Vanilla Flavoring is Not Diversity

Posted on July 14, 2003 in Reflections The InterNet

I think the first few weeks in a group tell you a lot about whether or not you want to remain with that group. I’ve grown very comfortable with my real life writing group, but there is the case of an online group where I am starting to feel uncomfortable.

Many people love to talk about how they love diversity. To be frank, within the context of this blog, I place limits on that. I don’t enjoy having nasty people who call me names coming here. So I pare off some of the “full diversity” that I have. On the other hand, when people civilly criticize me and honestly contrast their own positions, I welcome their views. Some people have expressed surprise that I am “so open-minded”, but then they haven’t been antagonistic. They’ve merely expressed that they differ and given me reasons and experiences that explain why.

It troubles me that others think that I am “dangerous” and unwilling to listen. Yes, I have closed my mind to a few things: I don’t buy that Creationism explains the Earth’s history better than the finding that the earth is very very old and that species change over time. I don’t listen to arguments in favor of the flat earth or the idea that the winds are generated by some puffy cheeked fellow who hangs off a cloud, either.

For some people, however, diversity seems to mean that you don’t express differences, that you don’t declare where you have personally closed your mind. I watched where in a recent discussion where someone referred to certain variety of writing as “goopy, drippy, sentimental, self-indulgent writing”. I stated my take on the place of that kind of writing in my life (in far less deprecating terms). I used the “I think”, “I feel”, “I believe”. I also declared my personal discomfort with the idea of “many truthes” thusly:

I believe that there’s Truth out there and that we see it. But in my reviews of literature through time — keeping in mind that exagerrated metaphor is a device used by many to touch emotions that the mere recitation of the facts cannot elicit — I must conclude that the facts and the account are not necessarily mutually exclusive — as in the case of Creationism vs. Evolution where the latter theory and its associated Law of Species Changing Over Time do a far better job of describing the world as it is. Not all accounts are equal, not everyone lies or misperceives. Clearly, some do a better job than others. We as writers should strive for that when we write factually.

Another member of the group singled me out, for a second time, as an enemy of diversity. My crime seems to have been expressing my disagreement with the idea that there can be no objectivity out there.

I find myself scratching my head and asking “Is this experience going to be good for me on the whole if these arguments keep getting directed at me?” I think I’ve walked into an old problem: an old group of friends who know each other, who get defensive if they think one of them is getting attacked. They probably don’t see it like that. My question is this: do I wait it out until I become one of the group or do I walk? I don’t expect answers from my readers, though if you have experiences to share, by all means put them forth.

Singling me out as “an opponent of diversity” says a lot more about the people who do it than it does about me. I’m an oddball, I agree. I approach things from a perspective that is nothing like the mainstream and it is nothing like the mainstream alternatives either. I’m not New Age or Skeptic (in the classic sense — I am more like Stephen Jay Gould & Michael Shermer) or Hippie. I plow my own field, speak in my own language with my own metaphors. I speak my own mind and select my friends on criteria that are unique to me. My friends know that they can like people I detest and still be my friends, hold views that I do not agree with. I am no Rush Limbaugh who makes up his facts to suit his audience. Nor am I swayed by the direction of a herd. By a reasonable standard, I support diversity.

The accusation, I dare say, is made for one reason and that is to silence me, to do a lazy job of speaking against views that I hold. Perhaps I have hit on something and because there isn’t a decent rebuttal to be made, I get attacked instead.

Any truly diverse community will want someone like me, I think. And I think when the so-called protectors of diversity start running me down as some kind of anti-democrat, then maybe it is time to leave: authoritarianism may have started to slip in.

This thinking continues.