I'd have to add that one to my list of objectionable terms to be stricken from anarchist discourse. Like "accountability," "privilege" expresses a hierarchical relationship (privilege comes from the Latin for "private law"), which we are supposed to want to abolish. When anarchists (and other more normal people) act like assholes, it may be due to some relative social privilege to which they've become accustomed (as male, as being perceived as white, as able-bodied...) and those of us who notice them behaving like assholes should definitely call them on it. But who the hell knows WHY someone's acting like an asshole? Can anyone come up with some objective measurement for the reason someone's behaving poorly? Is it because s/he's accustomed to being perceived as white? Or that he's used to being a dude acting like a dude in a context where dudes get to throw their weight around?
I know I'm not expressing this very well, mostly due to my frustration at the (ab)use of terminology by Leftist politicians and behavior police who are really good at making people feel inadequate and personally responsible and guilty for historic cultural problems.
"Privilege" is a relationship. Hierarchical to be sure, but that doesn't mean that it's immutable or invulnerable. Leftists are really good at setting themselves up as Privilege Monitors, those who have the requisite expertise and authority to decide who's privileged and who isn't. This removes agency from just about everyone: from the "privileged" to alter their own relationship to privilege -- unless it's to become uncritical "white (or whatever) allies," and also from the unprivileged to fight against all the institutions of privilege -- without the invaluable assistance of the Leftist. The only people who get any agency is -- surprise surprise! -- the Privilege Monitors, who decide who's bad, who's blameless, and what to do about it. In other words, in typical Leftist fashion, they get to replicate hierarchies, but with themselves in charge.
We all bring the nasty baggage of authoritarian conditioning with us wherever we go, and that certainly includes the benefits of belonging to historical oppressors as well as the disadvantages of belonging to the oppressed. I guess what I'm getting at is that folks deserve the benefit of the proverbial doubt before we start condemning them as "[fill in your favorite oppressor blank]" as if that label, with its institutional history, were enough to explain everything.