So, I’m talking to Ampersand, and he says that he’s chatting on a mailing list, having a frustrating conversation about some political hot topic, and I respond,<\/p>\n
“Bleagh. You really like debate, don’t you?”<\/p>\n
Well, of course he does.<\/p>\n
Me, though? I hate it. I would MUCH rather read the positions of people I disagree with, or listen to them talk without having to respond. (And then if I had to respond, do it all in one chunk, and then meander off.) The back-and-forth “No I’M right” “No I AM”… ugh, ugh, ugh, ugh, ugh.<\/p>\n
I associate debate with power games, attempts at manipulation, and a confrontational mindset. Is this gendered? Well, maybe — I’ve noticed that 90% of the people who have attempted to wrangle me into debates and refused to let me stop talking about the subject even after I’ve expressed my clear desire to stop… are men. Often men who are around my age, who say they’re delighted to find someone articulate! political! and informed! The mere fact that I’m capable of debating means I must want to listen to their theories on Ayn Rand or… whatever. And then rebut them! Rather than ignoring the argument I’ve heard 100 times and talking about cute graphics on Animal Crossing, which isn’t any less productive, certainly, and doesn’t make my heart pound or make me think the other person is a jackass.<\/p>\n
And especially in verbal debates, where there’s no recourse to the internet… oh, ugh. “Semi-colons are used just like colons!” says College Guy I barely know, who has asked me to proofread his essay because I’m a professional writer, and is now repaying the favor by arguing stridently against my critiques. “Um, no, semi-colons are properly used in two ways…” But College Guy Must Be Right.<\/p>\n
But the dynamic can’t totally be gendered. Mike and I are at Thanksgiving this year, and my aunt is talking about how lazy poor people are. Mike is melting into a pile of goo, because these arguments hit home for a guy who grew up eating from the dented can store. “Please, can we change the subject?” I ask. “We’re really uncomfortable. You’re really hurting our feelings. Maybe this isn’t the best time or topic.” But no — we just don’t understand because we don’t have EXPERIENCE of the world, there is no such thing as a hard-working poor person who can’t make ends meet.<\/p>\n
And besides, it’s not that Amp is somehow socialized to be more comfortable with debate than I am. His interest in debate, and my disinterest, cannot be explained by the differences in our sex.<\/p>\n
There are a lot of kinds of political discussion I *am* interested in. Conversation, negotiation, mind-stretching, talking about things, and talking things out. But as soon as the confrontational comes in, the sense that it’s me AGAINST you, instead of me AND you trying to work out an idea? I’m gone. Strong disinterest.<\/p>\n
Which is probably why I have no particular interest in chatting with people with whom I have irreconcilable views. There’s no way for me and a person who believes gay people are going to hell to work out an idea of how gay marriage should work as a cooperative exercise. We’re always going to be in opposition. How tedious. How fruitless. How obnoxious. I’d rather be talking to the radical queers who want to abolish marriage in the first place, to discuss whether there’s anything salvageable in the Western family structure (I’d probably say yes) — we disagree, but there’s a basic level of respect.<\/p>\n
I tell Amp this, in shorthand, and he replies that in debates there’s often less politics of the interpersonal at stake than in other kinds of conversations. I can’t say I totally understand this, since my instinct is so strongly against competitive conversation, but maybe some of y’all do.<\/p>\n
Again, I like being exposed to opposing points of view — at least within my Overton Window of acceptability — but I’d much rather be exposed in such a way that does not involve direct, personal confrontation and power games.<\/p>\n
So, the conversation made me wonder how other people who read the blog might feel. How do you feel about debate versus collaborative argument?<\/p>\n
I’m only opening this post to comments from people who accept the inherent dignity and worth of all people. I’m sure that the rest of y’all have interesting points on the subject, but… another time, another place. Hopefully, if I’m involved, in a collaborative way.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
So, I’m talking to Ampersand, and he says that he’s chatting on a mailing list, having a frustrating conversation about some political hot topic, and I respond, “Bleagh. You really like debate, don’t you?” Well, of course he does. Me, … Continue reading