omayovaomen - Tumblr blog

omayovaomen · 7 months

Text

The letter no one ever read:

Hey Professor, I wanted to reach out after class yesterday.

I came to university to challenge my mind.

I did not come to university to agree with everyone and be nice (I had 10+ years of service industry experience teach me that), I did not come to be told how to think, I came to learn how to think-How to form my thoughts into something tangible. How to critically engage with other academics and be part of the solution for the new future that lies ahead of us.

The minute I admitted to disliking and having a critique of the book, you became defensive. You and the entire class shut me down; questioning my mental health, indicating my emotional state and passion invalidated my point (in the age of ‘feminism and mental health awareness’, nonetheless).

Let me lay out some quotes from our class:

‘Wow, I didn’t expect you to have that perspective. I’m just kind of shocked.’

‘Sweetie, I just want to make sure you’re taking care of yourself because confronting these kind of complex issues can be tough.’

‘what you’re saying sounds racist.’

‘Wow, sounds like you’re taking things personal and being super defensive.’

‘Well, you’ve been talking a long time and no one has stopped you, so…(basically insinuating this is one way I benefit from the whiteness I am too intellectually inept to observe and acknowledge on my own) ’

‘Well, the book is based in ‘Time’, so if you didn’t get that connection to the course, I don’t know…*demeaning shrug*.’

I’d really love to know how this type of dialogue lends to open, tolerant discussions around complex issues such as racism, discrimination and diversity.

The entire experience was dehumanizing (treating me as though I lack the mental capacities commonly attributed to human beings) and humiliating (an experience I am quite familiar with, unfortunately).

No one inquired with active listening to see if they understood my perspective, no one initiated de-escalation techniques, you all just assumed what you heard, reacted to what you thought you heard with no attempt at clarification.

Instead of allowing me to confront a complex issue, everyone shut me down, rolled their eyes at me and accused me of mental instability. You then ended class when you decided it got ‘too heated’.

I find this type of behavior absolutely unacceptable in the academic setting.

In such a great time of political transition and enlightenment, I will activate and use my right to be curious, to critically analyze everything around me, and speak up when something makes me uneasy or requires clarification.

I am extremely disappointed I was not allowed to simply not like the book, as if my critique equated to perpetuating racism or trashing the author. As far a I’m concerned, I am 100% in the right to criticize a self proclaimed social critic. Especially in such a politically inflamed time as we are in now, especially with all that is happening as human life adjusts to this overwhelm of information unprecedented for our species.

If you had actually taken a moment to listen to my point, you would see my critique had nothing to do with the book and instead everything to do with the linguistics and culture surrounding the community (aka, ‘the people’ i.e. Times Mag, Vogue, Buzzfeed, Esquire, the news channels, etc.) which produced and promoted this supposedly, and I quote, ‘mesmerizing, astounding, intimately groundbreaking’ memoir.'

My critique was that I was unable to find a single negative or neutral review or critique on this book-every comment about the 'masterpiece' was loaded with exaggerated vocabulary, attempting to make the book seem more impressive than it actually is. Everyone who reviewed it said almost the exact same thing, claiming it’s some ground breaking masterpiece…My antenna become raised when everything surrounding a text, person, or idea is only positive and insidiously coercive-it reads as propaganda. It reads as, 'I make money having this opinion.'

As someone who has read extensively true masterpieces of human thought, my intelligence felt infantilized by this book, ‘Good Talk’. It is a youth reading level. The art and conversations are banal. I’m looking for the magnificent depth that is claimed to exist in this book, but struggle to find it. The more I dig, the more offended I feel-for myself and my generation. This isn’t new for me; being autistic means I don’t always ‘get it’.

But the thing is, I’m allowed to have my opinion. I’m allowed to ask questions. I’m allowed to disagree with you.

In fact, being able to disagree and have boundaries is what indicates a healthy relationship dynamic. Abusive dynamics do not allow for the free exchange of ideas-they are only concerned with control.

I’ve been through an extensive amount of psychological, physical and sexual abuse in my short life time-I have suffered greatly from being gaslit out of my human right to autonomy, to discern, judge and analyze my lived experience and perceived reality. I have spent 20 years pouring over psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, religion, trauma, somatics, politics and the extremely psychologically and socially damaging effects of coercive, manipulative, confusing and compelled speech. I have come to believe that compelled speech be one of the most insidiously predatory of human behaviors.

To recap my critique before you twisted it into calling me an uninformed racist and accusing me of not being smart enough to understand this ‘extremely complex topic’, instead of listening, inquiring and encouraging tolerance:

Let me make it clear, I do not have issues discussing racism, I do not have issues hearing about someone’s lived experience with racism, I do not take issue with someone garnering success for telling their story, I do not take issue validating racism as a very real and prominent struggle through out human history, I do not struggle to validate the generational effects of ancestral trauma, I do not struggle to identify my own experiences with racism or what privileges I may or may not have.

What I do take issue with is having propaganda shoved down my throat and being coerced into agreement with out critical analysis. What I do take issue with is the ‘in’ circle of the media dictating how we think and feel about ourselves.

What I do take issue with is the denial of tolerance and critical thought in an environment where that is exactly the entire point.

I really appreciate when my mentors care about my development as an individual and take seriously the act of education by making a commitment to the facilitation of a safe container for the ultimate freedom of thought and theory. This phenomenon, language, is how humans think with one another. In fact, there is data that indicates speech is actually more of a faculty of thought and thinking than actual communication.

Some would say freedom of speech is the antidote to war.

Because what happens when people don’t feel heard? When you restrict their autonomy? They protest and riot, rebel and fight; at the micro and macroscopic level of analysis.

What is most unsettling about all this is even though you think you are so thoroughly morally awakened with your correct political ideology, when I challenged your perspective, you reverted into your toxic masculinity to demean my point, use my emotions against me, call me crazy, and tell me I ‘just don’t get it’, just like every other man in my life. In this moment of discourse, your actions and the actions of the class went against everything you all regurgitatively preach about; tolerance, diversity and willingness to maintain open dialogue (like the program that suggested the book intends to do)

I have fought long and hard for my ability to think and act autonomously. I will not give it up so willingly just to fit in with the automatons. I am here to speak and challenge my mind, not be infantilized by professors who are intellectually intimidated by my critiques or questions and choose to perpetuate the ouroboros of silent ignorance under the guise of moral compassion and higher awareness.

I am here for all the people, not just the sum that are deemed morally acceptable by the elite.

All humans deserve the right to think and speak autonomously and to question everything.

I refuse to engage with othering political ideologies that pit us against one another over something so surface level as our skin color.

The experience of human suffering is much more complex than these skin deep, half baked, mind numbing, theoretical ideologies.

I am here to talk to humans, not at them. I am here for inquiry, curiosity and investigation; not propaganda.

Mind you, I am 28 years old. Most of your class I imagine is about 8-10 years younger than me. They’re babies, and they look to people like you to show them how to engage with healthy conflict. You really missed out on a teaching opportunity here, and I missed out on an opportunity of being heard.

My critique is founded in my passion to learn and contribute to the autonomous thought of the humans around me.

Language is more powerful than anyone likes to admit.

Empowering language is crystal clear- it respects an individual's autonomy.

Coercive speech controls others.

If you are curious to actually pick my mind and engage in a serious discussion about the insidious effects of viral, propagandist, coercive language, I am more than happy to do so.

Otherwise, I wish you best in the completion of your assimilation.

0 notes

omayovaomen · 1 year

Text