The Victim test

[benlehman]

I've been thinking about this lately. One thing which often comes up in discussions of discrimination is "but I'm discriminated against for being [white, conservative, male, whatever.]" My initial thought range here is "conservative."

I think that a lot of conservatives use this argument (this is me giving them the benefit of the doubt: that they're not just immature losers) is because they see it working with liberals, but don't really understand why. For instance, in some discussions, I'm going to privilege a woman speaking over a man speaking, for any number of reasons. Conservatives see that privileging, and want a piece of it, but don't really understand how to get it.

To be fair, that they are discriminated against is almost certainly true on some level. I cannot imagine any category which someone could belong to which would not cause someone to be biased against them in some way, particularly if we're going to include unconscious bias. The question is: do I have to give a fuck? Or, in other words, are they discriminated against enough that I should care?

I have found my line in the sand for this!

"If, in your society, someone who belongs to said group has suffered un-punished murder at the hands of a group -OR- uninvestigated murder at the hands of the police, explicitly due to them being a member of said group. Furthermore, the more recently this is the case, the more I give a fuck."

So. Gays? Check. Black people? Super-check. Women? Yeah, although not as much as black people. Indians? Jesus Christ.

Jews? Sorta check.

So the question is: has anyone ever been institutionally murdered in the US for being a conservative?

The answer is yes. During the revolutionary war, people were killed -- sometimes in brutal ways -- for the crime of being Loyalists. Now, this was a long time ago. But if a conservative wants to identify themselves with the Loyalist faction (which is, indeed, their intellectual ancestry) I will grant them a privileged voice in appropriate conversations*. But I'm not sure any conservative I know would be willing to do that.

* Offer also extends to communists, who were much more recently institutionally murdered in the US.

Comments

[funwithrage.livejournal.com]

Not bad. I'd also grab a couple items from a privilege checklist, but as a general rule, it's pretty good.

Also: geeks? Hell no. Which means I can use it to try and shut up our whinier brethren.

[http://users.livejournal.com/-thiefofhearts-/]

I need to speak up on this considering my past, where I was brutally attacked at 17 just because of the color of my skin. You've met me before. I'm white.

After my jaw was broken in three places by two black punks who thought it would be good fun to "beat up a white honky." To add insult to injury, when I got back to my high school, I was immediately considered "the aggressor" - I must have done something to deserve it, because hey, I'm white. Thankfully, common sense came into play there and it stopped after people figured out I wouldn't pull something like that.

The major complaint that I hear in regards to diversity programs is that instead of simply giving everyone an equal say or consideration, they seem to drown out or dilute an opinion simply because of a person's ethnicity or gender. In your example, why privilege a woman to speak over a man at all? Shouldn't their words be weighed by their personal ideals and what they have to say rather than their gender? Can't two people, who happen to be genetically different, have an equal say on a matter?

I think instead of just having some kind of "pain chart" like what you listed above, one should just keep it simple and try to give everyone an even break, reserving judgment on the individual.

[platonic1.livejournal.com]

The Ruby Ridge incident, in which a right-wing gun enthusiast was besieged by the FBI for a relatively minor gun-related infraction. During the siege several of his family members were killed (as well as a law-enforcement officer). On the far right, this one's a real touchstone; also considered by many to be a dress rehearsal for the Branch Davidian incident a few years later. A multi-million wrongful death suit was settled out of court after the fact. In the minds of many, the people involved have never been fully brought to justice.

[yeloson.livejournal.com]

The advanced version is: "If your group suffers in a disaster or other crisis, will your government send an equivalent response of aid and assistance as to most other sectors of society?"

See also: requests for medical supplies in the face of H1N1, and receiving bodybags instead.

[psychotropek.livejournal.com]

Do these stack?

I remember mumbling at my old company that I fulfilled almost all of their affirmative action requirements. If I were gay then some would have you believe I'm the most employable ever. Hah.

[(Anonymous)]

Oops! That's me above. LJ didn't log me in.

[joepub.livejournal.com]

Ben,

I think your litmus test is potentially a fine one. I've got a much easier one, which has so far proven infallible.

If someone says they have a "special right" to be heard, then I believe them and work hard to really hear them.
If their next move is to advocate for someone else being silenced, then I stop listening.

I have a feeling that our two litmus tests are going to bring up a lot of the same results. Thoughts?