Why I am No Longer Your “Ally”.

There are good reasons why I should not write this post. 

Frankly, I don’t like writing about myself: I’m a boring, unremarkable old bloke. Moreover, even if for some unfathomable reason readers had any curiosity about me: it makes no sense for anonymous bloggers to give personal details.

As importantly, I’m sure this post will not endear me with some readers or gain me any new friends among modern Leftists. In fact, it’s likely to positively incense many and it will certainly not sit well with the liberal/Leftish.

And yet, here we are.

So, as Yanks say, here goes nothing.

I’ve witnessed racism, I know it exists. It’s real. It’s unjust. You don’t need to persuade me of that.

But having recently been on the receiving end of gratuitous allegations of racism, I am also witness that claims of racism can be false. I won’t give any details beyond saying two things: being unjustly berated in public, humiliating as it is, is not the worst of it. This episode could have cost me my job, my livelihood. That is a serious threat for any working poor, trust me. But my age and personal circumstances don’t make it any better.

Luckily it seems things won’t get there.

Setting that aside, I have been wondering how frequent/infrequent false allegations are compared to true allegations. I don’t know (do you?). I hope relatively infrequent; my experience could be exceptional. So, I won’t generalise.

Let me put this differently. I can’t tell how big the set of false allegations is, but I do know, with absolute certainty, it’s not empty: it has at least one element. False allegations may be unusual, but they do exist. They are real. They are unjust. I’ve witnessed them. It happened to me.

I’ll go further. I am no mind-reader, I can’t tell the motivations of accusers. No doubt, many are right in their claim and seek justice; but at least some do not seem really interested in justice, whatever they might say about it.

I prefer to believe – based on no evidence whatsoever, but in an attempt to presume no baser motivation – my accuser, although wrong, was motivated by blind frustration. People, for example, may be pissed off at the unacceptable service your employer inflicts on its customers/clients, regardless of race, gender, sexual preference, age, nationality, religion. But it’s you who are at hand, not your boss. So it’s you who cop the abuse: from garden-variety rudeness to yelling and physical aggression. Health workers are facing that in Australia these days, but they are not alone.

A false accusation of racism is just a form that abuse can take. After all, what better than to call you “racist”, jeopardising thereby your employment? Failing to punish your employer, you are there: something is something, better than nothing.

----------

Chances are, if you claim to be a victim of racism or you are their “ally” or are at least familiar with new social movements thought, you may oppose that even if I did not act intentionally racist, I might still be guilty of “unconscious bias”.

Don’t give me that. In my attempt to make sense of the situation in the most honest way possible to me, I gave that some thought, believe it or not. It doesn’t cut it.

Suppose you stepped on someone’s foot. I can understand that person yelling in pain, or demanding you being more careful; in extreme cases, even a financial compensation may be demanded (maybe you broke their foot, say). What I can’t understand is anyone accusing you of assault, for assault implies deliberation or at least intention. The “unconscious bias” argument is well suited to conflate accident or external circumstances with deliberation/intention. To put this differently: it’s logically contradictory to speak of being guilty of “unconscious bias”.

There was no unconscious bias against that particular person, a poster child of oppressed intersectionality: young, foreign, female, of colour. In fact, if you were to look for any unconscious bias in me I suspect you would have been more likely to find unconscious bias in that person’s favour.

Ultimately: why only my “biases”, but not yours or theirs, must go under the microscope? Must I assume you all are immune to “unconscious biases”? Unconscious bias is a two-edged sword: it cuts both ways.

----------

So, has my experience affected me? You bet. Once bitten, twice shy, they say. 

Because I know racism is real, I will not dismiss out of hand allegations of racism. But because I also know false allegations of racism are real (that is, because racism has been “weaponised”) I can no longer believe accusers based only on their identity or their word.

My accuser has not apologised. But if she decided to apologise, I’d much rather pass. Professionalism is neither a virtue nor a choice, it’s an employment condition and I would have been compelled to accept the apology, even if I were in actual fact resentful. I much prefer this person kept a good distance: I’m twice shy.

I also learned that there is wisdom in the dictum “innocent until proven guilty”, there is a difference between an allegation and a verdict.

----------

To read that as the effect this episode had on me may sound anti-climatic. It’s not, for at least three reasons.

First: up to this point, I prided myself on being a good “ally” of those claiming being targets of racism. In truth, I’ve had my doubts even before things happened to me; some claims sounded between iffy and ludicrous. So, is not without shame that I must confess back then I used to brush doubts aside. Instead, I assumed truth was on the claimants’ side. I privileged their “lived experience”. Isn’t that what good allies are supposed to do? They, in my experience, are expected to live by an unstated “you are either with us, or against us” clause.

I would ask myself: why would anyone make up false accusations? Potential answers (because they can; because it’s easy; because it’s a way to release one’s neuroses and frustrations; because self-righteousness is all the sweeter when exercised in safety, against a soft target; because one counts on the uncritical support of allies; because victimhood, genuine or not, has at least one reward: sympathy) never before seemed persuasive. They seem persuasive now.

Second: there’s a corollary to “innocent until proven guilty”: a distinct whiff of slander surrounds allegations of racism thrown around without any supporting evidence. If I had lost my job on that allegation, as I might have had, I am not sure what I would have done and I am relieved I did not have to decide. However my options, in decreasing order of desirability, included: (1) calling my union, (2) taking my employer to the Fair Work Ombudsman/Commission, or (3) asking for legal advice and maybe even representation on damages and losses caused by defamation or (4) a combination. None would have been easy to take. None guaranteed a satisfactory outcome, either: to have my job back, an apology, and maybe some money in a matter of months does not help me pay my bills now.

Third: any subconscious favourable bias that might have been there, it’s not there any more.

----------

The bottom line is that I am not unconditionally with you any more. That is another way of saying that I am no longer your ally. From now on, I am a third party, looking at things from the outside and taking sides, if required, on a case-by-case basis and only on the merits of each situation. I do not like the “all options are on the table” commonplace, but it does describe well my stance.

You may see yourself sitting there in judgement, but my intention is not to get your absolution. My intention is to state my position. To deny that is too high a price to pay for your blessings. I refuse to pay it. If you feel any of this makes of me your enemy, so be it. That is up to you.

I don’t know if my experience resonates with many, but (again, without any evidence whatsoever) I suspect I’m not alone. Much more importantly: alone or not, I know I’m right.

----------

By one of those truly remarkable coincidences, just as I was wondering the wisdom of publishing this post, ABC News24 repeated an interview Tarana Burke,  #MeToo movement founder, gave Leigh Sales last October 24. I had forgotten it.

Sales is vocal in her support to women’s cause and had heard the claim that good allies must always accept as true any accusations made by victims of oppression, in this instance women alleging men’s sexual misbehaviour. The last question she asked Burke was:

There’s a segment of women who are #MeToo devotees who use the slogan “I believe her” and they use it to mean that any woman who makes an accusation against a man has to be believed. What do you make of that?

Read carefully Burke’s answer. Pay attention to the words she uses and how she justifies her beliefs.