penpusher: (DemReps)
I know that a lot of elements involved in the realm of politics are confusing, arcane, even designed to be misunderstood by the general public. But can we at least get this one basic fact right:

An affiliate of a political party's actions vis a vis sexual misconduct is not a "partisan" issue. Just because a man has acted in a way that is sexually abusive toward someone else that action is, in no way, reflective of a political party.

There are enough examples on both sides of the aisle to support this concept. So, I hope that we can at least agree on that. We can run down the names if you want, but we can easily do that. And the point that needs making is these are just the things we know. There are abuses that have been buried for ten, twenty, thirty years that are just beginning to come to light. Assuredly, as with all the previous cases, those that have committed these acts will not all be from one political party.

But by making it into an accusatory element that somehow reflects on the politics of one party or the other does two negative things. First, it turns the issue into something that it is not. This isn't about being a Democrat or a Republican. This is a method of power and abuse that these men, not just in politics, but as we have seen, in Hollywood, in big business, in small business, in colleges and universities and even in high schools, have used to have their way with other people who have been in positions of weakness against someone who had an image of an upstanding citizen who achieved success for the general public.

But it also diminishes the issue that we need to examine, which is how our society permits men to act in ways that are more related to our caveman ancestors than to persons from a modern day society.

The "Boys with be boys" excuse still gets used and that not only allowed "boys" (aka adult men), to act in this way, it made women and girls feel there was nothing that could be done! This is just reality so you better just lie back and enjoy it.

And really, that was the system of control, tolerance, and method of oppression that occurred for centuries. Women were not seen as equals to men, so what they said, what they thought, how they acted, likewise were not treated equally.

Here's the issue that needs to be examined. Our society has helped to perpetrate this system. In many ways, it's like racism. The oppressed group is diminished, treated like an "other," is frequently assumed to have "participated" in some way which allowed this to happen, and is questioned as if they are the perpetrator, not the victim.

And the problem we see, when we have a system that functions like that is that more and more men will want to participate in it. It becomes an expectation, an opportunity, a right. I can do it because every man in every generation before me did it.

That brings me to the crucial element that we must keep in mind. And the problem is the same for sexism and racism if we want to actually dismantle these cruel aspects of our society.

We need to have closure for victims, and for that, at the very least, apologies should be forthcoming from those that have acted inappropriately, or criminally, no matter if the Statute of Limitations has expired (because, after all, the victims have lived with these actions all this while). But to make the changes in our society that need to happen to stop it, to close the door on this behavior in the future, requires us to dismantle the elements that have permitted it, and that is a different element.

In that sense, we have to look less at individual acts, specifically because this is a macro problem that needs to be resolved. It involves teaching small boys about how to behave, what is appropriate, why certain actions should never be done to someone else without asking. It's about teaching children that if you were physically abused by someone, you need to say so and that adults will believe you. We need to begin this immediately because the longer we wait, the more abusers can still be created.

Ultimately, there is a cultural issue here. These guys may not have been taught that they have permission to do what they did, but they learned it by osmosis, based on how our societal norms treated others who acted the same way. And that's where the main focus needs to be if we are to bring an end to these issues. In no way does this absolve anyone who did anything before, but the most important idea we need to collectively focus on is keeping it from happening again to anyone. That means all of us need to start changing our behaviors for the sake of all of us.
penpusher: (Pen)
Jona Olsson really hit the nail on the head when she wrote Detour-Spotting. It really is a comprehensive view of racism and the elements that make it next to impossible to prevent it in the United States. Ultimately, the problems meticulously cited in this essay are basically true, more or less, for not just the USA, but for most all of Europe, Australia, New Zealand...

I hope you're finding some worth and meaning in this series of thinkposts. Here's the one for today:

4) Blame The Victim

“It’s their fault they can’t get a job, or be managers.” or “We have advertised everywhere, there just aren’t any qualified people of color for this job.” or “If he only worked harder, applied himself more, or had a stronger work ethic.” or

“If she just felt better about herself...” or “Internalized racism is the real problem here.” or “She uses racism as an excuse, to divert us from her incompetence.” and “If he didn’t go looking for racism everywhere...” (As if racism is so hidden or difficult to uncover that people of color would have to search for it.)

Reality Check and Consequence

All “blame the victim” behaviors have two things in common. First, they evade the real problem: racism. Second, they delete from the picture the agents of racism, white people and institutions, who either intentionally perpetuate or unintentionally collude with racism. (Similar to agent deletion in discussions of rape. Most statements refer to a woman being raped, focus on her clothing or behavior at the time of the rape and delete the male rapist from the picture.) As long as the focus remains on people of color we can minimize or dismiss their reactions, and never have to look directly at racism and our own responsibility or collusion.


Sexism and racism are closely related and connecting them, the way Ms. Olsson does here, makes that point very easy to see. We invariably hear about how a rape victim is quizzed about what she wore, how that might have differed from what she regularly wears, her drinking, smoking or drug usage during the time in question and anything she might have said or done to create an atmosphere that made her need to be raped.

Think about that.

The "she was asking for it" defense puts the choice to rape her by the perpetrator on the back burner. That person isn't responsible, and none of this would have happened if the hem of her skirt were three inches lower, or her jeans weren't so tight or if she wore a bra.

That's dead wrong.

But it's a way of protecting the attacker, of shielding what he did, of preventing him from being viewed for his decision to physically force his victim into that heinous situation.

And this method of ignoring racism does the very same thing. It's a very common response to simply blame the victim for their inability to achieve, for not being prepared, for being the reason they failed.

If we can see that blaming a rape victim for her attack is nonsense, and we should, no matter what she wore, who she was, what her job was, or what her stature in life was, or any of the elements that were about her at the moment of the assault, then all of these other elements we are discussing when it comes to racism must also be examined as the hollow excuses they are.

Now, to dig a bit deeper here, this is one of those circumstances where proponents of this concept might consider themselves "justified," as qualifications for jobs do require certain skills. Let's be honest, though. A lot of the job requirements are arbitrary and are designed to make sure that applicants who either can't prove or don't have the skills listed won't even send a résumé. And that's just another method of assuring that a minority job seeker won't get that position. They won't even apply.

But, for the sake of argument, let's say that all of the skills listed as requisite are actually needed. Acquiring the skills to accomplish the task means you need training. And that training may not be readily available to you if you weren't accepted to the school that could have provided it, if you weren't able to afford to attend that school, if you weren't aware that a particular school could have provided your training, if you didn't know such a school existed.

So, even in a case where you might claim that an applicant wasn't suitable for the job, the root still likely comes back to racism in some form. You see how complex and challenging discussing racism can be? This isn't always an obvious or a straightforward issue, but that doesn't mean it's not the root element that created the problem. This is why and how we require a discussion of race in America. The subtlety of racism can be very easily overlooked in some cases. But the results are anything but subtle.

We have to stop blaming the victims.

Previous thinkposts in this series:

1. Day One - I'm Colorblind
2. Day Two - Bootstrap Theory
3. Day Three - Reverse Racism

A reminder: because of the sensitive nature of the subject, comments directly to this and all previous and future essays in this series are screened. Thank you.

Profile

penpusher: (Default)
penpusher

January 2023

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
2223 2425262728
293031    

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 13th, 2025 01:35 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios