On explaining privilege

[mousme]

I keep coming back to RaceFail09. I really wish I wasn't, but it's troubling me, for obvious reasons, and not-so-obvious reasons.

I am not going to try to unpack the invisible knapsack here. I'm just thinking out loud.

Okay, so I am what the Intarwebs would consider a PWC (Privileged White Chick). So far, so good. I am also a lesbian. That makes me both a woman and homosexual. Still with me? Good.

This means that I get the dubious privilege of explaining privilege to those around me who are either not women, or not homosexual, or neither of the above. I get questions on the topic of GLBT issues all the time, especially when I start a new job/meet someone new/enter a new situation. Essentially, I spend a lot of time coming out to people, and then explaining What It All Means. Whether I like it or not, people assume that I am somehow the Official Representative of the Local GLBT Community (which is totally not the case, and I usually try to explain this right off the bat, as part of my little GLBT 101 spiel).

Clicking on a lot of links in the Epic Debate Fail Of Doom, I am coming across a plethora of posts by self-described PoCs (People of Colour), who are righteously annoyed at having to explain themselves to the PWPs (Privileged White People) who ask them for information/clarification/cluebats/etc. Some have downright been foaming at the mouth.

Okay. So I get that this is annoying/frustrating/makes you want to tear your hair out by the roots/possibly commit vehicular manslaughter after particularly stupid-seeming questions. I get it, I do. If one more person asks me if I would choose to be straight if I were given the opportunity, I may not be held responsible for my actions.

That being said, I feel that it is important for me to do this anyway, regardless of what my feelings are on the subject. Yes, it's annoying when someone proclaims that their good friend/cousin/mailmain/busboy is gay and that's totally fine with them, and it's annoying that they seem to want a pat and a cookie for it. But you know what?

They're not going to educate themselves.

It's as simple as that, really. If we, the People Lacking $Privilege, don't say: "You are mistaken in your assumption, and here's why," they are never, ever going to get it. No way, no how. I'm not suggesting that we need to deliver a three-hour multimedia presentation on the ins and outs of privilege, and spoon-feed it to them. But give them something, for crying out loud!

PWPs, myself included, are far from immune from asking really stupid questions to which we honestly don't have the answer. From my perspective, when I ask a stupid question, it's okay to look at me as though I just grew antlers (although my feelings will be hurt, I have yet to die from that particular affliction), but then I would very much like to be told why my question was stupid. It was asked in good faith, and a good faith answer would be appreciated. Even if it's an answer along the lines of: "That question isn't relevant/is stupid, and I don't have the time/energy/capacity to explain it to you in full, but some research in $Place is a good place to start."

Yes, it's tiresome. No, we shouldn't have to do it. No, each individual should not have to suddenly be the representative of $Group to which they belong. It sucks. Absolutely. Nonetheless, it's the reality of the situation, and at the very least the PWPs ought to be encouraged to move past those first tentative steps they're taking, to take the initiative and go out and educate themselves. First steps aren't enough, but if they get whacked on the head with the You-Are-Privileged-And-Therefore-Wrong-Forever Stick, then they're going to pull back into their shell and never come out again, and now it's a lost cause. First steps don't deserve a cookie, but they don't deserve a beatdown, either.

Oh, and while I can fully understand that that last paragraph is essentially an argument about tone, please rest assured that I am not trying to say "If only people had been more civil/polite/less hateful/whatever attribute you please, then this terrible misunderstanding would never have happened," because of course that's patently not true. Maybe the debate would have taken on a different form, and that form would likely have been equally filled with fail on both sides. I'm just lamenting the fact that many people (the aforementioned PWPs) are going to come away from this angry, more confused than ever, and less willing to learn.

I keep swearing I'm done with this, but then I come back and poke at it some more, so I'm no longer going to promise anything. :P

:::ETA:::

I have apparently been linked into rydra_wong's Linkspam of Doom thing.

So, dear New People Following The Fail To My LJ, I feel compelled to lay down a ground rule, should you want to comment.

Don't be an asshat.

This means no flaming, no personal attacks, no mudslinging, no outing people. Post in good faith, and with an open mind. Wait ten minutes before typing your responses, if you must. If you're still mad, then wait ten more minutes.

My friends (LJ and RL) are a varied bunch, with a wide range of experiences and opinions. The one thing they have in common in this LJ is respect of my space. I would ask that you also show this respect in your posts. (So far so good, btw.)

If you don't follow this one rule, I will ban you summarily, no questions asked.

Comments

[amanda-mary.livejournal.com]

I'm really perfectly willing to do a lot of the legwork when it comes to educating myself about my myriad priveleges, but, short of turning to a helpful liaison from a community/group lacking in said priveleges (who I realize can only speak to individual experience authoritatively, but may be able to offer more global insights as well), I don't really know what source of information would be legitimately informative. If I read a book on the topic, for example, how condescending would it be to claim, "Hey! I have Knowledge, now. I read a book!"?

That's the rub I've encountered ... .

[mousme.livejournal.com]

Pretty much, which is why I find it a bit flabbergasting that people are angry about being asked for information. Clearly I Just Don't Get It. :P

[terredancer.livejournal.com]

First steps aren't enough, but if they get whacked on the head with the You-Are-Privileged-And-Therefore-Wrong-Forever Stick, then they're going to pull back into their shell and never come out again, and now it's a lost cause.

Alternately, you get people like me, who has been introduced to the Privileged stick often enough (not really beaten with it much, but told I won't understand anything because of PWC issue) that I wander around apologizing at random for things that I don't understand but maybe a quarter of.

I can't even read any of this, and while some of my flist is all like "that's the advantage of privilege, that you don't have to deal with it", that comes across almost like a guilt trip, and I guess I don't see the point if I'm just going to reinforce the urge to sit and apologize for everything that has been done or not done, or that I may not understand.

[mousme.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I stopped apologizing a while back, around the same time that I stopped feeling the need to constantly explain myself as well. I still get the urge from time to time, but it's a lot better now. ;)

[owldaughter.livejournal.com]

Yeah. As someone kind of public who follows a not exactly clear-cut or easily understood spiritual path, I get asked what sound like lame questions all the time.

Except they're not lame when coming from someone who knows nothing about it. And if they're asking, it means they want to know more for some reason. And it's counterproductive to refuse to answer, or hit them with the You-Are-Privileged-And-Therefore-Wrong-Forever Stick. Yes, the question may sound lame to you, but they don't have a context for it yet. They're asking in the only way they can. They can try to be more sensitive, but since they don't know what constitutes insensitive in this context, they're flailing anyway.

So, erm, yeah.

[mousme.livejournal.com]

Precisely. The only way for people to not ask stupid questions is to provide them with both information and the context for said information. I am having a lot of trouble with the rage coming from people who are tired of explaining things to n00bs.

*shrug*

I got nothin', really. I'm just perplexed.

[bodhifox.livejournal.com]

Militant Dianic Wiccans make me want to kick them. Other than that, I really don't care, because I don't like most people equally. Except for the ones I like, and them I like unconditionally. It's not a matter of someone's race or gender or religion or whatever being OK with me, it's just, "Are you a dick? No? Shiny."

[fearsclave.livejournal.com]

Antlers would suit you. You'd look good in them.

Seriously.

[mousme.livejournal.com]

Promise not to shoot me when I'm in season?

[mousme.livejournal.com]

Thank you for that last link. I may re-post it in a separate entry, because it's worth spreading around.

I'll be the irritable and long-winded one today.

[the-xtina.livejournal.com]

For this, I am coming from a feminist standpoint.  Yay analogies.

For every one genuine good faith question about feminist-related stuff, I get:

* accusations that I'm overreacting (it's just a joke, it's just a word, you're such a feminazi, &c &c &c)
* people asking me basic fucking shit over and over as though I'm their personal goddamn feminist library and their fingers and brains are broken
* tone pissiness ("You were exasperated with me when I said that omg men get raped too as though you weren't aware - this has put me off feminism, I hope you're happy!" - god, I wish I were exaggerating)
* outright dismissal ("I can't trust your word on your experiences, because you're not objective enough.")

Not to mention my personal utter dislike of people asking me basic fucking questions that they could've looked up bloody anywhere.  I have never liked these regardless of the topic, because it shrieks to me that someone is expecting me to do the work for them.  "How many reported rapes have there been in the US?"  Google it.  Google it!  It's right there!

Q: Well, I'd argue better, except I don't know how many reported rapes there are in the US.
X: Argle, here.  Ten seconds in Google.

Also, I can't just, yknow, stop hearing stupid questions.  I get basic-ass questions at work (I do tech support), but if they truly drive me batty, I can quit my job, or take a vacation.  I can't quit being female in a sexist society.  So it's not like "X, you keep going to $place and you keep getting these questions, so stop going!".  If I wanted to stop getting feminist questions, I'd have to not talk about being a feminist.  If I wanted to stop being pissed off about sexism, I would have to never interact with another human being by any means, including any media and potentially clothing.

To wrap this up, every day I live in a society that is sexist as hell and doesn't... particularly care for women.  And I'm a woman.  It sucks rancid dog droppings that people don't understand and usually don't care to.  Further, they can get away with it, because society is set up to not have to give a shit about women.  (Which to me is what privilege is - the society-approved ability to not have to care about what a minority is going through.)  So I start out tired.

And then someone asks me, "Could you explain this 'feminism' thing to me?"

I am only human.  I try really hard to be as patient as I can, and to give the asker the benefit of the doubt.  But sometimes I would kind of, maybe, a little bit prefer that people shut the fuck up and do some goddamn reading up on the subject before they come to me and ask me to, on top of dealing with this woman-hating culture as a woman and a feminist, do some more work for them.

It's not a perfect analogy  - as one example, being female doesn't necessarily mean one is a feminist, whereas a PoC is a PoC (tautologically enough) - but it's certainly close enough to understand where PoC are coming from.

So while I might advise one to disengage from the internet if they're about to keel over from too-high blood pressure (I recommend this for just about anyone, and should do so myself more often), I can completely understand where PoC would get upset by yet more questions.

Re: I'll be the irritable and long-winded one today.

[the-xtina.livejournal.com]

ALL THAT SAID...

I do reserve patience-spoons for those closest to me.  I have good convos with my boyfriend where the only exasperation I have is that I can't find the right words, for example.  If a friend wants to hash out their thoughts with me on feminism, I've little problem with it.  (Depends on spoons, but.)  I absolutely understand the value of interpersonal conversations for learning more.  I can just also really really understand why people might be tired of it all.

[piotono.livejournal.com]

Hi mousme,

I've been thinking about that very thing - the endless explanation of what privilege is, mainly because I'm a privileged white male, and I don't think it's fair that everyone else gets loaded down with having to do that. Is that arrogant? I guess, what I mean is, if I'm going to try to be an ally, I should at least put my white privilege to good use schooling people like me.

I took a shot at it over on Scalzi's whatever. It's pretty darn vanilla, and kinda inadequate, and tries too hard to be inoffensive but I'd love your thoughts. Linky: what I said at Scalzi's (http://piotono.livejournal.com/979.html)

[mousme.livejournal.com]

Hi there!

I don't recognize your username... do I know you, or are you a new visitor to my neck of the woods?

Allies are welcome in this LJ. Heck, most of the time, when it comes to stuff that's not about women or GLBT issues, I'm an ally as well, and am still in the process of learning how to be a good ally and not rest on my laurels, as it were. Heck, even when it comes to feminism and GLBT issues, I suffer more than I'd like from foot-in-mouth disease. ;)

[kiwano.livejournal.com]

Wait, so having people ask dumb-ass questions about some aspect of your life, or make completely bogus assumption about you because of that aspect is a form of oppression?

Can I use this as a basis for identifying mathematicians as an oppressed group? I mean have I ever had to deal with a lot of bizarre and largely unfounded stereotypes of mathematicians. Hell, I'm pretty sure that my father still harbours some sort of bizarre expectation of business "success" based on some image of mathematicians as being kinda like accountants only moreso. (Reality, the average mathematician is a lecherous half-psychotic poly-drug-abuser who's no more likely to settle down in some high-paying company job than to make a living holed up in a Montana cabin mailing pipe bombs to people).

[mousme.livejournal.com]

No, dude, not oppression. Privilege. Not the same word.

Privilege or Justice: Pick one.

[montecristo.livejournal.com]

You can't have both; they're contradictory.

...people assume that I am somehow the Official Representative of the Local GLBT Community...

In buying into the whole concept of "privilege" you make yourself an "official representative." If you get your identity from your group membership, as the concept of privilege asserts as a fundamental premise, then you should expect people to treat you as if you are nothing more than your group membership. That's how it works. Justice demands that we evaluate each individual according to the actions and character of the individual. Assigning "privilege" and "unprivilege" on the basis of arbitrary distinctions like skin color is the antithesis of justice. You might as well assert that all dark-skinned people love fried chicken and watermelon — privilege is prejudicial by nature.

Re: Privilege or Justice: Pick one.

[hector-rashbaum.livejournal.com]

Privilege is not itself prejudicial, it's the result of a prejudiced system. True, there would be no privileged/oppressed dichotomies in a truly just society, but the blame rests with the prejudice causing that dichotomy.

[hector-rashbaum.livejournal.com]

But give them something, for crying out loud!

The problem with this attitude, IMO, is it demands [any given person lacking (x) privilege] assume the person asking asinine questions is doing so in good faith and with true desire to learn.

(Or, in the case of internet discussions that can be seen by anyone at any time, to assume that someone may come along who is reading in good faith and truly wants to learn)

And you can't always tell from the attitude or the context; so much of the problem with gerriwritinglog's failtastic post (http://gerriwritinglog.livejournal.com/102253.html?format=light) yesterday and the revelation she was using all the lovely people who were willing to answer her questions as story research is that she tricked people into thinking she actually wanted to learn.

I do understand that people generally won't educate themselves, but I have a problem with framing education as Your Duty As A Minority. There are enough issues to face as a member of an underprivileged class...do we really need to add guilt because you've gotten burned one too many times by people who pretended to be acting in good faith to assume the next time will be any different?

(here via rydra_wong's link list)

[ladyjax.livejournal.com]

so much of the problem with gerriwritinglog's failtastic post yesterday and the revelation she was using all the lovely people who were willing to answer her questions as story research is that she tricked people into thinking she actually wanted to learn.

That one post disturbed my calm mightily.

[ladyjax.livejournal.com]

They're not going to educate themselves.

And this is where I step back and look at people and say, "And why the hell haven't you gotten around to educating yourself around this?"

There is plenty of offline information if you want to educate yourself about racism/anti-racism/bias. Groups where you can plug in and find out what you want/need to know. People can go ahead and start their own groups, their own efforts. I'm explicitly thinking of organizations like The Working Group and their Not in Our Town campaign - they have a list of resources for starting your own work here (http://www.theworkinggroup.org/niotresources.html).

Have I answered a myriad of questions about being Black? Yes. About being a lesbian? Yes. How those two things intersect? Yes. My experience of racism and it's effects are different from my father's, my mother's, my grand parents just as they are different from another Black person who lives, say, in the UK, Canada, or Africa. Sometimes they're similar.

At some point, though, I have to step back from certain people and say, "You are on your own. I've given you a book list, I want you to read it and then get back to me." Folks have to start to do their own heavy lifting. A lot of the rage and anger you're picking up comes from posters having to do way to much of it over and over again.

[mousme.livejournal.com]

Hi!

No idea how you got to my little corner of the internet, but welcome. :)

I had a bit of a revelation, thanks to the_xtina, about where my disconnect came from concerning the aforementioned rage and frustration.

1- I tend to assume people are in good faith, because that's my default mode.

2- My own experience as the Minority Representative™ (for whatever it's worth) has been, essentially, on a volunteer basis. I totally, absolutely pass for a straight white girl. I choose not to, but that's where the difference lies: it's a choice for me. If my skin colour were not what it is, I would have no choice in whether or not people perceive me a certain way.

So I can choose, should I so desire, to go back and hide in my closet, and NOT engage with the regular populace and field their questions.

Anyway, yeah. That was my moment of illumination today. I didn't get it, still sort of don't, but am groping my way to understanding.

[kazaera.livejournal.com]

I think one of the important things to consider here is also context.

Generally, there are spaces especially set aside for beginners, for those just unpacking their $Privilege, where $Minority members or more clued-in $Privilege members have volunteered to shepherd and guide and maybe, in the case of $Minority members, answer those ever-so-annoying questions politely. 101 blogs (hi, racism_101 for all your needs!), compilations of essays geared at $Privilege members, compilations of essays where $Minority members explain what The Experience is like. There are other places which are specifically supposed to be safe spaces for $Minority members to share experiences or vent rage. Or, in this case, there are places where a specific discussion is going on.

Coming into a safe space and asking clueless questions... not even going to touch that one. Coming into a specific discussion post and asking clueless questions derails the discussion, and is exceptionally frustrating when there *are* spaces set aside, essays written, tons and tons of information out there specifically addressed at the clueless $Privilege person who is trying to figure things out - and they decide to ask it HERE. In a way, the intentions don't matter at all - in end effect, they are derailing the discussion. They are making it about Insert-101-subject-here instead of the actual subject under discussion - which may often be quite complex and interesting and not hashed out in a thousand other places online, and in any case is what we all want to talk about at the moment. "Educate yourself!" doesn't mean "figure it all out yourself without help from other people", it means "*find* the places online where this discussion is appropriate, find the essays that deal with your question, and stop encroaching on this space, here, now, because this space is meant for other things", it means "with your current level of knowledge you are not capable of participating in this discussion without derailing it massively - you should go elsewhere if you still want to participate." A lot of times people even link them to places to start.

I also find that the whole idea of saying that minorities *should* educate the privileged group if they want things to get better to be deeply worrisome. As someone's put it further upthread, they generally get enough trouble - why can't privileged group take some responsibility for educating themselves for once? I also find it does go dangerously close to the tone argument, to blaming a minority member for losing patience. How dare they not play self-narrating zoo exhibit on demand? (Terminology borrowed from the autism community - I just love it so.)

[mousme.livejournal.com]

1- Thank you for the link to racism_101.

2- I agree that there is a question of context. I will confess to not having followed this from the beginning, and so I am not sure whether this was a case of a more specific discussion getting derailed into 101 stuff, or just a case of massive fail on the part of a couple of the original posters, or whatever.

3- My post was originally a way for me to work out what was in my head, and one of the earlier comments by the_xtina allowed me to re-frame what I was thinking in a larger context, and understand that my own disconnect was coming from the fact that even though I often have to do a lot of 101 stuff, I am not coming from a position of unavoidable visibility.

As someone's put it further upthread, they generally get enough trouble - why can't privileged group take some responsibility for educating themselves for once? I also find it does go dangerously close to the tone argument, to blaming a minority member for losing patience.

I was trying very hard to avoid the tone argument. After all, people are entitled to lose their patience as they see fit, and having all the patience in the world won't make some people see the light, as it were. I don't think the privileged should sit back and expect to be spoon-fed the information, for that matter.

My problem was two-fold. 1) I was assuming that people were coming to the discussion in good faith. It has been pointed out to me that this isn't always the case. 2) I didn't quite understand the difference between asking to be pointed in the right direction, and asking people to play self-narrating zoo exhibit, to borrow your terminology. I was coming from the first position ("Where do I start?"), rather than the second ("tl;dr. Why can't you explain it to me, since you're $Minority?").

[tcaptain.livejournal.com]

That was very eloquent.

Not that this is a surprise, but know that you have my admiration.

That is all.

[mousme.livejournal.com]

Thank you! :)

A few of the comments have allowed me to re-frame my earlier opinion. It still stands, but I've had to revise some of my thinking about the whole "explaining of privilege" thing. It's been an interesting experience.

[feanna.livejournal.com]

I agree with you on the point you made in a comment above that visibility is important. People who look non-white will be recognized as such always.

There's also the point that there's a history of PoC being servants of white people. So it's even more important to consider implications that they're there to do something for white people. Would it be nice to have them answer our stupid questions? Yes of course it would be FOR US. (I'm sure many do, in fact there have been many recent posts that DO explain 101 stuff or at least many link collections of old stuff, and that's really nice of the people who put in the effort.) But it also gives the impression that PoC are under some obligation to answer white people questions, that their opinions have no value as long as they aren't explained to us or put in white terms.

There's also the issue of the shit PoC have to put up with daily. I found this post
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/01race/racism10.htm
great for explaining the impression Blacks get from Whithes that SAY they're not racist, because they think they aren't.

I also agree with you on the tone issue. I've been thinking a lot about a study I read about recently about impressions of strengh in people in leadership positions. When men got angry they seemd strong, when women got angry they they lost control. Women were percieved as more capable when they remained calm. I think this can be extended to PoC.

I've been reading Race Fail here and there. I'm sure I haven't reas everything, but I never got the impression that it was a flame war.
Here's another summary:
http://logophilos.net/blather/?p=1162

For the discussions of privilege in general that have been going on this is a good summary:
http://community.livejournal.com/debunkingwhite/794697.html#cutid1

[mousme.livejournal.com]

I also agree with you on the tone issue. I've been thinking a lot about a study I read about recently about impressions of strengh in people in leadership positions. When men got angry they seemd strong, when women got angry they they lost control. Women were percieved as more capable when they remained calm. I think this can be extended to PoC.

Tone is yet another of those contentious issues that I have trouble with. As a woman in a male-dominated environment (I work for the police), I get the tone argument thrown at me a lot, both personally and generally about the ubiquitous "other." Women aren't angry, they're hysterical, and PoCs aren't angry, they're being "latin," or "hotblooded," or whatever nifty epithet they can think of. That's why I try not to talk about tone, or acting rational, or not getting angry. I want to be taken seriously when I'm angry, and therefore I try to extend the same courtesy to those around me.

[(Anonymous)]

Excellent post. We the PWP can be inadvertant jerks and (get this) it's not usually deliberate. So help us help ourselves to be better people. Because many of us really want to be. And that's one thing that RaceFail/whatever the heck you want to call it has brought to the attention of a lot of writers: the "default white" perspective. Many who were clueless are thinking about it and trying to wrap their PWP brains around their blindnesses.

I'm very fortunate my G/L friends of old never slapped me for stupid nosey questions, either, so thank you for answering the silly/stupid questions that irritate the heck out of you, mouseme.

writtenwyrdd
http://writtenwyrdd.typepad.com

Jumping in a little late 1

[aislingtheach.livejournal.com]

Hi Mousme,

I find this post very interesting. I must say it rings very familiar bells, because I have long entertained the exact same thoughts you are expressing here.

I always liked to think of myself as mild-mannered and soft spoken. It came from a deeply held belief that softness is an essential measure of respect, and does wonders in changing peoples' hearts and minds. I still consider it to be an important ingredient of respect and will approach people with it. However, I no more hold unto it as I used to, and have come to understand the anger and the rage.

After I came out, I was ready to answer questions and considered it very important to do so in order to fight prejudices. Patience and softness, in my mind, were key. And I remember having a serious discussion with another activist who steadfastly held unto the belief that sometimes we need to «disturb» (déranger) people out of their complacency. Sometimes there is room for anger. I strongly disagreed with her. I was convinced of the countrary, that is that people will open their minds only if we are soft in our approaches and refrain from expressing anger.

When I started to grapple with antiracism, I was shocked out of my socks. There was anger directed by lots of LGBT POC at the mainstream white gay community for its racism and I remember feeling very defensive about it. First, I was in denial: I was convinced there was no such thing as racism in the gay community, that it was something of the past, and that they were making it up (you know, playing the «race card»). Second, I did not get the anger.

However, I had enough good faith that I wanted to keep listening until my discomfort was resolved. For instance I once quipped, at a worshop where I was hearing those harsh critics: «What is it that the mainstream gay community can do?». And I clearly, up to this day, remember one woman's answer: «Read books, we don't need to tell you everything». Being the enthousiastic lesbian101 teacher, I was taken aback. I just could not get it.

Jumping in a little late 2

[aislingtheach.livejournal.com]

Or could I?

... that comment sounded familiar. I did recall feeling annoyed myself by the fact that heterosexuals as a whole will rarely take the initiative of reading about gay realities or renting gay movies - in the same way that we read (heterosexual) realities, rent (heterosexual) movies and live in a heterosexual environment (only it never is called thus, being the «default» and the «universal» reality).

Also, I could relate it to my own growing experience in encountering bad faith, resistance, and denial, even when I was being very soft in the way I would answer questions - and even from people I was very close with. Gee, it happened no later than last december with a good friend of mine who was basically invalidating the experiences of hurt I was sharing with him («few people are homophobic», « there is no double standard 'friend' treatment » said he - among other things -, basically waving off what I was telling him). Granted, he did not do it in a rude way, but rather in a casual, matter-of-fact way, which, in the end, produces the same results. While I first thought I could draw from an unexhaustible well of patience, I started to realize, during the last two years, that it was getting a bit dry. Especially when it came to family and friends who display defensive attitudes and profess denial. You would expect them to take what you share more seriously. To really be listening. But eventually you get to the realization that they need to be decentered and shocked out of their complacency and coziness, that they have to know how much they're pissing you off because your softspokenness does not seem to be enough in driving home the point that you are hurting.

Now when questions are coming up, I brace up for Teh Stupid. Not the ignorance, but the denial. Ignorance, I can deal with that. Bad faith and defensiveness. not. And yes, I would hope that some people would take a little initiative sometimes and go outside their comfort zones.

Going back to the angry LGBT POC folks. I had the same realization you had. You cannot hide from educating about race. You cannot play pause and get a break. And if you are, say, a Black lesbian who is very much aware of sexism, racism and heterosexism, you often have to bear the brunt of Teh Stupid and patience gets exhausted pretty fast thank you.

I would like to add, too, that there is a difference in context between anti-racist activism and gay activism. There is a far longer history of Teh stupid from whites than there is from heterosexual people. Anti-racist activism appeared much more sooner than gay activism did. And they started out with being very mellow and soft-spoken as a whole. They were into educating, but denial and outright agressivity from whites has eroded it.

Here is an excellent link that is really worth a read, which illustrates it:

http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/3982

It is taken from a my-my! «required reading section» from the angry black woman blog:

http://theangryblackwoman.com/required-reading/

Oh yeah, there is also the part about derailing conversations, but it was already well adressed by others.

(Sorry about the convoluted nature of this post. I did not want to work twice the time on it in order to make it as fine as I'd wish! ;)

Jumping in a little late 3

[aislingtheach.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah, and I was about to forget.

There is an advantage to reading instead of talking. When you are in a conversation, it is harder for you to recognize you were wrong. That your judgment failed. You know, this ego thing. When you are reading, it is easier to let it sink in. The book will not challenge your ego. The book will not go «Here you go, now you see you were wrong!»

From the point of view of POC - or LGBT folks, or feminists, and so on - it also is more advantageous. You don't get to have your patience eroded by the «but»s, the denial and the bad faith. Because these are going to come like the sun rises every morning. You know all the «but»s, you've heard them before a gazillion times from privileged people around you, from the newspaper, from the «experts», from the tv shows and the radio forums. And you know all the answers to those «but»s. And you know all the counter «but»s, And you know all the counter-counter «but»s, and so on. The dominant ideology is the ideology of the dominant people (more money, more diffusion power, etc.) and they take theirs to be sooooooo «commonsensical» that they just can't get something that challenges their paradigm. The first answer you'll give may pretty well be distorted and misunderstood since they are going to be read with the dominant lense. And it's a whole structure you'll have to take down. All the while you'll feel the person is not really listening, is getting defensive, is interrupting you in the middle of an important notion, presuming he/she already knows what it is you are talking about.

Well, books often have the «but»s and the counter «but'»s in mind. Books can't get interrupted. Books won't care if they're thrown on the wayside. But yes, there is still that risk.

And yes, there is people of good faith, people who are ready to listen, fortunately. And yes, in an ideal world, I would much rather have a direct conversation.

Aisling and Tim Wise

[ankhorite.livejournal.com]

I'm glad to hear what you have to say on this.

I'm also glad you mentioned Tim Wise, because I wanted to add him to my own RaceFail contribution and couldn't remember his name, ack! I chose a different essay than the one you selected.

Trudge, trudge, trudge, trudge. Hopefully in the right direction.

[(Anonymous)]

I love you.

What's with the dollar signs?

[mousme.livejournal.com]

Hi there, stranger. Were you logged out when you commented, or are you not an LJ user?

The $ sign is something I picked up from friends versed in programming language, and I use it to designate a generic.

So $thing instead of "a multitude of things" or [insert actual name]thing. It's just quicker.

Here from metafandom

[alex-beecroft.livejournal.com]

I think maybe the really basic things, the 'this is what privilege is, and x, y and z are unhelpful things to say because of this reason' are things which it would be quite easy for PWP to learn. So maybe we can do some of the basic stuff ourselves and allow the FoC to pick up the stuff where we're still flailing.

I hope/believe I've learned enough from reading the posts in Racefail 09 to at least recognize some forms of derailing tactic. So I can get on them next time, and leave other more clued up people to do the complicated stuff.