Negative Positive Semantics, I

Why “privilege” rather than “disadvantage”?

Part of the reason is surely historical.  “White privilege,” for example, is an old phrase, it turns out—dating at least back to 1965.  When there is already a phrase in use for talking about the disparity between majority and minority backgrounds, there is no need to coin a new one.  Then again, I seem to remember hearing the phrase “disadvantaged communities” coming from the mouths of political actors in the not-too-distant past.  The question remains then, why did “privilege” rise to the top of the public discourse word bank, while “disadvantage” did not?

Once again, some of that may simply be accidental snowballing effects.  But the rhetorical implications of the different phrases are worth considering as well.

“Disadvantage” puts the focus on those who have less, whether they are women, children, ethnic or racial or religious minorities, people with disabilities, the poor … “Privilege” puts the focus on those who have more—men, adults, the majority race and religion, the able-bodied, the well-to-do.

The main difference between “disadvantage” and “privilege” then is that, while both highlight disparities, the focus, the highlight of the highlight, is on a different side of the disparity.

Sometimes it can be helpful to a side have the focus on them.  A focus on disadvantaged communities may lead to better housing laws; a focus on the disabled may lead to more wheelchair ramps; etc.  A focus on the middle-class white male might consider how he is a good tax-payer, and thus a supporter of his community.

But more often—perhaps by an accident of our current discourse, but more likely from a deep-seated human tendency—a laser focus shows what’s wrong with a group.  “No man is a hero to his valet”; and any group can become villainous when one begins to examine their lives too closely.  Thus, people who talk about the disadvantaged sometimes end up speaking as if their plight is pure and simple their fault—because laser focus on any group reveals all the (real) faults of the disadvantaged.  And, mutatis mutandis, laser focus on the privileged reveals all the (real) faults of the privileged, and makes it seem more plausible that their position is at least in part an effect of their misdeeds.