All forms of what is called "privilege" are unearned advantages you get by being, in some way that you didn't choose, part of the dominant group in society. European cultural dominance is also, in a sense, work that was done "on my behalf" by my ancestors, whether I wanted that or not.
My point is to say it's multi-dimensional. A black lesbian attempting to get an Ivy League education, even if her parents can essentially purchase it, is still going to face significant obstacles to success.
There are a plethora of white male role models to look to for inspiration in nearly any professional field (even basketball!). Is the same true for black lesbians? What about fitting in at this theoretical Ivy League school once she gets there — is it going to be full of people like her, who she can relate to and learn from, or is it going to be alienating? And how will that affect her likelihood to finish school?
Lots of people with money and good educational pedigrees have to face the accusation their education was simply purchased by their parents, they they didn't get in "on merit". Our protagonist has to face not only that accusation, but the additional, much more common accusation that "affirmative action" got her a spot in this Ivy League institution.
So when and if she graduates, she will have worked harder and persevered through more than a white guy with the same wealth and IQ. And the point of talking about all this isn't to make you feel bad, or to say that one group is better than another — it's just to create understanding.
There are a plethora of white male role models to look to for inspiration in nearly any professional field (even basketball!). Is the same true for black lesbians?
Black lesbians are as free to look up to white male role models as anybody else, just as I'm free to not care about someone's race, gender, or sexuality when I look to them as a role model. (Or religion, ethnicity, etc.)
Lots of people with money and good educational pedigrees have to face the accusation their education was simply purchased by their parents
You wouldn't say that poor people are privileged though, would you? This is where the concept gets shaky, because one person's challenge does not always equate to another person's advantage.
And the point of talking about all this isn't to make you feel bad, or to say that one group is better than another — it's just to create understanding.
You might reconsider what kind of understanding is created when you accuse people of not working as hard or persevering through as much as other people. Nothing is more alienating to hard-working non-bigots (of which there are many among the privileged) than to be accused of secretly being lazy bigots.
Just because you have privilege doesn't mean you're a bad person. It's not your fault. You shouldn't really feel guilty. It's just luck a lot of the time. Luck can take away privilege as well. One unluck car accident can make you paralyzed. There goes your able bodies privilege then.
And not everyone has the same obstacles (that's the point of privilege), so you can't say for sure that your white ancestors had the same struggles (say) to get university educated as a current black female person today.
No one has argued in this thread that you and I are bad peeple because we're priviledged. What they're saying is that if we are not aware of that priviledge you are living in ignorance and should not be surprised when less priviledged people don't take us seriously.
Take Rosseau's famous example of priviledged ignorance: "If the peasants have no bread, let them eat cake." If we are not aware of our priviledge we appear just as ridiculous as that French princess.
Also, I'm pretty sure my white ancestors never turned on the tv and saw a state governor standing at the door of a university trying to block white people from getting in.
Your ancestors effectively overcame these obstacles on your behalf, so in essence that is a form of privilege; just a different type.