I have been a fan of yours for many years and I have enjoyed reading your emails from The Globe.
I normally do not openly react to some of the serious shit you have written about (think: Trump) but this article "Feelings Over Facts" reminded me of a story I read years ago. It was about school children bringing "weapons" to school. School leaders and parents who were paranoid created a zero–tolerance policy. This policy was used to suspend or expel students who crossed the line and tested the authority by bringing knives and/or guns with them to school. Some students were seriously punished by principals and some went to face a judge. Then there was a story about an early elementary student who was probably 8 or 9 who was "caught" with a fingernail trimmer. This made the news! This young student was sent home, confused about what he/she did wrong. I wonder how the student's life went from that point on.
This story is certainly not parallel to a story as volatile as one about racism. However, it does suggest how difficult it is to steer the rudder of society when people react or overreact. These stories you wrote about can be debated about right or wrong/guilty or not guilty. But, we should take a close look at ourselves and focus on the important things in our lives stop getting wrapped up in often meaningless details.
I read the whole Smith College story. It is highly offensive and it enraged me that the College could upend the lives of two working-class people, in a rural area where I might guess there aren't that many jobs available, in order to assuage the hurt feelings of the superwoke elite children of privilege. It is this stuff that leads to the rise of conservative media shouting heads whose business model is outrage. But it is kind of a one-off incident, and people can vote with their tuition fees. The Times story strikes me as worse, especially the staggering 100+ signees of the letter to Baquet. What is the matter with these people?
I enjoy your work. But this is getting repetitive. How many times have you written abt Don? He seems to come up every other column. Life isn’t fair. And if the facts are as presented by obviously interested parties then yes, he got a raw deal and so did the janitors at Smith. But not every NYT HR dispute or random encounter in a small, lefty women’s college lounge is instructive in understanding race and power in America.
I am a retired principal. Questions like these often get us into trouble. I am sad Mr. McNeil couldn't have said, "That's a complicated issue--maybe you could ask your parents what they think". He got tagged for honesty.
As for the other example, it reminds me somewhat of the Prof. Gates issue in Cambridge when he was trying to force open his own front door, police were called and everyone got upset. Because of Prof. Gates' notoriety, President Obama became involved to soothe feelings with the Cambridge Police and also with Prof. Gates.
My Dad is a 90-year-old kind man who, since Trumpism, has resorted to acting like a bigot. He is also a widower. He never spoke like he tries to at my home when Mother was alive. I believe you cannot change belief systems but you can certainly shut down racist speech, nasty looks under your own roof. We do. And we still love Dad...just not that part of him,
I hope the NYT and Smith mull this over some more, and BIPOC folks think it over too. I don't see racial justice and better understanding flowing from seeing "offensive behavior" when it may not be there. In the Smith case there might be an argument that just need to be more people of color on campus (students, staff, faculty, security people) so that expectations on all sides are more realistic.
In interpersonal relations and engagements that include inequities in social power and status “intent” and “facts” are irrelevant categories for understanding or for remedying miscommunication and misunderstanding. They are, however, useful categories if ones intent is the maintenance of status, power or privilege. These distinctions are easily understood by those lacking social power or status. To insist that “intent” or “facts” are significant considerations is to miss the point of movements for social justice. The world experienced by those with low access to social power is a very different world from those who wield it. “Intent” and “facts” are tools useful for avoiding the consequences offensive behavior.
Hi Michael –
I have been a fan of yours for many years and I have enjoyed reading your emails from The Globe.
I normally do not openly react to some of the serious shit you have written about (think: Trump) but this article "Feelings Over Facts" reminded me of a story I read years ago. It was about school children bringing "weapons" to school. School leaders and parents who were paranoid created a zero–tolerance policy. This policy was used to suspend or expel students who crossed the line and tested the authority by bringing knives and/or guns with them to school. Some students were seriously punished by principals and some went to face a judge. Then there was a story about an early elementary student who was probably 8 or 9 who was "caught" with a fingernail trimmer. This made the news! This young student was sent home, confused about what he/she did wrong. I wonder how the student's life went from that point on.
This story is certainly not parallel to a story as volatile as one about racism. However, it does suggest how difficult it is to steer the rudder of society when people react or overreact. These stories you wrote about can be debated about right or wrong/guilty or not guilty. But, we should take a close look at ourselves and focus on the important things in our lives stop getting wrapped up in often meaningless details.
This kind of thing gives political fuel to the right.
Good intentions gone wrong for sure here.
And these have serious impacts.
Ask a school teacher, so much good work has focused on schools without funding and support.
I read the whole Smith College story. It is highly offensive and it enraged me that the College could upend the lives of two working-class people, in a rural area where I might guess there aren't that many jobs available, in order to assuage the hurt feelings of the superwoke elite children of privilege. It is this stuff that leads to the rise of conservative media shouting heads whose business model is outrage. But it is kind of a one-off incident, and people can vote with their tuition fees. The Times story strikes me as worse, especially the staggering 100+ signees of the letter to Baquet. What is the matter with these people?
I enjoy your work. But this is getting repetitive. How many times have you written abt Don? He seems to come up every other column. Life isn’t fair. And if the facts are as presented by obviously interested parties then yes, he got a raw deal and so did the janitors at Smith. But not every NYT HR dispute or random encounter in a small, lefty women’s college lounge is instructive in understanding race and power in America.
I am a retired principal. Questions like these often get us into trouble. I am sad Mr. McNeil couldn't have said, "That's a complicated issue--maybe you could ask your parents what they think". He got tagged for honesty.
As for the other example, it reminds me somewhat of the Prof. Gates issue in Cambridge when he was trying to force open his own front door, police were called and everyone got upset. Because of Prof. Gates' notoriety, President Obama became involved to soothe feelings with the Cambridge Police and also with Prof. Gates.
My Dad is a 90-year-old kind man who, since Trumpism, has resorted to acting like a bigot. He is also a widower. He never spoke like he tries to at my home when Mother was alive. I believe you cannot change belief systems but you can certainly shut down racist speech, nasty looks under your own roof. We do. And we still love Dad...just not that part of him,
Wear a cup. It's tough out here where the feelings are. No one said you should be able to evade Life's sticky situations. Grow up.
I hope the NYT and Smith mull this over some more, and BIPOC folks think it over too. I don't see racial justice and better understanding flowing from seeing "offensive behavior" when it may not be there. In the Smith case there might be an argument that just need to be more people of color on campus (students, staff, faculty, security people) so that expectations on all sides are more realistic.
In interpersonal relations and engagements that include inequities in social power and status “intent” and “facts” are irrelevant categories for understanding or for remedying miscommunication and misunderstanding. They are, however, useful categories if ones intent is the maintenance of status, power or privilege. These distinctions are easily understood by those lacking social power or status. To insist that “intent” or “facts” are significant considerations is to miss the point of movements for social justice. The world experienced by those with low access to social power is a very different world from those who wield it. “Intent” and “facts” are tools useful for avoiding the consequences offensive behavior.