Jump to content

"My Family's Slave"


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

He tried to teach her to use an ATM card so she could have access to her own money. He tried to teach her to drive so she could leave. He and all the siblings encouraged her to leave numerous times.

As he says himself, these were futile endeavors.  I was more referring to confronting his mother.

13 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

And keep in mind this is all assumption since you are claiming that he included in that one article every single thing he ever tried or thought about to help her.

My assumption is he is going to paint himself in the most sympathetic light in such a piece.  I think this is a very rational assumption.

14 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

I'm just uncomfortable with the only person/people that brought this story to the publics knowledge being the focus here. There's a rabbit hole of blame and hindsight to go around. IMO, from what I read in the article the author and his siblings should be among the least to be criticized.

I think this article made everyone who read it uncomfortable.  In fact I think that's its intent.  That does not mean we can't reflect on the actions of Alex and his siblings - just the opposite.

25 minutes ago, Xray the Enforcer said:

[mod] Note to participants of this thread: This isn't a situation where it's important to score Internet points, but a discussion about modern-day slavery and its effect on a woman and the family who kept her. I will be moderating comments heavily, so make sure you're not just here to win some edgelord battle. Thank you. [/mod]

I don't know what the bolded means, so I'll refrain from any further response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

As he says himself, these were futile endeavors.  I was more referring to confronting his mother.

So what exactly should have been done instead of or in addition to those futile efforts is my question. 

Quote

My assumption is he is going to paint himself in the most sympathetic light in such a piece.  I think this is a very rational assumption.

That doesn't mean that in reality he was just a guy who was motivated solely by his own guilt and didn't try hard enough to stop slavery.

Quote

I think this article made everyone who read it uncomfortable.  In fact I think that's its intent.  That does not mean we can't reflect on the actions of Alex and his siblings - just the opposite.

Sure, but then I can also comment on those reflections. Particularly if they seem to be portraying the author in some sort of sinister light.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

I don't know what the bolded means, so I'll refrain from any further response.

I meant what I said -- if anyone here is just arguing as an exercise in Internet battles, then this isn't the place for it. If you feel that you have a point to make, and that point is moving the discussion forward, then I don't have problems with it. This story is not easy -- I've already had something like 7 different long-ranging, long-term discussions about it elsewhere and in person, over everything including the ethical failures of the editors, the gendered nature of Tizon's blindness and confession, and the kneejerk reactions on both sides of this issue. There's no right answer. But there are ways one can (wrongly) make the discussion more about themselves than the topic, and that's what I will moderate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dmc515 said:

 

Exactly.  @DunderMifflin, you're right, I don't know what was available during those times.  But I'm not sure why you feel the need to take up this mantle that's effectively designed to excuse the children of slave owners.  That's...weird.  It certainly was a complicated issue for Alex, but I think the problem everyone who's responding to you has is you continue to frame your responses from Alex's perspective.  Which, obviously, is all we have, which is the...icky(?) thing about this whole damn thing.

Further, while faux-internet outrage annoys me to no end, I don't think it's been expressed too much in this thread.  Reading Alex's article, I identified and sympathized (shocker) with his dilemma quite a bit.  But there are certainly some places where it's clear his omissions strongly indicate he knowingly allowed the abuse to go on when he was capable of doing something about it.  That's what bothers me, and would from anyone who has seen a family member abused, let alone fucking slavery.

I think this is what makes it so powerful.  Alex could have been any one of us.  It's clear that Eudocia loved her masters and that at least some of her masters loved her dearly.  Even while we are devastated and angry for Eudocia, it's really hard to not think we might have reacted just like Alex in keeping her essentially enslaved or at least being complicit in what happened to her.  If he went to the authorities or sought out treatment for her, there's a chance he'd be in trouble or he may never see her again.  It's a sympathetic viewpoint.  Yet sympathy or not, there's still that fact that he was complicit and that Eudocia's slavery essentially continued even after she came to live with him.

The article also really forces the reader to think about today's slavery.  It often isn't like yesterday's slavery.  We even tend to use different langauge - trafficked instead of enslaved.  I'm definitely thinking back on some sitautions where I'm now wondering if this or that household member was there of their own free will.  Overworked "nannies", for example.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Yes, and people's reactions (including my own) revealed a lot of interesting things about people.  I'm very, very conflicted about (i) the contents of the story, (ii) my empathetic reaction to the story, (iii) parts of the story that resonated with me in an uncomfortable manner (e.g., the neighbor family that knew something was wrong but never did anything, (iv) the way that the story was or was not edited, (v) the contrast  with the obituary, and (vi) the contrast with the narrative of the author's life lived that you otherwise get from his obituary.  I think it is a very, very, very complicated set of issues.

This is how I feel too.

I read that story and it made me weep, for many reasons. I cried for young Ms Pulido, who would be formed into Lola the way a tree gets bent over in relentless winds. I cried for every mention of screaming and browbeating and suggestion of physical abuse. And when members of her family got ill and died far, far away, and for her being denied the right to see them. I cried for every bit of life she lost.

I saw this through Tizon's eyes, first, because that was the only view I had. Everything else I had to imagine. I felt sorrowful for his parents, who did not see what they were doing was wrong. Wrong in our culture, not remotely wrong, as far as I could gather, in their's, and I suspect Tizon's bleak portrayal is pretty accurate. As I read the story I wondered why the hell the siblings hadn't done more to help their beloved Lola. I wondered why she ended up with Tizon, and not with one of his other siblings.

Frankly, I thought you can take a third world person out of their world and plunk them down in the first, but it doesn't mean they will become a first world person. I wondered if I was being racist. I have not yet delved into the responses from the Filipino community, but I gather they are saying to us that we don't understand. I guess they are right there.

I thought about families I knew in my ethnic community who brought out poor relatives from behind the Iron Curtain, some of whom I am sure were exploited but most of whom were launched out into the community to build their own lives. But I remember older women who seemed to fill the role of drudges in households, especially ones with children. In fact, many were invited to Canada to fill those roles, and they were grateful for the opportunity given to them. But none of them, to my knowledge, were secret, hidden figures, mistreated to that extent. That I know of.

I mentioned elsewhere that it made me think of house elves, and I wondered if J.K. Rowling heard similar stories from other cultures and based Dobby and Winky on other Lolas from other lands. Stories I've seen about some diplomats and members of their households came to mind.

In Canada laws governing the wages and hours of nannies were passed, because of some horrible stories that were uncovered by the news media, sometimes when someone 'escaped' to a woman's shelter.

But for all the criticism of Tizon, if he hadn't written his powerful, albeit flawed, story none of us would be talking about this issue. The story focuses a hard, strong, light on a practice that is going on this very moment in dozens of countries around the world and right here in North America or Europe where most of the members of this forum live. Flawed as it is, the story has power. I think we all wish Tizon was still alive. I also wonder now if the other members of his family will be hunted down and pilloried on the Internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fragile Bird said:

This is how I feel too.

I read that story and it made me weep, for many reasons. I cried for young Ms Pulido, who would be formed into Lola the way a tree gets bent over in relentless winds. I cried for every mention of screaming and browbeating and suggestion of physical abuse. And when members of her family got ill and died far, far away, and for her being denied the right to see them. I cried for every bit of life she lost.

I saw this through Tizon's eyes, first, because that was the only view I had. Everything else I had to imagine. I felt sorrowful for his parents, who did not see what they were doing was wrong. Wrong in our culture, not remotely wrong, as far as I could gather, in their's, and I suspect Tizon's bleak portrayal is pretty accurate. As I read the story I wondered why the hell the siblings hadn't done more to help their beloved Lola. I wondered why she ended up with Tizon, and not with one of his other siblings.

Frankly, I thought you can take a third world person out of their world and plunk them down in the first, but it doesn't mean they will become a first world person. I wondered if I was being racist. I have not yet delved into the responses from the Filipino community, but I gather they are saying to us that we don't understand. I guess they are right there.

I thought about families I knew in my ethnic community who brought out poor relatives from behind the Iron Curtain, some of whom I am sure were exploited but most of whom were launched out into the community to build their own lives. But I remember older women who seemed to fill the role of drudges in households, especially ones with children. In fact, many were invited to Canada to fill those roles, and they were grateful for the opportunity given to them. But none of them, to my knowledge, were secret, hidden figures, mistreated to that extent. That I know of.

I mentioned elsewhere that it made me think of house elves, and I wondered if J.K. Rowling heard similar stories from other cultures and based Dobby and Winky on other Lolas from other lands. Stories I've seen about some diplomats and members of their households came to mind.

In Canada laws governing the wages and hours of nannies were passed, because of some horrible stories that were uncovered by the news media, sometimes when someone 'escaped' to a woman's shelter.

But for all the criticism of Tizon, if he hadn't written his powerful, albeit flawed, story none of us would be talking about this issue. The story focuses a hard, strong, light on a practice that is going on this very moment in dozens of countries around the world and right here in North America or Europe where most of the members of this forum live. Flawed as it is, the story has power. I think we all wish Tizon was still alive. I also wonder now if the other members of his family will be hunted down and pilloried on the Internet.

From what I gather, what Alex's parents did is seen as wrong in their culture as well. But that understanding requires understanding what "lola" and just reverence for those of that age range actually means in their culture. It's more telling a story spanning generations of women that go back farther than any one individual in this particular story. 

 

The part of the story Im surprised that is getting overlooked is the suicide of the grandfather and what sorts of things that could or couldn't imply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone from the country Alex and Lola are from, the Philippines, my opinion on it is that the media and even people here on this forum are going overboard with the whole slavery thing without understanding the context of what Lola's situation was.

First of all, all this stupidity about "Lola" being her slave name is just outrage without knowledge. Lola is meant as a term of respect to those older than you. Literally it means grandmother. I call my grandmother Lola and if anyone in my family older than me heard me refer to her using her first name I would get a smack on the head.  In the Philippines these things are very important. Lola was meant as a sign of respect and if the author ever called Lola by by her first name, he would have offended her, not because she was "brainwashed" but because in our culture that's the equivalent of saying he didn't respect her. 

Second, yeah even in our culture what his parent's did would have been considered wrong and this article is blowing up in the Philippines just as it is in the United States, although without the same vitriol towards the author. You have to understand the context before you pass judgment. The Philippines is an overpopulated but rather small country. We have around 120 million people living in a country that's less than half the size of Texas. We have a very high poverty rate as well. This means that labor is cheap since supply of labor is high and because of that there are many who seek out jobs as "Katulongs" or helpers for wealthier families. This is a legitimate and needed industry in the Philippines as millions would be unemployed without it. Many times these katulongs, particularly the ones assigned to take care of the children, become part of the family to the point where they are included in family photos. It really is in many cases a symbiotic relationship between employer and employee. The employer hires a katulong so that they are freed of more time from house work or taking care of the kids and are able to spend more time working. The employee requires the employer for free housing (most katulongs live in their employers house), free food, salary, and in some cases a free education as some employers will send their katulongs to college or pay for them to go back and finish high school. They can also resign from their jobs whenever they want and are in no way coerced into working for a particular family. 

Now going back to Lola's story, it's important to note that the author's views and opinions are shaped by the fact he grew up in the United States and thusly see what was happening to Lola as slavery due to the fact that he grew up in a country where that was really the only comparable thing that he would be shown. I'm not disputing the fact that Lola was maltreated and even in my country his parent's would probably be in jail but calling it slavery is trying to apply an American context to something that is very un-American.

It's also unfair in this situation to blame the author for complicity. In a filipino household you do not ever question your elders. Ever. No matter how wrong you think they are. The same cultural mindset that required the author to call their helper "Lola" ironically also inhibited him from standing up to his mother in defense of her and, if you know the context, you can tell that this is something the author was grappling with. 

It would take too long for me to explain the context of how American and European Colonialism in the Philippines affected the power dynamic between employer and katulong but that played a factor as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to clarify what I meant about 'not remotely wrong' in my previous post. I really meant the concept of katulongs as described by House Velaryon. I was guilty of hyperbole, which can happen when you see a story like this.

However, the comparison to slavery is apt in this situation. Tizon's family basically snuck her in and then kept her secret. They could never risk letting her go home in fear she would either not come back because she escaped a horrible situation and they knew it was a horrible situation, or she wouldn't be allowed back by US Immigration. They couldn't afford to hire help and no one would would put up with the conditions they had imposed on her. They needed her to support their lifestyle, plain and simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 UW professor of Southeast Asian history Vicente Rafael has an interesting take.

 

"It helps to get some historical perspective on the debate. For starters, “slavery” is not the same everywhere at all times. A lot of the comments tend to conflate Alex Tizon’s family with white slave masters, Lola with black slaves, and their household with the antebellum slave plantation. Once you’ve made these alignments, it’s easy to condemn Alex as insufficiently repentant, and the narrative as obscene and self-serving.

But that’s not the case. Servants may be enslaved but are not slaves in the way it meant prior to the Civil War in the U.S. And while there is a history of slavery in the Philippines, it was flexible and contingent, whereby the slave was never merely chattel, but could become part of the family, albeit a lowly and exploited member. Power relations between masters and slaves were mediated not just by the imperatives of the marketplace and by ideologies of race.

In Alex’s narrative (and in everyday experience of Filipinos who grew up with servants), they are also materialized in affective ties of pity (awa), reciprocal indebtedness (utang na loob), shame (hiya) that hold together as much as they pull apart the master to and from the servant. (Thus the kinship term, “Lola,” grandmother, used to refer to Eudocia: not a “slave name” as others have said, but a term of endearment even as she was often humiliated and abused........"

https://www.google.com/amp/crosscut.com/2017/05/my-familys-slave-can-alex-tizon-be-forgiven-for-his-sins/amp/

 

 

In many ways it's seems that Alex's parents treatment of her is seen as even more taboo in the Phillipines than it is to Westerners. In America we use grandparent as an insult to imply inferiority due to age. As in "hey grandpa, drive or get out of the way". Where there it's a term of respect not an indictment of inferiority.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There does not really hang much on calling it slavery. Calling it by any other name would not really change the exploitation of a dependent person. The obituary really was a disgrace although one can understood how difficult the whole situation was for Alex Tizon (and his 4 siblings - what about them, have they commented on the article?)

Still, as soon as he was not longer dependent on his mother (his father had left the family already anyway?), say in his mid/late 20s he should and could have done something about it. He waited another 20 years, so no matter how difficult the situation was, he clearly did not what he knew to be right. There could have been a way to do this without getting his mother into legal trouble. Just take Lola home (and in the 1980s there would have been more of her relatives alive) give her the wage she should have gotten for >40 years of service, so she could have lived her last 20 years or so in her home country close to some still living friends and relatives. At least give her the option between that and continue working for the family in the US for a decent wage. Not exploiting her for another decade or two. Nobody doubts the affective ties. But this makes it almost harder to grasp: How can you keep treating someone whom your children love so badly that she usually sleeps on a heap of laundry?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Jo498 said:

There does not really hang much on calling it slavery. Calling it by any other name would not really change the exploitation of a dependent person. The obituary really was a disgrace although one can understood how difficult the whole situation was for Alex Tizon (and his 4 siblings - what about them, have they commented on the article?)

Still, as soon as he was not longer dependent on his mother (his father had left the family already anyway?), say in his mid/late 20s he should and could have done something about it. He waited another 20 years, so no matter how difficult the situation was, he clearly did not what he knew to be right. There could have been a way to do this without getting his mother into legal trouble. Just take Lola home (and in the 1980s there would have been more of her relatives alive) give her the wage she should have gotten for >40 years of service, so she could have lived her last 20 years or so in her home country close to some still living friends and relatives. At least give her the option between that and continue working for the family in the US for a decent wage. Not exploiting her for another decade or two. Nobody doubts the affective ties. But this makes it almost harder to grasp: How can you keep treating someone whom your children love so badly that she usually sleeps on a heap of laundry?

I don't understand how people claim to know exactly the best thing to do was. We don't know what exactly happened in those 20 years. To just declare that "anything and everything not included in the article never happened, period" is just a guess. At best it seems like a kid in his early 20s in the early 1980s is supposed to appease a 2017 audience who knows very little about the situation or history of the culture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

I don't understand how people claim to know exactly the best thing to do was. We don't know what exactly happened in those 20 years. To just declare that "anything and everything not included in the article never happened, period" is just a guess. At best it seems like a kid in his early 20s in the early 1980s is supposed to appease a 2017 audience who knows very little about the situation or history of the culture.

I'm going to go ahead and call bs on cultural relativism on this one.  Eudocia was in the United States for the majority of her life.  The family's treatment of her was ethically and morally wrong (I would argue forcefully as viewed through any lens, but certainly in the United States).  This doesn't mean that I can't have empathy for Tizon (and his siblings) because I can and do (and it makes me uncomfortable).  But Tizon knew he hadn't done enough.  He wouldn't have otherwise written the article in the first place.  At least, that's how I read the article - as a confessional (but in his case, not just to his priest, but to the entire world).  Alex Tizon is currently beyond our opprobrium.  He doesn't need our defenses either.  He's dead.  But to the extent there are other Eudocias out there (and I'm sure there are - see the article re NYC nail salons from a couple of years ago) this at least shines a light on that.  And it shines a light on all of us who see things like this happening around us and ignore it as not our business.  Is it really not our business?  Shouldn't it be our business?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HouseVelaryon said:

As someone from the country Alex and Lola are from, the Philippines, my opinion on it is that the media and even people here on this forum are going overboard with the whole slavery thing without understanding the context of what Lola's situation was.

First of all, all this stupidity about "Lola" being her slave name is just outrage without knowledge. Lola is meant as a term of respect to those older than you. Literally it means grandmother. I call my grandmother Lola and if anyone in my family older than me heard me refer to her using her first name I would get a smack on the head.  In the Philippines these things are very important. Lola was meant as a sign of respect and if the author ever called Lola by by her first name, he would have offended her, not because she was "brainwashed" but because in our culture that's the equivalent of saying he didn't respect her. 

Second, yeah even in our culture what his parent's did would have been considered wrong and this article is blowing up in the Philippines just as it is in the United States, although without the same vitriol towards the author. You have to understand the context before you pass judgment. The Philippines is an overpopulated but rather small country. We have around 120 million people living in a country that's less than half the size of Texas. We have a very high poverty rate as well. This means that labor is cheap since supply of labor is high and because of that there are many who seek out jobs as "Katulongs" or helpers for wealthier families. This is a legitimate and needed industry in the Philippines as millions would be unemployed without it. Many times these katulongs, particularly the ones assigned to take care of the children, become part of the family to the point where they are included in family photos. It really is in many cases a symbiotic relationship between employer and employee. The employer hires a katulong so that they are freed of more time from house work or taking care of the kids and are able to spend more time working. The employee requires the employer for free housing (most katulongs live in their employers house), free food, salary, and in some cases a free education as some employers will send their katulongs to college or pay for them to go back and finish high school. They can also resign from their jobs whenever they want and are in no way coerced into working for a particular family. 

Now going back to Lola's story, it's important to note that the author's views and opinions are shaped by the fact he grew up in the United States and thusly see what was happening to Lola as slavery due to the fact that he grew up in a country where that was really the only comparable thing that he would be shown. I'm not disputing the fact that Lola was maltreated and even in my country his parent's would probably be in jail but calling it slavery is trying to apply an American context to something that is very un-American.

It's also unfair in this situation to blame the author for complicity. In a filipino household you do not ever question your elders. Ever. No matter how wrong you think they are. The same cultural mindset that required the author to call their helper "Lola" ironically also inhibited him from standing up to his mother in defense of her and, if you know the context, you can tell that this is something the author was grappling with. 

It would take too long for me to explain the context of how American and European Colonialism in the Philippines affected the power dynamic between employer and katulong but that played a factor as well. 

Thanks for offering your perspective.  As to the bolded, slavery isn't a binary, 'either or' thing, it is part of a 'sliding scale' of rights in persons.  

I am for the most part a proponent of cultural relativism but when it comes to things like indentured servitude, genital mutilation, slavery, rape, violence, etc; I don't see any issue expressing judgment that these things are not okay.  

It's tough for me to consider any kind of 'well you don't understand the culture' angle.  It's not pertinent.  Slippery slope or not, I'm going to say 'no, this is fucked up'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

I'm going to go ahead and call bs on cultural relativism on this one.  Eudocia was in the United States for the majority of her life.  The family's treatment of her was ethically and morally wrong (I would argue forcefully as viewed through any lens, but certainly in the United States).  This doesn't mean that I can't have empathy for Tizon (and his siblings) because I can and do (and it makes me uncomfortable).  But Tizon knew he hadn't done enough.  He wouldn't have otherwise written the article in the first place.  At least, that's how I read the article - as a confessional (but in his case, not just to his priest, but to the entire world).  Alex Tizon is currently beyond our opprobrium.  He doesn't need our defenses either.  He's dead.  But to the extent there are other Eudocias out there (and I'm sure there are - see the article re NYC nail salons from a couple of years ago) this at least shines a light on that.  And it shines a light on all of us who see things like this happening around us and ignore it as not our business.  Is it really not our business?  Shouldn't it be our business?

Not how I read it. Unless it's in a non finger pointing way in that all of us can always do more than we do to help those in need. 

Reading his history his writing seems notorious for portraying the world as gray, rather than black and white. 

We don't know if he or none of the siblings tried to get her to come live with them or tried other things. Or how much money or lack of it played a part in the decisions.  We just don't know, declaring that nothing haopened because it wasn't specifically mentioned in the article doesn't cut it for me. Just in my little research I discovered that Alex was married at least twice, that wasn't in the article either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

Not how I read it. Unless it's in a non finger pointing way in that all of us can always do more than we do to help those in need. 

Reading his history his writing seems notorious for portraying the world as gray, rather than black and white. 

We don't know if he or none of the siblings tried to get her to come live with them or tried other things. Or how much money or lack of it played a part in the decisions.  We just don't know, declaring that nothing haopened because it wasn't specifically mentioned in the article doesn't cut it for me. Just in my little research I discovered that Alex was married at least twice, that wasn't in the article either. 

How do you read it then?  Why do you think he wrote the article?

And, on the broader moral and ethical question -  you see something like this happening at a neighbors.  Maybe it's happening at the house of a young friend of your children.  What do you do?  Leave aside cultural relativism and what folks within the structure should and should not do.  What about the rest of us?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

How do you read it then?  Why do you think he wrote the article?

I'm sure guilt played it's part of course. Also love, confusion, cultural history, cultural clashing. And yes even prevention. I certainly didn't get a sense of him trying to portray himself as a hero surrounded by evil, nor as himself as evil either.

Quote

And, on the broader moral and ethical question -  you see something like this happening at a neighbors.  Maybe it's happening at the house of a young friend of your children.  What do you do?  Leave aside cultural relativism and what folks within the structure should and should not do.  What about the rest of us?  

Well where I grew up there were always rumors and stories about this happening with immigrants from the middle east. Where one guy would come over and start a business and send for his cousins or friends to come over and get unpaid slave labor from them. Very few of us ever said anything, the ones that did were not taken seriously and not much was done about it from what I heard. Maybe that's why I kneejerk jumped to Alex defense because it's a lot easier to chastise others for not being a superhero than it is to be one yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...