Rerelease: Wha is 'Call-Out Culture' and is it Always Beneficial?

This episode was originally released in January 2021 

Maria and Mikey join India in a discussion where they try to decide if calling people out is always the right thing to do, and if there's a better way to go about it. During the episode they also consider the effects of cancel culture, reaching outside of your echo chamber, unintentionally centring yourself in a discourse, and how well intentioned actions can actually sometimes lead to more problematic situations themselves.

Logo Art: Catrin Harrison 

Music by: Aleks Filipiak

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:07

Okay, I'm gonna start my recording. If you guys haven't started yours, I'm gonna start my bit closer. Okay, no, are you guys ready? You think you're ready? You need a few minutes?

SPEAKER_00 0:16

We've had 25 minutes, so I'm pretty sure we're good.

SPEAKER_02 0:20

Okay, Mikey, that was partly your Wi-Fi. Got things to do. So busy.

SPEAKER_01 0:27

Hello everybody, welcome to another episode of Blurring Boundaries, the podcast where we talk about anything controversial or avoided in society. Today I'm here with two of my friends who I met through volleyball, but who are a graduate in politics, Maria Klonhammer, who's currently living in Amsterdam. Hi India. And Mikey Culadin, who's a mechanical engineering graduate, currently living at home and waiting until he gets the chance to go to teach in China.

SPEAKER_00 0:54

Hello.

SPEAKER_01 0:55

Was that introduction okay for you?

SPEAKER_00 0:57

You added the pizzazz to the end of it, so yeah, I'm agreeable.

SPEAKER_01 1:01

So today the main theme is calling people out. And I kind of wanted to start with like what your idea of calling out is, what you think the reason of it is, how it helps kind of the cause to an extent. Because I think a lot of people have quite different ideas of what calling out means and what the reason is behind it.

SPEAKER_02 1:20

Calling people out, it comes is because you're accountable, and especially in well, in like a society or in in society where privilege plays such a massive role in so many aspects of our lives, it is really important to call people out to to kind of not really protecting others, but but yeah, by like living up to your accountability, um, in that sense, I don't know if I can explain that correctly. Um but I think we have a responsibility towards each other to look out for each other and to kind of and to call out people when in a sense they're power they're they're using their power to undermine others because by making a certain comment that is ultimately what that's what I believe you're ultimately doing. And I think especially I mean obviously calling out has gained kind of like prominence in our I mean discussions and in the media recently, but obviously it's been I mean it's been around for for ages, it's not a new thing, but for some people it's a very new thing, um, which is is positive, but also it's positive and bad that we've not always been doing it to the same extent. Um and then regarding like you have I think you have differences between like calling in and calling out. Um this idea of like either like once if someone says something, um, or maybe if you say something yourself to like immediately be like you can't say that, or like to be very like uh reactive, whereas calling in, and I think that's maybe also gained more prominence now, is like to have the discussions outside of the the kind of like debate or the the conversation at that moment to let's say one of your white friends, especially. I mean this is it's it's not just like a a a white uh topic, it's in all sorts of privilege, but uh in that sense to like afterwards say, hey, like what you said, I I don't think that's okay, and then kind of explain it as opposed to just like in the moment say you can't say that, or don't ever say that again. And it's like different, different strategies, and I think different strategies fit better with certain people and also with certain situations.

SPEAKER_01 3:32

Yeah, definitely. That's actually one of the main points I wanted to talk about in a bit, the difference between calling out and calling in, which I feel like has been actually I've only come to kind of understand in the past few like weeks, really, if if I'm completely honest, because I didn't really realise like calling in or calling, I think some people call it calling forth. There's a bit of a posh way of putting it, I don't know. But like calling you forth. No, but it's definitely it kind of makes you think about the reason you're doing it rather than just doing it maybe a bit more for your personal gain rather than actually the reason that it's coming out for in the first time in the first place.

SPEAKER_02 4:04

Yeah, no, so I think especially now because because calling out has become something that is becoming more expected of people, that you some people also have a tendency to do it very publicly because then you get the credit for it. Whereas what you also should be doing is have those conversations without then telling anyone that you did that, just like have at you know, with your parents, with your friends at the dinner table, have that conversation and then not go on social media and be like, I did this and I'm great. Praise them. Yeah, yeah, because that I mean it really undermines, I mean it doesn't undermine the whole point, but it undermines part of it. Um, I think because then again you're centering yourself uh while you're already the person with the privilege, so then again you can underpin your own privilege.

SPEAKER_01 4:52

Very well put. I'd forgotten how good you are at speaking, and you put that exactly perfectly. I try, I try. Mikey, do you wanna how are you feeling?

SPEAKER_00 5:02

Well, uh, I just like throw I've never heard of the term calling in before. Um but you're really good at it, Mikey. I'm so good, no. To start my point, I was gonna say that there's several different kinds of calling out depending on the topic that's kind of in question or the scenario that you're in. And I I suppose part of the way that I've called out people has been calling in. I just didn't know that that's the term used for it. And it definitely depends on the situation, how comfortable you feel in the group when someone says something that is questionable. And I do think there's much to be said for silence is violence, um, but there's also if you call out something at a certain point, yes, you're making it clear that that's not an acceptable thing to say, which has its own merits, but it might not be beneficial to the learning of the person who's made the mistake in saying that thing, and so sometimes calling in afterwards in a much more kind of intimate personal setting that's not exposing them to an entire group of people is more progressive in that person's development.

SPEAKER_01 6:01

Yeah, definitely.

SPEAKER_02 6:01

Yeah, because when I was saying like Mikey, you're really good at it, I think is like I definitely in the past used to be got quite shouty about these things where I was like, you can't say that. Like it's a very like typical like politics student, they love to shout at each other. And then I kind of got to a point where like this is maybe not very helpful, um, because the reaction of the person up like opposite you is just like, oh, you're I don't know, either you're annoying or it's too intense, or I'm so embarrassed that I'm just gonna ignore the whole issue. And I've definitely seen you do that, Mikey, where you're like very either be like a message or just like kind of like a quiet comment, be like, I don't think that's okay to say. Um and I think especially for people who are very new to certain like things not being okay or new to kind of being anti-racist or kind of tackling their own racism calling in can be way more successful just because you avoid that they kind of react to it with embarrassment or anger or annoyance. But I mean it's a difficult balance.

SPEAKER_00 7:08

I think there's a there's a good balance to strike to to make sure that when something is said in a group situation that it is challenged when it is incorrect, so that the entire group doesn't become to think that that's an acceptable thing to say. Um but I think in terms of progressing forward as a society, we need far more kind of quiet words with people to help them develop and move forward. Um and there needs to be reinforcement on both fronts in the in the public space so that we know that things are wrong and like unacceptable to say, um, but then to provide the learning behind that in a in a more measured way. Exactly.

SPEAKER_01 7:42

I think it's interesting as well in terms of calling out when you're just calling someone out, whether it's in a group setting or like in terms of like the severe calling out, often it can come from a place of like, well, I'm right, you're wrong, this is the situation, I've never done anything that's hypocritical or anything that's anywhere near this sphere. Often I think that's why you can end up ostracising people, because it's that I feel like it's what's happening like everywhere in politics and stuff, when each side is like, no, I'm right and you're wrong, and there's no like space for conversation in the middle, and you just end up completely pushing both sides, like just so much further away from each other, than whereas like you're saying if you just come up to someone or talk to them when they're you know not in a group, or just like if you're in a conversation and be like, Oh, why why do you think that, or are you sure about that, or some people don't really believe that and that kind of thing, you know what I mean?

SPEAKER_00 8:29

No, exactly. Yeah, it's it's very, very hard to publicly admit that you're wrong, like even more so people are becoming kind of more opinionated on things and like to imagine that they have all the facts and their opinion is definitely the correct opinion. And when it's challenged in a public space, it's very hard in the current climate to back down or admit that you've been at fault, uh, because that can effectively undermine all the rest of your arguments. Whereas if it's done in a public in a private space, it's a lot easier to kind of give leeway and say, Oh yeah, perhaps I was wrong on this point and go forward from there.

SPEAKER_02 9:04

Yeah. Yeah, no, exactly. And it I think it's very important. I do think that like in this approach, we do also have to kind of keep in mind that our feelings are not more important than the issue at stake. Because that is I am all for pulling in, I think it's very effective generally. Um, but it can kind of border to oh, you know, we don't want to upset someone, we don't want to trigger them or make them sad or feel uncomfortable in this group because they said something, but it's it depending on on the issue, or not even depending on the issue, just in general, that is kind of a dangerous approach as well, because then oh, their feelings become way more important. Whereas sometimes it is uncomfortable. Like these if these conversations are not uncomfortable, then they're not the right conversations. Um because it's it's super hard to be told that what you're saying or what you're thinking is harmful to other people or is underpinning a system that is super harmful to to major groups in in society. So I do think that that's like something that we also have to keep in mind to not just be super nice about it because it's not a nice topic. You're not talking about someone's hobbies, you're talking about very problematic parts of their thinking, of your own thinking, probably as well, if you're having these conversations, and that's kind of like tying to I think what you just said in the as well. It's like not holding on to the fact that you're a good person in like quotation marks, and I think that's definitely something like I also had to work on a lot more. Was like I kind of started, I mean, this is like throughout my life, it also was like, yeah, no, I'm a I'm a good person, I'm not not, you know, I'm not racist. I don't and I was like, no, I am racist, and like I am also sexist, and I am all these other like things to acknowledge that because if you hold on to the idea I'm a good person, then that means that you don't have any wrong viewpoints or ideas.

SPEAKER_01 11:03

I was just thinking the same thing. I think like in especially with the media and things like this, and you kind of often, or just with people in general, you either have an opinion that this person is either perfect, or um, you know, people who are maybe activists and they everything they say must be right because they're activists for this, or I'm trying to think of a good example, but you kind of get this idea that either a person is good or a person is bad, or so that everything that they do is good or everything that they do is bad, and it kind of negates the fact that everyone makes mistakes, everyone's hypocritical, some people maybe an activist does say something that could be problematic and then somebody calls them out or calls them in or whatever, and then they oh say, Oh, sorry, actually, you know, maybe I was wrong, or you know, that kind of thing. So I think it's so important to like keep in mind that everyone is a person, everyone, you know, is is constantly learning and to just to remember that, you know, none of us are gonna be perfect and all of us are hypocritical in certain ways. One of the things I wanted to ask was about cancel culture and like what you thought about that, because when cancel culture first became a thing, I was like, Yeah, of course, all these rapists and you know, Harvey Weinstein and whoever, like, yeah, get them out. I don't want to talk to them, I don't want to see them on my screen, da-da-da-da-da. I'm not saying I ever want Harvey Weinstein to be, you know, back in the public sphere, that's not what I'm saying. But I feel like a lot of people get cancelled on Twitter for saying something that maybe didn't realise was problematic, or you know, that so many people are getting cancelled at the moment when actually the more productive thing to do would be for them to kind of like somebody to be like, oh look, gosh, she I think that was a bit problematic.

SPEAKER_00 12:38

I think it's it's one of those difficult situations, as with most of these conversations, it is effective to a certain point, but it can be widely overused to the point that it becomes detrimental. And there's lots of people hold opinions that are damaging to society, but I think it's better that they be kind of open about those opinions so that they can be changed. And the issue with cancel culture is if we're having to try and project this perfect image of ourselves as an unflawed individual, uh the questionable opinions that you might hold will never come to light and can never you it's a lot harder to self-improve or help improve other people if everyone is suddenly too scared to say anything. And while there are definite times where a certain vile opinion should be outed as not acceptable for public debate because it's infringing upon all sorts of things, there's the opinions which are kind of less damaging, still damaging but less damaging, that should be able to be kind of openly spoken, and then that person not be completely shunned from society because there's every person is redeemable. And I know it's it's a it's very easy to say this as someone who is not affected by most of the issues in society, but engaging with people with the damaging opinions to try and help them develop and grow, I think is quite a viable option in progressions in society, and I think if we're cancelling everyone that we don't agree with, we're gonna get a huge rift in society, and you do see it in kind of parts of politics now where both sides are kind of heading away from each other, and that's not leading to any particularly unified uh places where you can progress as a society.

SPEAKER_02 14:15

No, I I agree with you, Mikey. I think it's the the problem with council culture is like the shutting down of it, the immediate immediate response being like no, you can't say that. And the thing is, it's like and I think this is good to mention of yours that like well, all three of us are very privileged, role, white, cis, etc. So we do have an additional responsibility to kind of like look out for those like four problematic um and dangerous by the like uh viewpoints and opinions, um, but instead of just like cancelling it, you can you can address it, and it's not the same because counselling is just like we we shut it out and it's not and there is some value in that because for someone who is more affected by certain discourses or and and comments, sometimes if other people are like okay, you can't just can't say that done, is very helpful and can really go a long way. Uh but then what you're saying as well, like if that just means that everyone gets uh really scared of saying anything, and that might also cause people to become more extreme in those thoughts because they never feel like they can address them, and then no one ever addresses those thoughts. So that is something that has I don't know, has to be kind of kept in mind and is problematic. But then, for example, I think I mean as far as I have have thought about it thus far, a case where I think council culture is good, is for example, now with JK Rowling, with her the the transphobia surrounding her as a person, basically, is that in this case people have addressed it, they've discussed but like what attacked her on this on these viewpoints, and she has actively defended it. In that case, to say we're gonna stop reading Harry Potter books or cancelling her, I think is productive because there has been that conversation and she has been okay, yes, by m kind of like mass groups on the internet, which is you could say difficult in a sense, but it's not like she said some something and immediately everyone went, Oh, that's it, she's gone. Like we'll never talk about her ever again. Um but I don't know if you guys agree on this. It is and it is a yeah, it's an it's an interesting discussion, I think. And especially now that council culture has kind of become like a like a buzzword, which I always find kind of strange when it becomes like a trend. Um these things shouldn't be really be trends, they should be something that we discuss all the time. Um but then I guess it is the case of better late than never, um, with a bit of a question mark.

SPEAKER_01 17:01

I think that's really a really interesting point because one of the things that I was gonna bring up is the idea. I think often, if you're just very on a surface level looking at calling people out and things like that, the idea is I'm gonna call them out because they are wrong, and they're gonna be enlightened because I'm enlightened, I'm gonna enlighten them, and then okay, they're gonna see that they're wrong and they're gonna change their views and change their behaviours and just move on with life, and that's gonna be you know happy and whatever. But I think we can all probably say that we've experienced a situation where someone's called you out or said, like, oh, I don't think that's right, and you've instantly kind of been like, Oh, I know, I'm right, because you don't know, like you were saying, nobody wants to be wrong. But then later on, you know, you think about it and you're like, Oh, yeah, I maybe was wrong, and you and you change your behaviour that way, and I'm sure it's it's probably happened with other people when you've called somebody else out or you know, talked to them about something, and you think, right, they've really like argued against me and they've defended their points now, but I know that they're the kind of person that'll go away and think about it and change the behaviour. But at the same time, there are those people who are just gonna keep defending their opinions, and unfortunately, I think often it is older generations who because I think if you've lived your life in a certain way for such a long time, and there's a lot of people who are younger than you are and are in quote marks less wise than you and have had less experience, they're coming and telling you you're wrong. I think that's gotta be a very hard thing to adapt to and kind of accept and change your behaviour after such a long time when you've believed something for such a long time. And in those situations, I haven't thought of it in the way that you have put it, in terms of like sometimes it is okay to cancel, and if we have called someone out and we have said to them you're wrong, and or you know, you're hurting a lot of people doing this and whatever. I think yeah, it is kind of acceptable to do that. I think of people, um I can't think of an example, but you know, people who've abused people or they're um, you know, been in abusive relationships, and they just keep either defending it or denying it, or even when they've been, you know, proven guilty, they still continue to not accept the fact that they're or not accept their own culpability. And I think then, yeah, it definitely is okay. And like you were saying, Mikey, it is just a balance. We have to accept that cancelling everyone all at the same time is not really productive in society, but at the same time, if you're also, you know, there is somebody who's continually saying like really dangerous and problematic things all the time, well, you know, we don't really want that to be spreading around the internet or wherever it is, and reaching so many people for them to continue thinking this is okay.

SPEAKER_00 19:40

Yeah, I think it it also depends on the size of the person's platform as to how how many chances you kind of give them before deciding that okay, now like you we've given you chances, you defended yourselves, uh, but now it you're perpetuating these things to hundreds of thousands, millions of people, and that is a dangerous thing. And I like I like to believe the idea that everyone is redeemable in some regard, and therefore cancelling it for me is a very kind of final act, and that like, right, you're done, you're never gonna improve on this, isn't a very kind of optimistic thought process, but at times it's got to be done for damage limitation's sake, and because if you have this person perpetuating the same the same kind of troubling uh opinions to millions of people who are then gonna take those forward and think it's uh acceptable to do, uh you have like a larger issue than one person being cancelled.

SPEAKER_01 20:35

On that note, I kind of wanted to bring up the idea that we all kind of obviously we all live in a certain circle, what's the word? Um, echo chamber to an extent. Um and I feel like, especially within our bubble, we're probably kind of like preaching to the converted. And I wonder, to me, the people who not the people who need to be influenced, because I feel like we're talking about this all from a very like enlightened perspective, and we're all being like, oh yeah, you know, we're always right and we can cancel everyone, which I I mean we all believe if we have like certain views. But I think then there's other groups who I think it's even more important to reach. For instance, you know, um locker rooms or you know, really right-wing groups who you're never ever going to come into contact with because they're just nowhere near your social circle or your circle. And I suppose I wanted just to talk about the difference between calling someone out who you who you're close with and who you kind of know are re receptive to those kind of ideas, and who are receptive to kind of think thinking like, oh maybe I was wrong and like analysing their own behaviour, and like the difference between that and somebody who is completely on the other end and who is completely adamant that they are completely right and that they're not doing any damage to anyone, or even if they are, they don't really care. Um I don't even know. I suppose I'm just wondering what you think, and if there is a way to like reach those people, or I suppose, Mikey, I'm really interested from your perspective as a white man, and being in like locker rooms. Those kind of situations, because obviously Maria and I haven't really been I'm often quite aware that in a group of guys they're never going to say anything that they know is going to be, you know, problematic to me. I'm just interested, I suppose, what what do you think? Have you been in those situations?

SPEAKER_00 22:13

Yeah, so I've been in a lot a lot of uh male dominated situations or male exclusive situations where there's obviously a lot of um very questionable banter is the term thrown around that is damaging. Um and I'll say most most of the times I've been in that situation, I never called anything out, um primarily because it was quite a long time ago before I was more saw the value of trying to kind of shut down that culture while it's developing, and also the feeling that even if I said anything, because I wasn't a particularly well-respected member of that group, it wouldn't have had much impact on anyone. And so, yeah, there's there are those situations, and I think in the case where you're interacting with people outside of your echo chamber, I don't think one conversation makes much of a difference, it's much more of a an engagement process over a long period of time. Um because if if people both sides are entrenched in their point of view, you're not going to get much from a quick, uh, rapid-fire discussion. It's got to be like a long exposure. Um people going away themselves and having a retrospective think and then coming back to discuss new ideas, and one way or another, influence will start uh your opinions will start to be influenced. So I think there's there's calling people out in that situation is good to try and stop the perpetuation of ideas and say, hey look guys, this isn't okay and this is damaging to some people. But I think in that situation, what makes the real change is having the patience and time to keep going back and keep trying to have this discussion in not an attacking way but in a constructive manner. Um and once again that comes from a place of privilege in that those opinions aren't damaging to me, um, and therefore I can take as much time as I want to try and kind of express why those opinions are wrong, and if it takes a few years, it doesn't have much effect on me because like them having a bad like a damaging opinion for several years isn't going to have a difference. Um, whereas if it's a a damaging opinion to a minority group, the minority might think that there's less uh kind of less lenience and patience to get rid of that damaging opinion.

SPEAKER_01 24:21

Yeah, that's so true. I think something also that I've been thinking about in terms of you talking about like um going back and you know spending the time and things like that, which I think is so important because, like you said, it's not something that's going to change overnight. And in terms of say, um, Black Lives Matter movement at the at the moment, you think of how long this, not specifically Black Lives Matter, but this kind of movement has been going on, you know, equal rights for black people or for minority groups or whatever it is has been going on for so long we still have so many of the problems that we have at the moment and we're still fighting for the same things, and sometimes they you feel even like you're going backwards. But um I suppose the point I was gonna ask is like, you know, the idea that if you're oppressed, you can also be an oppressor. So, like obviously, Maria, like you were saying, we're all quite privileged. I suppose the only thing that you and me, Maria, have is that we're women, but I think apart from that, you know, we're white cis women, you know, we are very privileged. And even if you are oppressed in a certain way, you can also be an oppressor. And I suppose where I'm going with this is like, do you think there's a line where it comes where you're and quotation marks if you're enlightened and you're trying to enlighten someone else, where's the line between say enlightening or you know, questioning or calling out and being kind of like almost not patronizing or narcissistic, but kind of like I can't even think of the word, like not misogynistic, that's not the word, but you know, when you're you're kind of like trying to educate people to the extent where actually you're just doing it because you feel like you're the one who's right and you're the one who's trying to educate people when actually maybe you're not the right person. I don't I don't really know if you understand what I'm saying.

SPEAKER_02 26:02

Yeah, I think so, or I think we can we can go somewhere with this, and it kind of ties into the echo chamber question as well, is like especially now uh social on social media is trendy to talk about Black Lives Matter, uh the like being anti-racist, etc. Whereas it ha as you were saying, this is not new in any sense, it's just like now finally quite a few white people have picked up on it, and like well, but the thing is like there have been so many people, and especially uh people of colour who have been like fighting this fight. I mean, they have to fight this fight every day in their just by existing, but also like on the actual like activists, um more like professional activism side. Um, they've been doing all this work, and then now for so many white people who've never really done any work on this, it's so easy to like pick just like pick their work basically, and then they're like, I'm now as you were saying, I think like the word enlightened kind of ties into this. It's a bit saying it in that sense is a bit problematic because it's not enlightenment, it's not like a kind of like oh I've you know the how we approach it, like oh, I now finally understand. So now I'm I'm a good person now, and I'm now and then this comes to to I think what you were actually asking, like to then be like, I'm now gonna teach everyone because I'm great and I've done the work, and and then it becomes a first of all, becomes it it becomes patronizing, which is something that's problematic in itself, but also it then becomes uh like a self-improvement uh kind of exercise because you're like you have all this, and there's this whole thing of like white guilt, etc. And I'm sure like men have this, some men have this as well, or any kind of like privileged position to kind of kind of diminish that guilt by as an enlightened person um teaching everyone around you, um, which is it's problematic in so many ways because you're first of all, you're sent first you're centering yourself again. Um, and I think saying this, it might be worthless to mention that the fact that like we as like three white people are discussing this, we should also acknowledge that it's like we're not having this as like a I mean I mean this is as you're saying, just a conversation between friends because it's also an important conversation to have between white uh people, but yeah, the fact that you're basically stepping into an environment where so many people have already been doing so much work, so by centering yourself, you're reinforcing the privilege that you're supposedly trying to kind of attack and and and and diminish. And I think we're all guilty of it. It's like it's always nice to because because posting on social media also does serve a purpose, um, because you're spreading information, etc. But it I mean, I think we can all acknowledge that it makes you feel good, you're like, ah, I've now posted something like that's like positive and and does certain work. So I think that's something to be very we have to be very very aware of, and the fact that also doing it kind of going into the more about social media, talking on social media, posting things is not the same as actually then when you see it in front of you calling out. It's like I saw this really nice like um with like an analogy where it's like if you compare it to mountain climbing, reading and posting about mountain climbing doesn't make you a mountain climber. And it's that it's the same thing. Like reading and posting about anti-racism doesn't make you anti-racist, so it's yeah, taking it from something that is a self-improvement action to actual action and calling calling your friends and family out, even when it is really hard and when you feel like maybe it is pointless.

SPEAKER_01 29:48

Yeah, that's that is exactly what I was trying to get to right at the start when I just couldn't really speak. On that topic, uh something I I kind of I suppose I want to ask you as well is what you know when you have these activists or people who I suppose people who aren't specifically affected by the activism they're they're doing or something, or um, I suppose a good analogy might be people who can come from say very privileged, say conservative background, and then they go to university or they go and live somewhere else and they they come across a lot of say left-wing people or liberal or however you want to put it, and then they'd realise, oh god, like actually I I think you're right. I'm I'm more I feel like I agree more with the left than I do with the right or whatever it is, and then they throw themselves into, you know, being an activist for that side of the the debate, even if they maybe aren't really affected by it or whatever, or similarly with white people kind of not jumping on the bandwagon, but you know, becoming activists for Black Lives Matter or whatever. And I've heard a bit of an argument that's like, how effective if somebody who is maybe slightly problematic in themselves and don't completely understand what they're the work they're doing at such a deep level is still doing the work, and there are other people who really do understand it to the level, but they're not really doing the work, is that effective? Should they not that should they be allowed to, but should it always be the people who really understand the work who are doing the work, or should it I feel like you get a lot of people who are doing who are activists because it makes them feel good and because um they feel they're doing the right thing and not quite white saviours, but you know, often people who are just like, I'm gonna come and I'm gonna help and I'm gonna like, you know, we're gonna stop all injustice, whereas actually you've not really got much to do with this and you haven't really it's not really affecting you, and although you are kind of helping the cause to an extent, you're not really do doing it for the right reasons. Um, I heard kind of something once if there's a man or somebody walking down the street and they see a homeless person and they give a pound to a homeless person and they make sure everyone sees them, and there's somebody else who's doing it just because they want to help somebody else comes along and gives a pound to the homeless person or whoever it is, they are still helping that person, whether they're doing it because it's the right thing to do, whether they're doing it because they want other people to see them, or whatever reasons they're doing it, they're still doing the work. So I suppose what I'm asking is do you think it matters the reason people are doing the work or how they're doing it, as long as they're, you know, doing the work?

SPEAKER_02 32:20

Yeah, I think it definitely matters. Like if you and this is something that's come up before as well, is like by centering yourself, let's get if you take the example of of giving someone to a homeless person, you're once again making it about you, and you're already getting all this attention. If we if we take this the example you gave, by drawing a lot of attention to the fact that you give money to a homeless person, you will probably make him feel really shit. Because then once again, it's emphasized that you are giving money to someone who is supposedly helpless and you know rock bottom, etc. Um, so I think that's the thing, like if you want to do it well, um, and you're always gonna make mistakes, you do really have to kind of think about why you're doing it, and I think it's okay if that starts out of like, oh, I want to, you know, it to look good and all my friends are doing it, but you then you have to work on kind of like shifting that that mindset to go to a point where like this is a a good thing to do, whether someone sees it or not. Um, and there's a um this is a s a scholar, an activist, uh like a a public figure in a sense, called uh Rachel Carl, and she in her she's a black American woman, and she's really good, and like in her comments you always get um white women being like, Oh, it's so horrible, like I support you, and she's like, This is not the white ally Olympics, leave my comment section. She's like, This is not your space. It's really and I I've been in her I started following her like a while back. Like one of my friends recommended um her to me, and then she was really I was really um offended. I was like, why is she so like mean to these women just like trying to support it? And then I was like, I thought about it more, and I was like, I read some of her stuff, and I was like, Oh, it's she explains it very well because it's like you're again sent it's not about you, and the whole problem is that so much evolves around you as a privileged person in whatever aspect. So, yeah, so to answer your question, I I do think it it it massively matters. But I don't know, Mikey, if you have a a different opinion.

SPEAKER_00 34:32

Yeah, I do. I I feel so far we've kind of agreed with each other on everything, so I'd like to throw a counter opinion in here to make it slightly more interesting.

SPEAKER_02 34:40

Yes.

SPEAKER_00 34:40

In the situation, I do agree with you. If it's a scenario where it's kind of like um the race, racial issues that we have, white people centering is actually perpetuating the racial issue in a certain way, despite trying to help. Um, but there's other issues where that becomes less of an effect. So with back to the homeless person example, in the in the case of the homeless person has so far received one pound in each scenario. However, in the scenario where the person's drawing attention to giving the money, while they might be doing that for their own kind of self uh self-satisfaction, drawing attention to an issue can cause more people to then think, oh, this is a thing we do now. And so in that scenario, it's possible that that action and the kind of raising attention to your own kind of goodwill will cause further goodwill to happen. And it's I mean, I'm I'm kind of throwing this out there just to provide a bit of debate instead of a grill in the situation. But could that not be can there not be scenarios where drawing attention to things, even if it is a bit of like a white saviour complex, actually benefits the cause you're trying to help further by bringing that extra attention in? Even if the kind of the means are self-centered, is it not better if the end is more beneficial to the the cause?

SPEAKER_02 36:00

But do you not think you can draw at 'cause I I I completely get your point, but you don't think you can draw attention to a cause without making it about you?

SPEAKER_00 36:10

Yes, that is definitely possible, but in the in the case of donation, I think there's something to be said for if you see a friend donate to a cause, I know I'm probably slightly more likely to do it because if it if a friend tells me donate to this cause, I'm probably more likely to do it if they say donate to this cause because I also have done so.

SPEAKER_02 36:30

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 36:31

Um I think that's just the case with like people do follow people they know and like if they know that they've done it. And I know that's kind of trend following, blah de blah. We can argue whether that's a good thing or bad thing, but if it does provide more funding for a particular cause, is that not beneficial?

SPEAKER_02 36:47

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 36:47

In the case where the self-centering isn't acting against that as it does in racial scenarios.

SPEAKER_02 36:54

No, I think I mean defin uh unfortunately, I think we still we still agree. Um good attempt. No, but it is like it's a good point that you you bring up because definitely by saying, Okay, I've done this, I think you should all do this. Um there's just like a difference between saying that I mean like I'm so great, I've done something really good today, and you're like, Well, it's I mean it's a very like small gesture, etc. But yeah.

SPEAKER_01 37:21

I think while you were talking, I was kind of thinking about it, and I was thinking, I have always been like, I think it's better for the person, you know, to just say we're the homeless person, give the money and not draw attention to themselves. But Mikey, I also see your point, and I was trying to think what is the problem, what would be problematic about lots of people drawing attention and then lots of people doing it, and I think maybe what I if there is anything, it would be the fact that it's a lot more superficial and it's not really at a deeper level. If you think of one example I was just thinking of is you know, um when they did uh what was it called, Blackout Thursday or Blackout Something, and everyone posted the black square on their Instagram and and it was typical example of oh my god, all my friends are doing it, I've got to show my support, I'm gonna do it as well. Um, and everyone did it, and like to start with, I was like, for the first few like I don't know, hours I was like, what do you hell? Like everyone's doing it, oh my god, wow, this is it shows such support support. And then within a couple of hours, or within especially within a couple of days, people were like, right, okay, so you've shown your support, like, where's your actual action? I suppose going back to like there's a difference between what you say and what you do, or you know, you're not a hiker if you've watched loads of videos on hiking and all that kind of thing. I suppose, with say giving money, if loads of people, I'm just thinking about donations on GoFundMe and stuff, and people are like, oh my god, and they instantly donate to that charity or um they instantly help this cause or whatever and sign the petition or whatever it is, but after they've done it once or twice, they're like, Okay, I've done my part. Um, I feel like I've done what everyone else is doing now. I don't really need to do any more, I've shown that I support this, and that's that's me done. And I suppose if we are looking for reasons why that might be problematic or not as beneficial or not as yeah, I suppose beneficial to the cause as, say, people doing it because they actually feel like they need or need or want to help the cause.

SPEAKER_00 39:14

Yeah, I I understand your point in that if it's a kind of reaction, knee-jerk reaction to jump on the bandwagon and just kind of do something to say you've done it, that doesn't provide the lasting um kind of effects that you'd necessarily want from a movement. Um but I also think it's kind of impossible to expect everyone to be full-blown activist in all corners of life. Um I think it might be a beautiful world if that were the case, but I think realistically that's probably not going to happen. And so an act that does garner a bit more support, even if that's not long-lasting support, can be beneficial. Um, and to go to like a more local example for me, Andy Burnham, the the mayor of uh Greater Manchester, who's been on the news a little bit recently, he's um uh kind of quite publicly donated to uh homeless charities 15% of his salary since he's been a mayor. And I think that kind of attention drawing to a good act is probably going to cause more people to follow that act and have better lasting implications than if he'd done that quietly. And it is slightly self-centering to be like, hey, look, I'm giving like £2,000, £2,500 a month to this cause, but I do think him doing that has then caused more people to be like, if he's giving that much, then I can kind of help and give my little bit as well. Um I think if he'd done that in silence, while maybe the kind of the meaning is more pure, the ends are probably less productive. Um and it does definitely depend on the cause, because if it's a cause that requires long-lasting social change and something to do with more than just kind of financial donations, then yes, having like kind of the the personal sway to wanting to be an activist more than just kind of following a trend is probably more important.

SPEAKER_02 41:00

I just think that if you're if you're benefiting it from it personally in whatever way, then you should also check the rest of your behaviour and your thought processes. So if you're in this specific case, like let's say I mean I don't know that much about this specific case, but if he's doing this publicly, yes, good. He's probably influencing what what you're saying, influencing people to give money. Um but it's also very good for his reputation. So if then his professional political actions don't match up with this idea of like I'm giving to the homeless, like if he like cuts funds that mean that certain I don't know, children don't get school meals anymore or something like that, then that's right, I think that's problematic because then you're benefiting it from it by with something that you're not actually like following through.

SPEAKER_00 41:50

So is is that necessarily worse than if he'd done nothing to help the cause? Because this is the case, like do the means justify the ends, and I know if you're getting self-benefits from it, as a lot of political action is just for self-benefit, if you want to look at the very cynical view, but it does still provide lasting good impact for the community. Is it therefore worth it? Because one person at the top benefits more than they should have done.

SPEAKER_02 42:16

For sure. No, it doesn't mean that like if he doesn't do this, he might as well have not have done it. Because that this is also something that really like, oh well, they could have done nothing. Yes, true, and especially okay, this I mean I don't know again about him, but again, like even if then his like actual actions don't um match that initial that initial action, it's still positive, and it doesn't mean like he shouldn't have done it at all, but you can still criticize it, and we should criticize it, and also in our own behavior, because I've definitely done things where I kind of like a bit more like publicly did something positive and then ignored a comment by someone because it was inconvenient for me to to attack them because they were my friends and it was a difficult situation, etc. And that's something that I like it was really it's very hard, but that's very important to keep yourself accountable and also other people.

SPEAKER_01 43:10

Well, I think you know what, we could probably keep debating this forever. But apart from the fact the zoom call is up in five minutes, um, we've also come to the end of our time and overshot as usual, but that's fine. Always better to have more than less. Um just before we finish, I wanted to ask: was there anything that I f you feel like we didn't cover or anything you wanted to add before I cut the call?

SPEAKER_02 43:33

As you said, we could talk about this for hours and hours, and we should and we will, but not on this podcast. Because no one will listen to us talk for 10 hours.

SPEAKER_01 43:44

No, but thank you, India, for having us.

SPEAKER_00 43:46

Oh, yeah, thank you very much.

SPEAKER_01 43:47

Well, thank you so much for being on this podcast. I forgot to mention at the start that this is the first podcast that we've had more than two people, and I think it's worked really great. I've really enjoyed it. I'm sure I'll call you at some point to do another one in the future. I guess we'll speak soon. See you soon. Bye. Once again, we've come to the end of another great podcast. Thank you so much to Mikey and Maria for joining me. As always, thank you to Catherine Harrison for the logo that she's created, and to Alex Filippiak, who created the intro on outro music that you can hear on the track. And of course, thank you to all of you who are listening. I hope you've enjoyed, and we'll see you next time.