Underneath my yellow skin

Tag Archives: actionable policies

Last post about safer spaces, part eight

Posted on by • 0 Comments

Let’s talk more about safer spaces and society’s expectation for ‘normal’ behavior in general. In yesterday’s post, I wrote about masking, social norms, and how I felt forced to do so for so many reasons. One, growing up in tthe seventies, there wasn’t even lip service to diversity. It was fit in or die, and I constantly felt like I was dying. Or that I wanted to die. As many autistic people describe it, it’s like always having to dedicate one hefty portion of your brain to fitting in. That makes it much harder to focus on what you actually need to do.

When I was in school in the eighties, there was the murmurs of diversity. In this case, though, it was the melting pot theory–which, to put it bluntly-fucking sucked. The idea was that immigrants came to America and ‘melted’ into American society. In other words, they were supposed to shed what made them foreign as soon as possible. Asian people tend to be more conforming in general, anyway, so my parents were eager to fit in. Or rather, not stick out.

My brother and I were taught to be white, basically. My parents tried to speak Taiwanese to my brother (who is older than I am), but they decided it would be easier to teach him only English. When I came along, they didn’t even bothre trynig to teach me Taiwanese. We did not eat Taiwanese food outside the house, and we preferred American. (A
t least until we were adults.)

I was so anxious as a little kid. I had to make sure that I was acting like everyone else when I didn’t even know what that really meant. I kept my eyes on everyone around me, but I was convinced I was an alien. I always felt like I was failing, and I was miserable.

I want to emphasize this because even if I looked like I belonged (which I most certainly did not), I hated everything about my life. I didn’t feel like I could ever be me, which was not a fun place to be. I smoothed and sanded my rough edges until they were completely gone. I hid everything that made me me because I heard the overt and covert message loud and clear: I as me and myself was unacceptable.

That was the main message my parents and society gave to me while I was a child and a teenager. I was unacceptable as I was. I was not fit to be present in polite society, and I better hide everything and anything about myself that wasn’t ‘normal’.

Again, this was before neurodivergence was acknowledge as a thing. Or rather, right around the time that it was first being recognized at all. Except it was thought of as a completely abhorrent thing that had to be surpressed/reprogrammed at all costs. Society was cruel, and doctors aided and abetted that cruelty. Hell, they pushed it forward themselves.


Continue Reading

Safer spaces and thee, part seven

Posted on by • 0 Comments

Let’s talk more about safer spaces. In yesterday’s post, I talked about reasons why it’s necessary to clearly spell out acceptable behavior in a group situation. I also mused about how people protested about it and about enthusiastic consent because….? Well, with the latter, they said it would take the spontaneity out of sex (ummmmmmm), and in the case of the former, I think it falls under the “people should just know this” umbrella.

Side note: It’s tiring. Being told that this or that is just something people should intuit. And as much as normies like to talk about how anyone can learn soft/social skills, it really isn’t as easy as that. And that’s part of ableism. It doesn’t help that it’s been so indoctrinated in people, many neurodivergent people feel the need to make themselves smaller, mask harder, and apologize for being different.

It’s not uncommon, by the way, for minorities to do this. Or to be one of the good ones. I have seen it time and time again, and I have been one to do this as well. When I was in college, I mostly hung out with guys. It really wasn’t a ‘I want to be the cool chick’ thing, but it ended up being that. In order to hang with the guys, I had to (or at least felt like I had to) rag on the women they did. I was well aware that my status as ‘cool girl’ was hanging by a thread that could be snipped at any time.

It’s hard. The world is made for the normies. It shouldn’t be that way, but it is. So while we’re worknig to change that, we also have to teach minorities how to cope and funciton in the real world.

I’ve talked about the double empathy problem, but I want to talk about it again. Before autism was really a thing, anyone who was autistic was pretty much expected to conform to normal society. Parents would basically force their autistic children to behave in a way that was deemed normal. If that wasn’t possible, then it was getting as close as possible.

Oftentimes, this was done through abusve/coercion. Be it emotional or physical or both. In my case, it was a heavy and constant dose of emotional manipulation–or maybe it’s more accuarate to say I was emotionally beaten down daily until I just crumbled.

I was told I was too sensitive, that I laughed too loudly, that I could not read while waiting for an event to start (Taiwanese event. Always started at least forty-five minutes late),and that I could not show any emotions other than happiness and gratitude. I know the latter is not an emotion, but it’s close enough.


Continue Reading

What a safe space is and isn’t, part six

Posted on by • 0 Comments

I’ve been talking at length about what a safe(r) space is and what it isn’t. The reason I put (r) at the end of safe is because no space can truly be safe, and I’m not sure that should be the ultimate goal, anyway.

We all live in the real world. No one can be protected by everything that happens unless they are completely wrapped in bubbles. Which, honestly, sounds like a nightmare. Being wrapped in bubbles, I mean. *shudders because of sensory issues* But I do think we can try to be empathetic and understanding of other people. This is where my rant is probably going to start, so be forewarned.

Oh, and in yesterday’s post, I talked about how hard it is to make a space safe(r) for many reasons. The one I want to expand on is how most people are invested in a version of themselves that may or may not be accurate, especially when it comes to prejudices. The more we are invested in seeing ourserves in a certain way, the harder it is to accept even the gentlest of criticsm.

Here’s the thing, though. As hard as it is to hear that, say, something you said was sexist–it’s even harder to be on the receiving end of sexist behavior/comments.But in our society, it has become (in the last decade or so) worse to call someone a racist than to be actually racist (substitute in any ist for racist). Because people hear any carefully crafted criticism of something they said or did as if the critique is saying they are utter shit and should self-flagellate for a hundred days.

I really wish we colud teach people that learning something they said/did was some kind of ist was taken more calmly. But, again, most people react as if you’re calling them shit on the bottom of your shoes.

The reason this is important when talking about safer spaces is because if you’re going to set limits and have rules, it’s good to name what’s going on. If it’s a comic con, for example, there is going to be sexism abound. And probably racism as well. It does no good to shy away from it or pretend it doesn’t exist. In fact, that attitude is why for so long, many women, genderqueer, PoC, etc., people who were minorities did not attend such cons. Not only were they not safe spaces (or even safer spaces), they were actively hostile to minorities.

It took a conscious effort on the part of con organizers to come up with actionable policies that made it much better for minorities to attend these cons. It wasn’t something that happened overnight, of course. It took many iterations to come up with something decent, but they kept at it.
I have never had to hammer out a policy like this, but I would start at the top with the broadest rules. The obvious ones. No racist/homophobic/sexist/ableist, etc. shit. I know that seems like an obvious one, but people are people, and obvious to most people will miss the ones that really need to hear it. Also, take that fig leaf of plausible deniability away. Clearly spell everything out so people can’t wave their hands and say, “But I didn’t knooooooooow I couldn’t call a woman whom I was pestering  a fucking c*** when she told me to leave her alone!”


Continue Reading

A true safe space, part five

Posted on by • 0 Comments

I have more to say about safe spaces. In part four of this series,  I was talking about how creepers are endlessly excused as just being socially awkward–if they are a white cishetguy. That’s not what I want to talk about today, though. I want to focus more on what a safe space would actually look like. Not in the context of being free of creepers, but more in general of forums/groups being more welcoming of people from diverse (read, minority) backgrounds.

Side note: There is a difference between being against something and being pro something else. What I mean is it’s one thing to say that you are against sexism, for example, but a different thing to say you’re pro-feminism. The first is good, of course, but the second is better.

It’s hard to describe the difference, but I’ll try.

Most people are not going to say they are pro-treating people differently based on race, gender, sexual identity–well, on the last one, I’m less sure about that, but we’ll let it slide for now. Even people who are explicitly sexist, racist, homophobic, etc., will rationalize why they’re saying what they said. It’s not because they’re racist, but because Asian people really are sly, for example. And it’s really hard to deconstruct statements like that without giving a twenty-minute lecture about history, stereotypes, biases, and so forth.

I’ve seen spaces claim that they are against racism, sexism, homophobia, etc., but then don’t actually do anything about it when casual isms are tossed around in the chats. (I’m talking about online spaces for now.) It’s not enough to claim you’re against isms. I mean, that’s the absolute base level for the rules of engagement.

The problem is that you can’t just state it without actually enforcing it. And you can’t enforce it if you don’t have actual rules past the statement above. That’s one of the problems I see with communities that aren’t focused on minorities. They mean well (truly), and their hearts are in the right place (I mean it!), but they don’t really put much thought into what it means to be inclusive.

Side note to the side note: This is what I meant by being for something versus being against something. Saying you’re anti-isms is great, but it’s the first step. Unfortunately, so many groups treat it as the last or only step. They post signs or tags in chat that they are against isms.

In 2026, that should go without saying. I mean, granted, we have a president who is about as close to being openly pro-racism, pro-sexism, and pro-queerphobic as one can be without actually saying the literal words. And we have so many anti-LGBTQ+ folks being passed, especially ones against queer folks.

Now I’m actually depressing myself once again by thinking about the state of the (ha) United States of America. It just still astounds me that minorities are losing their civil rights left and, er, right these days. I have mourned that I had more rights when I was in my twenties than my niblings do now.


Continue Reading

More about safe(r) spaces, part four

Posted on by • 0 Comments

Let’s talk more about safe(r) spaces and how organizations/conference managers can create them. In yesterday’s post, I talked about how people were willing to give creepers chance after chance, especially if they say they’re autistic. I also noted that some of the guys (and, yes, it’s usually guys) who claim to just be awkward and not know where the line is usually know not to, say, hit on their male coworker who is working on a project with them. In other words, they do know where a broad line is.

Now, let’s say that maybe they are fine until they go on a date. Then, that’s when they don’t know where to draw the line. In the case I mentioned yesterday, it was known that the guy would stop if you were brutally clear to him that what he was doing was making you uncomfortable. That allowed two of his ardent defenders in the post I was reading (and, to be clear, none of us knew the actual person this was happening to) to say that it was him being hapless/hopeless about where that line was drawn.

Women rightly pointed out that it wasn’t on all the women to constantly have to keep him in check. If he did not know where that line was, then he should not be dating. No one has the right to date anyone they please, and it’s so tiring to constantly have to state no loudly and firmly.  (that’s part of what enthusiastic consent is about. You want the buy in before you even start doing the activity).

Side note: when the idea of enthusiastic consent came about, some people were pooh-poohing it, and one reason they stated was because it would take the spontaneity and fun out of sex. I thought it was really telling that people objected on those lines, by the way. To me, what I heard was, “I want plausible deniability when I push this woman to do something she doesn’t really want to do” or even worse, “I don’t care if you consent or not. I’m getting what I want.”

Plausible deniability is where many creeps reside. They know how to push up against the line juuuuuust enough to test the waters without going firmly over the line. It really is a no-win siutation for the woman*. She’s supposed to be nice to any random guy who is around her, making sure not to upset his delicate ego. She must smile and be nonthreatening, being more of a visual accessoryldecoration than anything else else.

If a guy creeps on her, then she either had to give him a chance beacuse he’s such a nice guy! Why would she not go out with him? Or she had to turn him down so gently, he wasn’t hurt at all.

If that failed or if she went on the date and something bad happened, then it’s, “Why did you go out with him?” “Why did you wear that slinky dress?” “Why didn’t you fight?” The Monday morning quarterbacking went on and on and on. She was a cold bitch if she wouldn’t go out with him; she was a slut/dumb/naive if she did go out with him and something happened.

You know who often gets hurt by creeps who claim to be autistic? Neurodivergent women/Afab/nonbinary/genderqueer people. Because one thing creeps have in common is that they have an uncanny knack (or a skill honed over years)  for picking on people who are weaker than they are/have less societal clout than they do. People who will not be believed or who society don’t care about.

I was getting so angry at these two defenders who put so much energy into protecting this one guy who was probably a creep rather than his potential victims. The defenders kept harping on the fact that he might be being bullied/this was “just” a dating problem. Meaning he should not be “punished” in any other way (like being pre-banned from a hobby group). They say punished, I say the natural consequences of his actions. People are allowed to take his history of behavior into consideration when evaluating a person’s behavior. Otherwise, we would always have to wipe our memory clean.

I agree that there should be a policy in place to deal with future creeps, but I also think that not allowing this guy to participate in the hobby group in the first place was reasonable. This is how Missing Stairs are created–when creeps are allowed to keep on creeping regardless of how uncomfortable they make other people. Or unsafe.

The two enablers kept harping on how it wasn’t faaaair to make a neurodivergent guy not be a creeper. Of course they didn’t phrase it like that, but that’s what it came down to. They downplayed all the incidents reported and were flailing their arms about wailing, “How could he possibly knooooooow?”

Again, I must repeat that I was glad a few people said that he truly did not know where the line was, then he should not be playing the game at all. Meaning, if he was consistently fucking up when it came to dating, then he should not be dating.

I have zero sympathy for this guy because to me, there is enough evidence that he was creep. Which leads me to another–

Side note: You can be neurodivergent AND an asshole. My tagline for FB used to be, “Being a minority and being an asshole are not mutually exclusive.” Meaning you can be a minority AND a raging jerk! Or a creep. In fact, I would argue it’s more ableist to excuse every behavior as, “Aw, he can’t help it. He’s autistic!” than saying, “Everything wrong with him is because he’s autistic.”

I mean, what if I were to say, “I’m autistic so if someone touches me when I don’t want it/don’t expect it, I have to punch them in the face in return”? Would that be acceptable? Nope. It’s not even acceptable to sternly turn down a guy, let alone punch one.

Saying it’s just bad dating behavior as if that was enough of a silo to allow him to act however he wanted inn other situations show how much we devalue women. Or think that the mistreatment of women by the men they’re dating is more than acceptable. None of that behavior should be acceptable in any situation. And, honestly, if a guy a creeper jerk towards the women he dates, then I would not have him around in the office.

That’s all for now. More tomorrow.

 

 

*Usually a woman or someone who is perceived as a woman being creeped on.