?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry



Comments

catwoman980
Dec. 29th, 2010 09:41 am (UTC)
Re: :P
It is. He's uncomfortable with it because he's uncomfortable with the notion of me being with other men because other men = threat and other women = hot. He's the one who told me it was irrational and that it came from that place. Two girls is a fantasy even if he's not around for it, another dude is icky even if he's not involved at all. I even offered that maybe it's just that he's not attracted to dudes and he told me that wasn't it, it's just the emotional territoriality that women don't infringe on because that's not really what we're brought up to feel.

The fact, however, that he's aware that it comes from some pretty sexist places means that we discussed it and he was really open and honest about it rather than defensive and controlling. Recognizing where it came from didn't automatically mean we had to reject it, it just meant we knew. So, I didn't feel resentful, he articulated his feelings and fears, we both felt more secure about the whole thing, and minus a few bumps it's been pretty awesome. It also works out because I'm attracted to something like half the girls I interact with and maybe 1 out of 100 dudes I interact with. If I was closer to a 3 on the kinsey it may feel more unfair and we might have to unpack the issue a bit more.

Mostly it just means that we have to be a little mindful that my relationships with girls are respected as not being a porno fantasy, and involve another human being who I care about on some level. It also makes us more open about establishing clarity on his level of involvement and the other girl and I's level of emotional involvement with each other and him. Stuff people should really do anyway.

Being aware of privilege really just means not being a douche. Knowing when your actions might have an effect on the people around you, being considerate, stuff like that. There are very few circumstances in which privilege even can be outright rejected so thinking about whether or not one should is vaguely moot.
agent139
Dec. 29th, 2010 03:14 pm (UTC)
Re: :P
I don't know about guys being icky but we do resort to direct conflict rather quickly.

Anyway, the way you define privilege makes sense to me-- but it certainly isn't the "talking down your nose" sense in which it usually used. Every time I've heard it, it's been a verbal attempt at turning the tables, and making one feel superior than someone who is luckier, better connected, or simply more brutal than they are. If everyone had the same regard for it you seem to I doubt that would come through so much.
trinker
Dec. 29th, 2010 05:26 pm (UTC)
Re: :P
"ZOMG, "privilege", what-EVER" thing is deployed as a derailment tactic no matter how the term was intended.
catwoman980
Dec. 29th, 2010 07:08 pm (UTC)
Re: :P
Everyone I know who's discussing privilege in terms of power dynamics in a sociological (or civil rights) sense does have the same regard for it that I do.

Pretty much the only people I ever hear say that privilege is always bad are people who frame it as "Feminists/liberals/activists/people of color say privilege is bad and should be rejected and I think that's too simple!" It's a strawman. Since the underlying concept necessarily states that it's not something that can be gotten rid of or rejected completely (as things are now), only people who aren't familiar with the concept would say such things.
agent139
Dec. 29th, 2010 07:12 pm (UTC)
Re: :P
I AM familiar with the concept (I was raised by lesbians and went to Bard college for christs sake, a liberal arts school that has been said to "put the liberal back in liberal arts") and I still think that as it is generally used in academic circles, they may say one thing but they're acting on an emotional impulse which is quite another. Don't be quite so quick to make assumptione about another's assumptions. ;p
(Deleted comment)
catwoman980
Dec. 30th, 2010 08:56 pm (UTC)
Re: :P
Yes
Yes
Yes it is
Yes i was. Yes there are
Ok?
It is