There's something I see a lot in discussion of race, of gender, of any sort of marginalized group, really – someone who isn't part of that group will come up to someone who is and say "Wow, I didn't know. Could you tell me more?" And the person they're asking will say "No."
And then it usually explodes.
I want to write out exactly what I see as going on in that situation, to the extent that I know it, to tell people why they're getting that "No." – and this is a lesson I had to learn after looking at posts by people who refused, and thinking Well, that's unreasonable, isn't it?, and really sitting down to try to understand why that refusal was happening. Why someone who was a victim of ignorance would refuse to educate others.
Yes, it's counter-intuitive. But it's not unreasonable. Here's, to the best of my current understanding, why:
Educating others is an arduous and often thankless job, especially when you're educating someone who may be skeptical of your point of view, especially when it's topic which affects you deeply, personally, and emotionally. If you ask someone to put in the time and energy to educate you, whether or not (but especially if) you've given any indication that you might not agree with what they're trying to explain, whether or not (but especially if) it's a topic which is significant and personal to them they are not obligated to educate you.
On an issue like race, or sexuality, or gender, reams and reams of information have already been written. A little digging, at a decent library or on the internet, will give you a wealth of information on the topic – usually written by those who do sincerely want to educate others. By preferring not to sit down and discuss issues, people are not denying others access to that information. They're saying that they personally can't, won't, or don't want to teach it.
No, oppressed and marginalized people are not morally obligated to educate their oppressors or the mainstream. In fact, the constant need to defend oneself or one's lifestyles is a symptom of oppression and marginalization.
I personally don't find it offensive when people ask me to educate them. I may not always have the time, energy, or inclination to do so, and I may scoff at the notion that I am capable of speaking or qualified to speak as though I represented my entire demographic, but I generally assume (unless they indicate hostility or skepticism) that they're asking in good faith. This doesn't mean that I will always step up to educate them – as said before, it takes a lot of time and energy, especially emotional energy. And while I'd try to turn away people I didn't want to educate myself kindly, hopefully with a few edifying links or directions on where to turn, were I in an emotional state, I can't guarantee how that would come out. It might come out in a very hostile way – and if it ever does, I apologize.
The hostility. Not the refusal to educate. Because while I think that basic civility is a right of people in dialogue, having someone personally educate you is not. It is a privilege – yes, I said the P-word – and should never be demanded of anyone.
But, I hear someone say, people need to be educated, and if the marginalized and oppressed don't do it, who will? Excellent question.
The problem here is that people think the marginalized and oppressed can be tokenized down into the particular marginalized or oppressed person they happen to be talking to. People do educate on this. People write, people manage campaigns. People take social and civic action. Yes, people both from and outside of the marginalized and oppressed groups take it upon themselves to educate others and to work for equality and justice.
This doesn't mean that they, or other members of their community, have to work on the schedule of anyone who asks, or for anyone who asks, or because anyone asked. In the same way that you can't just grab an unemployed person off the streets and say "You, write a letter to your congressman about the economy – well, come on, hurry up; it's your responsibility!", in the same way you can't tell a victim of police brutality or even racial profiling "You, here's a pen and paper, write a letter to the editor of the local paper because the public has to know!", you should be aware that people have their own lives to live and their own concerns and their own apprehensions and hangups about stepping into that role and are not obligated to perform any civic duty to fulfill your sense of moral propriety.
And even asking that question reveals another one: why should it rest on the backs of the marginalized and oppressed? Pragmatically, yes, it usually does, but if you're asking the question, that indicates that you both come from a position of privilege and recognize that there's a problem that needs solving. Kudos to you, and that's a genuine kudos; you're ahead of a lot of people. The next step is to educate yourself.
You can do it. It's not even that difficult. It's the information age.
Educating yourself is likely to give you a much more solid grounding in the state of things, anyway, unless the person you're talking to is heavily involved in social action or has a degree in the subject you're asking about. People are great for personal touches and idiosyncratic experiences, but if you're coming in as someone who knows nothing and wants to learn, you might want more than personal touches and idiosyncratic experiences anyway.
I'd like to say here that I personally don't think there's anything inherently offensive about asking someone else for their opinions or for the basics, so long as you respect them and their right, if they choose so, not to tell you. I have to amend a caveat, though: in saying this I am very much not interested in being used as anyone's marginalized friend in an argument such as "oh, well,![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
magistrate says se doesn't see anything offensive about it." Do not tokenize me. My opinions are what I think, not what every person in my situation thinks or should be expected to think. If you ask someone and they're offended by it, apologize and don't ask any more. If they rip you apart for asking and apologizing, maybe that's not someone you want to talk to about this subject. It happens.
Disclosure. I am a member of marginalized groups. I'm biracial, asexual, non-cisgendered. I am also a member of privileged groups. I'm college-educated, American, able-bodied. Most people are combinations of privileged and non-privileged – this discussion, as with most discussions of privilege, applies to people acting on both sides, and should be considered in this light.
And then it usually explodes.
I want to write out exactly what I see as going on in that situation, to the extent that I know it, to tell people why they're getting that "No." – and this is a lesson I had to learn after looking at posts by people who refused, and thinking Well, that's unreasonable, isn't it?, and really sitting down to try to understand why that refusal was happening. Why someone who was a victim of ignorance would refuse to educate others.
Yes, it's counter-intuitive. But it's not unreasonable. Here's, to the best of my current understanding, why:
Educating others is an arduous and often thankless job, especially when you're educating someone who may be skeptical of your point of view, especially when it's topic which affects you deeply, personally, and emotionally. If you ask someone to put in the time and energy to educate you, whether or not (but especially if) you've given any indication that you might not agree with what they're trying to explain, whether or not (but especially if) it's a topic which is significant and personal to them they are not obligated to educate you.
On an issue like race, or sexuality, or gender, reams and reams of information have already been written. A little digging, at a decent library or on the internet, will give you a wealth of information on the topic – usually written by those who do sincerely want to educate others. By preferring not to sit down and discuss issues, people are not denying others access to that information. They're saying that they personally can't, won't, or don't want to teach it.
No, oppressed and marginalized people are not morally obligated to educate their oppressors or the mainstream. In fact, the constant need to defend oneself or one's lifestyles is a symptom of oppression and marginalization.
I personally don't find it offensive when people ask me to educate them. I may not always have the time, energy, or inclination to do so, and I may scoff at the notion that I am capable of speaking or qualified to speak as though I represented my entire demographic, but I generally assume (unless they indicate hostility or skepticism) that they're asking in good faith. This doesn't mean that I will always step up to educate them – as said before, it takes a lot of time and energy, especially emotional energy. And while I'd try to turn away people I didn't want to educate myself kindly, hopefully with a few edifying links or directions on where to turn, were I in an emotional state, I can't guarantee how that would come out. It might come out in a very hostile way – and if it ever does, I apologize.
The hostility. Not the refusal to educate. Because while I think that basic civility is a right of people in dialogue, having someone personally educate you is not. It is a privilege – yes, I said the P-word – and should never be demanded of anyone.
But, I hear someone say, people need to be educated, and if the marginalized and oppressed don't do it, who will? Excellent question.
The problem here is that people think the marginalized and oppressed can be tokenized down into the particular marginalized or oppressed person they happen to be talking to. People do educate on this. People write, people manage campaigns. People take social and civic action. Yes, people both from and outside of the marginalized and oppressed groups take it upon themselves to educate others and to work for equality and justice.
This doesn't mean that they, or other members of their community, have to work on the schedule of anyone who asks, or for anyone who asks, or because anyone asked. In the same way that you can't just grab an unemployed person off the streets and say "You, write a letter to your congressman about the economy – well, come on, hurry up; it's your responsibility!", in the same way you can't tell a victim of police brutality or even racial profiling "You, here's a pen and paper, write a letter to the editor of the local paper because the public has to know!", you should be aware that people have their own lives to live and their own concerns and their own apprehensions and hangups about stepping into that role and are not obligated to perform any civic duty to fulfill your sense of moral propriety.
And even asking that question reveals another one: why should it rest on the backs of the marginalized and oppressed? Pragmatically, yes, it usually does, but if you're asking the question, that indicates that you both come from a position of privilege and recognize that there's a problem that needs solving. Kudos to you, and that's a genuine kudos; you're ahead of a lot of people. The next step is to educate yourself.
You can do it. It's not even that difficult. It's the information age.
Educating yourself is likely to give you a much more solid grounding in the state of things, anyway, unless the person you're talking to is heavily involved in social action or has a degree in the subject you're asking about. People are great for personal touches and idiosyncratic experiences, but if you're coming in as someone who knows nothing and wants to learn, you might want more than personal touches and idiosyncratic experiences anyway.
I'd like to say here that I personally don't think there's anything inherently offensive about asking someone else for their opinions or for the basics, so long as you respect them and their right, if they choose so, not to tell you. I have to amend a caveat, though: in saying this I am very much not interested in being used as anyone's marginalized friend in an argument such as "oh, well,
magistrate says se doesn't see anything offensive about it." Do not tokenize me. My opinions are what I think, not what every person in my situation thinks or should be expected to think. If you ask someone and they're offended by it, apologize and don't ask any more. If they rip you apart for asking and apologizing, maybe that's not someone you want to talk to about this subject. It happens.Disclosure. I am a member of marginalized groups. I'm biracial, asexual, non-cisgendered. I am also a member of privileged groups. I'm college-educated, American, able-bodied. Most people are combinations of privileged and non-privileged – this discussion, as with most discussions of privilege, applies to people acting on both sides, and should be considered in this light.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-31 08:01 am (UTC)From:I can certainly understand the reluctance to give the same spiel on a regular basis without seeing any immediate benefit. Of course it is reasonable for someone to say, "Look, I just told this guy the same thing ten minutes ago and I don't want to do it again. Here's a book you should check out instead." I still think that attacking ignorant people for their ignorance and at the same time refusing to give them any reason to want to correct their misconceptions (by this I mean being flat-out rude or playing the You'll Never Understand card) is incredibly counterproductive, and that's what I think got lost in all the drama. Not the refusal, but the dismissal, if that makes sense.
I don't expect anyone to be a walking teacher by any means, but I feel that the best no answer would be something like: "read this book," or "visit this website." Wikipedia and the like are only so helpful, and in some cases they're full of bad information, and I've seen a fight break out more than once because someone wasn't uninformed, they were misinformed. If someone admits to being a blank slate on an issue, it's probably safe to say that with the billions upon billions of websites online they have no idea where to begin finding relevant information, so refusing to give them at least a starting point makes it more likely they will read something inaccurate or not want to read anything at all. I don't think a refusal such as "I'm lectured out, but this book by so and so is a good introduction," is asking too much.
And to go on with the statistics vs. personal experiences in learning about something you don't understand, I obviously can't speak for everyone but I would be more likely to empathize with a cause after hearing a personal story than I would after reading charts. I keep seeing people say this is exploiting someone's experiences, which I think might be reading too much into it; but that's just how I feel. I think that if someone is simply asking about another's experience to put something they read into perspective or to give them motivation to learn more, asking indicates it is a request and not a demand, and that there should be no obligation to give a life story. I mean, I certainly wouldn't mind hearing a life story, but I also don't expect it if I'm just asking a question.
Again, thank you a ton for writing this up. I really do think it's the best thing to come out of this whole kerfluffle and it definitely put a lot of things into perspective for me.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-02 12:27 am (UTC)From:Oh, I agree. I also think that civility should be a standard of any serious discussion, no matter what the other side is doing and no matter what points your arguing. But humans are emotional, fallible beings, and it's easy to wear past the point of patience. Some people have precious little patience to start with; some people have lives which wear down their patience as a matter of course. I can't presume to say who falls into what category, and whether or not people are justified in feeling angry is entirely a different post – all I can do is examine the underlying motivations.
I think this is largely a matter of how it's put across. If someone is asking because they have an interest in how that person is feeling – because they're a friend, or something – that's empathy. If someone is willing or eager to share their story, that's voluntary education. Things get hairy around the point when someone wants to know someone's personal story as an illustration of the group (which skirts into tokenization), or when people seem to think that people, either all people of a marginalized group by virtue of being in a marginalized group or specific people they're talking to by virtue of, well, being in a marginalized group and being the person they're talking to, are obligated to share their experiences.
It happens to a lot of people. When I crossposted this to my LiveJournal, friends of mine brought up two posts on the subject over at Ballastexistenz – both my friends and the writer had had a lot of experience, in their own lives and in working with others in their groups of people who would demand their personal stories. A couple of highlights from those posts:
Again, I think it's a matter (isn't everything?) of moderation. Curiosity and interest in a personal touch can be harmless, even a good thing. When that interest turns into an expectation or, worse, a demand, it gets threatening, and if forced on someone, it can get exploitive. And it is, I imagine, best asked of someone you're already friends with, or someone who's voluntarily put themselves in a position where they say "Okay, ask me questions about this." (Amorpha, for example, did this on the topic of plurality some time ago, for which I'm eminently grateful.) Otherwise it can all too easily come across as someone interested in another person more as a case study than as a person who has to deal with this sort of thing every day of their lives. (See the comment to this post at July 30, 2006, 0:54 – I'd direct link, but the layout doesn't seem to support that.)
I hope I'm making sense ^^;.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-02 09:40 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2009-06-02 10:49 pm (UTC)From: