How often have you heard a sentiment like this one: It is the responsibility of the privileged to champion the cause of the oppressed and fight for the inclusion of the marginalized.
That’s basically the going gospel de jour right now. And it sounds good, right? When we hear the categories of “privileged” versus “oppressed” or “marginalized,” most of us have an instinctual emotional reaction to them. Why? Because these words carry moral implications. Shouldn’t we do all those things? Isn’t that what Jesus did? Yes, and yes. However, there are a bunch of linguistically-thefted words going on here.
When altered definitions of these words are culturally accepted, there becomes a moral imperative to respond as society deems fit, not how God sees fit.
Let’s break these buzzwords down one-by-one and then look at what assumptions they smuggle into their definitions. (And don’t forget to see the next blog where we ROAR through this, discussing what they get right!… and where lies have snuck in.)
Buzz-Word Overview:“Privilege”Formal Definition: An advantage, right, or immunity only granted to the few, and typically in relation to being in a high position of a company or high status in society.
What we assume they mean: The proverbial “silver spoon” that a person is born with, usually in terms of wealthy parents.
The overly simplistic summary of what they actually mean: White people with their white privilege. (But really, it can extend to basically anything that benefits a person–espeically if that person is white–if it isn’t automatically given to everyone… like parents who read to you as a child. Or good parenting in general.) No matter what it is, if it wasn’t given to everyone, it’s a privilage, and you need to check it before you wreck it.
(Wanna know how “privileged” you are? Just take this quiz! Heads up, though. If you are heterosexual, feel comfortable with your gender, and have never “felt poor,” you’ve just racked up some serious privilege points. Extra points if you’re a papa bear.)
“Oppression”Formal Definition: Being under unjustified control or enduring unjust treatment.
What we assume they mean: Living under a regime that withholds basic, equal, human rights in a manner that you cannot overcome.
The overly simplistic summary of what they actually mean: Being poor or a person of color who now can’t access the privileges of rich, white people. (If you are white, your white privilege wipes out any of your poverty oppression though.) Beyond money and skin color, they can apply this word to literally anything that either currently or has historically created/resulted in inequalities between groups, regardless of whether it is within their control. And this is mostly all group related, not individual related because social justice advocates often think only in terms of a person’s group identity.
“Marginalized” Formal Definition: Viewed as less significant, lower status, and holding minimal amounts of power and influence.
What we assume they mean: People who have been unfairly forced outside of a group, polite company, or have been thrust to the margins of society to be forgotten and ignored.
The overly simplistic summary of what they actually mean: Everyone who does not feel equally normal within a group or society no matter if it is based on their ethnicity, criminal history, immigration, sexuality, religion, perceived gender identity, or–now–even how they choose to behave or dress.
“Equity”Formal Definition: The state of being treated with fairness and impartiality.
What we assume they mean: Nobody unfairly gets more or less than another person. (And “fainess” is defined according to contribution, not need)
The overly simplistic summary of what they actually mean: Everyone gets whatever they need in order to have equal outcomes with everyone else. Fairness is determined by need, not contribution.
The assumptions:
Each of these words smuggles in a lot of social justice assumptions. For example, the social justice version of an ideal society means that:
This is our culture’s idea of “equity.” Once you assume that the above are “rights” or how a “good society” should look, then anything that opposes it (or makes it harder to achieve) will be considered oppressive. The only solution at that point is to play “find the oppression.” And friends, it’s funny how when we assume that something is the root cause, we will always find “evidence” to bolster that assumption. It’s amazing how you can always find what you’re looking for.
Since we witness all three of those aspects (class distinctions, unequal access or quality, and people who don’t feel celebrated), then finding the “oppression” means finding the oppressor who has robbed these people of their rights to identical outcomes. And, according to critical theory, oppression is due to the “privileged” using their power and advantages to further marginalize others, whether or not it’s intentional. Do you see the ideological connection between all of these “buzzwords”? Once your kids understand the big ideological picture, it will be a lot easier to compare it to a biblical worldview.
In the next blog, we are going to talk about what they get right, what they get wrong, and how we can talk to our kids about it. So, we’re going to ROAR through these buzzwords! Read it here now!
Hillary and AlexaHillary and Alexa love writing together, so this piece is a little bit of both of them.
The post What do they mean when they say equity, privilege, marginalized, and oppression? appeared first on Mama Bear Apologetics.