{"id":29727,"date":"2022-12-01T16:38:02","date_gmt":"2022-12-02T00:38:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/?p=29727"},"modified":"2022-12-01T16:38:02","modified_gmt":"2022-12-02T00:38:02","slug":"what-do-you-mean-by-_______","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/what-do-you-mean-by-_______\/","title":{"rendered":"&#8220;What do you mean by _______?&#8221;"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">An enlightening video of Berkley Law Professor Khiara Bridges and Senator Josh Hawley emerged on the internet this summer. In this video of the senate judiciary hearing on abortion access and the law, a tense exchange between Prof. Bridges and Sen. Hawley ensued.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">[1]<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\"> The debate centered on transgenderism and the ability of men to become pregnant. Senator Hawley asked about the issue of abortion being a women\u2019s issue, to which Prof. Bridges clarified that other people groups (transgender men and nonbinary people) have the capacity for pregnancy. He then asked who the abortion conversation affects. Prof. Bridges let Sen. Hawley know that his \u201cline of questioning is transphobic and opens up people to violence.\u201d The shocked Senator Hawley combatted this statement of him opening up people to violence. Prof. Bridges then proceeded to inform him that this violence stemmed from the denial of a trans person\u2019s existence.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">[2]<\/span><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">This video is an example of the kind of dialogue that is both unproductive, and all too present in our culture: a contentious debate without common definitions. Sen. Hawley was surprised at the accusation of his line of questioning being a denial of trans persons\u2019 existence, thus opening them up to violence. I would argue that Prof. Bridges and Sen. Hawley were speaking different languages. They are after all in different contexts \u2013 Sen. Hawley a Missouri republican congressman, and Prof. Bridges a progressive from an elite west coast liberal institution. This video displayed to the world what an argument looks like when common vernacular is absent. I would argue that the conversation could have been more productive and respectful had either of them asked for definitions.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">In this blog, I will share how Shelby Steele, author of <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Shame<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">[3]<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\"> does the same thing with the word phrase \u201cAmerican exceptionalism\u201d and how this compares with other authors\u2019 understanding of this phrase. After this, I will close with making the case for healthier, more intelligible dialogue in which people establish common language in ideological disagreements.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Steele writes about the way America\u2019s past sins of racism have been used by the left to paint America solely as a nation of hypocrisy and evil. In doing so, the left then makes sure to disassociate from the past sins. Steele, a conservative, attacks this notion of America being a characterologically evil country. He tells a story of a dinner at which he gave a speech. He used the words \u201cAmerican exceptionalism.\u201d Upon uttering these words, there were boos as well as cheers from the audience. When I came across his words on American exceptionalism, my intellectual (and moral) defenses shifted to high alert. Dr. Soong-Chan Rah and Mark Charles of the Navajo Nation, discuss in great length the myth and the racist underpinnings of the concept of American exceptionalism in their book <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Unsettling Truths<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">[4]<\/span><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">However, Steele goes on to define American exceptionalism not as \u201ca hubris that evokes white supremacy\u201d but \u201cthe largess of our character as with our great wealth and power, and that causes like the one at hand only enhanced our reputation in the world as a fundamentally decent nation \u2013 a beacon, as it were, of human possibility.\u201d<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">[5]<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\"> He clarifies that it is not about the people of America being superior, but rather \u201cthat its wealth and power bestowed upon it a level of responsibility in the world that other nations did not have to bear. Exceptionalism as a burden, not a vanity, was my point.\u201d<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">[6]<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Though I still struggle with the phrase \u201cAmerican exceptionalism,\u201d after reading Steele\u2019s definition, I was far less disturbed. In fact, from Steele\u2019s definition, one ought to feel not an arrogance of being American, but rather a weight of responsibility because of the great wealth and power America has. \u201cTo whom much is give, much is required.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">There is much I agreed with in this book. However, there is also much I disagreed with. For example, one must ask how America became so powerful and wealthy. Yes, there are great examples in history of America leading the way in creating a just society. However, we must not celebrate these great moments in history without also lamenting the heinous sins of racism, slavery, land theft, and ethnic genocide of the first peoples of the land (to name a few). All that to say, from Steele\u2019s book I am taking away this: if we are ever going to experience intelligent, respectful, and productive dialogue amid diverging ideologies, we must ask the question \u201cWhat do you mean by_____?\u201d rather than hearing one another based on our own understanding of what words mean.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">[1]<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\"> \u201cSenate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Abortion Access and the Law | C-SPAN.Org,\u201d accessed December 1, 2022, https:\/\/www.c-span.org\/video\/?521318-1\/senate-judiciary-committee-hearing-abortion-access-law.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">[2]<\/span> <i><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Your Line of Questioning Is Transphobic<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">, 2022, https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=Fed5RzXyU20.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">[3]<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Shelby Steele, <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Shame: How America\u2019s Past Sins Have Polarized Our Country<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400\"> (New York: Basic Books, 2015).<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">[4]<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Mark Charles and Soong-Chan Rah, <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Unsettling Truths: The Ongoing, Dehumanizing Legacy of the Doctrine of Discovery<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400\"> (InterVarsity Press, 2019).<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">[5]<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Steele, <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Shame, 160<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">[6]<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Ibid., 159.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>An enlightening video of Berkley Law Professor Khiara Bridges and Senator Josh Hawley emerged on the internet this summer. In this video of the senate judiciary hearing on abortion access and the law, a tense exchange between Prof. Bridges and Sen. Hawley ensued.[1] The debate centered on transgenderism and the ability of men to become [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":152,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[2475,1997],"class_list":["post-29727","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-dialogue","tag-steele","cohort-dlgp01"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29727","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/152"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29727"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29727\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":29730,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29727\/revisions\/29730"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29727"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29727"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29727"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}