I think William David and Gechi make some excellent points and really hit a lot of the issues on the head in relation to the experience that Kipp had with the leader of the discussion. On the other hand, I can see where Kipp is coming from.

In undergrad, it was always the running joke that everyone had a support group. There was the women's group, there was the "Third World Transition Program", sexuality groups, nationality groups, etc. The only group of people who didn't have somewhere to turn were heterosexual American white males. There were never any groups that were targeted towards exploring what it meant to be a white male within American Society and within the world. It was just assumed because of their race and their gender that they didn't need the structured support that came from the institution. Based on their race and gender, it was assumed that they had a type of socioeconomic privilege that they took for granted. This assumption does not only negate the pervasive impact that class has on the experiences of people within the nation, it is also alienating.

While I do agree that conversations about poverty or social inequality should not be sugar coated to accommodate people who may feel uncomfortable with the racial undertones that are tied into the discussion, shouldn't there still be a space for white males to take part in the discussion? Just as Jared pointed out, those in power have found ways to keep the oppressed divided. I guess I'm just wondering what a coalition for general social equality could look like.

-- JenniferAnderson - 22 Apr 2012