6/Privilege: A chisplanation
So, I was derping around online doing valid and necessary research on the LJRP community for anthropology class (yep, yep, totally) when I ran across metafandom and of course got sucked in. I was mostly there to look at the topics and find out exactly how one submits articles to be linked, as I'm interested in posting my ethnography (when it is finished) to
( Read more... )
They can't. It's not possible. I mean, once you've learned to recognize one privilege set I think it's easier to recognize others, so if you for example are white but trans and know all about cisgendered privilege it might be easier for you to spontaneously become aware of your privilege in racial situations. But that only works if you're already deeply 'in the know' about how this stuff relates to an issue you're passionate about. The people who face the greatest challenges when it comes to realizing their privilege are those who most need to do so. Our culture places their interests above those of everyone else, and because they are participants who were born and raised in that culture and were never awakened to how it was oppressing them (because it wasn't), they have never thought to question it. They cannot possibly know about something so abstract as the symbolism behind their actions if someone doesn't tell them.
It is not the job of the oppressed to educate the privileged. It is, however, the job of the offended to speak out against whatever is bothering them. What everyone should do is find the areas where they are privileged and become hypersensitive to their own and others' use of that privilege. Sexism might bother me because I'm a girl, but since I'm white I should focus instead on race issues so that I can educate other white people about our privilege. The men among those people I talk to will then have an easier time adjusting to the idea of male privilege, once they find out about it through other means, because they will already know about white privilege and the ideas - though not the specific privileges - are similar. Perhaps some of them might even spontaneously become aware of their male privilege because they can see the patterns of symbolism.
If we're going to fight oppression of any kind without forcing the oppressed to do all the dirty work, that's going to be the way we have to do it - by focusing on "other people's" issues and not the ones of our personal interest and just hoping that everyone else does the same. I'm not sure if most people have the motivation to do it, though. I mean, think about it - would it really be that much easier to talk to a white man about racism than about sexism?
ANYWAY, YOU CAN'T MANSPLAIN TO ME. Because the symbolism wouldn't be the same if you did it. :3 And no mallets - I'm hard to understand, anyway.
Reply
That is an excellent point, and I certainly did not want to imply that I think the poor are obligated to teach the rich, or women to teach the men, etc. I like the way you said "the job of the offended to speak out about what's offending them" better than the way I worded it.
I guess what I'm hung up on, and what could definitely be me misunderstanding your post, is when someone in a position of privilege asserts a position of ignorance. Like the example you gave in your entry about the men going: "Well anyone can explain anything condescendingly." From what I understood, you were glad that there were "real feminists" who would simply tell the men: "NO" while your response would be much longer and much more sympathetic. And in terms of effectiveness, I think your longer, more sympathetic but still firm response is much more effective than a simple slap in the face.
I'm not sure focusing on "other people's issues" instead of the ones you care about is really the solution though (although that might not be what you're trying to say, either). Once you get into the "Well, I care about sexism, but I'm white so I should focus on racism," it becomes unsustainable. Like you said, motivation.
But I think once you're taught to see things holistically, it does become more sustainable. I took a class called Culture of Respect, which taught that there is no hierarchy of oppression because all the different -isms use the same tools to oppress. So, for example, sexism was my "intro" to oppression studies/advocacy. I was aware of different -isms, but I didn't feel a strong passion. But by seeing all oppression as interconnected, I've become much more aware of how racism, ableism, classicsm, etc. manifest themselves, and a much stronger advocate against them. (Which is not to say I'm a strong advocate against them. I still have a lot of work to do, but I'm better now than I was before.)
I feel like in Platonic essence, we agree, but language is getting in the way. Are you getting that same feeling? Because it's really disconcerting.
Are you saying I'm not manly, Chi? D:
Reply
My answer is more complicated, though, and sometimes a complicated answer does more harm than good. These men are in a sense saying, "Wait, so if I do this it's sexist but if she does the exact same thing then it's not? Isn't that... sexist?" The most effective answer is not, "Well, it's not the action that is sexist but the beliefs and values behind it..." because most men do not believe that they hold sexist beliefs or values. You are set up to fail because everyone believes either that they are an exception to the rule or that society as a whole isn't as bad as you're painting it.
So, no, the most effective answer that I can think of really is to slap them in the face with, "No, and shut up." When they have been burned enough times to finally get it through their heads that maybe you're not the one with the problem, then they will be ready for the longer explanation.
But by seeing all oppression as interconnected, I've become much more aware of how racism, ableism, classicsm, etc. manifest themselves, and a much stronger advocate against them. (Which is not to say I'm a strong advocate against them.
I think this is what I was trying to say, really. I haven't taken a class like that, but I can already see that all forms of oppression are interconnected and we would all be much better equipped to deal with it as a whole if we saw it as simply oppression as opposed to racism, sexism, etc. And I think the world - or at least fandom, if some of the stuff on metafandom is anything to judge by - is moving towards that.
I feel like in Platonic essence, we agree, but language is getting in the way. Are you getting that same feeling? Because it's really disconcerting.
I think you might be right, but a lot of this is probably my fault. I've noticed lately that I have trouble with language if I use too much of it. @_@; What I'm trying to say is that while I agree with you that smacking people on the head and telling them no is not effective because they shut down, there's no choice. That's what cultural change and integration is supposed to be like. We all have (or at least I do - maybe I'm weird) painful and embarrassing moments from childhood, when we were still learning our own culture and often made terrible mistakes about it. This is exactly the same thing, but it's happening mostly to adults. We might not like it, and we might try to use our privilege to get away from it, but our culture is changing whether we like it or not and eventually we're just going to have to adapt or become outsiders.
WELL UM. Are you sure you're not trying to appear manly just so you can use the phrase, "ALLOW ME TO MANSPLAIN...?" Because I know I would. Best word ever.
Reply
Either that or they'll simply stop trying to have a dialogue at all. When someone approaches you with an earnest response and you simply slap them in the face, that doesn't encourage them to continue the dialogue and maybe learn something.
Now, if someone is obviously being a troll -- ex: "YOU FEMINISTS ARE SO FULL OF SHIT. EVERYONE CAN TALK CONDESCENDINGLY. STOP YOUR WHINING" -- then I think a simple slap in the face is effective. But if they're approaching you with open-minded ignorance: "But I don't understand. Women explain things to me condescendingly all the time. Why is it wrong if I do it but not if they do it? Isn't that sexism?" then that shows that their minds are open and ready to learn. That kind of moment is a gift, a gift that requires a little care and delicacy.
Learning, change, and growth are painful and embarrassing, yes. The moment you realize "Oh shit, I've been a total dickhead" is absolutely humiliating, even without someone going "STFU you're a fucking retard."
So I disagree, there is a choice. And the choice you make may vary depending on the person you interact with, but in general, I favor gentler explanations that encourage a dialogue to a smack in the face that will HOPEFULLY inspire the other person to reconsider the POV or may inspire them to write off entirely your POV and everyone who agrees with you.
There's a chapter in FMA that perfectly embodies my philosophy on this subject. Wish I could remember which one it was. XD;; It had to do with Ishbal.
Where ignorance is not malicious, I think it deserves to be treated with compassion. I confess that part of this belief stems from the knowledge that I am ignorant and the hope that others will be compassionate about my ignorance, but if I in turn extend that compassion to others, is it wrong?
YOU'RE ONTO ME, CHI. ALLOW ME TO MANSPLAIN...
Reply
RL not sexism example. Remember the whole hoopla with LJ and the transphobic question of the day thing?
Friend: I don't understand why everyone thinks that question is transphobic.
Me: A) Because it made it seem like being trans is the equivalent of being a criminal and B) it implies that transgender people are obligated to tell their partners they're trans.
Friend: Okay, I see that connection and it's just silly. As for B, while I wouldn't say people are obligated to tell their partners they're trans, if you're that close with someone, I think you really should.
Me: Whether or not you're "obligated to disclose your trans status" is a really sensitive issue because a number of people have used that excuse to try and get away with murder. "My girlfriend didn't tell me from the start that he was really a man. When I found out, I was absolutely terrified and ended up killing her" -> trans panic defense.
Friend: Holy shit. ._. I understand the problem now.
(above conversation is not verbatim)
Neither long and complicated nor a slap in the face. Admittedly, this friend is a total sweetheart who genuinely wants to understand why people feel the way they do. Not all people would be that determined to understand. But I do think if people aren't utter douchebags, they'll treat you basically how you treat them, and if you treat their questions seriously, they'll take your answers seriously.
I think that's the last vaguely coherent thing you'll get from me tonight. My English is fading. XD;;;;;;;
Reply
I don't remember the question of the day thing, though, because I honestly avoided the whole oppression issue because I got burned once by some very cruel people (the whole bit about cat macros and ASCII art? That actually happened to me.) and saw the level of passion and anger in the community at large - this was a bit before racefail, but I saw some of that, too - and was like, "nope, I can't hack this." Actually, I will confess that I stopped reading your LJ because there was too much of that stuff in it for me. I should put you back on my default view again. X3;
Anyway, yeah. The only reason I'm having this conversation is because I have been slowly and slightly changed by my wonderful feminist girlfriend, and because I'm the sort of introspective person who must find out all of the reasons why I got burned so as to ensure that it never happens again. That's what led me here in the first place.
Reply
At the moment, I'm not much babbling about my ~issues~ -- it's kind of work/fannish focused at this point. But I'm sure something soon will set me off again.
I'm glad you're having this conversation. ♥ You've given me a lot to think about (when I'm more awake).
Reply
It might have been that my experiences tell me that smacking people around is the normal way to handle ignorance when it comes to these things.
Or it might've been that it worked for me.
Or. It might have been that "YEAH, BEING SMACKED AROUND REALLY SUCKS LET'S TRY NOT TO DO IT TO OTHER PEOPLE."
Seriously, I forget. WTF.
Reply
Reply
If they do ask these questions, yes, people should answer them. Or if they phrase it in the form of a statement, like, "I don't get why..." But not if they're coming at the discussion with the presumption that they already understand and that their personal experiences trump those of the group at large. That is a position of privilege and their minds are already closed to anything that will not reinforce that privilege.
Reply
Reply
A male can't help being male anymore than a female being female.
Is it "mansplaining" just because they happen to be male? It's just another form of discrimination. In reality a man can be just as knowledgeable or informative on a variety of issues without being in fact female.
It just sounds like.. "if you're looking for discrimination you will find it, whether it truly exists or not". Learn to be patient with others, to understand each other, and perhaps you'll learn the root of te misunderstanding rather than grandstanding as if you are the only one capable of intelligent thought.
Reply
No, seriously. Imagine that we are not posting on LJ but at a coffee shop or something. On one side of the room there is a group of women having a similar discussion to the one we are having over here. On the other side, there's a group of guys being misogynistic. What do you think the chances are that a man will go interrupt the girls and explain why they are wrong, and vice-versa? Which one do you think is more likely to be taken seriously - or expect to be taken seriously - by the group they are interrupting?
I could spoil it, but I think I'll just rest my case on the fact that you are male, butting into this discussion late and anonymous - so, without the advantages that pre-existing social ties would get you - and are expecting to open our eyes and be proven inarguably right. Oh, and probably also be flamed because you're so right that we just can't handle it. Hence the anonymity.
To answer your (probably rhetorical) questions, though, there are two key parts to a mansplanation: 1) the thing being explained must be something you already know about, preferably explained in as condescending a manner as possible. 2) yes, the explainer must be male and you must be female.
So, in effect, yes - it is mansplaining just because the explainer happens to be a man. However, the associated behavior - being condescending and acting as though you have something useful to contribute when you don't - can be performed by anyone and is rude no matter who is doing it. The term "mansplain" is used not to bash on men and make it sound like they're the only people who ever, ever do this but to highlight the difference between when men do it and when, say, other women do. This difference is important because men are the privileged class here, and when they engage in this behavior it is considered less socially unacceptable because they're men - or, more accurately, because the other party is a woman and therefore less of a person.
There is, for the record, a racist version, "whitesplaining". Buuuut I didn't go into it because I'm a white chick and would rather talk about feminism. Yeah, go figure - I'm unabashedly typical.
Oh, but believe me, I used to be in your boat. I really did think that people were reading too much into this stuff and that it was unfair, until I realized what is really going on: people aren't making up new words for the same exact behaviors performed by men, they're making up words for these behaviors which point to subtle differences in the symbolism behind them when they are performed by a man. Those differences are real, and they are true. Yeah, they're looking pretty deeply for this stuff, but it is pretty well ingrained in our culture and difficult to dig out.
Do our eyes create the discrimination, I ask you, or does the discrimination create our eyes? I say it is the latter.
For the record, though - the last part of your comment displays pretty much a textbook definition of mansplaining. Thank you, I already know how to listen respectfully to other people. Thank you, also, for butting in to tell us girls that we are being arrogant for having a feminist conversation that challenges your privilege as a male. It proves my entire point nicely.
Reply
In your coffee shop scenario I suspect the two groups would more than likely keep to themselves. In my experience when groups of people splinter off into their own cliques they don't bother to eavesdrop or butt in to another group's conversation. Usually it takes some sort of catalyst for that to ever change, something greater than a few overheard sentences.
Then you wouldn't be resting your case on solid ground. Just because a person may disagree with your opinions it does not mean that they must be of the opposite gender. The reason for my anonymity is merely due to the fact that I was curious how many conclusions you might jump to. My social ties as well as yours should have nothing to do with a localized debate, or exchange of ideas. I am not familiar with you and yet I was interested enough to finish reading what you had to say, even though I disagree wholeheartedly. I am not of the opinion that anyone I don't know must therefore be irrelevant. Quite the opposite I'm afraid. It's only through engaging with others, comparing their experience to my own, can one truly grow in certain areas.
And to refute your answers. Firstly, 1. How is the person explaining something to you supposed to automatically know what you know? Are they supposed to be psychic? It can be irritating when someone relates a topic you are already more familiar with but they really have no way of knowing to what extent you're acquainted with it. The condescending part is a mute point as females and males can both be condescending. Secondly, I still can't condone further dividing people by gender or otherwise. If one seeks equality one must be willing to let those differences fall to the background.
And you don't see how childish that is? Just because they happen to be male? I used to hate when I was younger and teams would be divided up as boys Vs. girls. We always beat them, and it was dull... but I thought by now we'd be past boys vs. girls. It is not rude to have an opinion that varies and a desire to express that difference. It's impossible to highlight a difference when there is none. I don't appreciate people being condescending whether they are male or female. They are only privileged if you have convinced yourself that they are. There are far more women promoted at my job then men, because the women are working hard to achieve those goals and not for any other reason. I don't consider a woman as less of a person.
What subtle differences are those? As of yet I have seen no valid example. I have had far more women talk down to me then men. To be perfectly honest.
The mind creates discrimination.. our eyes just project images to our mind that then interprets them. Beyond that, a complicated DNA sequence creates the eyes. Your mind interprets what your experiencing and you determine whether it's discrimination or not and a person who is actually discriminating makes the choice, mentally, to go through with the act. I'm not saying that discrimination doesn't exist but I am saying that it does not happen as much as people believe it does in everyday life.
Fascinating, a textbook version you say? Even though in reality I am not male? That seems to support my case, not yours. You're welcome for the presentation of a different opinion. Last I checked the internet was not exclusive and anyone could have commented if they wanted to. I wonder if your response would have been as negative if I had been agreeing with you. Would it still have been considered "butting in"? So no, you're not challenging my "privilege" as a male since as we are both female we would be exposed to the same level of "privilege" in society that you have created in your own mind for yourself. I have not limited myself in that fashion. If you convince yourself that the world is out to get you, than it will seem that the world is out to get you. Self-fulfilling prophecy. And thank you for being as condescending as possible and proving my point about the entire ordeal, or at least the fact that one can assume incorrectly quite easily if they are too impatient to learn the truth before speaking and acting.
Reply
You seem to assume that, because I believe in having a different word for something when a man does something than when a woman does it, I personally believe in treating the man differently.
You seem to assume that, despite my repeated claims to the contrary, I have not once spoken your arguments myself almost word for word and truly believed them.
You assume that I come from a similar background to yours and therefore give the same respect to an anonymous commenter that I would give to a stranger who signs his name to posts.
You assume that my viewpoints are caused by some mental deficiency such as paranoia or lack of experience in the world rather than a combination of experience and introspection. Yet you seem to bristle at the implication that your viewpoint is the result of anything less than sophistication and superior knowledge of the world when it is in fact the view we are all indoctrinated in at birth.
I don't envy you. My mistakes are at least easily corrected.
Reply
The only thing I really assumed about you is that you would in fact believe me to be male when I responded, which was proven. The other things you mention was conjecture, no where did I state that it was what I truly believed.
You are treating a man differently by categorizing it. Do you also refer to a woman in a similiar circumstance as "womansplaining" or any similiar term?
I never assumed we come from a similiar background. If you're referring to the comment about privilege that was only to show how ridiculous it is to believe that one has more or less privilege based on gender. I'm certain we are different, in many things. No doubt whatsoever. Privilege like anything depends on the individual and their circumstances, background, and everything. If that's the part you meant, you took it the entirely wrong way. If it was just about being anonymous then wow, there are more important things to worry about. For real.
Paranoia has not been entirely ruled out nor entirely confirmed. I wouldn't call it a mental deficiency though. Many bright people have been paranoid in the past. It often means they just had issues relating to others. I laugh at the later part. Way to misinterpret a person. I would be the first to tell you I'm not always right about everything but please.. indoctrinated from birth? That doesn't sound paranoid at all. I can't even remember anything from my birth, or early formative years, can you? And haven't your opinions in fact changed over the years? In that case your indoctrination was a horrible failure. People will grow and develop in different ways, no one can have complete control over another. Though I have witnessed much attempted indoctrination in the media and in school (college especailly). Not teaching opposing point of views is a large part of it, leaving out facts from history to suit one's goals being another. Somehow, my childhood pales in comparison to the indoctrination attempts I've been exposed to in the present.
Reply
Leave a comment