This got a bit rambly and meandering, but….

So I keep thinking about these little issues to do with the suggestions of feminists, race-equality activists, etc. when they call for the more privileged (I’ve talked about the use of this word before and how I don’t necessarily think it’s appropriate, but it is part of the accepted discourse of the movement(s), and so I will continue to use it here for convenience’s sake) to act in particular ways to steer us further towards equality. And I often hope that no one’s thinking that by making all these arguments I’m implying that I don’t support equality, or even that I don’t support the privileged actively striving to examine their privileges and working to fight -isms starting with their own actions. I do support these things.

But partly because I do support these things, I think that when suggestions are made in favour of them that have flaws or issues, it’s good to examine those fairly– and the activist circles tend to shut down on that sort of thing, saying it distracts from the topic at hand. Personally, I think that can lead to problems of any suggestion in your favour blindly being passed without thinking about the impact it might have on others or getting to examine why reasonable, thoughtful people might not do that thing, so I like to deconstruct those things. And it’s not even always about coming down on the side of “this thing you’re asking of us privileged people is unreasonable”; a lot of the time, it’s really about “I can see why you want this, and I’d like to find a way for you to have it, but understand that a lot of people will find it hard”, or “yes, it’s right for you to have this, but here’s a little side issue that I think it’s fair to also address, because I don’t think it’s bad for people to have this contradictory thing, either, and we need to find a solution”.

This particular discussion is along the latter lines.

Specifically, I want to talk about the role of human curiosity in treatment of minority groups. Because a lot of complaints about privileged people from non-white racial groups, disabled people, and other groups whose physical appearance or behaviour is in the minority involve actions that, I think, stem from simple curiosity: asking to touch hair, or about the origin of clothing or jewellery, is a common one, but also quoted, especially by disabled people, is staring.

We’re taught as children not to stare at others, even (especially) if they catch our attention. It’s simply not seen as polite, and for a good reason: no one wants to feel like their actions and appearance are being scrutinised. We are capable of gathering en masse and not being hugely socially uncomfortable because, in a crowd, everyone tacitly agrees to more or less ignore everyone else.

But how does this balance with the desire to satiate curiosity?

I know this must sound very strange: as if someone’s curiosity could ever outweigh the right of someone, especially someone who probably gets constant attention because of their appearance, to be left alone. It doesn’t really upset anyone to not satisfy their curiosity; at worst they might be a little disappointed. The black or disabled person, however, might feel the weight of a hundred stares per day, perhaps more, and this could be profoundly upsetting for them. Shouldn’t we do our best to alleviate that burden, not intensify it?

I do generally tend to think so, and because I know that in practice it’s extremely difficult to clarify to someone whether you’re staring in a good or a bad way, and that even if you could an overburdened person might not care, I try not to stare at people I’m curious about. But I also think that there’s something that’s being missed here: most human curiosity, when it comes to unusual-looking people, is not vicious or mean-spirited. It isn’t looking for flaws to point at and mock. It just wants to know. People have an inherent drive to learn which is triggered when they encounter something outside their experience.

I’m just wondering idly if, in an ideal world, people who wished to satiate that drive harmlessly could be allowed to do it. I don’t like making people feel uncomfortable, but I don’t like the fact that in order for society to go smoothly we have to pretend a lot of the time that we don’t care about things we do care about, or vice versa. I hold the ideological perspective that it should generally be okay for us to be ourselves, and that if we’re not explicitly seeking to cause harm, it would be ideal if society were better able to accept our lack of harmful intent (obviously depending on the circumstances: “I didn’t mean to cause harm by pushing that burning oil drum off a building onto that grandmothers’ convention” is not the same as “I didn’t mean to cause harm by asking about your father when I didn’t know he was dead”).

That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take care with our words and actions, because right now we do live in a society where many of us have been conditioned to be easily upset, and we do need to be mindful of others’ feelings. But I suppose I dream of a society where people who have no animosity in mind can be honest, without causing offence. I’m thinking I’d like it to be okay for someone to be curious about someone’s physical appearance, and be able to look at them, possibly even admire them, and have that not bother the person. And I know that’s not really possible in this world right now; but at the very least what I would like is this, and basically, for all that I’ve waffled above this is my main point:

I’d like for it to be acknowledged ideologically that curiosity is okay, that it’s not a bad thing, and that even if we shouldn’t practice it in some circumstances for the sake of people’s happiness, it’s still a shame and a loss that we can’t.

Maybe it’s not a big loss. Maybe it doesn’t outweigh the desires of others to be left alone. But it’s still not ideal that society is this way.

(This brought to you, incidentally, by spending the last leg of my recent flight back to England next to a boy who, despite having only one arm and that being deformed, was still able to play his DS. I thought that was pretty awesome.)

“The first thing you do is to forget that I’m a Reyvateil.”

Hmm, so… I was reading this article, and the statement at the core of it– that the correct way to treat oppressed minorities is summed up by “The first thing you do is to forget that I’m [black/female/disabled/etc.]. Second, you must never forget that I’m [black/female/disabled/etc.]“– is something that I nodded at, but less in agreement and more in “actually, that really sums up what a lot of activist groups seem to want people to do, and you know, it’s really hard.”

As the blogger continues to say, specifically referencing the treatment of non-white people, “They make a seemingly impossible suggestion: that white folks must be aware of the fact that the experiences and cultures of people of color are different, but they must not fixate on those differences to the extent that the behavior becomes tokenizing, or discomforting, or – possibly worst of all – self-aggrandizing.” It’s hard to notice difference, be aware that this difference is meaningful and has made these people the target of abuse and oppression, and not subsequently have your actions stilted or distorted by that heightened awareness. It’s hard to be vigilant while being casual. It’s hard to treat people with special care while at the same time treating them just like everyone else.

I’ve been guilty of feeling uncomfortable when oppressed groups ask for this. If my attention is called to the fact that I should be sensitive towards someone because of their colour, I immediately cannot stop worrying about whether I’m doing it right or wrong, whether I’m doing too much or not enough, whether I’m going to be offensive, etc. This makes me socially anxious, and thus more likely to do stupid things. And I’ll be brutally honest here: I don’t want this to be the case, but it causes me to see the person as a little more threatening and a little less human. Not because I inherently believe anyone deserves to be seen as less human than anyone else, but because I feel thrown off guard by the panic-response of “how should I act? How should I act? Will they hate me if I don’t act right?”, and my response to that is to feel less comfortable and more defensive around the person. It has nothing to do with my believing any of the differences between myself and them make them bad, and has everything to do with the fact that trying to act normal when my attention has been drawn to someone is something I do not do easily.

It’s as simple as noticing them by accident. Oh, I’m looking at them now. Should I be looking? Is that okay? Maybe I should look away. But then they might think I’m purposely trying to ignore them. So maybe I should look. But that’s going to look like I’m staring. It is impossible to act naturally once you start think about how you’re supposed to act.

But at the same time, the more I think about that statement– “The first thing you do is to forget that I’m [black/female/disabled/etc.]. Second, you must never forget that I’m [black/female/disabled/etc.]“– the more something about it does sink in and seem solid. At the core of it, this is what I do with my friends. I acknowledge that they may need to do some things differently from how I need to do them, that they may have special food preferences or social needs or squicks or cultural leanings that I have to respect and work with; but I don’t think of them as a collection of those needs and squicks and leanings, or stereotype them based on those. I just try to be careful of them and to be mindful of when they might arise.

The problem is that it’s trickier with altering the way you relate to someone based on their cultural group as opposed to as an individual, particularly when it’s an oppressed cultural group, because you don’t know their individual preferences, and you have to go on what you know about the culture, and most members of oppressed groups don’t like being stereotyped based on that. And you can always ask, but if you don’t know someone well, asking isn’t always easy, and may be presumptuous and annoying in and of itself. I am sometimes going to be casual with my friends and go, “lol, I suppose you don’t want the [insert food here], then”, because they’re my friends and I know them enough to know when I can do that without offending them, but taking the same tack with someone you don’t know well is likely to be problematic. It’s not easy; but then I suppose social reform never is.