In a blogpost entitled The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations, I stated:
According to one source, “The practice of expecting less from members of a disadvantaged group and thus implicitly encouraging those people not to reach their full potential,” is referred to as the soft bigotry of low expectations. This term was reportedly coined by Michael Gerson.
Bigotry may be defined as obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group. A softer form of bigotry is still bigotry, even if it serves as a seemingly banal form of prejudice.
It’s been a decade since I received a degree from a graduate program for social work, an academic environment in which I was surrounded by mostly white women who espoused softly bigoted views regarding so-called black, indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) individuals.
Since then, I’ve infrequently encountered people who advocate similar prejudicial views. Mostly, I’ve come across these individuals in connection with training for psychotherapeutic modalities (e.g., Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing [EMDR]).
As an example, in a blog entry entitled Kafka Trap, I discussed my experience of having undergone EMDR training conducted by a white woman by stating:
In “antiracist” fashion, which one images is akin to the struggle sessions of Maoist China; trainees were encouraged to provide our own accounts of racist behavior. However, I paid a total of $1,995.03 for EMDR training, not to be proselytized in regards to a social justice ideology.
Nonetheless, the trainer segued from her lived experience towards the topic of how one may treat racism with EMDR. Distorting the existence of actual trauma, trainees were presented with a [PowerPoint] slide that advocated “Race/Social Conditions” and “Generational Embodiment” as forms of traumatic experience.
For context, my dad is black and my late mom was white. According to genetic testing, I’m approximately one-third black and two-thirds white. However, I don’t align myself with “BIPOC” distinction. I’m biracial and that’s one of the least interesting facts about me.
In any case, I tend to disassociate from people who dogmatically cling to their softly bigoted viewpoints. Unless it’s necessary for me to receive a degree or certificate, or in the instance of providing psychotherapeutic services for a client, I don’t commonly fraternize with people who promote their racist views.
Racism is a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities, and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority or inferiority of a particular race. Even softly bigoted viewpoints may constitute racist rhetoric.
For instance, a white woman who infers that so-called BIPOC people are incapable of maintaining incorrect perspectives is one who ostensibly engages in racist discourse. Not always do progressive-leaning white people understand how bigoted such views actually are.
Even though a white woman may perceive her opinion as helpful, such an inference maintains that BIPOC individuals are somehow superior to other races. While I don’t typically dispute people, I do challenge their irrational beliefs.
Rather than discussing this matter in abstraction, it may be useful to highlight a concrete example of a perceivably white woman who recently voiced questionable viewpoints. To be exceedingly clear, I’m not protesting this person, though I object to her communicated beliefs.
In a national Zoom call during which many white women voiced support for Vice President of the United States (U.S.) Kamala Harris’ bid for the 2024 U.S. presidential election, Arielle Fodor was called upon to speak. The TikTok social media influencer then stated, in part, to her presumably white audience:
This is a really important time and we all need to use our voices and influence for the greater good. No matter who you are, you are all influencers in some way. So tonight I’m gonna share some dos and don’ts for getting involved in politics online and navigating the toxicity that comes with it.
What is the “greater good?” Who is the moral arbiter that decides what is good, bad, right, wrong, or otherwise for the majority of any given population? And upon what bases are these determinations formed?
Moreover, is a TikTok influencer one who is deemed morally and ethically worthy to instruct others what should, must, or ought to be the case for U.S. citizens? According to one source:
If you’re one of the more than 150 million Americans who use TikTok, you may have heard that Congress passed a bill that could result in the incredibly popular app being banned. President Joe Biden signed it into law in April.
Hypocrisy of TikTok being villainized by the Biden administration and a TikTok influencer showing support for Harris aside, why should U.S. citizens take moral instruction from a white woman in regard to racial matters? Furthermore, what need is there to refer to countervailing opinions as “toxicity”?
One of the definitions of toxic is that which is extremely harsh, malicious, or harmful. Couldn’t it be perceived as a soft version of toxicity when treating all white people as though they’re a monolith?
If so, could it further be considered the soft toxicity of low expectations to seemingly maintain that all non-white or BIPOC people think, feel, or behave the same – and in a fundamentally determinant manner predicated solely upon race or ethnicity? In any case, Fodor continued:
And spoiler alert, as much of the toxicity can come from the outside; it can come from us, too. So first, don’t isolate yourself. We can do our best work when we’re in community together, like we are tonight. ‘Cause the toxic feels smaller when we support each other.
By delineating the “outside” from “us,” when addressing white women, doesn’t one essentially practice a form of segregation by way of rhetorical formulation? When instructing people not to “isolate” themselves, isn’t the moral imperative of one’s argument defeated at the instance one also isolates through segregator actions such as a white affinity group?
Furthermore, what is meant by “community” when addressing white women? A community is a unified body of individuals who live in a particular area. Do all white women live in a particular area within the U.S.?
Additionally, does a white woman who lives in California necessarily share communal standards with a white woman residing in Texas? And what does it mean to say that toxicity “feels smaller” when people support one another?
A feeling relates to an emotion or bodily sensation. However, a feeling doesn’t represent a thought, belief, hunch, or suspicion. The words we use matter in this regard.
Although one may think that one is smaller than another person, or one may actually be smaller in comparison to another person; is there an emotion or body sensation relating to a size comparison of which I’m unaware? At any rate, Fodor continued:
But don’t make it about yourself. As white women, we need to use our privilege to make positive changes. If you find yourself talking over or speaking for BIPOC individuals, or God forbid correcting them, just take a beat. Instead, we can put our listening ears on.
Privilege is defined as a right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor. Although women in the U.S. have the privilege of not being subject to military conscription, what inherent privileges do white women have in relation to so-called BIPOC women?
Is it rational (logical and reasonable) to conclude that a white woman who earns $19,000 per year is more privileged than a black woman who earns $1 million annually? Could there possibly be factors other than race, such as economic status, which infer privilege?
If so, why is it necessary to demand (i.e., “we need to”) that white women uniquely bear the burden of using supposed “privilege” to make changes for non-white women? Also, “changes” from what to what?
Is all change desirable? And what are “positive changes?” One suspects that if white woman X was held up at gunpoint and all of her money was then given to black woman Y, the latter may consider the theft a positive change in income status while the former would disagree.
Who decides what “positive changes” are necessary when not making a matter about oneself? Are such demanded changes to benefit only BIPOC people Y while disadvantaging all white women X? If so, might some white women X maintain a rational dispute to such action?
Moreover, why oughtn’t to white women correct BIPOC individuals? Is the inference underlying this proposal related to the soft bigotry of low expectations? For clarify, consider the following syllogism:
Form (modus ponens) –
If p, then q; p; therefore, q.
Example –
If black people are infallible, then white people should never correct them.
Black people are infallible.
Therefore, white people should never correct them.
While the premises and conclusion follow logical form they are unreasonable, because black people aren’t perfect. No one is. Therefore, it’s irrational to conclude that white women oughtn’t to – “God forbid” – correct BIPOC individuals.
Fodor was reportedly a kindergarten educator at one point. While I make no judgement about her as an individual, I wonder about whether or not she refrained from correcting non-white children when they inevitably made mistakes.
Is it the soft toxicity of low expectations to assume that so-called BIPOC people are infallible human beings? Additionally, isn’t it potentially bigoted to presume that group X is inherently truthful by bent of their race while group Y is subject to error? Fodor continued:
So do learn from and amplify the voices of those who have been historically marginalized and use the privilege you have in order to push for systemic change. As white people, we have a lot to learn and unlearn. So do check your blind spots.
Marginalization occurs when relegating group X to an unimportant or powerless position within a society when compared with group Y. Suppose that in the U.S. group X represents black people and group Y relates to white people.
What does amplification of black voices over white voices in 2024 have to do with chattel slavery that occurred in the U.S. before any current member of group X or Y was born? Hasn’t there already been “systemic change” through the events of the Civil War?
When Fodor begins a statement by saying, “As white people,” could it be that she speaks on behalf of all white people in the U.S.? How about on behalf of all whites in the world?
Also, what is it exactly that needs to be learned or unlearned by group Y? And what are the bases upon which group X has presumably been bestowed the extraordinary ability to teach white people about the condition of all blacks? Notwithstanding any of this, Fodor continued:
You are responsible for your algorithm, believe it or not. Intentionally seek out and share content from BIPOC creators, activists, thought leaders. They should be the leaders about conversations about race and justice and equity.
Why must non-BIPOC individuals search for and boost the signals of BIPOC “creators, activists, [and] thought leaders” in regard to a U.S. presidential election – which relates to a job title subject to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) – when race isn’t supposed to play a deterministic factor in employment, per EEOC standards?
What is it a BIPOC social media content creator, a sociopolitical activist, or a “thought leader” (whatever that is) going to tell a white person that another white person couldn’t express? Could a BIPOC TikTok creator X possibly speak on behalf of all other BIPOC people in the country?
Why must “conversations about race and justice and equity” be led by group X versus group Y? Do the voices of group X carry some miraculous power? If one believes so, doesn’t that automatically render group Y inferior to group X?
Additionally, isn’t it the soft toxicity of low expectations to presume that BIPOC individuals need white people to remain silent when BIPOC people are present, ostensibly because BIPOC individuals couldn’t possibly abide rational arguments made by white people?
Also, race and justice are fairly straightforward concepts. However, one wonders about what Fodor means when referring to “equity.” Is it as one source defines, “Social equity is concerned with justice and fairness of social policy based on the principle of substantive equality, equal outcomes for groups”?
Why must one adopt an “equal outcomes” standard when such a principle requires artificially lifting up group X while unconstitutionally suppressing group Y? Isn’t that how prejudice, discrimination, and racism functions? Aren’t those actions which lead to a civil war?
Nonetheless, Fodor continued with her upspeak and vocal fry register rhetoric with a bubbly presentation style for longer than outlined herein. However, the already addressed points of disputation generally apply to the remaining portions of her infantilizing monologue.
While keeping in mind that I challenge Fodor’s beliefs, I take no issue with her as an individual. Just as I’m a fallible human being, I acknowledge that she is, too.
All the same, I dislike the soft toxicity of low expectations and I don’t consider white or non-white individuals particularly inferior to me simply due to their differing racial or ethnic composition. To suggest otherwise would be a bigoted proposition.
Also, while I understand that “toxic” refers to that which is extremely harsh, malicious, or harmful, I don’t consider Fodor’s rhetoric to meet this description. She’s the individual who evoked the term toxicity, as I’ve chosen to utilize her choice of words herein.
Therefore, I view Fodor’s expressed beliefs as a softer form of toxicity – the kind that presumably considers one-third of my racial composition incapable of being challenged by white people, “God forbid.” As such, I guess it’s fortunate for me that at least two-thirds of my racial makeup retains “privilege” enough to dispute Fodor’s communicated assumptions.
If you’re looking for a provider who works to help you understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.
As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.
At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply helping you to feel better, I want to help you get better!
Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW
References:
Boykin, A. W. (2013). “The soft bigotry of low expectations.” Marin County Office of Education. Retrieved from https://www.marinschools.org/cms/lib/CA01001323/Centricity/Domain/1250/Soft%20Bigotry%20of%20Low%20Expectations.pdf
Fodor, A. [@mrs.frazzled]. (n.d.). Mrs.Frazzled [Official TikTok account]. TikTok. Retrieved from https://www.tiktok.com/@mrs.frazzled
Freepik. (n.d.). Person in hazmat and mask inside a nuclear power plant [Image]. Retrieved from https://www.freepik.com/free-ai-image/person-hazmat-mask-inside-nuclear-power-plant_67216896.htm#fromView=search&page=1&position=5&uuid=767d5b27-f9a9-4ec5-8e1d-a205b3b07c96
Hollings, D. (2024, May 3). A bad IDEA. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/a-bad-idea
Hollings, D. (2024, July 9). Absolutistic should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/absolutistic-should-beliefs
Hollings, D. (2022, November 18). Big T, little t. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/big-t-little-t
Hollings, D. (2022, October 31). Demandingness. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/demandingness
Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer
Hollings, D. (2023, September 8). Fair use. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fair-use
Hollings, D. (2024, May 11). Fallible human being. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fallible-human-being
Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better
Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/
Hollings, D. (2023, May 18). Irrational beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/irrational-beliefs
Hollings, D. (2023, June 24). Kafka trap. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/kafka-trap
Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching
Hollings, D. (2023, September 8). Lived experience. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/lived-experience
Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason
Hollings, D. (2024, April 9). Moral arbiter. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/moral-arbiter
Hollings, D. (2023, October 2). Morals and ethics. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/morals-and-ethics
Hollings, D. (2024, July 7). Non-dogmatic preferences. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/non-dogmatic-preferences
Hollings, D. (2024, April 22). On disputing. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-disputing
Hollings, D. (2023, September 3). On feelings. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-feelings
Hollings, D. (2023, April 24). On truth. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-truth
Hollings, D. (2022, November 7). Personal ownership. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/personal-ownership
Hollings, D. (2024, May 26). Principles. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/principles
Hollings, D. (2023, September 15). Psychotherapeutic modalities. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapeutic-modalities
Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist
Hollings, D. (2024, April 21). Sensation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/sensation
Hollings, D. (2022, October 7). Should, must, and ought. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/should-must-and-ought
Hollings, D. (2023, October 17). Syllogism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/syllogism
Hollings, D. (2024, February 27). The soft bigotry of low expectations. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-soft-bigotry-of-low-expectations
Ian Conversation. (2012, January 28). Take a beat. Urban Dictionary. Retrieved from https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Take%20a%20beat
Indivisible. (2024, July 25). White women: Answer the call 2024 [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/live/8VxGlONBejg?si=HTh4ubZQ-CvyAn4z
Ramirez, N. M. and Suebsaeng, A. (2024, April 24). Could TikTok really be banned? Here’s what’s going on. Rolling Stone. Retrieved from https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/tiktok-ban-bill-us-what-to-know-1234985795/
Wikipedia. (n.d.). American Civil War. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War
Wikipedia. (n.d.). High rising terminal. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_rising_terminal
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Joe Biden. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Kamala Harris. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Michael Gerson. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Gerson
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Social equity. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_equity
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Struggle session. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struggle_session
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Vocal fry register. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vocal_fry_register
Wiktionary. (n.d.). Soft bigotry of low expectations. Retrieved from https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/soft_bigotry_of_low_expectations
Comments