hth | helpful hint for the colorblind: BE LESS BLIND

I think I'll quote somebody out of context, because that's always worked really well for me in the past.

Saying "black characters are written too broadly in New Who, making them resemble stereotypes" rather ignores the fact that white characters are treated the same way.

Look. This is the problem with trying to raise white people on Sesame Street in order to cure racism: you get a generation of white people who think it's to their credit that they hold everyone to the same standard, and run around operating like the world is one big, happy block party -- people who think they're complementing themselves when they say they're "colorblind."

BLIND is not a moral positive. BLIND is an inability to perceive what the non-blind people around you can clearly fucking see. My grandfather was red/green colorblind. His family also had a strawberry farm. His father used to beat him for not obeying instructions to pick only the RED strawberries and leave the GREEN ones on the bush.

Now, I'm not recommending regular beatings for the colorblind. That wasn't a nice thing to do (my great-grandfather was not a nice person in general, for oh so many reasons). But the thing is, my grandfather's colorblindness? Was a problem, because there is actually such a thing as color when it comes to strawberries, and it's easier to work on a strawberry farm when you can see it.

And there is actually such a thing as race. If you can't see it, you're not doing yourself or anyone else any favors. There are cases where you can give the EXACT SAME script/character arc/iconography/etc. to a white performer and to a performer of color, and the overall effect WILL BE DIFFERENT. Race is real. People respond to it, often on levels they aren't entirely aware of. So it actually misses the whole entire point of discussing race and racism if your sole defense is "but we're just treating them the exact same way we treat white characters!" It may be true, or it may not be true, but either way it's singularly useless.

Some fans seem to find gender easier to understand than race, so think of it this way: if there's a character that isn't very bright but always uses sexuality to manipulate other people, does it make a difference if that character is a man or a woman? Isn't it more of a stereotype in one case than in the other? And if some writer or producer said, "Oh, it's not sexist -- this is just what we were going to do, and we thought we might hire a male actor, but we went with a woman instead, so we kept the same stuff!" that doesn't magically make her not a sexist cliche, does it? If they'd cast a man, the character would read one way; when they do cast a woman, it reads differently. Same character. Different, because of the baggage we bring surrounding gender. If you were somehow magically oblivious to any and all gender issues, you might not notice that. But you wouldn't thereby be a better person than the rest of us. You'd just be oblivious.

Unfortunately, in our culture, we are conditioned to see white people as Real People, and black people as sort of thin slices of people, operating in one of a very few available modes and with only a very few emotions and interests. Therefore it's just different to write a white character "broadly" versus a black character. It's not enough to write the black character "just like" all your white characters, because race is not invisible to most of us and it doesn't have no consequences. In order to challenge people's already racist assumptions about black characters, writers have to work that much harder, and they have to work not blind. They have to work with their eyes open and their brains engaged and with the awareness of subtle signals and context and connotation that anyone who writes for a living should damn well be conversant with. To do less than that is to write lazily, to write foolishly, to write contemptuously of one's characters and one's craft, and to do all that because you can't or won't go the extra mile to bring race into the universe of stuff that factors into your writing does, in fact, have racist implications.

"Colorblindness" may be one's reason for making all of those mistakes, but it isn't an excuse, and it doesn't magically make the product impervious from criticism. Be less blind.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I really like the way you are putting this because it makes sense, to me, of an attitude I hadn't really previously understood. I'm one of the crowd who would normally say that treating a character of colour the same way as a white character, or a female character the same way as a male character, is a good thing to do. It's good to hear where the opposite position is coming from.

I still don't agree with it. Because what you seem to be advocating in its stead is... well, is a form of discrimination. And yes, I do know of this concept called positive discrimination, but I have always found that problematic as well. It remains discrimination. It makes me deeply uneasy that I should be expected to treat anybody *differently* because of their race or gender, or that I might be treated differently because of my race or gender. To my mind, that's not really what equality is about.

Not that I have a clever solution.

I'd like to know which culture you mean in which "we are conditioned to see white people as Real People and black people as sort of thin slices of people, operating in one of a very few available modes and with only a very few emotions and interests." I don't recognize this culture you describe, but then, I don't live in the US - are you being US specific? I wonder if this issue might also apply to the question of 'the baggage we bring surrounding gender [and race]'. Not everybody's baggage is the same.

I'd like to know which culture you mean in which "we are conditioned to see white people as Real People and black people as sort of thin slices of people, operating in one of a very few available modes and with only a very few emotions and interests." I don't recognize this culture you describe, but then, I don't live in the US

Your profile says you live in Scotland.

2002: "a study suggested that one in four Scots admit to being racist" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/2277356.stm)

2006: "Racially motivated crime is still rising across Scotland, according to figures for 2006." (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/6212021.stm)

I put it to you that racism and racist stereotyping happen in Scotland too according to the Scottish people, Scottish government, and the Scottish media.

You know, that really doesn't address the specific thing I was asking, but that's okay. Thank you for trying.

I'm glad to hear that you weren't claiming that there's no narrow racist stereotyping of people of colour in Scotland or denying that the racist stereotyping has a demonstrable negative impact on people of colour (which the links address).

Yes, do feel free to interpret my response in whichever way makes you happiest. I'm always pleased to please. Have a nice weekend, too.

So are you denying there's harmful racist stereotyping in Scotland or not?

I don't think it's either/or, I go with both/and -- seeing characters both as individuals in their own right and as depictions shaped by culture and history.

I'm thinking of the notion of "double consciousness" developed by WEB Dubois, where he wrote that "It is a peculiar sensation, this double-consciousness, this sense of always looking at one's self through the eyes of others, of measuring one's soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity. One ever feels his twoness,--an American, a Negro; two warring souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body, whose dogged strength alone keeps it from being torn asunder."

So I read colorblindness as a kind of luxury for whites that people of color are not afforded, which tends towards making not just "skin color" but also racism invisible. And that white people who want to resist racism have to cultivate their own form of double-consciousness, which includes seeing their whiteness as culture and history.

I don't know if that makes sense?

That's really interesting - thank you! I'm here with questions, and you're the only one so far that's bothered to actually, you know, answer. With more than rhetoric. The quote you give above is incredibly powerful and it gives me a lot to think about.

I don't know what this double consciousness is like, because yeah, I happen to be Caucasian. I'm also female but I haven't consciously experienced 'differential' treatment because of that, either. I don't feel that double consciousness on account of gender. Actually, I don't feel any consciousness as part of some identity at all - I'm just me. (Maybe that explains a lot.)

It's interesting, though, how the 'double consciousness' terminology rings a bell for me in terms of thoughts I had after my initial post, about what I feel I'm being asked to do, which I find so bizarre. This whole thing about not treating characters the same no matter what colour they are because of associated baggage (even if I may not associate the same baggage myself): it's a bit like being asked to treat the world not as I see it, but as I *think* others see it. And I have a huge problem with that because I don't *know* how others see it and, sorry, newspaper reports and statistics don't really tell me that, either. I interact with 'white' people and with people of colour in my job, and sorry, we've got a job to do, who cares what colour you are if you do it well? Or if you don't do it well? I realize that I'm working in a very middle class environment, and it may be different in other social spheres, but I don't *know* and I have no way of guessing, and I'm not sure I can (or indeed want to) change my own behaviour to deal with the alleged views of a group I don't even spend time with.

I do think your comment about seeing whiteness as culture and history is a good point, and so is - obviously - seeing coloured-ness the same way. I'll need to ask my colleagues of colour about that - and I will! (I'll also ask about TV characters.) Still, I personally can't help but wonder whether insisting on differential treatment doesn't just help perpetuate differences, or even create them in the minds of people to whom colour just doesn't matter as much as whether you're competent or incompetent, a decent person or an asshole. There is a point where looking back can stop you from moving forward. I'm not sure of myself in this statement, and I'm aware that this really isn't a popular position, and I'll live with that. I'll still continue to wonder, though.

It might give you some perspective to know that the 'double consciousness' explanation was written in 1903.

How many decades ago did he write that?

*rhetorical question*

I thought about going with Frantz Fanon instead, not that he's exactly contemporary -- though I already felt like I was on shaky ground with potentially misappropriating Dubois....

But that's the really interesting thing about these discussions about racism-- you can quote what someone said 50 years ago and its as appropriate as this morning.

Too true. Mainly I wondered if Dubois would be regarded as too specifically American, as if he didn't have a global audience & influence (looking forward to your diaspora post!).

Then again, a lot of the recent obtuseness around race seems to come from a white perspective of "Oh, racism, it's that thing (other) white people used to do with the hoods and the segregation, but we're all enlightened and we don't do that anymore." Like, the mutation towards colorblind/aversive modes of racism just doesn't register because so many people can only see racism through a kind of time warp.

Hey, how could a black person have a global audience if he wasnt an entertainer?!

*eye roll*

I'm not looking forward to my diaspora post. the fact of having to actually *explain* any of this makes me cranky.

...like you owe anyone an explanation....

I always liked Paul Gilroy's The Black Atlantic, though I don't remember how much it gets into African & Caribbean thinkers.

I am looking forward to your diaspora post, though. :D I remember how boggled I was when I learned the United States was not the main destination for slave ships. I was particularly amazed when I learned how many African slaves were once in Mexico. They have "disappeared" because, unlike the US, they were not prohibited by law or by violence from marrying outside their race. The book "The Slave Trade: The Story of the Atlantic Slave Trade 1440 - 1870" by Hugh Thomas is the best I have found on the subject.

I'm tempted to just beat people with Steve Biko books.

I wouldnt' say that blacks in mexico have 'disappeared', however. ALso, laws against interracial marriage have not resulted in an absence of mixed race people, in the US.

It makes me deeply uneasy that I should be expected to treat anybody *differently* because of their race or gender, or that I might be treated differently because of my race or gender. To my mind, that's not really what equality is about.

Do you think that you *aren't* treated differently because of race or gender? Do you think that you *don't* already treat people differently because of race or gender?

Because for many women (of all colors) and people of color (of all genders), this simply is not the case. To ignore or deny the existence of this burden places an additional burden on them.

To my mind, that's not really what equality is about.

Yes, but it's reality. It's what really happens to people. And your ability (and mine) to say "it shouldn't be that way, so I'll behave as if it isn't" is the *definition* of privilege. Deciding that we'll just treat everyone as if they had privileges *that they don't get* doesn't end in equality, it never does no matter how much we try it. It leads to racism.

Because what you seem to be advocating in its stead is... well, is a form of discrimination.

What I'm advocating is treating different people as if they are different. The way I see the world and the way the world sees me and a million things about me are different between me and my grandmother, many of them because of our age difference and our generational difference. It would be silly to expect us to be interchangeable. It would be silly to expect me to be interchangeable with a white fanboy of my age and class and region, because our different experiences with gender change who we are. I'm advocating taking race, class, and gender -- and religion and age and sexuality and physical ability and many other things -- seriously, in the sense of saying, okay, yes, these things really do shape who people are. And then treat them as they actually are, not as we wish they were.

I'm not saying that race will affect everyone in the exact same way; not at all. I am saying that many times, you should treat people *differently* because there are things that make them different from you. The more you know and understand what some of those things are, the better you get at making good choices about *how* differently, and when. That's not discrimination; that's granting people the dignity of their experiences, which are not always *individual* experiences, but sometimes social and cultural.

I'd like to know which culture you mean in which "we are conditioned to see white people as Real People and black people as sort of thin slices of people, operating in one of a very few available modes and with only a very few emotions and interests." I don't recognize this culture you describe, but then, I don't live in the US - are you being US specific?

Yes and no. I mean, I certainly speak from my own culture, but no, I feel on pretty safe ground when I say that I'm describing the central dynamic of many kinds of prejudice as they happen all over the world and at many different times. There's a vast and vastly common set of mental contortions that people of all kinds use to justify why they and who they identify with are regular, normal, and real, and other folks are exceptions and variations and special cases. That's what's meant by the terms "the Other" and "othering" someone. I'm not aware of a culture that doesn't have this dynamic, although different cultures have different preoccupations and manifestations.

I am saying that many times, you should treat people *differently* because there are things that make them different from you.

That's a fabulous point, and thank you for making it. Yes, I agree entirely!

I guess where I then run into trouble is if I want to put every, say, black person into the 'oh, right, black, must have XYZ issues' drawer, and treat them not as individuals but as a racial... uh, stereotype?

This is NOT to invalidate your point, because I think you are totally right! Everybody should be treated as an individual, and when we interact with people we ought to make sure we learn enough about them to do just that. Taking into account their colour AND sex AND age AND whatever else is relevant... but surely we only know which of these matter to *them* most by getting to know them? And surely there's an enormous danger in assuming things about them just because they're in one particular group? That's what I worry about. I guess it's the thing about the social and cultural experiences; I'm incredibly wary of that.

(Speaking as a woman who absolutely loathes pink and shopping...)

And about the 'othering'... isn't that exactly what's going on here? I'm really sorry and I'm *NOT* out to seek trouble (god, I know better!), but isn't that what we are doing when we say this character needs to be treated differently from this other one just for being a particular colour?

I guess where I then run into trouble is if I want to put every, say, black person into the 'oh, right, black, must have XYZ issues' drawer, and treat them not as individuals but as a racial... uh, stereotype?

Well, I'm pretty sure I never suggested that! However, in terms of writing (which isn't all we've been talking about on this thread, but it's probably the major part), I think you want to consider all aspects of your characters. If he's a military guy, what does that mean to him, how does he get treated by different people because of it, what are his expectations? Not that *every military guy* will answer those questions the same way, but I bet most of them will not say that being in the military does not inform their life experiences in any way because, after all, he's just an individual! And, yeah, he might have an easier time relating to other military folks because they share certain frames of reference and experiences, even though they aren't identical to one another and probably disagree on some, even many things.

Part of my frustration with this debate has been the utter LACK of willingness to listen to people. How many fans of color have to stand there waving their arms saying, Look, I feel trivialized, I feel insulted, I feel patronized, I feel XYZ by show/character/arc/pattern/fandom/whatever -- how many do white fans need before they say, oh, hey, maybe there's something racially sketchy happening, even if it's not obvious to me? We DO only know what matters to people most by getting to know them...and it seems like the vast majority of the FoCs' attempts to be *known* and to speak honestly about their issues have been met with "well, I don't see that, so it must not exist" or "race doesn't matter to me, why don't you try just not letting it matter to you and see if that helps?" If people are SAYING "my social and cultural experiences as a person of color are affecting the way I view this by making it painful instead of fun," then it's not assuming anything to listen to that, and it's just basic human decency to wonder if there's not something we could all be doing to help make fandom a less painful place for our fellow fans.

And, no, that's not othering. Othering is not a recognition of difference, it's a way of placing some variations inside a protected circle and banishing some to the outer limits. Trying to bring *everyone's* needs and interests inside, saying that *everyone's* perspective can be valuable even if that means embracing multiple perspectives and giving up one's own place of protection to make some room -- that's not othering, that's inclusion. People are not "just" some particular skin color -- they are a bundle of identities and experiences and perspectives, and I think it's unintentionally quite unkind to say, well, I deem *these* things important about you but *these* things "just skin color," even when you're telling me these are significant pieces of who you think you are.

I know you're not trying to cause trouble! I understand the kind intent behind your words, but the reason I wrote this post at all is that I think that, as they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and good intentions like yours (and all the rest of the nice folks who want to be colorblind) are making it monumentally harder for fans of color to be heard and taken seriously. That idea probably bothers you -- and I would hope it does! because being bothered by how things are is how things start to get better.

I read in another comment that you felt like no one was trying to answer your questions. I'm sorry you feel that way; I do have like 190 comments, so I'm sure I'm not giving my all to them -- and to do the job properly I would really have to A) *have* all the answers, and 2) work at it for a lifetime, as many people have been working at it. But you really are my target audience here -- I know you're concerned about racism, or you wouldn't be reading this at all, and I believe that you know a racist world requires change. What I'm asking you to do is to consider including yourself in that process of change by listening to PoC's who feel diminished and patronized by the rhetoric of "colorblindness" and consider some different ways to approach being an ally.

I'm really sorry it's taken me so long to get back to you - work and stuff. Thank you again for taking the time to set this out; I do realize that you too have a life besides answering comments on LJ!

Let me first of all point out that when you say:
"People are not "just" some particular skin color -- they are a bundle of identities and experiences and perspectives, and I think it's unintentionally quite unkind to say, well, I deem *these* things important about you but *these* things "just skin color," even when you're telling me these are significant pieces of who you think you are."

-- I don't actually disagree with you at all! Yes, of course colour is one aspect of a person's identity, and perhaps depending on their experiences a weaker or a stronger one, and if the role colour has played (or still plays) in constructing their identity matters to a person it should matter to the rest of us and we should take their concerns seriously.

It's with what that is supposed to mean in terms of character construction that I run into trouble, because people are by definition individuals but in character construction (and interpretation of such) we are almost instantly dealing in generalisations. Maybe I just struggle with that aspect of it. I'm not sure. I need to think about this more.

Your last paragraph makes a lot of sense to me, and yes, I do take the comments by people of colour who feel diminished seriously, and I will continue to try to find a way to be an ally in terms I, too, can understand.

(BTW the comment about nobody trying to answer my questions wasn't so much a complaint directed at you as a reflection on getting the usual snark-attacks that crop up in these discussions. *g*)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Profile

Hth

December 2018

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
						1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28	29
30	31

Page Summary

http://users.livejournal.com/solo____/ - Here via metafandom

Style Credit

Base style: Abstractia by chiming
Theme: Midnight by chiming

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Page generated Feb. 5th, 2026 04:29 pm

Hope That Holds.

helpful hint for the colorblind: BE LESS BLIND

helpful hint for the colorblind: BE LESS BLIND

Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Re: Here via metafandom

Profile

December 2018

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags