smiling over my shoulder

i think there is an important distinction between strong positions and strong reactions. positions develop from informed critical thinking, and take a great deal of historical and current information about the topic into account. reactions are formed without much context and are generally incorporated into an already existing position that serves as a metaphor or comparison.

(ex. if someone has a strong background in american women's studies, their reaction to gendered, cultural practices in another country would likely be based on gender relations in the US - based on their positions. this was, and still is, a huge problem in many women's studies programs.)

so i think amy gave you some really good advice for how to conduct yourself in a discussion about subjects that you have a reaction to. sticking to your own experiences - when you don’t present your own experiences as universal - is a good way to present your thoughts without positioning yourself as an “expert”. but i think it is also useful and appropriate to give your non-personal, theoretical reaction, if you present in the form of a question. (ex. but what about x?, wouldn’t that change your reasoning?) and i don’t think this just annoying conversational protocol. when one takes the time to study and think about a topic, they are doing so in the form of a question: “what is this all about?” if you haven’t engaged in this form of questioning yet, then it’s much more appropriate to have questions than answers. otherwise your company will eventually find you both naive and pompous (for good reason) - and probably stop taking you seriously. not much that is worth discussing is “common sense”; no one should expect that they can jump into a discussion they no little about and contribute very much. it’s like joining an organization, showing up to your first meeting, and expecting that your comments will be as valuable as those from someone who knows what’s going on.

however, this is not to say that reactions aren’t valuable and shouldn’t be taken seriously. sometimes reactions can jolt a dialogue into a fresh and productive direction. oftentimes this happens when someone from a different academic field or someone with significantly different life-experiences (from those currently engaged in the topic) throw their reactions into the mix.

unfortunately, i think that it is often the case that those with positions on a subject are often annoyed or reactionary when faced with someone’s reaction - even if it was presented in a productive manner. i would say this occurrence is the major issue people have with political correctness. and i think this is probably the reason that amy suggested presenting your own experiences (because it’s hard to yell at someone when they are just speaking about themselves). nevertheless, i think it is extremely important that people say what is on their mind, even if they expect an annoyed reaction from people who presumably know more about the topic. if someone doesn’t understand why saying “x” is offensive, having someone reprimand them for saying “x” without explaining why it’s offensive isn’t productive at all. likewise, reprimanding someone for expressing an opinion that runs counter to a widely-accepted belief doesn’t help that person understand why the belief is widely-held. there’s no quicker way to put such an irritated person in their place than to say, “sorry. i’m just asking a question.” the only way people are going to get comfortable with a topic and develop their own positions is if they feel comfortable discussing it with those who are more knowledgeable - which is exactly what you (orange) said you wanted to do.

but having a productive discussion is all about presumed levels of competency, so it’s never going to be perfect. (ex. if i were having a conversation with a first-year college student about feminist theory, i would position myself as someone who is much more knowledgeable about the topic. if i were talking to a women’s studies grad student, it’s more likely that we’d be engaging as equals in parts of the discussion, and i would be asking questions about other parts. if i was talking to an awesome professor, i’d probably be blushing while i asked them questions.)

i think all of this is important to consider when thinking about the article you took issue with. the first thing i would say is that, until you read the article in its entirety, you should reserve judgment. the author noted that she left out the entire section about what was actually being co-opted by “girl power.” the second thing i would say is that, because the article was written for bitch, it presumes a certain level of understanding of feminist thought. so, while it may appear that a judgment was simplistic, it is just as likely that such a judgment is based on widely-accepted and well-considered reasoning (that was left out because it was been unnecessary and bulky). the third, and related, thing i would say is that writers have only so much space to make an argument, and so they must make judgment calls on which positions need explanation/clarification/reasoning and which they can simply state and move on - which sometimes results in poor judgments (which doesn’t necessarily say anything about the value of their position). the fourth thing that i would say is that you should figure out exactly what rubbed you the wrong way about the article (if you still feel that way after reading the whole piece) so that you can have a discussion about it.

ultimately, i think that for someone to feel strongly enough to engage in an argument over a position (as opposed to a discussion where people are building off of each others ideas), they should feel comfortable publishing those ideas (i.e. publicly putting their name on the idea). too often i think that people become very vehement about a subject that they wouldn’t dare write about because it’s easy to distance yourself (and revise) from a past conversation.

so, that’s all to say that of course you’re not a bad person (you’re a good one!) - and that your concern and self-awareness about the topic put you way ahead of the vast, vast majority of humans. it is also to say that i would love to talk to you about your thoughts if your interested in doing so.

apologies for the length.

- b(2)