One of the most fundamental tenets of social science is that differences within groups are usually greater than differences between groups. We have more in common than we realize, and this is just as true of oppression as it is of most other human experiences. One’s identity affects the likelihood and level of oppression they experience, but this piercing glimpse into the obvious is not the whole story. What are less obvious, but perhaps more important are the intra- and inter-personal personal factors which influence this phenomenon.
The survey study that cost me my job as a tenured professor provided some relevant findings: 1) respondents who agreed that it was appropriate to shout down a speaker whose message might be hurtful to others; 2) identified as “extremely liberal;” or 3) agreed that protection from hostile environment discrimination was important, were more likely to perceive a hypothetical scenario as being a “hostile environment.” They also judged that the words or behaviors that created the situation would not be protected by academic freedom. https://researchers.one/articles/22.11.00007v1
More recently, a study by Lahtinen reported in the Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, identified many beliefs closely related to critical social justice (i.e., wokeness) Construction and validation of a scale for assessing critical social justice attitudes ttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/sjop.13018
Even more interesting, was his finding that the more of these beliefs an individual endorsed, the greater the likelihood that they would suffer from anxiety and depression. The gist of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is to identify and dispute the stupid (and oppressive) things we tell ourselves. As Albert Ellis might have said, there is nothing more oppressive than our own ”stinkin’ thinkin’.
I think "colorblind" is not the best word to describe what you (and Coleman Hughes) are advocating. Just as I could not be blind to the fact that you're a woman, I could not be blind to someone's skin color or the weather at the moment (raining and grey in NYC).
What do I have to offer as an alternative? Admittedly, nothing great at the moment. But it's worthwhile considering if there's a better way to say it.
Agree. But unfortunately even in quotes the word immediately triggers a lot of negative responses. So the question is whether it's better not to use the word at all but instead describe treating individuals as individuals.
One of the most fundamental tenets of social science is that differences within groups are usually greater than differences between groups. We have more in common than we realize, and this is just as true of oppression as it is of most other human experiences. One’s identity affects the likelihood and level of oppression they experience, but this piercing glimpse into the obvious is not the whole story. What are less obvious, but perhaps more important are the intra- and inter-personal personal factors which influence this phenomenon.
The survey study that cost me my job as a tenured professor provided some relevant findings: 1) respondents who agreed that it was appropriate to shout down a speaker whose message might be hurtful to others; 2) identified as “extremely liberal;” or 3) agreed that protection from hostile environment discrimination was important, were more likely to perceive a hypothetical scenario as being a “hostile environment.” They also judged that the words or behaviors that created the situation would not be protected by academic freedom. https://researchers.one/articles/22.11.00007v1
More recently, a study by Lahtinen reported in the Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, identified many beliefs closely related to critical social justice (i.e., wokeness) Construction and validation of a scale for assessing critical social justice attitudes ttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/sjop.13018
Even more interesting, was his finding that the more of these beliefs an individual endorsed, the greater the likelihood that they would suffer from anxiety and depression. The gist of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is to identify and dispute the stupid (and oppressive) things we tell ourselves. As Albert Ellis might have said, there is nothing more oppressive than our own ”stinkin’ thinkin’.
oops: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/sjop.13018
Katherine,
I think "colorblind" is not the best word to describe what you (and Coleman Hughes) are advocating. Just as I could not be blind to the fact that you're a woman, I could not be blind to someone's skin color or the weather at the moment (raining and grey in NYC).
What do I have to offer as an alternative? Admittedly, nothing great at the moment. But it's worthwhile considering if there's a better way to say it.
I put it in quotes for a reason. I don't think we can be "colorblind." But we can strive to focus on individuals as individuals.
Agree. But unfortunately even in quotes the word immediately triggers a lot of negative responses. So the question is whether it's better not to use the word at all but instead describe treating individuals as individuals.
I'll reflect on that more. You may be correct.