The Crusty Label

I seem to have offended someone using the “crusty Asian woman” phrase in my post about Adam’s haircut. I appreciate the person, although remaining anonymous, for speaking out. My intent was not meant to be racist at all, although the person raises an interesting point about labels.

Here I am talking about being careful about semantics, and whack, I used the word “Asian.” Now, I see that word as descriptive, for writing purposes – a set of physical attributes summed up in one word. If that person was German or Swedish (except that "they" are not visible minorities, I acknowledge) or whatever, I would have found a word to sum up a look in order to give this picture. I often describe people in terms of Black (a really general term considering the scope of the world where people are from), German, Jewish, British, Russian, Phillipino, Canadian, American, European. I try not to overgeneralize. Perhaps this is what makes any phrase slanted with racism. A label certainly doesn't describe a person. It only describes a set of features and physical traits. Instead of a sweeping brush stroke to provide a picture, I instead put a black line through an entire race of people?

Of course my intent was not meant to be racist, except that in fact, I did offend someone, so I suppose for that reason alone, it can be considered racist. For that, I am sorry. It’s a good question, actually (feel free to answer it) -- what is racist in the scope of writing, in being descriptive? (I think I've in part answered it). If someone who is not Jewish speaks about the Jewish people, it often comes across all wrong, perhaps even if the person didn’t intend it as such. Just prefacing a sentence "I met this Jewish guy," is like a loaded gun -- I find my hair standing on end, waiting for the next phrase, racist or not. Having converted into a Jewish family, my radar is a little more sensitive than it used to be, so I actually should have been more aware of this type of referencing. Yet, looking at the argument from the side of receiving supports for autism, what have we all come to that we can’t describe and state difference, and if we do, it appears to be discriminatory? How defensive are we that we must equate equality with homogeneity -- to whitewash description and difference entirely?

In my case, I do not intentionally use race to describe the human being. Except in my description, I placed together race and a description of the person “crusty” or abrasive, together. Any person of any race can indeed be unpleasant. Character traits transcend race indeed. It also takes many encounters with a person, many paragraphs and descriptions to figure out if someone is a racist. Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf is clearly a collection of rabid racism.

When I describe a person in my writing, I try to paint a picture of the character, hopefully in all their richness. If that character has unpleasant flaws does it make the writer a racist -- the collection and context of words is important here. Perhaps the desciption in my last post was simply too brisk of a sweep. If I describe a person autistic as a “bitch,” (Autistic Bitch from Hell dubs herself, not me... and I think she is brilliant) does that make me bias against people with autism? Many parents can’t take Michelle Dawson (I like her for what she is doing and the voice she has risen, I will state for the record, even if she might very likely find many flaws in me) – does that make them prejudice? It strikes me that if we are going to talk on an even playing field here, then we all have to presume ourselves equal, with difference -- an oxymoron indeed. To debate with Michelle Dawson presumes her competence to fight for her beliefs. In my case, when I call a person “crusty,” it is because they damn well are, white or black or Jewish or Asian.

To me, this is what we are fighting for – perchance to transcend labels or to use them without prejudice, to acknowledge the beauty and the challenge of difference, and the freedom to say that someone stinks when they just, well, er... are. This is the heterogeneity of humanity. Let us be careful, however, how our words are interpreted and how we sweep our brush.

It's a difficult issue -- to equate a person with a crusty old label, still as thick as rye, yet to crumble.