The Invisible Knapsack and White Privilege

It is rare that I sit down and ponder the experience I have had as a white individual in my country. Fortunately, reading Peggy McIntosh’s article “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack,” and participating in class discussion really broadened my perspective. Like McIntosh explained, I have grown up being told that my experience as a financially sound white girl is the norm, that my privileges are normal. This set perspective limits my way of thinking and problem-solving when it comes to issues of race and equality in America. McIntosh writes, “whites are taught to think of their lives as morally neutral, normative, and average, and also ideal, so that when we work to benefit others, this is seen as work which will allow ‘them’ to be more like ‘us.’” By seeing whites as the norm, the solution is always to bring the rest of the non-white population up to the level of white society. But this approach promotes the separation of the two groups. If the ultimate goal for America is equality, it will not be reached merely by attempting to shape and elevate others’ experience to that of the white world. White society isn’t the ideal society. Rather, the ideal will come about by taking the best from all sects of society and removing the ideas and practices that impede open and respectful progress.

This alternate approach involves whites recognizing the invisible knapsack, the reevaluation of the knapsack itself and then the redistribution of the knapsack to everyone. Or better yet, no need for a knapsack at all. We’ve just learned that white society in its entirety is not ideal. Are all the privileges in the knapsack the most ideal? Or are some merely faulty white privileges? For example, McIntosh mentions the white privilege to “ignore less powerful people” which will, “distort the humanity of the holders as well as the ignored groups.” This is one privilege that we can completely let go. Progression towards ideal equality isn’t about granting non-white people everything whites have, rather it is a reevaluation of everything. It’s a cleansing and balancing act rather than just an act of “catching up.”

Our class discussion about group settings helped me to think about McIntosh’s perspective even further. When I was younger I thought similarly to Damali Ayo in her article “I Can Fix It!” When in group settings where I had to interact with people not of my race, I would make a conscious effort to give them more attention. I would “broaden my experience” (Ayo 7) by picking group project partners that were black or Asian (and similarly excluding white students) on purpose. It was a white privilege of mine to always be a part of a group and never be neglected. The other white students were also included enough already. I thought that by incorporating students different from me, I was raising them up to my level of privilege and inclusion. While it was good to desire equality, my approach and understanding were all wrong. I thought I was raising them to my level, when I shouldn’t have separated “them” from “us.” I shouldn’t have supposed an ideal “level” at all. It is not opening a door for a black person that is wrong. It is opening a door for a black person just because they are black that is wrong. Just as opening a door for a white person just because they are white is wrong. We should open doors for each other because we care for one another as humans, completely regardless of race. I think this strategy of Ayo’s is off. It sets up the wrong intention and enforces the duality between colored and white rather than enforcing the plain respect of everyone. Whites should be aware of the privileges we have, but begin to look past them, humbling ourselves so that eventually, interaction becomes more a consideration of human treatment than of supposed social ideals and norms.