I see a bunch of things here in what Smiley is reported to have said.
I see a bunch of things here in what Smiley is reported to have said.
Smiley also copped to having several consensual relationships with people working on his show
Lack of understanding or denial of the inequitable power relationship of being the boss and the star. Also, an awful lot of men seem to think every relationship they've had is consensual. To say this reflects a lack of understanding of consent, not to mention privilege, is a gross understatement.
I understand that there are extra issues here because he is black (see his "angry black man" comment). However, he's a powerful, successful man and that gives him power. I wonder, in fact, if being a successful black man doesn't give him more power in a certain microcosm.
Meanwhile, if you are a powerful person, you do not have to tell people they have to sleep with you. This is an issue that runs through the culture. Yes, some people are probably more vulnerable or enculturated, and some people will be less affected, but that messaging is out there, it is strong, and as a person with power you have a responsibility to be aware of your power.
“I have an intense environment,” he said. “When the ball gets dropped on something I have to deal with those. Those might be intense but I'm not an angry black man and this notion of a hostile workplace doesn't fit.”
As noted, the "angry black man" is a separate problem and it absolutely pertains from his perspective and it is a real stereotype and problem. I'm not qualified to address it, but while it may have to do with how he is perceived by others, I don't think there's enough of a disconnect for that to completely explain away "a hostile workplace". Here's why.
Every time I hear someone in one of these reports talk about how "intense" they or their workplace are, I see and hear all the angry bosses out there, mostly men, mostly white, who think they are that great football coach who yelled at their players and called them names and made them cry but he made them better! They were winners! Yes, people have actually said that to me, and I've heard and seen it elsewhere.
In other words, the leader who scared the heck out of people and threatened them and damaged them mentally and emotionally (and threw away anyone who wasn't of use to them) made them real men, tough, they can handle anything. Congrats, toxic masculinity. It's hostile, and threatening, no matter what the supposed rationale. If it wasn't illegal, it would still include hitting. This is their management style, this is their leadership style. Break 'em down to build 'em up!
It's abusive, it's bullying, and it's nonsense, but it is rampant in every field, under every circumstance. It's also been shown through research to not be the most effective style of leadership, but it is one of the commonalities in many of these stories.
So there are at least two major things he is clearly not understanding. Two things that most of the other people who've been reportedly accused seem also to have not understood, whatsoever. Neither of those things makes them "guilty", even in a non-legal sense. However, that is not the point. It gives context, it gives some direction on where we should be working to improve and move forward from where we are. Again, though neither of these things makes any of this ok.
You misunderstood power, you misunderstood privilege, you misunderstood consent, and you misunderstood bullying. I understand why you feel threatened, why you feel you need to defend your honor and reputation, but you still do not understand why women feel threatened and on the defensive all the time, and you are not hearing what people are trying to tell you. You need to listen.
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/tavis-smiley-fires-back-pbs-huge-mistake-suspension-article-1.3706825
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/tavis-smiley-fires-back-pbs-huge-mistake-suspension-article-1.3706825
Smiley also copped to having several consensual relationships with people working on his show
Lack of understanding or denial of the inequitable power relationship of being the boss and the star. Also, an awful lot of men seem to think every relationship they've had is consensual. To say this reflects a lack of understanding of consent, not to mention privilege, is a gross understatement.
I understand that there are extra issues here because he is black (see his "angry black man" comment). However, he's a powerful, successful man and that gives him power. I wonder, in fact, if being a successful black man doesn't give him more power in a certain microcosm.
Meanwhile, if you are a powerful person, you do not have to tell people they have to sleep with you. This is an issue that runs through the culture. Yes, some people are probably more vulnerable or enculturated, and some people will be less affected, but that messaging is out there, it is strong, and as a person with power you have a responsibility to be aware of your power.
“I have an intense environment,” he said. “When the ball gets dropped on something I have to deal with those. Those might be intense but I'm not an angry black man and this notion of a hostile workplace doesn't fit.”
As noted, the "angry black man" is a separate problem and it absolutely pertains from his perspective and it is a real stereotype and problem. I'm not qualified to address it, but while it may have to do with how he is perceived by others, I don't think there's enough of a disconnect for that to completely explain away "a hostile workplace". Here's why.
Every time I hear someone in one of these reports talk about how "intense" they or their workplace are, I see and hear all the angry bosses out there, mostly men, mostly white, who think they are that great football coach who yelled at their players and called them names and made them cry but he made them better! They were winners! Yes, people have actually said that to me, and I've heard and seen it elsewhere.
In other words, the leader who scared the heck out of people and threatened them and damaged them mentally and emotionally (and threw away anyone who wasn't of use to them) made them real men, tough, they can handle anything. Congrats, toxic masculinity. It's hostile, and threatening, no matter what the supposed rationale. If it wasn't illegal, it would still include hitting. This is their management style, this is their leadership style. Break 'em down to build 'em up!
It's abusive, it's bullying, and it's nonsense, but it is rampant in every field, under every circumstance. It's also been shown through research to not be the most effective style of leadership, but it is one of the commonalities in many of these stories.
So there are at least two major things he is clearly not understanding. Two things that most of the other people who've been reportedly accused seem also to have not understood, whatsoever. Neither of those things makes them "guilty", even in a non-legal sense. However, that is not the point. It gives context, it gives some direction on where we should be working to improve and move forward from where we are. Again, though neither of these things makes any of this ok.
You misunderstood power, you misunderstood privilege, you misunderstood consent, and you misunderstood bullying. I understand why you feel threatened, why you feel you need to defend your honor and reputation, but you still do not understand why women feel threatened and on the defensive all the time, and you are not hearing what people are trying to tell you. You need to listen.
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/tavis-smiley-fires-back-pbs-huge-mistake-suspension-article-1.3706825
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/tavis-smiley-fires-back-pbs-huge-mistake-suspension-article-1.3706825
Comments
Post a Comment