Friday, March 18, 2011

On white maleness

I have been away for a few weeks.  It's a very long story - one which I am hesitant about telling - but it needs to be told.  At the end of last year, I got a new job.  Dear reader, this was a partly maginificent ego boost for me, but mostly, it was a veritable lifeline.  Hitherto, all my work experience had been gained within the restrictive walls of the university world, and for the last part of that journey, I laboured under a fairly abusive boss.  Add to that the terrible job market (forty plus job applications submitted, three rejections (not counting the people from whom you never hear back - where do unread CVs go to die, I wonder), only three call backs) and you can see why by December, I was quite near nervous exhaustion.  The new job was an oasis in a desert of self-doubt, self-loathing and deep despair.

And so, with such promise, it began this year.  Less oasis-like than I thought.  There are several things making my work life difficult; some of which I remember claerly but cannot share for fear of reprisal if my anonymity were ever compromised, others that are minor irritations, exercises in the absurd that are easily laughed off.  But then there are those which make my skin crawl, they are so dangerous and evil.  The place where I work is a civil society organisation, aimed at addressing a key social issue facing South Africa's young, fledgling democracy.  I work with many young people who come from working class and poor communities.  I also work with many young people who come from middle class communities.  We are all united by a need to change what we see happening in this country; we are all united by our love for this country, and this continent.

Here's what I object to.  Over the last few weeks, I have noticed, and it has been confirmed in conversations with some colleagues, that there's a certain pecking order that permeates the life and the operations of the organisation.  At the proverbial 'top' of the organisation (civil society does not like to admit its hierarchies are formal, hence the quotation marks), you have mostly middle class, and, yes, mostly white people.  In the 'middle', and at the (regrettably) 'bottom', you have mostly working class, black people.  Now, I hear you: I myself am middle class.  But by virtue of my 'newness', and, my disillusion, I am not at the 'top'.  I am (regrettably) one of the many 'not at the top' middle class people recruited by the top, because they 'need' our skills and our middle class educations.  Here's the thing though.  The people who I refer to as the 'top' are not evil, and overtly racist.  They are not even subtly racist.  I believe, with much respect, that they love their country, they see injustice, they are determined to act.

But here's where true colours show for me: what kind of action is needed?  The 'top' believes in raising awareness: getting their constituents together, educating them about the problems they (constituents, mind you) are facing, and organising them into awareness-raising action, largely conceptualised by them (executed, of course, by the 'not at the top', and the 'middle' and 'bottom' folk).  The results of this are constituents who are called in to meetings to be told of their problems, and of the solutions someone else has worked out for them.  I attended an awareness-rasing meeting (in lieu of a planned action) where one of the constituents asked me to explain something she was painting on a placard to be used in the aforementioned planned action.  Neither the placard, nor the action are her idea, neither involved any substantive input from her.  So, what really are we doing?  Going into communities that have been disempowered and victimised countless times over and doing...what exactly?  Telling people what their problems are, and what has been decided for them?  How is that any different from the disempowerment and victimisation experienced during Apartheid, experienced at the hands of the new administration?

Why is this happening, though?  As I said earlier, I do not believe the intent of my bosses is malicious.  But here's the thing about white maleness (and note, dear reader, I use white maleness here as a proxy for privilege - not everyone at the 'top' is white or male): it cannot be evaded, it cannot be shrugged off.  In spaces where liberal, progressive, anti-racist white maleness takes up residence, it still operates from the assumption that it knows best.  I watch it at work, telling people what they need to care about (in the midst of a myriad of social problems), and precisely how to care about it.  It's why I got my job, even though there are many people in the organisation far more qualified to speak and research and write with authority about the problems facing their communities.  White maleness, even when it is well-meaning, is still white maleness.  It cannot recognise the value in world views that have not benefitted from the feeling of being central and normative all their lives.  How can it?  It has been central and normative for time immemorial.

I am not saying that because of white maleness, or, more broadly, privilege, the people at the 'top' and the countless other people like them cannot work in civil society, or make a difference in their country.  What I am suggesting is that in order to do the work they want to do, the work that needs to be done, it is necessary for them - for me - to stare the ugliest parts of our privilege in the face every single moment.  What are the things we take for granted in our engagements with people who are not privileged?  What are we assuming about what they understand, and what they need 'help' with?  How are we implicit in the constant - nay, daily disempowerment of people whose identities are not normative or centred?

If we go into change work thinking that we have these answers - or worse, not even asking these questions - we run the risk of not only reproducing the problems that brought us to this work, but of becoming a worse evil than that which we assume we are fighting against. 

*Gratitude and love to a friend whose insight and bravery I have borrowed heavily from to write this post.

2 comments:

  1. I hear you! This has resonance for me. Can I day that even if I am a white male? Both in biological and social terms? Is it an expression of this reality if I argue that what you are saying only touches the festering toe-nail of the giant BEAST in the room? That change, and the rational organisation of groups to produce it, to alleviate social evils. That this itself is an import and imposition into the culture of the 'bottom folk'. That classes, class-mobility and cooperation for the betterment of all is itself a silencing of the values of those not holding 'approved' socio-economic resources. That not just the 'how' and 'why' but the 'THAT' there needs to be change would be absent without the presence of the middle class privilege. What would happen if the under classes were left to voice their hows and whys and nothing came out but a deathly silence? And what of those situations where members of the middle class really do know best?

    ReplyDelete
  2. You know for the first time- before i was insulted by Biko's writing- but perhaps he was correct, perhaps it is an only "Black" thing...Or perhaps leaders should only be those who have experienced the said issue on their own skin, the priviliged ones maybe working one rung below??? we \ I "White" cannot avoid my frame of reference, my presumptions, my sense of what is right, it is an internal elitism.. all they are trying to do is make things right, I get that, but ... Perhaps Biko was right

    ReplyDelete