大象传媒

I’m a natural to review Ijeoma Oluo鈥檚 new book, Mediocre: The Dangerous Legacy of White Male America (Seal Press, 2020).

I am White, male, American, and when I taught at the University of Texas at Austin, I routinely joked that 鈥渢he secret to my success is that I鈥檓 mediocre, and I know it.鈥�

That comment came in conversations with students about inflated faculty egos, partly as a caution to myself. In universities, the coin of the realm is being a big thinker with original ideas. But most of us aren鈥檛 big thinkers, and original ideas are rare. Rather than being satisfied with being competent鈥攁 hard enough standard to meet鈥攑rofessors too often puff themselves up, a weakness to which White guys are especially vulnerable. My quip wasn鈥檛 the result of a lack of self-confidence; I was simply suggesting that an honest self-assessment helps one do useful work.

If 鈥渕ediocre鈥� seems unkind, how about 鈥渙rdinary鈥�? I鈥檓 not special, but I live in a culture that designates people who look like me as the standard. A White supremacist and patriarchal society (we鈥檒l get to capitalism later) props up White guys not because we鈥檙e superior but precisely because we鈥檙e not. White guys need the unearned advantages to keep alive the fantasy that we deserve to be on top. That fantasy is not harmless鈥攐ur embrace of dominance means subordinating people who don鈥檛 look like us, which creates an incentive for White men to remain clueless.

That鈥檚 why Mediocre is not a threat to White guys but a gift, offering the social/political tough love that we need to see society鈥攁nd ourselves鈥攎ore clearly.

Oluo鈥檚 book is an engaging mix of American history, political analysis, and social commentary, brought to life through stories of her experience as a Black woman. That doesn鈥檛 mean it鈥檚 an easy read. No matter how often I face the depravity of patriarchy and White supremacy鈥攖he injuries that men and White people inflict on women and people of color鈥攖he realities are jarring, as they should be. To not be shaken by suffering would be to abandon some of one鈥檚 humanity. To ignore the fact that we White guys benefit from these systems would be to abandon any humanity that remains.

Oluo isn鈥檛 suggesting that all White men are evil or that no White man makes important contributions:

鈥淚 am not arguing that every white man is mediocre. I do not believe that any race or gender is predisposed to mediocrity. What I鈥檓 saying is that white male mediocrity is a baseline, the dominant narrative, and that everything in our society is centered around preserving white male power regardless of white male skill or talent. … The rewarding of white male mediocrity not only limits the drive and imagination of white men; it also requires forced limitations on the success of women and people of color in order to deliver on the promised white male supremacy. White male mediocrity harms us all.鈥�

White men are not genetically lacking. We are just more likely than others to fail to understand the realities of patriarchy and White supremacy and less likely to challenge those systems.

If White men鈥檚 mediocrity served only to puff us up in our own eyes, it would be unfair but less threatening. But Oluo points out:

鈥淭his is not a benign mediocrity; it is brutal. It is a mediocrity that maintains a violent, sexist, racist status quo that robs our most promising of true greatness. …

Our culture has shaped the expectation of greatness exclusively around white men by erasing the achievements of women and people of color from our histories, by excluding women and people of color as heroes in our films and books, by ensuring that the qualified applicant pool is restricted to white male social networks.鈥�

Mediocre offers ample evidence for her thesis. The first chapter grounds us in the pathological American mythologies of brave men taming the frontier, embraced by Buffalo Bill at the end of the 19th century and still present in the self-indulgent anti-government fantasies of Nevada cattle rancher Cliven Bundy and similar 鈥減atriots鈥� in the 21st. From there, Oluo takes us on a painful tour through White masculinity in higher education, social movements, sports, politics, labor, and business. The especially sick and sad history of the American South gets special attention, but no region is spared.

And no one is spared, including White men who have written about social justice for three decades. Like me. White guys like me routinely acknowledge that we will never fully understand, let alone experience, the effects of sexism and racism in the way someone like Oluo does. But Oluo鈥檚 skillful weaving of her own reactions, both intellectual and emotional, to that 鈥渧iolent, sexist, racist status quo鈥� reminded me how true that is, and how easily I can forget it in day-to-day life.

The book constantly forced me to face my limitations. Like many, I鈥檝e followed the careers of 鈥淭he Squad,鈥� four women of color elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2018. When I read Oluo鈥檚 account of the legislative activities of those representatives, I realized that I had been more focused on their effect on partisan politics than on their policy agendas. I had unconsciously ignored the work they do and had stuck in the personality-driven news coverage.

One more example. I don鈥檛 like football and haven鈥檛 paid attention to the sport since junior high. I knew the history of segregation, that clich茅s like 鈥渙n the field, all that matters is your performance鈥� were absurd. But the stories of Black players being beaten, even killed, by not only White opponents but also by teammates were new to me. Oluo鈥檚 history of White male supremacy in the game, along with insights into the current racial politics of the sport, reminded me why I should pay more attention, even if I never intend to watch a game.

I can imagine some White men dismissing the book as 鈥渋dentity politics.鈥� If that term means a simplistic assessment of people based on race, sex, sexual orientation, and class, I agree that鈥檚 a problem. If identity politics means that people in one group can simply declare a 鈥渃orrect鈥� interpretation of an issue and denounce those who disagree, that鈥檚 a problem, too. But this book doesn鈥檛 practice that kind of identity politics, instead analyzing systems of power and asking for accountability. And Oluo points out that White male identity has always driven our politics.

How to encourage White men, who need Oluo鈥檚 book the most, to engage with Mediocre? That requires thinking about how White men will react to her analysis. Here are four possibilities:

鈥� Rejection and embrace of reactionary politics: White men aren鈥檛 the problem, but rather the solution, and should be in control without multicultural constraints, and they have a 鈥渞ight鈥� to use intimidation and violence to protect their status.

鈥� Regret about history but rejection of the implications: Yes, in the past White men did damage, but that鈥檚 history and today鈥檚 problems aren鈥檛 our fault.

鈥� Reconciliation without reckoning: Yes, White men are still a problem, but we have to accept each other and all try to get along.

鈥� Acceptance and action: I have lived with unearned power and privilege that comes in White supremacist patriarchy, and even if I haven鈥檛 been an active agent of evil, I鈥檓 responsible for my part in changing the social norms that elevate me over others.

How do we move White men to that fourth option?

One tool is the argument from justice. If we truly believe in the moral principles we claim to hold around human dignity, solidarity, and equality, we have to embrace a critique of unjust systems. That鈥檚 a powerful argument but doesn鈥檛 always move people to act. It鈥檚 also important to make an argument from self-interest. Whatever material advantages we may risk losing, when we work for justice we gain a deeper sense of our own humanity and a richer connection to others.

Oluo is appropriately skeptical about the argument from self-interest, the 鈥渇eminism helps men鈥� argument.  

鈥淪ometimes it may seem like justice is disadvantaging you when the privileges routinely enjoyed are threatened. But you have to do it anyway, because you believe that women and people of color are human beings and that we deserve to be free from oppression, even when that means you personally have to give some things up.

When that true commitment to equality isn鈥檛 there, when white men waltz into social justice movements with their privilege unchecked and expect to feel rewarded and comfortable at all times, they slow us down. They also hurt people, and they compromise the integrity of our movements.鈥�

Oluo鈥檚 caution is necessary: alone, the self-interest argument is dangerous. But if we want to advance social justice, we have to create spaces in which people in the dominant classes can imagine themselves living with a self-respect that is more meaningful than dominance. Should everyone in those classes be willing to accept radical change without concern for self, to create a world in line with our stated moral principles? Yes. Will anyone do that based on principles alone? I doubt it. People鈥擶hite, male, and everyone鈥攏eed a meaningful sense of self to thrive.

in the radical feminist movement鈥攁nd subsequent writing and organizing efforts around issues concerning , , and 鈥攈ave put me in places where I was held up as one of the 鈥済ood White men,鈥� a designation that Oluo refuses to indulge. Her critique of how folks like me move in social movements was most uncomfortable to be reminded of, and therefore important, for me: 鈥淢ediocre, highly forgettable white men regularly enter feminist spaces and expect to be centered and rewarded, and they have been.鈥�

No matter how much I acknowledge advantages I have, I have them. When I acknowledge those systems of oppression, I often get more credit than people who are the targets. Statements that can raise my status can have the opposite effect for others. Again, Oluo is on target:

鈥淪tudies have shown that pretty much any time a white man talks about equality and justice, he is praised. It is seen as proof of his broad leadership abilities and his magnanimousness. But women of color are never praised. They are seen as bitter, divisive, vindictive, and self-serving.鈥�

Oluo鈥檚 focus on White supremacy and patriarchy is appropriate, but it鈥檚 also useful to separate White and male. White supremacy can benefit women, and women can be agents of White supremacy. Patriarchy can benefit non-White men, who sometimes promote male supremacy. And all White men don鈥檛 have it easy. Capitalism creates a relatively small number of big winners, a larger group of the comfortable, and a lot of losers. Even those who are economically comfortable in capitalism can live under the thumb of those with more wealth and power. Some of those 鈥渓osers鈥� are White men, as Oluo explains:

鈥淗ow do you keep the average white male American invested in a system that disadvantages him?

You give them whiteness. You give them maleness. You give them an identity that will provide a sense of victory in good times and bad. All you need to be successful as a white man is to be better off than women and people of color. And all you need to do to distract white men from how they are actually faring is to task them with the responsibility of ensuring that people of color and women don鈥檛 take what little might be theirs.鈥�

But Oluo avoids any false equivalency. Men and women, White and non-White, are not in the same position:

鈥淭he mediocrity of the constructed white male identity is not only disappointing for them, but devastating for those of us who are the first to be sacrificed when the predictable fruits of mediocrity come to bear. Those of us who are not white men are the labor to be exploited, the scapegoats to blame, the bags to punch. All this anger distracts us from noticing how we鈥檝e built a system that has never benefitted anyone except the most powerful white men, the select few who hoard the profits made from the systems of race and gender and class.鈥�

That鈥檚 a reminder that contemporary human societies are not only unjust but unsustainable, facing problems without easy solutions, perhaps beyond solutions at all. No matter how wealth is distributed, eight billion people on an ecologically exhausted planet won鈥檛 work much longer. 鈥淩ight now white manhood is on a suicide mission,鈥� Oluo says, and I agree. But the whole human species is on a suicide mission.  

The end of patriarchy, White supremacy, and capitalism is a necessary but not sufficient condition to dealing with the multiple, cascading ecological crises we face鈥攏ot only rapid climate destabilization but also soil erosion and degradation, chemical contamination of land and water, and species extinction. The human future will be defined by 鈥渇ewer and less鈥濃�攆ewer people consuming much less鈥攅ither because we plan for it or because the ecosphere imposes it.  

One response to that may be, 鈥淭hat鈥檚 easy for you to say as a White man living comfortably in the United States.鈥� Fair enough, but if it is so easy for people with privilege to say such things, why are so few saying them? I think the answer is that we are scared, and rightly so. No matter how one analyzes human failures to date, the human future is distressing. But as James Baldwin said, in the context of facing White supremacy, 鈥淭he only way you get through life is to know the worst things about it.鈥� Ecologically, the worst is yet to come. 

None of that, however, detracts from Oluo鈥檚 analytical clarity and eloquence in Mediocre, an achievement that came at a cost. She begins the book鈥檚 conclusion by acknowledging that the process of researching our country鈥檚 violent racism and sexism, 鈥渨hile living as a Black woman in this country, had been slowly wearing away at my soul.鈥�

She describes the reactions to her writing, such as her first book, So You Want to Talk About Race:

鈥淭hese men wanted me to know that they were miserable, they felt screwed over, and they felt demonized. … They wanted me to know that they were not capable of growth or change and that any attempts to bring about that growth or change would end them.

Nobody is more pessimistic about white men than white men.鈥�

She refuses platitudes and asks a hard question about the idea of love as a solution: 鈥淲hat does it mean to truly love white men who feel entitled to status and are angry at the world when they do not get it? And what would it mean to love the same people whom those white men seek to harm?鈥� What does it mean for me to love other White men鈥攖o love myself鈥攁s long as patriarchy and White supremacy exist? Oluo forced me to think more deeply about questions that have long bedeviled me鈥攑art of the gift of the book to White male Americans.

A shorter version of this essay, 鈥淭ough Love for Mediocre White Guys,鈥� appears in 鈥淪olving Plastics,鈥� 大象传媒 #98.