On "color-blindness," again.
Apr. 20th, 2011 11:50 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
gaudiorAnother day, another column pointing out the inherent racism in a film (John Shore on 'Hop'), another idiot commenter saying:
I just feel these race issues have gone on too long. Why can we not see each other as humans? Affirmative action only furthers the idea that each race is different... I just don’t think we should be focusing so hard on this.
But it seems like a good chance to trot out a new way of explaining the problem with this argument.
Saying "we should all be color-blind and see each other as humans without thinking of race" is very much like if I go up to someone and say, "Bob-- I don't care that you're wearing a long-sleeved shirt today. When I see you, I don't even think to myself about what kind of shirt you're wearing-- it's like I can't see it at all. I just see you as a human being, like me-- why should it matter that your shirt has long sleeves?"
People of different races are, in fact, different. They have different cultural heritages and ways that people treat them and (sometimes) languages and traditions and skin tones. If you didn't think difference meant something bad about the person, there would be no reason not to mention it.
It's true that pretending there's no difference is better than, say, beating Bob up or refusing to hire him or serve him. It's definitely a step in the right direction. But it means that nobody will take Bob to the hospital after someone beat him up for wearing a long-sleeved shirt, because that would mean acknowledging that he was wearing a long-sleeved shirt, and that there were consequences to other people reacting to that.
And besides the more serious consequence of people ignoring the real results of racism-- claiming colorblindness is silly. There's nothing wrong with wearing a long-sleeved shirt, so there's no earthly reason not to mention it and acknowledge it when it comes up. There's nothing wrong with someone being a different race, so there's no earthly reason not to mention it and acknowledge it when it comes up. Doesn't that seem straightforward?
--R
I just feel these race issues have gone on too long. Why can we not see each other as humans? Affirmative action only furthers the idea that each race is different... I just don’t think we should be focusing so hard on this.
But it seems like a good chance to trot out a new way of explaining the problem with this argument.
Saying "we should all be color-blind and see each other as humans without thinking of race" is very much like if I go up to someone and say, "Bob-- I don't care that you're wearing a long-sleeved shirt today. When I see you, I don't even think to myself about what kind of shirt you're wearing-- it's like I can't see it at all. I just see you as a human being, like me-- why should it matter that your shirt has long sleeves?"
People of different races are, in fact, different. They have different cultural heritages and ways that people treat them and (sometimes) languages and traditions and skin tones. If you didn't think difference meant something bad about the person, there would be no reason not to mention it.
It's true that pretending there's no difference is better than, say, beating Bob up or refusing to hire him or serve him. It's definitely a step in the right direction. But it means that nobody will take Bob to the hospital after someone beat him up for wearing a long-sleeved shirt, because that would mean acknowledging that he was wearing a long-sleeved shirt, and that there were consequences to other people reacting to that.
And besides the more serious consequence of people ignoring the real results of racism-- claiming colorblindness is silly. There's nothing wrong with wearing a long-sleeved shirt, so there's no earthly reason not to mention it and acknowledge it when it comes up. There's nothing wrong with someone being a different race, so there's no earthly reason not to mention it and acknowledge it when it comes up. Doesn't that seem straightforward?
--R
(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-20 07:05 pm (UTC)Regardless of how important I consider it, I always notice if the person I'm talking to is black, or white, or Asian, just as I notice if they are male or female, young or old, attractive-to-me or not. My perception of this may not be the same as their own, but I can't help but have one.
The question is, having formed such a judgement of a person's superficial characteristics, to what extent do I make extrapolations about more essential characteristics based on the superficial ones? Do I assume that a black man is dangerous? That an attractive woman is promiscuous? That an old person is senile? It's important for me to know what assumptions I'm making based on someone's race, if I'm to have any hope of correcting them when I'm wrong. But I can't answer that, let alone correct for it, if I'm pretending I haven't noticed the superficial characteristics.
I think it would be wonderful if we grew up in a world where we didn't learn these prejudices, and could reasonably expect that we judge each individual on the basis of what we know about that individual. I used to believe, like the commenter you quoted, that focusing on race the way we do just "furthers the idea that each race is different," and if we could just pretend to ignore the differences for long enough, they'd go away. But the prejudices are too deeply rooted to realistically expect that to work. Until then, we need to pay attention to them.
Also, culture isn't the same as race. It may be that people of different races always have different cultures, but it needn't be, and people within each race also have different cultures. Making assumptions about culture based on race seems just as unwise as making assumptions about anything else based on race.