The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles
This article was the subject of an educational assignment in Spring 2015. Further details were available on the "Education Program:University of Ontario Institute of Technology/Critical Race Theory (Winter 2015)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.
The previous concern is valid. White privilege is theoretical and should be portrayed as such. This exact article is why I don't use Wikipedia anymore. 142.177.42.150 (talk) 14:30, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
There isn't a section for criticism of the concept of white privilege. I don't see this in the article history. Am I opening a can of worms by starting a section? If I don't hear back soon, I'll give it a try. Feel free to post feedback here.
One thing I think is worth noting is research from Plos one titled, "How the term “white privilege” affects participation, polarization, and content in online communication." The conclusion is "Overall, mention of white privilege seems to create internet discussions that are less constructive, more polarized, and less supportive of racially progressive policies."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9067660/
In most cases separate sections devoted to criticism, controversies, or the like should be avoided in an article because these sections call undue attention to negative viewpoints. Articles should present the prevailing viewpoints from reliable sources, whether positive or negative. Segregation of text or other content into different subsections, based solely on the apparent POV of the content itself, may result in an unencyclopedic structure, such as a back-and-forth dialogue between proponents and opponents.
As Generalrelative points out, Criticism sections are a holdout from Wikipedia's cowboy days, where we didn't have as many guidelines. They've fallen out of favor, and any articles that still have them need to be edited for compliance with modern standards. It's just not people's highest priority to go looking for them on a volunteer project. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite19:55, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I think there is enough criticism of white privilege from left-wing and other social justice perspectives to merit its own section here. Adolph L. Reed and Karen and Barbara Fields have established an intellectual tradition that questions the salience of race-centered perspectives divorced from social class and other forms of oppression, which white privilege scholarship often embraces. 47.32.112.104 (talk) 20:32, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
It should be noted throughout the article that white privilege is a theory or the opinion of some and not a proven fact. Yes there are countless editorials and opinions about the topic, but very little factual data. For wikipedia to remain true to its mission it shouldn't be pushing one groups ideology. 146.168.64.10 (talk) 11:21, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
At what specific skin tone does it kick in? Or is the privilege graded, with say, an Italian enjoying less of it than an Irishman? Does a black albino person enjoy white privilege?
Perhaps the article could seek to answer these questions. As an "olive" type with mixed ancestry I'm not quite sure where I stand. Thanks. Gene Stanley1 (talk) 14:08, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When I was young, in a city where blacks were not allowed in white public schools, the public swimming pool, or on our side of the tracks after sundown; our black maid's skin looked white but was badly scared. This was due to her efforts to bleach her skin white to lift herself out of the situation blacks were forced to endure. O3000, Ret. (talk) 14:31, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not here to dispute the historical mistreatment of black folks. I was hoping that, here in 2024, I might find answers regarding my level of privilege. As someone who may or may not be "of color". Gene Stanley1 (talk) 00:15, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, much as my response sounded forumy; this is not a forum and that specific a question is not possible to answer anywhere. If you have a suggestion about an addition; you are welcome to provide reliable sources for that addition. O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
