tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post5838519910768438348..comments2024-03-06T08:29:13.333-08:00Comments on stuff white people do: derail dialogues on race with the arab trader argumentmacon dhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07795547197817128339noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-86863145981543509572010-02-26T12:03:54.812-08:002010-02-26T12:03:54.812-08:00[Wordy Me, you're right -- this blog isn't...[Wordy Me, you're right -- this blog isn't the place for your second rant; ironically enough, it's a perfect example of the Arab Trader Argument. ~macon]macon dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07795547197817128339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-38469702001257607462010-02-26T12:02:14.871-08:002010-02-26T12:02:14.871-08:00While I understand that it is not good to use able...While I understand that it is not good to use ableist language...<br /><br />1. Thanks to you handful of folks for proving the point in the original post. I believe derailment-by-crying-ableism was one of the behaviors mentioned. (Or maybe I'm thinking of another post at this blog that links to this one.)<br /><br />2. There's a difference between seeing a condition as a negative thing in some contexts, and seeing the people with the condition as bad (or lesser, or subhuman) people.<br /><br />I hate to be the one to break this to you, but if I lost my vision tomorrow, I wouldn't respond by saying "wow, gee, I get to be unique now! I have special abilities! Yay!" Number one, there's nothing unique about being vision-impaired. A large percentage of the population is, if you factor in everyone who needs glasses. Number two, we happen to be a highly visual species and it is very DIFFICULT to get along without your eyes working properly. Yes, we are now making allowances to make that easier. Yes, blind people have had to fight tooth and nail to obtain said allowances. YES, blind people are still human beings and deserve to be treated with respect and to have social and cultural equality.<br /><br />It still sucks to be blind.<br /><br />I'm glad blind people learn to live with it. I'm pretty sure I would, if I ever went blind.<br /><br />I would still hate it. Given the choice between sightedness and blindness I would probably never want to be blind, unless I was looking at something particularly awful or scarring and it was impossible to look away or close my eyes. Maybe then. But not any other time.<br /><br />I realize what-if arguments are pointless but IF a blind person were given the choice I don't think they'd stay blind either. If there were some way to restore sight that wasn't too risky, they'd take it. And there is nothing wrong with that. You are not your condition. Your condition is just something you have.<br /><br />I'm borderline diabetic. I'd give anything not to be. But if someone joked about going into insulin shock because a friend of theirs was being overly sappy, I wouldn't take personal offense. It sucks to go into insulin shock. (I don't know about that one personally but I've heard from people who do.) It sucks to have your mental functions get frigged up because your blood sugar's too high. It sucks to put on a hundred pounds and become socially invisible and have everyone assume you're lazy and good-for-nothing. It sucks to not be able to eat what so many other people can eat without consequence.<br /><br />But I can distinguish between being looked down upon because of my condition, and people calling the condition itself negative or bad. I AGREE with them. It IS bad. Knock yourself out, use it in all the metaphors you like, as long as you aren't slamming me too. It is just something I have. It does not define me.<br /><br />There is such a dearth of logical analysis in discussions of -isms, it drives me crazy. People need to do a little bit better job of figuring out where the actual problems lie. It's like people deciding that the solution for racism is to pretend everyone is alike and that there are no differences. The bullshit, trumped-up invented "differences" aside (such as supposedly innate lower IQ in some races), the whole point of why racism sucks is you're taking someone's physical characteristics as a reason to devalue that person. The differences are not the problem. The response to those differences IS the problem.<br /><br />But some people have trouble with the concept. I'm at a loss as to why.Wordy Menoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-76099587971001153662010-01-12T03:22:42.798-08:002010-01-12T03:22:42.798-08:00Yeah, I know I'm coming in awfully late on thi...Yeah, I know I'm coming in awfully late on this. I just have to ask if anyone else ever tried this argument with their mother, ala RVCBard's example.<br /><br />My Mom's response to the Arab trader argument was always, "If they jumped off a cliff, would you do it, too?"JustDavenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-30504273291833341102010-01-10T23:58:57.324-08:002010-01-10T23:58:57.324-08:00Could we avoid using ableist terms like "mora...Could we avoid using ableist terms like "morally blind"? It's a bit inconsiderate to people who actually are blind, yet not inherently immoral.Robinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-24182741340611891102009-10-31T23:58:51.817-07:002009-10-31T23:58:51.817-07:00It's nice to know that I haven't been hall...It's nice to know that I haven't been hallucinating this stuff. I'm new at this anti-racism thing and my husband and I typically give the talk to white Jews. We get the "arab trader argument" all the time!!!Aliza "La Jewminicana" Hausmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15867752362566335019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-36228320389453715132009-10-27T07:47:47.331-07:002009-10-27T07:47:47.331-07:00I usually respond with "And this is something...I usually respond with "And this is something I have to do something about now or can I wait until after lunch?" <br /> Or: "Tell me how you respond to these facts. Inspire me with the praxis of celebrating our diversity."<br /> Or: "You're right. We don't deserve to have all these people of color. They're too good for us. We should just take a few states and be shut off from the rest of the world forever, except for occasional liturgies of atonement."Brad Evanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17381562723928616425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-27645696426249731452009-10-27T07:36:47.710-07:002009-10-27T07:36:47.710-07:00It boils down to:
"But, Mooooooom! They do i...It boils down to:<br /><br />"But, Mooooooom! They do it too!"RVCBardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06481089855894764409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-16997701582546069672009-10-21T20:17:29.644-07:002009-10-21T20:17:29.644-07:00You really broke this argument down. I'm highl...You really broke this argument down. I'm highly impressed.The Witty Mulattohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14714368344885684793noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-72089402948395062012009-10-16T20:32:18.105-07:002009-10-16T20:32:18.105-07:00"Tu quoque" is used by everyone, everywh..."Tu quoque" is used by everyone, everywhere, including people who are arguing with Americans.Brad Evanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17381562723928616425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-48359362262289132152009-10-16T05:13:04.449-07:002009-10-16T05:13:04.449-07:00Your own dismissal of an argument outside its cont...Your own dismissal of an argument outside its context shuts down dialogue.flaccidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-89541367758745639502009-10-16T02:17:53.596-07:002009-10-16T02:17:53.596-07:00I think JM Perkins really nailed it. I'm often...I think JM Perkins really nailed it. I'm often amazed at the vitriol that gets leveled at white people and some actually think that white people should just stand there and take it. In the same sense, a black person is not going to stand idly by while whites talk about high black crime rates. If he brings up historical injustices of black people is he then guilty of derailing the conversation? This is a moral double standard placed on whites, that we should expect white people to want to be insulted and demeaned while all other races should be protected from this. <br /><br />No one wants to hear their group denigrated. They take it personally and try to shift the subject. I don't think that anyone can be faulted for this. It's simple human nature.Sagatnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-24112899971650178492009-10-16T00:05:55.297-07:002009-10-16T00:05:55.297-07:00In Australia recently, as some of you may have bee...In Australia recently, as some of you may have been aware, we have had a lot of news about attacks on Indian students in the streets and on trains. There was plenty of publicity about this. When Indians rose up and complained about Australian racism, an "Arab trader"-type argument was an exceedingly common response. <br /><br />Eg. "India is the most racist country in the world - have you heard about the untouchables?"<br /><br />Therefore, they have no right, ever, to criticise anyone else, or so the logic goes. So Indians in Australia should endure bashings in dignified silence, all because of what Indians in India do.Eurasian Sensationhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03486297795353354329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-47650888869831905022009-10-14T14:02:23.520-07:002009-10-14T14:02:23.520-07:00No prob. I can see how that paragraph might get.....No prob. I can see how that paragraph might get...mashy, hehe.Willownoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-12101593581697176242009-10-14T12:18:31.811-07:002009-10-14T12:18:31.811-07:00Willow, my sincere apologies. Having gone back an...Willow, my sincere apologies. Having gone back and read your other comments, I do realize that you're not coming from the place I thought you were. So we're clear, it was this para that threw me off:<br /><br />"In my experience, if no POC are around, white people can talk about racial issues without getting defensive. In fact, we can get pretty damn snarky about our race ("dead British dudes marauding across Africa" and so forth)(this is, by the way, the reason I agree with a statement I read a zillion years ago that was "a 'safe space' for white people to talk about race is not safe for people of color"). But that is because, of course, we tend to see each other not as part of a people, but as individual, separate persons. We're not actually connected to those evils, not really."<br /><br />I guess I genuinely just read that wrong.Jillianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01792137126898623243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-34150880217753459472009-10-14T11:40:46.779-07:002009-10-14T11:40:46.779-07:00For basic alterity theory, Levinas. Postcolonial ...For basic alterity theory, Levinas. Postcolonial developments thereof, probably Said or Bhabha. You can also look through the archives of this site.<br /><br /><a href="http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/04/lack-racial-self-awareness.html" rel="nofollow">lack racial self-awareness</a><br /><i>[W]hiteness has in a sense gone underground. Most white people no longer see themselves as white; they see themselves and other whites as individuals instead."</i><br />This post includes a quote from <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2007/jul/09/guardianobituaries.obituaries3" rel="nofollow">Ruth Frankenburg</a>; since you mentioned that your conversations have taken place in academic settings, I'm assuming you're familiar with her work.<br /><br />Also see:<br /><a href="http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/05/forget-names-of-non-white-people_15.html" rel="nofollow">forget the names of non-white people</a><br /><a href="http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/06/express-amazement-when-non-white-people.html" rel="nofollow">express amazement when non-white people see them as "white"</a><br /><a href="http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/10/assume-that-birds-of-darker-feather.html" rel="nofollow">assume that birds of a darker feather naturally stick together, and birds of a white feather don't</a><br /><br />Just a couple of examples.<br /><br />You said:<br /><i>I'm just saying there's a whole lot of inability to have an honest conversation and yeah, most of it IS coming from white people's assumptions.</i><br /><br />...And what I've been trying to do is pick apart those assumptions, so we (generic) can have honest conversations.<br /><br />You (generic, <i>of course</i>) can't fix something unless you understand what's wrong. That applies to your own internal attitudes and prejudices, but if you've got a grip on those or honestly believe you don't have them, it's equally important to understand the sources so you can then explain to other people in your group (in this case, white people) what is actually underlying their attitude.<br /><br />Oh, hell. I'll just put it this way: my use of the corporate "we" is intended to mean "some white people" (cf the quote at the top of the page, right?). Sometimes I'm including myself, sometimes I'm not. My point is to generalize so as not to attack any one person in particular. If you read any of my comments here you will probably grasp fairly quickly that I do not feel "bullied" by, well, anyone.<br /><br />Racism is not okay. <i>My</i> racism is not okay; I am not okay with it. And yes, I am racist. <i>In this society I cannot help but be racist, even though I do not want to be; figuring out *why* things are the way they are is an important step in changing the situation</i>. (There. Did you like my use of "I"?)<br /><br />I want to change things. Hopefully you do, too.Willownoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-84520725992417142022009-10-14T10:31:23.570-07:002009-10-14T10:31:23.570-07:00Also, Willow, you seem to be implying that your ra...Also, Willow, you seem to be implying that your racism is okay, because you feel bullied by PoC. Correct me if I'm wrong.<br /><br />And to further elaborate on my earlier comment: I'm not saying AT ALL that I listen so others will listen. I'm saying that more openness, more honesty, and more willingness to listen is imperative when discussing race. I have been a part of (both silently and verbosely) wonderful conversations about race - albeit in mostly academic environments - that involved both white people and PoC.<br /><br />I'm not saying either that simply talking (or listening) is the answer, or that there's no blame to be placed on white people.<br /><br />I'm just saying there's a whole lot of inability to have an honest conversation and yeah, most of it IS coming from white people's assumptions.Jillianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01792137126898623243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-85637318230833078532009-10-14T10:27:52.111-07:002009-10-14T10:27:52.111-07:00Willow,
A) I said nothing about that being the pr...Willow,<br /><br />A) I said nothing about that being the primary reason for my listening. It's simply a truism: if you listen, others will listen.<br /><br />and <br /><br />B) Standard sociological theory? For whom? Cite please.Jillianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01792137126898623243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-15979819469207825382009-10-14T09:55:58.090-07:002009-10-14T09:55:58.090-07:00@ Jillian
Okay, I'll clarify my statement by ...@ Jillian<br /><br />Okay, I'll clarify my statement by sticking a "some" in front of all of them, so as not to insult you. I'm working off the same basis as that this site is called "stuff white people do" and not "stuff some white people do." The "we" is intended to denote that I am white. It seems dishonest to use "they," whether or not I consciously engage in a practice.<br /><br />The notion that white people view other white people as individual persons and POC as a group, as the nameless Other, is standard sociological theory.<br /><br />The fact that you value "listening with open ears" in discussions primarily because it means people will listen to you, worries me very, very much.Willownoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-49633207269633663962009-10-14T08:17:59.336-07:002009-10-14T08:17:59.336-07:00"Well, let a few POC come into the discussion..."Well, let a few POC come into the discussion, and the (white) mindset totally shifts. Suddenly, the situation becomes (again, to white people) a bunch of individuals facing off against a Group (TM)."<br /><br />Um, please speak for your self. I don't, as a white person, feel challenged discussing race amongst non-white friends. In fact, it's quite empowering to be able to listen with open ears, because when you do that, people are far more willing to listen to you.<br /><br />And why exactly do you think of white people as individuals but PoC as a "Group"?Jillianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01792137126898623243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-66176818722765003922009-10-14T07:56:17.109-07:002009-10-14T07:56:17.109-07:00bluey512 on this thread:
"Certainly I think i...bluey512 on this thread:<br /><i>"Certainly I think it's worth noting that when people bring up either subject, white people are likely to hear it as a condemnation of their own personal moral failings."</i><br /><br />Pistolina on the race/gender thread:<br /><i>"Why is the onus on RVCBard and the millions of non-crazy black women to prove that they're not like the minority when white people always assume that other white people are not like our nastiest white counterparts?" <br />(Note: she is pointing out someone else's fallacy, not being unaware of the answer)</i><br /><br />I've been trying to figure out *why* I agree with bluey's comment, or rather, why that observation holds true. I had some idea that it was about the whole white-people-as-individuals, POC-as-a-group thing, but the thought was still kind of messy. Pistolina, I think you just cleared it up.<br /><br />In my experience, if no POC are around, white people can talk about racial issues without getting defensive. In fact, we can get pretty damn snarky about our race ("dead British dudes marauding across Africa" and so forth)(this is, by the way, the reason I agree with a statement I read a zillion years ago that was "a 'safe space' for white people to talk about race is not safe for people of color"). But that is because, of course, we tend to see each other not as part of a people, but as individual, separate persons. We're not actually connected to those evils, not really.<br /><br />Well, let a few POC come into the discussion, and the (white) mindset totally shifts. Suddenly, the situation becomes (again, to white people) a bunch of individuals facing off against a Group (TM). In moments like this, we perceive our whiteness because of what we are *not*, i.e. part of the Group. But we still don't see ourselves as a second Group, for the most part. Suddenly, we have a racial identity, and the connection with the past that that entails, but in the present that identity seems to stop with us. So whatever is said about white people of the past applies to us directly and, more importantly, individually. We are not used to this, and hence get defensive very, very quickly.<br /><br />The alternate explanation, of course, is simply that the discussion has dragged up our own racist attitudes and memories of past actions. But where's the fun in deconstructing *that*?Willownoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-20490951561914066712009-10-13T14:16:53.058-07:002009-10-13T14:16:53.058-07:00That is not how I read the original post, Bluey. ...That is not how I read the original post, Bluey. The way I read the original post is that the Arab Trader bit is just a stand-in for any PoC-on-PoC or PoC-on-white exploitation or violence that someone might use to counter a complaint about something white people do or have done. <br /><br />For example, people often do it in more modern contexts with things like, say, white police officers' attitudes toward innocent black people. If a black person is talking about how they got pulled over by a white cop when they weren't doing anything, and how often it happens to black people they know, and how frustrating it is, and the white person they are complaining to cites the one case they know of where a black cop pulled a white driver over and was clearly acting on prejudice, and acts like that means it's all right to do, or points out how black cops sometimes racially profile black drivers, too, as if that makes it all right, then that is a modern version of the Arab Trader argument. <br /><br />And I'm white, but I don't really have sympathy for white people who derail conversations because they feel bad. For every time a PoC brings up a racial issue that makes a white person feel bad, that PoC has experienced that racial issue probably a dozen times-- enough times that they feel like they need to air their grievances about it. The sum total of times PoCs face oppression is far greater than the number of times white people feel bad about it. I know I've felt bad about things I've said or done or been implicated in as a white person. But feeling bad is necessary for me to move on and unpack my own race issues and learn how to fight racism instead of complying with it unknowingly. It doesn't give me the right to deflect or derail when PoCs talk about what they face every day.Pistolinanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-80749579624578553952009-10-13T13:50:55.457-07:002009-10-13T13:50:55.457-07:00Generally, I use the rule of "but." Kin...Generally, I use the rule of "but." Kind of like how "I'm sorry I hurt you, but..." isn't a real apology.<br /><br />"But Arabs and Africans had slaves, too!"<br />"But remember, Christians were killed during the Holocaust, too."<br />"But black people call each other --."<br />"But that happens to me, too, so it's actually a sexism thing."<br /><br />The "but" isn't always spoken; in fact, it more often goes unsaid. Saying "but" makes it a little too obvious, I think, that you (generic; here, white people) are protesting the implications of the statement (e.g. "'white people did something pretty damn evil' is not true!"), rather than simply pointing out historical context ("white people did an evil thing, and this is how they were able to exploit intra-African rivalries in order to do it").<br /><br /><i>Certainly I think it's worth noting that when people bring up either subject, white people are likely to hear it as a condemnation of their own personal moral failings.</i><br /><br />I am going to do some thinking about this. I agree, but my thoughts haven't quite sorted themselves out yet.Willownoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-14351485247604634712009-10-13T13:19:01.366-07:002009-10-13T13:19:01.366-07:00Pistolina, what you're saying would make perfe...Pistolina, what you're saying would make perfect sense if the topic of discussion were the hurts suffered by oppressed people. But from what I can infer about the OP, it was written in response to a hypothetical conversation about the evil things white Americans do, which is a slightly different topic. I don't know, I could be wrong. But it seems to me that if I'm correct, then the Arab trader argument isn't even a derail.<br /><br />Certainly I think it's worth noting that when people bring up either subject, white people are likely to hear it as a condemnation of their own personal moral failings.bluey512noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-69568023367527475692009-10-13T13:00:17.826-07:002009-10-13T13:00:17.826-07:00JM Perkins and Bluey--
I think the issue is not r...JM Perkins and Bluey--<br /><br />I think the issue is not recognizing historicity in context, but using these things as a tactic to soften the blow. If white people were willing to openly agree that the things our people have done to other people are atrocities instead of trying to play them off by pointing out other types of atrocities committed by other people, I think a lot of people would feel a lot less like modern white people are harboring the same othering sentiments that led to these kinds of atrocities. <br /><br />It's not that people intend to derail. And maybe people bringing these things up have the best intentions, but we have all discussed or listened to discussions of unintentional racism, aversive racism, and derailment before. Just because you don't mean to belittle someone's honest description of their own hurt doesn't mean that you <i>didn't</i>. (I mean this as the proverbial you, of course) <br /><br />There are definitely conversations where discussing PoC-on-PoC or PoC-on-white violence or exploitation matter as far as context and historicity. Those, though, are not necessarily conversations where someone is talking about how slavery or white colonialism led to the status quo we have today. Whether Africans sold rivals to white slavers does not let us explore how white attitudes about Africans during the era of the slave trade led to attitudes we see from white people today. It is a different subject entirely and is a digression from the topic, and an attempt to shift blame, when blame is not necessarily even part of the equation of the topic of discussion. That's why it's a form of derailment.Pistolinanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-528074983146803930.post-86541467384945389832009-10-13T12:50:59.641-07:002009-10-13T12:50:59.641-07:00Right on. Not only is the Arab trader argument po...Right on. Not only is the Arab trader argument poor in the sense that it doesn't excuse Western slave ownership, but also because Arab slavery was a different being altogether (I like to point out that Moulay Ismail of Morocco had white Christian slaves, so there! - only half-kidding).Jillianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01792137126898623243noreply@blogger.com