We no longer live in a world of reality, but rather in a world of perception. Physics posited a multiverse with countless parallel dimensions, multiplying from each decision point. We, however, are now captive in a dimension with multiple realities all springing from the eye of the beholder. I began to observe this in my final years prior to retirement. Our Human Resources Department undertook a semi-annual training on the topic of sexual harassment. In the early years of this training, sexual harassment was defined by overt actions by an individual which were by consensus deemed to be crossing a line. If you did any or all of these actions, then you were guilty of sexual harassment. As the years passed, however, it was apparent that the definition of sexual harassment was changing. The issue of what you actually did became less significant than how you were perceived by an external observer. Sexual harassment became not what the Human Resources Department said it was, but rather what the victim said it was. If a male complements female 1 on her attire –“Hi Betty, you look nice today”, female 2 who overhears can become offended and legitimately claim sexual harassment. What was wrong with what was said to female 1? We won’t know until female 2 tells us. The reality of what has transpired is now irrelevant and is secondary to the perception of what has transpired. With the advance of technology, female 2 need not be present on the scene, but can instead be remotely viewing the scene well after the fact. By the time I retired, I was no longer comfortable pointing out to a female employee that she was in violation of the dress code because doing so could require me to overtly explain to her which articles were too revealing, too tight, or … Instead I would seek out a female coworker and ask her to assess the employee’s attire and speak to her if appropriate. Even that, though, by the end was insufficient insulation to prevent accusations. A female supervisor received a complaint about the attire of one of her subordinates. She called the employee in and suggested that her blouse was inappropriate and that the employee should either cover-up with a sweater or jacket, or go home and change. The employee pressed her with what was wrong with her blouse, and the she finally pointed out that the blouse was too tight, too sheer, and that her nipples were visible. The outcome of this was that the supervisor was accused of sexual harassment and, after studying the situation for several months, Human Resources concluded that that the supervisor should be admonished for having used the word “nipples”.
During my tenure with the court, there were two occasions wherein I was accused of racism. Both were investigated and I was thereafter absolved of any wrongdoing. I can’t help but wonder, however, how the same accusations would be treated in today’s climate. It should be noted that I am white, and my accusers were African-American. I recently dialoged with an African-American friend who, like me, worked for the superior court. She recounted several instances wherein white co-workers made racially ignorant and insensitive comments that betrayed that they either held innate prejudices or were influenced by generalized stereotypes. She concludes from these incidents that the organization was systemically racist, whereas I conclude that that the organization was systemically neutral, but with employees that at times behaved in a racist manner. The higher they were in the organization, the more they did to damage the organizations attempt at neutrality.
If you accept, as I do, that God created Man and that, as science agrees, we all have a common ancestry; then the concept of race becomes moot. In her book White Fragility, author Robin D’Angelo cites that there is no biological basis for race, but then turns around and makes skin color a determinant factor in society. Man is a discriminating creature. In establishing our own self-identity, we look for physical cues to differentiate ourselves from others and we take those cues to establish groupings. A tribe of pygmies might focus on height, a society of farmers might focus on attire. Differences in skin color have always been seized on by people as a point of differentiation. As soon as we find a point of differentiation, we start seeking patterns of behavior in our newly established groups, even though these different groups initially exist as constructs only in our own minds. We might conclude that people with big noses (meaning bigger than our own) are innately untrustworthy if we have a less than satisfying transaction with someone possessing a prominent proboscis. Having established a negative stereotype, it will take several positive interactions to overcome, if it can be overcome at all. As Shakespeare noted in Julius Caesar, “The evil that men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones”. Our memory of negative experiences is stronger than our memory of positive experiences. Perhaps this is a survival trait that’s been reinforced over the eons, or perhaps it’s just a byproduct of original sin, which similarly cannot be overcome with good deeds. As a race (the human race), we are all creators of stereotypes. We use these as a shorthand for dealing with others whom we don’t know in initial interactions. But after that initial interaction, it is our obligation and duty to look beyond the simplistic narrowness of our own imaginations and get to know the heart of the person. Some of us are too lazy or too fixed in our prejudices to do this. Time is dealing with them now and God will deal with them later, just as there will necessarily be an accounting for media outlets that attempt to stoke division and animus in quest of clicks and views. President Barack Obama in his excellent A More Perfect Union speech eloquently commented on divisive statements his pastor had made, saying that “they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.”
We now see racialists trying to steal the progress that we have made and to demonize our founding fathers, imperfect humans that they were, and distort our history for political and financial gain. Even as they try to stoke a new civil war, let us remember the words of President Abraham Lincoln in his 2nd Inaugural Address as the last civil war drew to a close: “With malice toward none with charity for all with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right let us strive on to finish the work we are in to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan ~ to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”
Those words are just as inspiring now as they were when spoken in 1865, however those who “have borne the battle” are today not those who donned a uniform, but rather those that have suffered as our nation has sought to better itself. It is important to remember that justice is not a destination, but rather a process.
In a dry and thirsty land 