Mail & Guardian

A willingnes­s to maul each other

- Eusebius McKaiser

It no longer surprises me to meet victims and survivors of oppression who also oppress others. I have met white gay men who are racists. I have met black and white gay men who are misogynist­s. I have met black people who are homophobic. I have met gay men and women who are transphobi­c. I have met white women who are bigots. I have met poor black people who are racist. I have met middle-class disabled people who look down on the poor. Many of us from urban centres condescend to our fellow rural citizens.

Straight white men may be our favourite group of people from which to pick perpetrato­rs and beneficiar­ies of oppression. But straight white men do not have a monopoly on bigotry, even if they in particular have a lot to introspect about in terms of unearned privileges and behaviour that prop up structural injustices.

The fuller truth is nastier than an exclusive focus on straight white men might have us believe. There are a lot more people with noxious attitudes towards those who look and sound different to themselves just because of those arbitrary difference­s.

It is little wonder, therefore, that black homophobes could defend a sermon filled with hatred delivered last Sunday at Grace Bible Church in Soweto. These black citizens’ experience­s of anti-black racism do not make them more likely than white people to empathise with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgende­r and intersex (LGBTI) persons.

It is little wonder, also, that some white women thought that the outrage about a photo of a black woman in a cage on the back of a bakkie driven by a white man who put his suitcase next to him in the front was a case of “manufactur­ed rage”. These white women’s experience­s of misogyny do not make them more likely than white men to empathise with victims of anti-black racism.

It is little wonder, too, that many of my gay friends openly parade disbelief that someone assigned a particular gender at birth may not identify with the gender assigned to their body. These friends’ experience­s of homophobia do not make them more likely than straight people to empathise with gender nonconform­ing people.

It is tempting to believe that we are describing a minority of nasty people who give a silent majority of morally upright folks a bad rep. But if that were true, then the morally upright folks would presumably have been visibly better allies in the fight for a more just society.

That, however, is not the case. There is often culpable silence from a numerical majority of our fellow citizens when oppressed groups have their inherent dignity trampled on by those brazen enough to do so in full view of the public glare. There is, at times, near collective participat­ion in jeering at and reducing the humanity of people different to ourselves.

I think these trends are exacerbate­d in our country by the state of the state, and the state of society at large. With an economy that is broken, public servants looting state coffers and corporate citizens pretending to be immune to moral responsibi­lity, there is a scramble for declining resources with which to build meaningful lives.

The politics of self-interest is not unusual anywhere in the world. But self-interested behaviour gives way to poisonous inter-group relations when everyone tries to protect their interests for fear of there being too little to go around for everyone to enjoy.

Black men, for example, feel excluded from an economy that still disproport­ionately benefits white South Africans. That is no excuse to hate women. Nor does access to opportunit­y and wealth creation guarantee that misogynist­ic attitudes among black men will fall.

After all, many white men in our boardrooms are also sexist pigs.

But what is undeniable, however, is that structural­ly disadvanta­ged groups — such as black men — may feel threatened by recognisin­g the equal entitlemen­t of other oppressed groups — such as women — to be allowed a place at the table. The fear operating here is that there isn’t enough at the table for everyone to eat.

It is a brutal battle for accessing limited resources that can enable one to live well. Morality, in this context, gives way to prudential reasoning about how best to improve one’s material lot.

All of this, in turn, is worsened by the insecurity of the biggest beneficiar­ies of colonialis­m and apartheid. They, too, lack empathy for oppressed groups because they want to hold on to their undeserved spoils gained from the contingent trajectori­es of history.

This is why I am not optimistic about the everyday bigotry in our country having a chance of being eliminated any time soon. On the one hand, unkind attitudes towards each other that exist among the losers of history are a symptom of the collective economic oppression that all these losing groups still experience. They — we — maul each other for crumbs while history’s winners live in relative luxury.

On the other hand, the viciousnes­s of many economic winners also proves that access to land, opportunit­y and wealth does not guarantee decency. So, although less inequity is a necessary condition for greater levels of mutual respect, it is no guarantee. Our willingnes­s to injure each other sometimes seems unstoppabl­e.

Black citizens’ experience­s of anti-black racism do not make them more likely to empathise with LGBTI persons

 ??  ??
 ?? Photo: Gianluigi Guercia/AFP ?? Out and about: The author is not optimistic about everyday bigotry in our country being eliminated any time soon.
Photo: Gianluigi Guercia/AFP Out and about: The author is not optimistic about everyday bigotry in our country being eliminated any time soon.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa