Wouldn't the privilege be in the ability to exercise rights without paying a price like so many groups have had to in our history?
This all sounds like a confusing semantics game.
This all sounds like a confusing semantics game.
A right gains its power from people's belief that it should be universally granted, and that they will stick up for others when that right gets breached. Once a thing gets redefined as a privilege there is no expectation for people to stand up for other privilege.
The left has tried to redefine harm to include "unequal result or outcome," which makes the entire principle meaningless.