I really try to have a high tolerance for ignorance, and working with nine-year olds, it really helps to develop it quickly. I mean, kids are born ignorant; otherwise, what would there be to teach?
My tolerance for ignorance, however, was extremely tested this week during a discussion I was having. I was trying to help someone with an assignment on United States history (not one of my own students), specifically related to a series of legislative acts called "The Great Society." According to Wikipedia, the Great Society refers to "a set of domestic programs in the United States announced by President Lyndon B. Johnson at Ohio University and subsequently promoted by him and fellow Democrats in Congress in the 1960s." Related to this idea of the Great Society is the Civil Rights movement, as well as more current issues such as gay marriage and even immigration policies.
I was trying to help him support his opinion on the Great Society and respond to the questions that he was asked. One of the most difficult things about being a teacher is that it is essential to remove oneself from the situation, especially when it comes to discussing and/or writing about controversial topics, so that a student may learn to express himself or herself--not express the opinions of the educator.
So, I continued on, listening to what he had to say, and trying to help him support his claims. The article to which he was supposed to respond discussed the current change in demographic in the United States. Many large cities are starting to have minority Caucasian populations, and when the "minority" groups are clumped together, they actually outnumber the "white" people. He responded to this saying we should tighten up immigration, in an effort to make sure that these other people do not "take over" our country.
I tried to remind him that his family had, in fact, originated from a different country, as well--a people that, at one time, was discriminated against, as well. This argument seemed to hold no water in his mind, and we continued to discuss. I eventually expressed my difficulties in helping him, as I so vehemently disagreed, and because he was unable to see the logic for most of his arguments. I was fearful that I was simply going to come off as argumentative.
I was able to hold my ground well and remain calm, up until his next remark. He was trying to make connections to other issues, which I applauded, but then he decided to bring up interracial marriage and, of course, gay marriage--without any prompting from me, mind you. He proceeded to say that people who marry outside of their race or within their sex are simply doing it for "attention." They don't actually love each other; they just want to make some waves.
I felt my eyes blur a bit and my face turn away, hot with disbelief.
I merely uttered, "Wow."
I felt it inappropriate to take this personally, and I felt it out of my rights as his tutor to turn this into a platform for gay rights. I also felt it unnecessary to reveal my sexuality at that time, but I wanted to so badly.
I did, however, tell him that he should be very careful as to how he expresses his opinions, even though he is very much so entitled to them, and when he does, he needs to make sure he can support them with fact.
Essentially, that is what his opinions were: Remarks strewn together with threads of ignorance and void of any experience on which to construct the foundation for his arguments. He claimed to know that those people felt no love, when he most likely had never experienced that kind of love on his own. The sad thing was, he was completely incapable of seeing this lack of foundation, making any of my attempts futile. I was arguing with ignorance.
And now, I see that it is true that you cannot argue with ignorance.