TEACHSOC: Re: heterosexual privelege

[Ottis Murray]

If you remove the “n” from Del’s link, it will work  (should be .html)   Ottis   From: teachsoc@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Del Thomas Ph. D. Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:07 PM To: Jennifer Hatten Cc: Teaching Sociology; Roberts Keith Subject: TEACHSOC: Re: heterosexual privelege   There are layers of problems associated with using the term privileged with race as well as gender.  As Rosa Parks demonstrated it is not a privilege to sit in any empty seat in the bus you want to.  There is also a very effective campaign to claim the minorities, and gays get extra privileges. Voting and other rights should not be discussed as privileges.   It was not a privilege to get married when there were anti miscegenation laws. The fact is the groups we refer to are underprivileged...... not a good term I agree. My comments come from white students who ask where's the privilege?  They tell how they have been short changed by schools.  In the 60's there was a piece called  "the student as N....."  Some of you may recall that series.  For those of you who have not had a chance to see this piece I have attached the web site below so that you can get more information on the treatment of students, even in 8:am classes :-) . http://www.soilandhealth.org/03sov/0303critic/030301studentasnigger.htmln Black students ask why is it always about white?  Non whites etc. As if there were more whites in the world.   Perhaps we can find a better term than underprivileged or unprivileged.   One that does not include the term privilege when we are talking about rights. Del Jennifer Hatten wrote: I have seen this as well--many are opportunities for loans and tax benefits for heterosexual married couples. Please share if you find the source. Thanks, Jen   -------Original Message-------   From: Roberts, Keith Date: 02/08/06 09:10:43 To: Teaching Sociology Subject: TEACHSOC: heterosexual privelege   TeachSoc colleagues:   I have recently seen in pamphlets—and I am pretty sure I read this someplace in a scholarly source—that the federal government grants 1,138 rights to heterosexuals (these are rights that are not available to homosexuals) and most states also grant more than 200 specific rights to persons who marry (but of course most states do not allow homosexuals to marry).  I am seeking a solid citation for this kind of assertion.  Does anyone have a suggestion for a source?   Keith   *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *      Keith A. Roberts, Ph.D.     Dept of Sociology & Anthropology     Hanover College     Hanover, IN  47243       [EMAIL PROTECTED]     Office: 812/ 866-7353