(no subject)
Oct. 18th, 2009 04:08 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatIt's funny as time passes, one thing becomes more and more apparent to me - you can't generalize about people. Every generalization I've made ...I discover is wrong, much to my own chagrin and often in the process find that I'm struggling to convey or explain this discovery to someone else who is well making the same error. It's an embarrassing and difficult thing to point out to someone - particularly when their generalization serves as the foundation of a value system or a justification/rationalization - a way of coping. An explanation for behavior patterns that they see and do not understand.
Case in point - I was exchanging emails with my aunt and we were talking about a video I'd found on Facebook - entitled "Knock Knock". The vid was about how we aren't our parents, we are ourselves. We can rise above them. My aunt saw the vid in context of her students. While I saw it in context of well people like her husband, her children, my parents, and others.
I responded about how my father believes that our children are a gift, to us, and not possessions. She responded about how this was an upper/middle class view not a working class view. I thought about telling her that she was wrong about this. But am afraid to. And not sure how to convey it politely.
See...she is of the view that the working class is more abusive to its children, sees them as possessions. That it is usually those from a lower economic sphere that are guilty of these infractions. But, I know from experience that she is wrong. I've had friends who came from wealthy parents that were abused, horribly, in ways you cannot imagine. Class...well, the only difference is it is easier for the wealthy to hide the abuse than it is for the working class. Money has a lot of interesting uses. It may not buy you love but it can buy you secrecy.
I think, unlike my aunt, I've had the odd experience of living in two worlds - as have my parents. And my brother. We lived amongst the poor, the middle class, blue collar, working class, upper middle, and rich. I lived in one of the poorest communities and in one of the wealthiest. Went to one of the worst school districts in the US and one of the best public school districts. I went to a private college and a public university. I've known people who were literally homeless or living day to day, and people who thought nothing of blowing five million on a trip. They aren't as different as one might think. I've also lived in numerous places - and numerous cities, of various sizes and shapes - and people, I've discovered are well, just that, people. Unique. With their own flaws and idiosyncrasies. There's no such thing as perfect. I remember sitting and listening to a French man, lovely guy, tell me in French and in detail his experiences in Vietnam - the French occupation, before the American's did the same dumb thing. Then several years later hearing a similar tale from a relative about his experiences with the Battle of the Bulge. The only differences were the wars, time periods, and language. The experience/emotions and pain were more or less the same.
The older I get the more I think assumptions based on generalizations are flawed. But I do not know how to stop doing it myself.
Case in point - I was exchanging emails with my aunt and we were talking about a video I'd found on Facebook - entitled "Knock Knock". The vid was about how we aren't our parents, we are ourselves. We can rise above them. My aunt saw the vid in context of her students. While I saw it in context of well people like her husband, her children, my parents, and others.
I responded about how my father believes that our children are a gift, to us, and not possessions. She responded about how this was an upper/middle class view not a working class view. I thought about telling her that she was wrong about this. But am afraid to. And not sure how to convey it politely.
See...she is of the view that the working class is more abusive to its children, sees them as possessions. That it is usually those from a lower economic sphere that are guilty of these infractions. But, I know from experience that she is wrong. I've had friends who came from wealthy parents that were abused, horribly, in ways you cannot imagine. Class...well, the only difference is it is easier for the wealthy to hide the abuse than it is for the working class. Money has a lot of interesting uses. It may not buy you love but it can buy you secrecy.
I think, unlike my aunt, I've had the odd experience of living in two worlds - as have my parents. And my brother. We lived amongst the poor, the middle class, blue collar, working class, upper middle, and rich. I lived in one of the poorest communities and in one of the wealthiest. Went to one of the worst school districts in the US and one of the best public school districts. I went to a private college and a public university. I've known people who were literally homeless or living day to day, and people who thought nothing of blowing five million on a trip. They aren't as different as one might think. I've also lived in numerous places - and numerous cities, of various sizes and shapes - and people, I've discovered are well, just that, people. Unique. With their own flaws and idiosyncrasies. There's no such thing as perfect. I remember sitting and listening to a French man, lovely guy, tell me in French and in detail his experiences in Vietnam - the French occupation, before the American's did the same dumb thing. Then several years later hearing a similar tale from a relative about his experiences with the Battle of the Bulge. The only differences were the wars, time periods, and language. The experience/emotions and pain were more or less the same.
The older I get the more I think assumptions based on generalizations are flawed. But I do not know how to stop doing it myself.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-10-18 08:41 pm (UTC)IMO you're not wrong, I've certainly observed that myself.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-18 10:23 pm (UTC)My father was a verbally abusive alcoholic, but it certainly isn't like there are no such people in other classes. He was a very controlling person, but (for a variety of reasons that I have figured out over the years, but have no reason to go into here) far more toward my brothers than toward me. I think he had some of the "I couldn't achieve X, so I want you to do it" regarding my brothers, but that too appears in all classes.
As for seeing children as possessions in the area of expecting them to follow in the parents' footsteps, I think the middle and especially upper classes are far worse than the working class. A man who was my friend in high school, who belonged to the richest family I ever knew personally (and they had social status as well), refers to "the horrors of my upbringing." (ETA: I.e., his, not mine.)
As for physical abuse: the two worst cases I know about among people I know in person were both by men who were professionals, not working class.
Your aunt's idea is, I think, a variant on the idea that spousal abuse happens only in the "lower" classes.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-18 10:44 pm (UTC)I've seen this happen a lot - people from the upper class who romanticize the working class and people from the lower class who romanticize the upper. Then of course there's the groups who demonize the opposite class.
All are guilty of the same thing - making broad generalizations based on their own limited range of experience.
(shrugs)
And yes, you are correct it is a variant on the assumption that spousal abuse happens only in the lower classes. I know for a fact that that is so not true. I know of a woman who had to flee her abusive husband, the woman was a ob-gyn, top of her field, and her husband a leading neurologist, also top of his field. And she was afraid for her life.
Moral: be very careful about making assumptions without all the information...
no subject
Date: 2009-10-18 10:44 pm (UTC)And as to stopping generalizing, knowing that you (not you specifically) do it is the start, and I think we *all* do to varying extents. I think imagining one in another's shoes is still the best way. Perception guides behaviors, and when perceptions change, behaviors hopefully follow.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-19 01:27 am (UTC)eg.
If people with red hair have freckles. And my brother has red hair and has freckles. Then his daughter who has red hair will have freckles.
(Not necessarily - to date, I haven't seen a freckle.)
Or
if vampires are evil without a soul. And Angel was evil without a soul, because Angel is a vampire. Then of course Spike, who is a vampire, is irredeemably evil if he does not have a soul. He must have a soul to be good. And once he does he is good. Just as once Angel has one he is automatically good.
But, what if...
Angel is sometimes evil with a soul. What if Spike is sometimes heroic and good without a soul. What if the soul is unimportant? Meaningless in regards to good or evil? What if there are people like Warren or Willow who have souls who do really horrible things?
Or what if my neice who happens to have red hair never freckles?
Truth is, and this is hard for people to wrap their brains around - sometimes two plus two equals five not four. In math - two plus two always equals four. But in life, maybe not.
I caught myself generalizing the other day = I said the people in one of the departments at work were always lax about getting work to me in a timely manner. This is not true. One or two of the people in a department of fifty, maybe. But certainly not all of them. I'm doing the people who do get work in to me on time, a disservice.
As an aside: I find the personal pronoun "you" frustrating at times. Every time I respond to people, I have to remember to put a qualifier after "you", stating no - I don't mean you personally, I mean you in the general sense or not specifically you. Then throw up my hands in frustration and say...people or
one. LOL!