Discrimination Sucks or ‘Let’s Start More Conversations’

When I was fifteen a friend made a comment to me about racism being a worse problem than homophobia. Their statement made me really uncomfortable. I didn’t like it — not one bit.

I’ve thought about it often since and realised there are two things I find problematic about the remark.

I knew that my discomfort wasn’t because I thought homophobia was a worse problem than racism.

I was uncomfortable that this person was ranking any kind of discrimination as worse than any other.

In their case they were gay and from a visible minority — brown skinned but not black, subject to discrimination from both the caucasian majority culture and from black culture for not being ‘black enough’.

In their personal experience, racism was a bigger problem than homophobia — which is fine and valid.

I am a woman and I can say, totally truthfully, that I have never once in my entire life, been catcalled. No one — male or female — has ever directed an unsolicited verbal objectification towards me. This is not part of my reality.

However, I would never for one second state that, because I personally have never been catcalled, catcalling and the misogynistic structure that continues to condone or justify it is not a legitimate issue.

My personal experience of sexism has no bearing on the validity of the experience of others and the over-all problematic nature of the misogynistic culture we live in. That being said, I have and do experience sexism — just the less overtly proprietary type — benevolent sexism.

Just because I haven’t experienced sexism to the same extreme as others is no reason for me to say that sexism isn’t a problem or to give it less weight than any other form of discrimination.

~

The other reason this comment made me uncomfortable has to do with aggression.

As a Buddhist, aggression is something I examine in my daily practice. Understanding it, and understanding how unhelpful it is and how to let it go, lead me to re-assess my personal identity as an activist.

When I was a teenager I was a very loud and proud activist. I hated sweatshops, I marched protests with placards and I had no tolerance for other people’s intolerances.

In fact, the word ‘tolerance’ was a point of contention for me. One of my favourite things to say was, “People should not be tolerated. We tolerate pimples and politicians — anything we merely tolerate is not something we accept. I would much rather be accepted than to be ‘put up with’.”

In short, I was a very aggressive activist. I saw things as right and wrong and was ready to fight it out — and yet, extremely uncomfortable with conflict.

I just wanted people to see how something was wrong and then to agree with me.

Why couldn’t they just agree with me?

There is a difference between aggression and anger.

We can be angry about an injustice without being aggressive. Anger is noticing that there is an injustice, that it’s not okay and that we aren’t willing to let it continue without some sort of action on our part.

This is what makes an activist.

To be an effective activist we must learn to see our anger but not express it with aggression — the action we take cannot be fuelled with aggression.

Aggression comes from a place of being on the attack.

When we are on the attack we are not listening — we are telling.

My discomfort with a statement that compares one kind of discrimination against another as ‘worse’ is not just because discrimination is not okay, regardless of what it is, but also because it shuts down any chance of conversation.

No one likes to be told.

Here are some statements I see often in comment threads around the Internet that shut down conversation:

Check your privilege

#NotAllMen

But I believe ALL lives matter, not just black lives.

Shutting down the conversation reinforces the systemic problem of separation by putting people on the defensive. It takes like-minded individuals, who probably actually agree on equality and human rights, and pits them against each other.

I recently read an amazing article here on Medium about racism, societal perceptions and how ingrained it is, whether we notice it or not. In the article the author states:

“Being told or knowing you have privilege is not an accusation of you having done something wrong…”

Saying ‘check your privilege’, for example, turns what is a simple fact of the society we live in, into an insult or accusation. It does not invite the individual to examine their experience and compare it against that of another.

Instead it reinforces this sense of:

‘That’s not MY experience, therefore it must not be the case’ OR

‘You can’t prove that ABC causes XYZ — you’re just being sensitive.’

I made a poor attempt to address this whole issue of dividing the fight and shutting down the conversation with a blog post specific to feminism. I was trying to be provocative, but what I really wanted was to address how much time is wasted arguing over what makes someone a feminist or what ‘counts’ as feminism.

Personally I define a feminist as anyone who believes that women deserve the same rights and opportunities as men. Effectively, unless you tell me otherwise I would just assume you’re a feminist because I just assume most people I know believe that all human beings deserve to be treated equally regardless of their identity, background or upbringing.

I want to clarify, when I say ‘treated equally’ I don’t mean ‘everyone deserves to have the exact same experience.’ I mean, no one should be prevented from making the choices they want to make in their life due to ability, skin colour, religious belief, sexuality, gender, age etc. etc. etc.

And to be really pedantic, because this is an annoying argument I’m sometimes presented with: I’m talking about choice within the limits of morality and ethics.

No, I don’t think someone who gets pleasure from killing people should be allowed to — obviously. Duh. That’s a facetious argument that distracts from the issue at hand. It’s something people who are unwilling to examine their own prejudices say in order to not have to examine them.

But I digress.

My fiancee recently made this brilliant statement:

“I think human rights can never be ‘granted’ — they can only be recognised and codified into law. Human rights pre-exist all other conditions.”

From the point of view of ethics and morality my personal experience, preferences and choices on how I conduct my life have no bearing on the personal experience, preferences and choices of others to live theirs.

If I want to marry a woman, earn the same salary as a man for doing the same job and not wear make-up, dresses and heels, I have every right as a human being to do these things because that is the human being I am and how I choose to express that.

If another human being chooses to under-go surgery to change their physical appearance to fit the gender they want to express based on what they know and understand of themselves, that is absolutely no one else’s business.

If a human being wishes to study at university, to purchase brand-name clothing and to work a high-powered job, the colour of their skin should in no way impact on their ability to make those choices. They should not feel uncomfortable or unwelcome living the life they choose.

If a man wishes to stay at home and care for his children while his female partner works, he should be able to do so without criticism for not being the breadwinner and also without excessive praise, as if what he is doing is some sort of ‘super’ accomplishment, whilst it would be seen as expected by a female counterpart.

If someone wants to go shopping for their own groceries, go to the cinema on their own, get around their house by themselves or generally have the freedom to come and go as they please, they should not be hindered in those choices because of a world that completely disregards their particular form of mobility — or, in short, a lack of or limitation in mobility should have nothing to do with the buildings we build, the buses we manufacture and the roads we create.

Discrimination sucks.

For everyone.

Regardless of ability, age, sexuality, gender, culture, class etc. etc. etc.

So if we really want to get rid of it, we need to start a conversation.

With everyone.

When Martin Luther King staged protests he was very clear that it was not just black people who had to take a stand for their human rights. They needed to point out the inhumanity of the way they were being treated in such a way that people could see systemic discrimination towards black people causes EVERYONE to suffer.

Discrimination hurts society as a whole. It creates a divide in humanity.

It causes intelligent human beings to justify their ‘lot’ and claim a lack of resources in the face of human beings drowning as they try to make a better life for themselves. It leads to justification of hatred in the name of tradition. It makes fools of us all — rather petty, sad looking fools of us all.

Consider the refugee crisis at the moment — it’s appalling that it’s the image of a drowned three year old that gives us a sense of shame. If we genuinely value human life we should not rank it according to age — or ability or gender or sexual orientation or skin colour or any of the great myriad of things that make us individuals.

We need to be willing to examine ourselves, or willing to ask questions that invite others to examine themselves. On the part of the activists this means we need to learn how to open up dialogue.

~

Arguing that some forms of discrimination are worse or calling someone out for being cisgendered or ‘too sensitive’ or not being able to take a compliment does not invite a conversation. It invites a war.

When we go to war we are no longer thinking of the other as a fellow human being. We are limiting our entire view of them as ‘other’ within a limited definition according to a label we have assigned them.

Instead of saying ‘Check your privilege’ we can say:

“That’s an interesting statement you just made but have you examined how society is structured in such a way that you may have certain advantages that other people lack because of their ability/skin colour/gender identity/sexual orientation/income etc.?”

Okay, it doesn’t sound as punchy and it’s going to take longer to type, but that’s the nature of effective communication.

~

On a finishing note — I have a mantra I go to when I feel myself shutting down towards or labelling a fellow human being as ‘wrong’ or ‘bad’:

No one does anything because they want to feel worse.

-Pema Chodron

Our motivation as human beings is to just be happy.

We all just want to be happy — to feel comfortable, to live the life we choose free of hatred, oppression or limitations.

The greatest thing we can do with our life is to help others. We can do this by examining our own prejudices, challenging the system on behalf of those who don’t have the voice or power to do so, and by simply being kind.

Let’s listen to each other.

Dialogue with the intention of understanding so we can address the imbalances and maybe, just maybe, create a world where human beings are valued because they are human, rather than being ‘the right sort’ of human.