The current discourse on outsiders and outcasts seems to further alienate and derogate them, rather than achieve the goal of defining them in a neutral manner, or showing any empathy to them. In addition, the current discourse seems to define them through potential sociopolitical aspects of their identities–demographic traits like sexual orientation, religious beliefs and convictions, and mental health and neurological status–rather than through personality or character traits. Such as whether they feel they are similar to other people; how they feel they relate to other people (in terms of their relationships to others); and the general dynamics of those interactions. How it generally goes or seems to go, for them.
It seems that traits like true shyness and introversion are much more likely to outcast you and sideline and marginalize you than traits like sexual orientation or religious beliefs. There are members of the lgbt+ community who are stars in sociopolitical circles, and who seem greatly loved and admired; it doesn’t really seem that they are being bullied or ostracized. (Which is more than can be said for the sociopolitical climate of at least the 60s, and all the decades prior to it. Although; the hatred towards them is never truly going away, completely. Among all people. An illustrative example is that the developing world, with its, at times, more traditionalist understanding of things [that’s a nice way to put it] has not really caught up, that well. I think most of the homophobia and transphobia today occurs in developing countries; I have no doubt about that, actually. I think a certain country in northeast Africa where I’m from is among the worst in terms of human rights, in general. And so lgbt+ rights might be the last thing on their mind. *But in the United States at least, where I’ve lived for about 15 years, it seems that many lgbt+ people have at least managed to find their own communities and associations and alliances in life…if not a completely accepting society. And I think the society overall has moved beyond the ostracism, in genuine ways. *Although; not really, by many measures. It all just depends who you talk to; everyone’s experiences are different.) ||| At the same time; it looks like many people of religious faith, like Muslims, Sikhs, and etc., are really popular among their cohorts and peers. They have a lot of friends; more so than the average person, even. And there’s even a chance that they are popular in society, as a whole. If they are public or semi-public figures (like journalists or academics or nonprofit leaders, or administrators of any kind, or anything else), there’s all the likelihood in the world that they are in fact not treated badly, for the most part. By those around them. They are loved and admired, even as Muslims, and other minority faiths. They are in the club, for sure. No one can deny that they’re in the club…just like a good number of lgbt+ people. *A lot of people in the world–others–are not in the club at all, though. In fact; people of similar background and very similar experience as the insiders (in terms of work, volunteer experiences, resumes, cv’s, actionable things they have done in the real world, or lived experiences/life narratives they’ve had, in regards to the past) are not in the club. This is despite being comparable to the insiders in life story or lived experience. So; that’s interesting, isn’t it(!) Why is there this severe insider/outsider dichotomy, even among people with the same lived experiences, and similar cv’s? That’s my question. All in all, there’s a definite club out there, and certain people are not in it. Even certain people who should be in it vis a vis qualifications and qualifying traits, are still not in it. Is there no room for them(?) -That’s not a way to treat your friend, or your counterpart, over there.
Here’s a thesis: I think it’s actually the thing of not knowing how to relate well to other people—perhaps ‘too self-reflective and introspective,’ and ‘too introverted, as a whole’—which makes people into outcasts and outsiders. Much more so than solely ‘being gay,’ or ‘being in a certain spiritual/religious tradition.’ Not knowing how to present yourself to others, or how to intermingle with other people, and etc., often does more damage to the person, over time, than do traits like homosexuality and religious convictions. And I actually don’t want to put forth the assertion of their being “too shy,” “too introverted,” or “uninterested in forming good relationships with others”; that would put the entirety of the blame on them. So that’s actually not my thesis or assertion, at all. My main thesis is actually that there is a special branch of humanity that will forever remain outsiders—even outcasts. And there’s nothing anybody can do about it. Some people are gay, some people are Muslim, and some people are outsiders. Some people are all three. But the one that you can’t really accommodate, it seems, is the outsider. He’s always gonna be in his own head, and more introspective and seemingly not-there (or simply ‘not like everyone else’) than is usual. It’s ok(!) We just have to not bully him (or her), even in an indirect fashion. We literally just need to “shut up,” mind our own business, and leave them alone. We’ve managed to do that with gay people and Muslims; why not with outsiders and outcasts? And other ‘weirdos?’ We can attempt to be friends with them if we want. But other than that, I don’t see the point in being mean to them.
It seems to be that being an outsider or outcast depends on how other people treat you; it doesn’t depend on inherent traits, in the person. And this is why it’s hard to define what an outcast or outsider even is, in regards to any inherent traits of the person. You’re only an outsider depending on whether or not other people treat you as equals; whether they let you into the group, and treat you as an insider.
This is why traits like sexual orientation, religious affiliation, and mental health/neurological status do not (cannot) necessarily outcast anyone. This is also why traits like true shyness/introversion are much more likely to ostracize a person; they are traits that are inherently to do with other people. They’re traits that bring others into the picture, and cause friction between the shy introvert, and the others. At any rate, there’s no specific trait that inherently, necessarily outcasts or pushes back anyone. Many gay, religious minority, and neurodiverse people have found acceptance and true camaraderie amongst people—even if only within their own circles, or their own lgbt+, religious minority/ethnic minority, or neurodiverse communities. Others have not; and it’s not a question of blaming them for any problems in connecting with others. Not at this point, anymore. It’s clearly more of an issue of bullying, deliberate ostracism and exclusion by others, and things of that sort. Again, the point of this thesis is to state (remind, really) that the phenomenon of outcasts and outsiders all depends on being made an outsider; it’s nothing to do with any particular features or traits of the person, himself—inherently or necessarily. One is only an outsider relative to others’ ostracism. Otherwise; what is an outsider? Who is an outcast? It is (necessarily) someone who is cast out (or not brought in); someone who has not been accepted or taken in by other people. It’s little to do with lack of assimilation, on their part—on the outsiders’ part. In all actuality, there’s a group out there for everyone; there’s a group of friends or like-minded peers, for everyone. It’s only a question of not having found that particular group, in regards to certain people. In other words, the very concept of outsiders and outcasts is null and void, at some paradoxical level. In that; no one fits in absolutely everywhere he goes. Everyone would be considered an outsider with at least one or two types of people, or groups, in the world. Everyone would be unpopular with at least one group of people, in the world. All it requires is a group of people to ostracize you. If you’ve ever been excluded, you know how easy it is for it to happen. In many ways, the in-group doesn’t even have to actively do anything in order to ostracize the person. All it truly requires is not bringing the person in, or shunning, or avoiding. (And so; the in-group might in some ways be absolved from any wrong-doing, technically speaking. In that ‘they’re not doing anything, at all.’ Ostracism is one of those things that is really difficult to address and hold anyone accountable for.) But I would honestly just say ‘don’t worry about it.’ It doesn’t matter.
A raw spirit is never without friends, companions, or well-wishers. Be yourself, and everyone who is like you, or attracted to you, will follow suit. There’s someone for everyone; true friends are rare, but they always exist. They’re always there, even if you don’t really get to know them that well, or become bosom friends with them. They will know of you, and that’s often enough comfort, in this life of loneliness and pain.
#outsidertheory
a portfolio 