Hostile, Phobic or Simply Ignorant?
For example, many contributors and commenters on this site have been accused by other commenters of being any or all of the following: trans-hostile, trans-phobic, homo-phobic, women-hostile, sexist, racist, classist. And while there may be a few wholly hateful folks who swoop in out of the ether and try to cause a ruckus, I genuinely believe that all our contributors and most of our audience is interested in working towards greater understanding of each other. So, if we are all so interested in creating community, why is it that we keep getting called x-hostile, y-phobic or z-ist?
I think the answer is ignorance. These people who say things and get accused of being -hostile-phobic-ist are not necessarily so, they're just ignorant.
If someone posts a truly sexist comment on this site, you have my permission to flame-away. Go for the jugular. This site is pro-lady and we're proud of it. Same goes with trans-folk. And people of color. We're pro-trans and pro-QPOC, too. All our readers have my full permission to cut down anyone who is genuinely hateful. The problem is, how can you tell? How can you tell a hateful statement from an insensitive statement? How can you suss out the motivations for what one person types into a small text box on a website? It's really hard.
Is it important to be able to tell the difference? Should it matter if someone's offensive statement was the result of hate or ignorance? Shouldn't we go on the attack and teach these offensive people that their speech isn't welcome in our forum?
Yes, Yes, and No.
The reason why it matters whether offensive comments were motived by hate versus ignorance is really simple: those who speak from a point of ignorance can be educated. If treated properly, they can learn the error of their ways and correct the clumsy insensitivities that so easily (and rightfully) offend others. These people, if not scared away by knee-jerk attacks, can become allies.
This is why it's so important to read others comments with an open and questioning mind, why it's important to really seek out the motivations behind one's statements: we need all the allies we can get, and we can't afford to scare away or piss off potential team mates when there are so many haters out there.
What do we do with the true haters, though? Is there ever a way to tell if someone deserves a full-on attack? Perhaps the educational approach might actually have a small positive impact on them, too, and should always be used?
As always, your (respectful) comments are welcome and encouraged.
5 comments:
There are also simple, legitimate differences of opinion. One of the biggest errors I see the "activist" mindset commit (whether activist for the "left" or the "right") is being so convinced of the absolute truth of their opinions that any disagreement with them comes from not "seeing" the situation as clearly as they do. The assumption is that if I disagree with you, I'm either mean-spirited or ignorant. But there is a third reality: I understand where you are coming from and I have thoroughly thought through the situation, but I have legitimately come to a different conclusion. That makes me neither mean-spirited nor ignorant. It simply means I have a different opinion.
Landoftrolls, I totally agree with you and I want to thank you for pointing this out because I do think this is an issue.
Actually I post here anonymously due to this very fact. The retribution one receives for either not supporting or disagreeing with some beliefs/assertions of some people or groups within the "community" is often really harsh and I, for one, fear harassment from those who would label me 'phobic' or 'hostile' simply because I disagree with them.
I agree with landoftrolls as well. If you're dealing with folks that are completely committed to a belief to the extent that any questioning of it is perceived as an assault, it's easy (and intellectually lazy, I might add) to pull the -phobic card. I've had "internalized homophobia" thrown at me more times than I care to recall, all because I ventured to disagree with a foaming-at-the-mouth demagogue.
That said, I don't think we'll be seeing this irrational rationalization pattern disappearing any time soon; to the contrary, I think that it's going to get way worse before it gets better. I believe that the gays in this country are undergoing a reexamination of what it means to be queer, especially as we become more and more mainstream, and for better or for worse, more "ho-hum" to part of the population. This progression is threatening to a great number of people who have made a cottage industry out of self-righteousness and outrage, as it becomes difficult to make a fuss when less of a fuss is being made on the other side of things.
An analogue would be the current wailing and gnashing of teeth on the side of conservative fundamentalists, which has greatly intensified in the last 10 years. This doesn't signal, to my eye, any sort of "conservative renaissance," but rather a frenzied response to the rapid loss of ground by conservative causes.
If you disagree with folks in the fundamentalist right, you're anti-American, communist, anti-religion, or a whole host of other things; if you disagree with those on the fundamentalist left, you're homophobic, misogynistic, a racist, an elitist, a classist, or a lot of other dirty words.
I'm at the point where I let it wash over me from either side of the spectrum, and have a little chuckle to myself as I contemplate how those who claim to advance progress only become more threatened when some of that progress is achieved in a way that does not meet their utopian vision.
I'm a Star Wars geek, so I'm always reminded of when Obi Wan Kenobi's words, "Only the Sith believes in absolutes." It doesn't matter which side you're on: if your mindset isn't flexible, you'll be perpetually angry, unfulfilled, and fearful, and as a human being, you will inflict your suffering on others as a way to self-medicate.
Of course, I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong, and I wouldn't label you as Sammyphobic if you disagreed with me.
"What do we do with the true haters, though?"
Is it possible to ignore them?
Also, I would amend paragraph 4 to say "If someone posts a truly bigoted comment on this site, you have my permission to flame-away." This language is more inclusive and doesn't leave certain people out.
Some people are very threatened that others have their own opinions. They see every conversation as an opportunity to evangelize their beliefs in a misguided effort to convince you they are right and you are wrong. This effort has nothing to do with the issue in question or healthy debate. It's about their insecurity.
If you go for a "full-on attack" please substantiate your opinion with facts and research. Personal experience and opinion are easily dismissed as such. If you have some concrete info that is hard to refute then you have an intelligent debate.
Although I see some difference between comments motivated by hatred/bigotry and comments resulting from insensitivity or ignorance, there are times when really don't feel like dealing with either.
If I am a member of a minority group and frequently encounter ignorant statements about my group from majority members of this community, I am going to feel like the community isn't fully my own. I might be "welcome", but one of the things I want in a community is to not have to defend my identity all the time, to be able to put my guard down and not be in "educator" mode so much.
Sometimes I'm up for a good dialogue with people who might not be very familiar with my group, but other times it's just really tiring or boring to be having that conversation -- and mind you, I've probably had the same conversation with other people many times before.
Post a Comment