12:39pm March 17, 2014

➸ A powerful (and potentially hazardous) communication formula.

And I’m sure I’m guilty of, at minimum, passing on things communicated in this formula. Because one of its serious advantages, for those using it, is that it’s the sort of thing that sticks in people’s minds and that they want to pass on But I’ve finally recognized that I see a…

I’m not actually sure we disagree, because I agree with everything you just said.

I agree that oppressive dynamics are present in pretty much all situations.

I agree that naming something doesn’t create it.

I agree that there’s no such thing as the kind of neutral situation you think I’m trying to describe.

And I agree that being part of an oppressed group doesn’t generally, in most situations, give you an advantage in any way.

In fact I think I was pretty clear about most of those things in my post.

What I’m saying, is that within communities where people do care a lot about ending oppression, I’ve seen this turned into a manipulative weapon rather than a means of describing an actual situation. And even when it does describe an actual situation, it can sometimes be so potent that it takes on a life of its own and takes over how everyone views things for a long time afterwards.

And I’m also saying that I’ve taken part in this at all possible levels, and I’m just starting to recognize why it’s a good idea to think before you frame a situation in this manner, or pass on information that’s been framed in such a manner. Because I’ve seen it spiral out of control in really destructive ways that don’t help end oppression in any way and may actually hinder such efforts.

So I’m not quite sure where we disagree. At least, I agree with pretty much everything you said there. Maybe we disagree on where to draw the line, or whether it can ever be destructive to frame situations in this way, but I don’t disagree at all with most of what you’ve said there.

Like… there’s a thing where people who are socialized as male interrupt and talk over people more often than people who are socialized as female, and especially talk over anyone who is presumed female. And there’s a thing where people without communication disabilities interrupt and talk over people with communication disabilities.

And there’s also a thing where autistic people interrupt people because we’re not good at figuring out conversational timing.

So an autistic man interrupts me, and I immediately say not “You just interrupted me,” but “You just interrupted an autistic person with a significant communication impairment.”

No matter what he says from then on, people who are aware of oppression are going to see it partial the way I framed it. And anything he says to defend himself will look like an excuse. And he may eventually, in extreme instances, get a reputation as that guy who interrupts people with communication impairments, even if he interrupted me once and everyone just remembers vaguely what I said about him doing it.

And like… that doesn’t seem entirely fair to me. Maybe it does seem fair to you, and maybe that’s where we disagree.

I also think there are times when it’s absolutely fair, and just, and right, to use this formula. I just think you really have to think about it first, you can’t just spit it out every time something happens that’s unpleasant. Maybe we disagree there, too.

But I suspect where we disagree, if anywhere, is a matter of degree, a matter of where to draw a line, possibly a matter of whether to draw a line. Because you’ve said nothing that I fundamentally disagree with overall, in fact I strongly agree with the vast majority of what you’ve said.

(But that happens to me a lot, and I’m never sure what to make of it. I say something, someone says “I disagree with that,” then they proceed to say a long string of things I completely agree with.)

I don’t think that naming oppression creates the oppression, by the way. And I don’t think naming oppression is wrong when it’s happening, although I do think you have to always think about it even in situations where you’re pretty sure it’s happening. I just think it’s important to think, rather than reflexively throw your oppressed identity into a discussion.

And if you’re not just doing it reflexively, if you are thinking about it first, and if you are not doing it in a manipulative way, then I’m probably not talking about you. I just know it can be done reflexively (I know because I’ve done it), it can be done in place of thinking about the situation, and it can have consequences that aren’t expected and go beyond what’s reasonable. And I feel bad about having passed on information I learned in that way, without getting to know the situation first.

Notes: