Opinion > September 6, 2007

By Matt Brumit | Old Gold & Black columnist

I imagine many of the readers of this column will identify with what I’m saying, so I’m not too sure how worthwhile it is. But nevertheless, I deem it worthy of being put into words.

Far too often, I’ve had the experience of being ridiculed for being a “rich, white kid.” (And it doesn’t help that I’m a heterosexual male).

It’s like somehow in this day and age if you’re like me you must be stupid because you don’t really know anything except for what you’ve read in a textbook.

It’s as if anyone who isn’t white, straight or from the same socioeconomic class as I am thinks I must be ignorant to the ways of the world.

Now, I could go on and on about all sorts of things I’ve seen, felt and experienced that would tell you that I haven’t exactly been sheltered to the degree that is apparently imagined.

I could also argue that everyone has been ‘discriminated’ against at some point in his life for some thing or another. (All of us have at least felt like outcasts in some capacity.)

But for some reason, race, gender and socioeconomic status are the only distinctions for which one can acceptably feel excluded or discriminated against. (I’m not including religion here because it seems to me that most of the time religious discrimination stems from issues of ethnicity.)

I find it odd that we can only acknowledge these issues as being real enough to merit discussion.

But, in the end, I think the safest way for me to argue against my supposed ignorance isn’t to deny it, but rather to somewhat accept it.

Let me explain what I mean.

Even though I’ve had personal experiences that have broadened my horizons and allowed me to see the world from various perspectives, no one will believe me when I tell them that I understand, simply because they can’t possibly get the fact that I’m a “rich, white guy” out of their heads.

So, the easiest thing for me to do, and the one that allows me to maintain my right to privacy, is to say, “You’re right. I haven’t experienced what everyone who isn’t of my race, gender and socioeconomic class has.”

Maybe after I acknowledge my ignorance, my critic will actually listen to what I have to say. Then, I can proceed to reveal their ignorance. I can show them how they are ignorant to think that I could possibly be as stupid as they have to suppose I am to assume that I understand so little.

In other words, I can explain to them that the mere fact that I am a cognitive human being capable of logical reasoning should justifiably explain how I have a right to an opinion even about an issue in which I have not been directly involved.

Do I have subjective knowledge of whatever it is that I’m being accused of not understanding? Not exactly.

I’ve never been anything other than what I am. I admit that.

But do I have objective knowledge of situations in which I may not have personally been involved?

Most definitely so.

For someone to assume that my lack of subjective knowledge signals a lack of knowledge altogether is simply ignorant on his part.

To assume that I know nothing about a given point of dispute is to suggest that I am incapable of objective reasoning and therefore either somehow subhuman or otherwise socially and intellectually inept.

I’ve had eyes for over 19 years now. I’ve walked down streets and through grocery stores, attended public schools, played on community sports teams, watched the news, etc. I’ve seen people. I’ve talked to people. I’ve had friends who aren’t exactly like me. I’ve noticed things and made observations. I’ve thought about things. I can understand a wide array of issues from a strictly sociological perspective.

But I guess nobody can understand that unless they’re a white heterosexual male in my family’s tax bracket.

Matt Brumit is a sophomore from Denison, Texas.