Victim Expert

[cantata]

Every so often, we need a thread to remind everyone of something important. Being a victim does not make you an expert.

Having suffered discrimination does not make you an expert on discrimination. Having been in a rail accident does not make you an expert in train safety. Having had a family member murdered does not make you an expert on criminal psychology. Your daughter dying from a heroin overdose does not make you an expert on the drug industry or heroin abuse. In fact, the emotional involvement entailed in having had something bad happen to them makes victims some of the worst people you could consult about the issues with regard to which they have been victimised. They are quite understandably prone to prejudice on the subject. They are prone to overestimate risks and disproportionately demonise any perpetrators.

Pointing to the responses of victims as evidence in a discussion is a very risky business. That a victim of a rail crash thinks that trains are not safe is not surprising, but nor is it a reason to invest millions of pounds in improving train safety. It is certainly not a reason to take the victim's word for it that buses are extremely safe in comparison to trains.

I have deliberately avoided using any controversial examples in this thread (I hope) because I don't want it to degenerate into a slanging match. I wish to make one and only one point: being a victim doesn't make you an expert.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Being a victim doesn't mean you were persecute or discrimnated against either. Both require detailed study to reach a conclusion or outcome resolution.

Good thread Ms. C.

 

[Yusuf Evans]

It may not make you an expert on the subject per se, but you can provide more insight into the effects of said tragedy on an individual more than someone who's never been subjected to it.

 

[cantata]

It may not make you an expert on the subject per se, but you can provide more insight into the effects of said tragedy on an individual more than someone who's never been subjected to it.

Sure, and that's why I wouldn't say that victims' opinions about things should never, ever be mentioned in discussion.

We just need to recognise the scope of their expertise. Yes, they know first hand what <insert tragedy> feels like, and perhaps their story can help us to empathise with their circumstances and adjust our views accordingly. But my point is that they shouldn't be lent false authority in subjects in which they have no special expertise just in virtue of the fact that they happen to be victims.

 

[brinny]

needless to say, being victimized creates a greater awareness and sensitivity to others who have been victimized and sometimes are the only voices raised against injustices and creating an awareness to the problem that contributed to the victimization from the gitgo.

 

[cantata]

needless to say, being victimized creates a greater awareness and sensitivity to others who have been victimized and sometimes are the only voices raised against injustices and creating an awareness to the problem that contributed to the victimization from the gitgo.

Which is all very well and good, but it still doesn't make you suddenly supremely knowledgeable about the risk of terrorist attacks or the likelihood of your offspring becoming autistic after having a vaccine.

I am not saying that victims should be ignored, but only that we shouldn't treat them as if everything they say about the thing that has caused them to become a victim is necessarily accurate, true, and insightful. The fact is that if you have been raped then in all likelihood you will overestimate the risk of rape, and you are likely to characterise rapists in a way which doesn't necessarily reflect reality in order to cope with your struggle. That's completely understandable but it doesn't make you right.

 

[wanderingone]

This is true across the board, experience makes one a witness not an expert. We run into so many problems in our immigration and refugee unit with people following the advice of others who have "been through it"

I will say that some of the most powerful teams of experts in any situation consist of people who have "been there" and followed up their own experience with education who team up with others who are also educated and viewing the situation without the emotional involvement.

 

[keith99]

Not a victim thing per se, but similar.

Decades ago I seperated my shoulder. Turns out my physician had a similar injury. Thinking back on it I'm very glad he did NOT draw on his personal experience at all. Like I said, decades ago, back when doctors knew their patients. He drew instead on his knowledge of medicine and even more importnat his knowledge of me to provide the correct tereatment and council. (In my case the right council was not reassurance, not needed, instead caution not to push too much too soon).

 

[Beanieboy]

I think being a victim can sometimes dirty the filter and make things seem larger than they are.

I had my head cracked open when I was mugged walking home late one night. I soon felt that the city, which I used to like very much, was now a threat. If you have seen "The Brave One", Foster captures the way a tragedy can greatly affect the way you feel, create intensified fear of strangers, being in open places, etc.

However, the response sometimes from people that did not experience it was to blame me. What was I doing out at 2 am? (Celebrating a friend's birthday). Why did I walk home alone-that's asking for it. (Because I am a man, have walked home many times, and live only 15 minutes away from downtown.) The person who first said this? A nurse who walked by, seeing me with mud and blood caked on my face (I was knocked out for about 45 minutes), and my scalp split showing my skull. She said, "well, maybe he should change his lifestyle."

The same happens with rape. She probably led him on. What did she expect with that sexy outfit? Men can't control themselves.

So, I don't think that those who haven't had the experience are even often in the parking lot of being an expert. A straight guy, back in the 80s, tried to act like he knew all about homosexuality, that clearly it was a choice, simply because he had talked it over with a couple of friends once over dinner, and then tried to tell me, who lives it, that I didn't know what I was talking about.

 

[cantata]

Although not being a victim doesn't necessarily make you an expert either, it does seem to be a popular ploy to point to the opinion of someone that that everyone rightly feels a bit sorry for in order to win an argument. Which is not playing fair, because then anyone who disagrees with you is automatically labelled insensitive by not saying "My goodness, you're right - poor ____________ said it, so it must be true." It's kind of the opposite of when people misuse authority figures to support something loony, like saying, "Well Isaac Newton poked his own eyes with a stick so it MUST be okay."

 

[Beanieboy]

I agree, and as I said, after being mugged, I thought the city was far more dangerous than I had the day before. My perception changed.

However, I think there is equally a problem with someone who has never been through the experience, has never researched it, never thought about it much, that wants to claim authority as well.

A friend of mine said that in college in the 80s, he would have people say, "What's it like to be gay?" He would answer, "You want me to give you a neat, pat, easy answer. If you really want to know, spend a few years staring at the ceiling, asking God why he made you this way. Every time someone asks you about your love life, dodge it, or use nongendered pronouns like, "they". Imagine your mother coming in in the middle of the night, crying about you being gay, and knowing that it simply is who you are. Imagine someone accusing you of choosing, when you know it isn't. And after you've thought about it for a few years every day, and thought about it every night, come back, and I think I will be able to give you some insight. "

I've heard white people talking about how blacks have more rights than they do, and how racism is dead, when the black person will tell a very different story, and the black person will know a lot more about racism than a white person that has only experienced privilege.

I'm not really clear what brought on the OP, but the person experiencing it first hand at least has more knowledge than someone who has had no knowledge, nor read much, and still thinks they speak with authority.

For example, if you don't haven't read anything about racism, or anti-racism, or experienced racism, especially in a business setting, haven't talked about it with anyone but white people, have never read about Seeing Whiteness, and White Privilege, you will talk as authority on racism only because your white friends don't challenge you, but it doesn't make you an expert either, and it makes you less of an authority than someone who can talk about being pulled over several times simply for being black.

 

[cantata]

That's a good point, actually. I have sometimes noticed that certain men trivialise the struggles of women in the same way.

 

[eeventuality]

Nice point made in the OP. Actually, this ties in well with a simulation we're going to be doing in one of my science classes. We're discussing the issue of grey seals in the northeast of America. In recent years, the population has greatly increased after reaching a point of local extinction in the 50s. What this means for commercial fishermen is damaged nets and decreased takes. Reading the "Fisherman's Voice" makes it obvious that they're feeling victimized by these marine mammals and they have no legal recourse to rid themselves of the creatures under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972. This victimized group has tried to appeal to governments to allow seal culling using observational statistics that seals are responsible for an 84% reduction in the take of local fishermen. There are no scientific reports to support or deny this claim, but as the OP points out, victims aren't the most reliable source for information. While seals most certainly have a measurable effect on take numbers and fish stocks, 84% is rather steep considering the population is still relatively small compared to its pre-20th century size.

Sorry for the scientific ramble, but it's nice when something I'm learning ties into an ethical debate.

 

[Beanieboy]

Right. You know how a guy will not think about the fact that women are thought prudes if they aren't sexually active, and [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] if they are, where men can be as sexually active with as many partners as they want, and patted on the back? And then men saying, "Women get our seats when they get on the subway, and they get equal pay. They have more rights than we do!", thinking themselves an authority, when women are still often judged on their outward beauty, still regarded as going against biblical teaching to my mom's generation in arenas of the Presidency and Leadership, and continue to struggle to prove themselves as able bodied soldiers, leaders, managers, CEOs, Politicians, Clergy, and a number of positions previously barred from getting.

I think those with no experience far more often try to speak from a place of authority when they usually have little, if any, knowledge at all.

Example: someone who is heterosexual, knows no homosexuals, but will tell you that it doesn't happen in nature (which it does), that it is a choice (which most gays will tell you isn't), that it is a mental illness (negating their own choice argument), that the bible clearly talks about it (ignoring Biblical Scholars that are split over the issue), that they want to recruit children because they can't reproduce (ignoring that most gays come from straight parents, and that gays understand that you can't turn a straight guy gay anymore that you can turn a gay guy straight), that they molest children (which has been proven false, since child molesters are more concerned with the age, and children, sexually, don't look all that different), etc.

And then the person will try to tell me that they understand being gay, that gay discrimination is false (which is untrue), that the is a Gay Agenda underneath the call for equality (though no one knows what it is, and my Gay Agenda subscription ran out), that it is a threat to straight people's rights, when it is not, etc.

The person doesn't even know anyone gay, doesn't know the history of the gay struggle and gay rights, hasn't read the Twins Studies, and still swears up and down that they know better than I do, who lives it.

This is far worse.

 

[Beanieboy]

The other problem is the truth about who is the real victim.

For Prop 8, Christians said that they were the victims, and had to vote Yes so as not to harm their marriage. However, had it been voted down, their marriages would not be invalidated. They would simply have to share the term "marriage" with gay couples. They have to share it with people who get married in Vegas in a Drive Through, or Britney, who got married as a goof for 58 hours, so I'm unclear why they won't share it with couples who are gay that are committed to one another enough to want to get married.

Those are the people that are victims - gays who wanted to get married, or those who were, and now, may not be. It was their marriage dissolved, their marriage legal rights ripped away from them, their personal commitment interfered by the State.

It bugs me to no end when someone oppresses another, and then tries to garner sympathy by claiming to be the victim, and not the oppressor.

 

[FaithLikeARock]

Victims aren't good to go to when you want information or answers.

If you want to talk to someone who relates to your problem though, they can be excellent. Hence the purposes of group therapy and rehabilitation. Doctors can fix problems but sometimes all you need is just a shoulder to cry on.

 

[wanderingone]

The person doesn't even know anyone gay, doesn't know the history of the gay struggle and gay rights, hasn't read the Twins Studies, and still swears up and down that they know better than I do, who lives it.

This is far worse.

I agree that produces an additional set of problems when someone who has no understanding and refuses to be educated calls themselves an expert. But when those people latch on to people who have an experience - such as supposed "ex gay" people as their proof or use some "black" people who vote against same sex marriage as proof that there shouldn't be marriage rights for all. It all combines to a big mess.

I was a victim of domestic violence. My daughter's father's last act after stalking me for weeks after I walked out of the marriage was to slam me into a brick wall and toss me unconscious into the street. (I imagine he figured a car would finish me off) It doesn't make me an expert on DV, but it provides a witness to the fact that walking away from violence doesn't save women. (It's an answer to those people who sneer.. "Why doesn't she just leave"?) I left... I pressed charges. He followed me, He stalked me, he called me, I hid and just days before I was relocating to a safe house courtesy of crisis pregnancy program he managed to catch me getting off the bus walking down the street to where I was staying with a friend.

I can be a danger or a resource to other victims.

I don't think people who were never victims of DV can't be excellent resources. I work with people who are excellent service providers who have never experienced violence. They have education, and personal character traits that allow them to be a resource, not to judge, not to force specific solutions on those they work with.

I know it's not popular to say, but I find families of victims of child sexual abuse - particular when the abuse was committed by a non family member to be extremely problematic when it comes to public policy. Anti predator actions have created expensive and difficult requirements for communities to maintain, at the same time the message that when a child is molested it is most often by someone they know, a friend or family member is lost among the political promises to keep predators "away from our children"

I say "I find" because working in public welfare policy development and administration means our office works with many of the providers who have to house released offenders, get them benefits and find acceptable employment. When counties decide they can't live certain places we create transportation and housing problems in abundance. People don't care what happens to the offenders.. I "get" it.. but do they want to pay for all the extra costs of unfunded mandates?

 

[morningstar2651]

I'm no expert...but i did stay at a holiday inn express last night.

 

[Verv]

Has Cantata suddenly gone conservative on us?

needless to say, being victimized creates a greater awareness and sensitivity to others who have been victimized and sometimes are the only voices raised against injustices and creating an awareness to the problem that contributed to the victimization from the gitgo.

This is true - I also think that being victimized by something does put things in a better context. One becomes certain of the feeling one gets when confronted with this problem, and that is indeed respectable.

I'm no expert...but i did stay at a holiday inn express last night.

LOL.

 

[stan1980]

Has Cantata suddenly gone conservative on us?

I don't think so