Intersectionality and privilege

I'd never be told to ‘check my privilege’ before. It was an eye opener.

 

It came about because I was challenged to think about intersectionality.

 

Inter-what?? Intersectionality has several meanings, all of which include a sense that ‘just because we are all X, it doesn’t mean we experience being X the same way’. Most meanings of intersectionality also talk of stigma and oppression, and how the totality of who we are will affect how we experience oppression in relation to any characteristic. For example, most writing about Black oppression is written from a man’s perspective, but Black oppression may be experienced very differently by a woman. Most writing about oppression of women is written from a White perspective, but oppression for being a woman may be experienced very differently if you are Black. Most writing about being disabled is written from a White man’s perspective and that’s not terribly helpful if you are a disabled Black woman.

 

You see, I have a number of stigmatising characteristics.

• I'm fat.
• I'm a woman (and to make that more stigmatising, I don't even behave like one - I don't wear make up or do my hair or nails).
• I have a long term mental health condition (entertainingly my other selves reject the ‘mental health condition’ label - we rather enjoy being a collective).
• I have a number of physical health problems that interfere with everyday life.
• I don't have a career or a proper job.
• I’m over 50

But despite those stigmas, I don't seem to experience the oppression that many people with one or more of those characteristics experience.

 

It's possible I've internalised oppression (so don't see oppression for what it is). And it's possible that I am in denial or that I subconsciously use avoidance tactics to make sure in never in a situation where those characteristics are relevant.

 

But I genuinely think I have avoided being oppressed (even though I have definitely come across people/circumstances that would have oppressed me - if I'd let them).

 

Pause, think:  If I'd let them….

 

And that's why I need to check my privilege. How privileged am I if I can avoid being oppressed?

 

I have a number of non-stigmatised characteristics, some of which confer privileges in contemporary Welsh culture.

• I'm white 
• I'm middle class  
• I’m well-educated 
• I speak (some) Welsh 
• I may be a woman, but I went to a majority boys independent school where I was never encouraged to see myself as different from the boys  
• I have a comfortable income (courtesy of husband) - oh, yes, there's another, I'm married to a man. 
• I'm not a carer of young children or older or disabled family members. 
• Oh, and I'm Christian – although based on how people react when I say that, I'm not sure whether that's stigmatising or privileging these days!

 

I think three features of my life stand out as privileged characteristics that over-ride the potential oppression of my stigmatising characteristics and allow me to refuse to let others oppress me:

• I went to Oxford University.  
• I do not rely on the benefits system. 
• I face life shoulder-to-shoulder with an amazing other half.

 

The Oxford University thing is so many privileges rolled into one.

 

The one-to-one tutorial system means I was taught to think, evaluate, critique, argue and stand up for my opinion.

 

The majority male environment continued the pattern set at secondary school of seeing myself as one of the crowd rather than ‘a girl’.

 

I knocked about with people who took power and privilege for granted, and who opened doors for me to see inside the powerful elite world of the very rich and very influential. Some of that confidence and assumption that you are worthy of respect rubbed off on me.

 

While I did not consider going to Oxford made me better than others, it was a very useful status symbol to bring out casually when needed. I tried to use it very sparingly. But it meant I got to talk to a senior government official in Hong Kong to sort a problem when a friend (a Filipina maid) told me about an issue affecting her and most of her friends.

 

Not relying on benefits. That is a huge privilege for anyone with long term mental ill health.

 

[my committee are likely to shoot me if I keep saying that – we would say: ‘for anyone who is neurodiverse’ because that’s the narrative that makes sense to us. It allows us to be powerful in being different, not powerful despite being different].

 

Back to the “not relying on benefits”. Having income (albeit mostly from being married to someone with a good income) means no debilitating fights with officialdom. No need to focus on what I’m not able to do, and why I’m ‘broken’ so I can fill in interminable forms. No constant fear of something going wrong with the system and being left destitute. No media portraying me as a charity case at best, and a work-shy, cheating, scrounging, fraudster at worst. I can’t imagine the day in, day out grind of negative messages about people who rely on benefits. It was bad enough when I was a part-time wheelchair user. I confess there were times I stayed sat in my chair in public because I couldn’t face another round of explanations, stares and tuts if I stood up to reach the can of beans on the top shelf in the supermarket.

 

Facing life shoulder-to-shoulder.

 

I don’t think it actually matters that my amazing other half is a man and that we are married. I think that what matters is that I am facing life with someone by my side. We have committed to each other, and we have honoured that commitment to each other for over 25 years. That level of commitment reduces the fear. It means in the self-doubting moments (of which there are many), I am reassured by someone I trust of the wonderfulness of being who I am. 

 

Thank you to the writer on intersectionality who reminded me to ‘check my privilege’.

 

Stopping to check has made me cringe to think of the times I have glibly told other women who share my ‘committee-in-our-head’ way of life that they just need to re-frame how they see themselves (ie think in terms of neurodiversity) and their oppression and stigma will start to recede as people interact with them differently. That might work if you have my privileges. But a new narrative won’t overcome the soul-destroying weight of relying on benefits and facing life alone. I have some apologies to make.

 

As I go into the future, I will be more aware of my privilege and my responsibility to use my privileges wisely. Privileges doesn’t mean I’m better. But it certainly means I get more doors opened for me.  My task is to get my foot in that door then hold the door open for anyone else who wants to get inside.  I wonder how the PhD can help with that.

 

Stop putting me at the centre!

Stop “putting people at the centre”!

 

I know you mean well, but can you please just stop it!

 

Everywhere I look, public services (especially health and social care) want to “put you at the centre” and “give you a voice”. It's part of the “new relationships” between users and providers of public services.

 

Well, there are two ways to be at the centre. You can be the spider controlling the web. Or you can be the object that the rest of the kids in the playground are circled around.

 

I lack the power to be at the centre of a social care web, pulling strings, making things happen. Would I want that kind of relationship with the social care workforce? Possibly, but that’s based on a history of not trusting public services and, while I understand my control-freak tendencies, I’m not proud of them. I need to learn to trust - but first I need evidence that it is safe and responsible to start trusting.

 

And I cringe at the idea of being the kid in the centre of the playground circle. Even if the kids who’ve put in the centre are benign, even if they are helpful, even if they have no intention of misusing their power – they are clearly on the outside staring at me, objectifying me, evaluating me, sizing me up.  

 

As far as I can tell, the playground circle is what is happening in social care. Those on the outside (the social care workforce) retain the power of controlling on what terms I can work with them. And they treat me as something qualitatively different from them for all the talk of partnership. As we meet in the roles of 'user' and 'provider', we become 'Other' to each other. Because, yes, I am guilty of treating social care workers as 'them', just as they are guilty of treating me as 'Other'.

The imagery of "putting people at the centre" just reinforces the fundamental inequality and Othering that Wales is trying to escape.

 

I certainly don’t think this is what the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act is supposed to be doing. But from what I read of briefings for the social care workforce, I fear the “putting people at the centre” approach is becoming engrained. In many ways I AM at the centre. I am the centre of my own life. No-one can put me there. I just am there. But when I need to relate with other people and work with other people, the imagery of being in the centre loses its power.

 

So PLEASE stop talking about putting me at the centre.  Maybe talk about you and I standing shoulder to shoulder. There’s a sense of equality and respect in being shoulder-to-shoulder.

'Giving voice'

I’ve been struggling with the concept of a PhD. So I decided to go back to basics and re-lay some foundations.

In the process I found I really helpful chart to match purpose for doing research with a research strategy (original from Martyn Denscombe’s The Good Research Guide), which I played around with slightly (based on John Hughes'. and Michael Crotty’s work):

Do I want a strategy to:

• Understand the complex relationship between factors in a particular social setting? – case study
• Describe cultural practices, and interpret social interaction within a culture? – ethnography
• Understand things through someone else’s eyes; describe the essence of a personal experience? Phenomenology
• Clarify concepts or produce new theories – grounded theory
• Explore a new topic and provide new insights – grounded theory
• Solve a practical problem – action research
• Produce guidelines for best practice – action research
• Give voice to individuals’ lives and their stories - narrative research

I was contemplating which was the right approach for me (personally) and which was the right approach for the research question (which would need to change if it didn’t lead to an approach that was right for me!!).

It got me thinking about the whole area of ‘giving voice”’. 

• Yes, I want people to have their voices, and have their voices heard.
• But do I want to be someone with the responsibility to ‘give voice’?
• Who am I to be giving people what is already theirs by right?

[There’s also the small philosophical issue of how anyone can ‘give voice’ accurately to someone else’s story, even when the stories are told by them using their own words and transcribed from an audio recording – but that’s for another blog]

And that got me thinking about disability and ‘inspiration porn’, and the ‘poverty porn’ that is little more than voyeurism under the cloak of being caring and compassionate.  That is often done with the intention of 'giving voice' to people, but is just telling stories about them.

If you aren’t sure what I mean by inspiration and poverty porn, it’s the kind of stories and research you see that objectifies people (hence the ‘porn’) while holding them up as objects of pity or inspiration. It makes the people who aren’t being objectified feel good about themselves, without calling for any change to an oppressive status quo.

Well, I’ve come to at least one decision from going back to basics.

I've done enough ‘giving voice’ to people who tell their stories, spill their guts, expose raw places, all in the hope that something will change for others (or themselves) as a result. I’ve done for almost 25 years as part of policy consultation work. I’ve done it on and off as part of social research. And I’ve read other people’s social research and consultation reports.  And I can count on one hand the times that people’s hopes of change have been realised.

So 2016 is the year I stop ‘giving voice’ to people. I refuse to be complicit in a game where people spill their guts to me in the usually fruitless hope of change.

2016 will be the year I work my socks off to find ways people can find and use their own voices, directly and effectively, have influence, create change and generally unsettle institutions that need unsettling.

I’m not sure that solves the problem of what strategy to use for my PhD research, but it has helped me work out what I don't want to do - and that's a good start.

It could be an interesting 2016.