Privilege without defensiveness

When inclusion conversations become a no-win situation

In my experience working with organisations on diversity and inclusion, the moment the word "privilege" enters the room, something shifts. Some people feel marginalised communities are being given favours. Others — people who may come from what looks like a more advantaged background — push back: "I've had a tough gig as well. I haven't had it easy. What about me?"

Both reactions are understandable. Both contain real feeling. And both, left unaddressed, make the conversation collapse into defensiveness rather than progress.

Privilege is not an accusation

Privilege is not a verdict on your character or a claim that your life has been easy. It is a description of which doors were not closed to you in the way they were closed to others. You can have faced genuine hardship — financial struggle, family difficulty, health crises — and still have benefited from certain doors being open because of your gender, your race, your class, your ability, or the way you present to the world.

Those two things are not in competition. Acknowledging one does not erase the other. The problem arises when we hear "you have privilege" as "your struggles don't count." They do count. That is precisely the point: everyone's experience counts, and that is why we need everyone in these conversations.

Why we need all the voices — including the uncomfortable ones

Some people need to speak up because they have felt discriminated against, felt victimisation, faced a lack of opportunity. We need to hear those voices. That is non-negotiable. But inclusion, as I see it, is about leaving nobody behind — and you cannot be inclusive by ignoring or devaluing the contribution of other people.

If the person who asks "what about me?" is simply shut down or made to feel like a villain, they disengage from inclusion work altogether. And then we have lost them. We need everybody in these conversations — not just the people who already agree.

Avoiding the "oppression olympics"

One of the quickest ways to derail an inclusion conversation is to let it become a ranking exercise: whose experience was worse, whose group has suffered more, who deserves more airtime. This is sometimes called the "oppression olympics" — and nobody wins it. It narrows the conversation to a competition when the work is fundamentally about building something fairer for everyone.

• Name the pattern, not the person. Systemic disadvantage is structural and measurable. Pointing to it is not the same as accusing an individual of causing it.
• Hold multiple truths. "Some groups face barriers that others don't" and "your experience and contribution matter" are both true at the same time.
• Focus on the system, not the scoreboard. The question is not "who had it hardest?" but "what needs to change so the same doors stop closing on the same people?"
• Make space without making enemies. Creating more room for underrepresented voices does not require silencing or blaming others.

Privilege, equity and the difference it makes

This is where equity rather than equality becomes useful. Equality means giving everyone the same thing. Equity means giving people what they actually need to reach the same starting line — because not everyone starts from the same place.

When people understand equity, "What about me?" changes shape. It becomes less a protest and more a genuine question: "Where do I fit in this?" The answer is: right here, in the conversation, as a person who can help build something better — not as someone on trial for advantages they may not even have been aware of.

Practical ways to have this conversation

• Start with curiosity, not compliance. Ask people what they find difficult about inclusion conversations before presenting them with a framework. People engage with problems they helped define.
• Acknowledge the discomfort out loud. Saying "this can feel like a no-win conversation — let's talk about why" disarms defensiveness before it builds.
• Separate intent from impact. "I didn't mean to exclude anyone" may well be true, and it still matters that someone was excluded. Both things can be true.
• Invite people in, not over. The goal is not to make privileged people feel guilty — it's to make them feel like a valued part of the solution.
• Listen to the discomfort. When someone says "what about me?", there is often a real fear underneath — of being overlooked, dismissed, or blamed. Hear that before responding to the words.

Take it further

These ideas come up regularly on the Inclusion Bites podcast — real conversations about the uncomfortable edges of inclusion work. Read more on equity vs equality or explore the full guides library. If you want to bring this conversation into your organisation, get in touch.