Part of a much longer post from skeptifem: skeptifem goes to LDS church (emphasis added)
If you ask someone if they are racist, sexist, or homophobic, they aren’t going to say that they are. No one likes to think they are doing something shitty. If we use the intentions and feelings of privileged people to determine when bigotry occurs, you will find that no one is bigoted by that definition. The experiences of oppressed people is the more appropriate way to judge the behavior of privileged people. This is uneasy feeling to people with privilege, but its not difficult compared to actually being subject to bigotry on a daily basis.
[...]
It is almost as if people wish they could express any opinion and have a polite disagreement about it, even if it is something inhuman with negative consequences for an entire class of people.
Skeptifem also points out the elephant in the room of a church where they claim to treat men’s and women’s contributions and worth as equal, but all the women’s service areas are small and hidden and routinely unacknowledged while the men’s service areas are front and centre and ornate and spacious and involve recognition in front of an audience. But they’re apparently both just as important! (There must be a bridge for sale somewhere round there.)
Related Posts:
- Blog against sexism by tigtog
- So Similar by tigtog
- Seen at Shakesville by tigtog
- I’m glad he said it by tigtog
- The most potent weapon in the PC arsenal by tigtog
* Quicklink to recent open threads
CastIronBalcony: 
bluemilk: 
mindyhoyden: 
puzzlement: 
vivsmythe: 
ChallyWrites: 
ilauredhel: 
“an iron clad commitment to cognitive dissonance.”
I like that. (The phrase, that is, not the practice.)
Thanks for highlighting this one, I hadn’t seen it.
Evidence on the blogs rather contradicts the claim that, if the feelings of privileged people are the guide, no bias will ever be uncovered. It seems every minute another middle class blogger uncovers evidence of ongoing bias, racism, sexism, classism, ableism, somethingorotherism somewhereorother by someoneorother.
I think perhaps you should try re-reading, TimT. Unless the misreading is wilful, of course.
It is almost as if people wish they could express any opinion and have a polite disagreement about it
To have a subject that is to them an abstract be treated as such by people to whom it is in fact practically and immediately relevant.