"Rona Y." > said:

>Damsel wrote:
>
>> I think Jill's biggest crime is including too much information when
>> she posts. I told her so in e-mail, and I think she's taking it to
>> heart. I know her pretty well. I think she's more detail-oriented
>> than prejudiced. She shops at that store several times a week. I
>> don't think she'd do that if she had a problem with the people who
>> work there.
>
>That ranks right up there with "I'm not prejudiced...some of my best friends
>are (fill in the ethnicity here)." Which, by the way, is quite similar to
>an argument she has made before.
>
>It isn't that she mentioned the people were "foreign born" (which in itself
>is a contentious phrase) that shows her prejudices, it's the implication
>that because he was foreign born, he couldn't read or understand that the
>pasta should have been refrigerated or frozen (and was therefore
>stupid--implied, not stated by the tone of the post--she's so lucky to get
>free pasta because some dumbass foreigner couldn't read). That and the
>implication that the foreign-born boss is literate *because* he was educated
>in England (why mention the latter were it not important?). I know many
>North American born people of European descent who are illiterate or not
>very competent readers. Should the pasta have been shelved by one of them,
>would Jill have mentioned the staff member was "American-born" or even
>Caucasian? Or that the person might not have been literate?
>
>There are some stories where ethnicity *is* important. For example, when
>the Filipino salesman tried to sell some kind of furniture cleaner to a
>business. He kept asking them to "look at my penis." Since certain groups
>of Filipinos pronounce "f" as "p" and the "sh" sound as "s", and short "i"
>as long "i", by knowing that he was Filipino, you can understand what he
>was really saying. In that case, that he was not a native speaker of
>English is essential to the story. In Jill's case, this is not so.
>
>FWIW, I think everyone has prejudices--*everyone* (and if I say someone has
>prejudices, it does not mean I think they're racist). It's what you do with
>those prejudices that matters. Do you pretend they don't exist and continue
>making statements that offend people (because you're too
>obtuse/insensitive/self-centered to notice your remarks are offensive)? Or
>do you recognize them, accept them and do your best to conquer or control
>them? Most people seem to fall into the first category (or the third
>category, where you openly recognize your prejudices and thrive on them) and
>IMO, Jill is most definitely in that first category. Note that this is not
>the first time Jill has made an offensive ethnically-biased statement on
>this ng. It's not that she's detail-oriented, it's that she's ignorant of
>her own prejudices.

That could be. Could be true of a lot of us. The thing with Jill is,
she's a very kind person. She just doesn't always communicate in the best
way. She's someone who is very open to constructive criticism. I do it
all the time, and she has never disregarded my suggestions. This is the
letter I wrote to her last night, after your previous post (I am posting
this with the highest degree of certainty that she won't mind my doing so):

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think you're prejudiced, but sometimes you appear to be. My advice
- if the race or language of someone you're writing about isn't mandatory
to get the point across, omit it.

If I'd written your post, I'd have mentioned that the stock guy didn't
speak or read much English, but that when you talked to the (non-described)
owner, the situation was rectified.

I know you mean no harm. But that's because I actually know you. To
someone who doesn't know what kind of a person you are, that post could
sound condescending.

I really, really hope you're not ****ed off at me now. I'm just providing
my perspective. I know your heart. It's not hateful.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

She did get back to me to reassure me that she wasn't ****ed off, and that
she understood what I was saying. I know that she'll edit her posts more
carefully in the future. If you look at any of Jill's longer posts, you'll
likely notice that she includes a lot of (don't get mad, Jill) basically
irrelevant information. But she's trying to tell a story, and create a
picture. She's sharing her life experiences. She's being generous with
herself.

This is my last post defending Jill. She has vowed to pay closer attention
to what she posts, and I know that she'll honor that vow. She's done that
with every suggestion I've made to her in the past. Jill's word is her
bond.

Carol