>> you are watching booktv on c-span2. where top nonfiction books and authors every weekend. booktv, television for serious readers. >> all right. should we go ahead and get started? sorry about that. welcome everyone. thank you so much for being here. thank you to the staff and folk culture for putting this event on tonight and for c-span being here to record it. book culture is such a wonderful place. one of my favorite bookstores in the city.

i buy many books here. and it has been a great place to not only by books what a wonderful place to argue to be in talk about books as well. my name is matthew and i am an associate editor at -- magazine. i'm so glad you also able to make it out. i will not keep us too long and introductory matters. but, for those of you not file with commonwealth, where a 92-year-old review of religion, politics and culture edited by --. we have all encouraged difficult conversations and the wielders of various religious or political might want to stuff though. in particular, the wheel, the monthly newsletter geared towards younger readers helped put this on as well. and behind this event. actually if any of you want to learn more about that, we will

gather for a drink afterwards. the first round is on us. you can learn more talking to anyone of us. our speakers tonight, those having this interesting conversation. phoebe was born and raised in new york city has a doctorate in french and french studies and her essays in french privilege have been in several publications. she is also the editor at the forward end of course it is her book privilege that we are celebrating tonight maria is a writer and the assistant digital editor. she also hosts the -- and before we get started a few other things. during the q&a i will have the mike and i will pass it to you

if you want to ask a question it is important they asked the question into the microphone. and also wanted to say that i first met phoebe a few years ago when we were working together at the dish. i've always been impressed with her work and it is a tribute gay subject. i think she handles it as well as anyone i have met and is very thoughtful and the complexities and nuances of this. it is really a pleasure to be old to have her here with us tonight. and let's let the conversation get started. >> thank you. we are going to start with a little reading from the book and so we all know what we are talking about. and then we will chat a little bit and we are going to open up for questions. so if you're interested then keep it in mind and will pass it around. >> thank you matt and thank you maria. when he grabbed my book. so, first of all it's an overview of what the book is about. it is called the perils of "privilege". it is about the idea of privilege. so the framework, it is not

about the perils of being advantage in every way that is not a dangerous situation to be in.but it is about the dangers of speaking of systemic injustice, systemic inequality in terms of "privilege". so that is what the book on a whole is about. and i look at different areas in which this is relevant so that includes academia, includes feminist debate, different areas but then one that my reading is come from is a chapter called the problematic phase. i'm not sure how many of you are familiar with that is an internet, if you like woody

allen or some other cultural, that you should not. it goes against your politics, your principles, somebody just feel you don't like it but it is a problematic phase. that is the title of this chapter. and it is about cultural criticism in the age of the privileged conversation. it is about how there is this privileged take, a privileged interpretation of really everything these days. and it is about certain the interaction between sort of online, especially -- that both express outrage about things that are offensive and the ones that are outraged at outrage. they interact back and forth and about the impact of t.v. shows, books and so forth. it is about that general area

if that makes sense. so the section i'm going to read now most of is called help privileged, criticism backfires. okay. so - the works that end up at five privilege framework are the ones that were never promising awareness to begin with. as you get to produce such work, white men. it is a art in the apolitical sense but also for political art it does not make an easily digestible so-and-so nails such and such and such and such issues to a point. except excluding anyone any sort of entity. consider the jonathan franzen and criticism dichotomy is laid out by writer michael medley in the globe and mail. end the piece about the novelist reputation. for some it represents

everything wrong with contemporary literature. unchecked privilege and unexamined sexism. to others, a great american novelist. one of the most skilled sentence builders of his time. a writer who can internalize the foremost issues of the day and bring clarity to them. such is the dichotomy. in the your on team identity politics and sit around policing whatever authors may or may not have left unexamined or you're able to appreciate their brilliance. four is the room for those of us that think jonathan is just okay? is it yes, he is got a boost from being from the one demographic allowed to exist outside the identity sphere. and his identity does not discredit his work. what privilege has done is create two tracks. the good but dull artist home thinks that peace is declared gets it right. in the -- an opinion writer or

two also comes to mind. who tells it like it is. but do they really? for your appreciation, it is ultimately as much of a boring political statement as sharing whatever sketches your right-thinking friends have declared a social media with nailed to the issues of the day. privileged criticism leaves no conceptual space for enjoyment that is not in line with politics identity. particularly for any reader or viewer who is not the white man and therefore, able to go to the and high-sensitivity route. and two options for either you can state your claim is being the whole woman or black person, gay person, etc. collapse along with the joke that not even funny. or you can object. which just is not how cultural conception really works.

plenty of the books, movies and television shows are for jews, women and two jewish women. it is difficult to articulate exactly how this works. and there certainly -- where programmer lose me entirely. part of their cultural consumption is this way. the privilege lens also more or less rolls out a sort of unlikable character. and no, i do not mean that's where unlikable is used to praise female characters for being feminist role models. i'm thinking of characters like -- from fawlty towers, a british children's 70s. archie bunker from all in the family. the same era. i'm actually 33 years old. [laughter] or george costanza from that relatively recent show seinfeld.

so, straight white men were privileged by today's understandings but convinced of their own victimhood. basil has a deal with nagging but usually correct wife and dispense employees he hardly speak english but who he hired is spelled out because of maintaining a lower rate. and the guests are mixed. some sweeping views from hotel windows and fresh squeezed arms use. others have the audacity to demand basic hotel services like checking in. rk meanwhile, is the casual bigotry machine. but his justification to sanctimonious incarnate son-in-law make it seem fastest to despise him right. and then there is george costanza. he pretends to be disabled in order to have a private restroom at the office. the privileged framework for bids such characters.

and then you have stephen colbert or softworks eric hartman. once there is any complexity or hint that the viewer might agree with that forget it. in the character and hbo's girls. such characters of self-pity and oblivious to what make them funny. but also what makes them relatable. that is where the humor comes from. the discomfort the conferencing a part of oneself in a character is clearly not intended to come across as an especially good person. we do not get this from -- taking his parents at dinner, and calling out all of the different bigotry's. and entitled obliviousness is both wrong and relatable. relatable across ethnic and gender lines. or else why would i kind of see where basil is coming from?

[applause] >> thank you phoebe. let's start from the basics. where does the term "privilege" as you are framing it originate? >> a great place to start. "privilege" in a general sense is super old and the french revolution was about getting rid of "privilege".but the something talk about for a popular understanding of peggy mcintosh. ashes was, check list. a paper that needs a checklist of where she uses her understanding of her disadvantages as a woman to understand her advantages as a white person.

in the checklist include some very profound insights and some items seem more specific to her or to maybe the social class rather than to whiteness. but they are spot on and seemed to be very relevant today. class one said i can shortly to meeting and it will not, i will not wear that it will affect negatively on my race. >> yes, that was good. so the only one where i wasn't sure would be something like i can have this published in a book that may be more specific. but others were very much just like you can move through society as a white person. so that, the understanding comes from that but it is also from, so the book is not

specifically about, white privileges about privileges in a variety of different facets. but it is really that sort of texted comes from. >> how did it latch on? what did it become? >> i think it really latched on in online conversations. it is often used like check your provigil your privileges showing, are you not necessarily to refer to even a specific type of provigil, it is sort of a way of saying that you are wrong in a way that probably stems from either your identity or your life experience. and it leaves the person hearing it sort of unsure. not necessarily unsure but possibly unsure of what they're being told or how to respond. >> so what are the progressive goals of comments like your privileges showing? >> i think the progressive

goals of the privilege itself and the framework is a general understanding that society is racist, sexist and that there is tremendous income in, wealth and equality. of using your privileges, your privileges showing i think is little more complicated. i think, and this is where i support the use, individual that is marginalized in a particular way and is venting about this. is it saying, you don't know my experience. and i think that makes sense. i think we are taking on this life of its loan from the often much louder voices of people who are themselves quite privileged telling others, you -- your privileges showing. >> why might they do that? >> that is why there is a book

on this. [laughter] for a variety of reasons. some well-meaning, some not. i think in individual cases it is hard to say. i would not want to put this in any individual's mind but i think sometimes it is just that, it sort of becomes the major argument. rather than saying you are wrong, it is sort of your privilege. but it is also i think, and is less pleasant variety it is, it can come from jealousy. i think it is something where, some of, not all but some criticism has been from people who are from similar demographics they just do not have their own television shows and best-selling books and stuff like that. which i think is different from the criticism she has gotten from people who are from marginalized backgrounds and i'm wondering why another show

about -- but then i think, sorry go ahead - >> no go ahead. >> i can go on that forever. >> i think we will return to that later. but i am wondering about the internet that goes hand-in-hand with what it is you are describing. >> absolutely. i think there are a few things that specifically relate to the internet. one, the big one is that online when i was writing this and certainly one is writing the blog. i was talking about blog comment threads. i was talking about the situations where people don't actually know who one another are. they don't even, they do not know one another's real names but they also do not even know the general demographics. so i think it is very easy online to just selectively present details of your story and see my cure this scrappy

underdog. whether or not a person in real life would remotely think that's true. so it is partly the anonymity. it is the anonymity but even when people know who one another are, there is that sort of not so kind natured of some online interaction.where people just want to declare one another wrong. and then i think sort of the third aspect of this online journalism and the economics of that and the fact that there is a privileged take where you take a political issue, anything that has happened that came up a lot with the discussion about the women's strike for international women's day. is it privileged strike or is it privileged not to strike? and the only thing you can discuss is that, who is really privileged? so i think those are sort of the three ways that the internet detective.

>> you have this sense that awareness becomes the tool and what it is trying to promote his awareness of privilege. >> i think it does not follow, even if it is not so plotted in that way. it does not follow it because you understand you are have

rather that have not in one way or another that you would want to stop that. when i think of things going on in the country and on the right these days, it seems like awareness of, for example white male privilege does not suggest a desire to shed the evidence. >> how do you believe the right is interactive with privilege discourse? >> just a little bit of background, finished writing this book before trump was the nominee and wrote the afterward right after he had been nominated, so things have changed. what i think has happened is the right, on the one hand has marked the left for using any jargon that comes out of academia. on the other hand more deeply embrace the privilege framework

of its own invention where this district auction of real america as the underdog even as a straight, white wealthy man it doesn't matter, if you support trump you're the underdog. i think this came through in the new york times style section profile of donald trump junior over the weekend which, if i m may. >> there is a profile in the new york times style section of donald trump junior that was about how he grew up in new york but he's not a city kid, he likes to go hunting and likes to wear flannel shirt and hiking boots and such. just seemed absurd. i grew up in new york myself not

deprived by any means but is not flying to shoot pheasants or whatever, it just seemed like he was using the things that not made him just a bit privilege but to make himself seem more like this weird populism where everything on the progressive privilege checklist and one that would be in line with my own politics would be advantage but actually he would be the underdog because he's associated with trump, he likes guns, and he is wearing the right shirt. so those are my thoughts on that article. >> he is his own kind of trump. >> aren't we all. we are all our own kind of trump. >> so has the right -- the

privileges? >> i think it has. returning to the topic of the women's strike. there were progressive critiques of the strike and also right wing antifeminist critiques of these privileged women should be not complaining so much. >> how can this discourse be used to prop up maybe not those on the right but the status quo? >> i think the way of the status quo is the focus on awareness and self-awareness and keeping discussions about understanding yourself as well as you can especially if you are privileg privileged. article after article about i have examined my own privilege i think that's how it does it. >> why doesn't that work? >> partly because they are inadvertently hilarious.

any article that is meant is sincere and comes across like that does not generally persuade. they don't work because there's no implied next step. it's like i understand this about theworld the proverbial wanting of a cookie for having understood something and then what? >> those articles require an imagined other as well. >> exactly. the most egregious of these was probably one about the yoga. this from a few years ago i think on it so jane a website that produces viral articles. where then, white woman self identified as thin white woman

had seen in overweight black women in her yoga class and this had caused her to cry. the thin white woman. because of some neurotic thing in her mind where cars turned to think about cultural appropriation and fat shaming. something that didn't make sense. she was really projecting a lot of offensive stuff onto a woman in her yoga class who had not asked. so, i think the more attempts at being privilege aware frequently not very self-aware in that way. >> that article went viral with a lot of criticism. one interesting thing was that the author think was just mentioning this casually the moment she had a yoga class who is an editor and they told her

to write it. >> i think that's really crucial for this. a lot of these outrage provoking and expressing articles are to do with the way journalism is produced in the whole thing where items have to go viral. another that i talk about in the book is there's an article that was controversy criticizing something either amy schumer have performed, said, tweeted, i don't know. the some article criticizing amy schumer that i got a lot of negative attention. then one of the co-authors was interviewed on turned out she had been prompted to write this but it had shown that she was so passionately outrage but for all we know she hasn't heard amy

schumer until that afternoon. >> was a possible were getting expensive things out of whack? i think so but even people who know one another off-line is just to say let's only attract off-line is not practical. >> can you explain about the connection between the privilege discourse and jewishness? >> sure. there's so much to say on this. my background is more in academia my doctorate is in french but i studied french jewish literature and history. what struck me when writing this book i kept thinking about the text from the 1840s is a french

socialist anti-semitism, once when it became anti-semitic. in 1840s, there was a book whose title translate roughly to the jews the kings of the era or something like that. it was about jews, if you're revolutionary you should want to get rid of jewish privilege. so this notion of jewish privilege is foundational to anti-semitism. that has made this centrality of talking about privilege made it hard to discuss anti-semitism within that framework because jews are discriminated against

for being privilege on the level that we quite frequently or not. >> was a different situation in the states currently. >> yes, that's true it certainly is than when i wrote this book. >> there has just been this is just been in the news that their suppliers on campuses i believe in illinois that says something about you should not care about white privilege, you should care about jewish privilege. it is really whether this is far left semitism are far right, whether it's even possible to say i'm not sure. >> that is certainly cropped up in my twitter mentions every so often. >> in this book is touching on things that are so fast-moving

there's something you would add or change if you wrote it today? >> yes. i like nevermind, but i'm think what would change moore's tone and emphasis. trump one on this i'm going to oppose political correctness sort of thing. i think it be much more i think at some point soon i was rereading it i really hammer the point home that's not right coming from and i think i would a bit more and also dwell a little bit more to dwell on it being find to use privilege to speak about your own struggles. it's in there but it's too buried and i would have said more about that. >> when is the privilege

discourse most effective? >> doesn't even have to be effective to be appropriate. that's what you're feeling. someone is being oblivious in a way that upsets you, i think use it even if it's not going to educate this person. i think it's most effective when it's used to discuss society as a way of describing both systemic inequality and at the same time the obliviousness that can bring about. it is least effective when it's applied to individuals, especially individuals who don't know much about one another. because you can get way off. >> where do you see the privilege discourse going? is it going anywhere? >> it may be with us for some time. i always with think this was a

thing for a while and some blogs and i made a big deal of it because i was procrastinating from writing my dissertation. then i'll see things like these women strike articles are like in the democratic primary when these articles and tweets, if you support bernie sanders your privilege no no, if you support hillary clinton your privilege. i think it's with us unless my book convinces people to find other ways. i'm not so confident will. >> but i hope. >> was suggesting you have a replacing the privilege framework. >> in terms of framework speaking about injustice and systemic injustice and equality and in terms of individual situations i would say use terms like racism, sexism, homophobia.

if you hear your privilege is showing you may not know what type of privilege. it's good to let the person know why you're angry even if it's defensive and annoying regardless. precision gives a chance that maybe the message will be more received. those would be the alternatives. >> that is great. thank you. i think we should open it up for questions. [applause] >> i had a chance to read a few sections of the book and part of the opening argument suggests that callout culture. particularly productive and that's in part because empathy is more effective than shame in terms of compelling people to change their worldview or take a

look at their own advantages. a couple of stories you outline are stories where persons lack of privileges presented and that invites empathy instead of declaring that someone is privilege that producing shame. i am wondering basically why you believe empathy is more powerful for us in this discourse than shame or whether shame has a role at all? does that make sense? >> i'm not sure totally. >> i guess i'm wondering rather than shaming people trying to create a situation in which a person feels invited to see something differently. were lifting the veil somehow gentler. my impression of the text is

that you find empathy is more compelling than shame. and if i'm right about that or if shame has a role at all. >> i think shame perfectly does have a role buzz it has a role and someone has done something or said something shameful. where callout culture comes into it it's the focus on gaps of people were overall well-meaning and what they said by any generous interpretation was not particularly offensive. what i would like to see is less attention paid to things that could be misinterpreted as offensive and more direct calling out of things that have actually offended someone, could've been the bare minimum instead of i bet someone could have been offended by this.

>> you are talking about privilege and the production of work by people who are not within the group that hold the privilege or does not hold the privilege. with that be something like the artist being criticized for a picture of a slave in the reflection of that in the commentary that has come up because of it from the population be depicted as the lack of validity for their ability to produce something like that? >> i think that's a different case because the people as i understand it from the scoria help skimmed earlier, it seems the people have the complaint or from the group in question or

from themselves black and not offended on behalf of theoretical black people. so different than what i'm talking about. in the cultural criticism chapter i found a lot of time -- think it fits into something i talk about in the book is really that as i understand it, the artist imagined that she was creating an antiracist work and frequently works that come under the most criticism are once going for something very progressive but get it wrong because it is somehow easy and trying to get it right, get it the opposite. >> in determining whether something is offensive the best you can do is listen to members of the group in question and not just people outgrew people

whether it ought to be offensive. there is no universal consensus. if it turns out many more black artists think it's fantastic, the conversation would have to be different. i don't feel in a position to really say. >> was there a moment that crystallize for you the limits of your. >> yes and this is getting to part i haven't yet mentioned witches from this came up when i was blogging about the topic which is the way privilege can be used to dismiss things that are very tragic in the world like personal tragedies and global tragedies the way these competitive conversations are used to say will someday post to facebook about something horrible happening in someone

else's clearly you don't care about this other thing. or somebody posts a being ill and somebody says you're lucky because you have health insurance or you're lucky, privilege, this use of privilege to describe situations that are awful but could be more awful. it could be where some instances like that of whites speaking of bad situations is privileged even though there's always a worse situation is not helpful. >> like what? >> the example, ages ago there is a post about a young woman who had died in a car crash. it is really upsetting, i did not know this woman but she was

22 and that seemed objectively awful. then people in the comment thread worth same will she was so privilege and cap calling out there privilege and his people care about every 20-year-old who has died, was this in the grand scheme of things a fair point. when talking about individual it seemed needlessly cruel. who is actually helped by that? you can talk about that which society cares about in a way that doesn't call it not tragic or privileged or luxurious. >> you have time for two more questions. >> i have a question about seems to me one feature of the way privileges talked about is you

need to mention all things. so rather than seeing racism and sexism as different types of oppression we get the attempts to instill different types of advantage into one. i seen this where they going to these weird attempts to discern whether wealthy black man has more privilege than a poor white man before he's taken privilege from the white man because he's poor and add published to the black man. i'm curious whether you have thoughts about how we have got to this point were people feel this need to distill different types of advantage into this one concept. >> i think it comes from a truth that has been analyzed in academia that people are

privileged are not according to different ways. in terms of the caricature version, the caricature olympics so what you mean? >> i don't think that is quite with the privilege. i think there is a misunderstanding on the right that privileges about giving a platform to the most marginalized. i don't think that is what the privilege turn has done. i think what actually has happened is the same people are empower as always were and they know not to preface it with the others. >> you wrote about in the yoga

studio in the grocery aisle, i wonder if you might just share one of the most absurd or gratuitous places you have seen the framework invoked. the most surprising place you have seen privilege invoked as a discussion point where you would not have expected to see it? >> the most surprising place that i have seen privilege you vote? yes. i know what that is. so it was textured role rather than real-life example so as to not callout any real-life private individuals. there's something on the website about money the billfold. where's something like young,

broke young privileged and broke. that was the headline. very young woman who had some cultural capital, she had been to college and was able to afford a coffee that cost a dollar 50 for she had bought one, whether she could afford it. it was a personal essay where this woman was saying that she could qualify for food stamps but she's privilege, think issue privileged in the current understanding, yes but the fact that on paper she would be able to make enough money to live is not actually translating to making enough money to live. just seem like privilege was a weird way to put that. then the headline you have a section that a sense gone this is your so privilege.

so being able to scrape together dollar 50 for coffee and being referred to as privilege seems maybe the most absurd. >> are you concerned about the way the discourse speaks to cultural capital. >> yes i think cultural capital is real but the epiphany about cultural capital can overshoot the mark will knowing about kalin having seen latte is not a lot enough to be privilege. >> the gentleman over here, his question popped a word on my brain, it intersection with someone you have age, ray age,

sex and you take them and combine them all into one person say that person cannot be called privileged but it's her characteristics. i was wondering you seem like you're aware of the concept, how does it play? >> this connects with one of maria's questions about what i do differently? >> i would have a whole section on the league the scholar theory of intersection reality which is more vaguely aware of at the time of writing the book and i have learned more about since. intersection alan he is really what this is about, the way the disadvantaged isn't just experienced in one way so that for example there's no one way women experience sexism if

you're less bmu will experience sexism that if you are straight woman. if you're a black woman you'll experience sexism different than a white woman and so forth. i think this gets to the difference between understanding how society is structured which i'm in favor of in the concept of privilege this is what i hope the book gets across, it takes on a life of its own it's not figuring it out or engaging with what people's individual experiences are, but more of this self presentation that is unhinged from concrete experiences. does that make sense?

>> there is a book called him a woman to. i had the impression that your book would've been more on a john simon paradigms law type of feel, but it doesn't seem like it is. i know i just change the topic. okay, you don't have to agree but i have to read the book,. >> everybody has to. there are a million things that my background is in academia and i'm constantly kicking myself that when i started the project i looked at a lot of scholarly books from privilege and thought i can't make it just that but i wish i do more in that area because there's so much and is so interesting.

>> just a few more things. one is if you're here you could definitely buy the book. >> is fabulous. >> books are everywhere including this one and if everyone wants to join us for a drink afterwards the crew will be having a beer at 10:20 p.m. so come along. but most of all let's give a big round of applause,. [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. 1979 c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. it is brought to today by your cable or satellite provider. >> 's done afterwards, the former chief of the new york police department's internal affairs. talks about investigations into corruption within the force in his book "blue on blue". the chief was the second lot-