![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
First, a rant:
I came across a post today with white americans whining about having no culture, because they're a bunch of immigrants with mixed backgrounds, a dark history they feel ambivalent about, and an emphasis on both conformity and individuality and consumerism. Other cultures, on the other hand, are distinct and uniform and well defined and have a wholly positive effect on people's lives.
Now as someone from a culture with similar issues who finds american culture distinct and rather alien (in an interesting, sometimes cool sort of way) I find this annoying (Australians may whine about not having any culture too, but we don't tend to act like it's a Special Unique Pain Noone Else Understands)
It's like the question of "How do non-white/non-American people feel about their cultures, and what does it have in common with how we feel?" doesn't even register.
For a start, afaict pretty much every non-American in the world has angst about the difficulty of being "modern" without becoming American, of defining ourselves without relying on rigid outdated jingoism. And no culture is an unchanging monolith, everyone has to balance tradition and change, personal preferences with accepted social mores, multiculturalism with flattening and uniformity. Every choice along those continuums has both benefits and costs. And pretty much every culture has dark patches in their past, unethical social practices(*), and just plain unappealing expectations that make it difficult for a lot of people to embrace their "people" unselfconsciously and without caveats. Afaict being a POC makes this more complicated, not less, since you have external and internalised racism to contend with telling you your culture is worthless.
The second is a bit advanced, and is only really annoying (to me!) when I see it from, say, feminist bloggers who should know better. Or myself :)
Hopefully a lot of people have gotten their head around the fact that only people who experience Xism are qualified to say if something is Xist or not. But a lot of people who get that have trouble understanding that even if you do notice something someone did is Xist all by yourself that doesn't mean you get to judge whether or not they apologised well enough for it. On seeing an apology for Xism of a sort you don't experience but still found personally offensive, your first priority should not be "Do I think this is good enough given how offensive I found their behaviour?" but "What do the people who experience Xism and were hurt in the first place think?".
And now I feel better :)
(*)According to ones own personal ethics, whatever they may be
no subject
For me, my culture, is, sadly, defined by a negative, my culture is 'I'm not American'. This 'I'm not American' is a culture that is common in the world, Kiwis (who probably also define themselves as 'Not Australian'), Canadians, British) any white, especially english speaking nation, defines itself by the fact that it's not American.
That's how bloody dominant American culture is. It's almost to the point sometimes where I wish I was French, or German, because at least they are protected by their language.
American culture is so dominant, that I've spent most of my time travelling around the world, telling people 'No, I'm not American' because everyone always assumes one is. It gets a bit old, but heh, that's the world we live in right?
ETA: I did also spend most of my travels in South-East Asia with a Chinese-Canadian (almost third generation Canadian, who could not speak Chinese to save her life) who spent a lot of time explaining she wasn't Chinese, which just goes to show how cultural dominance does shift from place to place, but 'being perceived as American' gave me protection/freedom that 'being perceived as Chinese' in many parts of Asia, didn't. Because as long as I was considered American, my independence was excused because American girls are wild sex fiends, but my friend, was just a big slut/prostitute who slept with American men. And she was threatened a couple of times because of it. I only got propositioned a few times. Perception is a bitch.
no subject
Australians have a pattern of tourism that is reviled all on its own.
no subject
This was back in 1995-97 period, Laos and Vietnam had just started being opened to tourists and 99% of foreigners in Korea were American soldiers based in Seoul.
Australians have a pattern of tourism that is reviled all on its own.
Was one of the biggest reasons I travelled solitary ;)
no subject
no subject
no subject
How does the colour of your skin have anything to do with this? Of course you could argue that there is an inherent pro-Western bias in terms of accepted vs. non-accepted culture, but this has little to do with them being white or black or whatever. Our own Australian society thinks disparagingly of the cultures of Slavic immigrants, for instance, and Italian and Greek cultures have only become mainstream in the last generation or so. Non-European cultures do get a harder time, but I would argue that the only way skin-colour really comes into play, is when people make generalisations that are ignorant of the similarities between other cultures and our own: assuming that just because people look different, their culture has different ideas of hygiene or the treatment of women, or whatever.
If you take 'race' as a social/cultural grouping, rather than one of appearance, then the story is of course different. And I can accept that the generalisations that racism within our society makes will lead many people to believe that their culture is frowned upon, when it is only a matter of ignorance, rather than anything actually "wrong" with that culture, that is to blame.
But when you get to the aspects of other cultures which actually do diverge from the accepted customs, the issue becomes more difficult. Female circumcision is something that our Western values cannot accept, and our ideas of universal human rights are inherently bias towards our own culture's views of what is, and is not, fundamental. We can argue that there are some basic things shared by all people, such as murder being evil, but where does that put "honour killings"?
I do realise that I am simplifying things, but, like it or not, our "enlightened" values demand us to reject parts of other cultures.
(Which is why I don't actually agree with exporting democracy etc. I don't want to tell other cultures:
"It doesn't matter about the colour of your skin, you can still be white inside! Please bring your food, festivals, language, and pretty costumes, just as long as you change to our system of values! You want to be free, you just don't know it!"
But I am over-simplifying again :P)
no subject
Are you arguing that cultural intolerance is sometimes justified? Because, no.
You can be against particular behaviours associated with a given culture (such as honour killings) without making assumptions about everyone in that culture or saying the whole culture is bad, especially since afaict(*) those behaviours are roughly equivalent to gay bashings in australia eg part of the culture and a sign of broader intolerance but still rare and considered too extreme by most people.
Anyway, my point was that if you're IN the culture, and don't want to give it up, it can be hard to work out how to deal with those aspects you don't like, ie the way you and I would feel about gay bashing.
(*)And I have no idea, really. But I do know I'm too ignorant to make generalisations or judgments.
no subject
Basically, what I think is that we have to decide where our priorities lie. I think that there are times when our values and those of others will contradict each other. We have to decide whether we are willing to stand back, or if our values demand that we interfere. I don't really feel comfortable with interfering.
Yes, of course. But I just feel that if we keep separating abhorent practices from the rest of the culture, and saying that someone's culture consists only of the customs that we can tolerate, then we are not really being culturally tolerant.
I am not accusing you of doing such, but I am commenting because I feel that this is an inherent contradiction that lies in our ideals of tolerance and equality. But perhaps I am seeing a contradiction where there is none.
no subject
I actually disagree with this strongly. There is certainly an argument for saying that only the individual can say whether something is personally insulting/abusive/discriminatory.* But the thing is that different people who experience Xism are going to have different views of it. So how can you define Xism as anything but how society overall views it? Of course this doesn't give me a right to personally say whether something in general is Xist, but in this case no individual can. But I can certainly say that I feel that someone is being cruely Xist towards me, even if society doesn't agree.
* Though at this point there comes the question of whether society is allowed to have certain expectations of how sensitive the average person is. Am I allowed to think someone to be an over-sensitive wimp if they aren't to takee the amount of criticism I think is reasonable and fair?
no subject
Yes because you are entitled to your opinion.
no subject
no subject
I think there's scope for non-X people to judge something IS Xist, it's just a dodgy position from which to say something ISN'T. Also, re: apologies: I do get to decide whether an apology is adequate for *my* offense. Because, for example, I may not be black, but I find racism personally offensive, especially the brand that assumes that because I'm white I won't have a problem with it.
To hell with that.
no subject
I disagree because I think that if you step back from it for something to be Xist it has to be discriminatory and I think that rational people could discuss something and come to the truth of it regardless of what X is. I mean sure they won't have all the information for example two guys might have a discussion about whether a transport system is sexist without ever considering pregnant women. This is just a flaw in their information and not their ability.
no subject
Agreed, assuming you wouldn't see your offense as the most important thing :) The sort of situation I'm talking about is:
White Person 1: *racist thing*
POC: That's racist!
WP2: Seconded.
WP1: *apology, kind of*
WP2: Oh wow let's all celebrate how awesome WP1 is for apologising!
POC: That apology wasn't good enough.
WP1: Yes it was! Gee, what do you want, blood?
no subject
Never mind then. :)
no subject
no subject
Don't like what I have to say, then have a nice cup of toughen the fuck up.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Anyway: no it shouldn't, that's...stupid is the nicest word I can think of right now. (I was going to explain but..really, c'mon. Noone can ever complain about anything anyone says ever?) And whatever you think, the people doing this were feminist activists who do believe, very strongly, in the importance of words, so by any measure they were being hypocritical.
And as it happens? I wasn't talking about just speech, or at least not "just" slurs or whatever. Two of the examples which inspired me involved plagiarism and discriminatory legislation.
no subject
Having actually convinced women who were convinced that something was sexist that it wasn't I disagree. Broadly speaking if someone is discriminatory towards someone else because of X that is Xist and sure there are some cases in which a person with more experience as X or with Xism can say something is or isn't but I think if someone says "you are dumb because you're a woman" even though I'm a man I can say that that is sexist. Speaking as someone who has experienced racism I disagree If someone who has not can explain to me why something I took offence to is not offensive in a rational way then I can be conviced this is the case. I think people are too willing to let people use their emotions as an arguement.
"What do the people who experience Xism and were hurt in the first place think?".
What because they all will have the same response? I think not.
no subject
Which..um...*falls into deep paradox*
I guess like with any generalisation there are exceptions? Mm. *is still figuring out exactly what I think*
no subject
no subject
(But yes, I do that too)
no subject
Only because the definition of what Xism is has been redefined in that direction by the liberal left. Personally I always feel that if I belong to group X then I am the last person in the world to understand what does and does not make people prejudiced against me or how they manifest it. If you want to know if something is motivated by prejudice you need to ask the person doing it, not the person being disadvantaged by it. And yes I know this is frowned upon because it takes the power away from the disadvantaged group but still, if someone turns to me and says 'you're gay, tell me all about homophobia and how to cure it' - well, I've got nothing.
Actually I'm fairly sure the English don't have that problem. But then a lot of our self-definition relies on not self-defining. We do have one hell of a struggle with multiculturalism though so I agree 100% with your balancing statement.
My immediate assumption is that this comes down to standard American insularity - their lack of knowledge of any culture beyond their own makes it hard for them to grasp what is unique and distinctive about their own. Plus all that sort of American gets to see of other cultures is the shorthand stereotypes their media is so good at dishing out, so no wonder they think other cultures are neatly encapsulated and distinctive.
Sorry if any or all of this doesn't make sense, I'm not very clear headed today.
no subject
Actually I'm fairly sure the English don't have that problem
This is what I get for making generalisations about every single culture in the world...
Agreed about american insularity being a major problem with this.