Thank you for your post, Naveen. You made me think about many important
issues:
- how safe spaces cannot simply be declared but have to be created, like
trust, over time
- how "robust" discussion dominates other values like listening and
attempting to empathize
- how people can act in solidarity by drawing (limited) analogies between
their experiences/position and another's, while also not mistaking those
positions for the same.
Questions of speaking -- who speaks, who listens -- are, despite comments
otherwise, precisely related to privilege. In carol Gilligan's empirical
linguistic work, she pioneered changing how to count what counts as moral
communication. She argued that scoring that privileges robust discussion
privileges men, while scoring that counts listening and statements that
demonstrate care and listening ought to count (and better captures
contributions American women are socialized to make).
Perhaps this list needs a culture of robust care for new positions and
ideas, as much as critical discussion. I certainly should try.
It was a brave and thoughtful post and I bet lots of people heard you, even
though clearly some people did not.
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 9:25 PM Naveen Bagalkot <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I have been a ‘silent’ member of this email list since some years now,
> except for sharing some job or workshop announcements. And may a debates
> and discussions have gone by and I have remained silent.
> But not anymore.
> This list has been a source of a lot of information for me, and as a young
> researcher attempting to navigate the waters of design research it has been
> a great resource.
> But not anymore.
> And I see that the problem lies in the fact that most of us do not
> understand what is privilege, or even if we do we are unwilling to see our
> own privileges. Which to me is not only surprising because as design
> academics and researchers we are supposed to be driven by ‘empathy’ but
> also scary that we miss the most fundamental aspect shaping not only ours,
> but also our students’ lives and experiences!
> Here is my attempt to unpack privilege a bit, with the hope that those who
> are blind to their own privilege open up to the possibility that it exists,
> and that this blindness and unwillingness to see it is harming this space.
> I will be mostly drawing specific examples from Prof. João Ferreira’s
> statements, but this is not personal. As in this is not an attempt to
> merely point at that person (I think he has been called out here and on
> other platforms), but to use his statements as examples to highlight his
> privileged position and how it harms this space.
>
> But before I get to the concrete statements, let me bring in other
> statements to highlight that the unwillingness to see privilege is
> structural, and hence more than any one person, the moderators and the
> general so-called liberal expectations of a ‘civilized exchange between
> multiple truths’ that are detrimental to this space.
> Let me begin with this statement that Prof. Ken Friedman made in response
> to Layal and Luiza.
> *I want to say to Layal that this list *is* a safe place in which to engage
> in a discussion on these issues. No one has the right to prevent you from
> speaking your mind. People do have the right to take a contrary view or to
> criticise your position — but no one on this list is going to adversely
> influence your future or your opportunities because you state a view.*
>
> And here is the problem. Just because you or any other person says or
> thinks that the list is “safe” because these are merely words and seemingly
> civilized exchanges, does not make this space safe. Because your position
> assumes that people here are all equally empowered. They are simply not. As
> the scheme of things work in this world, a white, male senior professor in
> a western university is more privileged than a black or brown, younger
> researcher in other parts of the world. More privileged if the other person
> is a female as compared to male.
>
> By privileged I mean that they have more likely chances to be heard and
> taken seriously, without interruptions and condescending attempts to shut
> down. In other words, the social and cultural structures around us give
> some of us more voice and agency than others, usually based on our race,
> gender, caste, and other such human markers and identities.
>
> Consider a white, male, and seemingly senior professor says these words,
> *I assume that the context of the workshop is western democratic countries;
> if so, it is granted (hopefully) that we all (well, maybe not Donald Trump)
> strive for a just society, a laudable principle that in our
> social-democratic states evolved to a political system based on the ideas
> of separation of powers (legislative, executive, and judiciary) upholding
> of individual freedom(s), egalitarianism, and so on.*
> As a brown, Indian, male researcher, this prof is telling me that my
> culture and my country do not strive for a just society, but only the
> western democratic countries do. So, western democratic countries do not
> need social justice, but the so called under-developed countries do. Isn't
> this an imposition of his thoughts on mine? On this email list, is he not
> stating this as a white, male, senior professor of design?
>
> And if I respond, as Luiza did, I will get more justification of such
> statements, not only by the person who said it, but also by others who feel
> that he is merely expressing his opinion and I have the right to disagree
> with it. Consider this response by Prof. João Ferreira
> *Hold it right there, Luiza. Are you under the delusion that I live in
> Saudi Arabia? Or Iran? If not, can you explain in what way is Europe a
> patriarchy?*
> I, as a brown, Indian researcher just about figuring out my space in this
> world, is made to be felt ashamed of my country by such statements. Not
> only that such sentences by white, male, seemingly senior professor make me
> feel insecure of my own culture, they also impose on me a world-view that
> the western / European culture (a monolith?) is superior to mine. This is
> not only false, but also hurtful, and silencing. In my shame, I am
> compelled to shut-up. It is not just opinion, is it? This is knowingly or
> unknowingly an attempt to silence. We need to see it as such.
>
> You could argue that these statements were taken out of context. My
> response is simply that they are not. As a reader of this mailing list, I
> see them in my inbox daily. I read them. That is the context. These
> statements will be deemed silencing, if not oppressive, even when the
> setting is a private exchange, but on a public forum, with a heterogeneous
> mix of readers, they are highly excluding and oppressive.
>
> And hence I am grateful to all those who stood up to such blatant attempts
> at silencing both by such explicit statements and by the attempts to
> justify and defend or rather wave these off as mere opinions and one
> version of the truth. I hope to see more such voices.
>
> Seeing ones own privileges is not really that hard. I know that as an upper
> caste male, educated in a PhD from a western university is much privileged
> here in India even while compared to similarly highly educated female
> colleague. Because in general, the world around me, and not only in India
> but also in the so-called democratic western world, an educated,
> dispassionate male voice usually laced with sarcasm carries more weight
> among peers than an educated, but passionate female voice.
> I too was blind to my privileges till I started acknowledging it. I started
> seeing who is the other person I am talking to and where do they and their
> voice stand, structurally – socially, culturally in the given settings of
> our exchange. In most cases my voice seem to carry more weight than theirs.
> So I made it and I continue to make it point to listen more to what they
> are saying. Even a slight hint that they feel unsafe talking or expressing
> in front of me, I apologize and try to learn how to engage better. I do not
> feel offended and attempt to defend myself thereby furthering my position
> of power over them.
>
> I will end this longish rant by drawing on, ironically, Prof. João
> Ferreira’s words.
> *This is a real problem indeed. I don’t know enough about it to have an
> educated opinion on the matter, since it is extremely complex.*
>
> If only we all had the same approach to whenever we come across terms,
> concepts, and phenomenon, and we took care to understand who is saying
> them, and why, then this list and actually the world too will be a better
> place for all.
>
> Best,
> Naveen
>
>
> --
> Naveen L Bagalkot, Ph.D.
> Researcher & Faculty Member
> Srishti Institute of Art, Design, and Technology.
> Bangalore
> http://srishti.ac.in/ <http://labs.srishti.ac.in>
>
> "This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
> confidential and exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
> distribution or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> have erroneously received this message, please delete it immediately and
> notify the sender. Thank you."
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
