Adjusting to Non-Binaryness
Last edited Sat Mar 13, 2021, 04:13 PM - Edit history (1)
I remember the first time I heard someone describe their gender identity as "non-binary."
It was unfamiliar. I had to think about it. But it made sense.
As a species we seem to be hard-wired to do binary.
An action is either right, or it's wrong.
Until, of course, circumstances arise that make what we labeled a "right" action, a very wrong thing to do. Or vice versa.
A person is either good, or they're bad.
Except, of course, good people have done some very bad things. And bad people may also do good things.
Humans are not comfortable with these anomalies. They are speed-bumps in our thinking about just about everything.
Coping with non-binary-ness may, however, be the key to success in a whole lot of important things.
Andrew Cuomo may, or may not, have done any/all of the bad things of which he is accused.
The GOP may, or may not, have manufactured any/all of the charges against Cuomo as a political machination.
The most likely reality is that BOTH are true.
Cuomo did some of the skeevy shit of which he is accused.
The GOP is pulling dirty tricks from a fat and well-used bag.
If we had a binary choice, as in:
"EITHER Cuomo is a serial harasser/assaulter of women abusing his position of power and perpetuating the long pattern of injustice to and dehumanization of women in the workplace;
OR the GOP is deliberately magnifying trivia and manufacturing more damaging charges against him to throw the NY Democratic Party into disarray, damage their credibility with "woke voters" and loosen their grip on power in state government";
it would be easy.
Pick one, deal with it quickly/decisively, and move on.
But it's non-binary.
The odds are that a male politician of Cuomo's age, background, and experience is a situational sexist pig even while he may support legal and structural change that will address systemic inequities affecting women.
The odds are that the GOP has certainly perceived an opportunity and is stirring the shit as hard as they can, up to and including magnifying and even outright manufacturing an ongoing cascade of increasingly damaging accusations.
There are no easy, fast solutions.
Individuals, voters in NY, journalists and media outlets, the NY Democratic Party, and the national Democratic Party all must examine a complicated set of circumstances surrounding a complex and important person whose actions include great good and disgusting bad. The scale of "how bad is worse" will look different to different people. We will have to negotiate, understand, compromise, and accept that there is no perfect response/solution that will make everything right or better.
And we can only do that from a standpoint of the greatest possible knowledge of FACTs, analysis and understanding of unknowable lacunae in the narratives, and careful examination and assessment of the quality of evidence.
Which brings me to our other dysfunctional bias: We incline most naturally toward the quickest possible resolution of uncomfortable situations.
Intolerance for ambiguity, the bullet-train of our modern news cycle, and certainly GOP pressure, will push toward "dealing with it fast is a better choice than letting it drag on while investigations are conducted, more accusations surface, the noise level escalates, etc."
I just hope we've learned from past experience the costs of that choice.
Remember the definition of insanity.
If we want real change, we need to be part of the change.
This time, let's tolerate the ambiguity. Let's investigate everything. Let's discuss with as little assumption of binary right/wrong as possible. Let's go ahead and do nuance. Let's accept an imperfect solution. Let's accept that the resolution of this situation is not "the bad ones (whichever they are) getting complete comeuppance, and the good ones (whichever they are) getting a satisfying happy ending of truth, justice, and the American Way."
Because it won't happen that way, no matter how we choose to deal with this situation. But we do have an opportunity to make positive change, not necessarily in THIS situation, but in our capacity to deal with it and to address similar situations as they arise in the future.
So what does that mean, in practical terms?
Reserve judgment.
Be aware of your own biases.
Keep as open a mind as possible.
Don't feed the trolls.
Don't add noise.
Ask for evidence.
Review the quality of the evidence, including the quality of the source of the evidence.
Don't apply binary screens to the principal parties in the situation. Accusers can be providing facts but not all of them. Accusers can have good motives or bad ones but most often they will have a mix of motives and their own biases. That does not make them bad or good, right or wrong or any other binary full-stop conclusion. The accused is a human being and as such is both bad and good. Motives change, short-term versus long-term motivations com into play.
Don't generalize from your own experience to a situation you are not part of. I'm a sexual assault survivor, I try to be aware of my biases and set them aside. Because I experienced this, this way, does not mean that's what necessarily is going on in the Cuomo situation.
Tolerate the ambiguity.
Don't give in to the push for a quick resolution.
Maybe something good can come out of the mess, if we learn to deal with messes more effectively, including a better adjustment to non-binary-ness.
wistfully,
Bright
= new reply since forum marked as read
Thank you!
thanks, you have articulated what I was feeling about all of this.
dwelling often in the grey,
Kali 
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this. 