Grieving the white void
March 21, 2016 10:04 AM Subscribe
"I was a conscious, left-leaning, intelligent, and compassionate White person. How could I allow the casual racism going on around me to continue unchecked? How could I, too, be host to that parasitic racism?" (SL medium, by Abe Lateiner)
shroedinger: You make a good point, when people have to explain something that is obvious to them over and over again it is understandably exhausting.
The worrying thing to me is that for a certain portion of activists this has turned into just yelling at white people asking questions in good faith, which really just works against everyone's interest. The online echo chamber makes it very easy to write off anyone who isn't clued in to your group's experiences and worldview (you can just talk to all the people who already think like you!), and if we aren't talking to each other the only outcome is increased polarization.
posted by sp160n at 12:09 PM on March 21, 2016 [11 favorites]
The worrying thing to me is that for a certain portion of activists this has turned into just yelling at white people asking questions in good faith, which really just works against everyone's interest. The online echo chamber makes it very easy to write off anyone who isn't clued in to your group's experiences and worldview (you can just talk to all the people who already think like you!), and if we aren't talking to each other the only outcome is increased polarization.
posted by sp160n at 12:09 PM on March 21, 2016 [11 favorites]
The worrying thing to me is that for a certain portion of activists this has turned into just yelling at white people asking questions in good faith, which really just works against everyone's interest.
I think social progressive movements tend to struggle with two things:
Both tendencies are completely understandable, especially #2. If you're a member of an oppressed minority and you've been fighting to be recognized as human your whole life, then members of the non-oppressed group who start arguing really fundamental shit ("I worked hard, how can you call me privileged") are going to come off as gas-lighting, no matter how well-meaning they are. And it's real tiresome to keep hearing those members say "well how else am I supposed to know" when those resources exist if they were actually interested in gathering that information. Like, I get real sick of the "well, why did she dress like that" bullshit that comes up when discussing consent.
But most of the time, they're not that interested. Not interested enough to spend hours at Google, sifting through the good and the bad, trying to divvy out the different perspectives in order to actively dismantle what they've been told about themselves and everyone like them their whole lives. It's shitty and selfish, but the protection of one's identity is an entirely human reaction.
When you're talking about race, you're additionally working against the fact that White people have been taught their whole lives that it's impolite to even acknowledge the existence of race, much less discuss it.
That's where I'm wishing there was a space for White people to take their baby steps: an encyclopedia of basic race issues, a place to ask asinine questions, a place to start exploring those feelings that are frequently rooted in privilege and selfishness and yet real and widespread enough that they direct public policy and halt progress towards equality. But like I said: I can't imagine asking POC to set such a thing up, and I also don't know how to start something like that as a White person and not be co-opting the conversation.
posted by Anonymous at 12:58 PM on March 21, 2016
I think social progressive movements tend to struggle with two things:
- Going over the heads of their target audience--i.e. building arguments off of theories and terms established in feminist/queer/racial studies, not realizing the audience isn't familiar with them
- Getting exasperated when these theories/terms are questioned by the audience, because the audience isn't familiar with them.
Both tendencies are completely understandable, especially #2. If you're a member of an oppressed minority and you've been fighting to be recognized as human your whole life, then members of the non-oppressed group who start arguing really fundamental shit ("I worked hard, how can you call me privileged") are going to come off as gas-lighting, no matter how well-meaning they are. And it's real tiresome to keep hearing those members say "well how else am I supposed to know" when those resources exist if they were actually interested in gathering that information. Like, I get real sick of the "well, why did she dress like that" bullshit that comes up when discussing consent.
But most of the time, they're not that interested. Not interested enough to spend hours at Google, sifting through the good and the bad, trying to divvy out the different perspectives in order to actively dismantle what they've been told about themselves and everyone like them their whole lives. It's shitty and selfish, but the protection of one's identity is an entirely human reaction.
When you're talking about race, you're additionally working against the fact that White people have been taught their whole lives that it's impolite to even acknowledge the existence of race, much less discuss it.
That's where I'm wishing there was a space for White people to take their baby steps: an encyclopedia of basic race issues, a place to ask asinine questions, a place to start exploring those feelings that are frequently rooted in privilege and selfishness and yet real and widespread enough that they direct public policy and halt progress towards equality. But like I said: I can't imagine asking POC to set such a thing up, and I also don't know how to start something like that as a White person and not be co-opting the conversation.
posted by Anonymous at 12:58 PM on March 21, 2016
Schroedinger, as a white person, I see my role as to listen, actively and supportively, to people of color, and to try to carry a little of the burden for the reasons you describe. I've tried to avoid co-opting by signal-boosting instead: sharing plain-talky, matter-of-fact essays by writers of color on, say, what's wrong with 'colorblind,' or the complicated issues about black hairstyles, or whatever. Or I can point to things that strike me as a good illustration, like this criminal defense lawyer tweeting about how the justice system treats a black kid.
posted by Lou Stuells at 1:21 PM on March 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Lou Stuells at 1:21 PM on March 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
Getting exasperated when these theories/terms are questioned by the audience, because the audience isn't familiar with them.
Or maybe they are disagreeing with said theory? We can all acknowledge that racism exists (big time) and racism is bad -- but I, for one, am starting to get frustrated by the ahistorical and/or hand-wavey vague race theory I sometimes hear. Especially race theory that wants to over simplify very complex social phenomenon, which changes by time and place.
Racism is so important that I think it's very important that we understand just how it works -- just like we need to understand cancer better. If we want to treat it, we need to think about it critically.
posted by jb at 1:31 PM on March 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
Or maybe they are disagreeing with said theory? We can all acknowledge that racism exists (big time) and racism is bad -- but I, for one, am starting to get frustrated by the ahistorical and/or hand-wavey vague race theory I sometimes hear. Especially race theory that wants to over simplify very complex social phenomenon, which changes by time and place.
Racism is so important that I think it's very important that we understand just how it works -- just like we need to understand cancer better. If we want to treat it, we need to think about it critically.
posted by jb at 1:31 PM on March 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
shroedinger: I think that's another part of the problem. If you walk up to someone and say LET ME TEACH YOU HOW RACE WORKS, people won't listen, and they shouldn't either. People should just share experiences and opinions and stay respectful. That's how change happens on the individual level. If you want to talk about race you need to consider their POV too. Nothing in this area has any sort of authoritative answer about what's right and wrong.
posted by sp160n at 1:35 PM on March 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by sp160n at 1:35 PM on March 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
If you walk up to someone and say LET ME TEACH YOU HOW RACE WORKS, people won't listen, and they shouldn't either. People should just share experiences and opinions and stay respectful. That's how change happens on the individual level.
I am hesitant to say "people should just share experiences and opinions and stay respectful", because that is basically what Black activists have been doing since the first civil rights movement ended and it hasn't done much for increasing White understanding of racial issues. The only reason this conversation has started again at all is because of Black Lives Matter and the resurgence of mass protests and agitation.
I don't think our country is going to get to a position of moving past racial inequality until White people are willing to grapple with the fact that White privilege exists--and centuries of history indicate that's not going to happen organically. The problem is that getting to that point frequently involves White people asking really basic questions over and over and vocalizing unintentionally offensive shit, because White privilege is based in offensive shit.
Simply retweeting and sharing amplifies the voices of POC but is not the same as concerted outreach and education initiatives that seek specifically to engage White people in discussions of racial disparities and Whiteness. I think the latter is something that is the responsibility of White people, somehow.
Or maybe they are disagreeing with said theory?
I'm not talking about a debate over how the intersection of colorism and gender influences the popularity of Black entertainers, or the exact effects colonialism has had on shaping East Asian beauty standards. I'm talking about White people who aren't all sure this White privilege thing is real, or who are operating under the assumption that non-White people get the majority of scholarships in the USA, or don't understand what the big deal is when a school sends a kid home for having an afro. Like, very fundamental misconceptions that result from ignorance and social segregation.
Do we fault PoC, then, for clapping back, after years of having raw nerves rubbed rawer until there's naught but a string to snap? For not assuming "good faith" from individuals in a group of people that has traditionally treated them in bad faith?
Exactly. I don't think it is the job of POC to assume good faith and patiently hold the hand of every White person through their racial awakening. They are trying to deal with being the targets of the fucked up society we create, and now we want them to fix it? But the fact remains that if you want to maximize the rate of change, the majority of currently alive White people will require some degree of hand-holding. Which is where I think White responsibility lies. The difficulty comes from walking the line between providing that support and co-opting the discussion.
posted by Anonymous at 2:21 PM on March 21, 2016
I am hesitant to say "people should just share experiences and opinions and stay respectful", because that is basically what Black activists have been doing since the first civil rights movement ended and it hasn't done much for increasing White understanding of racial issues. The only reason this conversation has started again at all is because of Black Lives Matter and the resurgence of mass protests and agitation.
I don't think our country is going to get to a position of moving past racial inequality until White people are willing to grapple with the fact that White privilege exists--and centuries of history indicate that's not going to happen organically. The problem is that getting to that point frequently involves White people asking really basic questions over and over and vocalizing unintentionally offensive shit, because White privilege is based in offensive shit.
Simply retweeting and sharing amplifies the voices of POC but is not the same as concerted outreach and education initiatives that seek specifically to engage White people in discussions of racial disparities and Whiteness. I think the latter is something that is the responsibility of White people, somehow.
Or maybe they are disagreeing with said theory?
I'm not talking about a debate over how the intersection of colorism and gender influences the popularity of Black entertainers, or the exact effects colonialism has had on shaping East Asian beauty standards. I'm talking about White people who aren't all sure this White privilege thing is real, or who are operating under the assumption that non-White people get the majority of scholarships in the USA, or don't understand what the big deal is when a school sends a kid home for having an afro. Like, very fundamental misconceptions that result from ignorance and social segregation.
Do we fault PoC, then, for clapping back, after years of having raw nerves rubbed rawer until there's naught but a string to snap? For not assuming "good faith" from individuals in a group of people that has traditionally treated them in bad faith?
Exactly. I don't think it is the job of POC to assume good faith and patiently hold the hand of every White person through their racial awakening. They are trying to deal with being the targets of the fucked up society we create, and now we want them to fix it? But the fact remains that if you want to maximize the rate of change, the majority of currently alive White people will require some degree of hand-holding. Which is where I think White responsibility lies. The difficulty comes from walking the line between providing that support and co-opting the discussion.
posted by Anonymous at 2:21 PM on March 21, 2016
As a European-American child in a mostly-White community, I was raised with walls between my heart and my head, and walls between myself and other people
Funny, I'm white and didn't experience that at all. Maybe it's because I'm not a trust fund kid. Maybe the 1% are just more attuned to themselves. I mean, they're better than us, so maybe they're more perceptive, too.
posted by jpe at 3:53 PM on March 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
Funny, I'm white and didn't experience that at all. Maybe it's because I'm not a trust fund kid. Maybe the 1% are just more attuned to themselves. I mean, they're better than us, so maybe they're more perceptive, too.
posted by jpe at 3:53 PM on March 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
"Walls between my heart and my head" is pretty spot-on for my experience. It might be a New England thing more than anything else.
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 3:57 PM on March 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 3:57 PM on March 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
That was my experience as well. It was nothing as conscious as "Black people are bad and different!" It was a very underdeveloped sense of racial issues and an inability to interact with non-White people normally, as if they were just another person. I prided myself on how socially progressive I was, so it took a long time and living in a city that was 60% Black before I was able to admit it to myself. My family moved around a lot, but the biggest chunk of my childhood was spent in the Midwest.
I've talked with more White people than not who identify with that awkwardness and subconscious "othering". I see it in the awkwardness with which they interact with minorities--either getting stiff, or becoming overly friendly and possibly dropping in slang they never use. I see it with the divide between the number of White people I know (including myself) who grew up with the impression that it is tremendously impolite to refer to someone as Black--and the non-White people I know who find it both confusing and funny that we feel that way. On a larger scale, that divide is exposed every time someone says they think White people are being discriminated against, or argue that it's unfair they can't use the n-word, or invoke MLK to disparage Black Lives Matter protesters. Most White people live in majority-White communities, and I think that culture leaves us ill-prepared for interacting with non-White people as fellow humans rather than living embodiments of all the stereotypes and preconceptions we absorbed from the media and history books.
(sorry, I think I am taking this discussion over and will back off)
posted by Anonymous at 4:57 PM on March 21, 2016
I've talked with more White people than not who identify with that awkwardness and subconscious "othering". I see it in the awkwardness with which they interact with minorities--either getting stiff, or becoming overly friendly and possibly dropping in slang they never use. I see it with the divide between the number of White people I know (including myself) who grew up with the impression that it is tremendously impolite to refer to someone as Black--and the non-White people I know who find it both confusing and funny that we feel that way. On a larger scale, that divide is exposed every time someone says they think White people are being discriminated against, or argue that it's unfair they can't use the n-word, or invoke MLK to disparage Black Lives Matter protesters. Most White people live in majority-White communities, and I think that culture leaves us ill-prepared for interacting with non-White people as fellow humans rather than living embodiments of all the stereotypes and preconceptions we absorbed from the media and history books.
(sorry, I think I am taking this discussion over and will back off)
posted by Anonymous at 4:57 PM on March 21, 2016
Here are his links, mentioned upthread:
I donate what I can to Black-led Black liberation organizing efforts locally and nation-wide. Check out this partial map for local efforts.
I support local Black-led organizing efforts, especially by fundraising and publicizing their efforts to White communities. For me, this includes groups like Intelligent Mischief and Black Lives Matter Cambridge.
I also support efforts to organize White people for racial justice, via Community Change, Inc., Showing Up for Racial Justice, the Catalyst Project, and others.
I am part of a growing collective of White racial justice educators and trainers called White Awake. We designing curricula for White people to embody our personal stake in ending White supremacy.
I organize people with class privilege to commit to redistribution of wealth as a part of donor-organizing networks Resource Generation and Solidaire.
posted by The Minotaur at 5:06 PM on March 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
I donate what I can to Black-led Black liberation organizing efforts locally and nation-wide. Check out this partial map for local efforts.
I support local Black-led organizing efforts, especially by fundraising and publicizing their efforts to White communities. For me, this includes groups like Intelligent Mischief and Black Lives Matter Cambridge.
I also support efforts to organize White people for racial justice, via Community Change, Inc., Showing Up for Racial Justice, the Catalyst Project, and others.
I am part of a growing collective of White racial justice educators and trainers called White Awake. We designing curricula for White people to embody our personal stake in ending White supremacy.
I organize people with class privilege to commit to redistribution of wealth as a part of donor-organizing networks Resource Generation and Solidaire.
posted by The Minotaur at 5:06 PM on March 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
Incidentally, I couldn't make it all the way to that part of the article. It was a little overwrought but I was doing okay until I got to this line:
I stand on a bridge over the abyss. On one side, a return to the feast, the soft pillows, the warm bed. On the other side, a wall of flames.
And then I had one of those flinches like you get when the radio news person screws up really bad and you have to punch a different channel to cut off the feeling of vicarious shame. Everybody gets those, right?
posted by The Minotaur at 5:08 PM on March 21, 2016 [6 favorites]
I stand on a bridge over the abyss. On one side, a return to the feast, the soft pillows, the warm bed. On the other side, a wall of flames.
And then I had one of those flinches like you get when the radio news person screws up really bad and you have to punch a different channel to cut off the feeling of vicarious shame. Everybody gets those, right?
posted by The Minotaur at 5:08 PM on March 21, 2016 [6 favorites]
I feel very thankful that I can't relate to much of what the author says in this piece. First off, I'm Canadian rather than USian, which gives a somewhat different context to racial issues. Mostly, though, when I was about 13, my Dad married a black woman, and not too long after that I moved out from my Mom's house and in with them.
Growing up through my adolescence as a white kid with my primary maternal figure (my Mom and I had a strained relationship for a long time) being a black woman did a lot to make me aware of white supremacy in North America. God knows I showed my ass so many times, and Stepmom was never shy about calling me on it. I thank her profusely for that, because it has made me a better ally and, ultimately, a better person.
So when I say I'm thankful for being unable to relate, it's very much in the feeling-like-I-dodged-a-bullet kind of way. And I have my wonderful, honest, patient, and forgiving Black stepmom to thank for that.
posted by Jynnan Tonnyx at 5:15 PM on March 21, 2016 [5 favorites]
Growing up through my adolescence as a white kid with my primary maternal figure (my Mom and I had a strained relationship for a long time) being a black woman did a lot to make me aware of white supremacy in North America. God knows I showed my ass so many times, and Stepmom was never shy about calling me on it. I thank her profusely for that, because it has made me a better ally and, ultimately, a better person.
So when I say I'm thankful for being unable to relate, it's very much in the feeling-like-I-dodged-a-bullet kind of way. And I have my wonderful, honest, patient, and forgiving Black stepmom to thank for that.
posted by Jynnan Tonnyx at 5:15 PM on March 21, 2016 [5 favorites]
qcubed: you bring up a perfectly correct point about POC having the right to be already upset with white people. That being said everybody (white people in this case) has the right to be treated respectfully in every encounter. It's obvious that this is a formula where neither side gets everything they want. That's why this is so hard.
You're 100% right that it's an additional burden for POC to have to repeat themselves ad nauseum. But what other alternative is there? Changing minds is work, and work requires labor.
I think where a lot of people get hung up is on 'white people have privilege, they should just sit down, shut up, and listen to POC', but really, is there any topic where that would work?
As the son of a Syrian I've had a really hard to time changing people's mind on US foreign policy / the media's portrayal of that conflict (Americans have no context for middle eastern history!). And you know what? People don't want to hear it / don't believe me half the time. Doesn't mean I just yell at them, throw up my hands, and say 'you have no right to your opinion!'.
posted by sp160n at 5:16 PM on March 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
You're 100% right that it's an additional burden for POC to have to repeat themselves ad nauseum. But what other alternative is there? Changing minds is work, and work requires labor.
I think where a lot of people get hung up is on 'white people have privilege, they should just sit down, shut up, and listen to POC', but really, is there any topic where that would work?
As the son of a Syrian I've had a really hard to time changing people's mind on US foreign policy / the media's portrayal of that conflict (Americans have no context for middle eastern history!). And you know what? People don't want to hear it / don't believe me half the time. Doesn't mean I just yell at them, throw up my hands, and say 'you have no right to your opinion!'.
posted by sp160n at 5:16 PM on March 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
This is an excellent article, thanks for posting.
Simply retweeting and sharing amplifies the voices of POC but is not the same as concerted outreach and education initiatives that seek specifically to engage White people in discussions of racial disparities and Whiteness.
I think it's hard, because there are some people who are just not willing to listen or hear it. But in the same way that I believe that feminism needs men who are willing to speak out about gender issues because some men just will not hear women, I think the same goes for some white people talking to each other about race. For me, it's a delicate balance which first requires me feeling out where the person is even starting from with their beliefs on race, which can vary wildly from person to person. If I can figure out common ground on which we can agree wrt to race issues, I can then try to talk to them about race, framing it in terms of what I know is meaningful to them.
It often takes (as much as I hate to say it) a lot of reassurance and some ego massaging to try to get them to see that (for example) white privilege exists. I totally avoid using loaded terms like privilege and use more neutral words that don't make them feel like they're being judged. It's like when Obamacare first passed and when they polled people on the actual provisions of the law (using neutral language), people overwhelmingly supported it, but when they asked people how they felt about "Obamacare" people's minds snapped shut and they reverted to their tribal leanings. Most people don't think of themselves as racist and if they feel you're accusing them of racism, their minds automatically snap shut (in my experience).
I don't know if I'm even addressing what you're asking but I agree that it's really important for white people to really try as much as they can with other white people. The method of the message will differ from recipient to recipient, but I've personally had the best success with the nonthreatening approach. And don't underestimate the power your influence can have, even if you're not directly talking to a person about racism. I vocally support Black Lives Matter whenever I can, because the racism I see around it is appalling and overwhelming and it can be really difficult to see how many supporters there are because they often stay silent, which could make it seem like the non-supporters are consensus (whether they are or not). I think it's important to be a person who speaks up and visibly offers support, even if it's just a passing comment - "yeah, the latest BLM protest might be inconvenience for some people driving home from work, but it's pretty hard for black people to be heard otherwise, so I totally get why they're doing it and I fully support them". No argument, no big fight or confrontation, just an aside to show there are people out there who support them. I think enough people doing this can start to chip away at a person's self-imposed bubble of reinforced racism.
I take the same "subtle influence" view with debating with friends on facebook. While I'm guessing that while I may not change the mind of the person I'm debating, I know there are lots of people reading and maybe I can introduce a new POV to their thinking that they hadn't considered. I believe this is an area where I can lead by example, i.e. if I say - "yeah, All Lives Matter seemed to make intuitive sense to me at first [nb: I never held this view] but when I looked at it a little more, I saw how it really erases the unique struggles that people of color have experienced, which is an erasure and denial of their suffering, which is pretty much a different method of doing the same thing that we white people have been doing for centuries. I'm glad I learned that because I want to be part of the solution and i realized it doesn't hurt me to let other people speak and try to hear what they're saying." Or whatever, I just made that up, the point is that by framing it in terms of my own learning and growth in this area may make it more safe for people to consider their own role in the system in a way that is non-threatening.
It won't solve racism and it certainly shouldn't be the only thing I do, but these small things make a difference too.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:37 PM on March 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
Simply retweeting and sharing amplifies the voices of POC but is not the same as concerted outreach and education initiatives that seek specifically to engage White people in discussions of racial disparities and Whiteness.
I think it's hard, because there are some people who are just not willing to listen or hear it. But in the same way that I believe that feminism needs men who are willing to speak out about gender issues because some men just will not hear women, I think the same goes for some white people talking to each other about race. For me, it's a delicate balance which first requires me feeling out where the person is even starting from with their beliefs on race, which can vary wildly from person to person. If I can figure out common ground on which we can agree wrt to race issues, I can then try to talk to them about race, framing it in terms of what I know is meaningful to them.
It often takes (as much as I hate to say it) a lot of reassurance and some ego massaging to try to get them to see that (for example) white privilege exists. I totally avoid using loaded terms like privilege and use more neutral words that don't make them feel like they're being judged. It's like when Obamacare first passed and when they polled people on the actual provisions of the law (using neutral language), people overwhelmingly supported it, but when they asked people how they felt about "Obamacare" people's minds snapped shut and they reverted to their tribal leanings. Most people don't think of themselves as racist and if they feel you're accusing them of racism, their minds automatically snap shut (in my experience).
I don't know if I'm even addressing what you're asking but I agree that it's really important for white people to really try as much as they can with other white people. The method of the message will differ from recipient to recipient, but I've personally had the best success with the nonthreatening approach. And don't underestimate the power your influence can have, even if you're not directly talking to a person about racism. I vocally support Black Lives Matter whenever I can, because the racism I see around it is appalling and overwhelming and it can be really difficult to see how many supporters there are because they often stay silent, which could make it seem like the non-supporters are consensus (whether they are or not). I think it's important to be a person who speaks up and visibly offers support, even if it's just a passing comment - "yeah, the latest BLM protest might be inconvenience for some people driving home from work, but it's pretty hard for black people to be heard otherwise, so I totally get why they're doing it and I fully support them". No argument, no big fight or confrontation, just an aside to show there are people out there who support them. I think enough people doing this can start to chip away at a person's self-imposed bubble of reinforced racism.
I take the same "subtle influence" view with debating with friends on facebook. While I'm guessing that while I may not change the mind of the person I'm debating, I know there are lots of people reading and maybe I can introduce a new POV to their thinking that they hadn't considered. I believe this is an area where I can lead by example, i.e. if I say - "yeah, All Lives Matter seemed to make intuitive sense to me at first [nb: I never held this view] but when I looked at it a little more, I saw how it really erases the unique struggles that people of color have experienced, which is an erasure and denial of their suffering, which is pretty much a different method of doing the same thing that we white people have been doing for centuries. I'm glad I learned that because I want to be part of the solution and i realized it doesn't hurt me to let other people speak and try to hear what they're saying." Or whatever, I just made that up, the point is that by framing it in terms of my own learning and growth in this area may make it more safe for people to consider their own role in the system in a way that is non-threatening.
It won't solve racism and it certainly shouldn't be the only thing I do, but these small things make a difference too.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:37 PM on March 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
I don't want to knock the work he actually puts in - maybe I should just say "good for you whatever makes you tick." But something kinda bugs me about this, the whole idea of deliberately putting his own introspection as a white person center stage. Stuff like this:
As a White child, I was brought up to hone my weapons of intellectual, logical, rational analysis, disconnected from my body and my spirit.
Turn that stone over, wipe off the mud, you don't see a little sparkle of a very old kind of fetishism?
From his twitter:
Supporting #BlackLivesMatter is the only hope to #SaveMyWhiteSoul
That... creeps me out a little bit?
Am I completely off-base here? Seriously tell me if I am. Oddly he does reach a conclusion that is very close to my own perspective:
I was born into this mess, which isn’t my fault, and now it is my responsibility to fight for freedom from it.
but some of what he goes through to get there is unfamiliar and even offputting to me.
posted by atoxyl at 6:43 PM on March 21, 2016 [13 favorites]
As a White child, I was brought up to hone my weapons of intellectual, logical, rational analysis, disconnected from my body and my spirit.
Turn that stone over, wipe off the mud, you don't see a little sparkle of a very old kind of fetishism?
From his twitter:
Supporting #BlackLivesMatter is the only hope to #SaveMyWhiteSoul
That... creeps me out a little bit?
Am I completely off-base here? Seriously tell me if I am. Oddly he does reach a conclusion that is very close to my own perspective:
I was born into this mess, which isn’t my fault, and now it is my responsibility to fight for freedom from it.
but some of what he goes through to get there is unfamiliar and even offputting to me.
posted by atoxyl at 6:43 PM on March 21, 2016 [13 favorites]
So his privileging of the perspective of white people as being "disconnected" with his "body" and "spirit" is pretty symptomatic of the weird, wordy, unanalytical racism that pervades this piece. It's not "disconnected" from your body when it serves primarily to benefit your "body"; you're pretending that what is beneficial to you is somehow objective (albeit "disconnected" from "spirit") rather than just the self-serving bullshit that it actually is.
posted by mister pointy at 6:43 PM on March 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by mister pointy at 6:43 PM on March 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
If history were an epic fantasy novel, white people would be the orcs on the side of Sauron and Melkor. It's an airless analogy, but mostly because history overfills it. Because I was a sf/f fan first and "woke" much later, it has provided me no end of distressing mappings from the images and stories my childhood imagination was enraptured with to the images and stories in the daily news. One thing is unignorable: orcs aren't "victims" of Sauron, they're agents. They aren't just "doing their jobs, trying to feed their families", they live to serve the end of Evil. One can see this as the dividing line: an area where the analogy's simplicity fails to provide any further understanding. I used to feel this way, but I'm less and less comfortable with the idea that it's obviously such a limit.
posted by wobh at 9:45 PM on March 21, 2016
posted by wobh at 9:45 PM on March 21, 2016
people really don't have the right to be treated respectfully in every encounter. that's. That's not a right. It's the preferred outcome, but - what qcubed said.
I certainly hope the FPP dude is not the final word on white supremacy, but honestly I haven't seen many people talking about white racial identity from the inside, and I think it has value. He has another piece which I think is a better read. Of what he says, some of it hits home. Some of it is ... I don't know how to put this. Like "never allowed to grow into a full person" - I mean, I feel like a full person. I don't feel like I lack a fundamental empathy.
But the truth is, I have no idea what life would be like without white supremacy. I have no idea who I would be. None of us do. Dividing people - dividing a community - is inherently a violent thing. So what does that do to the people on top? What does it do to the children?
Asking that question feels a lot like stepping onto a missing stair and flailing into the void. Idunno. If it inspires a rigorous, critical examination of whiteness, then it's a good question to ask. (just, like, far away where people of color do not have to deal with it.)
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 10:30 PM on March 21, 2016
I certainly hope the FPP dude is not the final word on white supremacy, but honestly I haven't seen many people talking about white racial identity from the inside, and I think it has value. He has another piece which I think is a better read. Of what he says, some of it hits home. Some of it is ... I don't know how to put this. Like "never allowed to grow into a full person" - I mean, I feel like a full person. I don't feel like I lack a fundamental empathy.
But the truth is, I have no idea what life would be like without white supremacy. I have no idea who I would be. None of us do. Dividing people - dividing a community - is inherently a violent thing. So what does that do to the people on top? What does it do to the children?
Asking that question feels a lot like stepping onto a missing stair and flailing into the void. Idunno. If it inspires a rigorous, critical examination of whiteness, then it's a good question to ask. (just, like, far away where people of color do not have to deal with it.)
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 10:30 PM on March 21, 2016
The author theorizes that people tend towards the most convenient change that will fix their cognitive dissonances, even if that entails increasing their prejudices, paradoxically. He adds a very subtle point, that: fear and anger are only a transmutation of anxiety, whereas anxiety would be the emotional state if one were more honest (etc.) with themselves. Similarly to this I believe Slavoj Zizek has said asserted something along the lines of "anxiety is the only true emotion".
But when confronted with a challenge to one's value system, it is natural, and even necessary, to exhibit resistance. The implicit question is, how do you know what to revise about yourself?
For if I were the racist person, how would I know what? Or if I were a particular minority--let's say, my resistance manifest as the Angry Asian Man stereotype--how would I know? (And isn't this partly the problem of all that second-guessing that we who are or have been minorities are already too familiar with?)
It's the very idea of having to somehow adjust your entire worldview, and in this modern world, with the added critical situation of uncertainty about who or what information to trust and be open to. Regardless of which shoes you see yourself standing in in the author's depiction, I think we all face this basic cognitive problem that he mentioned in the article. And I have no sure idea as to what to do about it.
posted by polymodus at 12:47 AM on March 22, 2016
But when confronted with a challenge to one's value system, it is natural, and even necessary, to exhibit resistance. The implicit question is, how do you know what to revise about yourself?
For if I were the racist person, how would I know what? Or if I were a particular minority--let's say, my resistance manifest as the Angry Asian Man stereotype--how would I know? (And isn't this partly the problem of all that second-guessing that we who are or have been minorities are already too familiar with?)
It's the very idea of having to somehow adjust your entire worldview, and in this modern world, with the added critical situation of uncertainty about who or what information to trust and be open to. Regardless of which shoes you see yourself standing in in the author's depiction, I think we all face this basic cognitive problem that he mentioned in the article. And I have no sure idea as to what to do about it.
posted by polymodus at 12:47 AM on March 22, 2016
The worrying thing to me is that for a certain portion of activists this has turned into just yelling at white people asking questions in good faith, which really just works against everyone's interest.
One of the big things that I've realized in exploring issues of race, ethnicity, and identity, is that while one person may be new to a given topic or set of topics, others have probably read, discussed, hashed out, etc. a lot more. So it's helpful to do your own research and reading, rather than expect to be spoon fed on a forum (or FB or Twitter or wherever).
I can't tell you how many times I've seen the following dialogue:
Newbie: (entry-level question)
Old-timer: Here are a bunch of entry level links and citations. Read that stuff and it will answer your question and explain the broader context.
Newbie: (series of follow-up entry-level question and "you're wrong because..." statements)
Old-timer: Did you read what I recommended?
Newbie: No, I just want to know ... (entry level question)
Old-timer: It is not my job to do your reading for you!
In old-school internet culture, the concept was called RTFM - "read the f'ing manual". As in, don't waltz in to an open forum expecting an unlimited amount of free effort and labor from highly-paid professionals who are talking about these things on their free time. They don't owe you their time and assistance. Do your homework, ask specific, focused questions, and be grateful for the help you get.
posted by theorique at 4:49 AM on March 22, 2016 [5 favorites]
One of the big things that I've realized in exploring issues of race, ethnicity, and identity, is that while one person may be new to a given topic or set of topics, others have probably read, discussed, hashed out, etc. a lot more. So it's helpful to do your own research and reading, rather than expect to be spoon fed on a forum (or FB or Twitter or wherever).
I can't tell you how many times I've seen the following dialogue:
Newbie: (entry-level question)
Old-timer: Here are a bunch of entry level links and citations. Read that stuff and it will answer your question and explain the broader context.
Newbie: (series of follow-up entry-level question and "you're wrong because..." statements)
Old-timer: Did you read what I recommended?
Newbie: No, I just want to know ... (entry level question)
Old-timer: It is not my job to do your reading for you!
In old-school internet culture, the concept was called RTFM - "read the f'ing manual". As in, don't waltz in to an open forum expecting an unlimited amount of free effort and labor from highly-paid professionals who are talking about these things on their free time. They don't owe you their time and assistance. Do your homework, ask specific, focused questions, and be grateful for the help you get.
posted by theorique at 4:49 AM on March 22, 2016 [5 favorites]
But like I said: I can't imagine asking POC to set such a thing up, and I also don't know how to start something like that as a White person and not be co-opting the conversation.
To get to a higher level of understanding about race, identity, "being White", and so forth, activists do describe need for White people to self-educate and have conversations with each other about these subjects so as to lessen the load on minorities who are called upon so often to be a spokesman for their entire race or ethnic group (e.g. "Now, Ming, since you're Chinese, could you give the class the Chinese perspective on this issue?").
In other words, this kind of process is not co-opting the conversation so much as it is creating a necessary, parallel conversation among White people that actually benefits minorities by removing the cognitive load of being a go-to resource for uninformed (but well-meaning and non-racist) Whites.
(That being said, I don't know how well it would go over to create a group for "Whites-Only conversation about race" in your average activist space.)
posted by theorique at 6:09 AM on March 22, 2016 [2 favorites]
To get to a higher level of understanding about race, identity, "being White", and so forth, activists do describe need for White people to self-educate and have conversations with each other about these subjects so as to lessen the load on minorities who are called upon so often to be a spokesman for their entire race or ethnic group (e.g. "Now, Ming, since you're Chinese, could you give the class the Chinese perspective on this issue?").
In other words, this kind of process is not co-opting the conversation so much as it is creating a necessary, parallel conversation among White people that actually benefits minorities by removing the cognitive load of being a go-to resource for uninformed (but well-meaning and non-racist) Whites.
(That being said, I don't know how well it would go over to create a group for "Whites-Only conversation about race" in your average activist space.)
posted by theorique at 6:09 AM on March 22, 2016 [2 favorites]
Insomniac thought about how schroedinger's racism education site* could work:
A small team of white people do the work of filtering genuine user questions from the inevitable spam & hate mail, writing answers and moderating any replies & follow ups. They are helped in this by a large group of POC, who are available for advice and corrections. The POC would act as a brains trust, but wouldn't have to deal with the general public. They would only have to be in touch with the small website team who will be mostly familiar with basic racism concepts, and willing to do research on resources suggested by the brains trust. To even further reduce the work for the brains trust, when the site team needed help they could post the item to a closed forum instead of directly contacting people. That way anyone with the energy/resources could answer when ready, and people who are sick of that specific topic could just scroll on by, knowing that someone else from the group could handle it. There's no real urgency to any one question/answer, so if no-one picks it up, no big deal. So you could have that parallel White conversation but have it be informed by more experienced people when necessary.
For this to work I think there'd have to be some guidelines and principles agreed upon by the whole team about what a good article on the site would look like, and tolerance on the closed side for people blowing off steam or disagreements about theory. You'd want mostly people with experience in writing for an online audience and/or teaching, I reckon.
Anyway, it's just a thought about how something like that could work. If you give it a try, please credit me when you get either your Nobel Peace Prize or your entry in BuzzFeed's "Top 20 Flamewars of the 21st Century".
* sounds like the site might be alive but we won't know until we look?
posted by harriet vane at 9:23 AM on March 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
A small team of white people do the work of filtering genuine user questions from the inevitable spam & hate mail, writing answers and moderating any replies & follow ups. They are helped in this by a large group of POC, who are available for advice and corrections. The POC would act as a brains trust, but wouldn't have to deal with the general public. They would only have to be in touch with the small website team who will be mostly familiar with basic racism concepts, and willing to do research on resources suggested by the brains trust. To even further reduce the work for the brains trust, when the site team needed help they could post the item to a closed forum instead of directly contacting people. That way anyone with the energy/resources could answer when ready, and people who are sick of that specific topic could just scroll on by, knowing that someone else from the group could handle it. There's no real urgency to any one question/answer, so if no-one picks it up, no big deal. So you could have that parallel White conversation but have it be informed by more experienced people when necessary.
For this to work I think there'd have to be some guidelines and principles agreed upon by the whole team about what a good article on the site would look like, and tolerance on the closed side for people blowing off steam or disagreements about theory. You'd want mostly people with experience in writing for an online audience and/or teaching, I reckon.
Anyway, it's just a thought about how something like that could work. If you give it a try, please credit me when you get either your Nobel Peace Prize or your entry in BuzzFeed's "Top 20 Flamewars of the 21st Century".
* sounds like the site might be alive but we won't know until we look?
posted by harriet vane at 9:23 AM on March 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
It would absolutely be best if white folks would do their own reading and research and work toward a basic understanding. But even the people who could likely be swayed to understand, *just aren't likely to bother to do this.* I think that's just true.
So given that fact, and keeping in mind that PoC shouldn't bear the huge burden of constantly explaining, what is a possible solution?
I think that's the key question.
posted by mkuhnell at 10:05 AM on March 22, 2016
So given that fact, and keeping in mind that PoC shouldn't bear the huge burden of constantly explaining, what is a possible solution?
I think that's the key question.
posted by mkuhnell at 10:05 AM on March 22, 2016
Simply, as an activist, I look to good-intentioned allies to self-educate. Period. End of sentence. No negotiation. This is to me what good faith is.
I'm an activist - not on race issues, but on queer issues.
Education - whether directed towards allies or non-allies - is 90% of my activism. That's how change is made.
posted by jb at 10:51 AM on March 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm an activist - not on race issues, but on queer issues.
Education - whether directed towards allies or non-allies - is 90% of my activism. That's how change is made.
posted by jb at 10:51 AM on March 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
The author seems to be showing the decentering of Whiteness is a crucial yet very difficult standpoint to convey. The main idea of the article doesn't seem to be articulated in other writing, and I like that someone is voicing this in a different way. When the author says his life contains an absence, that opens him to a lot of dismissiveness, etc.
posted by polymodus at 12:03 PM on March 22, 2016
posted by polymodus at 12:03 PM on March 22, 2016
One of the challenges is that the people who "need" this kind of education the most are likely to be the ones to resist it the most, because it is psychologically challenging to confront. ("Am I racist? NO! I am not racist!"). The OP is an interesting article but its dramatic language is not likely to be an easy on ramp for the resistant:
Maybe an editor would have helped? On the other hand, maybe this kind of histrionic cri de coeur is necessary for people coming to terms with their own bigotry.
posted by theorique at 12:23 PM on March 22, 2016 [2 favorites]
How could I continue to live in the world, knowing that my mere presence was destructive? I wished to return to ignorance, back to the time when I wasn’t aware of how much harm my existence caused.
I’ve spent my life wrapped up in a velvet strait jacket, force-fed rich food, laid down and shackled on the softest of cushions next to a roaring fireplace. Through the persistent, aggressive, comforting, and silent White acculturation process, I was never permitted to develop into the full human that I have the potential to be.I feel like saying to him: "Yeah, dude, OK, we get it - you are examining your participation in a racist system and questioning your own racism. It's a challenge. But turn the drama down just a little bit. You aren't Stalin."
Maybe an editor would have helped? On the other hand, maybe this kind of histrionic cri de coeur is necessary for people coming to terms with their own bigotry.
posted by theorique at 12:23 PM on March 22, 2016 [2 favorites]
If I'm going to do education, I would rather do it, not with beginners, but with clear and invested allies who already have skin in the game and need more advanced pointers and training.
The willingness to do the 101-level self-education is a pretty effective filter for time-wasters. If someone is not willing to read the basic texts, in what sense is he an ally at all? The RTFM filter is a pretty time-honored way to determine whether someone's serious or just wants other people to chew his food for him.
Investing your energy where it will pay the highest returns is just the smart thing to do.
posted by theorique at 1:40 PM on March 22, 2016 [2 favorites]
The willingness to do the 101-level self-education is a pretty effective filter for time-wasters. If someone is not willing to read the basic texts, in what sense is he an ally at all? The RTFM filter is a pretty time-honored way to determine whether someone's serious or just wants other people to chew his food for him.
Investing your energy where it will pay the highest returns is just the smart thing to do.
posted by theorique at 1:40 PM on March 22, 2016 [2 favorites]
The willingness to do the 101-level self-education is a pretty effective filter for time-wasters. If someone is not willing to read the basic texts, in what sense is he an ally at all? The RTFM filter is a pretty time-honored way to determine whether someone's serious or just wants other people to chew his food for him.
Or maybe they are an ally who works long hours, has caregiving responsibilities, has difficulty reading -- there are a lot of reasons that "read the basic texts" assumes, frankly, a lot of privilege that not all allies have. (Shocking as it may seem, not all white people are educated or middle class). They are too busy living their own lives, trying to make sure their rent is paid.
The other day, I explained what "butch", "femme" and "dyke" meant to some gay men (and a supportive straight brother) I met at an event. Nice young men, clearly supportive and would happily ally with this bi, slightly butch woman (who was teaching them how to knit) -- but their lives didn't include learning what these words meant in the context of queer women's history or local usage. Why should they? They had their own issues going on. So when someone asked a 101 question about bisexuality, I smiled, and assured him it didn't work that way for everyone.
Maybe it's because I know people who have invisible disabilities, who've faced serious barriers and who have heavy caregiving responsibilities -- but I always assume that anyone I meet might have a shitload of their own emotional (as well as physical) labour that they are doing just to get through their lives.
But I still need them as my allies. Because people who are busy and stressed are 90% of our society - and if I can't convince them to support us, we lose.
posted by jb at 5:23 AM on March 23, 2016 [4 favorites]
Or maybe they are an ally who works long hours, has caregiving responsibilities, has difficulty reading -- there are a lot of reasons that "read the basic texts" assumes, frankly, a lot of privilege that not all allies have. (Shocking as it may seem, not all white people are educated or middle class). They are too busy living their own lives, trying to make sure their rent is paid.
The other day, I explained what "butch", "femme" and "dyke" meant to some gay men (and a supportive straight brother) I met at an event. Nice young men, clearly supportive and would happily ally with this bi, slightly butch woman (who was teaching them how to knit) -- but their lives didn't include learning what these words meant in the context of queer women's history or local usage. Why should they? They had their own issues going on. So when someone asked a 101 question about bisexuality, I smiled, and assured him it didn't work that way for everyone.
Maybe it's because I know people who have invisible disabilities, who've faced serious barriers and who have heavy caregiving responsibilities -- but I always assume that anyone I meet might have a shitload of their own emotional (as well as physical) labour that they are doing just to get through their lives.
But I still need them as my allies. Because people who are busy and stressed are 90% of our society - and if I can't convince them to support us, we lose.
posted by jb at 5:23 AM on March 23, 2016 [4 favorites]
That's fair. I think people tend to self-select at their own suitable level of involvement in activist and political work.
As in, if someone wants the "status" of an ally, and to be keynote speaker at anti-racism conferences, and to be recognized by others as an activist, the bar is a lot higher than if someone is unfamiliar and asks a honest and well-intentioned but clumsy question.
Not every 101 level question is a bad one and I did not intend to convey such by my response. I think the problem arises most often when people show entitlement to the time and effort of others, while showing no gratitude when others invest such time and effort.
Part of it is a function of attitude - is the person conveying "I want to help out here", or "I want to be recognized as 'A True Ally' by the people I am claiming to help"?
posted by theorique at 6:09 AM on March 23, 2016 [2 favorites]
As in, if someone wants the "status" of an ally, and to be keynote speaker at anti-racism conferences, and to be recognized by others as an activist, the bar is a lot higher than if someone is unfamiliar and asks a honest and well-intentioned but clumsy question.
Not every 101 level question is a bad one and I did not intend to convey such by my response. I think the problem arises most often when people show entitlement to the time and effort of others, while showing no gratitude when others invest such time and effort.
Part of it is a function of attitude - is the person conveying "I want to help out here", or "I want to be recognized as 'A True Ally' by the people I am claiming to help"?
posted by theorique at 6:09 AM on March 23, 2016 [2 favorites]
Not only do people show entitlement, but sometimes they are trolling specifically to get into an argument with you. (I mean, obviously, right?)
I am a white ally who is well known to be anti-racist in my community. Minnesotans don't use the n-lover term in public, but they have subtle ways of letting you know what they think.
Most white people I run into who pull the Explain to Me Why conversation are basically operating in somewhat good faith, even though they're openly being lazy and don't seem terribly invested in doing anything about their attitudes.
But an example of someone who has crossed the line with me is a local professor friend who's long since gone off the rails into extreme-libertarian nonsense. He pulled an obviously disingenuous "I don't understand what BLM wants?? Please tell me" on my FB page. He wanted to draw me into an argument, because his pet issue is campus free speech (and racist speech is our right, right? right.).
I told him (ostensibly) to RTFM. He was offended. I don't care.
Picking out those who are worth the time and effort is not easy. I realize that people of color are confronted with this bullshit all the time. I have had to deliberately run out into the figurative traffic to experience even a modicum of this crap. Privilege means I can always get back to the sidewalk whenever I want.
posted by RedEmma at 6:44 AM on March 23, 2016 [2 favorites]
I am a white ally who is well known to be anti-racist in my community. Minnesotans don't use the n-lover term in public, but they have subtle ways of letting you know what they think.
Most white people I run into who pull the Explain to Me Why conversation are basically operating in somewhat good faith, even though they're openly being lazy and don't seem terribly invested in doing anything about their attitudes.
But an example of someone who has crossed the line with me is a local professor friend who's long since gone off the rails into extreme-libertarian nonsense. He pulled an obviously disingenuous "I don't understand what BLM wants?? Please tell me" on my FB page. He wanted to draw me into an argument, because his pet issue is campus free speech (and racist speech is our right, right? right.).
I told him (ostensibly) to RTFM. He was offended. I don't care.
Picking out those who are worth the time and effort is not easy. I realize that people of color are confronted with this bullshit all the time. I have had to deliberately run out into the figurative traffic to experience even a modicum of this crap. Privilege means I can always get back to the sidewalk whenever I want.
posted by RedEmma at 6:44 AM on March 23, 2016 [2 favorites]
Is it possible, jb, that just because you haven't experienced this for yourself, that it's still a valid experience for me, and I'm not just simply mistaken or doing it wrong?
Your experience is your experience.
But you are also talking about someone else's intentions which - unless disclosed - are ultimately unknowable, and are part of their authentic experience to express.
Personally, I try to assume good intentions for most of the people I deal with - or at least, genuine/neutral intentions - because it makes things easier for me. When I do get tired, because emotional labour is tiring, I have to stop activisting. It's not always easy: years later, I'm still known in the family as the one who caused a row because I objected to another family member's casual homophobia. The ensuing argument left me in tears and feeling emotionally battered (and ganged up on, and blamed for the row). I'd like to hope I would still do it again, though I'm not sure if I would have knowing how it came out.
Some people I just ignore: I know I don't have the energy to discuss X issue with them.
But part of my training as a historian has been learning to wrap my mind around the humanness of every person, and that includes a great number of people with values and ideas I find abhorrent: colonists and slave owners, fascists and dictators, and even proto-capitalist early modern developers. I disagree with them, but I try to take their point of view seriously. (With an aim to undermining it, hopefully).
Sorry: this is a bit incoherent. I am taking your point seriously. But I also think that we can - and we must - have a conversation about rhetoric in activism that isn't derailed by calls of "tone policing". Because the world isn't fair - and I know that even I tune out when activists in my own movement (eg bi visibility) use aggressive and combative tones, or appear to be dismissive of people who disagree with them or lack certain knowledge.
Yes, I know that people of colour face tone higher standards. So do women - and it's not fair (for either). It shouldn't be that way. But it is, and skillful use of rhetoric is one of the few tools that people without money and/or political power have to sway the majority to support them - especially the majority who are not already allies and really have no skin in the game, no reason to make any effort to support us.
posted by jb at 12:56 PM on March 23, 2016
Your experience is your experience.
But you are also talking about someone else's intentions which - unless disclosed - are ultimately unknowable, and are part of their authentic experience to express.
Personally, I try to assume good intentions for most of the people I deal with - or at least, genuine/neutral intentions - because it makes things easier for me. When I do get tired, because emotional labour is tiring, I have to stop activisting. It's not always easy: years later, I'm still known in the family as the one who caused a row because I objected to another family member's casual homophobia. The ensuing argument left me in tears and feeling emotionally battered (and ganged up on, and blamed for the row). I'd like to hope I would still do it again, though I'm not sure if I would have knowing how it came out.
Some people I just ignore: I know I don't have the energy to discuss X issue with them.
But part of my training as a historian has been learning to wrap my mind around the humanness of every person, and that includes a great number of people with values and ideas I find abhorrent: colonists and slave owners, fascists and dictators, and even proto-capitalist early modern developers. I disagree with them, but I try to take their point of view seriously. (With an aim to undermining it, hopefully).
Sorry: this is a bit incoherent. I am taking your point seriously. But I also think that we can - and we must - have a conversation about rhetoric in activism that isn't derailed by calls of "tone policing". Because the world isn't fair - and I know that even I tune out when activists in my own movement (eg bi visibility) use aggressive and combative tones, or appear to be dismissive of people who disagree with them or lack certain knowledge.
Yes, I know that people of colour face tone higher standards. So do women - and it's not fair (for either). It shouldn't be that way. But it is, and skillful use of rhetoric is one of the few tools that people without money and/or political power have to sway the majority to support them - especially the majority who are not already allies and really have no skin in the game, no reason to make any effort to support us.
posted by jb at 12:56 PM on March 23, 2016
I get that you are being careful and respectful, but I cannot get away from how the essential foundation of the argument against a minimum effort in the general population is a tone policing argument.
That's because it is. I don't agree that we should never police our own tones.
As for why to try with people who have no skin in the game: because they are the ones who have to be convinced. Maybe it's because I'm coming from a queer perspective - we're like 3-5% of the population and we always will be. Allies are essential. And we can't even make our own country - our mothers, fathers, children and even (sometimes) spouses are straight allies.
posted by jb at 4:54 PM on March 23, 2016
That's because it is. I don't agree that we should never police our own tones.
As for why to try with people who have no skin in the game: because they are the ones who have to be convinced. Maybe it's because I'm coming from a queer perspective - we're like 3-5% of the population and we always will be. Allies are essential. And we can't even make our own country - our mothers, fathers, children and even (sometimes) spouses are straight allies.
posted by jb at 4:54 PM on March 23, 2016
What I was trying to suggest--and what I think the author is also suggesting--that in the space between "RTFM" and "POC slogging through emotional labor every damn day on top of everything else" there is a space for White people to talk to other White people to help bring everyone up to speed. Because it's fundamentally our problem.
posted by Anonymous at 5:46 PM on March 23, 2016
posted by Anonymous at 5:46 PM on March 23, 2016
I'm not demanding anything. I'm making statements about my own experience.
I do, however, strongly believe that progressives - whether fighting racism, sexism or *phobias - are engaged in a war that we are losing - a war of marketing and rhetoric. The forces of reaction and hate has an easy message to sell: selfishness, self-centredness, self-justification blaming the weaker for your problems. We have a complex message and one that forces self-examination and change in behaviour. We are the ones who have a steeper battle, rhetoric-wise.
Not every one can or will engage in this battle - and no one expects them to, no one demands anything. Many of us - and I include myself - will spend the vast majority of our lives engaged in the more pressing needs of working (until recently, I was on minimum wage) to keep a roof over our heads, striving to keep body and soul together for one more day.
But for people actively engaged in the battle for hearts and minds, who purposely take on activism, it seems like discussing rhetoric has become verboten. But rhetoric is a tool - and some forms of rhetoric are sharper knives than others. Tone-policing is a way of honing your own tool, until it is more effective for the job you want - or need - to accomplish.
posted by jb at 5:58 AM on March 24, 2016
I do, however, strongly believe that progressives - whether fighting racism, sexism or *phobias - are engaged in a war that we are losing - a war of marketing and rhetoric. The forces of reaction and hate has an easy message to sell: selfishness, self-centredness, self-justification blaming the weaker for your problems. We have a complex message and one that forces self-examination and change in behaviour. We are the ones who have a steeper battle, rhetoric-wise.
Not every one can or will engage in this battle - and no one expects them to, no one demands anything. Many of us - and I include myself - will spend the vast majority of our lives engaged in the more pressing needs of working (until recently, I was on minimum wage) to keep a roof over our heads, striving to keep body and soul together for one more day.
But for people actively engaged in the battle for hearts and minds, who purposely take on activism, it seems like discussing rhetoric has become verboten. But rhetoric is a tool - and some forms of rhetoric are sharper knives than others. Tone-policing is a way of honing your own tool, until it is more effective for the job you want - or need - to accomplish.
posted by jb at 5:58 AM on March 24, 2016
I think where a lot of people get hung up is on 'white people have privilege, they should just sit down, shut up, and listen to POC', but really, is there any topic where that would work?
This has been my approach for quite a few years now, and it's really transformed how I view the world. Give it a try for a year. Pick a few of the thousands of places where people of color are talking to each other about anything and listen/read with the assumption that they are right. See how that feels. Notice your reactions without acting on them. Weirdly, I've found the "Settler" lens to be one of the most useful in getting my head around my own whiteness and why it suuucks - I guess 'cause I was raised color-blind racist, so White (wo)Man's Burden is my jam, and it's a hard sandwich to quit - so much self-importance-so-tasty~.
I also cannot recommend enough Meg Kramer's statement on how to be a good white ally from Another Round with it's attendant links and some responses from people who want to be anti-racist allies at the bottom.
The issue of "be nice to allies because they mean well" troubles me. There always seems to be this implicit threat along with it - 'be nice, other people don't have to care, we're doing you a favor' which ....bugs me. If someone actually does mean well - shouldn't that come with their willingness to help all kinds of people, not just the properly submissive/grateful ones? Offering help only if one is treated in a certain specific way strikes me as fundamentally not being helpful an very much a piece of the White Man's Burden - which demanded submission, cleanliness, and obedience of the people being "helped."
posted by Deoridhe at 6:07 PM on March 24, 2016 [1 favorite]
This has been my approach for quite a few years now, and it's really transformed how I view the world. Give it a try for a year. Pick a few of the thousands of places where people of color are talking to each other about anything and listen/read with the assumption that they are right. See how that feels. Notice your reactions without acting on them. Weirdly, I've found the "Settler" lens to be one of the most useful in getting my head around my own whiteness and why it suuucks - I guess 'cause I was raised color-blind racist, so White (wo)Man's Burden is my jam, and it's a hard sandwich to quit - so much self-importance-so-tasty~.
I also cannot recommend enough Meg Kramer's statement on how to be a good white ally from Another Round with it's attendant links and some responses from people who want to be anti-racist allies at the bottom.
The issue of "be nice to allies because they mean well" troubles me. There always seems to be this implicit threat along with it - 'be nice, other people don't have to care, we're doing you a favor' which ....bugs me. If someone actually does mean well - shouldn't that come with their willingness to help all kinds of people, not just the properly submissive/grateful ones? Offering help only if one is treated in a certain specific way strikes me as fundamentally not being helpful an very much a piece of the White Man's Burden - which demanded submission, cleanliness, and obedience of the people being "helped."
posted by Deoridhe at 6:07 PM on March 24, 2016 [1 favorite]
« Older Kraft changes their mac and cheese; doesn't tell... | Baltimore: The Third Rail Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Many, many POC I know and activists I follow talk about how exhausting it becomes to answer the same questions and make the same basic arguments over and over. And yet I know so many, many White people who need to have those questions answered. If I'm going to be realistic, most are disconnected enough from the issue that they're not going to search out the answers themselves--and if they do God knows where they're going to pull that information from at the end (I'm looking at you Reddit).
Where I struggle is how exactly to go about doing this. I have thought about setting up discussion groups, or putting together a website that answers these questions, both simple (how is Black hair different and why does that matter) and complex (Asians are discriminated against, why are they doing so much better). But "White people explain racism" is an inherently problematic idea for a wide number of reasons--and yet agitating for POC to start such a website brings us back to expecting POC to explain racism. I am extremely glad the author linked to some of the organizations he's working with!
I have been to groups here and there that were aimed towards explaining these issues--but invariably they used language and arguments that made implicit assumptions that were extremely optimistic about the place their audience was starting from. I think that's an issue with progressive advocacy groups in general, though.
I am glad to see there are an increasing number of articles coming out where White people discuss their own experiences of Whiteness--not just the cultural effects, but what coming to terms with it means for their identity.
posted by Anonymous at 11:29 AM on March 21, 2016