The title of this piece is a joke; a
family joke at my expense. It is a joke I indulge because I have a
self-deprecating sense of humor. Yet, the more it is uttered, referred to, and
the more I think about it; the more it crystalizes my relationship with the
discipline of Sociology and the long term effects Sociology has on its
disciples with privilege.
When Sociologists talk of social research
they often do so with equal parts revelry and distain. Sociology being the
study of societies and the various social forces that effect our lives means
that data is everywhere (and it is glorious). Anything about human behavior has
the potential to be turned into a research project. Yet, as a person engages
with the discipline, and the veil of ignorance is lifted (What we call adopting
the Sociological perspective), our joy at the vast volume of (potential) data
is tempered by feelings of alienation, disappointment and disgust at the capacity
of human cruelty. While this is may not be true for all Sociologists, it seems
the most plausible for those of us that study inequality.
Critical Sociologists that study social
justice issues often wade through the innumerable amounts of horror, suffering,
and agony of the world in an attempt to make sense of it for other people
(their readers, followers and students). Yet, as noble as this pursuit may seem,
there is a danger to anyone studying discrimination or variations of polymorphic
injustices heaped upon a group of people. The researcher could be perceived to be
a misery tourist, vacationing in other people’s pain. While harsh, this is an
especially astute criticism from anyone with an ounce of privilege. Those who
study social injustice while having privilege within a privileged system have
to openly admit, recognize and attempt to dismantle their copious amounts of
privilege; if they are to avoid hypocrisy and retain any amount of credibility.
Credibility is a consistent issue in a culture
of identity politics, where how you are perceived, in regards to your
demographics (age race gender sexuality social class, disability etc.), often
determines your authenticity to speak on such an issue. This creates a problem that is twofold: One, Sociologists
with white male privilege may feel alienated, or unqualified to talk about
social justice issues that do not negatively affect them[1]
and Two: White male Sociologists may be perceived as having greater credibility
(by the public) because their judgement is not perceived to be “clouded” by demographic
loyalties. Because of the color of a person’s skin, what they say is given more
value. While this is a basic constructionist
argument it cannot be overstated that the social categories that we often
create are based in biology; thereby promoting archaic and morally bankrupt
cultural norms like biological determinism.
Additionally, A person is seen to have
greater legitimacy, and their augments taken more seriously, when it is assumed
either A: They have no “stake” in the issue at hand because of their
demographics and thus their argument is seen as more rational (therefore
better). Or B: the experience afforded to you by your demographics provides the
only manner of validity (AKA: Biological Determinism).This dichotomy is
especially true if those individuals are in positions of power and authority. A
white male perspective is seen as more acceptable because we are used to seeing
them in positions of authority. Whereas the public often bristles at the claims
made by people of color in authority even if the content between a white and
nonwhite authority is the same. What is true, regardless of who is in
authority, people are being effected by socially constructed categories that
gain primacy through these pseudo-biological explanations.
The question then is how can we combat
this? As a Sociologist in a privileged position (through whiteness, maleness,
sexuality and social class) our first role to combat these legitimacy issues is
to listen. Listen to the stories, experiences and analysis of other people from
different demographics. Read their words and attempt to empathize with their
struggle. However, it is important not to co-opt their struggle, or try to fix
the struggle alone without them. That is not our place. We cannot be saviors
fueled by guilt. That mentality still casts non-privileged people as helpless,
and maintains a complicated narrative based on victimhood. We need to be their
support for their self-liberation that they have strived towards and fought for
generations. And it’s about time more of the privileged jump on the bandwagon,
and the key to success is intersectionality.
I am an anti- social sociologist, I do not
like to be around people; because my research and field of study results in me
seeing the worst in them (people with power and privilege) and the system(s)
they create. I have attempted to be a conduit for the work of the non-privileged/under
privileged. I read their work and echo their voices in an attempt to use my
privilege for good. In that effort, I attempt to sway the powerful and the
privileged because maybe, just maybe, when they hear a heterosexual upper class
white guy say the same thing that people of color, women, trans folk, gays and
lesbians, and the poor have said for years; they might actually listen. Therefore,
like a snake who eats its own tail, I use my privilege to tear down a system I
benefit from; so one day that system, and my privilege, do not exist at all.
[1]
Many of White male Scholars go through some kind of existential crisis if they
talk about social injustice in the classroom.
