my mouth is a fire escape

PerfectStorm​(masochist female) - #FACTS

Bunnie - So Gandhi chose the side of the oppressors?
Perhaps we all have a different definition of what “neutral” means.

Bunnie - Bullies never see that they’re bullies because they always hide behind a cause... that is what I don’t support.

simplylaura​(sub female){djinni} - Ghandi was actually an abusive racist, so yes he did. He did engage in civil disobedience, which is hardly neutral. He picked a side. Neutral means "all lives matter" bullshit. There is no room for neutrality in this. You either support wide spread systemic change or you support racism. There are also many levels of creating change. Some are in the streets, some are behind closed doors working on policy. But to stay neutral is to stick your head in the sand and fail to acknowledge what is going on and what you are complicit in. I am not perfect at this, anyone who engages in legit anti-racist work acknowledges that they are not perfect.

Neutrality is privilege. Plain and simple.

simplylaura​(sub female){djinni} - Btw, neutrality is literally defined as "not helping or supporting either side in a conflict, disagreement, etc." in the OED.

Bunnie - So how does neutral become the side of the oppressor again?

simplylaura​(sub female){djinni} - Perhaps you should look into apartheid in South Africa, which is where this quote from Archbishop Tutu came out of. People remained neutral, didn't take a stance and black people remained oppressed for years. Germans ignored Hitlers rise to fascism by remaining neutral. These were good citizens. People who cares about their country.

By not taking a stand, picking a side, you are saying that you don't care what the people being oppressed are experiencing. That is de facto siding with the oppressor.

Bunnie - “By not taking a stand, picking a side, you are saying”... actually no... that is what *you* are saying my personal stance means. You were welcome to ask why I may choose what you like to call “neutrality” and which I call “trying to instigate change using a different mindset than that which created the problems in the first place,” however, the above quote is based on assumption and bullying... or emotionally guilting people into choosing what you think is right, so I’m wondering if discussion is something you might be open to.

Perhaps there are more than two options. Narrow thinking keeps our options rather limited does it not? I don’t see it as solely this specific topic that needs to be shifted... but the mindset behind it. Take a close look at the “opposing” sides shouting at each other... and switch their words. Do they seem so different from each other?

I agree we need change, and we’re in a great place to instigate it... if it comes from a place of love and not fear. The only thing fear instigates is hate and separation.

simplylaura​(sub female){djinni} - You're right I'm saying that. Because I value change happening more than I value your feelings. It's true. We've had years to come to place of agreement through love and it hasn't worked (taking a knee ring a bell?). I'm absolutely open to discussion. I actually teach on this topic. What I'm not open to is passive aggression.

Bunnie - Obviously I failed to clarify anything of what I was trying to say. I’ll leave you in peace. Good luck to you :)

djinni​(dom female){smplylaura} - Gandhi was not neutral. He engaged in civil disobedience against British rule in India.

Bishop​(dom male) - By civil disobedience, he took a very “passive”, non-aggressive stance. He never condoned violence, to my knowledge. I also don’t think things have to be so divided, either we think this way or that way. Isn’t that trying to bully someone into taking a particular stance that fits a certain narrative? I am certainly not neutral, I stand up against all injustices that I can. I choose not to see skin color or decide to help based on ethnicity or job profession. I do not support racism of any kind, and as far as law enforcement goes, I support retraining to a higher standard and removing those from their jobs if they are racist or show brutality.

simplylaura​(sub female){djinni} - I hear you and respect that. However, being color blind doesn't take into consideration that other people have to wake up and be treated differently on the basis of their skin color. You may not be actively racist, but there are plenty of people and systems that are not.

I used to think that same way, for example that labeling myself as a lesbian wasn't important. Until the first time I was walking down the street and someone yelled out "dyke" and chucked a soda at me. I realized that I live in a world that sees my short hair and masculine clothes and makes assumptions based off that. So i became very involved in the local queer community because I needed to be around other people who have been hated for who they are. Queers have never wanted special treatment, we just want equity. The same with people of color.

Regarding the looting and violence, given that there are a lot of reports of these protests being infiltrated by people who are intentionally starting it to discredit BLM and the cause, I'm not sure exactly where I stand. I am not a violent person and it hurts me to see people's homes, businesses, and property being destroyed. But I also know that I have been so angry before that I have broken things or thrown things or whatever. I think most people have. So I can understand when violence erupts where it's coming from.

This is a complicated issue, but one that I firmly believe we have to take a stance on. I work in affordable housing, an industry that was literally borne out of racism (redlining, white flight all led to the projects being built) so in a way I engage in a system that is racist. Which means that I need to remain intentional about everything I say and everything I do because as an educated white woman my voice is valued, so I need to make sure policies are actively anti-racist. I don't hate cops, my dad was a cop and he was my favorite person ever. When he died, they are the ones who took care of my mom. But like me, they work within a system that is historically and currently racist. It doesn't make them bad people, it just puts the honus on them to work to change the system. Thank you for engaging. I believe in choosing sides when it comes to this stuff, but I also think respectful dialog is what allyship is built on. I'm actually an incredibly "grey" thinker so it takes a lot for me to choose sides.

Bishop​(dom male) - I assume you're both referring to the idea of "white" privilege? Not trying to stir anything up, just a question to clarify.

simplylaura​(sub female){djinni} - Yep. Other kinds certainly play into this but white privilege is what I'm referring to.

Bishop​(dom male) - Ok

Sunshinegirl​(sub female) - Look people, here’s what her post meant. I will use a scenario that’s so basic my 9 year old sister could understand. I’m sure you 30+ folks can get this through your head. Scenario: You’re walking home minding your own business when all of the sudden you see a helpless person being abused over and over again by another. You have two choices, tell the abuser to STOP/implement other methods to stop the abuser, or you continue walking home. When you SAY nothing and DO nothing to stop the abuser, you become a BYSTANDER. A bystander by google definition: a person who is present at an event or incident but does not take part. When you become a BYSTANDER, you allow the abuser to CONTINUE the abuse. THEREFOR, as a BYSTANDER, have chosen the side of the abuser.
In this scenario, let’s say, the person being abused DIES. Of course the first thing as the bystander to come out of your mouth is, “Well I didn’t kill him/her!” It’s not MY fault!”
This is correct in the fact that you as a bystander didn’t land the deadly blows. But you ENABLED the abuser to continue because you chose to do nothing.
Now apply this scenario to the current civil issues. You are a white person and you see another white person, which in this movement, is the POLICE, shooting/stabbing/kneeling on the neck of an innocent black man (aka Mr. Floyd). If you say NOTHING, DO nothing, to help save this black man then you SIDE with the white abuser (the police). There are many seemingly “harmless” ways to side with the abuser:
1. “All lives matter”- takes away from the point of the movement. Yes dipshit, we know all lives matter. We know other colors and groups face their own issues. But this movement is focused on BLACK lives which are in EXTREME danger every single day, and this needs to change!
2. “I don’t see color” It is something white people say when they get uncomfortable. Nope. I want you to see color. I want you to see 400+ years of second class citizenship and dehumanizing treatment. I want you to feel like absolute garbage. Then, when you are uncomfortable because you SEE color and what that color has meant for that person and their family for generations, that’s when change happens. When people are uncomfortable.
3. “All police aren’t bad” Like the bystander in my above scenario, while the bystander didn’t land the blows, the bystander still let it happen, which makes them a pretty bad person. All bystanders, like all police, are bad because they stand alongside a corrupt institution that continues to harm black people because of the color of their skin. If cops had demanded institutional changes from within so that the INDIVIDUAL racist cops are fired/let go/put on desk duty, along with implementing more training and psych evaluations (to see if they’re a racist POS) this entire issue of blacks vs police wouldn’t be happening. Instead, all cops just shrugged their shoulders and said “it’s someone else’s job”. (This is called Bystander Effect by the way. Look it up and read about the “Kitty” Genovese case).

There are so many other examples. But I’m mentally and emotionally exhausted from typing this. It’s sad that I have to educate obviously brainwashed and/or incredibly ignorant adults who are sometimes twice my age.
I hope you start to educate yourself on how/why things happen.

And I hope this ridiculously long comment CLARIFIES SL’s original post.