Hm, I think I agree with 99.9% of what you say. You have a good point, especially, when you say that forgiving someone for what their ancestors did is not the same as forgiving them for something that they did, and in that sense, the quote above is an intrinsically flawed example.
And I can definitely see how, in the last example, anger is a justified/understandable reaction.
Of course, my point here (and I think maybe I didn't bring it across as well as I had hoped) wasn't so much that the anger isn't justified--with that I totally agree. More so I feel (and even though part of me agrees with your last paragraph, part of me still maintains) that even if anger is justified, it's still not very productive.
Basically, I think the different between the Kung Pao chicken analogy here and someone in a position of privilege causing offense is this:
when you spill Kung Pao chicken on someone, it's immediate and obvious what you've done wrong.
When you engage in a Xist stereotype, it is NOT always immediate and obvious what you've done wrong, even though it probably should be. (assuming you haven't done something obviously *ist, like calling someone a faggot or a retard.)
In that case, I feel like it's time for some 'splaining of the minorities own. (perhaps poetic justice after all the *splaining they've had to endure. ;) ) I think the spoon essay is a *great* example of this. Many people who I have linked the spoon article have read it and said, "Oh, now I get it! Now I can't imagine how much it sucks to be disabled."
Perhaps a good analogy here would be someone who comes from a strange alien world where spilling Kung Pao chicken is no big deal. (I realize this is an imperfect example at BEST.) Your reasons for getting pissed at this alien are perfectly justified, but you'll have to excuse the alien if they're a little angry and defensive. (The major flaw with this analogy is that being *ist is a big deal even among the "aliens" in the real life example, that is, privileged people. It's just we aren't always able to recognize when we've spilled the chicken.) They don't understand that spilling Kung Pao chicken is wrong. At that point, it may be better to back up and explain to the alien that they have done something grossly in error patiently.
So perhaps the best solution here is something between what you've suggested and what I've suggested... it's okay to get angry about it, but if someone responds defensively, maybe it's more productive (even if I am TOTALLY ADMITTING it's unfair) to explain their stupidity patiently.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
Re: I want to share...
Date: 2010-07-22 07:49 pm (UTC)And I can definitely see how, in the last example, anger is a justified/understandable reaction.
Of course, my point here (and I think maybe I didn't bring it across as well as I had hoped) wasn't so much that the anger isn't justified--with that I totally agree. More so I feel (and even though part of me agrees with your last paragraph, part of me still maintains) that even if anger is justified, it's still not very productive.
Basically, I think the different between the Kung Pao chicken analogy here and someone in a position of privilege causing offense is this:
when you spill Kung Pao chicken on someone, it's immediate and obvious what you've done wrong.
When you engage in a Xist stereotype, it is NOT always immediate and obvious what you've done wrong, even though it probably should be. (assuming you haven't done something obviously *ist, like calling someone a faggot or a retard.)
In that case, I feel like it's time for some 'splaining of the minorities own. (perhaps poetic justice after all the *splaining they've had to endure. ;) ) I think the spoon essay is a *great* example of this. Many people who I have linked the spoon article have read it and said, "Oh, now I get it! Now I can't imagine how much it sucks to be disabled."
Perhaps a good analogy here would be someone who comes from a strange alien world where spilling Kung Pao chicken is no big deal. (I realize this is an imperfect example at BEST.) Your reasons for getting pissed at this alien are perfectly justified, but you'll have to excuse the alien if they're a little angry and defensive. (The major flaw with this analogy is that being *ist is a big deal even among the "aliens" in the real life example, that is, privileged people. It's just we aren't always able to recognize when we've spilled the chicken.) They don't understand that spilling Kung Pao chicken is wrong. At that point, it may be better to back up and explain to the alien that they have done something grossly in error patiently.
So perhaps the best solution here is something between what you've suggested and what I've suggested... it's okay to get angry about it, but if someone responds defensively, maybe it's more productive (even if I am TOTALLY ADMITTING it's unfair) to explain their stupidity patiently.