I'm still brooding a little over the person who quit a group I am part of. I find myself wondering: could my history of having been unpopular made me, ironically, more likely to stick with groups/people and to try to either reconcile differences or overlook them?
As I mentioned in Sunday school class: my MO with things like personal differences is to think about them. If they don't cause great damage to the relationship with the person, I just let them go and don't talk about them (this in the context of gossip and talking behind people's backs). If it is big enough to damage my relationship with them (or is a moral issue I personally need to address), I will go to them and talk to them about it. If it were a really big thing and I didn't feel safe going alone (like: it was a guy who tended to be "handsier" than I liked despite my repeated comments of "hey, I don't like this" or squirming away from his grasp), I'd get a neutral third party to come along as an arbitrator.
But anyway.
I got to thinking about this again after reading a story on one of the higher-ed news sites I skim a couple times a week. Fundamentally, it was an essay (very likely a "Modest Proposal" style essay, though that was not emphasized in the article) written by a student suggesting "white boys" should not be allowed to speak. Presumably because they've "had a seat at the table" for too long and have excluded others.
And, I don't know. But I don't think the solution to people being excluded in the past is to start excluding the group that was "on top" in the past. By all means, let more voices be heard. And maybe encourage people who historically have been reticent to speak. But kicking some people out of the circle, instead of just making the circle bigger, seems like a poor solution to me (not least because it will breed resentment on the part of the newly-excluded).
(I would also note that not all "white boys" have always been at the top of the heap. There are "white boys" who come from lower-SES backgrounds, for example, Or "white boys" who are gay. Or who are some minority religious group that get hassled for it. (Jewish kids in the South....)
And that brought me back around to a bad teenaged memory. I've talked about it before: the very ham-handed attempt at an "anti racism" lesson of the "blueys" thing. What they did, was divvy up the seventh grade class* (or at least, the "team" I was in - they did "teams" in my school, where there was a math teacher, a social studies teacher, an English teacher, and a science teacher, and they all had homerooms and all taught in their subject area. So you had each of the teachers, but perhaps at different times than other people in your homeroom) into groups and each group was assigned a day to be a "bluey." This was achieved by painting an asterisk on the person's cheek with greasepaint for the day.
(*Seventh grade was the lowest pit of Hell in my school years. This is just one example of the bad stuff but this seems somehow worse to me because the teachers condoned it and didn't seem to see how it could be damaging. I will also note there was ONE African-American family in our district (I don't remember if the young woman my age was in my team that year or not) and maybe 2-3 Asian families. We were NOT a diverse school, but...I think giving kids free rein to be prejudicial towards other kids was not a helpful lesson)
The thing was: blueys were to be treated as second-class citizens. No effort would be made to stop kids from harassing the blueys (not that much effort was made on any day to stop kids from bullying other kids) and the teachers were allowed to do things like make the blueys sit in the back of the classroom. (Marginally related: that's when I learned I was nearsighted and needed glasses)
Anyway. I was in the first cohort. I look back on it now and wonder why none of the teachers stepped forward and said, "You know? She gets a lot of harassment otherwise, maybe don't make her go on the first day" but maybe my teachers really cared less about me than I imagined they did.
It was horrible. I had, before the exercise, kind of looked forward to "Maybe now I get to give my bullies back as good as they give me" and planning to taunt and harass the blueys. (And you know? Maybe this is one of those "God things," and the reason I wound up doing it ON THE FIRST DAY was that I was looking forward to being a harasser).
I don't even REMEMBER now the later days of it - maybe, in fact, it went so bad the teachers ended the experiment after the first day. But it was awful and very isolating - not even having the teachers seem to stick up for me, being made to sit in the back of the room, the teachers play-acting being mean (calling me "uppity" and the like when I tried to answer a question).
But yeah. It was a cruel exercise and I'm not sure it taught anyone very much. I don't think anyone bullied any less after it.
So anyway. I think the way to "open the circle" is to literally open the circle, but also to recognize that some people who look like they've had an easy time of it in the past (me: white, Christian, cis, hetero, not-disabled beyond needing eyeglasses) may not necessarily have been the aggressors or the bullies. (And for that matter: religion, sexual orientation are not obvious unless the person talks about it. I know people ASSUME things, but I've known cases where I thought someone was in one group and they turned out to be in another)
Anyway. I was thinking about that this morning and wondering: is perhaps the reason I *seem* more tolerant of people, and tend to try to be friends with everyone, is that I felt unaccepted by a lot of groups as a kid? I mean, I would have to think very, very long and hard about leaving a group I was part of now (and I still might not leave) because I have no guarantee of finding another group - or being accepted by one if I found it.
I wonder if I put up with more low-level difficult human behavior (there are things people around me complain about in other people that I don't even really notice, and frankly it bugs me when they complain, because they just FORCED me to notice the thing*) because as a kid I was desperate enough for friends that there was stuff I'd put up with. Even now I have no stomach for the "If you (insert whatever personal preference here), then unfollow me right now" like, you're not allowed to be friends if you....whatever....don't like Marvel superhero movies or put mayonnaise on your sandwiches or things like that.
I mean, yes, yes, if someone is genuinely abusive cutting them out of your life is FINE but often it seems to me people are very judgmental about things that carry no actual moral weight. (And yes, I know in some cases those people are joking about the "unfollow me" thing but (a) I tend to be very literal-minded and (b) I also think what people joke about gives you a morsel of truth about their personality, and someone who would joke about cutting someone out of their life over a choice of sandwich condiment perhaps harbors the ability to cut someone out of their life over an awkward comment that could be explained away, or over not paying "enough attention" to them, or something.
I don't know.
I've NEVER felt I had the luxury of having enough friends that I could cut one out of my life. Yes, again, I would make an exception in the case of someone actually being abusive or similar, but I am also slow enough to make friends with people that I generally know if that's gonna be the case before I'm their friend.
(*And then I doubt myself: am I being TOO tolerant? Is this behavior actually a big problem and I am not seeing how it is one?)
But I dunno. I kind of feel like cutting people out of your life over things (real or perceived) that are not ongoing serious issues becomes a slippery slope.
I would honestly LIKE to have the luxury of having so many friends that losing a few wouldn't feel like it mattered, but I can't even imagine a number of friends where that would happen. And yeah, a big part of my psyche and how I act in this world is driven by that tween or young-teen girl sitting, alone and sad, in a dim corner of the lunchroom, because it seems like no one wants to eat lunch with her.
****
Edited to add: And another interpersonal thing happened here that has me sitting at my desk, staring at the thing I know I need to work on, but not having the energy to.
(Someone humblebragging about the Big Things they have done, when they well know that I've spent much of this past year feeling very ineffectual. And now I just feel small and sad and expendable. But I also feel mad at myself for being petty enough to be annoyed at this person because another part of my mind is reminding me that they're probably someone who is deeply insecure and the humblebragging is more them reassuring themselves, than coming to me and demanding pats on the head for it. But the literal-minded part of me (The Drax part of me, except my inner Drax is not a warrior) is feeling like "Why do people always come to me asking me to stroke their egos, but no one ever bothers to care about how I am doing?")
It doesn't help that I have to look forward to a five-year-old being in my class today. I hope he's quiet. (Long story, but: schools are closed today, the family member this person uses as childcare is down with the flu, she has nowhere else to take the kid and doesn't want to miss my class)
No comments:
Post a Comment