All things being equal, it would be just as hurtful and deconstructive to undervalue someone's contribution to a discussion for being white and male as it would saying "you're a woman/disabled/a person of color, so you don't really understand." But things are not equal. One man's experience doesn't do much to counter centuries of history, dominance, and power which have become an integral part of how we view the world. Growing up in the minority doesn't prevent the reception of white privilege, which permeates countries across the globe.
This doesn't make someone unable of understanding those who lack this privilege, any more than someone who grew up in a racially homogeneous community is incapable of tolerance. It just means that your personal experience is not a guarantee of any deeper understanding.
Many people seem to take offense at the idea that white people have something to prove in these discussions. But this is simply the reversal of privilege -- in almost all other areas of life, it's everyone else who is asked to listen better, learn faster, prove themselves worthy of the same rewards. And then there's the question: well, it's not fair there, so why is it fair here?
Because when a white person says I want to counter racism, I want to understand the world better -- all the while benefiting from white privilege and (this is the crucial part) refusing to acknowledge that it has shaped his/her life -- it's hard to take them seriously.
And the problem is that in these discussions those lacking in privilege are deeply vulnerable, because the discussions are not started to educate those with privilege, but to create a safe space. This is the gathering noise of people who for so long have been denied a voice, and it's terrifyingly obvious that those with privilege are in no way above, consciously or unconsciously, using the weapons at their disposal -- coded language, social hierarchy, or simply the assumption of unquestioned right -- to try and shut these conversations down when they feel threatened.
And that's the crux of it: that when they say, "white people, it's not actually about you," what they mean in it's not actually about white people, or how they are expected to response or what place in the discussion they're owed. So when a bunch of white men (or women) have their feelings hurt because no one really wants to listen to them right now, that concern is peripheral. There are other things at stake for people of color, and no internalized global system is going to protect their interests, so they need to take a different approach in order to get shit done.
It isn't "shut up, you're white and male and don't matter." It's: "Shut up. For once -- for once -- let's hear the other side of this story."
no subject
Date: 19 Jan 2009 08:00 pm (UTC)All things being equal, it would be just as hurtful and deconstructive to undervalue someone's contribution to a discussion for being white and male as it would saying "you're a woman/disabled/a person of color, so you don't really understand." But things are not equal. One man's experience doesn't do much to counter centuries of history, dominance, and power which have become an integral part of how we view the world. Growing up in the minority doesn't prevent the reception of white privilege, which permeates countries across the globe.
This doesn't make someone unable of understanding those who lack this privilege, any more than someone who grew up in a racially homogeneous community is incapable of tolerance. It just means that your personal experience is not a guarantee of any deeper understanding.
Many people seem to take offense at the idea that white people have something to prove in these discussions. But this is simply the reversal of privilege -- in almost all other areas of life, it's everyone else who is asked to listen better, learn faster, prove themselves worthy of the same rewards. And then there's the question: well, it's not fair there, so why is it fair here?
Because when a white person says I want to counter racism, I want to understand the world better -- all the while benefiting from white privilege and (this is the crucial part) refusing to acknowledge that it has shaped his/her life -- it's hard to take them seriously.
And the problem is that in these discussions those lacking in privilege are deeply vulnerable, because the discussions are not started to educate those with privilege, but to create a safe space. This is the gathering noise of people who for so long have been denied a voice, and it's terrifyingly obvious that those with privilege are in no way above, consciously or unconsciously, using the weapons at their disposal -- coded language, social hierarchy, or simply the assumption of unquestioned right -- to try and shut these conversations down when they feel threatened.
And that's the crux of it: that when they say, "white people, it's not actually about you," what they mean in it's not actually about white people, or how they are expected to response or what place in the discussion they're owed. So when a bunch of white men (or women) have their feelings hurt because no one really wants to listen to them right now, that concern is peripheral. There are other things at stake for people of color, and no internalized global system is going to protect their interests, so they need to take a different approach in order to get shit done.
It isn't "shut up, you're white and male and don't matter." It's: "Shut up. For once -- for once -- let's hear the other side of this story."