#internalized bias

[fandomeic]

I'm going to get torn apart for this

So it's been a few weeks. I've seen post after post after tweet after, well, you get the idea, about Robby and his mental health. I've seen think pieces about how we have to factor in his heritage as an Eastern European/Slavic and Jewish person. Hundreds, if not thousands of words, we need to understand his cultural and generational trauma.

And these posts about intergenerational trauma around Slavic cultures, Jewish families, etc., aren't wrong. There is verifiable historical evidence to point to all of these causes and reasons. This trauma is very real and deserves empathy and consideration.

But I cannot fucking STAND how people center a white man and his issues, and completely ignore or don't even bother to think about the women, and women of color, he lashes out at.

How about we look at the stigma in South Asian cultures around mental health? Various African cultures, Black communities, East Asian, Southeast Asian, Indigenous, etc.

Why do they not exist in your understanding of these characters?

Let's just take a look at how heavily stigmatized mental health is in South Asian communities.

Supriya Ganesh even addressed this in an interview about how they wanted to touch more on the stigma in her own community.

I am all for expanding our understanding of characters through the lens of cultural context. I get completely and utterly pissed off when I see this being done for white characters, especially white men, and yet when it comes to having all of this energy for characters of color, it's crickets.

Why do their contextual cultural backgrounds not matter?

Why are we writing so many pieces about only white characters, white men, to center and explain their suffering, while women of color, ONCE AGAIN, are left to bear the brunt of their lashing out, and are expected to shut up and take it?

Do they just not matter? Do y'all not care? That seems to be the conclusion to draw here.

Does Heather Collins' emotional and cultural trauma not matter? Do Samira Mohan's or Victoria Javadi's emotional and cultural trauma not matter? I'd ask about Trinity Santos, but I damned well know what half of this fandom thinks about her.

Why, over and over again, are people of color, specifically women of color (and ESPECIALLY Black women), forced to carry water for white people's emotional disregulation, and then have to sit and watch as piece after piece is written to justify or understand said white character's emotional disregulation, and no thought is given to them?

To be frank, this isn't just a Pitt problem. This happens in nearly every fandom. It's an unexamined bias problem, and too many people refuse to acknowledge or confront it.

After all, why engage with the reasons a show decides to center some characters and de-center others? Isn't it just so much easier to say, "Well, white person (usually a man) is the LEAD, of course, he gets all the attention!"

This is the fucking problem in the first place.

Media and representation have power in that they can still dictate to us who is and is not worth exploring, whose emotional issues deserve empathy, and whose should continue to be ignored. And we're still uncritically eating that shit up with a spoon.

These male doctors deserve empathy; they're noble heroes!

An Indigenous person buckling under the weight of massive intergenerational and personal trauma is just a deadbeat alcoholic. Also, they just died waiting for help in the EM, because medical racism is a fucking thing.

Robby has been under enormous trauma in his career and personal life!

So have multiple women on this show. But they're largely not white, and not the lead, and therefore don't seem to deserve the same level of empathy or importance.

Who you choose to invest your empathy and time in understanding is your choice. It's also very telling.

[rosetyler42]

The twins + protective gang as requested by @heartsong1994 and inspired by my responses to @drawing-prompt-s "Monster protecting child from human adult" prompt.

I decided to go with Johnny and the others being defensive since...well, Mavis has some fears and internalized shit, and Johnny doesn't really get to do much in the series anyway despite the fact he's clearly feisty enough to challenge Vlad to a fight and loves his family (clearly got a bit of the original Harker in him.) I know part of it was because they're family and they mean well, but...she does kinda let Mike and Linda and co get away with some things in her efforts to protect Dennis and ends up pushing humanity over monsteriness. The novel kinda makes things clearer that she feels pressured to do this but...I definitely feel Mavis has some internalized stuff to deal with that might get in the way of telling humans off that Jphnny and the others don't have. Plus, I always love when the less powerful one sticks up for the one you'd think not need the protection and letting Mavis in on having someone stand up for her. Especially when it's someone she wouldn't have expected to do that growing up.

Of course...Johnny's a bit more of a hothead than the others, even Ericka, when he's in protective mode. That's kinda where Lucy's "punch racists" philosophy comes from. XD

Johnny gets to be an ally/protective brother and husband, you got scary protective uncles, Mavis has her worldview opened a bit...ya know. What more can you ask for?

@lovelylivelyv @deathfangirl9 @serial-serializednovelreader @kittyball23 @genderqueer-bithing @monstetransylvaniasstuff

[sometimesrosy]

Part of me is as always looking forward to the next episode, but part of me is dreading it in regards to Echo. I know that spoiler account is biased as hell but all their facts were correct. I know they didn't like Echo so maybe they over exaggerated her scenes but if they didn't, it doesn't bode well for her to not have "learned anything" Murphy's words this late in the game, if this was S6 it would be okay because there would still be time to fix this but this is the last season so I'm worried

The concept of her “not learning anything” has been an anti-echo position from the beginning.

But I don’t think it’s correct.

It’s taken on the assumption that Echo has the same character journey as Clarke and Bellamy and even Octavia. But I honestly don’t believe her path is the same at all. First of all, Echo is not a leader. Or rather, she’s a lieutenant... which does make her a leader of people, a tactician, but she’s not the one who makes the plans. She figures out how to go about achieving someone else’s plans.

This doesn’t mean she isnt’ important. It doesn’t mean that she shouldn’t have morals... they’ve made it explicit that doing something just because you’re following orders is what every war criminal ever says. 

BUT Echo’s journey is NOT about breaking the cycle and stopping more violence and never fighting back. (frankly, clarke and bellamy and octavia are NOT pacifists. their journey is not about non violence either. there IS a time to fight back and it’s hard to know exactly when it is, so that’s part of their struggle.) 

Echo’s journey is about, I believe, independence and identity. It’s about the OPPRESSED standing up and declaring themselves no longer subjects of the oppressors. Even if Echo’s oppressors, her masters in azgeda, are long gone, THEY HAVE STILL COLONIZED HER MIND. She is not free because her self worth was reduced to being a good spy, a servant. She doesn’t exist outside of servitude.

And even though she’s learned what it means to be valued as part of a family and has found peace, she can’t put that sword down because she was TRAINED to use it to protect everything she holds dear. What she holds dear has changed, but the conditioning HAS NOT. 

This is a real life phenomenon, it’s not made up. She has INTERNALIZED the oppression and is not free. I suppose it’s part of the problem with her culture, that they’ve internalized the violence and blood for blood mentality, as well biases against outsiders, technology, mutants, etc. 

Hmm. I’ve kind of gone on thinking all this time that this show has set up Sky Crew as “us.” Like they’re the pov characters, the heroes, so I assumed they were “us.” But looking at the way the grounders deal with their biases, I think “we” (meaning americans, sorry international folk, i’m referring to jr and where he’s from, which is detroit, michigan actually) are the grounders. Which makes sense in world, because the grounders are the mid atlantic american survivors. 

Anyway, what I’m saying is if that is the case, then Echo could actually represent people from our own society, americans, confronted with their place in the cycle of violence (or racism if you want to put a modern day struggle to the metaphor,) learning (or not learning) how to break free of that internalized oppression. 

The first step of ending the cycle is not rising up in revolution, but decolonizing your mind. Echo is in the process of doing that. This is growth. This is learning. This is development, but it’s not the same development as Clarke, Bellamy and Octavia. 

This doesn’t mean that Echo is safe from death. She’s still on my list. Not everyone does reach their growth before they die. Some people do reach the growth and still die. Because part of the tragedy of their death is that they’re ALMOST there, the potential for transformation is right there, and it’s swept out from under them because of senseless violence. (Lxa, Pike, Kane, Jaha, Abby, Wells, Finn.)

That spoiler account is biased, definitely. And if it’s who I suspect it is, she has a marked difficulty interpreting anything beyond bellarke (which she’s good at) and racism, (which she’s limited with because she’s not intersectional, since she thinks only her intersections count but nobody else’s do.) I would not take anything she said about Echo as truth, because she is unable to see her through anything but a bellarke lens. Echo doesn’t exist for her outside of the opposition to her ship, so she’s unable to understand the story that is building for Echo. 

We’ve already seen 3 of the episodes that she did. Her facts of the canon may be accurate, but what she chooses to report on is still only her perspective, which is limited. I’m not sure where she gets the ability to interpret the entire character arc of a character after those four episodes. it’s not clear in the 3 we saw, so i doubt that suddenly echo’s arc is set in stone with one more episode. 

When people use their authority or access to professional material and contacts to influence fandom towards their biases without fandom having the ability to verify their sources, it’s an abuse of power and unethical and unprofessional behavior. Can we really trust that kind of person to make sense of someone else’s story? Particularly since they have an admitted bias against the story and the storytellers? 

[speakoutwithtimwise-blog]

Episode 38 of Speak Out with Tim Wise is entitled: "Psychologies of Oppression: Post-Traumatic Slave Syndrome, the Death of Empathy and the Assimilation Blues.”

This episode is the first of three programs taped in front of a live audience at the National Conference on Race and Ethnicity (NCORE), held from May 29 to June 2, 2018 in New Orleans. The guests —  Jacqueline Battalora, Joy Angela DeGruy and Rahuldeep Gill — explore the ways that people of color are psychologically affected by racialized injustice — from internalizing oppression to feeling intense pressure to assimilate — and the way whites in America are conditioned not only to accept our “superiority” but to restrain and subdue our own natural empathic tendencies, which might otherwise mitigate against injustice.

Additionally, the panel discusses the way racial trauma is transmitted across generations, the importance of using a sense of shared injury and pain as a bridge for building movement solidarity, and the issue of how and why we must begin to repair the damage of accumulated racial injury, both collectively and individually.

[novasystem2]

As a minority group in the dominant culture, you learn things about the world and about yourself through exposure to other people's ideas and realities.

Content warning:

Detailed discussion of internalized bias and stigma against multiple minority groups, including trans people and plural systems.

Discussion of (predominantly american)politics, while not too detailed, it's a little nihilistic.

The goal of discussing such topics is to attain better understanding of why those biases exist and to help others feel more comfortable with themselves knowing their thoughts don't make them monsters. As well as to encourage community gathering and companionship among those who are oppressed.

For example, if you grew up openly trans in a small Texas town (like I did), you may have internalized beliefs about trans people. And maybe as you've gotten older you have realized that those beliefs aren't true about you, and they aren't true of most other trans people you've met, but sometimes you see someone who doesn't pass quite as well, isn't making an effort to pass, or looks gender ambiguous on a masculine frame. Those situations unfortunately defy social norms to such an extreme that you may still have internalized stigma and wind up (internally) reacting to that stigma with discomfort.

I would never want to normalize hatred and stigma like this, but unfortunately the world has already normalized it for us. And I don't fully know how to unlearn things like that. But I know I have to.

I'm posting about this because I know I'm not alone in this.

You probably have some internalized biases about whatever minority group you're from. I think there's a reason a lot of systems represent themselves with art rather than their physical face. It's really difficult to put yourself out there and it's even more difficult with the little worms in your brain telling you that no matter what you do, people will always see all of you as one person because of your shared body. Sometimes those worms get loud even when it's not your pictures, even when it's other systems.

Nobody wants to have internalized stigma and biases, but so many people carry those thoughts about themselves and they extrapolate those onto others. It can sometimes lead to resentment for those who share traits with you because at your very core you're afraid that the dominant culture will never accept you.

As a minority on various levels, I can't tell you that the dominant culture will accept you or your group. Trans people, plural systems, people of different sexualities, racial minorities, women, disabled people, poor people, homeless people, sex workers, neurodivergent people, and otherkin/therians/alterhumans (in no particular order) have a rough run ahead of them. Society is built for those in power to stay in power and we are unfortunately not in power. But the dominant culture is not the only culture. It's important to remember community, especially in times like these.

Make friends, make allies, do it with people you feel a little uncomfortable around and get to know that makes them wonderful. We can't change the way the dominant culture sees us, not on our own, but together, as a community, we can make it better for ourselves and eachother. And when you find your community of like-minded individuals, look in the mirror and see a little bit of each of them within you and remember that you share a world with every one of them.

Basically don't get bogged down by all the hate that keeps getting pushed on you from the outside world. Find the love. And love deeply everyone you meet because the more you love, the more love exists in the world, and the better the world gets.

Eventually if enough minorities come together, we become the majority and the love we share for each other could very well, one day, fight all the insufferable hate.

I write all this knowing that it doesn't really feel like love is working right now. And just loving each other isn't going to do all the work. This is more directed at those who don't have the safety or ability to go out and protest. This is more for those who are trapped in their shell scared to go out there and make change because of the real dangers associated with it. But community is important for everyone and it's an easy-ish first step towards everything good. You can't start a revolution by yourself.

I guess it's worth mentioning why my discussion of internalized bias led to that and the real issue behind all of it is how the dominant culture treats us, how they manipulate us into hating each other so we can't get together and fight back. There are billionaires working hard to dictate our fates for us and we need strong community to take our fates back into our own hands. All of that hate we feel for those who look like us or act like us or feel like us, isn't from us. That hate comes from the billionaires and the "-ists" who try to control us.

And hopefully my list of minorities shows you whose team we're on. It isn't a conclusive list because I couldn't figure out how to include religious minorities, and I may have forgotten some more. But I really want my find community message to mean two different types of community. Those that are like you and those that are unlike you. A lot of people try to pretend that each minority group is supposed to fight alone. That's exactly what the oppressors want. If you're a white trans woman, remember to do your best to stick up for black trans women as well. And so on and so forth. We're all in this together and we need to remember that.

- Bard

[fandomeic]

Both, and

The Pitt can have extremely biting commentary on parts of the American industrial healthcare complex and parts of "American" culture. The primary showrunners can also have glaring blind spots in recognizing/admitting "quieter" misogyny and racialized misogyny.

The first part can make the show a breakout hit. The second can attrition drain sections of the audience as they decide the first no longer makes up for the second.

You can acknowledge the success of the first part while leaving room for criticism on the second.

[sionnualanicheallachain]

This is your periodic friendly reminder that I think some of y'all are using (variations on the phrase) internalized bias when what you actually mean is (variations on the phrase) implicit bias.

You know that post going around about fathers and daughters making fun of mothers, but it won't save the daughter from the mother's fate, with pictures of Robby and Santos and Al-Hashimi? In that context/framing, you could argue that Santos has internalized misogyny and that is why she favors Robby over Al-Hashimi — she has internalized a negative view of her own gender.

If you're trying to make the distinction that Robby is unintentionally/unconsciously sexist/racist/etc. even though he would oppose those views if you asked him, that is implicit misogyny/racism/etc. — it's the opposite of explicit bias, which is what we see/hear from Monica.

The two internalized things I can think of that could theoretically apply to Robby — but I only think one of them does — would be internalized antisemitism and internalized ableism. I think it's pretty clear that Robby does not experience internalized antisemitism, but I think it's equally pretty clear that Robby does experience internalized ableism when it comes to his PTSD and burnout. And I would argue that he's implicitly racist and sexist in season 1, but that both of those tendencies become more explicit in season 2 than in season 1 and in the later parts of each season relative to the earlier parts of the same season.

Fiona Dourif thinking that Robby is harder on Langdon than the other residents reads to me as internalized misogyny and maybe implicit racism. Noah Wyle insisting that Robby yelling at Samira is less intense/layered than it is reads to me as cognitive dissonance around having his implicit sexism/racism made explicit by the reaction to it.

[sweet2canyon]

trying not a to tweak out whenever I meet someone that feels incredibly trans irl because you can never tell but I rarely meet people like me and it’s so cool to possibly be in the room with someone farther along in their journey than I am but also they could just be cis and I’m generalizing a group based on stereotypes💔