It's so often misinterpreted because it is an inaccurate and, I would guess, an intentionally divisive term. It is counterproductive to the stated intentions of those who most readily toss it around, making their motives seem very suspect. Not to mentioned that it is as frequently misinterpreted by those who advocate its use as it is by those opposed to its use.
It's a shitty, shitty term and I tend to view its use as inciting speech because through it's inaccuracy and racial bias, the term itself has a racial scapegoat built right into it. It's more akin to Hitler's "Jewish question" or my own country's "Swart Gevaar" (black danger) than anything I've seen from America's mainstream right. Though it's even more insidious, because people using it perpetuate racism while claiming to want to defeat it.
Grim stuff.
I don't think I do misunderstand your point; I think you've not thought your point through very well.
Privileges possessed by men and women
are, more often than not, based on sexism by virtue of the fact that they are based on biological traits we assume (both correctly and otherwise) to be inherent to biological sex. Because the differences between men and woman are so stark compared to the differences between black and white, for example, that you'd even make the comparison strikes me as ill-thought-through; it either denies biological sex differences (and the fact that those differences might have impacted culture/society) or it propagates the idea of stark biological racial differences.
I wouldn't call either a male or female "privilege", but whatever you call them, they are behaviours that we have adopted to what we assume are unchangeable biological facts (women can fall pregnant, men can't; men tend to be larger, stronger and more physically aggressive than women).
As to your questions:
A) Why is it more acceptable for men to be disgusting? Probably has something to do with the fact that women are more
prone to a 'disgust' response than men are, and are more
forgiving of said response when sexually aroused, so, for
sound evolutionary reasons, men get away with being grosser. Simply put, hygiene is biologically prioritised in the female of the species as compared to the male - that's reflected, to various degrees, in the behaviour and expectations of most human societies that have had the luxury to consider it at all.
B) Why are women less likely to be suspected of crimes? Could you source this, segmenting by the types of crimes for which they are less likely to be suspected? Pretty sure most of the time it could be summed up with assumptions about women's natural predispositions when compared to those about men's. Ie, "Woman don't like math" or "woman are smaller/weaker than men."
In some cases, men and women
are different in biological ways that society does not dictate. And in others still, our treatment of one another is based on ways in which we simply assume we are biologically different.
To cut-and-paste the premise underlying the respective day-to-day treatment of the sexes onto the respective treatment of people of different colours, is to imply unchangeable differences between people of different colours.
To fight "white privilege", rather than accurately identifying and naming the problem, is to plan to fight a war you have no intention of winning/ending. You've tied being privileged to being white. Whatever my personal circumstances, I cannot change being white and therefore I cannot change the perception of privilege that the term associates with being white.
And, to be honest, it actually wouldn't matter even if your own personal definition of the term weren't racist. Hardly any utterance of the term comes with an honest or informed discussion about what it constitutes, and so we are left only with the term itself. And, taken at face value, it's a racist term.
To your last point, I am not going to blame my ancestors. I'm going to blame the people who insist on continuing the clearly flawed narrative started by the rulers of those ancestors. My ancestors had less information to work with than you do, they lived in a less tolerant society, and they had far less personal power, so they can be forgiven for following stupid paths. YOU know how dangerous a race-based narrative can be. YOU have the advantage of having a longer view of history, AND you have the accumulated knowledge of mankind at your fingertips, and yet you continue to drive the same story that backwards peasants from 300 years ago did.