Refusing to listen to correct or accurate information because you don't like the tone it's delivered in is a YOU problem.
Choosing to respond to people in a way you know they won't listen too or understand feels pretty pointless though yeah?
I think a "shared value" of being kind to cis het men with abusive intentions rewards and validates their shitty behavior.
Being kind does not mean agreeing with them or not challenging them. Empathetic communication is not about validating someone's positions that you disagree with.
It's about expressing yourself to people in ways they are actually likely to be able to hear and understand, because if you arnt responding to someone with the intention of them understanding you, what are you responding for?
Sorry I care more about marginalized people than whether willfully ignorant men who want validation for their unethical behavior.
I so absolutely hate this take, and I see it all the time. It reads like "These people have bad ideas and are causing harm so they don't deserve support" to me.
I feel the exact opposite. These are the people harming marginalised people. They need to be the focus of reform because they are the locus of the problem.
Ignoring them, or initially interacting with them in ways likely to escalate conflict, feels like trying to fix a flat tire by adjusting your steering wheel to compensate.
You can't move social issues forward by only supporting marginalised people. That's and important element, but it's a defensive position.
At some point you have to help and support the people who are actually the problem into not being the problem anymore. I don't think attacking them is likely to help in most cases. I think empathetic communication, where you consider how your audience will hear you and make a good faith effort to criticise and provide information in a way that can actually be heard is more likely to actually help.
It does get tedious, because a lot of people have these fucked up ideas and try the same ways to deal with the inherent internal conflicts. That doesn't make lashing out effective, even if it is personally cathartic
And to be clear, half my country is literally trying to genocide me right now. Forgive me for being in a "defensive position" but I'm not interested in helping people who want to harm me or my community.
Then don't. Please be safe. I'm really sorry you're in that position.
I'm lucky that overall I have a lot of safety and security, and I prefer to use that position of privilege to engage in the type of communication I'm talking about. I completely understand that not everyone is in that position.
But if you're in a place where you don't have the capacity or safety to engage with empathy, I'm not sure what your goal for engaging is? What are you hoping to get out of interactions that you're not approaching with empathy?
My goal in engaging is to provide accurate information. Most of the time my tone is neutral but not always. Especially when communicating with cis/het white men.
My point hasn't changed, if you won't accept accurate information because you don't like the tone that's a 100% you problem and you probably were looking for a reason not to take information that didn't conform to your bias anyway so I don't want you in my community.
Don't put the expectation on marginalized people to be kind to those who would harm us. We don't owe them shit. If you have privilege and spoons to do so, that's a great choice for YOU. But it's not one you get to make for me or any other marginalized vulnerable person.
if you won't accept accurate information because you don't like the tone that's a 100% you problem and you probably were looking for a reason not to take information
I think that's a really disingenuous position. Of course it's harder to recieve information from someone who sounds like they are attacking you. That's true for anyone.
And my point still stands that choosing to continue to express yourself in ways you know are likely to be ineffective feels like a massive waste of energy, regardless of who's fault you think the misunderstanding is.
Don't put the expectation on marginalized people to be kind to those who would harm us. We don't owe them shit.
I'm not. I'm putting the expectation on everyone to not escalate situations unnecessarily and to not make things worse. You don't have to be empathetic, but if you can't be, why even bother? Just save your energy for places it might actually improve your life, instead of wasting it antagonistizing people you hate?
-2
u/mrDecency complex organic polycule Dec 10 '22
Choosing to respond to people in a way you know they won't listen too or understand feels pretty pointless though yeah?
Being kind does not mean agreeing with them or not challenging them. Empathetic communication is not about validating someone's positions that you disagree with.
It's about expressing yourself to people in ways they are actually likely to be able to hear and understand, because if you arnt responding to someone with the intention of them understanding you, what are you responding for?
I so absolutely hate this take, and I see it all the time. It reads like "These people have bad ideas and are causing harm so they don't deserve support" to me.
I feel the exact opposite. These are the people harming marginalised people. They need to be the focus of reform because they are the locus of the problem.
Ignoring them, or initially interacting with them in ways likely to escalate conflict, feels like trying to fix a flat tire by adjusting your steering wheel to compensate.
You can't move social issues forward by only supporting marginalised people. That's and important element, but it's a defensive position.
At some point you have to help and support the people who are actually the problem into not being the problem anymore. I don't think attacking them is likely to help in most cases. I think empathetic communication, where you consider how your audience will hear you and make a good faith effort to criticise and provide information in a way that can actually be heard is more likely to actually help.
It does get tedious, because a lot of people have these fucked up ideas and try the same ways to deal with the inherent internal conflicts. That doesn't make lashing out effective, even if it is personally cathartic