During the course of writing this blog about common white tendencies, I sometimes discover as I do so that I myself am unwittingly enacting a common white tendency. In my previous post, for example, I responded to an email from "L," a reader of this blog, about a white man who only dates non-white women. I thought I was writing about this man as a white person, but I also ended up writing a lot about a particular personality disorder that I thought he might have.
As many commenters soon pointed out, writing about a personality disorder, and suggesting that this interracial dater might have it, was not a good idea, primarily because I'm not a medical professional. The offending post provoked such a strong reaction that I deleted it (I've reposted that response, for the record, in the comments to that post, here). My response implied that I was diagnosing this man with Narcissistic Personality Disorder, and yet, I don't know him; again, even if I did, I'm not qualified to diagnose him with anything like that.
My gratitude goes out to that post's commenters for diagnosing my demonstration of this common white tendency, and for their thoughts on that tendency, especially Commie Bastard, RVCBard, Ana Paula da Silva, Thaddeus Gregory Blanchette, Kit,IzumiBayani, Lady Dani Mo, Cloudy, Restructure!, Victoria, honeybrown1976, Spiderlgs, Sheila, Doreen, Kinsley, bluey512, Julia, and Jillian (please let me know if I've missed anyone). These observers taught me something that I hadn't realized about my whitened self -- white people often offer amateur diagnoses of mental illness. Apparently, non-white people rarely do that (further comments on these provisional claims are of course welcome here).
In response to complaints about my response to L, I tried to point out in the comments that the post was really about whiteness itself as a sort of narcissism, but that didn't go over well either. Explaining what one meant to do after a screwup -- instead of simply acknowledging and apologizing for what one did -- is also a common white tendency (one that also deserves its own swpd post). As Kinsley wrote in that comment thread, "More and more it seems to me that with whiteness, the impulse to explain and the act of derailing/taking center stage/etc do sit awfully close together."
I'm more aware of that common white tendency than the tendency to diagnose mental illness without professional training, but I still do it sometimes (and hey, I'm writing and running a blog -- it's all about explaining things! just kidding). I won't do it here; that is, I won't explain anything else about my messed-up response to L's query. I acknowledge it, I apologize, I appreciate the chance to learn about another common white tendency, and I promise to do my best to never do it again.
Finally, there's this question: if white people do tend to offer amateur diagnoses of mental illness more often than non-white people do, why do they do so? When they offer such diagnoses of non-white beliefs, attitudes, behaviors and so on, I think it's more clearly a racist tendency. What is it that's happening differently when, as in my case, a white person offers an amateur diagnosis of mental illness in another white person?
Since I just learned about this tendency in myself, I don't have answers to these questions, so I'll simply offer them to you.
Short answer: WP think they're experts on many subjects. The medical and mental health industries are not exempt from our realm of expertise.
ReplyDeleteLong answer: I think that many WP, especially of my generation, possibly the one before it, but certainly the ones to come after it are raised in a world of correcting ALL medical conditions - both real and perceived. Everyone seems to "have" something - clinical depression, ADHD, social anxiety, bipolar disorder, etc. It's openly talked about and often used to write off a person's "problem" instead of holding people responsible for their issues. Mind you, I'm thankful for the medical advancements, but it's to the point now where patients walk in and tell their doctors what medicines they want to be on.
Now, I'm sure I'll catch some hell from people who are like "OMG I have this and I need meds for it" which is perfectly fine and probably true, but this constant open dialogue about what ails us and the medicines we're on for it creates this entire culture of so-called medical professionals who got their certifications from reading about it on the internet, having a loved one with the condition, watching medical shows, talking to their doctor about medicines they've seen commercials for, or - in my case, taking a few classes on it.
I'm not excusing it, I'd rather stop doing it, frankly. I'm giving my perception of what I think fosters the perceived "rightness" of this white tendency. Many, if not most of us, were raised in it. We see it as helpful and a "logical answer" to things we have no business providing answers for.
When a white person does it to another white person, as I said in my other comment, it takes away the diagnosed person's problems in an instant and makes it something they can't help. Wrong. Most of the time, they can help it. When I think things like "His dad probably abused him." In my mind, I'm practically giving him a pass to be a total dickwad to people because someone was a dickwad to him. Well, I don't want to do that anymore. I would really rather that he to get over his problem and take it out on the person he has his beef with.
As white people, this diagnosing makes people less responsible for their actions and their words.
As a white person myself, I am curious about this question too. One thing I noticed with white people: they have to offer an opinion or thought about every topic. You see this on cable television news segments. You see this on the internet message boards. Every stupid topic must have a comment from a white person. White people love to play the arm-chair sociologist, the arm-chair lawyer, or the arm-chair psychologist.
ReplyDeleteAs you can see...I just demonstrated my whiteness with this message post. Done posting and begin reading.
In my experience, white "diagnose" mental illness for two different goals.
ReplyDeleteFor a white person, the diagnosis is to explain away bad behaviour by making it something out of the person's control. No strangers to upholding stereotypes and holding unprivleged and vulnerable groups down, whites don't care that they're maligning those of us with real mental illness, just so long as they get their point across.
For a PoC, the diagnosis is intended to discredit their thoughts and feelings. They get shut down. "Paranoia", "persecution complex", "bipolar", "anger management issues"... you get the picture.
Doing this hurts people suffering from real mental illness, PoC, and of course, PoC with real mental illness.
I actually also do the whole diagnosing-mental illnesses-without-really-knowing thing...and I'm Asian. I'm not quite sure if it is a white tendency or a class tendency, as most people who are diagnosed with mental illnesses or know people who are mentally ill do tend to be better off financially (I think).
ReplyDeleteIt's different, however, in that white folks seem to tend to "diagnose" PoC with made-up mental disorders in order to silence them, and they also "diagnose" blatantly racist white folks with mental disorders in order to excuse their racist actions.
Well, pretty much they are the "life experts". *snark* Also, when applying it to fellow whites, they want a reason for a certain behavior; whereas, members of POC are just "being themselves".
ReplyDeleteI tend to diagnose individuals do to my own lifelong mental situation because as a person living with BPD, you know one when you see one. I don't know if I have the credentials to do so, unless you count life experience.
Thank you for owning up and apologizing.
ReplyDeleteWhat is it that's happening differently when, as in my case, a white person offers an amateur diagnosis of mental illness in another white person?
What it definitely, absolutely is is ableist--people who are mentally and physically abled or "normal" feel they can diagnose and pass judgment on people who are not. It comes from a very judgmental mindset about disability and mental illness--and since this comes straight out of the history of the white European medical establishment (think of, for example, the Victorians and the concept of female "hysteria," or how Down syndrome was considered a "regression" to the primitive "Mongoloid" state), going back very far, that may also affect the probability of white people practicing this particular form of ableism more than POC (and perhaps men more than women).
So it's quite possible that white people, particularly men, are more likely to buy uncritically into this model of mental illness or physical disability as a marker of less moral worth or being an inferior person. I would not be surprised either if POC raised in the US or Europe would be more likely to play diagnose-and-judge in this particular manner than POC raised in other countries, with a different (not necessarily better) medical-social attitude towards disability and mental illness.
Disclaimer: I'm white, female, and have sought treatment for clinical depression in the past.
Important point: while the person doing the armchair diagnosing might claim the intent is to remove responsibility from the "diagnosed" person, the stigma attached to mental illness is such that the person then becomes blamed for causing zirself to have X mental illness. (This goes for WP as well as POC. I am not talking about shit like how every third white kid suddenly has ADD if ze gets extra time on the SAT).
ReplyDeleteWhat does the diagnosing do? It makes the diagnoser look smart and knowledgable. It yields a false sense of control over the situation. There is NO BENEFIT for the person labelled, or other people involved in the situation. The opportunities for victim blaming multiply. ("He wasn't stalking you; he obviously just has Asperger's and doesn't realize that following you home every day, sitting outside your parents' house in his car all night, and calling you every 5 minutes is not normal! Stop being such a bitch and call him back!")
@ Macon, I don't think you can say that WP labelling other WP versus POC as mentally ill are necessarily separate phenomena. Commie Bastard made this point on the other thread--when POC transracial adoptees are tagged with diagnoses somewhat haphazardly, it is seen as a sign that their original background is somehow dysfunctional, allowing the white adoptive parents to gain a measure of "control" over the situation without actually doing anything to fix the problem. (CB, I'm sorry if I paraphrased that badly; I'm sure you can do a better job). The motivation is the same. But because Whiteness lets white people be induhviduals whereas POC are Representatives, the implications are different.
>> "as most people who are diagnosed with mental illnesses or know people who are mentally ill do tend to be better off financially (I think)."
ReplyDeleteNo. There is a high correlation between poverty and mental illness, not wealth and MI.
I've noticed many people do it (I'm around white people primarily so they are the ones I see/hear doing it the most however). My belief is that much of it is symptomatic of internet overexposure. We all get snippets of information, read a blog about said subject and believe we're on par with the people behind all of it. I know in my family circle growing up, you were the black sheep if you weren't well versed in a variety of subjects. White people have been blessed with access to education for longer and so it is seen as an affront not to get in as much knowledge as you can (which leads back to the easy way out of gathering "knowledge" from the internet.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, it makes me a little uncomfortable for us to be exempting health professionals from this sort of criticism -- as though the problem was with the lack of degrees rather than with the diagnoses themselves. Ultimately, it seems like a diagnosis of NPD (or any of the other disorders people have talked about) has the same effects in terms of either excusing behaviors or delegitimizing opinions, whether or not that diagnosis is made by a health professional.
ReplyDeleteSince I've been given no reason to believe that (physical or mental) health professionals are less subject to racism, sexism, heterosexism, ableism, transphobia, etc., as the rest of society, it worries me that we're phrasing this only in terms of unqualified people diagnosing personality disorders. I think more generally, there's a common white tendency to diagnose rebellion/nonconformity of people of color, as a way to delegitimize those people's beliefs and actions and to provide a justification for more complete control (e.g., institutionalization, confinement, taking away children of color, etc.).
There's a parallel common white tendency to diagnose white people when their racism gets too severe -- I've heard a number of armchair diagnoses of Asperger's for people who go too far in their public racism. My instinct is that the purpose of this isn't so much to excuse the behavior as to confine it, and deny that it's related to whiteness -- this distances us from the misbehavior, by relating it to a trait that we don't share (a personality disorder) rather than a trait we do share (whiteness).
I do also think our (that is, white people's) reactions to perceived personality disorders are affected by race -- that we are more likely to see a POC's personality disorder as something we need to control, and a WP's personality disorder as something we need to understand. This, I think, is what gets read as using mental illness to excuse misbehavior.
And I think the "we" above includes all white people, not just white people without advanced degrees.
"Victoria said...
ReplyDeleteShort answer: WP think they're experts on many subjects. The medical and mental health industries are not exempt from our realm of expertise."
That’s it in a nutshell:
I think whites have been looking to whites for so long as authorities on everything it becomes part and parcel of the white mindset. I see it in the gaming forums; the movie forums. Whites argue amongst themselves about who is right. Speaking with authority, bringing up obscure facts to make themselves appear more informed. Insulting each other for their lack of intellect. It seems like a common practice for white networks to employ white experts on everything from the current war, to finance or politics. From movies and entertainment, to subjects like race or history. Just look at the History, Discovery or Military channel. You won’t find many black experts there. I’m still bothered by the fact that the History channel seems to fixate on Hitler, but that’s for another subject.
@ Per:
ReplyDelete>> "To be honest, it makes me a little uncomfortable for us to be exempting health professionals from this sort of criticism"
Certainly, we could write encyclopedias about racism (and every other ism imaginable) in the [American] mental health system. However, the too-quickness to diagnose phenomenon that seems to be the basis of the conversation thus far is really NOT that prevalent in mental health in general. I say this as a very experienced peer educator/counselor (with people of all races). I am not talking about "Why won't a shrink say I have ADD? I want extra time on the SAT"; I mean kids who have gone to 5-6 different doctors, had zir life completely in ruins, finally gotten a diagnosis and gone on a drug and therapy regimen for BPD, schizoaffective, etc--and seen miracles. That is a *disgustingly* common experience (well, not always the miracles part; most of my kids continue to struggle even when taking meds).
So, while the mental health system is racist, this particular aspect of it is not necessarily thus.
Oh, and as for the proliferation of *official* diagnoses among upper class people/white people...a lot of that comes down to brutal determination and money, and how many "second opinions" you can afford to get.
And on a radicially different note, Happy New Year, everyone!
I can't say if this is a white thing or not, but I think there is definitely a trend to make anything into a disorder. What you call NPD used to simply be called "egotistic asshole". I think this trend is very harmful, because it removes the responsibility. You can treat people like crap, as long as you have a "disorder" to blame for it.
ReplyDeleteI do also think our (that is, white people's) reactions to perceived personality disorders are affected by race -- that we are more likely to see a POC's personality disorder as something we need to control, and a WP's personality disorder as something we need to understand.
ReplyDeleteThank you for saying this. I was having trouble putting my finger on it, but this sums it up nicely!
But let's take things a bit further, shall we?
What really gets me are the types of things White people diagnose when it comes to other White people and POCs (especially Black people). In my experience, White people seem to diagnose other White people with things that appear to expand their potential. OTOH, White people seem to diagnose people of color with things that diminish our potential.
White people (especially White men) displaying signs of ADHD, schizophrenia, and various personality disorders are often viewed and treated as though the source of these traits is their innate specialness. The reason why they can't do things like hold a job, maintain healthy relationships, etc. is because they're so unique and gifted - and thus superior to such conventional expectations. POCs (especially Black men) who share those traits are not seen as special, but lazy and immature.
People of color (especially Black men) who have trouble focusing during class and learning the standard way are seen and treated as mentally deficient (IOW, they can't know better) and/or lacking in home training (IOW, what more can you expect?). White people (especially White males) with similar traits are seen and treated as being restless due to their being so much more advanced than their surroundings. They're just quirky.
And let's not forget how class plays into it as well. Sometimes I suspect that the difference between a brilliant artist and a crazy bum is how well-funded they are.
(Just FYI - this thread has some of the most thoughtful comments I've seen at SWPD for a while.)
RVCBard,
ReplyDeleteThere's a real simple solution with male students of color. Get them moving. I tend to get them active in our lessons at school by focusing on tactile, spatial, and kinestatic learning. While using these modules in a combined fashion, they, especially AA boys acquire the content far more accessibly rather than the typical ignore it and send them to remedial.
Of course, I'm often seen as the rogue because I'm going against "accepted research" toward students of color. Unfortunately, you are correct with your observations of how white male students are seen in comparison to their non-white counterparts. In addition, God help them if they are Asian. If they don't fit the model minority student role, they are screwed.
Wow, this one really resonated with me. Someone diagnosed me on an Internet forum once. To be fair, I'm not sure the person is white, but I'd be shocked if they aren't.
ReplyDeleteI got into an "argument" with a staff member after asking a question about a language I didn't understand (and now understand much more). The responder acted as if it was a pain to explain a concept to me, even though I'd never asked before. I wondered what I'd done wrong, so I sent him a PM. That led to a series of back-and-forth PMs, in one of which he said you don't have to respect people online because you'll never meet them. I gave the worst reply I could have thought up: "I feel sorry for you" for thinking that. I expected a flame, but what I got was a bonfire. The next PM was from ANOTHER staff member who'd been asked to "deal with me." He told me I'm a "textbook psychological case." I'm "emotionally unstable" and inclined to "act out" because I "crave attention."
Never mind getting to know me or my background -- he had me figured out. Yeah... I'd been on the forum less than a month. Even psychologists don't jump to conclusions so quickly before gathering information. So how could a stranger think they knew me that well? I've been selective about Internet forums ever since.
Again (as if to negate my own words), I'm not sure if these people were white. I strongly believe they are, but just as they were wrong about me, so could I be.
I’m Asian, but I’ve done this too. Not to the extent of labeling ppl with a disorder though. But more like, why is he being a jackass? Probably because [insert family background issue]. Not that it excuses them (and usually it’s about a friend or someone close), but I go around hoping that they’ll get their emotions ‘healed’. I haven’t noticed any trends as to who does this more or less. But I can now see how that can be hurtful to the other person. Hence I shall refrain from doing it.
ReplyDeleteBut I don’t get the whole ADHD, etc etc to explain away and excusing bad behavior. This is definitely a white thing, IMO. And yeah, conflating racism with mental illness is problematic, as Doreen said in the other post. Racism is racism. Arrogance and pride.
>because I "crave attention."
Bwaahahhaha. A friend of mine said something similar to me after I emailed her to explain how hurtful it was that she negated my experience of racism.
>God help them if they are Asian. If they don't fit the model minority student role, they are screwed.
Oh? In what way? Earnestly curious. I know that some/many Asian parents tend to be very demanding of their kid’s academic performance, but I don’t quite understand how not fitting the stereotype works in the school context. (I didn’t grow up in a place where they had that stereotype.)
> Doing this hurts people suffering from real mental illness, PoC, and of course, PoC with real mental illness.
Cloudy, you mentioned “real mental illness” twice. The second one is qualified with “POC”, the first one isn’t. Did you mean people in general for the first one, or white people? If the latter, then that would be kinda funny/ironic ;)
fromthetropics, I hadn't even thought about that, sorry for the confusion.
ReplyDeleteWhat I meant was it hurts people with mental illness (general, all races and genders), it hurts PoC, and the two big problems with it intersect at PoC with mental illness.
Fromthetropics,
ReplyDeleteWell, it's quite simple, and thanks for asking. I found that in certain Asian groups (e.g. Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Indian) within my school, academic excellence is basically expected, which puts so much pressure on many of my students. Many of my students come to me frustrated with what was expected of them. Gawd forbid, they receive a "B", or dare I say it, an "A-" in most of their subjects, especially Math and Science. The stress levels of their students are really unfortunate.
On the other hand, if you are, Cambodian, Thai, Vietnamese, or any other Southeast Asian, the other extreme is that you aren't expected to excel in the same manner as the Chinese, etc., Asians (at least where I teach here in Southern CA - I can't speak for other U.S. regions, though). This expectation to be unlike the "superior Asians" offers frustration and stress levels that I can only liken to, perhaps, AA students when compared to Caribbean blacks or African immigrants.
Either way, I would like to do some further research on the mental health of these students when focusing on academic expectations. There is an intersectional relationship with class as well, which furthers the stress levels.
I don't think this is a white tendency at all because I've seen this behavior in a lot POC as well. The real problem is how mental illnesses are being trivialized.
ReplyDeleteA lot of people nowadays say, "I'm depressed." instead of "I'm really upset." or "I'm so stressed out." When something is at the tip of their tongue, I've had people think for a few minutes because forgetting what they were about to say bugged them. "I'm OCD like that," many joked. I've had people tell me that I'm OCD because I wash my hands quite a bit. When people have mood swings, popular sayings I've noticed are "I'm/she's/he's so bipolar!" or "Bipolar, much?"
I find this to be completely nauseating. As a result of this cultural trned, I've found that a lot of people don't really take mental illness all that seriously.
Last year, I began seeing a counselor but was soon recommended to a nurse practitioner who then referred me to a psychiatrist. They all agreed that I had depression, but the psychiatrist also diagnosed me with paranoid personality disorder. I was adamant against the idea of having depression--I didn't want to be viewed as some attention seeker or someone who exaggerates their feelings or some "emo kid." The first two are my own personal views on people that use the word "depressed" out of context while the last one is a very popular phrase. I didn't want to be associated with any of that.
After learning about PPD, a lot of events from my late childhood to the present became very clear. My way of thinking, as well. I haven't told my parents about any of this because they think psychology and anything related to it isn't real. However, I ended up telling about five of my friends.
Almost all of them tried to explain what was "wrong" with me, tried to rationalize it, and downplayed the disorder. "Everyone sort of has a mental illness, if you think about it." "We all have some symptoms of certain disorders." It amazed me how they tried to make what I have normal. One friend even accused me of wanting attention, wallowing in self-pity, and derailed the entire conversation by telling me about how she always has bad days but doesn't whine about it. Needless to say, we aren't friends anymore. I blame the trivialization of mental illness.
For the record, I'm Korean-American and said friends were either white or Asian.
People of color (especially Black men) who have trouble focusing during class and learning the standard way are seen and treated as mentally deficient (IOW, they can't know better) and/or lacking in home training (IOW, what more can you expect?). White people (especially White males) with similar traits are seen and treated as being restless due to their being so much more advanced than their surroundings. They're just quirky.
ReplyDeleteDepressingly true. It's a bit like how a young black person who lives downtown and smokes pot is a thug, while a young white person who lives downtown and smokes pot is a hipster.
@ Deborah:
ReplyDeletePerhaps it would be better to phrase it "An additional problem is the way mental illnesses are being trivialized"? ^_^ I think that earlier comments on this and the "only date non-white people" thread show that there *is* a racist angle that actually contributes to the marginalization of *all* people with MI (even though the people hurt most are POC; given WWS/WWT and Center Stage Syndrome I don't think that can be said enough). RVCBard, that essay assignment on intersectionality you mentioned...hehe.
I am wondering, now, in light of especially RVCBard and Deborah's comments and my PEC and personal experiences, how does gender play into this? I know it is a LAND MINE to bring up gender typically, and this must not become a discussion about white women, but the story that I hear from all my "kids" (undergrad students, mostly 18-22), who are women of all races, is mostly about MI used to marginalize rather than "understand"/excuse them. Either in the way Deborah described, or in the sense that "Oh, well, now that you've got meds for it, the problems will all go away, right? So why aren't you perfect?"
Hm. Now that I think about it, a statement like "Everyone sort of has a mental illness, if you think about it" comes very, very close to "I don't see color." That might be trivializing MI on the surface, but what it is actually a betrayal of a deep discomfort with MI that only serves to reinforce the stigma.
I'm not going to waste my thinning breath catering to people's predictable disbelief of directly relevant human rights violation epidemics I could reveal here. Considering the exhausting levels of FAIL meeting the discussion of racism alone, to say nothing of racism compounded with the experience of kids the masses only ever see on informercials and gossip mag covers being rescued by saintly snow-white celebrities - yeah, it'd likely fall on deaf ears. And I gotta say, it seems the number of white "allies" here who think that antiracism is an opportunity for them prove how awesome they are, derail and flaunt theory is growing. (see previous posts)
ReplyDeleteMaybe it's holiday stress or something.
Anyway, all that's probably safe for me to say right now is that these atrocities happen every day all over the world (though mostly concentrated in North America and Europe), and not by accident but under the auspices of legal systems and cultural doctrine choked by racism, Eurocentrism, ageism, sexism, classism, ablism and pseudoscience.
(White people like to shrug off the lattermost element as "shampoo science" used to hawk amusing and politely antiquated brands of snake oil, glossing over the longstanding traditions and lethal consequences of junk science; eugenics, anybody? Not to mention the ways in which junk science mixed with infuriating clinical "discipline" is used to indoctrinate oppressor and oppressed that they were somehow born to their lot. Just look at what the field of "evolutionary psychology" does for patriarchy.)
Reposting comment from the post that gave rise to this one:
polite folks are gobsmacked whenever they catch some wind of how transracial (often transnational) adoptees are casually diagnosed with serious mental afflictions via e-mail, phone or a f*cking fax machine. It's hard for people to see the racial significance because this epidemic is such a clusterbomb of intersectionality - those who suffer most being the most vulnerable members of society: orphaned; children; nonwhite; impoverished; abused; traumatized; disabled; sometimes all simultaneously but NOT all the time - it's crucial to make this distinction in order to fight fear and prejudice of us savage alien baby hordes as automatically "broken" and unhealthy in comparison to all the nicely domestic, breeder cherubs.
But that's a whole other bag that can't be at all adequately conveyed in one comment or several, so lemme just say that this casual invocation of psychopathology does lend itself to oppression of nonwhites, particularly those among us who had the gall to lose our parents one way or another. The adoption industry and foster care system trafficks heavily in lucrative brands of junk science and quack diagnoses.
And it's funny how if someone like me with my experiences were to go around diagnosing white folks at the drop of a hat, I'd be tarred and feathered.
But a white person, especially a white dude, can do so with impunity.
@honeybrown1976 – (off topic) Wow. I’m glad I asked. That’s interesting and relevant to my research. I’m partly looking at how the status of your so-called country of origin in the global financial hierarchy affects behavior at school, such as popularity. I knew about the NE Asians & Indians being expected to excel, but I didn’t realize how the dynamics play out when SEAsians come into the picture. Man, racism sucks. And it’s ugly how it rears its head at all different levels/places. Would you say it’s a similar dynamic to how sometimes people say you’re not black enough if you perform well academically, etc? So in this case “you’re not Vietnamese enough,” etc.
ReplyDelete@fromthetropics
ReplyDeleteIt's cool! Any help from me is available. The dynamic you mention could be considered similar; however, I would further add that "you're not Asian enough" when comparing SE Asians as if they are the lesser in class (it's ridiculous in all aspects). By saying that they're not "Asian enough", the implication that the only true Asians are the NE Asians or the socially acceptable ones.
@Deborah
ReplyDeleteYeah, it pisses me off when others equate being upset/stressed/frustrated with depression and use the disgusting phrase of "Bipolar, much?" These "folks" do not know what it is like to live with BPD; so, by throwing around these ridiculous phrases so freely they keep the misunderstandings of mental health issues festering.
I really would love a mild mood swing than not knowing how the hell I'm going to be the next day. Or, rather or not, I'll feel like feeding my kids.
@ CB:
ReplyDeleteThe readiness with which MH professionals diagnose transracial adoptees with MI--do you think this has something to do with the fact that it is white parents who are asking for the diagnoses (note: I am assuming that we are talking chiefly about white people adopting POC)? I am trying to reconcile (not the right word, sorry) that situation with what I see as a PEC, which is chiefly that young women are not believed to have "real" problems solely from their own authority (and again, this is also my own experience, although in my case it is VERY clearly linked to my physical disability). Maybe what is going on w/transracial adoptees is a case of a (white, presumably) shrink thinking "Okay, white person's judgment about POC, must accept as gospel"? (Shit. That's creepy.)
For the record, I do not blankly oppose transracial and/or transnational adoption, nor the clinical psych Establishment - so take note, potential derailers.
ReplyDeleteTo answer Willow's inquiry-
The readiness with which MH professionals diagnose transracial adoptees with MI--do you think this has something to do with the fact that it is white parents who are asking for the diagnoses
Yes. White Western parents especially. There's often a complacent and flat-out idiotic unwillingness to better communicate cross-culturally. Transracial/national adoptees adoptees are frequently diagnosed with disorders simply for adhering to their birth customs, or for not assimilating into thaeir adoptive ones fast enough for the parents' liking.
Again, there are so many other types of oppression (all of which I named in my last comment here) active in this epidemic that it is extremely easy for those in power to deny that race is a strong factor.
Epidemic is not an understatement here. If you think that the false diagnoses and pompous pathologization projected onto orphaned children of different races and cultures are appalling, wait til you learn of the 'treatment' they put us through.
The methods have been pronounced lethal for adults, much less children.
(note: I am assuming that we are talking chiefly about white people adopting POC)?
In its current state, adoption as a whole on both American and global scales is chiefly a for-profit exchange between poor people of color and affluent whites, which is NOT to say that the poor people of color are actually the ones profitting from the exchange, which in many cases is often of dubious consent.
Of course, white babies still command the highest price, but there's just not enough of them to meet demand.
In the very simplest terms, to be an orphan caught in the crosshairs of adoption industry/foster care regulations (or lack thereof) and popular psychological practices is far more dangerous than most people can imagine, and given the fact that most orphans lack racial privilege while most adoptive parents possess it... well. Dicey situation.
I am trying to reconcile (not the right word, sorry) that situation with what I see as a PEC, which is chiefly that young women are not believed to have "real" problems solely from their own authority
It is not analogous to that. In this the "problems" of transracial adoptees are either overestimated or created and exarcerbated iatrogenically. In other words, problems are seen as stemming from and being the SOLE responsibility of the child, thus absolving the clinician and parents of any and all shortcomings and abuse.
[continued]
ReplyDelete(and again, this is also my own experience, although in my case it is VERY clearly linked to my physical disability). Maybe what is going on w/transracial adoptees is a case of a (white, presumably) shrink thinking "Okay, white person's judgment about POC, must accept as gospel"? (Shit. That's creepy.)
Not just white, but likely also Western, affluent, conventionally abled, neurotypical and - perhaps most significant - ADULT.
The US is one of the only two countries in the world to refuse ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
I question how much this counts for if only because the countries that HAVE ratified still do the exact same shit that goes down here.
We'll bemoan and handwring and talk a blue streak about how horrible it is to deny basic human rights to grown up prisoners of war. All very well and honorable and statesmanlike. And yet, worse is being done to children via institutionalized quackery and pseudoscience, and nobody even fucking knows. NOT because it's clandestine - it isn't - but because nobody gives a damn about colored orphans, some of whom have the added cheek to be disabled.
We're far too powerless for anyone to care about earning our approval. We're just expected to proffer neverending streams of gratitude to our white Western saviors for being "rescued from third world orphanages."
CB, thanks.
ReplyDeleteAnd sorry for the semi-muddle; I wasn't trying to suggest an analogy or that it's one situation--just that it is, um, disconcerting (read: really fucking scary) that many shrinks won't easily believe a WW's words about herself, but her words about a POC child/transracial adoptee are solid.
White health care professional here, non-psychologist
ReplyDeleteWhite men are used to telling everyone else what to do, diagnosing mental illness for the purpose of discrediting the other person / group is SOS,NV. (Same old shit, Nth verse)
Per, Willow, RVCBard - As you have said, both "amateurs" and health care or educational workers diagnose mental illness with racial and other forms of bias. Unfortunately, individuals doing so also have different definitions of and nomenclature for mental illnesses, different motivations in making diagnoses, different actions concerning the diagnosed person.
In some sense, (usually unexpressed) "diagnoses" of "mental illness" in others are made by almost all people during the course of daily life. Most of us will recognize some instances when an individual's behavior falls way off the scale of "normality". Often we can recognize the difference between ordinary "blues" in a person who is doing all of their normal activities, versus the major depressive who loses (or gains) a large amount of weight, retreats from own usual activity, becomes uncommunicative, and so on over time. We recognize signs of emotion and changes in behavior because we are human, members of a social species. We may not be particularly good at "reading" people via facial expression, body language, speech, and actions, but most of us can do so, however incompletely and inaccurately, if needed.
Fuzzy language, fuzzy diagnostic criteria, wide variation in diagnostic skill, wide variation in motive for diagnosis, and general stigma given to mental illness - a recipe for poor communication between honest people of good will, a blame-avoiding way for hostile jerks to use "diagnosis" language as a rhetorical bludgeon.
Too often we reduce another person to a supposedly "scientific" diagnosis, and then believe that we know all that is knowable about that person. Almost all lay people as well as health care and education professionals think this way (commit this sin, if you will) some of the time. Humans tend to simplify persons as "problems" - for health care workers, "...the liver in bed 8..." thought process.
PS:Stating the obvious:
An individual who has the defining symptoms of a given mental disorder does have legal responsibility in the great majority of cases. There have been various legal standards, the most widely used being the "McNaughton rule" defining criminal insanity as inability to know right from wrong at the time of the crime.
I love how no one but me and RVCBard had any problems with MY psyche being dissected but as soon as a White man (whose traits were described in much more detail than mine) was diagnosed in absentia did all the outrage spring up eliciting even a separate entry in SWPD.
ReplyDeleteGuess we must protect White people at every turn from everything while Black women get routinely thrown under the bus.
Witchsistah, which thread was this in? Because I'll admit that I tend to only skim over boneheaded comments. I can only pay attention to idiocy for so long. I would have said something if I'd caught it.
ReplyDeleteAlso, who is protecting the white guy macon diagnosed?
Cloudy, it was in the one about White people only dating PoC. Macon said that the guy described in the OP sounded like he had NPD. Everyone and their momma jumped on Macon for diagnosing the guy in absentia. But speculations about MY character and psychological makeup have been bandied about here like it's no big deal.
ReplyDelete@Witchsistah:
ReplyDeleteYou just want an excuse to hate on White people!
@RVCBard:
ReplyDeleteAND Black people, and other PoC...
@Witchsistah:
ReplyDeleteYou just want people to pay attention to you because you're miserable and have a big chip on your shoulder and want to blame White people for everything!
No one is protecting the guy, you'll notice that the outrage is stemming from a) diagnosing him with a mental illness, especially without any credentials, takes away his personal responsibility for his actions, and b) it maligns those with actual mental illness.
ReplyDeleteWe're upset because racism does not ever get a pass, no matter how many white people try to pretend it's just mental illness and not an inherent component to Whiteness.
@RVCBard,
ReplyDeleteYou forgot that I look for racism in EVERYTHING. And I provoke White people because I'm low in my WWT harvest. It's been a VERY cold winter where I'm at and demand for those tears is HEAVY.
Cloudy,
All I know is people have been head-shrinking ME here without credentials and no one but me and RVCBard have said BOO to them. But when it happens to a White man everyone goes apeshit. Yeah, it may be because they don't want to give racists excuses and passes for their racism or soften up racist acts, but very few outside of the aforementioned and Imhotep who wondered why folks were trying to take our heads off, have even bothered to question the headshrinking into Angry Black Bitch diagnosis and dismissal that has happened to me.
Hell, folks can't even be consistent. One dude even suggested that I give White men passes and therefore deserved past abuse by one. Either I'm a crazy, Whitey-hating Angry Black Bitch or I'm a sellout, White-dick-loving doormat. At least pick a side and stick to it!
per said:
ReplyDelete"I do also think our (that is, white people's) reactions to perceived personality disorders are affected by race -- that we are more likely to see a POC's personality disorder as something we need to control, and a WP's personality disorder as something we need to understand. This, I think, is what gets read as using mental illness to excuse misbehavior.
"
Well this is a problem in the mental health field as well. With the mental health field being comprised of majority white people, there have been some discussions over the difficulties in diagnosing POC, because they're not sure whether what's effecting POC is cultural, social, or an actual disorder. So if you're one of the many feeling overwhelmed byb the racial disparity in America, there's not really a place to go- therapists' couch- to talk about the issues, because there isn't much attention given to POC and their mental health. So I would even go so far as saying white people commonly diagnose other white people with mental disorders, everyone else gets stamped with "evil" or "stupid". They don't diagnose, they merely send away and consider them unfit for society.
After all I think society considers POC as being not of sound mind in general anyway. We have to over explain things in order to be taken for our word, and have to prove at every turn that we're not crazy, and that it truly took place the way we said it did. White people who are crazy are a defect, not a reflection of their race.
Yes, but Cloudy, keep in mind the gendered/racist factor in armchair MI diagnosis, as has been discussed in this and the previous thread: MI serves as an "excuse" for white men (sometimes), but for MOC, WOC and sometimes WW, it is often a silencing factor and a way to delegitimize real feelings. That should upset us, too.
ReplyDeleteGroup fail. :o(
Willow, If you'll look at the other thread, I was the first person to mention the gender component. My full comment in the other thread was:
ReplyDelete"2) There's also a very big gendered component to it. In people with the same symptoms, males are most likely to be diagnosed with NPD, while females are most likely to be diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder."
I probably should have expanded on my example, I was working on the idea that people were familiar with both. BPD is pretty much the new "hysteria" where women are considered codependant, prone to violent moodswings, manipulative, needy, narcissistic, and prone to feelings of victimization. Even when they have the same symptoms as men, they're given the "hysterical" diagnosis. It's considered normal for men to be abrasive and aggressive, but women's actions are always thought to stem from being "needy" and "codependant" rather than just narcissistic. In fact, the DSM makes it clear that most people diagnosed with BPD are female.
And earlier in this thread I said:
"In my experience, white "diagnose" mental illness for two different goals.
For a white person, the diagnosis is to explain away bad behaviour by making it something out of the person's control. No strangers to upholding stereotypes and holding unprivleged and vulnerable groups down, whites don't care that they're maligning those of us with real mental illness, just so long as they get their point across.
For a PoC, the diagnosis is intended to discredit their thoughts and feelings. They get shut down. "Paranoia", "persecution complex", "bipolar", "anger management issues"... you get the picture.
Doing this hurts people suffering from real mental illness, PoC, and of course, PoC with real mental illness."
...Which is all and good, but it is not enough to talk in the abstract. Witchsistah's point is that there was also a very concrete situation of a black woman being pathologized very *explicitly* to delegitimize her experiences, and nobody else spoke out.
ReplyDeleteWe had a tangential discussion awhile ago that touched on how it's difficult for POC in online racism discussions to accept that the WP involved are really doing it for the POC's benefit, because the WP they know in meatspace are "allies" rather than allies, but there's no concrete way to back up online that a WP is genuinely committed (see: "my black friend" etc). Well, this was a concrete chance for WP in particular, but also non-BW as a whole, to show online that they are in the fight against racism for the benefit of black women*, not just to trash WM. And at this, we failed.
* all POC, but Witchsistah is right in that BW and, I think, Native American women get treated particularly callously
Willow, I've not said anything contradictory to any of that. I asked for the specific posts because I'm saying I missed the specific posts, not "Oh I don't think anyone has done this to you." Like I said, I tend to only skim over the longer posts from derailers. Because, as I'd said, if I'd been paying attention and caught it (and it hadn't already been addressed by others*) I would have said something.
ReplyDeleteAlso, ad hominems are bandied about so frequently on the internet and in real life, they generally don't stand out to me.
*I don't really see the need to be the Nth poster calling out a troll.
I'm not even sure if I paid any attention to the Internet diagnosis inflicted on Witchsistah--I think I just may have tuned it out as the usual static. I do know that, in true White Person fashion, I'd blithely assumed that amateur Internet diagnosis was a "people in general thing" and not necessarily a "White People thing." When Macon got called on it, I had another one of those moments of "Huh, really? Wow, I'd never thought of that. I wonder why that is?" The more you know, and all that.
ReplyDeleteAs for 'defending' or 'not defending' Witchsistah, all I have to say on my own behalf is she seems fully capable of defending herself here and there would be nothing left for me to do but plant a 'me, too' flag on whatever smoking crater is left when she's done.
Sheila wrote,
ReplyDeleteAs for 'defending' or 'not defending' Witchsistah, all I have to say on my own behalf is she seems fully capable of defending herself here and there would be nothing left for me to do but plant a 'me, too' flag on whatever smoking crater is left when she's done.
Ha --EXACTLY. I've been thinking the same thing here. So, although it's belated -- I hereby plant my "ME TOO!" flags of solidarity in Witchsistah's smoking craters.
Sheila wrote,
ReplyDelete"As for 'defending' or 'not defending' Witchsistah, all I have to say on my own behalf is she seems fully capable of defending herself here and there would be nothing left for me to do but plant a 'me, too' flag on whatever smoking crater is left when she's done."
and Macon d wrote,
"Ha --EXACTLY. I've been thinking the same thing here. So, although it's belated -- I hereby plant my "ME TOO!" flags of solidarity in Witchsistah's smoking craters."
Witchsistah, may I ask what you think about Sheila and Macon's comments? I'm curious because you sound upset that no one did comment on your behalf, but here people seem to be saying that they were giving you the benefit of the doubt.
I've been thinking about the way things unfolded over the past week, particularly how Witchsistah and RVCBard were treated. It's actually really hard for me to think that I may have gotten swept away by the WWT. What, with all the 'crying' and 'trigger' issues, I did start to believe that we were 'ganging up' on her. Plus, my personal dislike of certain words and expressions did not serve the two commenters well. (It is a personal preference which I am not apologetic for even now, but I can see how that may have colored my perception of the bigger picture.) But when I step back and think about it, I think it's very likely that I got 'sold out' so to speak by the WWT.
ReplyDeleteSo I do apologize to Witchsistah and RVCBard for having doubted what they were doing for awhile during said discussions, and by extension for not having been able to really grasp that the ABW stereotype was being dumped on you or butted in to stop it. Sorry about that.
Macon, I hope somewhere in all this mayhem you're having a little bit of fun in your life.
ReplyDeleteEven I have to let go and have some fun sometimes.
Lutsen,
ReplyDeleteWitchsistah, may I ask what you think about Sheila and Macon's comments? I'm curious because you sound upset that no one did comment on your behalf, but here people seem to be saying that they were giving you the benefit of the doubt.
I think they are dis-ingenuous because BW's position in meatspace and online is such that this kind of "affirmation" is FAR from a given or common sense. What I almost always find is that the only people defending BW are other BW (and not even that many BW but a select few). So this idea that I should have just KNOWN without them expressing it that they were on my side is bogus as hell. BW NEVER get the benefit of the doubt either in 3D or online.
Thanks Craig, I am indeed. This blog just doesn't seem like the place to talk about or share that.
ReplyDeleteThis constant non-defending of BW comes directly from the stereotype of BW not being "real" women as in not being seen as delicate, feminine, worthy of care, affection and protection. We are seen as "mules uh duh worl'" and as rhino-hided, she-beasts utterly incapable of delicate, complex feelings or thoughts. Basically no one defends us because we can "take it." It also leads to the idea that BW cannot ever be harmed (from this comes the view that BW are un-rapeable).
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting. Treatment that would be seen as retrograde for other women is really radical for BW. Being seen and treated as valued, feminine, womanly and ladylike would be progressive when applied to BW.
I think they are dis-ingenuous because BW's position in meatspace and online is such that this kind of "affirmation" is FAR from a given or common sense. What I almost always find is that the only people defending BW are other BW (and not even that many BW but a select few). So this idea that I should have just KNOWN without them expressing it that they were on my side is bogus as hell.
ReplyDeleteWho said you should have just KNOWN that?
If I'm being disingenuous, then it's unintentional (if that's even possible . . . ). Also, as comment moderator, I think my approval of, if I remember right, all of your comments, including ones that others have objected to, is itself affirmation of them.
Nevertheless, my use above of the word "belated" indicates my regret over not affirming your stance more openly than that. My apologies for not wading in to say directly, "Yeah, what she said!" I'll look for chances to do that in the future.
That said, and tbh, I have wondered in some of these situations how much the argument at hand is really an argument that I, as a white guy, should even be jumping into. For one thing, I'm not sure sometimes whether doing so would make me an unwelcome "white savior" type, especially when, as Sheila pointed out, the POC I'm backing is already doing so well, and fighting so mightily, on hir own. Maybe my doing so could even seem opportunistic.
@Macon
ReplyDeleteDo you see any ways that a WP could enter the fight without playing the role of "savior"? In a recent thread I experimented with confronting a WP on their behavior in an exchange with a PoC. This was (in my mind) in contrast to coming to the rescue of the PoC. I let the PoC fight their own fight, but tried to tell the WP to fight fair. [see: "only date non-white people", CommieBastard vs. Bluey512]
I'm don't know if that was a wise, appreciated move on my part or not. But I also hear that Witchsistah felt marginalized and fear of being a "white savior" might be a cop-out on your part. I do aknowledge what you said about you posting all of her comments, btw. I don't mean to minimize that.
I do aknowledge what you said about you posting all of her comments, btw. I don't mean to minimize that.
ReplyDeleteActually, after I wrote it, I realized that I do want to minimize it -- I also published the other side of debates she fought in, and my merely publishing those didn't mean I "affirmed" them. So, I think I should narrow that to the just the ones by Witchsistah that others were objecting to -- the ones that others thought shouldn't be published.
I also hear that Witchsistah felt marginalized and fear of being a "white savior" might be a cop-out on your part.
Maybe, but in what sense? In my recollection, I'm fully supportive of everything I've seen her write here. How would I be copping out?
Do you see any ways that a WP could enter the fight without playing the role of "savior"?
So far, I don't see solid, well-established rules for it, and anyway, I don't think it's up to me to declare what they are. I think the primary rule I have perceived for white folks is to just shut up and listen (which counters what I'm now hearing), and resist the common white tendency to thrust our talkative selves back onto center-stage, elbowing aside POC in the process.
That said, I like the example you just gave, but I'd like to hear from POC about it.
Two comments:
ReplyDelete1. My use of "we" in we failed is deliberate. Witchsistah is not accusing each one of us *as individuals* of letting vitriol against BW go unanswered. Each person who did not reply--whether regular, occasional poster, or lurker--had a specific reason or set of reasons. With the assumption that most of us are here in good faith, I highly doubt that anyone was thinking, "Pshaw, fuck black women"--reasons probably cluster around not wanting to say 'me too', knowing that RVCBard and Witchsistah are extremely witty and, especially when they tag-team someone, can be much fun to read and not wanting to interrupt this, and thinking that someone else could say it better. These are not bad reasons in and of themselves. But the net result is the abandonment of BW. And our fight is not just racism on an individual level, it's against racism as a brutal and insidious systemic force. So we fail.
2. This is a prime example of a situation where my general rule of self-reflection applies. If I feel anger flare up in me after reading a comment by a POC, or have a flash of "that's an unreasonable comment," or feel the need to defend myself, especially for a comment not addressed to me personally, it is a very, very likely indication that an element of my own racism has just been uncovered. This is not to say that all words of all POC must be taken by WP as gospel truth in anti-racism discussions, but I would say about 85-90% of the time an anger-triggering statement (not in the sense of "the world is fucking racist" anger) means my own ugliness has been revealed.
We are not in anti-racism work for the ego boost (um, I hope); we have no face to save on an anonymous online blog. So if you (generic) feel the need to defend yourself against Witchsistah's statement, ask yourself why you feel this need.
My short answer is that we WP are more comfortable with the notion that we are all mentally ill than with the notion that we are all complicit in racism. We will go to any length--including diagnosing PoC for seeing things that we don't and diagnosing ourselves for what is more easily explained as racism--to avoid the dissonance produced by believing that we're "just people" who live in a meritocracy and having to admit the pervasiveness of racism.
ReplyDeleteRe: white savior
ReplyDeleteI have been told by various POC (to be specific, this came up in a conversation involving me, two BW, and one Indian-American woman; I would guess that individual opinions vary by, well, individual):
1. Don't let yourself see yourself as savior
2. Don't expect gratitude (the "have a cookie" mentality)
3. DON'T prohibit POC from speaking as well, and just as importantly, DO assume that they are speaking the truth from their experience while being aware that you can only imagine it. This was the big thing that all three of them stressed--"Say whatever you say, and if/when I correct you, don't insist you're right." "Don't talk over me."
I would love to hear more views as well, but that's what those specific people said.
(What led to this discussion, by the way, was MacGyver. ^_^ An awesome show, but damn.)
When Black women talk about their experiences as Black women here at SWPD, people (particularly White people, but at times other WoC as well), tend to respond with knee-jerk contradictions (typically betraying a lack of true engagement with the content) or remain silent.
ReplyDeleteFor me, personally, it would be nice to see more comments make a more proactive attempt to engage with Black women in a more constructive way.
How about treating Black women as if we are, first of all, human? Yeah, it goes without saying, but from how we're treated, I'm not always sure people truly assume that from jump street. How about treating Black women like women and not disobedient children? Again, it goes without saying, but from what I've seen, I'm not sure if a lot of you really grasp that. How about treating Black women as though our lives are important to us? Once more, it goes without saying, but the things I've seen make me question whether you genuinely understand that.
IMO, there will be less explosive fireworks and fewer ruffled feathers if more people started showing us that they are operating from these very basic foundational concepts.
How would I be copping out?
ReplyDeleteBy refusing to take risks. By doing nothing to avoid failure. By not putting yourself out there the way we [meaning POCs] do when we share things that are painful for us to think about, let alone experience (even vicariously). Even in the conflict between POCs, each of us was willing to risk being wrong and fucking up.
Do you see any ways that a WP could enter the fight without playing the role of "savior"?
Stop thinking in terms of conflict and start thinking in terms of discourse. In discourse, there is always a time for asking questions to get a better understanding of the ideas and dynamics playing out. Case in point: During my conflict with Jillian, Julia asked, point-blank, "I feel like something went wrong, but I don't know what it is. Can someone help me out?"
That led to a constructive conversation via Google chat that I wish could happen more often here.
I want to applaud Witchsista for her comments on this thread in delivering her point-of-view of the situation that happened in the last thread. From reading the comments someof you guys spent way too much time shaming Witchsista and RVCBard word choices instead of getting back on track on dismantling White tendencies in the anti-racist blogsphere. The commenter KD was out of line PERIOD for using the Arab Trader arugment and using herself as center stage in the discussion. Her last comment was very arrogant and she was not willing to be challenged on why her behavior was problematic. She just played herself as the victim and since most people were more concern about RVCBard and Witchsista's word choices, she was seen as the victim and got her way. You guys have all the right to feel that their word choices were misplaced in the discussion but I have to admit the "angry Black bitch" stereotype and the tone arguement was implied in the disagreement of the word choices. You can call me names all you want to but the "bitch is you for real" and "go fuck yourself" did not give me a kneejerk reaction to shame. Maybe because I thought that RVCBard was being sarcastic and snarky when she posted that comment in reference to KD's comment. Also when Witchsista said "go fuck yourself" I was thinking it in my head she just said it LOL. I've seen worst in racial discussions and thought their word choices were mild.
ReplyDeleteI actually do find it funny that Macon and Sheila felt that Witchsista can defend herself. Which is very common for people to think of Black women. It's quite obvious that Witchsista can handle herself, but sometime it does not hurt to have someone's back. I mean come on some of you guys didn't hesitate to defend KD or thought she could handle herself after she made her bullshit comments did y'all? She was bold as hell coming on an anti-racist blog saying that shit LOL The WWT is so strong I tell ya!
Yeah Witchsista was talking about gooblyblob as well for dissecting her psyche and acting like she had her figured out because of some comments she made. Gooblyglob compared the argument between her and KD to an article about a Black man who physically assaulted a White woman after a discussion about Race. I mean that was appauling to me for gooblyblob to ever make that parallelism. I mean a Black woman expressing her disagreements to racist commenter is equivalent to physical violence? Are you Serious?
I love how no one but me and RVCBard had any problems with MY psyche being dissected but as soon as a White man (whose traits were described in much more detail than mine) was diagnosed in absentia did all the outrage spring up eliciting even a separate entry in SWPD.
ReplyDelete@Witchsistah: You had better not be lumping me in with the 'outraged' masses there. Whether you know it or not, the white privileged and Western tendency to psychopathologize DOES have lethal consequences for bastards like me, i.e. women of color who are ALSO orphaned, transracially/transnationally adopted and put into foster "treatment" systems, to say nothing of the intersecting ablism and classism.
Oh, and you might've missed or forgotten my response, but again, Heizenwhatshisface's douchebaggery was such that your rejoinder was damn near genial.
I could go into a long "um, what I meant to say was..." ramble, but it wouldn't help anything in the end, so I'll just say this:
ReplyDeleteI see your point, Witchsistah, and I apologize for leaving you twisting in the proverbial wind like that. Thank you for your insights. I'll try to do better in future.
No one is protecting the guy, you'll notice that the outrage is stemming from a) diagnosing him with a mental illness, especially without any credentials, takes away his personal responsibility for his actions, and b) it maligns those with actual mental illness.
ReplyDeleteWe're upset because racism does not ever get a pass, no matter how many white people try to pretend it's just mental illness and not an inherent component to Whiteness.
THIS. White people claiming that their racism is a "mental illness" is a fucking insidious tactic, because then it makes people of color who call them out on their racist bullshit guilty of ablism - you can't criticize someone for having an illness!
And I for one did note how quickly Cloudy addressed the gendered component to this as well - though perhaps not as ever "expansively" as those with cisgendered privileged would like.
My short answer is that we WP are more comfortable with the notion that we are all mentally ill than with the notion that we are all complicit in racism. We will go to any length--including diagnosing PoC for seeing things that we don't and diagnosing ourselves for what is more easily explained as racism--to avoid the dissonance produced by believing that we're "just people" who live in a meritocracy and having to admit the pervasiveness of racism.
This is brilliantly articulated.
Macon,
ReplyDeleteBasically you exhibited benign neglect. You assumed "Yeah, those two Black broads are tough. Look at how they're handling a pile-on against themselves. They're doing fine. They don't need my help." While what I and RVCBard saw and experienced was "Here we are, BW defending our honor, BY OURSELVES, yet again."
And no, I was not asking for an Amen Corner. It would have been nice for someone besides me to say, "Gee, I find it very interesting that Witchsistah's psyche's undergoing a lot of analysis and conjecture while we're here castigating Macon for doing the same to a WM in absentia." Or at least go, "Yeah, you're right Witchsistah! Let's discuss that," when I pointed it out.
Your implication that I wanted a "White savior" to come and rescue me is a cop-out. I feel the same about that as Lutsen does. It's a figleaf, and you're trying to passive-aggressively throw mud at and on me for being an unreasonable Negress for wanting what other folks seem to get readily, seen as a full-fledged human being and not an emotionally calloused flesh-tube.
Dude, if you don't want to do the work or just want the cookies, just say so. I'll drop off a batch of Famous Amos at your house and forget your name.
Thanks for the further dose of forthright gunslinging, Witchsistah. Sounds like you're saying it's best after all for a white guy to jump to the side of a battling/embattled black woman, and that he's not going to be seen as a self-serving white savior, at least if he does so in certain ways -- or rather, you're not going to see him that way. All right then, thanks for the tip, and I'll do my best to do that in the future.
ReplyDeleteYou also wrote,
Your implication that I wanted a "White savior" to come and rescue me is a cop-out. . . . It's a figleaf, and you're trying to passive-aggressively throw mud at and on me for being an unreasonable Negress for wanting what other folks seem to get readily, seen as a full-fledged human being and not an emotionally calloused flesh-tube.
I'm wondering how you got that out of this:
For one thing, I'm not sure sometimes whether doing so would make me an unwelcome "white savior" type, especially when, as Sheila pointed out, the POC I'm backing is already doing so well, and fighting so mightily, on hir own. Maybe my doing so could even seem opportunistic.
How could my statement that I would be seen as an unwelcome white savior type imply that you wanted a white savior to come and rescue you? I wrote that I feared I'd be unwelcome as a white savior, not that you wanted a white savior. Aren't "unwelcome" and "wanted" opposites, or am I missing something here?
As for the idea that I'm "trying to passive-aggressively throw mud" on you "for being an unreasonable Negress" -- wtf? I wrote the exact opposite, that is, that I agree with everything I can remember you having written here. Seems to me you're choosing to ignore that. Which leaves me wondering one thing -- why?
As for the idea that I'm "trying to passive-aggressively throw mud" on you "for being an unreasonable Negress" -- wtf? I wrote the exact opposite, that is, that I agree with everything I can remember you having written here. Seems to me you're choosing to ignore that. Which leaves me wondering one thing -- why?
ReplyDeleteMacon, this right here - so not the point.
I almost forgot.
ReplyDeleteMacon, I never thought I'd say this, but I have to take a swig now.
okay, I got defensive after being told I did something I didn't see myself doing. I'd appreciate an explanation of what my white blinders are apparently preventing me from seeing...
ReplyDelete@Macon:
ReplyDelete*sigh*
The point of the discussion was about Witchsistah's experience being "psychoanalyzed" and how to prevent that from happening to her, myself, and other Black women who share personal and often painful things here.
Rather than focusing your words and energy on THAT, you seem to be spending a great deal of time proclaiming your intentions and defending your behavior against what you perceive as baseless accusations. In the midst of that, you actually question Witchsistah's motives and reasons for doing so - which is exactly the thing she and I were talking about in the first place: people feeling so comfortable scrutinizing and interrogating Black Women this way as opposed to trying to figure out where we're really coming from.
I have to add, once again, the irony of my more thoughtful and carefully worded comments (the ones I hoped would lead to more in-depth discussion) going ignored in favor of comments oozing sarcasm, mockery, and snark. Then people wonder why I do the latter so much.
ReplyDelete"As for the idea that I'm 'trying to passive-aggressively throw mud' on you 'for being an unreasonable Negress' -- wtf?"
ReplyDelete"Thanks for the further dose of forthright gunslinging, Witchsistah."
*busts out the Patron*
@ RVCBard
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that when women of color talk about their experiences of racism, most people just write it off as sexism and trivialize their experiences of racism. I remember how I got into a heated argument with a young White woman about Sonya Sontomayor and the attacks she was faced with were racialized sexism. She kept telling me that it was just sexism. I mean the constant bashing of her Puerto Rican heritage didn't ring a bell that it was racism as well as demeaning her feminity as a woman? racialized sexism maybe? I just think most White people are familiar with Men of color facing racism than women of color, and White women facing sexism than women of color. So therefore racism and sexism are treated as a seperate entity. Intersectionality should be the next leap for people to understand in the anti-racist blogsphere, because I've had long-winded and tiresome debates that Black women and women of color generally suffer from both racism and sexism. I just think women of color are just not really taken seriously in the anti-racist blogosphere.
Macon, here's a slice of explanation: you argued that "I wrote that I feared I'd be unwelcome as a white savior, not that you wanted a white savior."
ReplyDeleteTo protest, in reply to Witchsistah, "Oh, I thought you didn't want a white savior" is to imply that she asked for one. Simple as that.
I do have explanations for why I personally didn't comment on any of the kerfuffel about word choices or that thing that jerk said to Witchsistah about her dating choices (away for the holidays with limited computer time and spotty smartphone coverage), but I get the impression that's not important. For what it's worth, I did think RVCBard and Witchsistah's word choices were completely valid and not nearly so offensive as what KD was saying - not even anywhere close - and that what'shisface was being an ass to Witchsistah.
Witchsistah, your comments about how no one defends black women because they think black women can take whatever abuse is being thrown at them (and the many comments RVCBard has made about that exact topic) are really interesting. I've definitely seen that happen.
But you're completely right that treating women as delicate, feminine creatures seems retrograde to white women. It seems strange to me, to wish to be constrained in that way. But perhaps it's a form of constraint that would be relatively pleasant compared to the constraints you currently experience? I don't quite understand - what exactly is the appeal?
Okay, thank you.
ReplyDelete*steps off center-stage*
But you're completely right that treating women as delicate, feminine creatures seems retrograde to white women. It seems strange to me, to wish to be constrained in that way. But perhaps it's a form of constraint that would be relatively pleasant compared to the constraints you currently experience? I don't quite understand - what exactly is the appeal?
ReplyDeleteWhat you probably view as people seeing BW as capable human beings while seeing WW as childlike, helpless, dependents is really neglect benign and gross.
Even capable people need assistance and care every now and then. And capable people are able to assess when they need them and are able to request them if needed. If others see those capable people as deserving they offer said assistance and care.
Not so with BW. BW are often just left to fend for ourselves while others psychoanalyze, pick apart and pass judgment over how we do that. The whole Strong Black Woman motif is just an excuse to do that, neglect us. It rationalizes that neglect. BW don't really need anyone's help. We're tough. We can take it. We can make a way out of no way. No asking us if that's what we WANT to do, especially since it seems that's what we're always OBLIGATED to do.
There's a difference between having no other choice but to do something and having that something be one viable option of many. When middle-class WW wanted to work outside the home, they were entering the workplace from a place of strength. They had race privilege, educational privilege, class privilege. They saw work as liberating, in part because they did have a CHOICE. They could either brave the public sphere or stay retreated in their White, middle-class household enclaves.
BW, for the most part, worked because we HAD to. It was work or starve and be homeless. We were coming from a place of weakness and that showed in the jobs we had to perform. THese were not liberating professions. Mostly they were brawn work, not brain work. They involved hard, often body and soul-destroying conditions. Cleaning some woman's house while her husband constantly sexually harasses and assaults you and she blames YOU for it, doing backbreaking work in a factory for pennies a day, working in somebody's field, those don't sound very liberating do they? But that was often all that was available to Black women up until very recently in history.
I used work as an example of the very different places Black and White women are coming from when we speak of liberation and freedom. Many BW wanted the freedom to stay home and raise children and be FREE from the tyranny of White racist-sexist supremacy. Many BW want the freedom not to have to work and deal with a racist-sexist workplace. We don't see it as confining to have that CHOICE of whether or not to work and therefore to be better able to control our working conditions if having no other tool than being able to quit a job we felt didn't sit well with our well-being.
It's the same with simply being considered as actually feminine which entails being able to get help when needed, having people CARE when you say you need assistance or care. WW see it as a weakness and a liability as a diminishing of their humanity. Many BW see it as an acknowledging of ours.
I didn't read all of the comments so sorry if I'm repeating someone.
ReplyDeleteI think the WP tendency to give amateur diagnosis is a derivative of WP tendency to claim perceived credibility. I'm not sure how it happens, but it seems like WP think they're the head honcho for every situation they're in. I feel like there's something programmed in everyone to trust what a WP says. The consequence is that everyone mistrusts or dismisses what a PoC has to say which i think is the gist of some of the comments I skimmed over in this post.
I think the common WP tendency to be the expert manifests everyday. In everyday conversation or in formal group discussions, if you pay attention to which identities get interrupted in mid sentence and which identities do the interrupting, I think you'll see a very clear line that WP and men do much of the interrupting over PoC and womyn and almost all white men going uninterrupted when they speak. This situation is something I try to check myself from since I identify as a male and try to call people out on, especially if I feel that someone is using their identity to dominate a conversation/discussion. I encourage you to do the same
Even capable people need assistance and care every now and then. And capable people are able to assess when they need them and are able to request them if needed. If others see those capable people as deserving they offer said assistance and care.
ReplyDeleteThe whole Strong Black Woman motif is just an excuse to do that, neglect us.
And to make it even worse, it sets it up so that Black women are not acknowledged as anything BUT strong, as if strength alone is all that can define us. So hung up on being strong makes it seem like Black women can't be sensitive, intelligent, mystical, creative, or a myriad other things real human beings can be. It creates a dynamic where Black women are, psychologically speaking, beasts of burden who must bear the weight of racism and sexism but receive no recognition of the toll it takes on our psyches. Mules of the world indeed.
Not to mention, the connotations of strength, as applied to Black women, further perpetuates the bestial, subhuman nature often associated with Black people in general.
what exactly is the appeal?
ReplyDeletePut succinctly, to be treated as completely human and innately valuable simply for existing.
Do you see any ways that a WP could enter the fight without playing the role of "savior"? In a recent thread I experimented with confronting a WP on their behavior in an exchange with a PoC. This was (in my mind) in contrast to coming to the rescue of the PoC. I let the PoC fight their own fight, but tried to tell the WP to fight fair. [see: "only date non-white people", CommieBastard vs. Bluey512]
ReplyDelete@Lutsen: You pretty much answered your own question in the aforementioned thread:
Why do white people claim we have no experience with racism? We have tons of experience with racism. WE ARE THE ONES COMMITING IT! We're beyond experienced, we are adept. We know so much about racism that if we were honest with ourselves and everyone else, really fucking honest, we could uproot racism on our own, without having to be led through it by the hand by PoC who doubtless would rather be doing just about anything else, if only we could get with the program.
Given that whites constitute the oppressor class, it is indee their responsibility to combat and upend racism. So long as you aren't motivated by any self-aggrandizing desire to be handed gratitude and kudos for how progressive/intellectual you are (otherwise you'll inevitably end up derailing, just as bluey512 was and is continuing to do), I say fire away!
Wow. I am so very grateful that RVCBard and Witchsistah has seriously kept at it in trying to explain what happened with that exchange (KD's White Woman's Tears, & so many coming to her rescue, so to speak, at RVCBard and Witchsistah's expense). Thank you. And to Lady Dani Mo too for her explanations. I think I finally get it now. Yes, when I had my knee jerk reaction to the choice of words, I did see KD as a "fragile" being/woman in need of rescue. I thought, "Oh shit, she's gonna cry and cry and be in a wreck if someone doesn't rescue her." Meanwhile, yes, I did start to see the Angry Black Woman or Strong Black Woman stereotype overlap with RVCBard & Witchsistah's reactions. It did not occur to me at all that they might be hurt by the exchange that was occurring because, well, they seemed tough judging from all the comments and posts they've made before. And I can now totally see this actually is part of stereotyping or racism based on the notion that Black Women (or any women who don't burst into tears and seem obviously fragile) do not need to be treated as feminine. (Note: Being treated as feminine with respect as a human being, I believe, is very different from being treated in sexist ways.)
ReplyDeleteIt helps me understand the above when I think of it in terms of class, for example, in Indonesia. Upper-middle class women are often treated as feminine - worthy of gentlemanly gestures, everyone's attention, not expected to carry heavy loads, or mop the floor, etc, etc. And God forbid they chip their nails or get mud on their shoes. And people all around will try to ensure that these things don't happen to them. Whereas lower-class women who are often darker skinned and don't look as good (because they don't have the finances to go to upmarket hairdressers and skin care centers) are often not treated as feminine or even seen as having feelings which can be hurt.
I think the point that the three of them (and were there others?) are digging at here warrants a separate post. I think they're digging at something real important that we need to listen to.
Witchsistah and RVCBard,
ReplyDeleteI apologize for not jumping in more forcefully. Like FTT, I think I was partly confused by the WWT. Also, I found it really confusing when POC were also actively participating in the tone argument. It disoriented me completely. In a private conversation, RVCBard helped me see that it's more useful for me to share my confusion and ask an honest question than to remain a silent observer. That seemed sort of earth-shatteringly simple at the time, and also--in hindsight--blindingly obvious.
Anyway, for sure I owe you both an apology and a promise to remember and do my best to apply all that I have learned in this thread. And further apologies for having had to learn it at your emotional expense.
RVCBard wrote,
ReplyDeleteAnd to make it even worse, it sets it up so that Black women are not acknowledged as anything BUT strong, as if strength alone is all that can define us. So hung up on being strong makes it seem like Black women can't be sensitive, intelligent, mystical, creative, or a myriad other things real human beings can be. It creates a dynamic where Black women are, psychologically speaking, beasts of burden who must bear the weight of racism and sexism but receive no recognition of the toll it takes on our psyches. Mules of the world indeed.
Yes. That last line came to mind this morning for me too. I can see now how standing aside and letting an apparently strong black woman "fight her own battles," as well as cheering her on in those terms, actually participates in and perpetuates the damaging stereotype of black women as little more than "strong" (and often along with that, "angry").
I agree with ftt that this topic deserves a separate post, and as always, I welcome anyone's efforts to put it together as a "guest post" (the realization feels too new to me to try it).
Lady Dani Mo makes a great point. I've noticed that anti-racist folks(white and non-white)seem borderline incapable of understanding race/sex together.It just goes back to the same old "All women are white" shit.
ReplyDeleteWitchsistah, RVCBard, that's really fascinating. I'm so used to scorning "gentlemanly" treatment that it didn't occur to me that any woman would want that - at least not for any other reason than not having heard the gospel of feminism. Heh.
ReplyDeleteBut it sounds like the gender/capability intersection is just completely different for black women than it is for white women - not being allowed to work and being forced to work are obviously two different problems. And I can see how the treatment of white women and black women respectively reflects that difference. Very interesting points. And you're absolutely right that strength shouldn't be an excuse for abuse or neglect.
You know, I just went and saw The Princess and the Frog the other night. That movie is an absolutely perfect illustration of this image of black women as tough, because Tiana is the toughest, most hard-working Disney princess by a long shot. Well. Come to think of it, most Disney Princesses of color (DPOC?) are tougher than the white ones. Possible spoiler warning! - I wonder whether Princess and the Frog is progressive for showing a black woman having a Disney romance or not. On the one hand it's totally a classic Disney romance, and Tiana is an incredibly sympathetic character. But on the other hand it was all about how Tiana herself lightened up and discovered love, with no hint that she wanted it in the first place. What she wanted originally was to work hard and achieve her dreams. So I don't know.
As for WWT - as a blue-eyed blonde, I can attest that people definitely treat people like me with a soft touch. I still remember the adjustment period when I started going online where people couldn't see me and didn't assume I was sweet and earnest and deserving of sympathy. Lots more, "Hey jackass, STFU" and far less polite, reasonable discourse. WWT is totally a legit phenomenon and I could definitely see that happening with KD. I've been laughing my ass off at the moisturizer jokes.
I'd love to see a separate post on this topic as well.
(off topic) - Oh my goshhhhh. For the past week or so I've been googling for "FTT" thinking it was an internet language acronym like "IMO" or "WTF". I couldn't find anything and was confused, but didn't dare ask thinking it's too minor a thing to ask on this site. And it only just dawned on me that it's an acronym for my own username! ...Uhm, if you addressed any comments to "FTT" in other posts and I didn't answer...Sowwy. It's coz I didn't know.
ReplyDeletebluey512, you know what gets old really quickly? When white people parrot back exactly what was said to them but preface it with an "It sounds like..." as if they were the ones who observed everything and came to this conclusion. Never "Am I correct in understanding...?"
ReplyDelete@ FTT:
ReplyDeleteLOL
@ RVCBard:
I can't copy-paste your past statement into the comment box since the format switched, so to paraphrase you: you have mentioned, on this thread and at least once previously, how your snarkier posts tend to draw responses, whereas the serious-toned ones that you hope will provoke conversation often fall flat. Now, this would seem to be a common Internet phenomenon (link to "But that happens to me, too!" on Derailing for Dummies). So with that in mind, 2 questions:
1. Do you notice this happening to self-identified BW online more often than to others?
2. And/or is this a case of, as suggested by the D4D answer, the same phenomenon targeted at POC (in this case, BW in particular) means something different than when directed at WP?
Idea for follow-up post:
ReplyDeleteSWPD: Treat black women like they're made of Teflon and adamantium.
Perhaps compile commentary here and at other threads that show this phenomenon and question it more thoroughly.
As for writing it,
I agree with ftt that this topic deserves a separate post, and as always, I welcome anyone's efforts to put it together as a "guest post" (the realization feels too new to me to try it).
What does that even mean? How about trying a different tack and see where that takes you? Like this one:
In a private conversation, RVCBard helped me see that it's more useful for me to share my confusion and ask an honest question than to remain a silent observer.
Which, in a way, would counteract the typically White tendency to assume expertise on - well, everything.
@ bluey512, I really, really recommend reading bell hooks' Ain't I a Woman or Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center, as bh talks a *lot* about what you brought up. If your library doesn't have them, Alibris has fairly cheap (<$10) copies of both available right now.
ReplyDeleteWitchsistah, I've been trying to figure out why your comment that no one defended you has been bugging me. Looking back through the old threads, such as the ones with KD, myself and several others (Commie Bastard, Lady Dani Mo, Imhotep, more) did stand up for you. I'm absolutely not trying to ease anyone's conscience, but rather I'm wondering where our approach is failing and what we can fix. You are a very bright, witty, and thoughtful woman and I do not want to continue to make you feel abandoned and unimportant.
ReplyDeletebluey512, you know what gets old really quickly? When white people parrot back exactly what was said to them but preface it with an "It sounds like..." as if they were the ones who observed everything and came to this conclusion. Never "Am I correct in understanding...?"
ReplyDelete@Cloudy: Heads up, you may be wasting your breath on that one (the derailing on bluey's part just devolves from there).
Witchsistah and RVCBard, I'd also like to apologise for failing to jump in to dress down my fellow WP who have treated you badly. Probably too little, too late and I'm sorry for that, too. I'd also like to thank you for all your contributions to the discussions on SWPD. I've learned a lot from reading what and how you both write. And yet, I can't believe you haven't given up on the whole lot of us yet.
ReplyDeleteI've only recently come to grasp how the stereotype of strong BW is harmful. It came up too in this article, What If Black Women Were White Women? (Things That Make You Go Hmm…) on Shadow and Act. I recommend the comments, too - people have added their own "funny" examples.
1. Do you notice this happening to self-identified BW online more often than to others?
ReplyDelete2. And/or is this a case of, as suggested by the D4D answer, the same phenomenon targeted at POC (in this case, BW in particular) means something different than when directed at WP?
I can't speak for all Black women online because the set-up for these discussions is different in every place. I'm going to limit myself to "safe spaces" for Black women since that seems the most relevant for our purposes.
I do believe that, when it comes to engaging with Black women in these discussions, it does mean something different than it would in online discourse that is not ostensibly about race. It's simply impossible to remove that context from these interactions.
But in my experience, the answer to your first question is yes. I can't determine whether it's because there are simply more Black women around to be vocal during these discussions and thus is a matter of simple statistics or because people (including other Black women and non-Black WOC) expect Black women to be vocal in a particular way and thus are incapable of engaging with us when we don't fit that mold. It's very likely that it's a combination of the two. But parsing this particular distinction is not important at the moment.
Let's flip the script a little bit. Why does it often seem that people cannot engage with Black women unless we affirm the Mammy or Sapphire stereotype?
Why is it so difficult to make the leap from acknowledging the idea that we are real human beings to acknowledging the reality that we are real human beings? Why does it seem that Black women only become human when we silently endure suffering of a depth and magnitude that made even Job curse God? Why must Black women be Christlike before we can be treated as merely human?
And even more than the why is how.
How can you affirm the humanity of Black women from jump street instead of waiting for us to prove it to you?
Okay, bluey, I don't really have any other way of explaining it to you. You can either step out of your comfort zone and quit with the me-first-ism of how you position other's experiences or basically you can go fuck yourself too as far as I (I speak for no one else here) am concerned. I get sick and tired of explaining the same shit over and over and over again. This is what leads me to believe more and more that engaging White folk on racism is utterly pointless.
ReplyDelete@Witchsistah:
ReplyDeleteThere's nothing here to get upset about. Why do you have to be so aaaaaaangry? White people would listen to you better if you weren't always so aaaaaaangry! We could have a great conversation if you stopped being so aaaaaaangry!
So shut up and eat your shit sandwich.
bluey512,
ReplyDeleteWhat Witchsistah, RVCBard, Commie Bastard and Willow said.
In solidarity,
macon
macon wrote,
ReplyDeleteI agree with ftt that this topic deserves a separate post, and as always, I welcome anyone's efforts to put it together as a "guest post" (the realization feels too new to me to try it).
RVCBard responded,
What does that even mean?
It probably means different things to different readers. Do you mean, "What did you mean by that?" Anyway, to me it means that I welcome in this case, as always, a guest post, especially by people of color because they're the real experts on racism. The proposed topic here for a post is about something that I just realized, so I doubt I could produce a post that explains the topic as well as POC could. And so, that sentence is a request for someone more capable of writing the post, in the interests of producing a better post.
How about trying a different tack and see where that takes you?
Thank you for your suggested different tack. It sounds entirely do-able to me.
RVCBard also wrote,
How can you affirm the humanity of Black women from jump street instead of waiting for us to prove it to you?
I anxiously await other answers, but I'll tentatively say that white people can't do that from jump street, because our heads are too full of preconceptions of black women that get in the way of affirming their humanity. I do have faith, though, that we can learn about those preconceptions (and what they tend to make us do), if we're willing to shut up and listen, particularly when black women are as willing, patient, and good at explaining these things as you, Witchsistah, and some others here have been. Another thing I think we can then do is call out other white people when they do things that we (hopefully) used to do to black women.
>> "How can you affirm the humanity of Black women from jump street instead of waiting for us to prove it to you?"
ReplyDeleteA couple of thoughts; I am fully open to correction...
1. Work to stop that suffering and prevent/lessen future occurences of it
2. Engage w/BW when they do and say something that is not in the mold of one of the stereotypes (this doesn't mean ignore what does fit into a stereotype; just, don't take that exclusively)
3. The impression I have gotten*, not just from swpd but race discussions elsewhere as well, is that when Black women in particular slip into a "stereotype", it is often, though not always, a conscious choice, and in many cases a response to the actions of the other people. So if you (WP) see what you think is stereotypical behavior, instead of blowing her off as "just" an Angry Black Woman (or Suffering Servant or whatever), examine your own actions.
* "Impression I have gotten" being a euphemism for "...and she said to me, 'Willow, has it seriously NEVER FUCKING OCCURRED TO YOU that I know exactly what I am doing?'" /sigh
Cloudy - hmm, that does strike me as something white people do. I used that phrasing specifically because I heard somewhere (I forget where - maybe there's a book out there that a bunch of white people read, and the concept has just stuck around?) that saying "It sounds like" and then paraphrasing shows that you comprehended what was said, which lets the other person know you were listening attentively. Apparently it didn't come off that way, though. I am assuming you have the same issue with my last comment, Witchsistah?
ReplyDeleteWillow, thanks for the book recommendation.
I used that phrasing specifically because I heard somewhere (I forget where - maybe there's a book out there that a bunch of white people read, and the concept has just stuck around?) that saying "It sounds like" and then paraphrasing shows that you comprehended what was said, which lets the other person know you were listening attentively
ReplyDeleteActually - it is a related example of this white tendency. "It sounds like..." is called reflective listening and was widely popular among the liberal, new-agey, book-certified psychoanalytic whites of the late 80s, I believe, and the 90s as well. It was taught to every couple in marriage counseling or parent dealing with an unruly kid in seminars all over America. Yes, it's mainly a white thing, a part of our white American culture.
"It sounds like" could be intended and heard as "I am the expert summing up", or as "readback", trying to learn by rephrasing the concepts and expecting to be corrected if wrong - "Have I gotten this right?"
ReplyDeleteabout the new post - there's a wealth of info that Witchsistah, RVCBard and Lady Dani Mo has already offered as comments. I agree that putting that together into a post and maybe with some reflections/comments from macon might be good. I thought the topic warranted a new post because the comments sounded too good and too deep to be left as just comments.
ReplyDeleteVictoria - Interesting. I'm glad to know I'm not completely off-base. My mother does some marriage counseling and has tons of books on relationships, so I probably picked it up from her. Funny how this works back around to psychoanalysis, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteNancyP - That's very true. I meant the latter, but it came off as me trying to sound like an expert. Not surprising, now that I look at it that way. It's kind of an interesting little miscommunication.
In helping children with challenges in learning, the best reason for labels is to provide support appropriate accommodation and help. Not to dismiss the child as "learning disabled" "dyslexic" "autistic" etc. as an excuse to pigeon hole. A label such as "bipolar" is useful to me if it results in appropriate treatment and support. Labelling to isolate, dismiss, excuse or blame is counter productive....Using a label such as "white person" might be unhelpful for the same reasons.
ReplyDeleteI realize that this is a bit late, but as a white person I think I have some idea why we tend to do this. (At the very least, I know why I would do it.)
ReplyDeleteFirstly, I love to analyze things. Love it to death. This is both a personal quirk and something I have in common with a lot of other white people. I like to read books and watch movies and try to understand why characters do the things they do, what parts of the plot mean, what's going to happen next, on and on and on. Couple that with the fact that I live in an isolated area and receive no professional medical attention whatsoever (physical or psychiatric, and it's given me quite a penchant for doing amateur diagnoses (with the caveat that I'm not a professional and should not be treated like one).
The second thing (which is probably also a white thing) is that I have a deep investment in having faith in the inherent goodness of "the human race" (AKA other white people). I know that I and a number of other white people have this peculiarity. We feed on the very notion that other white people are inherently decent; without that reassuring background, some of us would die of a mixture of embarrassment and despair. The extent of desperation to hang on to this illusion varies from white person to white person; in extreme cases it will manifest as "District 9 Was Just An Alien Movie Syndrome," where a white person is so desperate to cling to his or her delusions of superiority that he or she will leap through the most convoluted and nonsensical hoops to go on preserving this belief.
Of course, I'm just doing my white-person thing by trying to diagnose these people. I doubt this explanation is good for everyone out there, but based on my own experiences and observation of other white people I'm fairly sure this is at least part of the problem.