I can appreciate your good intent, but I don't subscribe to the idea that I am privileged from being white. If you point to a random white person you might assume that they have had things better than a non-white person because of their skin color.

But you don't know that for sure, right? Probably not. How do you know that John Smith hasn't experienced the things that a non-straight, non-white, female person has? Just because correlations exist between physical traits and experience doesn't mean you can assume anything about John Smith's experiences just by looking at him. Especially these days, it is absolutely possible that John Smith has dealt with racism and sexism. Mind you, I'm using the common definition that does not require power alongside prejudice. I reject the exclusive "prejudice + power" definition.

Likewise, I can't look at a black person and say for sure that they have experienced racism. It may be likely that they have, but I don't know for sure. It's this sort of pre-judgemental thinking based on skin color that has led to the widespread enthusiasm for "equity" among numerous organizations in this country. It creates a hierarchy in which individuals gain favor by how oppressed they're perceived to be, and accordingly lose favor by how privileged others assume they are. I think of race-based equity as taking the "all" out of equality.