Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site kontron.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!pesnta!pertec!kontron!cramer
From: cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.politics
Subject: Re: Discrimination and Affirmative Action
Message-ID: <248@kontron.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 17-Jun-85 15:37:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: kontron.248
Posted: Mon Jun 17 15:37:29 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 19-Jun-85 04:24:54 EDT
References: <480@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP>
Organization: Kontron Electronics, Irvine, CA
Lines: 56
Xref: watmath net.women:5923 net.politics:9465

> I wrote:
> 
> > In my everyday encounters with people, I treat women and blacks
> > somewhat differently from white males, that is, my knowledge of a
> > person's race or sex can and usually does affect my actions in some
> > way.  Part of the reason for this difference is my knowledge that
> > both groups suffer from deep-rooted and tenacious prejudices in our
> > society, and that this is an important factor in the life of each
> > individual woman or black.  This does not mean that I have judged the
> > individual to be better or worse merely because he or she is black or
> > female, and I don't see how it makes me a racist or sexist.
> 
> Clayton Cramer replies:
> 
> > This used to be called "patronizing".  *I* treat everyone as an individual;
> > if I don't know someone, I treat them dependent on the circumstances.
> 
> It's offensive to most netters when someone attributes to them
> beliefs and attitudes that they didn't express.  Cramer's response is
> just mud-slinging, like his repeated statements that affirmative
> action is "racism."  To patronize means to treat with a manner or air
> of condescending notice.  What I stated above was that my knowledge
> of a person's race or sex can influence my actions toward them.  (The
> same is true of everyone reading this:  I doubt that many netters are
> sex-blind in their dating and sex life.)  Nothing in this implies
> condescension or a superior attitude.  Is it condescending to be
> aware, as most of us are, that any woman or black in the US, merely
> because he or she is black or female, is the object of some deeply
> rooted prejudices and discriminatory practices, and that this is a
> significant fact in the lives of most of them?  Cramer seems to say
> that if we let this awareness influence our actions IN ANY WAY, we
> are guilty of patronizing and taking an attitude of superiority to
> blacks and females.  Perhaps the safest thing to do, on this view, is
> simply to forget that blacks and women suffer from racism and sexism
> -- otherwise we are on a slippery slope that leads through
> condescension to the horrors of "reverse discrimination."
> 
Mr. Carnes, you assume that every black or woman in the US has been
victimized by prejudice and discrimination; worse, you assume that they
have experienced the same level of it.  You also assume that white males
have not also experienced prejudice and discrimination, which is false,
even if you ignore the government's actions.

> What does Cramer mean by the phrase "treat everyone as an
> individual"?  Or is this just a question we're not supposed to ask?
> I've been going around today trying to mend my ways and "treat
> everyone as an individual," but I'm damned if I know what to do.
> 
> Richard Carnes

"Treat everyone as an individual": that means I approach people without
preconceived ideas based on their race, sex, national origin.  I'm sorry
that you seem to have trouble approaching people that way.  Do you remember
Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" speech, when he said that he looked
forward to a day when people would not be judged by the color of their
skin?  I'm sorry you've forgotten.