Catwoman Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Would you agree that the comment I received from my friend about everyone wanting to be her tall, blue-eyed, blond-haired daughter was something less than gracious? In that particular example, I would think your friend's comment could offend the vast majority of people as I would assume that most people's dds are not tall, blue-eyed, and blond-haired, thus making them obviously inferior in your friend's eyes to her special snowflake dd. She sounds obnoxious and arrogant, and I'll bet she makes similar comments to most of the people she knows or meets no matter what their race. Because her dd is such a special snowflake and all. :rolleyes: 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 In that particular example, I would think your friend's comment could offend the vast majority of people as I would assume that most people's dds are not tall, blue-eyed, and blond-haired, thus making them obviously inferior in your friend's eyes to her special snowflake dd. She sounds obnoxious and arrogant, and I'll bet she makes similar comments to most of the people she knows or meets no matter what their race. Because her dd is such a special snowflake and all. :rolleyes: Sadly, this is mostly true. But it's still a singular example of an observable pattern. I'm asking what we should make of/call that pattern. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmseB Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 I think most of the things you're talking about point to self-centered-ness and general boorishness. I call it human nature. I find that most people have to be trained out of seeing themselves as the center of the universe, most people relate everything they see or do or experience (including dealing with those boorish people) back to themselves and their preferences or ideals or experiences in some way, and being able to consider others is a tough life skill to teach or learn. Your friend was not considering how she would like to be thought of or treated by others. She would most likely assume that I would rather have blond hair and blue eyes, no? It wouldn't be worth it to take her insult personally as a reflection on who I am. Why waste my time on feeling bad about her lack of perspective? People like that are tiresome to deal with for sure; sometimes we have to deal with them our whole lives because they are family and they never grow up. But to extrapolate her comment to say she must be racist...well, her references would have to be more specific than just thinking people must want to be like her. A lot of people think that the default is who they are, because they don't think outside of their own experience. On another note: I was thinking of this conversation just a bit ago when I was editing a group paper for an online class I'm taking. I was posting edits for others to approve and I wasn't really conscious of who wrote which section, but I was wondering how many people would take my corrections as a personal slight. We're talking grammar, spelling, a big of informality that I changed to be more formal for a 400-level class. And then I was thinking about the fact that maybe I was changing someone's "voice" in the paper and what if by changing a certain style to fit into formal college writing I'm committing a microaggression? Like, me changing it is reflective of my upbringing in relatively well-off suburbs? And it's insulting to take out commas and formalize the style to make it uniform? I have no idea really who the other group members are, how they grew up, where they are from, what race they are, etc. And I want a good grade on the paper, and I know what the prof is looking for, but maybe still, I shouldn't be condescending to think that my edits would be the best way to do things? I still don't know what to make of it. I would rather someone change my writing if they thought it was wrong/not good...but I don't know how it is perceived from others. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) I think most of the things you're talking about point to self-centered-ness and general boorishness. I call it human nature. I find that most people have to be trained out of seeing themselves as the center of the universe, most people relate everything they see or do or experience (including dealing with those boorish people) back to themselves and their preferences or ideals or experiences in some way, and being able to consider others is a tough life skill to teach or learn. It sounds like you see that pattern of behavior and do not think it's just limited to "white people". On that we can agree. If that's the case and, as you said here, people have to be trained out of it (I agree there too), how do you do that without having common language or terminology? That is what this thread was about, right? The concept/term "white fragility", others have included 'microaggression'. It seems like we agree that the patterns exist. Is it just the terms you find bothersome? Your friend was not considering how she would like to be thought of or treated by others. She would most likely assume that I would rather have blond hair and blue eyes, no? It wouldn't be worth it to take her insult personally as a reflection on who I am. Why waste my time on feeling bad about her lack of perspective? People like that are tiresome to deal with for sure; sometimes we have to deal with them our whole lives because they are family and they never grow up. But to extrapolate her comment to say she must be racist...well, her references would have to be more specific than just thinking people must want to be like her. A lot of people think that the default is who they are, because they don't think outside of their own experience. This woman specifically objects to the Asian-ness of the islands and the preference that Asians get (she's open about this) but I don't think it's productive to continue using this example. To the bolded, I do not see this same sense of self as default among ethnic minorities. I really don't. I do not see myself as the default in media, my workplace, my educational environments, anyplace really. So I am constantly looking beyond myself. I think, but may be wrong, that experience is broadly shared among minorities but I don't think the same can be said of those in the majority (and the majority may change based on country). On another note: I was thinking of this conversation just a bit ago when I was editing a group paper for an online class I'm taking. I was posting edits for others to approve and I wasn't really conscious of who wrote which section, but I was wondering how many people would take my corrections as a personal slight. We're talking grammar, spelling, a big of informality that I changed to be more formal for a 400-level class. And then I was thinking about the fact that maybe I was changing someone's "voice" in the paper and what if by changing a certain style to fit into formal college writing I'm committing a microaggression? Like, me changing it is reflective of my upbringing in relatively well-off suburbs? And it's insulting to take out commas and formalize the style to make it uniform? I have no idea really who the other group members are, how they grew up, where they are from, what race they are, etc. And I want a good grade on the paper, and I know what the prof is looking for, but maybe still, I shouldn't be condescending to think that my edits would be the best way to do things? I still don't know what to make of it. I would rather someone change my writing if they thought it was wrong/not good...but I don't know how it is perceived from others. I think your example here is really helpful, and here's what I would say. In academic writing there is a certain formality and cadence--one that scores better/receives better grades. And yes, you probably will offend some people by editing out more distinctive voices (and by voice I mean subjective things like word choice/cadence/tone which is different from usage or grammar errors). When I edited docs for public distribution at a state agency, I worked very hard to focus on the latter rather than the former (I always mix these up, lol). I was very conscious of the fact that the recipient might feel like I was editing out their style/voice when there was no need for me to do that. They didn't need to sound like me. After all, those documents were going out with their name on them, not mine. In a group project, it makes perfect sense to end up with a document that has a shared, neutral voice and I wouldn't make apologies for that. Edited December 10, 2015 by Sneezyone 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slojo Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 No, I'm saying I read your post and it reminded me of the clip I watched earlier this week. I'm saying your post and that video helped me to understand a couple of perspectives I think were eluding me for quite awhile. As to the 2nd part of your post here, that's just the thing. My general operating idea in life is that I try to treat people how I would like to be treated. When I realize that I've gone off the rails in this regard, and I do something to someone that I think would be unkind if they did it to me, then I try to back up and offer more respect. In reading this thread and the microagression thread and others, it seems like that is just not good enough, because as a white woman I cannot possibly ever understand how someone else would want to be treated in various situations (which I admit, I cannot know exactly how someone wants to be approached or treated at any given time, I can only do what I think I would appreciate or how I would like someone to talk to me). So me trying to apply the golden rule doesn't even work because it's offensive to presume someone else would like to be treated as I would like to be treated. And, even if I am trying to treat someone as I would like to be treated, I can still piss them off inadvertently, and if I seem to think my actions are defensible in any way, well then, I have white fragility. And, if all that is true, then I feel like, no, there's no hope of bridging the gap. It seems horribly circular with no end to offense and defensiveness. Instead of everyone involved just assuming people mean to do the best they can (even though we know it's not always true) we are looking for tiny ways they might be offending us or asserting themselves. It seems exhausting for everyone involved. Whereas just assuming people are trying to get along as best they can (even though we know it's not always the case) just seems like an easier way to live ones life. We can have errors in communication, we can have oblivious people, we can have tough conversations without it being microaggression or white fragility, or something that is horribly evil and permanently divisive. When we say that treating others as we would like to be treated is not good enough...it just seems very, very hopeless. Nah. There's hope. The golden rule isn't a static concept. Part of what doing unto to others as you would have done unto you is to hear feedback and to hear about others experiences that you may not have been aware of, and with kindness and empathy say, "Huh, I never considered that. I didn't mean to offend, but now that I know more about why it was important to that person, I guess I can have empathy for that." Then decide if changing is something you can do. For the vast majority of microaggressions, you really could just forego saying/doing those things and move on. Because what you would want done unto you is that if someone did offend you, you'd like them to hear you out and for them to seriously consider changing without making a big deal out of it. If I say Merry Christmas to my co-worker, and they tell me "I'm Jewish" then wouldn't I note that, and not wish them a Merry Christmas next time. Better yet - still doing unto others as I'd have them to unto me -- might I just take a minute to not assume everyone is Christian or celebrates Christmas. That doesn't sound like a big deal to me. Sure, the Jewish co-worker should be gracious - but being gracious is not equal to being silent. That only serves the majority - and gets back into the fragility concept, "you can't even hear that I don't celebrate Christmas" kind of thing. Learning about microaggressions or deciding that maybe there is something to the idea that defensiveness can crop up when hearing that someone else's reality is different than yours isn't about something "horribly evil" or permanently dismissive. We do not have to freeze people in time. And the word is "micro" aggression - the gist is that it is fixable/a small gesture that can go a long way, and may or may not be rooted in bias that is totally fixable. Not even close to the realm of evil, but certainly in the zipcode of the Golden Rule.That doesn't seem so unmanageable. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bibiche Posted December 10, 2015 Author Share Posted December 10, 2015 Your friend was not considering how she would like to be thought of or treated by others. She would most likely assume that I would rather have blond hair and blue eyes, no? It wouldn't be worth it to take her insult personally as a reflection on who I am. Why waste my time on feeling bad about her lack of perspective? People like that are tiresome to deal with for sure; sometimes we have to deal with them our whole lives because they are family and they never grow up. But to extrapolate her comment to say she must be racist...well, her references would have to be more specific than just thinking people must want to be like her. A lot of people think that the default is who they are, because they don't think outside of their own experience. I think this is an area where people really need to listen. Sneezyone said that her friend's comment was offensive/symptomatic of racism because friend assumed everyone wanted to have blonde hair and blue eyes ie blonde hair and blue eyes is superior and everyone knows it. You say the remark is "tiresome" not racist. But here's the thing, whether or not we would feel that the remark was racist or not (I agree that it was), we are not the ones who get to decide. And by constantly telling people of color that what they perceive is not correct, we ourselves are perpetuating this racial hostility. We have to listen to what people are telling us they are experiencing, not invalidate them by telling them in a paternalistic manner what they are "really" experiencing, 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FO4UR Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 No, we're not. Structural racism isn't about hatred. If it were, how simple it would be! It's about systematic inequalities throughout our society that no one person is responsible for. Consider the issue of blind auditions for orchestras. Without blind auditions, orchestras are overwhelmingly white and male. With blind auditions, suddenly their demographics mirror those of society! Is this because of hatred? No, because if the people making the decisions on the auditions were really full of seething rage for non-whites and women they would find an excuse to get those people out of the orchestra after the fact! It's because of unintentional and generally unconscious biases. And we see the same thing in our justice system. Cops are more likely to arrest blacks who are using marijuana than whites, even though blacks and whites use it at the same rate. Once arrested, black people are more likely to be convicted. When convicted, they get tougher sentences, and are less likely to get parole. Do we really believe that every cop, and every juror, and every judge, and every parole board, they're all nothing but evil, hate-filled people who are cackling with glee at the thought of screwing over black people? That's an absolutely ludicrous proposition. Those people exist, but not in those numbers. We can't end structural racism by pretending that it doesn't exist. Even if it were a matter of hatred, which it's not, pointing out somebody else's hatred might not stop them from being bad people, but it will certainly make others think twice before dealing with them. That subtle discrimination certainly comes from a place of hatred and/or fear, which often end up with the same results. Why? The little white children are taught that the little black children are a certain way, and the little black children are taught that the little white children are a certain way. When an adult tells a black boy that "society" will treat him unfairly, he reads between the lines and translates "White people will hate me." and that sparks an anger that might never have been. It fans flames that might have been cooled, given that he did meet with some horrible people who did treat him unfairly. Society perpetuates racism through much of it's attempt to do the opposite. I'm not arguing that it's intentional, just that it happens. How would you propose to end structural racism? (We cannot mandate feelings, and yet the examples you gave are the results of what amounts to individual's feelings. We can refuse to be driven by feelings of hate/fear, but we cannot stop another person from doing so.) One doesn't have to teach racism. It's already there. I do think it's important to give kids a vocabulary for talking about what they already know. It's like pointing to their shoes and saying shoes or watching a temper tantrum and acknowledging that they are feeling something called frustration or anger. Ignoring the things on their feet or the pain in their heart doesn't make them go away. They need the words to talk about and process those feelings. They need to know they can trust their own mind. That does not create or perpetuate racism. The feeling these conversations often create is one of RELIEF. Like wow, I'm not crazy. There's a name for this and other people feel it too! This makes sense. I do think there is a difference in telling a child that what they have experienced is racism, and telling a child that they should expect society to treat them unfairly. The former explains, gives vocabulary. The latter sets up ugly feelings before good ones have a chance to grow. I am in a mixed-race marriage, not completely naive to racial issues. My attention is absolutely drawn to how this applies in parenting. I'd prefer my children assume the best in others, and not focus on how unfairly they are treated. Love and kindness are as contagious as hatred and fear. We can choose what we share in this world. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) SKL, the very first comment you made on this thread ran like this: It doesn't sound very sincere to me. It sounds snide - and looking at the people who upvoted you, and the responses some of them made, I doubt I was the only one. Yes, that first comment was a lighthearted joke. Shoot me. I am sure you have never ever uttered a lighthearted comment about dumb fragile white people, or about anything else that is related to a serious matter. I don't know why you should do this. I can tell you that it's frustrating to watch. If you were just snideness, we could put you on ignore and be done with it. I was wondering why you don't. Or if it was just thought and effort, we could say "We disagree, but at least we're both striving to understand each other". But this...! [the final line where I said "try not to be too fragile"] - you failed to notice that I was responding directly to a person who just said in their post that I "display white fragility quite well." They directly accused me, and then I said "try not to be" what they accused me of. Yet I'm the creep. How come you call me out and not them? That's exactly what I'm talking about. I don't know what you intended, but it's hard for me to read that as anything other than "Shut up and stop bugging me". Which is exactly how I'm reading your posts to me. I don't think you've said those words in this thread, but you've several times said things like: Quote It is condescending to say someone can't possibly understand something. What if whites went around saying other races can't possibly understand how it is to have a bad sunburn, or to be repeatedly accused of racism with no objective basis? Quote You know, it's a lot different to say "I can't possibly understand" than to say "you / your group can't possibly understand." Quote Well I think some people (of all races) waste a lot of emotional energy thinking up things to get upset about. That's just in this thread. A casual reader might interpret these comments as you saying that you do understand what it's like to be a racial minority, and it's really no worse than a bad sunburn; that being accused of racism is just as bad as being discriminated against for your skin color; and that if people are upset about inequality then that's because they are wasting their energy "thinking up things to get upset about" rather than that those things (whatever they are) are actually a problem. The first two of your examples were me trying to tell other people that their word choice / voice was coming across obnoxious to me (and probably others). The second was an attempt to be more specific about what I intended to express in the first. It is well established that when people say "YOU do/don't ___" it's often received as an attack, and puts people on the defensive. The third quote was a comment on human nature and I specifically said "of all races." If you read these three quotes as "I know [even better than you] what it's like to be a minority," that is pretty amazing. Anyway, I'm glad people are coming out and saying what they think about me and my posts. It's kind of refreshing actually. I really think those of you who get offended by every word I write should put me on ignore. Edited December 10, 2015 by SKL 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) That subtle discrimination certainly comes from a place of hatred and/or fear, which often end up with the same results. Why? The little white children are taught that the little black children are a certain way, and the little black children are taught that the little white children are a certain way. When an adult tells a black boy that "society" will treat him unfairly, he reads between the lines and translates "White people will hate me." and that sparks an anger that might never have been. It fans flames that might have been cooled, given that he did meet with some horrible people who did treat him unfairly. Society perpetuates racism through much of it's attempt to do the opposite. I'm not arguing that it's intentional, just that it happens. How would you propose to end structural racism? (We cannot mandate feelings, and yet the examples you gave are the results of what amounts to individual's feelings. We can refuse to be driven by feelings of hate/fear, but we cannot stop another person from doing so.) This makes sense. I do think there is a difference in telling a child that what they have experienced is racism, and telling a child that they should expect society to treat them unfairly. The former explains, gives vocabulary. The latter sets up ugly feelings before good ones have a chance to grow. I am in a mixed-race marriage, not completely naive to racial issues. My attention is absolutely drawn to how this applies in parenting. I'd prefer my children assume the best in others, and not focus on how unfairly they are treated. Love and kindness are as contagious as hatred and fear. We can choose what we share in this world. See, I don't think you can make that statement about how that little black child will translate those statements. I mean that with all due respect. I know quite a few black men, my dad, my husband, my son, brothers, uncles, cousins, friends, etc. and they don't feel hated or hatred. They feel feared and are afraid. The fear others have literally puts their lives at risk. Hatred is deadly and counterproductive and certainly not encouraged. That's not a sentiment I hear much at all. Please understand that if they didn't extend grace most of the time, try to see the best in others most of the time, our society would see much more unrest than currently occurs in fits and starts. Do you know Langston Hughes' dream deferred poem? It's like that. Edited December 10, 2015 by Sneezyone 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmseB Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Nah. There's hope. The golden rule isn't a static concept. Part of what doing unto to others as you would have done unto you is to hear feedback and to hear about others experiences that you may not have been aware of, and with kindness and empathy say, "Huh, I never considered that. I didn't mean to offend, but now that I know more about why it was important to that person, I guess I can have empathy for that." Then decide if changing is something you can do. For the vast majority of microaggressions, you really could just forego saying/doing those things and move on. I guess what I wonder, then, is what onus is on the other party to simply forego being bothered by microaggressions and move on? To me, that is part of the golden rule. Overlooking offense, assuming I am in the wrong to be taking offense and working from there. Especially in the case of a minor point, I would like to be the person that just doesn't even think about it, much less point it out or require someone else to change their own cultural proclivities to suit mine. If someone commits a small faux pas against me, and they don't even know they've done it, and they were maybe trying to be nice at the time and it came out wrong to me, maybe I've got it wrong to think that I need to be offended about it. Maybe the best thing to do is just assume the best? I think, for me, treating people with kindness is one part of the golden rule that also includes being kind and overlooking foibles or perceived offenses. I'm not always good at it, but I do consider it part of what I'm supposed to strive for. I would rather see where I could change my attitude about others rather than try to make them change what they are doing, because...what if I'm wrong about my perception of what they are saying or doing? Because what you would want done unto you is that if someone did offend you, you'd like them to hear you out and for them to seriously consider changing without making a big deal out of it. If I say Merry Christmas to my co-worker, and they tell me "I'm Jewish" then wouldn't I note that, and not wish them a Merry Christmas next time. Better yet - still doing unto others as I'd have them to unto me -- might I just take a minute to not assume everyone is Christian or celebrates Christmas. That doesn't sound like a big deal to me. Sure, the Jewish co-worker should be gracious - but being gracious is not equal to being silent. That only serves the majority - and gets back into the fragility concept, "you can't even hear that I don't celebrate Christmas" kind of thing. Here's where we differ. If someone committed a blatant offense with intention to hurt me, sure! But on other accounts, I'd love someone to wish me a Happy Hanukkah, or a Merry Christmas, or whatever they celebrate. I love seeing Hanukkah greetings on my FB wall. I love seeing Merry Christmas, I love seeing whatever people celebrate. I don't think that Jewish people assume I'm Jewish when they say that stuff to me (maybe they do, but what do I care?). They are bringing glad tidings. It's great all around! Not offensive. Not macro or micro worth getting upset about. So what I would like others to do unto me is clearly not your take on it. But why would anyone be offended by any number of holiday greetings? I just don't understand being upset by someone wishing me happiness, in whatever form. I don't feel fragile about it at all if someone else uses their customs to greet me. What makes me feel hopeless is when people say that we have to make everything generic in order to make everyone feel good. I don't think so. I say happy holidays, I say Merry Christmas, when someone wishes me "Happy such-and-such" I say, "You too!". I enjoy the greetings of others. In reality, in order to do what you're talking about truly effectively we would have to pare down to extremely generic greetings with little mention of anything except hello. I mean, if I say happy holidays to someone who doesn't celebrate holidays, I've just micro-aggressed, right? And how could I possibly know in everyday small talk? I certainly do not expect people to know if I do or don't celebrate things. I couldn't possibly. Sure, when the cashier at Kohl's tells me happy holidays, I could tell her I don't celebrate holidays. And she could be mindful the rest of the day about not greeting anyone with happy holidays so as not to offend those who don't celebrate anything at this time of year. That doesn't sound great to me. Is there any onus on the offended person to examine themselves and say, "hm, should I be offended by this? or could I be wrong here about what was intended and how I'm taking it?" Learning about microaggressions or deciding that maybe there is something to the idea that defensiveness can crop up when hearing that someone else's reality is different than yours isn't about something "horribly evil" or permanently dismissive. We do not have to freeze people in time. And the word is "micro" aggression - the gist is that it is fixable/a small gesture that can go a long way, and may or may not be rooted in bias that is totally fixable. Not even close to the realm of evil, but certainly in the zipcode of the Golden Rule.That doesn't seem so unmanageable. See, you've narrowed in on micro, but aggression is a strong word that carries certain connotations. Actually, to me, pairing it with "micro" almost seems paradoxical. Like, oh you're being aggressive toward me, but in a nice, innocuous way. It seems impossible to even pair them, now that I see you taking the words apart. But racism, sexism, those things are evil. Acting aggressively towards people is offensive. And yes, that is where people get defensive, because if they feel like they are asking a lame question, or feel like they are trying to be chatty or nice, and then they are accused of racism or sexism, that's a pretty big leap for most because most people do consider racism and sexism insidious. And then on top of that you're (general) also telling them that, oh, it's not a problem, it's just that you're ignorant and I can educate you to have more correct thoughts and actions so that you at least aren't being racist "out loud" by asking me this question that you thought was friendly chit chat. And, if you disagree with my take on this situation in any way, or become defensive, that makes you even more wrong and you have white fragility. Ugh, I'm having trouble parsing out the quotes. Hopefully this shows up readable. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halftime Hope Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) On another note: I was thinking of this conversation just a bit ago when I was editing a group paper for an online class I'm taking. I was posting edits for others to approve and I wasn't really conscious of who wrote which section, but I was wondering how many people would take my corrections as a personal slight. We're talking grammar, spelling, a big of informality that I changed to be more formal for a 400-level class. And then I was thinking about the fact that maybe I was changing someone's "voice" in the paper and what if by changing a certain style to fit into formal college writing I'm committing a microaggression? Like, me changing it is reflective of my upbringing in relatively well-off suburbs? And it's insulting to take out commas and formalize the style to make it uniform? I have no idea really who the other group members are, how they grew up, where they are from, what race they are, etc. And I want a good grade on the paper, and I know what the prof is looking for, but maybe still, I shouldn't be condescending to think that my edits would be the best way to do things? I still don't know what to make of it. I would rather someone change my writing if they thought it was wrong/not good...but I don't know how it is perceived from others. JodiSue, my son had this exact experience with a group paper writing team last spring. He and two other gents, both black men, one in his forties, the other roughly the same age as my son, were assigned together *all semester* as a team. They contributed to their papers together, but my son (the dyslexic one -- ha!) always edited their papers. The older man, a businessman returning to college, sided with my son on the editing, but the young one objected that "his voice" (the incorrect grammar, strange rabbit trails, and informal, non-academic writing, ) was edited out of the papers. Twice he took things into his own hands and reinstated some of what the other two had edited. DS and the other gent had to go talk to the prof and explain that they would have turned in a corrected paper had it been up to them. Edited December 10, 2015 by Halftime Hope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmseB Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 I do not see this same sense of self as default among ethnic minorities. I really don't. I do not see myself as the default in media, my workplace, my educational environments, anyplace really. So I am constantly looking beyond myself. I think, but may be wrong, that experience is broadly shared among minorities but I don't think the same can be said of those in the majority (and the majority may change based on country). I didn't mean the default as represented in the media, I mean the default as in, if someone says something, I default it into what they must mean about me when they say it. To use the example of your friend, if she simply thinks everyone would enjoy having blond hair and blue eyes over any other combination, then someone who has hazel eyes and blond hair would instantly focus on the fact that she thinks hazel eyes are uglier, whereas someone with red hair and blue eyes would focus on the fact that your friend insulted red heads. Your friend has defaulted to thinking that other people want to be like she is, and that's wrong, but I think it's just as dangerous to start making everything about "us" in another way and taking things personally that could really just roll off our backs because some people are arrogant and classless. Or even worse, someone is not arrogant and classless and says something benign, but I take it as a personal slight because it's something that bugs me or a question I've answered a ton of times or something like that. And I've then set up this perceived aggression from them, when really it's just me making something that's not about me...about me. It's just about living with people who have different experiences. I feel like homeschoolers and people with more than 2.5 kids field a lot of questions like this. I just mean that people tend to personalize things based on who they are. They take a statement or a question and (a lot of times) think that the statement must reflect on who they are, whether the person who said it had that intention or not. Here's an example from when I was younger: My then boyfriend's sister had a baby some 15 years ago, and everyone was remarking on how the baby had funny shaped toes. Instantly, I said, "Oh, you know, I have toes shaped that way!" and everyone in the room laughed hysterically and the comment was made, "Uh, JodiSue, I don't think the baby has your toes". I turned about 500 shades of red. And it was actually a really good lesson for me at a young age about how just because I can relate something back to me in some way, it's kind of self-centered to think of the world in that way. And it's helped me a lot when I think people are trying to be personally insulting (or complementary) to me, when really they are just making general statements. The default of someone else's statements is not "How does this reflect on JodiSue and what could it possibly say about what they think about me?". 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) I didn't mean the default as represented in the media, I mean the default as in, if someone says something, I default it into what they must mean about me when they say it. To use the example of your friend, if she simply thinks everyone would enjoy having blond hair and blue eyes over any other combination, then someone who has hazel eyes and blond hair would instantly focus on the fact that she thinks hazel eyes are uglier, whereas someone with red hair and blue eyes would focus on the fact that your friend insulted red heads. Your friend has defaulted to thinking that other people want to be like she is, and that's wrong, but I think it's just as dangerous to start making everything about "us" in another way and taking things personally that could really just roll off our backs because some people are arrogant and classless. Or even worse, someone is not arrogant and classless and says something benign, but I take it as a personal slight because it's something that bugs me or a question I've answered a ton of times or something like that. And I've then set up this perceived aggression from them, when really it's just me making something that's not about me...about me. It's just about living with people who have different experiences. I feel like homeschoolers and people with more than 2.5 kids field a lot of questions like this. I just mean that people tend to personalize things based on who they are. They take a statement or a question and (a lot of times) think that the statement must reflect on who they are, whether the person who said it had that intention or not. Here's an example from when I was younger: My then boyfriend's sister had a baby some 15 years ago, and everyone was remarking on how the baby had funny shaped toes. Instantly, I said, "Oh, you know, I have toes shaped that way!" and everyone in the room laughed hysterically and the comment was made, "Uh, JodiSue, I don't think the baby has your toes". I turned about 500 shades of red. And it was actually a really good lesson for me at a young age about how just because I can relate something back to me in some way, it's kind of self-centered to think of the world in that way. And it's helped me a lot when I think people are trying to be personally insulting (or complementary) to me, when really they are just making general statements. The default of someone else's statements is not "How does this reflect on JodiSue and what could it possibly say about what they think about me?". All of this may be true. Having thick skin is a requisite in my house. But you're still assuming that people are not ignoring slights, turning the other cheek, letting things roll. In my experience, that is absolutely the default response, particularly because minorities are often not in a position to challenge something without being punished or retaliated against in some way (be it the end of a friendship or loss of a job). When you hear about something here or IRL, it's because the issue has bubbled up; it's the tip of the iceberg. What you see may seem small, even petty, but beneath that are all the things that went unsaid, unheard, and unaddressed. I have to go back to the questions I asked earlier... How many slights, how much annoyance do you think people should accept when they see/experience racial slights? And why do you think you should be the one to determine when enough is enough? Should I tell you when to stop grieving? The pain can be similarly visceral. ETA: I just wanted to say thanks for sticking with this discussion. Edited December 10, 2015 by Sneezyone 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slojo Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Ugh, I'm having trouble parsing out the quotes. Hopefully this shows up readable. Sure, people should think about whether someone has meant offense, but, no, I don't think people are obligated to accept comment after ignorant comment in silence. Sometimes, it IS the most gracious thing to interrupt a biased comment or action. I don't know what to tell you - you either lack a certain kind of life experience to put yourself in the shoes of a minority group member or you are being willfully obtuse in this area (really? "maybe I should just not wish anyone a happy holidays" - actually, yes, that's what I'm saying...). The vast majority of people of color are extremely patient in this area. If you've run into LOTS of people giving you feedback on how offensive your comments have been, probably you are pretty offensive. If you've had one or two incidents like this, then that's your evidence to suggest that people of color are generally not looking for a fight (doesn't really go that well for us anyway, so most of us pick our battles.) So, you really needn't spend a lot of time worrying that you're going to run into this situation often. Now if you need to hear that microaggressions aren't a thing for your world to be okay, consider your bubble restored. We'll go back to inconsequential chit-chat: How's the weather? So, the Khardashians - they're quite the family, huh? I had fish for dinner last night, and you? But if you actually want to engage a perspective and life experience different than your own, call me when you are ready to deal. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joules Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) See, you've narrowed in on micro, but aggression is a strong word that carries certain connotations. Actually, to me, pairing it with "micro" almost seems paradoxical. Like, oh you're being aggressive toward me, but in a nice, innocuous way. It seems impossible to even pair them, now that I see you taking the words apart. Jodi, I don't know if you've read this on the other thread, but it was my epiphany as to why the word is so bothersome. I still think it is the word itself that causes the problem (though it is a defined by its field of study so unlikely to change). Joanne says "doesn't earn you the right to evaluate microaggressions for the populations who do experience it." But I (and I think some others) think of aggression as being defined by intent. If I fall into you and knock you over, it's different than if I push you over. One is intentional. I would apologize for either case, but I might be a bit upset if someone suggested my falling over is "aggressive." Maybe "careless" or "clumsy," but "aggressive" would seem over-the-top. The suggestion that the person I knocked over gets to decide my intent seems wrong. And our word "aggressive" seems to involve intent. From Joanne's description the term microaggression does not involve intent. One commits a microaggression even if there is no intent. Microaggresion is defined strictly by how the person experiencing it perceives it. So we have the feel of a word we know, "aggression," but a new term that means the opposite. and my further thoughts: Lots of the microaggression examples I've seen are just plain rude or obnoxious. I guess that is the point. It's obvious for the things that everyone recognizes and agrees on. I'm guessing microaggresion was coined for those more subtle things that not obvious. So before, I didn't see "Where are you from?" as rude. But now I can see if you look different and are asked that four or five times a day, it makes you feel unwelcome (even if you are still in your home state.) It might give your kids a weird feeling that they don't belong (and to that parent it is a microaggresion even if I am well meaning.) It's obvious to me that "Where are you REALLY from?" is pretty rude, but to someone who is just trying to get at country of origin, it may seem an honest clarification (though still a microaggression as that is defined by the recipient.) And, of course, either of the above could be used intentionally to make someone feel unwelcome. No one in the know really commented on them, but since this thread has moved in that direction, I thought I'd share and see if anyone here thinks I'm on the wrong track. Edited December 10, 2015 by Joules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joules Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) nm Edited December 10, 2015 by Joules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie12345 Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Why? The little white children are taught that the little black children are a certain way, and the little black children are taught that the little white children are a certain way. When an adult tells a black boy that "society" will treat him unfairly, he reads between the lines and translates "White people will hate me." and that sparks an anger that might never have been. It fans flames that might have been cooled, given that he did meet with some horrible people who did treat him unfairly. I do think there is a difference in telling a child that what they have experienced is racism, and telling a child that they should expect society to treat them unfairly. The former explains, gives vocabulary. The latter sets up ugly feelings before good ones have a chance to grow. I am in a mixed-race marriage, not completely naive to racial issues. My attention is absolutely drawn to how this applies in parenting. I'd prefer my children assume the best in others, and not focus on how unfairly they are treated. Love and kindness are as contagious as hatred and fear. We can choose what we share in this world. I think that's a severe underestimation of not only childrens' vocabulary skills, but adults'. I've had a difficult enough time trying to get my kids to grasp that *some people* discriminate, *some people* are ignorant and mean, *some people* believe horrible things. The only way I can imagine convincing them that all X people are this and all Y people are that would be through years of indoctrination and a lot of social isolation. I also think kids are perfectly capable of understanding the difference between "you should expect this" and "these are the dangers of the world and this is how we should handle them if it happens". There are many possibilities my own kids are aware of and have a frame of reference for without assuming they WILL happen, even though they're all statistically less likely than a non-white person experiencing racism. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaeFlowers Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) It's absolutely not futile, but it can be hard. I get that. I've spent my life in this skin. Whether I'm here or abroad, I'm almost always a minority. LOL. I appreciate your willingness to try. It feels futile because I can't understand. I can listen, I can try to understand, but I can't. I don't blame that on anyone. I was raised to try and put myself in other peoples' shoes and attempt to understand where they come from. I don't know that I can do that with this subject because it seems like it just isn't possible. ETA: I'm not giving up and I still want to listen. Edited December 10, 2015 by MaeFlowers 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pam in CT Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) It feels futile because I can't understand. I can listen, I can try to understand, but I can't. I don't blame that on anyone. I was raised to try and put myself in other peoples' shoes and attempt to understand where they come from. I don't know that I can do that with this subject because it seems like it just isn't possible. I can listen and try to understand the experience of my dear friend battling cancer, but I can't. Not truly. It just isn't possible. Nonetheless I would never say the attempt is futile. It's essential. ETA: Hang in. Please. Edited December 10, 2015 by Pam in CT 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmseB Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 All of this may be true. Having thick skin is a requisite in my house. But you're still assuming that people are not ignoring slights, turning the other cheek, letting things roll. In my experience, that is absolutely the default response, particularly because minorities are often not in a position to challenge something without being punished or retaliated against in some way (be it the end of a friendship or loss of a job). When you hear about something here or IRL, it's because the issue has bubbled up; it's the tip of the iceberg. What you see may seem small, even petty, but beneath that are all the things that went unsaid, unheard, and unaddressed. I have to go back to the questions I asked earlier... How many slights, how much annoyance do you think people should accept when they see/experience racial slights? And why do you think you should be the one to determine when enough is enough? Should I tell you when to stop grieving? The pain can be similarly visceral. ETA: I just wanted to say thanks for sticking with this discussion. I don't know, obviously it's all a very personal choice. I am not trying to dictate when enough is enough for any one person; I'm trying to engage on how/why taking offense at small things (that may or may not actually be racial/sexist/prejudiced slights) may not always mean offense is being given. If someone is being aggressive or mean, then do what needs to be done for the situation. But, when I go out of my house I expect annoyances and slights..I just do. People drive rudely, people are oblivious, my kids aren't exactly perfect, lines are long, store clerks are tired or overworked, someone wants to be first, the elevator is crowded and that lady wore too much perfume, this person bumped into me on the sidewalk and didn't even notice, that guy dripped coffee on my shoe and didn't apologize...I mean, I don't live in a world where annoyances and slights don't happen to me at least once a week out in public. Usually it's more. How much is too much? I don't know. But it is usually balanced by the friendly and the kind and goodwill. And sometimes those two categories even strangely overlap. A couple of people have said that since I'm not in the minority I don't get to determine if something is a slight or not, and that the person who is offended gets to determine that. But I don't know that I actually agree with that. I could interpret someone's comment in a completely wrong way, I could make an error in judgment when being offended, and then I've assigned my own biases and perceptions to what someone else has done...and what if I'm wrong about that person? But I get to say what they mean because I'm on the receiving end? I don't think that should always be the case. I can say, "This is offensive to me because" and the other person could say, "Oh, I just meant blah blah blah, not what you were thinking" and maybe I could reevaluate my initial take, and maybe they don't have to apologize because I was the one who was wrong to take offense. The presumption seems to be that if I am offended that makes the other person automatically in the wrong. I thought about this a lot last night and I don't think that should be the automatic presumption. I think each interaction should be taken on an individual case-by-case basis. Is everyone who comments on my family size looking for a fight? Or being offensive? No. But maybe the person who intends to compliment or is asking questions in a genuinely curious way gets the brunt of my frustration because it's the 4th time that day someone has said something about me having four kids with me. I think how I react is always on me. Even when someone means to say something nasty, my reaction and my emotions are totally my responsibility. That doesn't mean I always have to accept what they say or be congenial or what have you; sometimes sticking up for my kids is the best thing to do. But I often don't know what someone means or what their intent is, so I can't ascribe some motivation to them that I know nothing about. Once we get to a situation where everything is problematic, then people stop listening entirely (and probably for good reason). Maybe I'm just easily annoyed, but there are a million ways people interact with others in public that can be taken in a way to be ignorant at best or possibly hostile...when usually people are just going about their day and are oblivious or self-centered, or sometimes inappropriately curious, or have a lack of social skills. How much of that should any of us take? I don't know. When someone rushes to get in front of me in the supermarket line, are they being mean to me personally for some reason, or are they just self-centered in general and have no idea I'm there? When someone looks at me while I'm nursing a slightly older baby are they judging or thinking fondly of me? When someone asks me if I'm done having kids are they remembering their large family with fondness or are they disgusted with the amount of resources I'm using? Most of the time I have no idea. If the motivation is clearly malicious, that's another issue entirely. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarah CB Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 The presumption seems to be that if I am offended that makes the other person automatically in the wrong. I thought about this a lot last night and I don't think that should be the automatic presumption. This - a thousand times. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 I'm trying to engage on how/why taking offense at small things (that may or may not actually be racial/sexist/prejudiced slights) may not always mean offense is being given. It's not about taking offense. It's about noticing problematic patterns in society which reinforce the structural inequalities inherent in the system. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bibiche Posted December 10, 2015 Author Share Posted December 10, 2015 Was this already linked? Pretty funny. But also pretty not funny. http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/08/white-people-microaggressions/ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lb20inblue Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 After reading this thread, I have decided that maybe I need to change the way that I approach race. Maybe people just don't know how things sound and maybe I need to allow everyone to be uncomfortable sometimes. It's not my job to make everyone comfortable with me. I am who I am and I belong here. For instance, today at pick up, one of the mothers was telling all of us how she wished we were back in the old days, when kids respected authority, x,y,z. Normally, I would let this go. But today, I remarked that people like me didn't really didn't think the old days were all that good. I was met with an uncomfortable silence. Then another lady said your right, those days were not that good. Could it be that the mother who made the remark had a different intent, maybe. But my feelings are just as valid. ultimately, the lady who first said the remark got defensive. I could have tried and made her feel better, but why? My feelings are just as valid. I truly feel that sometimes we let people of the hook and we never grow. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) After reading this thread, I have decided that maybe I need to change the way that I approach race. Maybe people just don't know how things sound and maybe I need to allow everyone to be uncomfortable sometimes. It's not my job to make everyone comfortable with me. I am who I am and I belong here. For instance, today at pick up, one of the mothers was telling all of us how she wished we were back in the old days, when kids respected authority, x,y,z. Normally, I would let this go. But today, I remarked that people like me didn't really didn't think the old days were all that good. I was met with an uncomfortable silence. Then another lady said your right, those days were not that good. Could it be that the mother who made the remark had a different intent, maybe. But my feelings are just as valid. ultimately, the lady who first said the remark got defensive. I could have tried and made her feel better, but why? My feelings are just as valid. I truly feel that sometimes we let people of the hook and we never grow. I feel like, in life, I extend a lot of grace to people. When my coworker asked me if I likewise wondered whether black people smelled funny, I extended grace. When the lady at the airport, having spoken briefly with me, stepped in front of me to get to the the business class section (only to find myself and my children seated a row ahead of her) I extended grace. But that grace is not appreciated. The people I'm extending it to don't even know that I'm doing it. And I need to stop, because it's not helping. When I finally do say something, it feels like it comes out of nowhere to the recipient when, in my mind, I've been working up to it for quite some time and was only sparing the other person's feelings. Maybe white people aren't that fragile after all. I just need to tell them what I'm really thinking of comments like those and let the chips fall where they may. Edited December 10, 2015 by Sneezyone 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bibiche Posted December 10, 2015 Author Share Posted December 10, 2015 On "color-blindness" and why it is counterproductive. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/color-blindness-is-counterproductive/405037/ 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSNative Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 After reading this thread, I have decided that maybe I need to change the way that I approach race. Maybe people just don't know how things sound and maybe I need to allow everyone to be uncomfortable sometimes. It's not my job to make everyone comfortable with me. I am who I am and I belong here. For instance, today at pick up, one of the mothers was telling all of us how she wished we were back in the old days, when kids respected authority, x,y,z. Normally, I would let this go. But today, I remarked that people like me didn't really didn't think the old days were all that good. I was met with an uncomfortable silence. Then another lady said your right, those days were not that good. Could it be that the mother who made the remark had a different intent, maybe. But my feelings are just as valid. ultimately, the lady who first said the remark got defensive. I could have tried and made her feel better, but why? My feelings are just as valid. I truly feel that sometimes we let people of the hook and we never grow. Do you think the woman who made the comment was meaning to say anything about race relations with her comment? Do you think she was really expressing a desire to go back to everything that happened in the "good old days" - including no microwaves, cellphones or Starbucks? Does the expression the good old days always encompass every part of yesteryear or can it just mean, "sheesh my kids are driving me nuts and darn it I never woudl dream of doing that to my parents or grandparents. I wish we could go back to the good old days when kids minded." (not that all kids minded then or that none do now and leaving aside the fact that there wasn't Magic "listen to your parents" dust flying around back then that made kids listen) Honest questions. The only snark is in parenthesis. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Do you think the woman who made the comment was meaning to say anything about race relations with her comment? Do you think she was really expressing a desire to go back to everything that happened in the "good old days" - including no microwaves, cellphones or Starbucks? Does the expression the good old days always encompass every part of yesteryear or can it just mean, "sheesh my kids are driving me nuts and darn it I never woudl dream of doing that to my parents or grandparents. I wish we could go back to the good old days when kids minded." (not that all kids minded then or that none do now and leaving aside the fact that there wasn't Magic "listen to your parents" dust flying around back then that made kids listen) Honest questions. The only snark is in parenthesis. She probably wasn't thinking about race relations at all but that thinking...that my experience of history of beauty of life is the only or default one...that's what underlay her comment and that's the thinking among the majority that rarely gets challenged. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Do you think the woman who made the comment was meaning to say anything about race relations with her comment? Do you think she was really expressing a desire to go back to everything that happened in the "good old days" - including no microwaves, cellphones or Starbucks? Does the expression the good old days always encompass every part of yesteryear or can it just mean, "sheesh my kids are driving me nuts and darn it I never woudl dream of doing that to my parents or grandparents. I wish we could go back to the good old days when kids minded." (not that all kids minded then or that none do now and leaving aside the fact that there wasn't Magic "listen to your parents" dust flying around back then that made kids listen) Honest questions. The only snark is in parenthesis. That's what I was thinking, as well. It sounded like the woman was quite specific about what part of the "good old days" she was talking about, which was a time when kids respected authority. I wouldn't have read any other intention into her comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bibiche Posted December 10, 2015 Author Share Posted December 10, 2015 Do you think the woman who made the comment was meaning to say anything about race relations with her comment? Do you think she was really expressing a desire to go back to everything that happened in the "good old days" - including no microwaves, cellphones or Starbucks? Does the expression the good old days always encompass every part of yesteryear or can it just mean, "sheesh my kids are driving me nuts and darn it I never woudl dream of doing that to my parents or grandparents. I wish we could go back to the good old days when kids minded." (not that all kids minded then or that none do now and leaving aside the fact that there wasn't Magic "listen to your parents" dust flying around back then that made kids listen) Honest questions. The only snark is in parenthesis. Who cares? I think it is great. Ignoring the problem of racism has certainly not made it go away. Why not bring it up whenever there is an opportunity? Because it might make white people uncomfortable? Screw white people's comfort levels. White people make minorities feel uncomfortable every single day. If turning the tables a bit is the only thing that is going to make people take notice of racism, I am all for it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 After reading this thread, I have decided that maybe I need to change the way that I approach race. Maybe people just don't know how things sound and maybe I need to allow everyone to be uncomfortable sometimes. It's not my job to make everyone comfortable with me. I am who I am and I belong here. For instance, today at pick up, one of the mothers was telling all of us how she wished we were back in the old days, when kids respected authority, x,y,z. Normally, I would let this go. But today, I remarked that people like me didn't really didn't think the old days were all that good. I was met with an uncomfortable silence. Then another lady said your right, those days were not that good. Could it be that the mother who made the remark had a different intent, maybe. But my feelings are just as valid. ultimately, the lady who first said the remark got defensive. I could have tried and made her feel better, but why? My feelings are just as valid. I truly feel that sometimes we let people of the hook and we never grow. I think more people should tell well-meaning folks when their feelings are unintentionally hurt. Communities could agree on a way to convey the message that "I believe you didn't intend any harm, but ____." In the above example, you called someone out for not treating you like an "other," and she didn't take it well. Some will call this "white fragility" and roll their eyes. Others will say "damned if you do, damned if you don't" and roll their eyes. Maybe that third person listening will say "good point, I'll try to remember to choose better words." And the discourse on race relations rolls on. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Who cares? I think it is great. Ignoring the problem of racism has certainly not made it go away. Why not bring it up whenever there is an opportunity? Because it might make white people uncomfortable? Screw white people's comfort levels. White people make minorities feel uncomfortable every single day. If turning the tables a bit is the only thing that is going to make people take notice of racism, I am all for it. I think that is an incredibly negative and divisive attitude, and that it will do far more harm than good. In this particular instance, the "opportunity" was a woman making an offhand comment about how she wished kids still respected authority. It wasn't a racist comment. If it had been, then she should have been called on it, but in this case, I think it was an over-reaction to confront her about it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) That's what I was thinking, as well. It sounded like the woman was quite specific about what part of the "good old days" she was talking about, which was a time when kids respected authority. I wouldn't have read any other intention into her comment. It sounds specific to you because the 'good old days' don't immediately bring to mind negative associations. For me, they absolutely do. The good old days that are longingly referred to were not good for my family. Folks are allowed to be irritated at the dismissive way their feelings about the good old days are treated. They shouldn't have to keep quiet about that to spare your feelings. Is it not divisive to assume there are only positives in the good old days?...and expect everyone to nod along in agreement? Edited December 10, 2015 by Sneezyone 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 It sounds specific to you because the 'good old days' don't immediately bring to mind negative associations. For me, they absolutely do. The good old days that are longingly referred to were not good for my family. Folks are allowed to be irritated at the dismissive way their feelings about the good old days are treated. They shouldn't have to keep quiet about that to spare your feelings. Is it not divisive to assume there are only positives in the good old days? The "good old days" is nothing more than a phrase to me. People use it all the time to talk about anything that is different or worse now than it was when they were younger. I sincerely doubt that most people have even the slightest racist intentions when they use the phrase. Obviously, if someone makes an obviously racist comment while referencing the good old days, that's a different story and they should be confronted about it, but this situation did not appear to have even the slightest hint of racism. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSNative Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Do you think that calling her out like that will help? Do you think she will be more or less likely to take cries of racism as real or will she use this as another example of someone seeing racism where none is intended? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bibiche Posted December 10, 2015 Author Share Posted December 10, 2015 I think that is an incredibly negative and divisive attitude, and that it will do far more harm than good. In this particular instance, the "opportunity" was a woman making an offhand comment about how she wished kids still respected authority. It wasn't a racist comment. If it had been, then she should have been called on it, but in this case, I think it was an over-reaction to confront her about it. Nope. Sorry, not buying it. I absolutely do not think it will do more harm than good. It will certainly make people uncomfortable to have to confront what other people live as a reality every single day of their lives, but hopefully when they get over their discomfort they will stop to think. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bibiche Posted December 10, 2015 Author Share Posted December 10, 2015 The "good old days" is nothing more than a phrase to me. People use it all the time to talk about anything that is different or worse now than it was when they were younger. I sincerely doubt that most people have even the slightest racist intentions when they use the phrase. Obviously, if someone makes an obviously racist comment while referencing the good old days, that's a different story and they should be confronted about it, but this situation did not appear to have even the slightest hint of racism. But that is because you are white!!!!! Your viewpoint, while the default in our society, is NOT the only viewpoint. Just because "the good old days" is good for you does not mean it was good for all people. This is what people need to hear. This is what people need to take from this conversation. The white experience is not the only one that is valid, and by insisting that it is you invalidate everyone else's experience. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Is it not divisive to assume there are only positives in the good old days? The woman was commenting on a few things in the old days that she felt were positive. I am certain she could tell you a long list of not-positive things from the old days quite apart from race. It seems to me that you are objecting to the colloquialism "good old days." I think I understand your objection, but I also try to remember that "you attract more flies with honey." Regardless of race. There are ways to present an idea that build consensus, and there are ways that decidedly don't. It wasn't the PP's responsibility at that moment to address this issue in the most perfect possible way. We all miss or blow opportunities every day. And this is not an easy think to tackle off the seat of our pants. That's why I said communities can agree on how to talk about this without leaving well-meaning people on the defensive. It seems all our language for race relations these days is negative. How about some constructive words that can build the entire community up? Or is that too pollyanna? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Nope. Sorry, not buying it. I absolutely do not think it will do more harm than good. It will certainly make people uncomfortable to have to confront what other people live as a reality every single day of their lives, but hopefully when they get over their discomfort they will stop to think. We will have to agree to disagree on this, bibiche. I don't think it is a good idea to confront people unless you're at least relatively sure that they have bad intentions and that their comments are indeed racially motivated. Otherwise, you are creating discord and hostility for no good reason, and confronting a person who made an innocent comment and accusing them of being racist isn't going to help improve race relations. It will shut down conversations and relationships instead of encouraging them. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) No one is crying racism either. I'm saying that those offhand comments come across to me as dismissive and blind, ignorant, to the realities of life for other groups of people in this country. Newsflash, the 'old days' belong to more than just white people and everyone does not share fond memories of them. I find this a bit ironic too. Because the term white fragility is very bothersome. And then when you say, OK, you're not fragile, GREAT! Let's take the gloves off and say what we're really thinking and saying behind your back, that's divisive. No, it's honest. If we want to be united in any way, we have to develop a common understanding of eachother and that doesn't happen when we hold back. Edited December 10, 2015 by Sneezyone 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosie_0801 Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 But that is because you are white!!!!! Your viewpoint, while the default in our society, is NOT the only viewpoint. Just because "the good old days" is good for you does not mean it was good for all people. This is what people need to hear. This is what people need to take from this conversation. The white experience is not the only one that is valid, and by insisting that it is you invalidate everyone else's experience. I'm white too!!! And back in the good old days my great grandmother was having backyard abortions and was still living in fear of going to hell for it 60 years later. Good times. Sometimes you have to break things to have room to build things, but some times breaking things doesn't leave room to build things, it just keeps breaking more and more things. In war, guerrilla fighters often don't know what to do when they are finally in charge of governing. An ideological war can have the same problems. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lb20inblue Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Do you think that calling her out like that will help? Do you think she will be more or less likely to take cries of racism as real or will she use this as another example of someone seeing racism where none is intended? It might not help her but maybe it helped the other lady think through the idea. Those times were not the good old days for anyone other then rich white males. If I didn't say anything I would probably have wasted time tonight thinking about what she meant and try to figure out her intent. But I'm realizing, no I am part of this community and that means my feelings should be voiced. She doesn't have to accept it and maybe she thinks what she said isn't a big deal. But to me, it's a very big deal. I think because it makes me feel as if my groups struggles do not matter but they do because we are all American. How would she know that if I kept all that in? 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 The woman was commenting on a few things in the old days that she felt were positive. I am certain she could tell you a long list of not-positive things from the old days quite apart from race. It seems to me that you are objecting to the colloquialism "good old days." I think I understand your objection, but I also try to remember that "you attract more flies with honey." Regardless of race. There are ways to present an idea that build consensus, and there are ways that decidedly don't. It wasn't the PP's responsibility at that moment to address this issue in the most perfect possible way. We all miss or blow opportunities every day. And this is not an easy think to tackle off the seat of our pants. That's why I said communities can agree on how to talk about this without leaving well-meaning people on the defensive. It seems all our language for race relations these days is negative. How about some constructive words that can build the entire community up? Or is that too pollyanna? I don't think that's pollyanna-isn at all. But I don't think you can get to that place by tone policing those who've kept silent for so long. What some of us are saying is, hey, I've been giving you a gift with my silence. If you don't appreciate it, or value it, I'll take it back. And then it's like....WOAAA, no, you can't do that, it'll just make matters worse! Well, the gift didn't make anything better, did it? So, yeah, I am also confused. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) Do you really think the old days so great for most white people? "Good old days" doesn't mean everything that happened in the old days was good. My dad was severely dyslexic in the good old days. His childhood was torture. He doesn't love thinking about the old days either. My mom's parents and paternal grandparents were very abusive in all sorts of ways, as well as being in poverty. She will use the phrase "the good old days" more as a joke than anything else. My grandma had many friends who were liberated from concentration camps. My other grandma had to work as a house maid from a young age to help support her family. She was also subjected to a lot of blatant discrimination as an Eastern European immigrant. My friend's parents were refugees from Ukraine when the Russians were taking over that country. Her mom wrote a memoir about how "not good" it was to try to get from there to here via several other countries. Another friend was essentially forced into an arranged marriage with an abusive man and had to serve him and his mother until she divorced him - and then was ostracized for being divorced. Perhaps some folks are reading too much into the words "good old days." Edited December 10, 2015 by SKL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Do you really think the old days so great for most white people? It was certainly better for that group than for my group, yes. There will be outliers on both sides, but in the main, absolutely. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 But that is because you are white!!!!! Your viewpoint, while the default in our society, is NOT the only viewpoint. Just because "the good old days" is good for you does not mean it was good for all people. This is what people need to hear. This is what people need to take from this conversation. The white experience is not the only one that is valid, and by insisting that it is you invalidate everyone else's experience. Wow, you are getting awfully emotional over this, rather than reading what I am actually saying. I never said the "good old days" were good for me. I said that the woman in question used it as a common phrase and probably didn't mean anything by it. She was talking about how she thought children in the past were more respectful of authority. She chose to say "the good old days" instead of saying "years ago" or any other phrase that would have meant "in the past." I'm not sure why you insist that I think the "white experience is the only one that is valid." Are you intentionally baiting me and others on this thread? I have no idea why you are making such ridiculous and offensive accusations. It is posts like yours (that I quoted above) that are most damaging to threads like this, because by judging others' motivations so quickly and negatively, you shut down the possibility of further discussion and understanding. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lb20inblue Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 [quote name="SKL" post="6724852" timestamp="1449786179 It seems to me that you are objecting to the colloquialism "good old days." I think I understand your objection, but I also try to remember that "you attract more flies with honey." Regardless of race. There are ways to present an idea that build consensus, and there are ways that decidedly don't. It wasn't the PP's responsibility at that moment to address this issue in the most perfect possible way. We all miss or blow opportunities every day. And this is not an easy think to tackle off the seat of our pants. That's why I said communities can agree on how to talk about this without leaving well-meaning people on the defensive. It seems all our language for race relations these days is negative. How about some constructive words that can build the entire community up? Or is that too pollyanna? I hear you but 30 years of honey hasn't changed enough. I didn't think the interact was negative. Uncomfortable maybe, but that is growing pains. No one likes to be challenged on their viewpoint but sometimes it has to happen. It's not my responsibility to monitor who I am all the time either. I'm not going to hide myself or my feelings to get along. For too long I think we have done that as a society. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) Wow, you are getting awfully emotional over this, rather than reading what I am actually saying. I never said the "good old days" were good for me. I said that the woman in question used it as a common phrase and probably didn't mean anything by it. She was talking about how she thought children in the past were more respectful of authority. She chose to say "the good old days" instead of saying "years ago" or any other phrase that would have meant "in the past." I'm not sure why you insist that I think the "white experience is the only one that is valid." Are you intentionally baiting me and others on this thread? I have no idea why you are making such ridiculous and offensive accusations. It is posts like yours (that I quoted above) that are most damaging to threads like this, because by judging others' motivations so quickly and negatively, you shut down the possibility of further discussion and understanding. Please don't make her, or anyone else, responsible for your decision (or not) to participate.This is tone policing and it's not OK. Her feelings are valid and they don't have to be expressed in a way that's comfy for you. Your tolerance for disagreement is really low if you're objecting to that post. She's not cursing you, calling you stupid, anything of the sort (which is why I was laughing at the idea that I might be fragile). You need your big kid undies on for these conversations. Edited December 10, 2015 by Sneezyone 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 I don't think that's pollyanna-isn at all. But I don't think you can get to that place by tone policing those who've kept silent for so long. What some of us are saying is, hey, I've been giving you a gift with my silence. If you don't appreciate it, or value it, I'll take it back. And then it's like....WOAAA, no, you can't do that, it'll just make matters worse! Well, the gift didn't make anything better, did it? So, yeah, I am also confused. But your gift does make it better. It really does. Any time anyone treats another person in a kind way and gives them the benefit of the doubt when they make a one-off stupid comment is making things better. Heaven knows I appreciate it when someone gives me a break for saying something awkwardly. I may not always acknowledge every little thing, but I do try to let people know I appreciate the little things they do for me, even if it's just chatting with me in a long line at the store or letting me know I dropped my glove on the floor, or not getting annoyed if I accidentally bump into them in a crowd. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 But your gift does make it better. It really does. Any time anyone treats another person in a kind way and gives them the benefit of the doubt when they make a one-off stupid comment is making things better. Heaven knows I appreciate it when someone gives me a break for saying something awkwardly. I may not always acknowledge every little thing, but I do try to let people know I appreciate the little things they do for me, even if it's just chatting with me in a long line at the store or letting me know I dropped my glove on the floor, or not getting annoyed if I accidentally bump into them in a crowd. It makes it better for YOU, it doesn't make it better for ME. Do you see how that is, again, focusing on your need for comfort? I internalize those slights, I tamp down those feelings of frustration.The stress literally negatively impacts my health and shaves years off my life. Does that matter to you? 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.