I find that when white people talk about race it is mostly a conversation that affects the power dynamics between white people. Liberal whites bring up race to make a point against conservative whites, and vice versa. It’s a conversation that is often shallow and academic and less often explores structural racism issues. Of course, white anti-racists who do explore structural issues and oppression within oppressed groups and other such things often get a lot of backlash. This is because they are shifting the conversation away from an intra-white playing field to a multiracial one.
Similarly, when minorities add their voices, suddenly the conversation even more powerfully affects the power dynamics between whites and other groups. The conversation becomes more salient and urgent. The perceived threat is deeper so the reaction is stronger.
She said she rarely posts about race here, and sticks to more trivial topics instead. You ignored the part about more trivial topics so you could jump on the “rarely post about race” part. That’s pretty much exactly what knee-jerking looks like.
I can concede that this form of thinking is not purely irrational. What you are saying make sense. But it still strikes me as problematic because it affirms bias against non-whites–and in a way, stereotypes about non-whites. What I see is this leading to racial discrimination in the marketplace of ideas that could easily go unchecked because of progressives not wanting to admit their own racial preferences.
I imagine that even well-meaning people sometimes take one look at an opinion piece authored by a brown person and preemptively roll their eyes, and yet not do this when the author is a white male. Even if 100% of this reaction was based on the “he’s arguing against his self-interest, therefore he’s more credible than those who have an emotional reason to think racism is pervasive” position, the end result would be the same as if the reaction was 100% based on “he’s a white guy, therefore he’s more credible than the crazy black folks who rant about racism”. That end result being that the brown person is ignored in preference to the White Authority (to use the term Inner Stickler introduced).
What’s the solution? Maybe we need to talk about this more. I don’t know.
I only said “Sooo” because you gave kind of a non-answer. “I rarely talk about anything IRL” was a dodge, istm. I would guess you rarely talk about anything IRL because it’s a lot harder to log off and save your blood pressure. Fair enough. It’s just that you entered a thread about race issues and I was pretty mild in my challenge, but I am still being the jerk. So forget it I guess. Don’t need a heart attack on my conscience.
Jimmy, we are in a race related thread. Forgive me for not engaging with monstro on trivial topics instead of the subject of the thread. You Americans sure are damn jumpy on the subject.
With regards to the OP/linked article, I think it’s funny how blind we can all be. She refers early on to “Raffi Williams, he of the manufactured Ebony Magazine scandal” wherein a Jamilah Lemieux told a combatant tweeter (paraphrased)“Oh here comes the white guy telling me how to be black”. Of course Raffi happens to be black and “manufactured” outrage ensues. Isn’t this hand-waved away incident exactly the complaint of the linked article?
During the first years I started posting here I remember a lot of old SDMBers (most are banned or inactive now) who would post, non-stop, fringe, racialist crap in any black-ish themed threads (history, politics, culture, language issues on Africa/Americas/etc) as cutting edge points that must be addressed.
It was quite crazy to often see points like “The blacks/Africans never did/achieved this” or “Scientists have found that about the brains of the races” or whatever, appear in history themed threads on Timbuktu; political threads on southern Africa; economic threads on the developing world; from people who, I assumed, were well informed adults.
This hurt me as 1. An MSc student in Neuroscience and 2. A life long student of global history and culture. So, I’ve always dedicated some of my SDMB posting time specifically to anti-racism and rebutting gross racial misconceptions of modern biological/behavioural sciences. Of course this wasn’t a conscious choice, it just sorta happened that way.
I like to think I’m civil in my postings but, more often than not, I’m shocked on just how (absurdly) civil I find the SDMB are to many of our resident racialists. Once, I summed it up thusly
Today, the OP just might have helped answer this question of mine. If you, as a black poster, feel less relevant than a white poster (of similar mind set) you probably won’t be posting as often or if you feel more reviled you wouldn’t be posting as confrontationally.
If I might be so bold, Carnal, your tone was seen as needlessly argumentative because you seized on such a small detail and dug into it as if it was of consequence to her point. monstro said she was reluctant to post about race on this board and explained why she felt that way.
Your response seemed to question the validity of her statement, not really serve as an attempt to understand her perspective.
“I stay away that bar. Why? Because every time I go there, I get leered at and catcalled.”
“So do you go to other bars frequently? Seems to me you’d get leered at those places too.”
“I don’t go to bars much at all.”
“Sooooo ‘I stay away from that bar’ doesn’t really stand as a comparison to anything?”
That isn’t what I meant. You were pushing monstro for an explanation she had already given. Before you asked her anything, it was already clear what comparison she was drawing: she doesn’t bring up race here; she talks about other stuff instead. You cross-examined her anyway, for some reason.
OK, but “staying away from that bar” implies that other bars aren’t that bad. No? Or that walking down the street isn’t as bad. I agree that I was being a little argumentative, but my point was that it’s the world in general. monstro says she does have websites where she feels freer to discuss these issues. So is it EbonyForums.com or YouCan’tBelieveHowUnracistAndDiverseThePeopleAreHere.com?
eta: and I release monstro from her involuntary interrogation by me. If you don’t want to respond, that is totally cool.
In the end, I guess, I’m looking at this more cynically than you are. I think I would quibble at the “well-meaning” part. I don’t think it’s a communication problem which is impairing an otherwise good-faith effort. I think the problem is about one part cognitive bias caused by seeing it as self-serving, and ninety-nine parts plain old racial prejudice. Or maybe a mix of racial prejudice and “race fatigue” which I see as just another, more passive-aggressive way of being racially prejudiced. I think the white authority problem is mostly just a manifestation of the way the deck is stacked in general; the real difference when it’s a conversation specifically *about *prejudice is that race/gender/etc. is expressly a cause of the condescension, rather than only implicitly.
Like you said, everything else a minority says is discounted in accordance with the prejudices of the audience. Why should a conversation about the discount itself be any different?
It means that a person has had a particularly unpleasant time at that bar and because of that, wishes to never go there.
Just because she isn’t a bar-hopper in general doesn’t negate the fact that she associates a distinct kind of unpleasantness with one bar in particular. Her attitude towards other bars is irrelevant in the context of her statement.
So asking about her bar-hopping proclivities, in a way that implies her assessment about that one particular bar is faulty in some way, is a bit obnoxious.
I don’t think the bias is just toward white anti-racists because of the argument against interest. I’ll be honest, when I see a woman arguing for MRA or Tea Party Republicans, I don’t think “Gosh, it could be valid because she’s arguing against her interest.” I think “What a fucking idiot.”
I just read a book by Tim Wise, by the way. I enjoyed it. And I think that his standing as a white man is a valuable bridge between cultures, but I do get the feeling of someone being more legitimate because we feel, societally, that he is more legitimate about everything.
I think some of this problem is the result of unexamined attitudes and beliefs. In the heat of the moment, people lapse into lazy ways of thinking. Maybe by putting it out there as a “thing”, people will be more inclined to check themselves.
A white man is arguing that white men are not, overall, beneficiaries of special privileges in society as compared to other groups. A black woman is arguing that white men are not, overall, beneficiaries of special privileges in society as compared to other groups. Do you perhaps grant the second just a bit more legitimacy than the first? Do you perhaps discount the first as someone who is just a bit colored by his own experiences and/or self interest? How do you think most people would perceive the two?
I personally go the opposite way, the blacks/hispanics/whoever are more reliable than white people since they actually live it and were actually there. But a lot of people won’t believe reports of police brutality or trumped up charges unless there’s video evidence and an affidavit signed by the pope.
As God as my witness, from the bottom of my soul, I would not grant the second more legitimacy. In fact, odds are high I would assume something went tragically wrong wrong in her development and I’d feel little a sad and embarrassed for her. That’s assuming I believed she was actually being sincere. Most likely, my first reaction would be to laugh because…surely she’d had to be joking.
This is one of those situations where flipping the hypothetical doesn’t work. Racism is a lived experienced for most black people; it’s existence isn’t debatable in the same way it is for the average white person. Your perception of whether it’s a problem may depend on how well you relate to the person trying to persuade you. But when you’re a stigmatized minority you don’t have the luxury of needing external “persuasion”. Reality is persuasive on its own.
Can only speak for myself. It doesn’t necessarily make me less inclined to post or post in a extra polite manner. But it’s predictable and tiring and can make would could be an entertaining thread, very boring.