Comments Policy
Comments on this blog are moderated by the blog's proprietor, macon d (that would be me). Differences of opinion are welcome here, but comments that break any of the following rules may not be published, or they may be deleted after being published. Comments that don't seem to break any of the rules below may also not be published (when that happens, I will consider writing a new rule to cover them).
The following rules for commenting are subject to change; if you have suggestions for changes in these rules, or in other features of this blog, please write them in a comment here. If you have questions about these rules, do not write them below; please send them to me via email (suggestions of any sort are always welcome that way too): unmakingmacon at gmail dot com
I've made these rules as clear as I can. Nevertheless, whether particular comments fail to follow them is sometimes subject to interpretation; in those cases, I'm the interpreter. Sometimes I explain in a posted comment of my own [in brackets] why I rejected a comment (or why I redacted just part of it), and sometimes I don't. If you submit a comment and wonder why it was rejected, you're welcome to write me an email, and I'm likely (but not guaranteed) to respond.
Anyone can comment here, but any comment can also receive criticism, especially if its writer is new to discussions of racism (and even if they're not).
Finally, if you are new to thinking seriously about racism, whiteness, de facto white supremacy, and common white tendencies, you've got some catching up to do -- please consult the list of online resources at the bottom of this page before commenting here.
1. Please do not choose the "Anonymous" function for your name. If you do, I will assign your comment a name. If you then comment after that happens to you, stick with that new name, or else chose another and stick with that one.
2. Do not ask why I or others here "hate white people" (we don't). Do not ask why I "hate myself" (I don't). This blog is not about claiming that "white people are bad." Instead, it's about the effects of racism, especially the habits induced in white people by being socially categorized as "white." Despite what white individuals tend to think, being classified that way does matter in white people's lives; if you're white and you read around in this blog's archives with an open mind, you're likely to realize that.
3. Keep in mind the subtitle of this blog ("The ways of white folks, I mean, some white folks . . ."), and don't complain about what you see as "white-bashing" here. Very few if any of the posts here are about stuff ALL white people do. If you're white and you don't do it, then it's not about you. If I, or other guest writers or other commenters say "white people" do this or that, we almost never mean ALL white people do it, and it's a repetitious annoyance to continually modify "white people" with "some" and other qualifiers. Do not complain either about the past sufferings at the hands of whiteness of your immigrant Irish, Italian, etc. ancestors -- yes, they may have suffered what amounts to racism at one time for not being classified as white yet, but their currently white descendants don't.
4. Address the topic in the post. Comments that are overly distracting or derailing do not get published here. (This does not mean, however, that comment sections do not sometimes take a productive tangent away from the topic at hand.)
5. If you express disagreement with anything here, including other comments, do us all a favor by also explaining why.
6. Try to be concise. Keep in mind that long, long comments tend to get skimmed over, and just as often, skipped entirely.
7. Focus on what people say, instead of whoever you think they are. Avoid ad hominem attacks, and do not call anyone else here names or terms other than those they identify themselves with. If you refer to another commenter here, please do your best to retype their online name correctly.
8. Do not threaten anyone with violence (even if you think you're joking).
9. Try not to repeat something that's already been said in the comment thread. Some "co-signing" and affirmations of "what she said" are okay, but please at least skim through a post's comments to see if anyone's already said what you're about to write.
10. Race is understood to be a social construction here, a categorical fiction (but also, one that nevertheless continues to have major real-world effects). Do not espouse racial essentialism, by which I mean, do not suggest or claim that members of any race are inherently anything other than that which members of any other races are as well.
11. Do not complain about the ways that other commenters here communicate. Different people communicate in different ways, some of which you may object to. I do not consider it my place as a middle-class, white resident of the United States to impose here one particular set of communication standards and rules. One exception: although I despise "English Only" demands in the U.S., I must impose that rule here because I moderate the comments, and can do so most effectively in English.
12. Do not bother to point out that other people also do the things that white people are described here as doing. If you're ever tempted to do that, and wonder why you shouldn't, read this post on "The Arab Trader Argument." In a similar vein, avoid dismissing the matter of racism in favor of sexism, classism, ablism, and so on. These factors do of course affect and intersect with racism, but the latter, racism, is the focus here.
13. If you're white and you want to interact here with people of color, stop and consider first that the way you're about to act may actually be a common white way to act. When you do interact here with people of color, practice expressing instead those human qualities that your culture and racial upbringing subtly discourage you from expressing in such interactions. These qualities include respect, humility, open-mindedness, compassion, and an understanding that in terms of the topic at hand, their experience of, and understanding of, racism is probably much greater than yours. Since the topic is racism, listen to their experiences. Since the topic is racism, do not distract from their experiences with it by comparing them to your own, supposedly similar experiences (which are not about racism, right?); or by offering your own, necessarily ill-informed diagnoses of what they're feeling or thinking (after all, how would you know?); or by sincerely offering in response your own shock, regret, or sympathy, however deeply heartfelt (because after all, what would that really do in the struggle against racism, except to help convince yourself that you're not racist?).
14. Along with that, do not ask people of color here to do work for you. If you have questions for people of color here about their experiences, try to find answers elsewhere first (and if they do provide you with answers, or if they otherwise express their views or describe their experiences, do not take those as views or experiences that represent those of other members of their group). For one thing, finding information that you can find on your own is not their job; for another, remember that this is a blog about stuff white people do, not stuff people of color do (unless what they do has something to do with racism). That said, if you are a person of color or a white person, feel welcome to relate, analyze, and otherwise share your own experiences with white racism, as long as what you're writing is more or less related to the topic at hand.
15. In general, avoid lengthy, multi-comment, thread-hijacking, and/or nitpicking discussions with another commenter or two. These kinds of discussions tend to drive away other commenters and distract from the topic at hand.
16.If trolling commenters do get through, ignore them. If I delete your bait-taking comment but didn't delete theirs, or if I delete your comment but didn't delete another that was similar to yours, don't get too pissed at me for letting things occasionally slip through the cracks. In these cases, as in all others here, please remember that I'm a human being, and not a comment-moderation robot.
SUGGESTED NEWBIE RESOURCES
Racism 101 for Clueless White People, Written by a Slightly Less Clueless White Person
Racism 101
Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack (PDF)
teach their children to act white
Talking about the Hard Stuff (Racism 101)
How to Suppress Discussions of Racism
White Liberal Bingo
The Glosario
This . . .
ReplyDelete5. If you express disagreement with anything here, including other comments, do us all a favor by also explaining why.
And this . . .
6. Try to be concise. Keep in mind that long, long comments tend to get skimmed over, and just as often, skipped entirely.
And this . . .
11. Do not complain about the ways that other commenters here communicate. Different people communicate in different ways, some of which you may object to. I do not consider it my place as a middle-class, white resident of the United States to impose here one particular set of communication standards and rules.
. . . seem contradictory. However, that's what privileging the earnest, well-meaning White person's voice (no matter how hurtful or harmful to POCs on the receiving end of it) leads to. "Fuck you, asshole" is, from time to time, exactly what people need to hear to finally understand. Remember those comments about trying to force a "rational" and "respectful" conversation that is anything but? Yeah.
16.If I delete your bait-taking comment but didn't delete theirs, or if I delete your comment but didn't delete another that was similar to yours, don't get too pissed at me for letting things occasionally slip through the cracks. In these cases, as in all others here, please remember that I'm a human being, and not a comment-moderation robot.
This is very White of you to say. And it's a very White thing to do - demand to be treated like a human being - while allowing dehumanization to take place all around them. And seriously? "Don't get pissed"? Are you sure you wanna go there?
"6. Try to be concise. Keep in mind that long, long comments tend to get skimmed over, and just as often, skipped entirely."
ReplyDeleteThe same applies to your comment policy. I only skimmed it. So will 95% of your readers. Sheer length induces eye glaze.
1. Write in an inverted pyramid style. The opening paragraph should get across 80% of your comment policy to 80% of people. Set up the rest as a sort of reference guide.
2. Make sure the first sentence of each paragraph is the topic sentence.
3. Try to hide as much depth behind links. The truly curious will seek and find.
I did not like this:
ReplyDelete"
9. Try not to repeat something that's already been said in the comment thread. Some "co-signing" and affirmations of "what she said" are okay, but please at least skim through a post's comments to see if anyone's already said what you're about to write.
This is 95% of the reason I barely comment on your blog. I read the post but then it is followed by 65 comments, much of it theology between regulars. So I skip the comments or just skim them. But then I am in a poor position to comment on the post itself. So I do not. You need to allow that somehow.
I'd go further than RVCBard and say that 5 and 6 are examples of 11. Some people communicate by telling stories, which might be lengthy, and some are so exasperated at a stupid comment that they don't feel like explaining their disagreement. Those are ways of communicating, and 5 and 6 appear to be complaints about those ways of communicating. I know that it says "try" to be concise, but the list itself is anything but, and it might be a little too much micro-management to try to cover so many points. And as for the "human being" plea, maybe it could just say "I can't catch everything"; that's what you mean, isn't it? Or maybe even, "As a white person, I am not as attuned as many of the commenters are to derailing and such, so some might get by me."
ReplyDeleteIf you mess up and an apology is asked for, don't make your apology about you. (Although I'm wary about this as it might lead to unwanted apologies and thus center-staging.) Or at least, you should be more careful to moderate out comments of this nature as POC have pointed out numerous times that they are unproductive and even offensive.
ReplyDeleteAdd White Women's Tears as a resource.
A comment that got a lot of props was a repost (I don't remember by whom, sorry, or the thread to look it up) of a quotation that was something along the lines of, Ask yourself how your action plays into the system of white supremacy. So maybe a guideline like, "Before you comment, ask yourself whether and how your comment supports the system of white supremacy." Perhaps this should be addressed specifically to white people?
Put in "we consider racism to be prejudice + power", because not all new people know that.
Put a permanent link to this post on the sidebar. (You were probably going to do this anyway, but still).
RVCBard's last comment is right on.
The problem with asking oneself on how one's comments plays into white supremacy is that there is no consensus definition of white supremacy. I've just been told that my interpretation of racism (which definitely falls into the "prejudice + power" gloss) is offensive to other people who consider any attempt to discuss white-on-white racism as "supporting white supremacy".
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, it's silly to have a list of "comment guidelines" and then have the blog's owner ignore them himself.
Why not just say what is simply true, Macon?
"I try to let freedom of speach reign but this is my blog and if I dislike what you're saying, I will feel free to dump it."
Otherwise, what you're trying to do is claim you have some sort of policy when the REAL policy is "whatever Macon says is law". You've got a couple thousand words written here, friend, trying to convince us that there's some sort of guideline at work here that's anything more than your subjective call.
You might want to delete and republish this post, macon (probably sooner rather than later, before too many people comment). The misspelling of "policy" is in the URL of this post, which might make it less easily searchable later.
ReplyDeleteDo not espouse racial essentialism, by which I mean, do not suggest or claim that members of any race are inherently anything other than that which members of any other races are as well.
ReplyDeleteYou should probably stick to your own advice, and fix those posts which suggest white people are more restrained than people of colour, white people dance stiffly (compared to people of colour), white people shake hands one way and black people shake hands another, white people sit quietly in movie theaters, etc.
Thanks August, I'm planning to do that, but I won't delete this one because I'd like to preserve the comments. I'll eventually post the revised draft as a new post (hopefully with a correctly spelled title).
ReplyDeleteI agree with those above who see the comment policy as too long. I had to skim. (Now I will leave an inappropriately long comment.)
ReplyDeleteI think you're trying to do too much with the policy. You seem to explaining both what will get comments deleted and HOW to comment--that is, what modes of discussion are appropriate.
The former is a reasonable thing to attempt to construct--the latter, not so much. As others have already pointed out on this thread, by trying to tell people how to have the discussion, your privelege is showing. (Full disclosure: I am a white woman.) If you want to have a "how to" on the topic of the blog, give that a separate post.
I'd keep it simple:
No ad hominum attacks (thus, "fuck you asshole" is subject to deletion).
No outright bigotry.
No derailing agenda pushing.
And then the caveat that you reserve the right to delete anything you deem inapproprate (or keep things you think are appropriate). That is the blog owner's privilege. Also, if you are comfortable, agree to answer questions about why comments were deleted via email.
Last, can you just cut the "anon" option? If so, do that, since it will save explanation.
I think derailingfordummies.com is a wonderful resource as well.
ReplyDeleteAnd macon, you're in a really tough spot. Just so you know, I support this blog and all the commentators in it. Maybe an open thread would work and you rely on your commentators to lead the discussion. You can always chime in because I know when I see your name appear on the comment section, I stop and read it.
I enjoy reading your blog. I think you have a unique way of thinking about things, and I stop by occasionally to read. I have noticed lately that you have been having a problem filtering your comments. I offer you this advice, disable the comment function on your blog. You seem to not have very thick skin, something needed when viewing comments for any blog. That will always be an issue with blogs, because you are going to run into people who are argumentative and will oppose your viewpoints no matter if their argument is sensible or not.
ReplyDeleteYour blog could serve it's main purpose (to share your opinions on race relations and various white culture to the world) by simply posting your thoughts and letting the world read it without commenting. This leave no room to judge, as most here is opinion anyway, so it's can never be right or wrong.
I leave you with this, you will not be able to filter and delete undesirable comments. As your blog grows, you will find it to be too time consuming and lucidly impossible to do on a daily basis. If you cannot handle the comments just shut them off and continue to post your thoughts. I will continue to read your blog and I hope this situation works out for you, but talk to any blogger on the net, your 16 rules to commenting and more on the way if you think of any is rubbish...
I strongly disagree with Prove Gotti. A major part of the value of this blog are the comments. macon is a white person trying to be aware of his privilege--he needs the comments--both from PoC and other White Folks--to keep him accountable and raise issues that he missed, got wrong or never would be able to address. I don't comment often, but I often learn as much (or more) from the comment thread than the original post. I think macon has handled it pretty well when he gets criticized, especially because most readers recognize that what he's trying to do is very difficult. So, please, keep the comments--even if it's a challenge.
ReplyDeleteI'm with Jamy (the first comment) about short and sweet.
ReplyDeleteAnd then perhaps some additional links that specifically address problematic white behavior.
I'm thinking about something like this on ally behavior:
http://loveisntenough.com/2009/12/30/how-to-be-an-anti-racist-ally/#more-1174 [which, with editor tami's permission, i would be fine with posting here to be fully taken apart and revised for whatever it misses/gets wrong]
And also Tami's post on what to do when allies fail http://loveisntenough.com/2009/12/21/when-allies-fail-part-one/
FWIW Tami also did a companion post on how marginalized groups can respond when allies fail [http://loveisntenough.com/2009/12/23/when-allies-fail-part-two/] But I don't think it's for me to say whether that's appropriate here.
In addition, Prove Gotti, please don't dismiss macon's way of viewing the world as "unique". its a nice way of saying "I don't believe anything you say unless I have some use for it". If you only stop by to occasionally read the blog, I'm not sure why you feel like you have authority to make a comment about it. Unless you're white...hmmmm...
ReplyDelete@IzumiBayani
ReplyDeleteRight on re: ProveGotti's (probably white) entitlement. There are give-and-take blogs, like this one, Racialiscious and others--and there are "pulpit" blogs where the blogger says any old thing without being held accountable or caring what anyone else thinks.
I think comments are necessary. I can't think of one post I've read here where the comments didn't help drive the point home completely. Comments are opinion and those opinions are often further examples of how the issue that the topic is discussing is perpetuated in other ways. It gives life to people as individuals instead of groups. The topic gives one or two examples and then people come and follow it up with the variations of that example in the comments.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Julian Abagond, the comments policy is a bit too lengthy and is in need of concise points with links to their further explanations. As time consuming as that sounds. I don't feel like it's my place to impose rules on this site so I'll leave it at that.
I think the comments are necessary too... i just feel if macon d edits them and takes down the ones he doesn't like waters down the true essence of honest reactions. and for the record, i am a black 25 year old college student finishing my last semester to be a high school english teacher. macon d has a great blog and i like that he exposes white people for what they try to hide.
ReplyDeleteonce again, i just dont like the fact that macon edits the comments. if a white person writes some bs i feel like they should be able to post it. why not, freedom of speech. it just doesnt make sense to edit undesirable comments, and maybe it's because i am coming from a blogger's perspective. go to any popular blog on the net, they all have haters in their comments, its just a part of blogging. if macon cant understand that, then take the comments down. i dont want to read comments if i know that they have been watered down.
MACON D, THIS IS SERIOUS. THAT IS WHAT WHITE PEOPLE REALLY DO. THEY TRY TO HIDE THE TRUTH. THEY HIDE WHAT THEY DONT WANT PEOPLE TO SEE AND HEAR. THINK ABOUT IT MACON.
If I wanted to read undiluted hate speech, I would stick to comments in mainstream news sites and blogs.
ReplyDeleteProve--you have a good point about an uncensored atmosphere where nothing is hidden. If it were me, though, I'd want to delete unproductive comments--comments that were insulting and personal and didn't contribute to the overall conversation. An example: name calling. Do you think name calling is ever productive?
ReplyDeleteI went further with my initial suggestion to macon that he remove ad hominum arguments. I find those unproductive and derailing too. BUT, as a White person, maybe I'm wrong and I'm adhereing to a White, middle-class, "rules of debate" perspective that is actually privileging.
I don't know why macon decided to come up with a comments policy, but perhaps he wants to make sure the comment section remains a friendly place. I don't know if a concrete policy will achieve this, but we can hope.
. . . maybe I'm wrong and I'm adhereing to a White, middle-class, "rules of debate" perspective that is actually privileging.
ReplyDeleteMost likely you are, since the tendency to call foul at the point when people say, "Fuck you, asshole" (or some permutation of it) ignores the hell out of everything that came before.
RCVBard--I certainly have said "fuck you, asshole" more than once in real life conversations. I do try to refrain online where nuance is lost. I disagree, though, that objecting to name-calling devalues everything that went before. I'm not going to privilege my right to name call over yours--I don't like it when anybody does it. So, is that the issue--that if a PoC were to write, "fuck you, asshole" and a WP were to say, "you ruined this discussion by name-calling" it would be an egregious use of privilege and a derailment? In that case, I would agree.
ReplyDeleteI can imagine scenarios where a "fuck you asshole" in the comment thread would be appropriate and well deserved--and presumably macon would let that stand....which is why it's so hard to have a good comments policy--there are reasonable exceptions to everything.
@macon d,
ReplyDeleteIs there a "required reading before you post here if you're white" section of links?
I'm thinkin' if white folks had to do a little hw, in lieu of lived experience as a PoC, this might make the world a bit better. At least the world of this blog.
There have been some blog threads offered above which could come under this category "To Any White Folks: Please read some (or all) of this stuff before you post a comment" with a however long list with some spot-on stuff.
As a white Jewish gay man from mixed class background, I find liberal middle class [gentile] whiteness to be a bit like fingers slowly running across a chalkboard. It's both irritating as hell, and makes me want to scream or flee.
For me, these books have been "necessary reading":
Yurugu: An African-Centered Critique of European Cultural Thought and Behavior, by Marimba Ani
Sister Outsider, by Audre Lorde
Deals With the Devil and Other Reasons to Riot, by Pearl Cleage
I'm curious to know if anyone else has some "prior to commenting" reading suggestions for white folks. If we white ppl aren't doing our homework, then aren't see setting up people of color here--who are all women in the comments I've read--for yet another go-round of racist sexism and sexist racism?
And some of your policy stuff seems really classist to me. Very middle class academic rules. As someone said, sometimes stating "this is some fucked up bullshit" is the appropriate thing to say.
And, macon d, I think you shouldn't tell any PoC how upset with you to be, nor how to express that to you. There's an implication in doing so that PoC just don't know how to behave "properly"... according to whom? I've been called out calmly in language my grandparents would approve of, and I've been called out up one side and down the other with plenty of four letter words lining the speech. It's all been some of my deepest learning. Hearing anger as it is honestly expressed in response to receiving racism is what white people need to do more of. White people controlling how PoC speak is old and racist. And men trying to control how women speak is old and sexist.
My four cents.
@ jamy:
ReplyDeleteYou have misunderstood what an ad hominem argument is.
@ Prove Gotti:
The problem with posting all flamebait/troll comments is that they tend to derail [sometimes] previously productive conversations, as people respond to the nastiness instead of what was previously being discussed.
Willow: why do you assume that I don't know what an ad hominem argument is? (Leaving aside that I didn't spell it correctly.) I know it's not exactly the same as name calling or personal attacks.
ReplyDeleteWhat I think it means: when an argument is rejected based on a fact about the person who made it. E.g. "of course you'd say that, you're White, Gay, Republican, Black, etc." Thus, I reject your claim, regardless of its truthfulness, because of your personal characteristics.
Now, on this blog, a lot of personal experiences are shared, but those aren't arguments, per se. Personal stories seem to be subject to different kinds of attacks (which probably have a formal name I don't know), where others doubt the veracity of the story or claim that the experience described is really another -ism and not racism. I don't think those exchanges should be deleted--unless people start insulting the OP. They've been quite enlightening to me as to how even the most well-meaning White person can easily dismiss the truth of a PoC's experience.
But "Fuck you, asshole" is not an ad hominem. AD isn't name calling during an argument, it's when, instead of addressing the points in anothers argument, you attack their character instead*. You can still say "Fuck you, asshole, you're totally wrong because..." although macon also banned namecalling (which I'm ok with)
ReplyDelete*pointing out one's racism would not be included in this because it is pertinent to the topic.
... the short and concise suggestion frequently gets overlooked in this space ... I am hooked on this blog (and have linked it to mine) despite this because it is great sport watching the universe unfold as it should ... props to Macon for the forum ... from my vantage point (outside the USA) I can see the pathway to progress is lined with enlightened introspection ... play on ...
ReplyDeleteLabel threads "no commenting by WP" or "WP may comment", according to the purpose of the post/thread.
ReplyDelete(see comment # 257 or later on "teflon and adamantium" thread for reasoning - I can't copy, cut, or paste in the comment window for some reason.)
Label threads "no commenting by WP" or "WP may comment", according to the purpose of the post/thread.
ReplyDeleteThat's the rub, isn't it? What is the purpose of a particular post? What direction do you want discussion to go in? Without making that explicit, you're sort of setting people up to fuck up. And despite a few ruffled (roasted?) feathers, that potential for fuck-up does largely benefit White people at POCs' expense.
Here's a relevant question: Will guest commenters be able to lay out specific rules or expectations for the comments to their posts? I was chatting with RVCBard earlier about how I've often tinkered with the idea of pitching a guest post to this blog and actually have some great ideas in mind, but I never do it precisely because the comments on guest posts by POC are so ridiculous. So, I don't know, should we have extra precautions built in for guest posters? Can we ask macon to be extra-selective about publishing comments? Does this idea appeal to people?
ReplyDeletemacon d, maybe you could ask for some suggestions from the folks at Love Isn't Enough. They've strengthened their comment moderation recently and it has made a big difference. I don't know how; it's mostly invisible to the readers.
ReplyDeleteThe comment policy is much too long to be posted as is. It reads a little like that News with Nezua spoof of professional white anti-racists. But having something long like that maybe useful for your own administrative purposes - for cutting and pasting into a commment/email to someone whose comment you deleted.
Have you considered what will appear in the instructions just above the comment box? Maybe just something about it being a moderated forum and a link to the comment policy and/or newbie resources?
I really like thesciencegirl's last suggestion. It seems totally reasonable and appropriate to me for the person sharing to be able to set boundaries for how people respond to them. I do wonder if that could lead to post-to-post micro-moderating on macon's part (quite an undertaking) but so far I do like the idea.
ReplyDeletehow is this blog, this whole thing, not just yet another example of a WP being in charge of a space for and about PoCs? however deferential, reverent, polite, well-intentioned, well-informed macon d may be; it's still a WHITE MAN'S place. because he owns it. he controls it. it's HIS own weblog. and he-not any black person-can pull the plug whenever it suits him.
ReplyDeletehow can all you razor-sharp fanon's out there have faild to confront and critique this? sorry folks, but it appears that we whites just can't damn help ourselves from taking over, from dominating, from setting the terms, from RUNNING THE SHOW-however benignly.
you all are constantly in a blither about ambient white supremacy...yet you don't see it RIGHT HERE.
how can all you razor-sharp fanon's out there have faild to confront and critique this
ReplyDeleteWho are these "fanons" you speak of, and why is it their failure, or even their responsibility?
@ Randy:
ReplyDeleteYou said, how is this blog, this whole thing, not just yet another example of a WP being in charge of a space for and about PoCs?
Um, I don't think is isa space "for and about PoCs", exactly. It's called "Stuff White People Do".
I believe there's a difference between what's happening here -- an anti-racist white man creating a space to do his critical thinking, which must involve people of color if the conversations are going to go anywhere -- and what it sounds to me like you're talking about.
It's a fine line to draw. If this were a PoC-run, PoC-oriented safe space and some white guy, however well-intentioned, came in and tried to lay down the law, I'd have a problem. But that's not what's happening here.
JulianReal posted some thoughts in another thread that seem much more relevant to this conversation -- which is really, or at least partly, about the very nature of swpd itself -- so I'm reposting them here:
ReplyDeleteHey macon d, I'm wondering about something, and wanted to run this buy you, and since rules and guidelines are being discussed, I figured this might be a good time.
I notice that your profile blurb says this:
macon d
I'm a white guy, trying to find out what that means. Especially the "white" part.
And, for me, when I first saw that, I just wasn't interested, even though I'm white. It's not that I don't have plenty to be more conscious of being a white person, it's that THAT focus seemed so problematically racist to me. Like it was setting up this space to do exactly what happened in this thread. Again, I'm a newbie, so I have no idea how other discussions here have gone, except from reading what RVCBard says above about the comparisons.
So I'm thinking this: what if that initial blurb said "I'm a white guy here to learn about the experiences most of humanity has that I don't have, in a space that is determined to be respectful of marginalised voices." Because, after all, most people in the world are women of color. And we're the global minority for sure, but not marginalised.
I think that would help set a tone and message to those white folks who come by... to know this isn't the "hey, let's stop off here and have a looksee at what a white guy is learning that I need to learn too", which, as has been very well expressed by so many commenters here, comes at way too high a price.
And frankly, I don't think white folks learn that way anyway. I mean you can read Robert Jensen, Marilyn Frye, and Tim Wise, as well as Derrick Jensen, Marimba Ani, Andrea Smith, Audre Lorde, Pearl Cleage, and so many other people to find out what white people do that's fucked up and that we tend to (read: need to) be in denial about. We don't need to sap, drain, and invasively use the energy of PoC, and especially WoC, as white males, to find that out.
I have a profeminist blog and wouldn't ever want it to be a space where males lurked soaking in women's painful stories. Or worse, a place where men came to find out how to be better males from women. Eeek. That'd be, well, exploitive and gross, sexist and male supremacist. You know? There are mostly Black women commenting on my blog and I just ban white person who makes a comment that's not appropriate. What NancyP says above makes me wonder, again, who is this blog for? And at what cost if it exists "for" white ppl? The "world" according to white ppl, is for white ppl. So why replicate that here?
[Cont.]
ReplyDeleteI don't think white folks and men learn through discussion. So that's my bold statement du jour. I don't think intellectual and emotional exchanges on a blog have that effect. Nor reading books alone. In my experience, and this is just one whiteboy talking, you have to be in relationship with folks, with actual lived accountability in place. That's where transformative and healing bonding and friendship and community-building happens. Because that way, the relationships are mutual. There's giving and taking on both sides, mutually. Needs get met. People get heard. People are real to one another, face to face or voice to voice. With the anonymity factors inherent in blogging, really misogynist/racist/heterosexist stuff just keeps playing out over and over again.
I used to comment over at a blog called Feral Scholar, where a white heteroman ran the show. His heart was in the right place, to be sure, but all manner of racist/heterosexist/anti-Semitic/misogynist shit kept going down. And it was due to what he let through from white straight non-Jewish men.
I'm realising this blog may exist to do very different things, but after seeing what played out above [that is, the thread for this post ~macon], I gotta ask: who do you want this space to be welcoming to? Ignorant whites who have plenty to say that's off topic, or women (and potentially men) of color who, as evidenced above, have plenty of powerful things to say on this subject.
@ Randy,
ReplyDeleteAlso, you said, how can all you razor-sharp fanon's out there have faild to confront and critique this?
I'd think that's kind of like walking into someone's house and telling the owner to get out, isn't it?
Macon's running this blog has not stopped anyone, as far as I've noticed, from confronting and critiquing him when he says something that is racist. But it sounds like you'd... rather he hand this blog over to a PoC? Or that you think he shouldn't have started this blog in the first place? If that's the case, I respectfully disagree.
@Randy
ReplyDelete"how is this blog, this whole thing, not just yet another example of a WP being in charge of a space for and about PoCs?"
That is presuming this blog is in fact "for" PoC. I haven't heard macon d say that it is (or isn't). If this space were specifically for PoC's, then yes, its being run by a white dude is a serious eyebrow raiser; and you're hardly the first person to point that out.
However, I believe it is high time that white people started really confronting racism ourselves, holding each other accountable ourselves, deconstructing it ourselves; finally removing that burden from PoC. In such a context I can only say "right on!" to macon's (or any other equally proactive white person's) attempt to create a space like this.
There are other anti-racism blogs out there run by PoC. The existence of this one isn't detracting from that. If this one is irreperably flawed, then don't read it. Try one (or more) of the others. Meanwhile we'll still be over here trying to work out the kinks with this one.
RVCBard said... "What is the purpose of a particular post? What direction do you want discussion to go in? Without making that explicit, you're sort of setting people up to fuck up."
ReplyDeleteVery much this. It might help to reiterate the thesis at the very end of each post, and maybe bold it or something, so that the actual topic-for-discussion is the last thing you see before commenting. Even if it's just "I think I'm seeing this phenomenon, do you you agree?" I know it'd help keep me on topic.
Because the actual content (the examples of the phenomenon of the day) can sometimes exhibit so much intersectionality and whatnot (and excite so much emotion) that the comments are all over the place, but still related to the post. We end up discussing 17 things, and it's all valid (or... not), but it's just... too much.
@Zara:
ReplyDeleteMacon's running this blog has not stopped anyone, as far as I've noticed, from confronting and critiquing him when he says something that is racist.
Of course you're not going to notice if the critical comments have been censored.
I feel that his comment moderation has prevented me from confronting and critiquing him when he says something that is racist, several times in the past. This has been done this by him not publishing my critical comments.
Even now when I bother to comment, I feel the need to qualify my sentences with "I feel" to mellow the directness-perceived-as-harshness, to increase the chances of my comments going through.
I'm glad we're actually having a conversation about "the very nature of swpd itself". In the past, when my comments were deleted (I believed I was pointing out problematic patterns in Macon D's writings across his blog), Macon D gave the reason for deleting my comment as his rule of not being allowed to refer to comments he made in another post. He also said that his comments should not be criticized/examined for oppressiveness to the same extent as his posts, because he does not put as much thought into his comments, as sometimes he writes them in a hurry.
Macon, could you reproduce or link to a few comments by WP that you consider exemplary - i.e., perhaps comments that were interesting and constructive while avoiding all the above-mentioned pitfalls? Sometimes I think people are able to learn and modify their behavior more intuitively based on a few concrete positive examples than a laundry list of vague and contradictory admonitions.
ReplyDeleteComments that werent made by WP but would have been apropriate even if they had instead been made by WP would probably be just as useful.
The one suggestion I wanted to offer after reading the comment policy is that maybe it would work better framed as a statement of purpose or "what this blog is/is not" type post. A lot of what you have in the commenting points are just that and I see a lot of comments before mine are discussing things like the nature of swpd, which could be answered in that kind of post.
ReplyDeleteThose kinds of answers (as well as the resources) would be helpful not only to people who comment but ones who don't.
Then, as many others have already suggested, you could keep the comments policy more concise, where a point like "no off-topic or derailing comments" would cover a lot.
ok...yes...i geuss i wasn't as clear as i could have been. i'll try to rephrase it;
ReplyDeletea lot of the focus, commentary, analysis, etc on this blog is about subtle, sometimes VERY subtle cultural and social/societal factors which privilege WP's. and that these factors are PERVASIVE but nonetheless difficult to spot because they-at least in part-form the very structure of modern life. i coined the term 'ambient white supremacy', and i think it is apt.
and you all-and macon himself-are super aware of this non-overt form of semi-racism/racism; citing many, many examples of it. not much escapes you folks.,..very much including WP who are 'in solidarity' with PoC, supposedly and yet who nevertheless tend to gum things up, or be clueless, or do it all for weird personal reasons, or are very self-congratulatory, etc.
and macon d; cool as he does genuinelly seem to be-is one of these WP.
my point is not that macon shouldnt do this site. he can and should do as he pleases. i'm just saying maybe he and other folks here should always keep in mind that this blog IS white-controlled space. because i think that's forgotten here often. it's treated by many here as 'by and for PoCs'(my previous phrase)and this allows for the launching of much righteoously angry invective at White Privilege.
yet my own view is to take the analysis further out; that is...is this ambient white control a bad thing necessarily>? WHY is this blog so incredibly active and popular even tho its white run?(could it be that knowing a White Man is ultimately in charge sets some at ease?).
that's all i'm saying; always take the 'meta' viewpoint; include the Space which allows analysis and critique WITHIN your critique.
I also like thesciencegirl's idea of having much stricter moderation on guest posts. Maybe you could also select some of your own threads for strict moderation while leaving others as 'Racism 101' threads, as long as you clearly identified which was which in the post.
ReplyDeleteTo Zara and others who believe that Macon's running this blog has not stopped anyone from confronting and critiquing him when he says something that is racist:
ReplyDeleteStuff White People Say was started in 2008 in response to Macon D's decisions not to publish some of our comments. It's more about common white tendencies, Macon D being an illustration of many, but the blog probably would not have been created if we were allowed to criticize him in the comments of his blog.
(Of course, whether or not this comment goes through depends on what Macon D decides, as he is the gatekeeper of which criticisms of him appear in the comments.)
Restructure,
ReplyDeleteI have no problem with people criticizing what I write (though yes, I do have a problem with people criticizing "me" -- interesting ad hominem-ish terms in your latest comment). I find your comments here incomplete and disingenuous. You and your "we" have criticized what I write here exhaustively. You all ran away with cries of "censorship!" when I blocked what I saw here as thread-hijacking. You know that.
End of discussion of this issue here, because I think more of it here would be threadhijacking. If you want to take up "criticizing" not "me," but earlier things I've written here, you're of course welcome to go back to those comment threads and do so. Who knows, the convo could well go differently -- I've certainly changed since the year or more ago that I wrote posts that still stick in your craw.
Randy, I'm wondering how you make the valid point that this is macon's blog and then want to know how no one has called him out on this. Are we to be upset with him for creating this space?
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I'm surprised (and happy) the blog has made it this far. I've seen many other well-meaning white people try to create such a space and eventually give it up because of all the fickleness that is created in spaces such as these.
I'm way off on a tangent, so I'm done with that, but Randy, my e-mail address isn't hard to find if you'd rather e-mail me the answer to my question than continue a derailment.
As for the actual post, it's long -- all swpd posts are.
I haven't read all comments, and I don't have much else to add except, I hope that we don't let the pursuit of perfection be the enemy of progress... (I stole that from somebody, not sure who and I'm too lazy in this moment to find it)
Shorter, please, shorter!
ReplyDelete