I haven't read a word you've written that I take issue with. It makes no sense to me that most people have this huge "blind spot" to systems and therefore systemic injustice just because they've been indoctrinated into not seeing it, though, because I certainly was socialized the same way, and yet I questioned it. Are we just outliers, or are many people lacking some capacity to see through the beliefs or assumptions about the world that were handed down to them or prefer not to question what they were taught? I wish I knew, but I do know that any friends I may have lost over things that are important to be, such as at least acknowledging systemic bias or discrimination, or social injustice as I tend to think of it, I have not missed.
I wish I had answers. I have questions, and I have observations.
I also have what I've been told.
The word "priviledge" when referencing systems seems to confuse many people. They think it is supposed to be a "hand up" as opposed to the lack of a "push down".
If you have been othered by systems (androcentrism/misogyny/sexism/cisnormativity, abelism, heteronormativity, racism, capitalism and its minor critiques/derivatives built on the same class system, etc) you become more likely to notice something is off. I say more likely, as many individuals will internalize these systems and become even more strict in their adherence to them than those who are alleged to benefit from these systems.
Internalized misogyny, internalized abelism, internalized racism are all too common.
When I read the book “Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race”, it resonated with me and echoed my own experience even though I’m clearly “White” according to that social hierarchy (even if I’m not “old stock” British). I have, however, observed many self-identifying “progressives” get offended even at the existence of that and similar books, claiming that the books are “racist” and the people making the claims are “not racist”.
All I can do is observe the phenomena, and try in any ways I can to convince other people to be able to see systems, even though I can’t make any sense of why there is so much opposition to being able to see them.
Can you offer more of your own thoughts and observations?
----
I have read several books including: "White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism", ""Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race", "Nice Racism: How Progressive White People Perpetuate Racial Harm", "White Tears/Brown Scars: How White Feminism Betrays Women of Color"
They all matched my experiences. Even as a White (enough) Male (enough) person, the people I've spoken to get really offended at the conversation being brought up. Even if you are seen reading any of these books, their titles will generate offense for some people who claim "they are one of the good ones". They really do think that any conversation about Racism is actually an accusation that they are individually Racist, and will fight against the alleged accusation rather than ever trying to even observe the system.
Your thoughts?
-------
Racism is only one system among many. I'm AMAB, and am 6'4'' and even I treat other "males" I don't yet know like you might treat a gun. The first and arguably most important gun safety rule is: Always treat every firearm as if it is loaded. Not all males will be violent towards you (as an obvious female, or a male that doesn't match some narrow silo conceptualization of masculinity), but it is a basic rule of safety to treat every male presenting person as if they will be violent.
Males are trained from birth in this culture to personally identify with Androcentrism/misogyny/etc (systems), and "White" people (even white passing) are trained from birth to identify with Racism (systems).
Any idea why many families and communities still indoctrinate youth with these ideologies and uphold related systems?
My main reply is actually "why would someone care if they found out they are racist? Why can't they handle that?" I used to be sexist, when I was a kid. I listened to a lot of rock n roll that "normalized" misogyny...so when I realized later in life that my mind had been corrupted, I was able to shirk "self-hating" by admitting I was duped. And not by one band, or one person...the origin/source made no difference. All I can do is recognize what I can control (how I react to thoughts) so it wasn't hard or insulting to admit I was sexist, stop being sexist, and then move on. I don't "tell other men" when they're being sexist, and i might even still be sexist, but i think the overt problem is with people being afraid to admit that at the end of the day, hypocrisy is a current in every human's life, like it or not, so we can just "whack the moles" as we see them, but no berate ourselves for succumbing to thoughts and reactions to those thoughts. So I want THAT to be mainstream: It's okay to find out you aren't perfect and then still strive for perfection even though that's relative AND impossible.
Does that (sort of) answer your question? And yes, I can apply all of that to racism in me. There's a great white comedian out there who has a bit on "if you want to know how racist you are, lose something at a huge party and then when you can't find it, see who you try to blame for stealing it" And I don't think it applies to just any one "race" but I'm more on the "can we identify as "consciousness" and nothing more?
"So I want THAT to be mainstream", which seemed like an articulation of a desire.
"We need to make this "go mainstream"...how can we?" which seemed like we might be doing something to try to help that desire to become more true.
-----
I am so on-board with people being able to admit their own human limitations and moving forward, but .... how do we help people to move into that mindset from feeling deep shame at the reality of their own limitations?
I guess this relates to other questions I regularly have: We live in a society that is relatively fine talking about physical health and some physical diversity, but not at all comfortable talking about mental health or mental diversity.
I know there are some origins within the Christian Puritan philosophy/ethic, but after centuries is it not possible to move past that (which continues to rise to the surface in the form of toxic individualism that seeks to eradicate diversity and human complexity/reality)?
Curious what you think about this article:
Not Empathy, But Power: A Leftist Rebuttal to the Gospel of Cruelty
What Allie Beth Stuckey Gets Wrong About Empathy, Sin, and the Fear of Revolutionary Love
(For governments that claim themselves to be secular, you really need to get into the weeds of various Chrisian philosophies to understand USA or Canada. These governments need to be understood as non-denominational, as they are clearly Christian).
I don't really understand what you're asking (about desire vs. articulation of desire) but I think behavioral economics works without "economics" so if it's incentivized, we're pack animals, and we then change to fit in the pack, so the system might be guiding the pack, but if the pack is incentivized in a way that leads the system to change, maybe that would work? I'll try to check out that article, but I did want to try and develop what you were asking about (but I'm not sure what you're asking "little old me" about what I can do/we can do...I think I'm doing all I can to embody beliefs that try to help others feel like "it's OK to have these feelings and thoughts. I don't need to hate myself or others")
You are modelling the behaviour, and being a safe person for others who are asking questions themselves.
My question was whether you thought there was something more that can be done beyond that.
I agree humans are pack animals, contrary to the ideology of individualism, but I don't know what incentives exist to get certain populations out from under what I consider to be harmful (to themselves, to others, to life, etc) ideologies.
Even on that specific ideology, individualism, I don't know how it is able to survive given humans are so obviously pack animals. I understand its origins as a temporary response to European Feudalism, but that shouldn't still have so much impact on peoples -- especially on continents beyond Europe.
----
The article I referenced was a rebuttal of a self-identified Conservative Christian Woman who is doing quite a bit more to convince people to adopt and identify with a specific set of systems. She has taken a very narrow reading of specific English translations of a series of stories written long ago (some of the stories written down possibly 4000 years ago) from a different land and in different languages, and treats them as irrefutable facts that all humans must conform to.
Nearly all the "facts" she imagines from those broken-telephone story readings are supremacist ideologies I strongly disagree with (Religious Supremacy, Human Supremacy, Male Supremacy, Binary Gender role enforcement, heterosexual enforcement, individualism, individualism from conception).
Those who identify with these systems seem to have social tools to encourage/enforce conformity, but those who don't identify seem to be stuck without tools.
I'm curious about your thoughts on the "go mainstream" question that you posed.
-----
Humans are complex, and yet there are so many that want to pretend everything is simplistic. They want black/white, good/evil, and never want themselves to be accused of the False Binary (logical fallacy) of being on the side of "evil".
Why are so many stuck in False Binary logical fallacies? (Or to be honest, I find most complex conversations to be riddled with logical fallacies).
Fewer individuals identifying with sexism and racism would be a huge first step towards being able to help in dismantling those systems.
Note: I assume there is sexism and racism in me, and sometimes I do need to have a scenario pointed out to me to have given it any thought.
I couldn't make sense of the gender binary even from a young age, so less sexism became normalized for me than racism. I grew up in a place called Sudbury and while there were a lot of different people of different genders in my life, diversity in the social-construct of "race" wasn't as visible (mostly on TV, and 1970's and 80's North American television was very racist).
I see my personal relationship with these systems not as a binary, but as a level of infection that requires constant work to remain healthy given the environment (North American governments and their culture) that I live in.
Unfortunately if someone believes they are binaries, they won't even be working on themselves as individuals.
I haven't read a word you've written that I take issue with. It makes no sense to me that most people have this huge "blind spot" to systems and therefore systemic injustice just because they've been indoctrinated into not seeing it, though, because I certainly was socialized the same way, and yet I questioned it. Are we just outliers, or are many people lacking some capacity to see through the beliefs or assumptions about the world that were handed down to them or prefer not to question what they were taught? I wish I knew, but I do know that any friends I may have lost over things that are important to be, such as at least acknowledging systemic bias or discrimination, or social injustice as I tend to think of it, I have not missed.
I wish I had answers. I have questions, and I have observations.
I also have what I've been told.
The word "priviledge" when referencing systems seems to confuse many people. They think it is supposed to be a "hand up" as opposed to the lack of a "push down".
If you have been othered by systems (androcentrism/misogyny/sexism/cisnormativity, abelism, heteronormativity, racism, capitalism and its minor critiques/derivatives built on the same class system, etc) you become more likely to notice something is off. I say more likely, as many individuals will internalize these systems and become even more strict in their adherence to them than those who are alleged to benefit from these systems.
Internalized misogyny, internalized abelism, internalized racism are all too common.
When I read the book “Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race”, it resonated with me and echoed my own experience even though I’m clearly “White” according to that social hierarchy (even if I’m not “old stock” British). I have, however, observed many self-identifying “progressives” get offended even at the existence of that and similar books, claiming that the books are “racist” and the people making the claims are “not racist”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_I%27m_No_Longer_Talking_to_White_People_About_Race
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/30/why-im-no-longer-talking-to-white-people-about-race
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/jun/03/why-no-long-talking-white-people-review-race-reni-eddo-lodge-racism
All I can do is observe the phenomena, and try in any ways I can to convince other people to be able to see systems, even though I can’t make any sense of why there is so much opposition to being able to see them.
I truly appreciate this take!!! We need to make this "go mainstream"...how can we?
Can you offer more of your own thoughts and observations?
----
I have read several books including: "White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism", ""Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race", "Nice Racism: How Progressive White People Perpetuate Racial Harm", "White Tears/Brown Scars: How White Feminism Betrays Women of Color"
They all matched my experiences. Even as a White (enough) Male (enough) person, the people I've spoken to get really offended at the conversation being brought up. Even if you are seen reading any of these books, their titles will generate offense for some people who claim "they are one of the good ones". They really do think that any conversation about Racism is actually an accusation that they are individually Racist, and will fight against the alleged accusation rather than ever trying to even observe the system.
Your thoughts?
-------
Racism is only one system among many. I'm AMAB, and am 6'4'' and even I treat other "males" I don't yet know like you might treat a gun. The first and arguably most important gun safety rule is: Always treat every firearm as if it is loaded. Not all males will be violent towards you (as an obvious female, or a male that doesn't match some narrow silo conceptualization of masculinity), but it is a basic rule of safety to treat every male presenting person as if they will be violent.
Males are trained from birth in this culture to personally identify with Androcentrism/misogyny/etc (systems), and "White" people (even white passing) are trained from birth to identify with Racism (systems).
Any idea why many families and communities still indoctrinate youth with these ideologies and uphold related systems?
My main reply is actually "why would someone care if they found out they are racist? Why can't they handle that?" I used to be sexist, when I was a kid. I listened to a lot of rock n roll that "normalized" misogyny...so when I realized later in life that my mind had been corrupted, I was able to shirk "self-hating" by admitting I was duped. And not by one band, or one person...the origin/source made no difference. All I can do is recognize what I can control (how I react to thoughts) so it wasn't hard or insulting to admit I was sexist, stop being sexist, and then move on. I don't "tell other men" when they're being sexist, and i might even still be sexist, but i think the overt problem is with people being afraid to admit that at the end of the day, hypocrisy is a current in every human's life, like it or not, so we can just "whack the moles" as we see them, but no berate ourselves for succumbing to thoughts and reactions to those thoughts. So I want THAT to be mainstream: It's okay to find out you aren't perfect and then still strive for perfection even though that's relative AND impossible.
Does that (sort of) answer your question? And yes, I can apply all of that to racism in me. There's a great white comedian out there who has a bit on "if you want to know how racist you are, lose something at a huge party and then when you can't find it, see who you try to blame for stealing it" And I don't think it applies to just any one "race" but I'm more on the "can we identify as "consciousness" and nothing more?
In case I goofed, and my language wasn't clear.
I was contrasting
"So I want THAT to be mainstream", which seemed like an articulation of a desire.
"We need to make this "go mainstream"...how can we?" which seemed like we might be doing something to try to help that desire to become more true.
-----
I am so on-board with people being able to admit their own human limitations and moving forward, but .... how do we help people to move into that mindset from feeling deep shame at the reality of their own limitations?
I guess this relates to other questions I regularly have: We live in a society that is relatively fine talking about physical health and some physical diversity, but not at all comfortable talking about mental health or mental diversity.
I know there are some origins within the Christian Puritan philosophy/ethic, but after centuries is it not possible to move past that (which continues to rise to the surface in the form of toxic individualism that seeks to eradicate diversity and human complexity/reality)?
Curious what you think about this article:
Not Empathy, But Power: A Leftist Rebuttal to the Gospel of Cruelty
What Allie Beth Stuckey Gets Wrong About Empathy, Sin, and the Fear of Revolutionary Love
https://autside.substack.com/p/not-empathy-but-power-a-leftist-rebuttal
(For governments that claim themselves to be secular, you really need to get into the weeds of various Chrisian philosophies to understand USA or Canada. These governments need to be understood as non-denominational, as they are clearly Christian).
I don't really understand what you're asking (about desire vs. articulation of desire) but I think behavioral economics works without "economics" so if it's incentivized, we're pack animals, and we then change to fit in the pack, so the system might be guiding the pack, but if the pack is incentivized in a way that leads the system to change, maybe that would work? I'll try to check out that article, but I did want to try and develop what you were asking about (but I'm not sure what you're asking "little old me" about what I can do/we can do...I think I'm doing all I can to embody beliefs that try to help others feel like "it's OK to have these feelings and thoughts. I don't need to hate myself or others")
You are modelling the behaviour, and being a safe person for others who are asking questions themselves.
My question was whether you thought there was something more that can be done beyond that.
I agree humans are pack animals, contrary to the ideology of individualism, but I don't know what incentives exist to get certain populations out from under what I consider to be harmful (to themselves, to others, to life, etc) ideologies.
Even on that specific ideology, individualism, I don't know how it is able to survive given humans are so obviously pack animals. I understand its origins as a temporary response to European Feudalism, but that shouldn't still have so much impact on peoples -- especially on continents beyond Europe.
----
The article I referenced was a rebuttal of a self-identified Conservative Christian Woman who is doing quite a bit more to convince people to adopt and identify with a specific set of systems. She has taken a very narrow reading of specific English translations of a series of stories written long ago (some of the stories written down possibly 4000 years ago) from a different land and in different languages, and treats them as irrefutable facts that all humans must conform to.
Nearly all the "facts" she imagines from those broken-telephone story readings are supremacist ideologies I strongly disagree with (Religious Supremacy, Human Supremacy, Male Supremacy, Binary Gender role enforcement, heterosexual enforcement, individualism, individualism from conception).
Those who identify with these systems seem to have social tools to encourage/enforce conformity, but those who don't identify seem to be stuck without tools.
This is an individual answer about themselves.
I'm curious about your thoughts on the "go mainstream" question that you posed.
-----
Humans are complex, and yet there are so many that want to pretend everything is simplistic. They want black/white, good/evil, and never want themselves to be accused of the False Binary (logical fallacy) of being on the side of "evil".
Why are so many stuck in False Binary logical fallacies? (Or to be honest, I find most complex conversations to be riddled with logical fallacies).
Fewer individuals identifying with sexism and racism would be a huge first step towards being able to help in dismantling those systems.
Note: I assume there is sexism and racism in me, and sometimes I do need to have a scenario pointed out to me to have given it any thought.
I couldn't make sense of the gender binary even from a young age, so less sexism became normalized for me than racism. I grew up in a place called Sudbury and while there were a lot of different people of different genders in my life, diversity in the social-construct of "race" wasn't as visible (mostly on TV, and 1970's and 80's North American television was very racist).
I see my personal relationship with these systems not as a binary, but as a level of infection that requires constant work to remain healthy given the environment (North American governments and their culture) that I live in.
Unfortunately if someone believes they are binaries, they won't even be working on themselves as individuals.
A related note: https://substack.com/@russellmcormond/note/c-136935625?
well said!