sophiaserpentia | bravery seeds bravery

Entry tags:

bravery seeds bravery

People with cultural privilege protest that they never asked for that privilege, therefore they should not be held accountable for it, nor should they have to participate in efforts to level the cultural playing field. For example, i've been told, "I am a man who does not rape, therefore i have done enough," i am told, or, "I am a Christian who does not bash gay people, therefore i have done enough," or the like.

But this very attitude is part of the pattern of privilege you enjoy. You have the privilege of not thinking about inequity in society, not thinking about how minorities to which you do not belong are asked to sacrifice in ways you've never known about.

Minorities -- women, non-Christians, people of color, queer people, people with disabilities, and so on -- have no choice but to think about it. We can't help but notice that you have advantages we do not. It is blatantly obvious to us, but you have the option of completely ignoring our protestations, and, quite frequently, that is exactly what you do.

You have the privilege of not even noticing the power you wield and possess as if it were a natural part of the way the world works; and that includes deferential self-sacrifices by people in your lives. Chances are, there is someone in your life who is making a sacrifice for you that you never requested, that they never explicitly offered, but which you unthinkingly accept as a part of the way the world works.

And as i wrote yesterday, you are ethically responsible for it. It is your responsibility to take note of what other people give up so that your life can be improved. When that sacrifice comes at great cost to someone, it is your ethical duty to deny acceptance of it.

It is not too much to ask. It is the right thing to do.

This kind of introspection beyond the basic golden rule is what is required of all of us. If we are serious about combatting oppression, it is our duty to take note of how we benefit from it, each of us, and decline to accept that benefit any longer. It is our duty to look for it. It is our duty to acknowledge it when it is pointed out to us.

This is hard. It's damn hard. But this is what it takes. I won't settle for less, not in myself, not in any of you.

One form of privilege is immunity from the community-wide effect of a hate crime. When three straight people are shot and/or hacked up in a bar, it is not perceived as a crime against all straight people. When it happens to three gay people, as happened last night not far from where i type this, It sends the message that it could happen to any one of us at any time, and it triggers post-traumatic responses in the large portion of our community that has been victimized for being queer.

People who are straight generally have no comprehension of what it feels like to have this fear, because they don't have to; they are privileged in that respect. Straight people are perhaps only marginally less likely to actually have their face hacked up randomly in a bar; i don't know what the stats are. But they are excused from having to fear it.

It is said that it is hard to detect the presence of absense, or to prove a negative. How is someone heterosexual supposed to notice the absence of such fear in their lives? How are they supposed to recognize that 1,049 rights which they have and take for granted are not shared by another segment of the population?

By listening, by caring about your fellow human being. These things take a toll on your fellow human being that is not being taken on you; and as a result, we are more likely to suffer depression, substance abuse, and so on. We are therefore at a disadvantage when we compete with you for scarce jobs and resources. Even in the absense of blatant discrimination, you are benefitting from stealth genocide.

And these patterns hold for other forms of discrimination too. Women fear being raped; and even men who do not rape benefit from this, even if they don't want to. For example, many women avoid going out at night, creating an economic and social advantage for men who do not have this fear.

It is the duty of each of us to actively look for these privileges in our lives and decline to benefit from them. Waking up to the ways you benefit from sexism, racism, homophobia, is a lifelong commitment, and one in which we often stumble. It is also one that makes us unpopular with people around us, because they know, even if they cannot consciously articulate it, that you are thereby becoming part of the rebellion against Cannibal, a step that they are themselves not ready to take.

For the pastor of a conservative church to be the first one to speak about an end to violence against queer people is a move that requires a good deal of bravery. So does being the man who speaks up when his friends make sexist comments. In either case, the person who speaks up will catch flak for it. But people respect bravery and compassion. Displays of it can change the world. For each brave soul who takes that step, it becomes a little easier for the next person to do so. Bravery seeds bravery.

Is it unfair for me to demand that step be taken? Maybe it is. But i need, my community needs, more people to take that step. We are literally dying in the meantime, waiting for it to happen. I will pray i have the courage to take that step when i am called upon to do it myself.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

For example, i've been told, "I am a man who does not rape, therefore i have done enough," i am told, or, "I am a Christian who does not bash gay people, therefore i have done enough," or the like.

I love people who think they should be rewarded for doing the right thing.

::applause::

It's a hard road, yes, but it's the only worthwhile one.

"I am a Christian who does not bash gay people, therefore i have done enough," or the like.

But this very attitude is part of the pattern of privilege you enjoy. You have the privilege of not thinking about inequity in society, not thinking about how minorities to which you do not belong are asked to sacrifice in ways you've never known about.
Even more, many of us enjoy getting to take credit for doing "good things" because of our affiliations, even if we personally do nothing. It's not enough to say "I'm Christian" - you have to be able to say "I'm a Christian who tithes to support programs X, Y ans Z at my church, volunteers for programs P, D, and Q, and is vocal in arenas T, V and W about issues A, B and C." There's a HUGE difference between those two kinds of Christians, and yet the lazy kind often get just as much credit... Heaven knows I don't feel *I* do enough on a regular basis. Lazy is so much easier.

Observant Christians might note that hiding behind the appearance of righteousness as an excuse to avoid doing the hard work of social justice that God demands is exactly what Jesus was complaining about in the religious hypocrites of his day.

Precisely!

beautifully boiled down.

It is great to see this so well articulated.
As of late I have been trying to talk about bigger things like this and I end up ranting and crosslinking and going on tangents to over-explain every thought - until I don't post anything.

I am always amazed by your grace and distilling skills.

*adding to memories*

I think you go too far, your reasoning appears flawed. You rail against others for the difficulties your fears place upon you. You seem to say you place limits upon yourself and that anyone who does not limit themself similarly is taking advantage of you.

You can not force others into a cage to protect yourself. You should not tell others that they should cage themselves for your protection. You seem to be demanding the sacrifice of others for your benefit. Is this not just a different form of Cannibal?

You have to be careful to avoid the world of Harrison Bergeron. It is one thing to demand that people step forward to confront evil, it is another to demand that the limit themselves because you can not perform the same feats that they do.

I do not think i go too far at all. It is not a cage i demand that people step into, because it is not a limitation to deny yourself that which is not rightly yours to begin with. I cannot help it if giving up privilege that no one deserves looks like being caged. It is only 'being caged' compared to the state of privilege that we have come to take for granted.

What i am asking for is therefore not a sacrifice. Oppression itself goes too far, in that segments of the population are forced to accept unfair restrictions on their lives. Oppression is an immense intrusion into one's life, and the steps and self-examination i demand go a small way towards correcting that intrusion.

Bear in mind that as someone who benefits from racism in this society, i am among those at whom this post is directed.

Your claim of "too far" is a cage itself - how is your statement any different?

You are now dictating what appears to be the space you feel comfortable giving - which is a way of TAKING UP space or going "too far".

From your words I suppose you belong to a few privilege categories? cis-gendered male/white am I off base here?

This post is speaking TO you - to the fear many of us feel that does NOT come from ourselves - it comes from a culture of hierarchy.

"You can not force others into a cage to protect yourself. You should not tell others that they should cage themselves for your protection."

Where is she forcing others into a cage? What I read here is mearly a post about how many cages exist that most people have the fortune not know about. These cages are not built by minority people - they are built FOR them.

That's the point.

I am also a member of many privileged groups - this post is something I totally relate to and a philosophy I struggle to realize in my day to day life.

It's hard work - but it is not a cage.

(deleted comment)

Agreed. The goal isn't to stop using our strengths, imho, but to not use strengths that directly harm others. You hurt no one by allowing your parents to pay for school, for example. It made no difference to anyone's lives but yours and theirs. Trying to distinguish between right and wrong with a directive like "decline to benefit from your privileged position [as a matter of principle]" is a very hairy thing. It's much more clear to take a stand where a stand is clearly needed, to be alert for ways to aid the individuals or groups that are being oppressed. It's also much more effective, in both the short and long run, to take that individual stance clearly in circumstances where it is warranted, as opposed to making general statements and having We Want Our Rights parades. If everyone who felt that this treatment is unfair worked every day to change that in any appropriate opportunity that arose, it would do a lot more than any discussion or protest will do (protests often exacerbate the problem).

Trying to uncover ways to sacrifice for the principle of equality when the sacrifice is unfelt by the oppressed is an empty gesture. Better to make it count for something other than a demonstration of principle alone.

Yes. Yes yes yes.

stealth genocide.

You've described it better than anyone I've heard on the subject yet.

Thank you for this post.

For the pastor of a conservative church to be the first one to speak about an end to violence against queer people is a move that requires a good deal of bravery. So does being the man who speaks up when his friends make sexist comments. In either case, the person who speaks up will catch flak for it. But people respect bravery and compassion. Displays of it can change the world. For each brave soul who takes that step, it becomes a little easier for the next person to do so. Bravery seeds bravery.

But here's the thing. You simply won't countenance that same pastor both calling for an end to violence against homosexual people AND also stating that he thinks homosexual behaviour is immoral.

No?
I've heard conservative pastors say things like that.

well, quite. But apparently the latter is not allowed since we told we are complicit in the violence even though we express our opposition to it.

I shall roughly paraphrase what I heard a (very conservative) pastor say:
Just as Jesus went about with prostitutes, we must go about with homosexuals. That does not mean that we celebrate their wrongful choice, but we must recognize that if Our Lord were here today, he would be with them, the maligned, sidelined, and hurt of our society.

that's right. He would be with them and be clear that their lifestyle was sinful.

But, according to some not far from here, His clarity on their sin would make him complicit in any violence perpetrated against them, despite His opposition to it.

(deleted comment)

This is exactly the sort of thing. Why call it "intellectually untenable" when it's quite apparent that a good number of very intelligent rational people hold the view?

Why not take people as they present themselves? Or, even more simply put, why not treat people with the dignity that you demand of them?

(deleted comment)

No one has taken anything away from homophobes. They are the thieves and the exploiters of ignorance. Why don't we treat thieves with the same dignity as the people they have stolen from?

If you would only listen to yourself.

"homophobe"
"thief"
"exploiters of ignorance"

all because someone disagrees with you. And with the next breath you'll cry out against oppression and injustice. Pot kettle black.

(deleted comment)

but you're not "merely pointing out", are you? You're using deliberately provocative, sensationalist and offensive language and misrepresenting those that you disagree with.

And, irony of ironies, you even have to use the language of a war "started by" another party to defend this action. I recall a right-wing president being chastised for using exactly the same tactic. Full circle, methinks.

(deleted comment)

but that's the point - it's all about style and style is a prime way in which you make your point, by rhetoric.

So, if you don't like rhetoric then don't use it.

The main, or even the *only*, reason i do not think this is a realistic position for a pastor to take, is that the extremely poisonous climate of oppression makes it difficult or impossible to hear that message properly.

Because of that climate, it is not possible to say, simply and plainly, that homosexuality is immoral, and have it be taken to mean only that. When people hear it, they invoke a complex set of memories, emotions, and associations. Some people hear in it justification for their continued mistreatment of gay people. These associations are so strong that they would drown out anything the pastor said about acceptance and non-violence.

I have cited repeatedly, because it illustrates this so well, the case of Southern Decadence in New Orleans in 2003. Southern Decadence is a yearly street party held on Labor Day weekend by the gay community. A pastor led a group of thirty or forty people through the French Quarter on the first night of SD, talking about the immorality of homosexuality. I saw them myself, chanting "Satan be gone!" as they marched down Dauphine Street. One of those people was later arrested for stabbing a man in the back; he told the police that God wanted him to kill someone gay.

People who are gay, when they hear a sermon about the immorality of homosexuality, feel a range of emotions also, which likewise prevents them from hearing the plain, simple meaning of the words themselves. This teaching has become an emotional catchphrase that implies much more than it is intended to state.

Is it fair to the pastor, to have his words so misunderstood, that no one hears him properly? No, it's not. But it isn't *me* who's making it unfair; it is the culture of oppression. Help me rid the world of that culture of oppression, and you will be able to preach your beliefs and have them be taken at face value.

A person who speaks in public, who takes the role of teacher, guide, shepherd, has the responsibility of taking into account the effects of their words on others. I believe that *in the current climate* that it leads to greater sin for a pastor to speak about homosexuality being immoral.

Is it fair to the pastor, to have his words so misunderstood, that no one hears him properly? No, it's not. But it isn't *me* who's making it unfair; it is the culture of oppression. Help me rid the world of that culture of oppression, and you will be able to preach your beliefs and have them be taken at face value?

I would love to help you rid the world of that culture but I find myself stymied by your refusal to take the step yourself of defending the pastor.

On the contrary, you repeatedly tell me that I cannot say the very things that you say I should have a right to say. You understand the issues - you've articulated them clearly enough in this post - but you still maintain it's not your obligation to call for clear understanding of the conservative position while at the same demanding of me the opposite.

That is my consistent complaint, that you are not level-handed in this and, in so doing, contribute to "the current climate". Could you begin to consider whether this stance of yours actually contributes to the problem? Radical, I know.

On the contrary, you repeatedly tell me that I cannot say the very things that you say I should have a right to say.

Say them all you want. You won't be understood properly. Your words will close queer people off, because that is how they have learned to survive in a culture that hates them.

Say them all you want. You won't be understood properly. Your words will close queer people off, because that is how they have learned to survive in a culture that hates them.

And what will you do to ensure that I'm heard correctly? In other words, how committed to making an open environment are you?

I'm doing it, that is, i am speaking out against oppression. What else do you suggest/request?

I've been telling you what you need to do for a long time now. Why plead ignorance?

You want me to agree that it is possible to preach that homosexuality is immoral without supporting homophobic violence?

I've said all along that this distinction is indeed meaningful, but that as long as gay people are badly mistreated, that this distinction will be lost on a lot of people.

and when will you appeal to gay people to understand what is being said rather than branding people like me as "homophobic" and as contributing to the violence?

Actually, that dovetails with a post i've been planning to write about communication...

This is wonderfully clear and well-written.
I completely agree with your (dearly needed!) call for more people to step up and offer the compassion this world desperately needs.
The need of privileged people to recognize how society gives them a hand is crucial - and even more important are the privileged people who are willing to help the underprivileged.

"It is your responsibility to take note of what other people give up so that your life can be improved."

This is where the slight mistake happens that I was talking about earlier.

Keep in mind that I agree with your general gist on this, but I think you have some errors that could lead to some really weird, bad ideas if applied in the material world.

I would restate that as "It is your responsibility to take note of what other people [have taken from them] so that your life can be improved."
And then the responsibility is to act to stop the taking.

In the case of your original sentence there is a mild responsibility also, which is to remind the sufferer to stop giving these things up. But much less so.

I believe that free will is warped in a society where there is oppression.

lady_babalon gave an excellent example of this when she brought up "survival sex", which even when it is freely offered is not truly, freely offered, in that the person offering would not do so unless she felt she had to.

So, i do not think i am in error, although i admit that my idea here is extremely radical. I think this is the kind of ethical step it takes to overcome oppression and thereby make it possible for people to truly act in accordance with their free will.

(deleted comment)

All white people benefitted economically from slavery, even if they didn't own slaves. White people today still benefit from the racial economic inequities of a century ago. I don't know that cash payments from modern white people to modern black people would solve the problem, but i do feel that there is an inequity that has to be acknowledged and addressed.

So you're saying that because white and christians are not oppressed, they have a White Man's Burden to manually oppress themselves and/or not publicly express viewpoints opposing the behaviour of the oppressed?

I can and do stand up for others when they're being victimized, but it isnt my right to claim that my opinions are inherently superior to those I disagree with, and therefore I am a better person. I'll always stand up for the equality that I believe in, and I will disagree openly with those possessing an opposing viewpoint. But I dont believe that it makes someone a bad person for having an opposing viewpoint, even if those views bring them into direct conflict with me.

they have a White Man's Burden to manually oppress themselves

Under this ethic, nothing is being taken from you or from anybody. I am only asking people to stop allowing themselves to benefit unfairly.

I did not specify that only certain people were required to examine offered gifts or planned initiatives; it is a duty everyone has. I do feel that those with more degrees of privilege will find that they have benefitted more from the status quo than others, as they come to realize the ways in which they have benefitted unfairly.

Losing one's privilege under oppression is not oppression. Levelling the playing field it is the undoing of oppression.

not publicly express viewpoints opposing the behaviour of the oppressed

People are free to say whatever they want. But the climate of oppression makes it difficult for them to be understood properly.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

bravery seeds bravery

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Too Far

Re: Too Far

Re: Too Far

I hope this makes sense... I'm exhausted

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

reposted with clarification

Re: reposted with clarification

Re: reposted with clarification

Re: reposted with clarification

Re: reposted with clarification

Re: reposted with clarification

Re: reposted with clarification

no subject

no subject

reposted with clarification

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject