexual men and promote self-serving anarchy against the state; it is to work toward impassioned self-determination that can unlock doors to personal emancipation and triumph. Among the measures that can make a real difference are:
- Facilitate the enrollment of males in grades kindergarten through 12 in church-sponsored private or charter schools for boys that foster self-esteem and encourage them to be productive members of society. Educated this way, they can become proud men who strengthen and secure neighborhoods. The public school system has undoubtedly failed in this regard; in contrast, single-sex schools, with appropriately tailored educational settings and curricula, offer the best hope of improving academic achievement and the lives of inner city boys.
- Provide training that helps individuals gain greater control over their financial lives because money gives them easier access to privilege, power, freedom and happiness. Instead of promoting handouts and dependence on others, they should be taught how to survive on their own. Offering them a better education and, eventually, the prospect of higher-paying jobs, will give them independence and freedom. As the philosopher Maimonides once said, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”
- Implore people to think not just about today, but about tomorrow. They shouldn’t be focused only on survival, but on building the kind of wealth that can pay valuable dividends in future. There are different ways of moving forward, of course: some require a reordering of priorities and a reevaluation of current patterns, while others depend on taking certain steps to save and invest so as to increase freedom and future options. For insights on what can be done, they should read my book for men, MGTOW Building Wealth and Power.
Criticizing feminists for their self-serving and completely misguided efforts to address a national tragedy is not misogyny; it is a warning call aimed at shifting the narrative away from alt-left ideology and the language of rage and hate.
After years of trying to do it their way, it is now time for practical measures that enhance dignity and lift people up. Contrary to what some say, whites, including males, are not against this. In fact, all of us have a strong interest in seeing inequality and poverty cycles reduced. It is no longer about them versus us; it is that we are all in this together.