Understanding Privilege and Diversity
A few months ago, I was conducting my routine walk with my dog in the neighborhood. While crossing the street, someone yelled “CHINK” towards my direction. I was the only pedestrian in my sight. I looked towards the source of the slur, and when my eyes locked on to the vehicle, the white pickup truck suddenly peeled away (as a side note, I am not attempting to demonize white pick-up trucks). In some aspects, this can be interpreted as a fairly straightforward instance of prejudice, but my intention is to use this example to explain the concepts of privilege and diversity, constructs that seem to be frequently misunderstood.
Unfortunately, defining “privilege” is already a bit complicated because it often conjures elitism (e.g., a privileged person has access to exclusive goods, rights, or general advantages). In the entertainment industry, the term nepo-baby has become somewhat fashionable lately, and it describes a type of advantage that children of already established celebrities receive because of their family identity (admittedly though, I am uncertain why this term has risen in popularity since nepotism has existed for much of civilization, in every industry). I also want to clarify that this “head start” does not necessarily guarantee success, as there may still be substantial hurdles within their life. However, when conceptualizing privilege, rather than the possession of prized resources, it may be better to understand it as an absence of specific socioeconomic burdens (i.e., the more privilege one has, the less they need to concern themselves about certain obstacles).
In my racism example, having privilege means not needing to be inherently concerned about receiving racial slurs. Privilege then consequently safeguards against the many overt and insidious ways that racism can permeate and manifest. A person who has experienced a racist event against themself may make efforts to avoid further incidence. This can mean they will avoid certain streets, change the timing of their routines, or even be wary of certain cars. If they decide to move, they will need to consider the prevalence of racial attacks in their prospective area, in addition to all the other factors that are evaluated in a residential move. They will need to plan out the “talk” with their children, including topics on how to behave (or how they are expected to behave) in specific group contexts (which is not related to courtesy or public decency). These are only a few of the supplemental deliberations that are made by those who lack privilege, and there are unique differences depending on race, ethnicity, sexuality, and gender (among many other identities). Essentially, people who have privilege do not need to consider many of the detrimental aspects of those with less privilege (to complicate matters, privilege is not a one-way street).
To simplify it in another context, privilege typically removes hurdles from one’s path…it does not necessarily provide tools to more easily overcome hurdles (though this does happen frequently). This next point might feel a bit like an offshoot, but privilege is often why it is important to factor in one’s life experiences when considering them for an appointment in a school, job, or other position. In sport rankings, an athlete or a team is usually given a higher rank if their opponents or game schedules are more competitive than their rivals. Imagine a person who has endured many challenges but has still reached similar levels of accomplishments than their less-challenged colleagues. Perhaps the additional challenges also bring unique and competitive perspectives, or imagine what that person may have accomplished if they were not burdened by the additional cognitive load.
Understandably, progressive efforts to consider privilege and diversity in admissions have not always resulted in immediate and explicit benefits. However, there is no magic formula or algorithm that equates to “success.” Additionally, diversity is not simply a spice added to an already concocted soup (this might ruin the soup because it has already been created with strict constraints and ingredients). Diversity needs to be part of the base, the foundation, which means that an entirely new dish may need to be created. As another thought exercise, if an employee from an American company is placed in a very similar position at a Japanese company (let’s say, within the same industry with comparable assets, income, and workforce), we can assume that the American will still encounter difficulties (and not just the language barrier). There is an entirely different culture to navigate (e.g., how teamwork is conducted, the method of presenting ideas, the different work rituals that are practiced). Not needing to consider these nuances is also a type of privilege.
I want to emphasize that diversity and privilege are not static or easily arranged constructs. There are vast spectrums of experience to consider, and it is a topic that requires far more rigorous examinations than what my blog can offer, but I hope my efforts provided some digestible clarifications.