COLUMN: An ideological revolution

From Nathan Smith's, "Just Skip to the Crossword," Fall '97 From Nathan Smith's, "Just Skip to the Crossword," Fall '97I am racist, sexist, homophobic and xenophobic. Now hold on! Before you go lighting torches and gathering a lynch mob, let me describe the reasons compelling me to make such a potentially inflammatory statement. It all started with a little letter I wrote last semester to The Daily Pennsylvanian registering a complaint regarding a racist movie review I read in 34th Street. "Yeah, but these days, if you're going to call someone a racist, he better be the lowest scum you ever met, man. He's gotta be out marching and yelling slurs. Because people just jump up and down at the mention of the word." That last sentence rang painfully true. The truth was further evidenced in the almost immediate resignation of the author of the movie review in question. I had never intended such an effect; I merely thought people should take notice and discuss the significance of this occurrence. This seemed to me a more productive course of action than rashly attacking the individual, as though he or she were the originator and sole carrier of racist thought on this campus. I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt, almost beyond reason. And thus I've presumed this person didn't actually understand the impact of his or her words, an oversight which serves as an indicator of a much bigger problem: the omnipresent racism in our society. The author probably thought such commentary would be acceptable simply because more subtle forms of prejudice appear in our media constantly, often without comment or question. Had the review itself been less blatant, it surely would have passed by without remark. The various forms of prejudice to which I have laid claim at the beginning of this column permeate our culture, our media, our politics (both international and domestic), our educational systems and our daily interactions with people on the street. It can be overt and ugly like yelling the word "nigger" or "faggot"; seemingly innocuous like attempting to speak Korean to a third-generation Japanese American; or even self-inflicted like skin-lightening cremes, plastic surgery or denial of one's own true sexuality. These things happen all the time, and prove the power and depth of cultural bias. Who then has the right combination of ignorance and egocentrism to proclaim immunity to them? Who would come forth and say they have never been influenced by the prejudices of their parents and friends, teachers and classmates, employers and coworkers? Unfortunately, many people do. Conservatives often claim such prejudice exists only in the minds of individuals who seek pity and sympathy by playing the role of the victim. Many liberals acknowledge the phenomenon in society at large, angrily pointing fingers at others. Meanwhile they claim because they use the proper PC vocabulary they themselves have avoided it altogether. Minorities who take the brunt of prejudice often believe themselves incapable of propagating it. All the same, they can maintain intense hatred for other minority groups, for members of their own communities perceived as having "sold out," or for white people whom they've never met. I should pause here to mention these forms of prejudice are not identical in effect; prejudice has much greater influence when combined with power. In my mind, everyone may succumb to the sociocultural forces of racism, sexism and homophobia when ideologically they extricate themselves from responsibility or vulnerability. It's like alcoholics who claim they don't have a problem. Prejudice differs from alcoholism, however, in that one may choose never to drink the first beer. One cannot choose when it comes to culture. The youngster has inculcated the family values and personal failings of his or her parents even before he or she knows what they mean. Sometimes, parents' ideas and opinions replicate exactly and permanently in the views of their children. Sometimes, the kids rebel so strongly they espouse diametrically opposed opinions. In either case, the influence remains strong. The child's family doesn't exist in a vacuum either; every individual integrates (not necessarily through assimilation) into their culture in some way or another. Most families in America, regardless of race, have seen the Rodney King beating, the O.J. Simpson trial, the countless rapes reproduced in movies and television, the debates over gay marriage and so on. Everyone who has ever encountered these issues has been influenced by the experience and has drawn conclusions or asked questions about their significance. If one acknowledges that there are indeed racist, sexist and homophobic people in the world, one must also accept that simply through encountering them one runs the risk of blindly accepting their views. So why not take a moment to falter in your steadfast denial of your own prejudice? I just have, in hopes that it might spur some real introspection and discussion among readers. I genuinely would like to see people, all people, admitting to their vulnerability if only for the sake of putting everyone on level grounds for discussing these phenomena. Such a unilateral move must precede any productive discussion of the issues. Furthermore, it might have prevented the guy I met at the party from thinking I had launched some self-righteous attack with my letter. Unfortunately, most people are too proud, stubborn, scared or angry to do so in a conversational context. Racial tensions have heated up so that doing what I have just done is like being the first to disarm during the Cold War. Denied the comfort of 1,000 uninterrupted words, you open up wide for attack. Regardless of the rest of the world, making such an admission is vital to my ideological evolution. It seems an inescapable cycle of enculturation. Perhaps it is. I do not know what the solution is; I only know that nothing is accomplished by closing off any chance of even seeing the problem.