Force Will Never Unite Us.
Earlier this month a UK woman was arrested and detained for several hours, essentially for calling a transgender woman a man and offending her on Twitter. Okay, there was a bit more to it than that and I can't condone what this woman did, but her arrest is not good thing for transgenders or even minority communities as a whole, because rather than creating the mutual respect and acceptance that we're all different, it will create fear. Fear is at the root of discrimination so it's the last thing that activists should want.
The reason it creates fear is because it is so easy to offend, especially online where the written word can't be imbued with expression and with the English language being so malleable and evolving. As an example of just how easy it is to accidentally offend, this report on it slipped up and referred to the transgender, Stephanie, as a man and they were fully aware of her current sexuality preference.
Even those who would normally be an ally are going to be cautious or even actively avoid interactions with any people who wield the kind of power that will send you to prison if you accidentally say or do the wrong thing and offend them. Yet this avoidance in itself could offend. I know how easy it is to offend accidentally. I did it to a vegan who I was actually trying to be supportive of. Sometimes these people are so used to being attacked that they are always on the defensive and see everything as a potential attack. So you're on the back foot before you even open your mouth or write a single word. It probably doesn't help that I'm an expert at putting my foot in my mouth anyway. What can I say, it was a talent I was born with. 😕
You might say that justice would prevail and find them not guilty if it was indeed un-intended to offend, but by then it's too late, the damage is done. Even brushes with authorities can create fear.
One might also say its unlikely that anyone would report someone unless they really were harassing them and not for a one off slip up. Sadly there are no guarantees to that and the fear is already there anyway, because news sources tend to boil it down to the basics and it becomes as simple as “UK mom arrested for calling a transgender activist a man,” something I actually discussed in my last post, about not having enough information to get a full picture.
How far will this fear spread? People might avoid shops where certain people are serving because they fear saying something to upset them or maybe just not doing the right thing which shows respect to their culture. Then employers might avoid hiring certain people because they lose custom with them.
Let's put this in perspective. Insults and arguments happen all the time, especially on social media. Bullying is a stark reality, but you're not going to necessarily get arrested for offending just anyone.
Far from uniting us, the hate speech laws are driving an even bigger wedge between us. The law already covers crimes. If you are involved in a harassment campaign, it doesn't matter who it is, the punishment is there. By making it particular to the LGBT, Muslim or black communities you’re singling them out and isolating them even more. How can you make a worse punishment for harassing them than anyone else? You can't. So that makes it a lesser crime if its done to someone else?
The fact is that you are always going to get people who aren't very nice, even with laws to protect you from it. In fact laws aren't going to stop the most determined bigots, they'll just try and disguise themselves better. After all, it's against the law to commit murder and steal, but it still happens. Forcing people to not be mean to you isn't going to make them like you, only give them more resentment towards you and others like you, taking away any opportunity for others to prove that they are not to be feared or hated.
I'm not familiar with Twitter, but most social media has an option to block or unfollow people. Surely using that option is better than using the force of the state to stop harassment.
For me this is sad news indeed for everyone. Force will never unite us, only drive us apart.
So who do you think benefits from creating ‘wedges’...?
It’s probably a good idea to begin to learn how to recognise the unspoken presuppositions in every statement, especially when reading things in the media, or statements from government officials.
As you say, many people who were once marginalised have their voices heard nowadays... but the wounding and trauma of previous times still prevails.
Perhaps we can all remember to hold kindness when communicating with one another.
Posted using Partiko iOS
The past can be hard to escape, but it only serves to make people resentful and can lead to the marginalising of others in return, which certainly doesn't help matters. It just creates another kind of separation.
Who indeed.
Posted using Partiko Android
I'm not going to comment on the topic per se, I'm unfamiliar with the case, but in the spirit of trying not to offend and education over anger:
Don't say "transgenders" or "the transgender." That's othering people hardcore, and making them into things and not people. You wouldn't say "coloreds" when referring to people of color, or "the black" when referring to a black person. You just say "transgender people" or "the transgender person."
I'm not pissed off because I know your intention wasn't to offend, and I'm stupidly difficult to piss off. But now you know. ;)
Sincerely,
A Transgender Person
Thank you Phe.
Ironically you are also highlighting again how easy it is to offend without knowing and just how much the English language is always evolving. I actually probably would have said coloureds if referring to multiples of people of colour as when I was growing up coloured rather than black was more socially acceptable and adding an 's' makes plural, doesn't it? (There's some tongue in cheek there, but can't think how to express it) Personally I hate labels as we're all people. It was hard to avoid in this post though, but trust me to get it wrong!
I'm actually going to leave my mistake as it triggered this comment and I think that's valuable.
I differentiate between people-who-are-trying-to-offend and people who don't mean any harm, they're just not intimately familiar with a topic, because there's a difference. :)
Language does always evolve. Like when I was a kid, I think the actual medically-accepted term was to say that someone was "retarded," but now that's a slur. You might say an actual diagnosis (like, Down's syndrome) or you might say "developmentally delayed" or "learning disability" or something like that.
Labels are important when you're an outsider. It helps, not harms, when you have that moment of, "There's a WORD for people like me?? I'm not alone??!" because before that you often feel broken. Funnily enough, I felt this the most with the label "asexual," because I am that, too. At different points in my life, I thought I was broken, stupid, immature, a late bloomer, a devout Christian, and a freak - because I don't get sexually attracted to people. Anyone, of either gender. I'm gay, because I'm homoromantic - another label - meaning I can romantically be interested in people, but I only do so when they are interpreting me as the same gender. A lot of trans folks have that experience when they transition, their orientation goes with them - but I haven't medically transitioned at this point and I already have had it come up and recognized it. When a straight guy flirts, I want to wretch. When a gay guy flirts, I get giggly and happy and stupid. When a lesbian flirts, I also get giggly and happy and stupid. Because the gay folk are reading me as their gender, but the straight guy is reading me as the opposite (I've never had a straight woman flirt with me thinking I was a dude, but the thought doesn't appeal). So ...labels are important, to me. They have helped.
Not having labels is actually a privileged position, because it sets up the majority as a "default normal" and leads to that feeling of brokenness for anyone who isn't that. So like when cis folks get upset over the word cis - cis literally just means "not trans," as in, you were born and the doctor said "it's a girl," and yep, that's correct - but some people will get MAD about it, because they don't want a label to describe them (I'm not saying that's you, I've just come across it several times). But saying, "I don't want a label to describe people like me" is implying that whatever group that is (in this case, cis people) is "normal" and it's only a deviation from that "normal" that needs a label to describe it as "different." It's like when white people don't wanna be called white because they're reading that as some connotation that they're oppressors and their lives are easy (though that's not what white privilege means, it just means that your problems and struggles aren't magnified because of being white). But I'm white (well, like 94% white, if you wanna get technical, but as far as the world is concerned, white because I look it), because that's the word for it and it doesn't come with a history of oppression like the n-word does or any other slur. Hell, even the words that are meant to be derogatory for white people, like "cracker" or "wonder bread" or whatever, don't really matter, because again, there isn't that history of oppression attached to them (and the first time I heard "wonder bread" I thought that shit was hilarious). Though the intention is usually good, saying "I don't see color" is something only white people can say, because as much as a black person might like to not see color, that doesn't prevent then from being targeted by stop-and-frisk policies or followed around in a store because the clerks thought they would steal or having their resume tossed in the circular file because their name sounded "too ethnic" or whatever - color effects their day-to-day in a negative way whether they like it or not, just like I have white privilege whether I think it's fair or like it or not. I can go through my day being treated better because of my whiteness and HAVE NO IDEA that it's happening - like, maybe I just think the clerk at the store is polite but then they turn around and are rude as hell to a Latinx person - so I can not see color, because that kinda thing is invisible to your experience. But somebody discriminating against you - maybe sometimes it's invisible, because maybe that person is just rude to everyone - but lots of times, it's obvious, and you can't not see it.
Edited to add:
And sometimes, when you're in a vulnerable group, you are hyper-aware of the other people around you, because that might be dangerous. The odds are probably low that it will be, but the possibility is there. It's like how a woman might be super aware that a man is walking behind her down the street at night. The odds are good that he's just a normal guy going about his business, but he might be a rapist, and the woman is even admonished to be vigilant about such scenarios. So too, a person of color might be hyper aware if they are in a place with only white people, or a gay person is surrounded by only straight people. Probably everything is fine, but it behooves your safety to be aware.
Now here are the conversations we should be having! Some fantastic points raised and some great insights.
There may be some cultural differences with us too, as I'm a Pom. I've never heard of the references "cracker" or "wonder bread." The only white insult I know of from England is honky, but I don't know of anyone who took insult from it. I'm also not familiar with the label cis. Is that kind of like wizards calling non-magical people muggles? ;D Perhaps that's why some don't like it, because they don't want to be normal, they want to be special.
I learnt a new description for my appearance when I came to Australia and that's "ranga." Aussies have a lot of jibes, but rarely used other than in jest. The only time someone's really shown dislike towards me here as a foreigner was someone serving me at a food place. She was smiley and friendly until I spoke and revealed my accent. I hope she didn't spit in my food when I couldn't see! Lol!
I get the need for labels. You put it better than I could have; I hadn't thought of it in quite that way. The problem comes when they categorise in the wrong way or when people use them as insult making it bad. A single label also doesn't cover the diversity of what makes someone. Often a label assumes a range of things about someone, some of which may not be true. Even the label normal is subjective. Everyone can have their own different definition of what is normal. As you said, some people are happy with a particular label some are not. Who's to judge who's right and who's wrong. I suspect the main reason labels don't sit well with me is this ambiguity. I struggle with that, which could be the OCD in me. If I say that we are the same species, then at least that's something which can't be disputed (you're not going to burst my bubble on that are you? ;D).
Also, in my school years I went to a Waldorf school in what was classed as a deprived area. It attracted people of a certain mindset and that mindset usually held no room for discrimination. The result being that I wasn't even aware it existed for a long time and when I became aware that it had existed, I was genuinely grateful that it no longer did (was I in for a shock)! We didn't need labels to describe differences because as far as we were concerned we were all quite normal, yet individual people. We really were a melting pot and those on the outside looking in did seem to think we were either hippies or a bit weird. We also had a fair bit of old fashioned learning and to this day the word gay has just as much meaning in its original use as it does referring to homosexuality. My daughter was trying to tell me that her friend was gay and it was such an apt description of her character that I didn't realise she meant her love preferences. Doh!
Gosh yes, this language. In 20 years time the youngsters might be saying that transgender is a derogatory term and wondering why you used let people call you that, let alone call yourself that! Lol.
Good addition. There is always a fine balance between being aware and protecting yourself and being seen as discriminatory. It is fear, after all, that underlies discrimination. Even a white man can feel painfully aware of he finds himself somewhere where he's a minority. It must get particularly wearing on those who often come under suspicion, though. It's not helped when others of your community/type/culture have given people cause to have fear or suspicion of you. For example, the shop keeper who keeps a close eye on any blacks who walk in could have experienced robberies from mainly blacks. Or maybe it's teenagers that he's wary of. In America the white slave owner past created a lot of resentment. It doesn't mean all are like that and most are not, but people are still wary. Sometimes a few can ruin things for the whole community.
I think the issue with the "white privilege" label is that while you may see it one way (a way I much prefer, incidentally), many see it as an attack. They way you describe it makes perfect sense, but the word "privilege" creates the image of having a head start in all walks of life. Something that the majority of the population in any country doesn't have, because the majority are poor and have little chance of improving on that. Then to tell them that they're privileged adds insult to injury. In some cases, in the UK, ethnic minorities have priority due to laws, and even company image, which prompt them to hire none whites whether they're suitable for the job or not. I don't know if there's anything like that in America. In Australia they're more likely to favour Australians for certain jobs so some firms won't even consider my husband. However, the firms who will employ him always have a real multicultural work force. It's a country with such a high immigrant population that really you can't avoid mixed work forces. There are exceptions for indigenous Australians. Companies get incentives to employ them and they also get extra welfare benefits that no-one else gets. This does make some Australians resentful and likely to say "aboriginal privilege." Ironically (and sadly) racism is not overly common towards the immigrant cultures, but it is apparent towards the indigenous Australians.
I did once experience someone being polite to me then completely rude to someone of another ethnicity. It's an awful feeling and quite a shock. It's not something I often encounter though. I have known people who are racist, but they don't show it around those of other races who they actually meet. They criticise after they're gone. Perhaps it's an English thing, stiff upper lip and don't show emotions type of thing.
Thank you so much for a view from your perspective. It was very thought provoking. I think these comments are getting longer than some of our posts! :D
Posted using Partiko Android
See now, Pom I haven't heard before, and I don't even know what that means. :) And thank you for having these interesting conversations with me! I don't mean to come across as lecture-y or anything, but it sounds like we're on the same vibe and just sharing our experiences and thoughts and cultural differences.
Oh, and yeah, people say honky here, too. LOL. The connotation is kinda southern, hick, redneck here; I don't know what it would be in England!
Ah ha, the muggle point about wanting to be special might be a thing for some people, that's true.
As for your accent being the giveaway - I've heard of plenty of Americans overseas pretending to be Canadians because so many people hate Americans but like Canadians, and our accents are mostly close enough, unless they can't feign the difference in the word "about," ha ha.
The some happy, some not about a label comes up a lot in the LGBTQ community over "queer." Generally, I'm right around the generational gap where my age and people younger have reclaimed it and use it to describe ourselves, but a lot of older LGBTQ folks who grew up with that being a major slur HATE that we use it. Nobody is forcing anyone to use or not use a label for themselves, but man do the arguments rage.
I'm secretly fae! :D
That's cool that you were able to have that experience in school. That's what I'm sure the GOAL is when people say, "I don't see color," it's just the unpleasant reality of society makes that not possible for most people. When I was a kid in New Jersey, honestly, people described themselves more by nationality or religion or ethnicity than race. It was, you were Irish or Italian or Puerto Rican or Korean or Jewish; even religion was designated with nationality - I was raised Irish Catholic, not just Catholic. The only exception really was black, because so many African Americans don't know what nation their ancestors came from. But when I got to Colorado, I literally walked into the lunch room on the first day and the kids were mostly self-segregated by race! I had never seen that before! It so didn't happen in my little army base town in Jersey (the army base meaning we had people from all over creation because the army moved their family around to wherever their job was).
Yeah, the word "privilege" is a HUGE point of contention here. I understand - my life has not been easy - but really, it's semantics. If I can understand that privilege or lack thereof is intersectional, I'm sure others can, too. So like, I have white privilege, but I don't have class privilege because I'm wicked poor; etc. Probably nobody except some guy who is literally a cis white rich Christian straight good-looking thin able-bodied neurotypical man, has all of the facets of privilege. And how much of the population is that? Not much. We all have a different bag of privileges and disadvantages, and it's really our responsibility to face them in order to erase them; it's our job to face the privileges we HAVE because we're the ones in the position of power in that way to be able to dismantle it. So like, it's important for me to call out white privilege; it's important for a cisgender person to call out cis privilege.
We have a similar situation here in the States about Affirmative Action, which are those kinds of laws that mandate businesses must have a certain number of whatever group in order to prevent discrimination; but really, the reality is the starting line is not the same. Like, it's not a privilege for a disabled person to be able to park nearer to the door, it's leveling the playing field a bit. It's like this:
The short kid isn't being given an advantage by having two boxes to stand on. :)
The nice-to-their-face racist happens here, too. That's my dad, actually. He'll be nice to everyone's face, but get a couple of drinks in him and slurs start coming out of his mouth and all sorts of bullshit. My sister and I would argue with him about it growing up, but he's never changed. He's not some sheltered person from a backwater who "just doesn't know people," he's from Brooklyn, his best friend when I was a kid was black, his sister-in-law is Korean, his kid is my queer ass (homophobic slurs come out of him, too), and his own dad escaped the damn Nazis in the 30s. You'd THINK that would have instilled in him some anti-bigotry, but it didn't. That's the other assumption people seem to have - that all it takes to overcome prejudice is exposure or education - but that's not always the case, or my dad wouldn't be like he is. We never stopped arguing with him - he just doesn't care.
We're writing many articles, here. LOL
Nice post. ;D
Pom is how the Brits are referred to in Australia. Nobody know for certain how they arrived at it, though. Would Americans call us limeys? I know how we got that name!
I think honky might have come from American tv shows, to be honest.
Americans are really copping it at the moment. The irony is that those willing to travel are usually the open minded ones and every one I've met has been lovely. My daughter was visiting England last year and she was mortified by how rude the Brits were towards American tourists. It wasn't always that way, so it shows what unsettled times we're in. Maybe it's a response to Brits being the bad guys after the fizzling out of the British Empire. Now America is becoming the bad guy we can divert the world's attention towards them. So much easier to blame the whole nation, isn't it?
That's interesting with the re-use of "queer". Does it have a new meaning to it? Growing up in England, "queer" referred to homosexuals, but lesbian and gay already cover that in the initials of the movement.
I'm curious, have you ever come across someone saying that disabled parking is a privilege? It seems odd to think of it that way and I'm pretty sure most don't. People mostly express disgust at none disabled using the spaces, but then I guess some people's definition of disabled vary. Sometimes disability isn't always apparent. It's a good example, however, and brings to mind the elastic line drawn between equity and privilege. At what point is someone abusing equity in order to make it a privilege? Those are the people who get others riled up.
I love what you say about facing your privileges. Without acknowledging the benefits of where and how we live, we're really just whining about everything. Nearly everyone has times in their lives where they see what others have and envy that. When I'm frying about paying the next bills or having to replace broken items, it helps to remind myself that some don't have the privilege of being able to worry about replacing a washing machine or fridge. They still manage to survive, though. Counting our blessings is a very good idea.
Isn't family funny. You can't choose them, though. I sometimes wonder if us offspring are fate throwing lessons into the workings for the parents. Apparently, my father said, before I was born, that if he ever had a red haired child he'd disown it! Then I came along. I've never heard him say anything against redheads, but I know his younger brother used to rib him about me, saying I was the milkman's despite me obviously having my father's traits. His brother's third child was a redhead too! This uncle was also rather racist and his redhead daughter now has a black partner. It made me roll when I first found out, because he adores her, so he'd never reject her over it.
Exposure and education probably works to a point, but often it can take a few generations. Even then there will still be those who it don't necessarily get it. Weird example, but cannibalism wasn't uncommon at one point, but even the last cultures to move away from it would be appalled by it now. However, there is still that odd one that crops up in what I guess we'd call a perversion. It's also not beyond being considered in crisis situations, when hunger overrides disgust.
I don't think you come across as lecturing. I love that you're making me think. Although I really should get some cleaning done instead of writing essays! Lol.
Posted using Partiko Android
Limeys is rather old timey and nobody says it anymore, but everyone would know what it meant. ;) Nowadays we'd just say Brits. Though if the UK breaks up because of Brexit, that will probably change, too - speaking of evolving language! LOL There's a song called Honky Talk Blues, so maybe that's where that came from, too. LOL
Yeah, America has been the colonial bad guy since probably WWII, when Europe had to rebuild and America started playing World Police and tinkering in other countries' business. Well, we were involving ourselves in other countries' business before that (cough Philippines cough), but we were really just doing what a lot of other European countries were doing, basically FOMO catch up scrambling trying to be like Big Daddy UK; it wasn't until the empire started breaking up and Europe was a major warzone that we really took over as The One With All The Resources And Nobody To Stop Us. It never ceases to amaze me how many Americans are shocked, shocked I say about the whole Russia scandal, while I'm like - do you know what the US has been doing since the cold war? Especially in Latin America? READ A HISTORY BOOK. A real one, not a rah-rah 'Murica one.
Queer still means gays, but it also applies to the whole spectrum - gay, trans, nonbinary, bi, etc. A lot of us that fit more than one letter in the alphabet soup acronym like it because it's more like "I'm in the gender/orientation rainbow" generally without having to run through a list of "I'm gay, ace, and trans."
Yeah, I've seen people actually say that accessible parking was a privilege, usually as they park there without being disabled and ranting about it to justify themselves. But as you say, more often I see people getting attacked because people think they are doing that, when really they ARE disabled, they just don't fit that mental image of being in a wheelchair, or even being paralyzed in a wheelchair. Like I've seen memes making fun of people in wheelchairs as faking it because the person in the chair stood up to reach something on a high shelf at the store. Like, they think the only reason to be in a wheelchair is if you're paralyzed and unable to stand at all. Um. People have all sorts of reasons to be in wheelchairs. It means you can't walk all over creation under your own steam just then, not that you absolutely can't move your legs. Like some days a friend of mine with CP needs a chair, and some days she needs a crutch, and on really rare occasions (but only really for short, indoor distances) she can manage without if it's a good, low pain day. She's not faking it, that's just how CP works. That's how a lot of things work. I just wish people wouldn't jump to conclusions!
Thank you so much for participating in the Partiko Delegation Plan Round 1! We really appreciate your support! As part of the delegation benefits, we just gave you a 3.00% upvote! Together, let’s change the world!