You have to sit with THOSE people

The BBQ Pit
21

Actually, no, I don’t know if you think that or not. There are still plenty of people who think black folks should sit in the back of the bus or who otherwise would like to return to the shameful days of segregation of the races. You might even be one of them. Or might not. I don’t know yet.

And if you don’t want to be offended stay out of the Pit. I come here to rant. If this was to be merely a descriptive, feel-good exercise it would be in MPSIMS.

It’s been my experience that, by and large, bigots don’t want to be educated. And, I’d say denying this man a choice of seat and then pushing him towards the “segregated” seats against his expressed desires IS, most certainly, BIGOTRY. Ignorance would be “Oh, sorry, I thought you might want to sit there.” Saying “You MUST sit there” is bigotry. At a certain point ignorance is no longer a valid excuse. If you wouldn’t treat any other adult male human being in that manner then you are judging him based SOLELY on his disability, in an area where that disability is irrelevant. That’s prejudice. That’s bigotry. Granted, it’s not on the same level as a lynching, but the fact it’s not life-threatening in no way pardons it.

I expect she would have remained an ignorant, bigotted busy-body regardless of what I had done.

You guess it would have been embarassing? You mean there is some uncertainly in your mind about this? OF COURSE it would have been embarassing to the blind man!

Upset? No… mostly just irritated and sad that people are so damn narrow-minded.

Problem is, there are so damn many of them. And it’s NOT a matter of “giving offense” (although offense is given), it’s a matter of EQUALITY - of being treated as a competant, adult human being capable of making his own decisions, capable of taking care of himself.

You can’t force someone to learn anything - they have to have some interest in learning. Artificial applications of force (the learn this or die approach) may cause a brief upswing in rote memorization, but you can NOT forcibly change ingrained belief systems. At most I might have been able to wedge a new thought in through the cracks - a “have you ever considered X” approach - but it will NOT change a fundamental belief that the handicapped are helpless and must be “protected” or segregated - either for their own good or someone else’s comfort.

Nope. Not long-term at least. Maybe it’s different over in England, perhaps you have more pressure to comform to the norms of your society. Here in the US, it’s quite possible to find an enclave of fellow bigots in which to exist in a never-never land where you needn’t encounter “those” people. Overt displays of bigotry are forbidden on a social level in a large urban area such as I live in, but that only means it’s driven underground.

It was not the woman’s words so much as her actions that were offensive. Saying “I’ll help you” while wacking someone over the head with a stick doesn’t make sense - and it makes even less sense to trust the words as opposed to the actions. She said she wanted to help, but acted in a rude, boorish, and intolerant manner.

22

I’m beginning to think you have more in common with the woman on the train than you might like to admit.

You began the thread saying “Saw an interesting thing on the train coming home last night”, which is not an expression I’d use to describe the Rosa Parks incident, and you’ve gradually degenerated to suggesting that this woman might even “find an enclave of fellow bigots in which to exist in a never-never land where you needn’t encounter “those” people”. Be serious.

Imaginary differences between social conformity in England and America have nothing to do with this. If you are going to change somebody’s mind about something, how is sitting quietly by doing nothing going to help? You have no reason to deduce from her actions that this woman is not capable of changing her attitude. She didn’t “wack anyone over the head” and if you imagine that the only way to communicate is by shouting then it’s no wonder you’ve never succeeded in explaining to somebody how they should behave.

It’s true that if a person doesn’t want to learn they won’t learn, but unless you try to teach them you won’t know how possible it is to succeed.

Racist organisations are determined and resourceful. Of course I’m not suggesting that a casual conversation is all it would take for a Klansman to drop his bigotry. But surely you don’t expect me to believe that there is a comparable organisation of anti-blindness fanatics in the USA and that you’ve been able to conclude that this woman belongs to such an organisation? Or that having said nothing to her, therefore, nothing you or anyone could have said to her would have any impact? That she is an inert, unchangeable disciple of some underground disablement-hating society?

I haven’t sided with this woman against you. I have said several times that I agree her behaviour was unacceptable. But what happened to the American “can do” spirit? Some mountains are hard to cross, it’s true, but if your ancestral countrymen had used that excuse to avoid trying they’d never have reached the Pacific.

It’s not that you’ve tried to educate people and failed through their reluctance, you just haven’t tried. It’s not good enough to complain that there are a lot of bigots in the world. The woman on the train was alone. You will meet other people by themselves who need an attitude change. Re-educating even one of them means one less. And yet having passed up that chance, now you want to shout at me too just because this is a Pit thread?

When you’re neck-deep in a hole, stop digging.

23

Hah! Someone who believes a bigot can be re-educated. Nice. At the level of intelligence that allows you to be a bigot, or even allows you to be a fool, “re-education” is impossible, because the education didn’t take in the first place. (usually) (Certainly, a bus/train trip isn’t enough time to bother to find out if someone is worth messing with)

As far as the American Can-Do spirit is concerned, it’s only practiced on worthwhile pursuits. Why waste time messing with those whom education cannot, will not help?.

And as far as holes are concerned, when digging a well, stop when you hit water.

b.

24

Oh, come on now. This silly woman thought she was being “helpful”. She was being an ass. But I would not call her behavior openly hateful, just idiotic and wrong. Idiotic and wrong people can be educated. At least some of the time. I have been idiotic and wrong (was raised with idiotic and wrong ideas—I suppose all of us have) and yes, I was capable of being re-educated. I’d hate to think that my friends and acquaintences would have given up on me as a hopeless case without at least trying to set me straight. Because, you see, I did learn, and did improve my attitude and behavior. Their efforts on my behalf were effective.

~ yosemitebabe, who used to say and think some pretty offensive and stupid things (and is too embarrassed to admit what they are now).

25

Wow, that’s an amazingly huge and insulting assumption, especially the bolded part. Were it directed at me, I suspect there’d be a new pit thread opening up soon. But of course, I’m just a bystander here.

Suffice to say, I’m a little puzzled by your attitude here, everton. No one is under any sort of obligation to go around educating every ignorant person they might happen to run into on the street. If you, personally, feel that you have to do that, more power to you. Other people may not have the time, energy, or inclination.

And to say that Broomstick wasted an opportunity to educate people is simply and self-evidently untrue, because she did, after all, open up this thread to talk about what happened. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that most pit threads carry the unspoken message of “Don’t act like this person.” Certainly, reading the OP made me consider how I interact with handicapped people, and how I would act if I found myself in the situation Broomstick was in.

It seems like you’re giving Broomstick an awfully hard time, and I’m not sure towards what end. If you were in her position, how would you have handled the situation? Ignore Dennis to seek out the busy-body and lecture her on how she should act towards blind people? This would be exceedingly rude and embarassing to Dennis, and would likely only piss off the busy-body and lead to a huge scene. Broomstick did exactly the right thing in this situation: she was nice to the blind guy, ignored the asshole at the time, and vented about her here in the Pit after the fact. This is behavior that warrants your extended and pointless hijack?

26

Reluctant as I am to “waste time messing with” someone who claims to be out of his mind, I will say that it’s only a matter of opinion that this woman was a bigot (which according to my dictionary is “a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his own, esp. on religion, politics or race.” We know of no attempt to influence this woman’s opinion in any way whatsoever, let alone that such attempts have been tried and failed.

I have first hand experience of how adults can have their views changed on controversial matters. Millions of others could say the same, but I wouldn’t put any money on your chances.

27

I’m not claiming Broomstick was under any obligations to educate every ignorant person she meets. I’m saying that she has no justification to claim that this woman was incapable of learning.

The opportunity she missed was right there on the train. In this thread she’s claimed that people like the woman on the train can’t be educated, and I happen to disagree with that. Furthermore I don’t think you have reason to make such a claim unless it’s been tried and failed.

I’ve tried to be sympathetic to Broomstick but I felt it was completely unnecessary to suggest, as she did, that I would have been happy to see Rosa Parks pushed around on a bus. I find that an offensive and unjustifiable accusation against me personally. Nevertheless I’ll repeat if you need me to that I think her reaction to the blind man was entirely right and that the other woman’s behaviour was unacceptable.

Not at all. I’ve already freely said that I might not have said anything to the woman on the train. I certainly wouldn’t have shouted at anybody. But I still say that to conclude from very little evidence that anybody who doesn’t understand blindness, or shows insensitivity to a blind man, is a permenantly frozen bigot is simply incorrect. I also think claims that there are organisations similar to the KKK for every misinformed person make no sense.

What hijack?

28

Did he have a seeing eye dog?
Thems cute.

Maybe that lady was the seeing eye dog. She was acting enough like one…

29

Obviously, it would be a waste of my time.

b.

30

What you are missing, everton is that I did do something to refute the woman’s ignorance/intolerance/stupidity (call it what you will).

As I said, it was not so much her words as her actions that were objectionable. What were MY actions? I treated Dennis as an intelligent, responsible, adult human being and had a perfectly normal conversation with a gentlemen sitting on the train. In other words, I demonstrated that, for the most part, he required no special treatment whatsoever.

By the way - he’s made quite a few trips to England. If you run into him tell him I said hi.

If you go back and re-read what I posted I make no claim one way or another. My point was I don’t know if you are a bigot or not. I assume nothing. I assume neither goodwill nor malice in anyone I meet. I judge people by their actions, and that requires time and observation.

31

Oh, and I’d like to remind you, everton, that the woman in question continued to watch during my conversation with Dennis and was visibly distressed by my treating him as I did - really, go back and re-read the opening post. Again, look at the ACTIONS. I was having a conversation with someone else, a conversation she was not part of, and she was actively trying to censor my speech. Is that an action springing from ignorance? Or is that something else?

32

If someone attempted to re-educate people in front of me and my children, I’d be so fucked off it would be unbelievable. The dignity of the person with the disability is what matters here.

If Dennis chose to re-educate this twit, that’s a fine and groovy thing but how fucking patronising it would have been for Broomstick to begin instructing the idiot in front of Dennis.

Broomstick I think you did the exact right thing, you were courteous and modelled right behaviour ;). Lecturing would not have saved Dennis’s dignity in any way whatsoever.

33

Broomstick:
I seem to have upset you here, so let’s see if I’ve got this summary right.

You started off saying that you were on a train in which a woman behaved in a bizarre and unpleasant way towards a blind man. You said that he chose to sit next to you and that you had a normal, pleasant conversation with him in spite of her behaviour. You launched this thread to criticise this woman’s behaviour. So far so good. Every other post here - including all of mine - have agreed that you were right and she was wrong.

But I suggested that there was a chance that this woman’s behaviour might be motivated more by ignorance than by malice, and that it would be better if she learnt how she should’ve behaved instead.

You disagreed that it would be possible to educate her, and you suggested that to claim otherwise was equivalent to approving of racial segregation and harrassment:

That’s where I started losing sympathy with you. All the same I have never said you had an obligation to educate anybody. I have said that you have no grounds for assuming she is uneducatable. I have also said that I don’t believe you have grounds to say she is part of some organised plan to segregate disabled people from the rest of society.

If I’ve offended you by saying any of that I am mystified as to why, but if you feel insulted I should apologise. Please explain which of my remarks have criticised your behaviour on the train, or supported hers, or supported discrimination - racial or other - and I will happily withdraw them.

34

Naw… you haven’t upset me a bit. I love a good tussle with stubborn cannon fodder. Even if you have upset me, so what? That’s what the Pit is for. If I wanted serenity 24/7 I’d chew a triple cocktail of Prozax, Paxil, and Valium. Ugh, how boring

No… it was not bizarre. Sadly, it is an all-too-common reaction that people have disability of any sort. Unpleasent yes, you did get that part right.

Um… did I? I suppose in part - but mostly it was vent my disgust at her actions.

Oh, skippy, I am so happy. You do know that this is not Great Debates, yes?

How old are you, everton? Old enough to vote/drink/drive a car? College age?

Yes, it could be ignorance but my decades of experience on this planet tell me that, given the situation, that was unlikely.

Also, an act does not have to be motivated by “malice” in order to be wrong or harmful. She clearly believed that she was acting from the best of intentions, to be helpful. She was still in the wrong. If a parent refuses to put a child in a car seat but insists on carrying said child on their lap because they honestly believe and feel that child is safest in their arms - they are acting with the best of intentions but they are still wrong. No malice, evil, or nastiness involved. In such situations, good intentions will not prevent a potential tragedy.

No, I suggested that to agree with her and her behavior would be the equivalent of approving racial segretation. YOU chose to take it personally.

Um… and so? I realize there’s a stereotype that we Americans want everyone to love us, but I must not be stereotypical. I did not come here seeking your sympathy, or your approval. I came her to give vent to my feelings about this woman’s insensitivity and boorishness in an environment where no one would be hurt by the discharge - unlike the time and place where it occurred where hurt would have happened if I had given vent. That is, in part, what this Pit is for - to express safely words and emotions that need to be bit-back as part of being a civilized society.

I never said that either - why do you assume evil must be organized?. A multitude of individuals all acting in an immoral fashion, each on their own, can cause just as much havoc as an organized group. Do you believe individuals have no power on their own? That everyone must be part of a group? If an individual has the power to do good on their own then they must also have the power to do ill on their own. It was NOT the existance of the KKK that lead to the Jim Crow laws - after all, such organizations continue to exist even today (more’s the pity) and yet such laws do not exist. What made the American apartheid possilbe were the multitude of individual acts of discrimination practiced daily by individualsagainst black people. When the majority of individuals in this country figured out that seating people on the bus by color alone was bad, it stopped. Nowadays, to attempt to suggest we do any such thing would evoke consternation and disgust in the overwhelming majority of the country. But neither are blacks now forced to sit in the front of the bus - they can choose to sit wherever they please. Which is the comparison that whizzed over your head, apparently - that a disabled person who is able to sit in a normal seat may choose to sit wherever they want. The woman involved apparently could not comprehend this.

I am mystified as to why you think I feel insulted. Rest assured, everton, that if I ever feel insulted, offended, or wronged by you I will say so in VERY explicit terms. Have I done so? Nope… can’t recall standing up and saying anything like “EVERTON, YOU OBNOXIOUS PIG I TAKE GREAT OFFENSE AT XXXXX”. Which, by the way, is more or less what it will look like if I ever do take offense at you out here.

Why do I get the feeling we’re not having the same conversation here? This is the Pit - not a “play nice” space. You can insult me without having to “withdraw” (of course, I get to insult you back). You do not get into a mud-slinging contest then apologize for getting the other players dirty.

OK, let’s lay a few cards on the table - what I am disagreeing with you on is NOT my behavior, or hers, or any of the events that actually took place on that day at that time in that place. What I am disagreeing with is what I perceive to be your position (based on your statements) that my thinking on the matter of educating bigots is somehow wrong. That is what this has turned into - an argument about whether or not bigots are educable. We could even, perhaps, discuss educational techniques and which ones may or may not work on bigots.

My experience in life leads me to conclude that while bigotry might arise from ignorance, a lot of bigots are quite happy in that ignorance and will resist attempts at education. If you wish to take a different view you are, of course, free to do so.

35

OK, I’ll try again. Whatever your experience of life may have taught you about bigots in general, I don’t believe you have good reason to assume that the woman on the train can never have her views changed.

She’s a stranger to you, you have never even spoken to her. Some people never change, others do change. I have first hand experience of it.

Nobody who has posted to this thread has any idea which category this woman belongs in, yet you claim to know that she’s in the former category based on your general life experiences. The Pit may be the right place to let off steam, but I’m saying you’ve made a simple error of judgement, not criticising your language (patronising though your last post was). How is suggesting that she might be capable of change similar to agreeing with her behaviour?

36

This is really getting way out of proporition to the situation and is moving away from discussion of issue and rapidly into personal attack. Let’s not do this.

Many people have the very best of intentions when they see a person they perceive to be handicapped. They want to help, they’re solicitous, they see whatever they can do to make that person more comfortable or help them get to where or what they need, they see that as what they’re supposed to be doing.

And sometimes it is.

And then again, sometimes the worst thing in the world is good intentions.

In this instance, was the “helper” bigoted? Probably not. Was she clueless? Yeah. It’s like the little old lady that gets helped across the street by the Boy Scout, whether she wanted to go across the street or needed his help or not. Well intentioned but clueless. Makes it no less annoying, of course, but it’s not a character defect here, it’s goodness gone awry.

When I was quite young I saw a similar experience: a man was having what appeared to be an epileptic fit on the sidwalk. A crowd had gathered, as they tend to do around such things. Someone came up out of the crowd and forced a pencil between the man’s lips (so he wouldn’t swallow his tongue, I guess). After a minute or two the man came to, spit out the pencil, and started yelling at his rescuer. “That’s an old wives’ tale, I wasn’t going to swallow my tongue, I’ve had mouth injuries and chipped teeth because of well-meaning people like you. DON’T DO THAT AGAIN!”

Want to be kind to your fellow man? Great. Find out what they need first. Sometimes what they really need is for you to butt out.

your humble TubaDiva

PS On a similar note, for all of you that like to finish sentences for people that stutter, you’re not being helpful at all. It’s infuriating. Bear with 'em for the five seconds of extra time it takes to find out what they need to say. Take a breath and get a grip. By putting them on the spot like that you actually contribute to the problem and make it worse. (And those that mimic or mock stutterers, you are going to hell, going directly to hell, do not pass go.)

37

Slight highjack, but this reminds me of my favorite quote from last week (it wasn’t on the SDMB)

“If the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, what is the road to Heaven paved with?”

38

Such things show up surprisingly often in Stevie Wonder songs.