#privilege dynamics

[wild-at-mind]

https://xtramagazine.com/uncategorized/privilege-conflict-236673 OK I honestly hate this advice column answer, and feel it is leading to some toxic places. I wrote a goddamn essay of a comment which I will put under the cut, just because I think it’s important. Without going into too much detail, this is quite close to home for me. Tumblr keeps giving me ads for xtra magazine but this is the first time I clicked in and I’m going to hide the ads now, I’m not a fan and it’s not for me. My response, which I ended up needing 4 comments for:

1. I find this advice quite troubling, and there are many things that go unaddressed. For example, OP's reason for drifting during the pandemic was a very clear one: they had their first child. If the friend in question is childless, then this becomes the age old question (which disappointingly is not addressed AT ALL by Kai)- how does the friend who newly has children stay connected with their childless friends? If OP is a women, which the friend's comments suggests, she is likely to be doing much more than 50% of the childcare. I have not experienced this conflict in my own life yet but I have seen it discussed many times and both sides have reasonable grievances: the childless friends feel the friend with the new baby never has time for non baby related things any more, a lot of things such as evening events may be totally out for a while, and if meeting up the baby may have to come too a lot of the time which can be disruptive and a big change for the friendship. The friend with the child feels the childless friend doesn't understand the problems of always having to find childcare in order to do things, etc, and feels the childless friend thinks they are turning down too many invitations and it means they no longer want to be friends. Neither's feelings are wrong, but the fact that the child needs care will not change, and it will be a good long time before the child is old enough for childcare needs to not be a factor. This will always affect how much time the new parent has for their friends. Now, I know we don't actually know from this whether the friend has children, it is not mentioned. But from the information we do have, the fact the the OP needs to spend a lot of time doing childcare and this is unchangeable fact should be acknowledged. 2. The main thrust of this advice is that the OP is somehow looking at their conflict  in an overly white way. I understand why Kai wrote it this way, because it's kind of a right wing talking point, that people of colour will manipulate using their race and you can just ignore it. This is of course gross and no one would want to imply this. I do not think the OP wants to imply this and I think OP is already pretty aware of these dynamics. However, reading this you might think that friendships between white people and people of colour (or between a more marginilised and a more privileged person) could never, ever work. Despite the protestations to the contrary, I think this advice encourages an unhealthy amount of eggshell walking.                             The truth is the friend of the OP is hurting, and feels she has not been supported by the OP in her bereavements that happened during the height of the pandemic. Her feelings have gone unexpressed for a long time and have built. In one way the OP can never truly make up for this because she can't go back in time and be there for her friend during those times. Listening to the friend's grievances is difficult for her because they become very emotionally charged. Whether or not OP subconsciously is experiencing this as more difficult because the friend is a woman of colour, the outcome is the same, and OP will not improve anything by being a space for her friend to vent into. I fundamentally do not want the OP to get the impression from the advice given that it would be at all useful for them to attempt this, or that it would be a good thing for social justice or their duty as a white person. 3. I feel that Kai could have suggested something like: maybe the OP asks her friend to write her a letter, expressing all her feelings, and that she will read it and reply, also in a text medium. Sometimes text is easier when emotions run high. I don't know, maybe this is a very privileged suggestion of me or something, but it is clear that the OP crying and the friend shouting is not working for either of them. (Also re: crying- as a former constant crier who is now on the right meds and doesn't any more, I do NOT argue with the idea that my tears could leverage oppression against people of colour, and it doesn't matter what the reason for it is for that to happen, but......involuntary tears are for the most part treated as unprofessional in workplace scenarios, and embarrassing for all in the room. It can really suck, and OP I feel for you on that count. 2nd assurance that I'm well aware there are scenarios where tears from a white person could manipulate racial hatred, including if the tears are involuntary! Good thing I do not do it any more, this is a constant relief to me. Anyway..) The implication that white, middle class people are uncomfortable with yelling and plain speaking in interpersonal conflict is very strange to me. They may be uncomfortable with this in certain scenarios, but trust me my white middle class parents were perfectly fine with yelling at their kids. I don't know the OP's class background, but it sounds like her white parents liked to yell too. I understand the need to emphasise that yelling is not the worst thing that can happen, and that the friend may experience the OP's request for no yelling or swearing as a function of their white privilege. However I STILL don't think this was a boundary that was wrong for OP to try to set. 4. OP, please do not feel that the only 'right' thing in this scenario is for you to continue being friends, your friend is angry about you being out of touch when you needed her, and you will never truly be able to make it right but you must keep trying. This dynamic would be incredibly toxic for both you and your friend. I do think a sincerely expressed apology that expresses the facts without excuses would be a good thing if you haven't already sent one: 'friend, I am sorry I wasn't there for you when you really needed me. I regret this very much and I know you're still hurting. I really care about you and really want you to continue to be in my life.' Stick to the facts and don't self flagellate- despite what columns like this one suggest, people do not really want this. Do it via a text medium as it can be easier if things are becoming very emotional. It's not a solution, your friendship may still not survive in the end, but you will have said the truth of how you feel about your friend. From there, resist any attempt by your friend to bring you into a cylce of you listening to venting and becoming upset. This will not lead ANYWHERE good. You suffering does not help marginilised people.                              Relationships across privilege dynamics always need to have awareness, tact and self reflection from the more privileged person, but I honestly feel that when the 2 people become nothing more than those two roles, one oppressor and one oppress-ee, the friendship cannot survive. The theories your friend is using as a framework are real, but they are about overall dynamics and systems, and things will always be affected by more factors with two individual humans and how they relate to each other.                              Good luck, and my love to both you and your friend.                                

[xenoqueer]

1/3 You're mischaracterizing Biyuti's argument: it wasn't that (white) nb ppl don't have 'real oppression' (B even says white nbs' gender is illegitimate in the binary), it was that there's no 'binary privilege' that either trans poc or white trans women have over white nbs, which is true. You were identity politicking by saying this discussion was had by 'binary' trans poc who don't think nbs are really oppressed, as if trans poc in general aren't in a position to comment on the working of

2/3 the white gender binary and are acting in bad faith. B wasn’t just ‘denying’ the term to white nbs but denying the power/privilege dynamic underlying the idea of ‘binary privilege’ as something trans poc can have over white nbs. The reasoning behind this is not hard to understand, and it’s pretty damning that white nbs merely gave lip-service to the idea while trying to repackage the original concept, then pointed to their own ~confusion (the fact that they can’t get B’s conclusions to fit

3/3 their preestablished framework) to say agreeing to it was a mistake. It was never just about who can use which term, but about the concepts and frameworks being employed.

I am going to give this one more shot, as you are clearly operating in good faith, but I feel like we’re talking past each other.

You are right, I made a mistake when I said “binary trans people.” As I said at the time, and several times since, I was operating on memory of the event. I was wrong, and I am sorry for that.

However, you seem to think that I will eventually agree with you that the underlying concepts which are called binarism or exorsexism are faulty.

I will not, because in my opinion they are not faulty. This is where Biyuti and I disagree, and are unlikely to ever agree.

It’s also interesting to me that you continue to characterize everyone who disagreed as being white, when that is demonstrably untrue. Neither myself (as you well know) nor the person who created “exorsexism” (as I expect you know), nor a great many other people of color who disagree with biyuti on this subject are “white nb’s who gave lip service while trying to repackage the original concept.”

You seem to be operating on the assumption that every descriptor for a type of oppressive force requires the existence of a contrary privilege.

This is untrue.

Just because exorsexism exists does not mandate that binary trans people have privilege over nonbinary people. It means that the way they are attacked by the gender binary looks different. 

There are many examples of this complexity in existence. Let’s take, for example, allism (the centering of non-autistic people in society). 

Allism undeniably exists, but there is no “allistic privilege,” there are plenty of people who ADHD, PDs, Down’s, and a host of other neurodivergences who are also not centered in society. But the way ableism (the broader centering of neurotypical and able bodied people) affects them looks different than the way it affects autistic people.

The same is true in race. My girlfriend is first nations, and I am levantine. Both of us are people of color. But orientalism, racism against people from asia, looks different than anti-native racism. Neither of us is treasured and protected by white supremacy, and yet, both of us experience very different kinds of racism and imperialism. 

Over and over, we see the same oppressive systems manifesting differently against different groups, and label them accordingly.

However, in the context of queer theory, there is a desperate urge to present one or another group as privileged rather than different. And so, any discussion of unique manifestations of oppression is hampered by this unnecessarily commitment to privilege dynamics.

We saw this happen with binarism, which was decided to contain a “binary privilege” even though it does not, and thus the entire word and underlying framework were declared invalid. And so, for years, discussions of nonbinary identity and experience were hampered by people feeling they were not allowed to describe their own lives and experiences. 

We saw this happen with monosexism, which was decided to contain “monosexual privilege,” even though is does not, and thus the entire word and underlying framework were declared invalid. And so, for years, multiply-attracted people were denied the opportunity to talk about their own lives, because it was “inaccurate” to do so.

We are still seeing this happen with allosexism, amatonormativity and dyadism, all of which are currently being declared unacceptable because people assume a privilege dynamic where none is required. 

At any rate, claiming that this entire debacle was “caused” by white people is demonstrably untrue. I hope you now better understand why, though.

[valkylander]

Friendly Reminder

If a-spec identities describe how you experience attraction rather than who you are attracted to, the argument that allo privilege cannot exist because LGB+ people are marginalized for their attraction is invalid.

Under that model, LGB+ people are marginalized for who they’re attracted to, not how they experience that attraction.

[valkylander]

When the argument has shifted from "asexuals aren't oppressed because they don't experience [thing asexuals totally experience]" to "okay, you experienced that, but not because you're ace. It was because of [misogyny, ableism, misdirected homophobia, etc.]", two things have happened. First, the person making the argument has admitted, tacitly but nonetheless, that your experiences would be considered oppressive, and second, they've stated, again tacitly, that they don't consider asexuals, as a class, trustworthy judges of our own experiences, and they believe they, who wasn't even there, are a far better judge of what happened than you are. They have no actual argument and have resorted to... I don't think it's literally gasslighting, but it's definitely something akin to it.

[valkylander]

The idea that Allosexual Privilege or Monosexual Privilege exist comes from the same misunderstanding of privilege dynamics that makes people think there can be A-spec people with straight privilege or bi/pan/poly people with “het”-privilege.

[thatdiabolicalfeminist]

It’s a lot more realistic to arm marginalised people with ways of describing their experiences than it is to expect outsider academics (esp. those who see us as “interesting topics”) to understand the depth and breadth of those experiences accurately enough to properly convey them.

Make room for academics who want to study communities they’re actually in. Don’t use your relative privilege as an outsider to take up space that should go to people more qualified to speak on those issues, just because the academic establishment sees you as more respectable by virtue of your privilege.

[roseapprentice]

A somewhat grumbly reaction to the Robot Hugs about tone policing

*sigh*

I really like the Robot Hugs comic, but their strip today about tone policing felt to me like it painted such an incomplete picture.

Like, on the one hand, it’s important to call out tone policing when it happens as described in the comic -- in a way that fails to draw a distinction between emotionality and irrationality. Or when it happens in a way that’s oblivious to context, in a way that disrupts pockets of safe space.

It made an important point, but that important point looks misleading to me without what I see as the other half of the way the phrase “Tone Policing” gets used.

That is, when people -- (depending on how you define the word) -- “Tone police” by reacting to these kinds of situation:

1) Anger about oppression -- rather than just being expressed -- gets directed at a specific person/group in a way that’s hurtful and out of proportion with that persons/group’s behavior.

When people react to that, I feel like I’ve seen it get labelled as “tone policing,” but, like, I think it’s important to be able to denounce that kind of behavior. It’s important to me to protect people from situations where they’re treated as the mistakes they make first and as a human being second. And to denounce that treatment in a way that still acknowledges how important the underlying problems are that people are reacting to.

2) People explain oppression and privilege in ways that are genuinely untruthful, which is super easy to mistake for explaining it in a way that’s passionate. Like how saying, “Everyone in such-and-such group makes fun of me,” may not be true, but tends to feel true in the context of the emotions a person has about it.

So when someone says, “wait, that’s not actually true,” that gets labeled as “tone policing,” even though the thing they’re reacting is not the tone, but the idea being communicated.

Example two presents a complicated question, because I certainly do think having spaces where people are allowed to exaggerate this way is super important. Just because the correction is not specifically about tone doesn’t mean it’s automatically okay to correct someone that way.

But it’s also true that I’ve found it amazingly helpful to be in spaces where that kind of exaggeration gets respectfully called out. Helpful in terms of being able to communicate effectively, and in terms of being more able to cope with my own anger and hurt. Helpful in terms of being able to think clearly, and not feel overwhelmed all the time, and have faith in humanity.

And frankly, when I’m in a space like tumblr, I feel like the social norms are heavily slanted toward not questioning the wording/thinking distortions that go hand-in-hand with anger, generalized hatred, paranoia, and despair.

I think that’s bad for my mental health, and bad for my capacity to deal with the forms of oppression I deal with in my life. It makes me more paranoid to hear all the exaggerations and oversimplifications about how violent and dangerous men are. It makes me less happy to be told that thus-and-such group hates me, when a five minute conversation with someone from that group would prove that they like me very much, but are under-informed about certain aspects of my life.

I guess my point is, the umbrella of things that get called tone policing is more broad than I feel like that comic deals with. It involves a variety of motivations and moral grey areas, and I’m really tired of seeing grey areas get swept under a giant rug of “they just do this to oppress us.”

Which, like, I don’t want to undermine the truth that sometimes tone policing is as simple as a tool for oppression, used consciously or unconsciously by a privileged person. That’s true. That’s important. I don’t want to silence that message.

I’m just frustrated, and I’ve been frustrated about this for a while. I feel like a comic I respect has contributed to the thing I find frustrating. I guess that brought things to the surface for me.

Really, I’m not 100% certain that I’m right about how the phrase gets used. I can’t think of any specific examples of the word’s usage at all. But I have all this frustration about it, and I think that frustration is coming from real interactions that I’ve observed.

[punlich]

Another serious issue with the social justice community on tumblr is their insistence on using the rank oversimplifications of privilege discourse uncritically to the point of literally turning discussions of lateral violence into Privilege Pissing Matches.

Also the expansion of phobia phrasing and privilege phrasing into areas it doesn't apply or would be obnoxiously redundant (butchphobia, vanilla privilege)

Also turning oppression vulnerabilities into separate and distinct axis lines that intersect geometrically, rather than interlacing structures that transmute each other when in contact. Even the visualization is oversimplified and bad.