
Shut Up and Listen - unalone
http://whatever.scalzi.com/2011/09/06/shut-up-and-listen/
======
Anechoic
A textbook example from a Reddit thread: in a conversation about college, one
poster lamented the existence of women's and minority groups (like the Society
of Women Engineers or the National Society of Black Engineers) that exclude
white males. A second poster pointed out that those organizations don't
exclude white males, and in some cases white males are actively courted. The
third poster responded to the effect of "sure, they let white males join, but
I attended a NSBE meeting one and I was the only white guy in the room. As the
only white guy I was extremely uncomfortable and that discomfort was basically
the same as not welcoming white guys."

I don't think this poster was a racist or a bad guy, just someone that didn't
realize how his privilege colored his perceptions, or how the privilege (or
lack thereof) of others can affect _their_ perceptions.

~~~
steveklabnik
Do you have a link to that? I'd love to be able to show that to others.

~~~
Anechoic
Ugh, I'll see if I can find it, I don't even remember what the original topic
was.

edit - found it:
[http://www.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/184uh5/as_a_w...](http://www.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/184uh5/as_a_white_male_attending_university_i_should/c8botsc)

Looks like that post was heavily downvoted. You can read up the parent chain
to see the other posts I referenced.

~~~
steveklabnik
Thank you. It's almost too good to be true.

By the way, to 'read up the comment chain,' you can add '?context=3' to add
the top 3 posts. Like this:
[http://www.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/184uh5/as_a_w...](http://www.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/184uh5/as_a_white_male_attending_university_i_should/c8botsc?context=5)

~~~
Anechoic
Thank, I'll remember that for future Reddit links.

------
jellicle
That's a good old post by Scalzi, but the people who most need to pay
attention to it are the ones least likely to pay attention to it.

EDIT: He also has a current post: [http://whatever.scalzi.com/2013/03/21/two-
simple-observation...](http://whatever.scalzi.com/2013/03/21/two-simple-
observations-regarding-women/)

~~~
Steuard
There's hope, though: every time a link like this is posted, a few of the
folks who haven't had their "ah-ha!" moments yet may get nudged in that
direction (just as the commenter he quotes did). Those nudges do have an
effect, and they do add up. Or at least, they did for me.

I just wish there was a way to make it happen _faster_.

~~~
mkr-hn
It took a few times for me, but it happened on forums and Twitter many months
ago.

------
jiggy2011
I think that the biggest privilege one can have, at least when it comes to
matters of career and finance is being born to middle-class or better parents
and having an above average IQ.

I would imagine a lesbian black woman with an Ivy league education has much
greater odds of success than a straight white guy from the trailer park/slum
who struggles with reading/writing skills.

I find it interesting that it is generally considered correct and fair that
somebody has better income and quality of life because of high intelligence
when this is a factor as much outside your control as race or gender.

~~~
beatpanda
But the point is, you're just imagining those things, which is what causes you
to set up this neat little world where a black lesbian has an Ivy League
education just because she's smart, ignoring all of the extra obstacles that
would be in her way compared to someone with more social privilege.

You're able to do this by comparing different kinds of circumstances — the
person born with white and male privilege but little money or academic skill
(and indeed, these are handicaps!), and the person born into the world with
similar handicaps, _who has already overcome them,_ preventing us from
actually comparing their circumstances.

When oppressed people reach recognizable pinnacles of success, like an Ivy
League education, it's because they worked _harder_ than lots of other people
might have had to, despite other advantages they might have had.

~~~
btilly
_When oppressed people reach recognizable pinnacles of success, like an Ivy
League education, it's because they worked harder than lots of other people
might have had to, despite other advantages they might have had._

That would be better than the world we have.

Until I moved to the USA and observed the process first hand at an Ivy League
school, I would never have credited the claim that there are people whose
whole lives are based on having won the affirmative action lottery, and then
playing the race card. This ticks me off, because having known such people I
can no longer discount the possibility that any FUTURE minority person that I
meet with the trappings of success is one of them. Most aren't. Most got there
on their own merits, against all odds. But the nature of business is that a
bad hire frequently costs much more than the opportunity cost of waiting to
make the right hire. And that pushes you to not give the benefit of the doubt.

In particular I witnessed watching a black woman who had played the race card
her whole life getting kicked out with a masters in math despite objectively
knowing less math than I expected from undergrads. At the same time a much
more competent white man who had a block in ONE subject area (and enormous
success in many others) would have been kicked out with no degree at all if I
had not taken a month of my personal time out to teach him all of topology.
And a third person, an undergraduate black from England who had never received
any preference, took an extra quarter to finish a well-earned masters on top
of his BSc.

All three frustrate me in different ways. I hated seeing the ridiculously easy
qual she was given compared to the rest of us, in written take home format
yet, with a blind eye turned towards the fact that she was begging other grad
students to do it for her. At the same time a student who had worked much
harder and done much more got no breaks at all from the system. And in
parallel I saw a truly deserving minority student, and know that for the rest
of his life upon first meeting someone like him, I'll need to unfairly suspect
his deserved accomplishments until I know him better.

Yes, I recognize the historical injustice. Yes, I recognize the barriers. But
our current affirmative action policies give some a lottery ticket at the cost
of perpetuating the problems into future generations. That's not what we need
to do.

~~~
mtrimpe
I'm not American but don't you have the same problem with rich kids whose
parents donate buildings to get their kids through school?

If so, do you also discount the trappings of success of every person that
looks like he could have rich parents?

~~~
jack-r-abbit
Is there really a problem in the US with a huge number of people donating
buildings to schools to get their kids in? I did not realize this happens on a
large enough scale to make that an actual issue.

~~~
GHFigs
It's less literal than that.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_admission>

~~~
jack-r-abbit
Ah, yes. In a broader sense that probably is a bit more of an issue.

------
cantastoria
Great, another guilt ridden diatribe against John Scalzi from John Scalzi.
I've never read someone who is more obsessed about being a "privileged white
male" than he is. I wish he would take his own advice or at least the first
part of it. I'm not going bother arguing with him because really what's the
point, this self-flagellation obviously gets him off and as usual it's all
about him. Is "self-hating narcissist" a thing?

~~~
scotch_drinker
Self-flagellation? I went back to make sure I didn't miss anything but it
looks like a post about understanding your privilege and how your success
relates to it. It's a post about understanding the depth of experience that
other people live with, experiences he has not had because of that privilege.

~~~
resu_nimda
It seems that a trend is developing of labeling earnest introspection as
"self-flagellation." See my comment at
<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5375270> for an identical situation on a
different subject. I don't want to make assumptions, but are people really
that hostile to the idea of openly questioning oneself?

(I'm speaking specifically of the HN community, obviously the answer for the
general public is a resounding "yes")

------
beachstartup
the example of walking through a dark parking lot to demonstrated 'straight
white privilege' is pretty shitty. in fact it's probably the worst example you
could choose.

his 'privilege' of not worrying about being assaulted comes from the fact that
he is 6' 280 pounds, not because he's white or male or straight. a big gay
black man (or woman, for that matter) of the same stature probably doesn't
feel that twinge of fear his petite asian female colleage felt walking through
a dark parking lot.

smaller/shorter straight white guys still have to worry about getting beaten
up or bullied or robbed. in fact bullying it's kind of a wide spread problem
these days affecting everyone.

in my experience most straight white guys have no problem understanding their
privilege in society, i work with a lot of them and they joke around about how
being a "white dude" is awesome. it certainly doesn't suck. lots of these guys
grew up in diverse neighborhoods or went to school with people from different
backgrounds so they have heard stories or seen first hand how people different
from themselves go about life. anyone with average IQ and

however, there are some that _just don't get it_ and no amount of reading blog
posts is going to help them understand, it just takes time (age) and personal
experience. or they're just a couple of IQ points below the threshold it takes
to think about these things in an abstract manner (beyond "my life is all that
exists in this world.")

~~~
shardling
I am a 5'6" white guy weighing 120lb. I don't feel fear walking through dark
parking lots. The shortest path between my house and the closest grocery is
through a large, poorly lit lot. The better lit street route would add, oh,
about a minute to the walk.

I would _absolutely_ not walk through there if I was a woman. I don't really
mind the small chance of being robbed -- a small chance of being raped is a
completely different thing.

~~~
beachstartup
"small chance of being robbed"

do it in a bad neighborhood at the wrong time/place and this turns into "large
chance of being cornered, beaten for being white/outsider/unknown, robbed, and
if you put up any resistance, killed."

all your anecdote tells me is you don't venture far from your own safety
zones.

my point is a bank, board room, police station, or any number of other places
is a MUCH BETTER place to illustrate the "white, straight, male" privilege
that exists.

~~~
sophacles
Sure, but when relating a personal story about it, you have to go with what
you got.

For the record here's mine:

I was the white employee at a hip hop club. The owner was black, as were my co
workers. The clientele of the club was mostly black. I was a manager, but the
owner was there most nights too - making me not the senior person. The cops
were there a lot waiting outside to harass people leaving. I saw an awful lot
of cops fucking with people for minor things, that the same cops didn't even
glance at in other parts of town [1]. Incidents like fights were met with
forceful reactions by the police - full out "lay on the ground and get cuffed"
responses to small brawls, but worse fights at the other bar, the response was
"hey break it up, go home, and don't come back tonight". This gave me an
inkling to privilege.

Then one night some hoodlums were causing a lot of mischief in the street out
front and the cops initiated a full on riot response. Woah - tear gas, arrests
everywhere, 40+ cops. Again, the last time I saw something on the same scale
of disturbance on campus, it was 5 cops, a couple of arrests, and a "disperse
and go home" on loop on the PA. During the riot response, I was standing in
the entryway with my boss, the club owner. The cops came up and tried to usher
me to safety and arrest my boss for loitering. It took a lot of effort on my
part to find a cop who would listen to the fact that the guy wasn't loitering,
he was standing on his property for sane business reasons. That was privilege
right there.

The other thing I constantly encountered was that delivery people, job
applicants and so on, always assumed I was in charge, no matter if I was
sweeping or counting money, and no matter if the boss was sweeping or counting
money. In well over 75% of cases, it was just assumed I was the boss. Again,
privilege. (I mean seriously, I dressed like a bum, and the bos had style. It
was absurd).

[1] All my cop behavior comparisons are based on the job i had before that
working at a college bar in the same town, closer to campus, where the
clientele was mostly white college kids.

------
127
This is silly. Just because Scalzi has problems with listening to what people
are saying, does not mean that everyone else has. Also, just because it's good
to listen, emphatize and understand where people are coming from, it's not
good for anyone to just stand there and take abuse. Nip it in the bud. Don't
feed the trolls. Respect people who respect you. If people are silent and
don't share their feelings and opinions, ask them questions, get them engaged
into the conversation. Be a builder, feed constructive, respectful discussion.

Assuming that everybody has something worth listening to makes a huge,
fallacious assumption that simply causes you undue suffering. People use words
to inform. People also use words to manipulate and gain power over someone.
Recognize the difference. You will feel much better and be a much more
effective communicator.

Just because the only way you understand discussion is in order to share
information and discuss things logically, someone else may just use words to
try and twist your mind, use whatever dirty tactic to gain an advantage over
you, or over a group. They don't care about logic, they don't care about
information, they don't care about fairness. Only thing in their mind is
power. Recognize.

~~~
mistercow
>Just because Scalzi has problems with listening to what people are saying,
does not mean that everyone else has.

Yes, but I can assure you that when it comes to discussing privilege, well,
yes, everyone else does have.

~~~
127
Privilege is a heavily loaded word that is difficult to use in context of
contructive discussion. You are by default swallowing the feminist bait and
playing by their rules. Making it impossible to gain any ground because of
fallacious, circular logic.

I'm not denying that privilege exist at all. I'm just saying that how it's
understood and used is heavily biased and politicized. It would be much more
productive to discuss about topics without resorting to feminist dogma.

~~~
resu_nimda
FWIW, I found Scalzi's post to be much more constructive (not to mention well-
written) than whatever agenda you're pushing here, which is coming across as
fairly toxic...

It seems pretty clear that people's obliviousness to their own privilege is a
much bigger problem than too many people "swallowing the feminist bait."

------
revelation
The concept of privilege only makes sense on a statistical basis. Whats the
obsession with constantly applying it to single persons? That speaks to a
fundamental misunderstanding. If being white is correlated with being high-
earning, that doesn't mean every white is high-earning. That is just not the
implication.

~~~
shardling
That's not what the concept of privilege means, though!

------
jack-r-abbit
I guess I'm the only person that has had the "privilege" of being physically
assaulted, several times... in separate states, and harassed and threatened
for no other reason than being white. Yay privileged white me! Or maybe the
only one that was denied financial aid because my father (not me... my
father... single father even) was about $1K over the cut off. Damn him for
working that second job and getting a few extra hours of overtime. If only
he'd not been such a hard worker, he would have made just a tiny bit less and
I could have qualified for assistance. However, this was my dad's money they
were counting... not mine. _I_ didn't have money. It would have been nice if
my totally (not) rich dad had been able to help me with college. Yay
privileged white me! And then there was a whole set of grants I could not even
apply for because I was white. Yay privileged white me! And then there is the
law about making sure that all groups were proportionally represented in
schools and jobs, regardless of qualifications. Yay privileged white me!

Not everyone in this perceived "privileged" class gets dealt aces. Not that it
has to be some competition about who has the harder life (sure... you win that
prize)... but some of us actually do get the shaft plenty and have to power
through it like everyone else. But you can choose to use it as an excuse or
you can choose to use it as inspiration. I chose inspiration! I don't complain
about it [except in cases like this. ;)] or use it to dismiss the plights of
others. I studied and earned an academic scholarship to partially fund my
schooling. I worked nights and weekends to pay rent like everyone else. I
worked hard to get where I am. And sure, people will just dismiss that and
point a link to that "White Male: Lowest Difficulty Level in Life" article.
Those people are hypocrites. If your whole argument is "You don't know what
it's like" and "Don't judge me until you've walked a mile in my shoes" then
you are not allowed to judge me until you've walked in my shoes either. I shut
up and listen plenty and mostly what I hear is "Oh poor me and the tough hand
I was dealt... I need to tell everyone else to shut up and listen to me
because they can't possibly know the hardships I've seen." My "privileged" ass
will shut up now. But shutting up and listening is not reserved only for
"privileged whites." We'll gladly share that with anyone willing.

~~~
prawks
I think the OP was discussing more privilege in general, and using the
stereotypical straight white male as an example. I agree with you that this is
obviously a stereotype, but I don't think the OP used it as anything but just
that. Your example speaks volumes about shutting up and listening, both by
people of all backgrounds, and to people of all backgrounds.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
Sure, I get that. But just like many other things, talking about stereotypes
is generally looked upon as racist (or genderist, etc)... unless it is a white
stereotype and then it's just fine because apparently we deserve it. Somehow
along the way (probably due to the sins of our fathers) we've been shackled
with some gross double standards that make it really difficult to take it all
seriously. Hypocrisy is rampant.

------
tehwalrus
Rather than thinking of different perspectives (which the author mentions in
the last paragraph), I like to think of the list of facts I know as divided
into two categories:

"the things which I think are actually true, based on data I've obtained from
_lots_ of first hand witnesses and, perhaps, first hand"

"the things which I dreamed up in my head, which allow me to tell a narrative
about a phenomenon, but about which there are other people who _actually know_
the real answer if I can only find and listen to them."

This is mostly so I can fit an anti-relativist empiricist worldview into one
where I have to listen to other people (especially when they're talking about
interesting things) - i.e. while the universe (and morality) are
deterministic, I have not measured everything about them yet (and I will never
finish this task).

Also my chronic fear of embarrassment in unfamiliar social groups is helpful
in making me shut up and listen for a while, and generally stops me
contributing where I would "show my ass" as the OP says (although, as a white,
straight, cis-male with too many qualifications, I tend to speak up and make a
fool of myself depressingly often in spite of this.)

------
Sambdala
Even giving all benefit of the doubt, what's the solution then?

If you don't personally treat anyone differently based on attributes outside
their control, what else are you obligated to do?

~~~
stormbrew
Looking for a 'solution' is the wrong angle to take. There is no easy answer
to any question that involves privilege. You can't make a decision about how
it can be fixed and just fix it. It's an ongoing process and a living
conversation.

That's why he says that it's not just about shutting up when you're called out
on your privilege, it's also about listening. Accept that there are things in
the world, and positions people are in, that you can't just argue out of
existence.

~~~
mikecane
People are all privileged in different ways and in different circumstances. I
think this idea is what tends to get swept under the rug when pointing to some
overarching Privilege.

~~~
mikecane
Sure, you can downvote me but any married man will tell you that it's always
best to have the _wife_ ask for something from someone else because women are
perceived as being "nicer" and usually get such favors. When men ask, it's
either intimidating to a woman or invokes a power trip with another man.

~~~
unalone
People who talk a lot about "patriarchy" will point out that a society in
which men are made out to be strong and aggressive and dominant doesn't just
hurt women. It hurts all the men who would rather be reasonable and mild-
mannered and effeminate too.

That's not evidence against there being a systemic imbalance. It's further
proof of it.

~~~
mikecane
>>>That's not evidence against there being a systemic imbalance.

I never said nor intended to imply there wasn't. But there's imbalance in
_every_ system too. Which now makes it sound like I'm saying "Just shut up,"
which is really why I tend to avoid discussions like this because they become
No Win. For everyone. Gah.

~~~
unalone
Haha, indeed. Nobody here feels victorious. It's a lot of trekking through mud
all around.

Anyway, I think that the fact that systems have imbalance is why we need to
talk frequently about _what_ imbalance exists, and how we might fix it. It's
also why we should stop this irritating habit of turning everything into a
system of processes and functions that don't allow for human error. Plenty of
people in the tech community think that a series of rules is the end-all be-
all cure to every problem, and refuse to admit that rules often cause as many
problems as they solve. Learning to listen and empathize with other people is
a more valuable trait than ever, because there are more ways than ever to get
away with not doing it.

~~~
mikecane
I think to cut to the chase: Put yourself in someone else's shoes.

People used to be taught that. They need to be again.

------
cousin_it
Is "shut up and listen" a more winning group strategy than "keep telling
others about our grievances"?

~~~
hurfdurferson
Fallacy of the excluded middle. NEXT.

------
rdtsc
When our brains encounter certain issues (politics, religion, racial issues,
favorite editor) it automatically goes on the defensive and start filtering
out everything and starts immediately thinking how to come up with bullet
points to deflect the arguments. That prevents us from listening.

With respect to those kind of topics there are very few if any who can
approach it with a clean slate. So it takes considerable effort to try to
ignore all that baggage and listen.

~~~
danielweber
Yeah, and lots of people think it's only The Other Side that does it. But most
of us are wired to be tribal. Our Side does it, too. In fact, each of us
ourselves likely does it.

It's good to have friends with a wide variety of political beliefs.

------
munificent
The older I get, the more I realize two very fundamental facts:

 _People are remarkably different._

Like Clementine in the referenced comment, I'm continually astonished at how
_different_ the experience of being someone else is from mine even in an
ostensibly identical environment. Just walking in a room can be a remarkably
different experience for someone beautiful, ugly, female, disabled, etc.

 _People are remarkably similar._

I see people do stuff that seems patently dumb are totally counter to how I
would do things or how I feel. But as I learn more about the person, I
invariably realize what they're doing makes much more sense in context than I
originally realized. Much of the difference amounts to differing priorities or
background. Much of the core human psychology leading to the behavior is the
same.

I'm still trying to figure out how to reconcile these two observations, but
the big one for me is to try harder to learn where someone is coming from,
what their experiences and background are.

------
theorique
Who is John Scalzi and why should I listen to him scolding people?

~~~
epochwolf
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Scalzi>

~~~
theorique
Well, that's the literal answer. I guess my question is more of a rhetorical
one - why does he take this rude, scolding, authoritative tone with his
readers?

------
andyl
Yet another HN article on Social Engineering.

~~~
unalone
I enjoy this weird HN approach of taking ordinary life, applying weirdass
labels to everything, and then trying to somehow "optimize" all of the various
little categories.

This is about treating other people like their grievances are legitimate, and
accepting that your own perspective on the world is not the only one that
exists. "Social Engineering"? really?

~~~
nollidge
Viewing the world through cynicism-colored glasses.

~~~
mikecane
OK, I object to the misuse of the term "cynic."

[http://mikecane2008.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/in-praise-of-
th...](http://mikecane2008.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/in-praise-of-the-cynic/)

Cynics would point to the very things Scalzi does.

~~~
nollidge
For better or worse, the word "cynic" has changed meaning over time. My usage
matches definition #1 here:

[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cynic?r=75&src=re...](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cynic?r=75&src=ref&ch=dic)

~~~
mikecane
That matters not to Cynics and is only proof of the very corruption we mock.

~~~
unalone
There's something ironic about a cynic, in the classic sense of "question
everything and undermine assertions", protesting the corruption of his own
self-declared title. ;-)

~~~
mikecane
The Ironics are a different school of thought.

