I've found myself using the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riddle_scale]Riddle Scale[/url] when I self-examine my feelings and thoughts about others, or about self-identified groups (based on whatever method of separation that they have chosen in order to say "we are different than you"). It's a scale originally created to evaluate an individual's reaction and perception of LGBT individuals/groups, but with a little modification, it pretty much can be applied to anyone's views of someone else, or of a group who are not seen as "us" (by the observer or the group themselves). [quote]Repulsion: "They" are seen as a crime against nature, common sense, or decent society. "They" are considered sick, crazy, immoral, sinful, wicked, etc. Anything is justified to change them: incarceration, hospitalization, behavior therapy, electroshock therapy, etc. Pity: Represents self-image chauvinism. "We" are considered more mature and certainly to be preferred. It is believed that any possibility of becoming "like us" should be reinforced, and those who differ should be pitied as less fortunate ("the poor dears"). Tolerance: "They" are viewed as a phase of ongoing development that many people go through and most people grow out of. Thus, "they" are less mature/reasonable than "we" are and should be treated with the protectiveness and indulgence one uses with children who are still maturing. It is believed that "they" should not be given positions of authority because they are still working through their adolescent behavior. Acceptance: Still implies that there is something to accept; the existing climate of discrimination is ignored. Characterized by such statements as "You're not one of "them" to me, you're a person!" or "What you do in your own mind is your own business." or "That's fine with me as long as you aren't obnoxious about it!" Support: People at this level may be uncomfortable themselves, but they are aware of the general climate and the irrational unfairness towards "them", and work to safeguard the rights of "those people". Admiration: It is acknowledged that being "different than me" in our society takes strength. People at this level are willing to truly examine their attitudes, values, and behaviors towards people who are different. Appreciation: The diversity of people is considered valuable and "they" are seen as a valid part of that diversity. People on this level are willing to combat prejudice and hostility from themselves and others. Nurturance: Assumes that "they" are an integral and indispensable portion of our society. People on this level view "them" with genuine affection and delight, and are willing to be their allies and advocates.[/quote] However, there is a new term and trend in the ongoing conversation that I find to be..... a distraction. The term is "privilege". White privilege, male privilege, hetero privilege, 1st world privilege, etc. I understand the real and valid meaning behind the term, but it is (more and more) being used as a cudgel and a way to say "I see that you disagree with me. My view in response to your disagreement is as follows. You are not me, and you will never know/understand accept me, and your views/statements are ALL invalid due to your _______ privilege." Its abuse is the new version of "STFU" and in meant to silence any discussion, not to encourage more. And I find the abuse and misuse of the term as a way to tell someone else that they have no right to an opinion, to be as dangerous as any other form of suppression of thought or other methods that are used to end a discussion rather than further explore it. There are times when self-examination of "am I assuming that I have privilege?" is healthy. But there are times when its use is approaching that of Godwin's Law and/or the "nuclear option" in a conversation. Which I cringe when I see it occur.