I had a conversation with a friend (we will call them Leaf) of mine, sort of on the spur. We were driving and Leaf made an observation about a person and instantly mentioned how racist Leaf’s observation/thought was. We talked and concluded we all (yes that includes me) have racist stereotypes. Leaf agreed, and we didn’t really talk about it in any depth. I think it was because for the most part the observation/thought by Leaf was rather benign. But my mind kept on churning. A conflict arose in my mind; I wasn’t able to yield anything insightful to say; and because of how complex the conflict is; I remained silent about it.
This conflict affects most of us on a daily basis. I have no real answer to it. It primarily revolves around two ends of a spectrum, but the real problem happens because of human nature. So let me get to the body of the issues.
I make the assertion that we human beings are classifying beings. We make distinctions. That table is white, or it’s red, or it’s black. That organism is a cat. Certain distinctions are easy, like ones based on scientific classification. For instance this rock is a such and such kind of rock because it has such and such characteristics. Granted the characteristics that make a rock such and such are arbitrarily agreed to, but nonetheless we need to make distinctions to understand what something is. Some distinctions are harder than others because they are vacuous. For instance that person is tall. You have to ask well what do you mean by tall, or tall compared to what? There are even tougher ones like such and such is evil/bad. Or such and such is wrong. Or such and such is alive. Definitions that help us make distinctions in these areas are yet to be settled, thus making the classification near impossible in certain instances. More often than not you get answers like I don’t know if such and such is alive. There are clear cases in these groups, but there are also cases where things are difficult. Now some may say that is where the gray area comes in. It still doesn’t matter because we still try and need (by our nature) to make distinctions. With gray area issues (I’m conceding the existence of a gray area for the sake of argument) we will have to make distinctive assertions like such and such is evil enough to render this kind of action, such and such is alive enough to require this kind of protection. Even in gray areas we make distinctions. It’s just a part of being human.
In our society and in my own personal sense of ethics, we have made the assertion that it is desirable to be culturally sensitive, aware, and appreciative. Our society and my own personal sense of ethics have also concluded that racism, or rather making cultural and ethic pre evaluations are bad.
So what are the basics of racism? Racism happens when one takes a preconceived notion about a race/culture and applies an evaluative judgment about that notion and then applies it to an individual. For instance a clear case of racism is black people have a disposition for violence, you see a black person at a job interview and then don’t higher them. But you can apply a preconceived notion and not have it be racist. For instance Muslims don’t eat pork. (I realize Muslim is a religion and not an ethnic group but I’m using a really broad definition of racism, see above.) So when you host a dinner party to which you invited your Muslim friend you decide to leave pig off the menu. Hey some just don’t dine on swine. Dog on the other hand, now there’s an animal with character. Sorry got side tracked. I know in the examples given above one was a false preconceived notion and one was a true one. I don’t think that changes the working definition of racism or the conflict that I will talk about.
So what must we do in order to be culturally sensitive, aware, and appreciative? A fundamental part of that is to know what constitutes a culture. That is we must develop notions and apply it to a group of people. In order to understand a culture I must know what people of that culture do for custom, believe, how they resolve conflicts, where values are placed, etc. Now there are a slew of issues that are raised by this requirement. I won’t go into depth about the issues; it is enough to say that one will have a hard time constituting what a culture is. But for the sake of argument I am assuming that I can define a culture.
Here comes what I consider the essence of what the conflict is. Racism is the evaluative application of a preconceived notion on an individual, cultural sensitivity requires creating preconceived notions based on individuals. So where do we draw the distinction between racism and cultural sensitivity? Some cases are clear, you don’t shoot an African American in a dark ally because you have built up a preconceived notion that most felons are African American. Some are still clear but less so; you don’t ask an Asian immigrant at a dinner party if they’d rather eat with chopsticks. You don’t instantly turn your radio to hip hop channels when you are ridding in your car with an African American person because you think that’s the kind of music he/she would like. I’m talking about the instances where it’s hard to make an evaluation as to its properness. An example would be, “hey he/she is dressing so black”. Or how about she is totally dressing Chinese, and she happens to be Chinese. Now these instances seem to be rather benign, but what if we add an evaluation of some sort. For instance she is wearing her hair so X, and I think X is unattractive. Or he is dressing so X, and I think X looks so stupid. Or person Y’s culture believes only a man can ask a person out on a date, and I think that is so backwards thinking.
Obviously more thought is needed on this topic. I have yet to generate an answer for the issue. I have a gut feeling, but I'd hate for the differance between racism and cultural sensitivity to be based on a gut feeling.
4 comments:
I can totally understand the bads of racism. I don't think that even needs to be explained.
However I don't think stereotypes or racism is all the result of imposed notions or hatred. It's a form of inductive logic. Is it a stereotype to assume that a zebra is a herbivore? If all the zebras you've previously seen were herbivores and that is why you make your distinction, it is.
My outlook on one of Hume's writings is that cause and effect are also the result of inductive logic/stereotyping. You notice the way of physics in our universe and start assuming that when X happens, Y follows. When you play pool, you hit the white ball with your stick, and you assume that ball will then go into motion. That ball makes contact with another, causing that ball to go into motion. In the same situation repeated, you learn that's how it works. You can predict that the ball will move after being struck by another.
Similarly you may notice something that a certain group of people share in common. This can be true when they do it on purpose, for instance the trend they follow, the club they're invovled in, or the people they hang out with. But it can also be true of people from the same culture. Though genetics does hold power over people, I think culture has more to do with propagating stereotypes that actual race does.
It's like being in a club or constantly hanging out wiht the same tight group of friends. Certain things mean something to you and your group that they do to others. You will also think, act, react similiarly to those who you are similar to and have spent much time with as you get closer. So someone from the other side of the world where things may be much different is going to have similarities in a different place, here, to someone else who is from the same part of the world and new here as well. And if you are bombarded with proof of that stereotype, agian and again from the same group, it is only logical and natural to apply it, inductively, unless proven otherwise. In this case, it's experience, not "racism" which implies hate and assumptions. Even if you get a few examples to the contrary, when the majority agrees, it's like a science.
Yet not all mexicans speak spanish, not all koreans speak korean, not all americans speak english, etc. Even if the majority of a particular group shared a specific trait, one not having it makes the racism false. People are born different, people are different, so the danger in making stereotypes is that it's quite possible to be wrong. Plus as people are assimilated into the new culture, the habits of the old slowly diminish, and the old culture has hardly any hold on the next generation, and even less on the next. Only the physical race, perhaps, is left to make judgement by, but it would be an incorrect one.
So I can see how stereotypes may easily come into play and be inductively reasoned, but holding to the assumptions can easily lead to be false. But on the other hand, I think being offended by such gestures if made in a friendly or innocent manner is equally dumb as holding the stereotypes themselves. Perhaps you are being offered the chopsticks in good nature of trying to make you more comfortable. You may or may not choose them, but no offense was intended, and perhaps the next asian may happily accept them. The next african american may appreciate the rap music. If not it can always be made clear without the childishness of being so easily offended. As naive is the stereotype, it is naive to be offended by it, as you assume assumption. Not everyone turning on rap music is assuming you are black and so like rap. That's also stereotyping.
I think "racism" is also often a friend thing. Racism just isn't as serious as it used to be, and nowadays friends are calling each other "jew, wetback, gook,cracker, kike, nigger, honkey, sand nigger, spic, towelhead, beaner, chink, camel jockey, nip, spook, redneck, injun, jap" etc. all in good fun. You've gotta have fun with who you are, accept it, and realize your differences. Especially when it's among friends.
Come on guys, our differences keep life interesting.
Stereotyping can be logical and even usually correct, and yes it is human nature. But also realizing that people are different from each other is important, so that the stereotype "people are all different" works, it destroys simpler stereotypes such as "asians can't drive" and "pakis are terrorists."
You're going to use stereotypes in every day life from the smallest level to the highest maxims of scientific theory. You still eat bread, assuming it's going to nourish you, right? Learning from experience is suvival. It's human nature and it's a good thing. Just be careful how you apply it, or if you do, be ready to be wrong. And as stated above, it's probably best to show some sensitivity and not assume things like music preferences based on race. Well, I've lost where i'm going with this (i must be getting tired)...
I have thought long about this issue. It is an amazing thing that still baffles me about people. Now, I don't agree with Jimmy on a good portion of his ideas on racism. First, I think Jimmy broadens the idea out to the point were "everyone is racist." I think that with the pejorative meaning of the word that is a dangerous thing to say. I know that Jimmy thinks that we all need to admit it so that we can deal with it. I think differently, I think that if we accept the idea that everyone is racist, it loses some of its inherent distaste.
Racism, in my opinion, is an extremely damaging term and should only be applied to an individual who has proven it is the case. In my opinion it is like comparing someone to Hitler, we are talking about something that shouldn't be applied lightly.
My second disagreement has to come in when Jimmy starts to talk about cultures. For years in school as I was getting my Anthropology degree we were taught the idea of cultural relativism and I couldn't have disagreed with a scholarly tenet more. The fact is that there are eternal truths. Right and wrong. We should not be afraid to stand up and say X is wrong. The danger comes in when we say X is wrong and so the practitioners of X are evil. We can make value judgements on cultural norms without coming to hate the individuals who perform such.
As an example. The Inuit culture had two practices that were common before they became more integrated, (for those who don't know Inuit is what Eskimo's are) infanticide, and offering your wife to a guest for the night. Now, can we look at this and say the Inuit are evil, and they are less worthy of respect and equal treatment than other people, no. However, we can look at this culture and say these two practices are wrong.
The problem comes in, just as Christ set forth, when we unrighteously judge individuals. When we say he is evil instead of what he is doing is evil.
I saw a lot of racism and hatred when I lived in the South. I have often wondered why it continues so strongly there. Some people say that it is just because there are more black people there and I just lived up in a sheltered area with little to no "minorities". I disagree with this. I think the most dangerous activity that perpetuates racism, and the one that was most prominent in the areas I lived, is the continuation of classifications.
It may surprise you, but these classifications that I believe were so dangerous were not the ones imposed by others, but the ones continued by the group themselves. I believe the most dangerous act that can be done to perpetuate racism is to continue to define yourself or your group by a made up distinction known as "race". Black pride, White pride, NAACP, Black History month, etc. set up walls around groups that are not based on any real difference, but on the idea that skin color makes one different.
If someone wishes to protect their culture, then I think that is admirable and cultural groups should try to hold on to those parts of their culture that are good. This should, however, be done in an inclusive manner. Anyone who wishes to learn about this should come and see it. There are many examples, the Greek festival, the thing they do over at the Buddhist Temple, whatever that thing was where will threw rocks at a demon (Hindu), etc..
I have a lot more that I could say, but this is long and I want people to read it so. . .
Will, I agree with a lot that you say, but I still think that what you and Jimmy are talking about isn't racism. I don't think that the judgements that are being discussed have anything to do with race. These judgements vary in range from idiot driver, to this person is poor therefore more likely to commit crime. This is called being judgemental and I agree that everyone has that.
I have to seriously disagree with you about one thing, however. The NAACP by its very purpose is around to help black people, and only black people. Now, you can argue that it was founded in a time when this group specifically needed help. My point is that in this day and age distinctions like this of any kind are detrimental. Also, Black HISTORY month (not black pride month) is very damaging because it inherently segregates history. If there are black individuals who are worthy of history (and there most definitely are) teach about them in history. There is no reason to have a special month were we make sure that history is taught, all that says is that it is okay to not teach it during the rest of the year.
The Tuskeegee Airmen, by the way, should NOT be classified as a Black Pride movie. It is a historical story that should have been told, their race is important to the story, however, the story is so much more than black people can fly.
Oh, and I never claimed all black people had the same culture, or that black people in America had the same culture as those in Africa. That is my point. A black guy in Jersey has nothing in common with someone in the deserts of Botswana. But, when people categorize themselves by their "race" there is a claim to some sort of inherent relationship. As long as people define themselves in these ways, racism will have a perfect haven to fester.
Dan- hoping you will never see this... let me just say that i love you... good work... I didn't read your second comment or even all of your first, but i read enough of the first... the part about good and bad/eternal truths etc.... thank you... i love you...
Post a Comment