Brief disclaimer
This is another little side-quest from my usual writing. I originally wrote this as a paper for a University rhetoric course.
I have broken it into two parts and made efforts to edit it to make it easier to read, so I hope you enjoy. If you do, stay tuned for part two!
Good conflict
I’ve written a few times about the risks of conformity and compliance. I’ve written about the harms of unquestioning obedience, and of avoiding disagreement for the sake of being “nice” or easy-going. When I read Conflict is Not Abuse, I thought I might a kindred spirit.
I’m a bit late to the party, but I recently read an article written by Molly Fischer entitled Good Conflict. In a profile of Sarah Schulman which featured her book Conflict is Not Abuse, Fischer describes Schulman’s insights as viable alternatives to our current culture of hostile disagreements and perpetual victimhood.
Fischer summarizes the social issue outlined in Conflict is Not Abuse as one wherein people overstate harm when experiencing the inevitable discomfort of human misunderstanding. Rather than accept some responsibility as participants in a shared situation, we position ourselves as victims.
If I had accepted Fischer’s article as a fair and accurate characterization of Schulman’s book, I may have agreed with this sentiment and left it at that.
When Fischer said Schulman had been described as someone who doesn’t perform a lot of the expected social niceties and is often blunt, I thought she would probably be someone I would get along with if I were to ever meet her. In fact, I began reading Schulman’s book with an expectation that I would likely nod along with much of its content.
Conflict is Not Abuse does highlight important issues which Fischer concisely summarizes: it is important to have difficult conversations and to see possibility in difference. As Schulman illustrates, there is a human tendency to claim victimhood as an attempt to avoid accountability, one which can be exacerbated with shorthand communication via email, and bandwagon jumping perpetuated by groupthink.
Schulman begins her book with strong arguments about the risks of conflating discomfort, disagreement, and difference with abuse. Unfortunately Conflict is Not Abuse very quickly devolves into victim-blaming, rape apology, and unfounded generalizations.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Neurodiversity MB to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.