When Will Barack Obama answer for the bad behavior of his brethren?

by Guest Contributor Tami, originally published at What Tami Said


That said, it would be nice to see some glimmer of feminism coming out of our presumptive black male candidate. I’d like to know what he thinks of OJ Simpson, for example. Would he, law professor, stand up in front of a black crowd and admit that he thinks OJ got away with murdering a white woman - unlike the countless black males who actually didn’t murder the white woman, but were hanged anyway? In all cases, remember, the woman was actually dead.

More importantly, will Obama repudiate the misogynistic undertone in rap music, the tidal wave of bitch and ho vulgarity that does nothing to move young black (and white) women an inch closer to parity with men? Read more…

Wow! Just…wow, Nina Burleigh. In her recent post on Huffington Post, the writer wonders “Is Obama Man Enough to be a Feminist Too?” I wonder if Burleigh realizes how ridiculously race biased it is to ask a candidate to weigh in on O.J. Simpson and decry hip hop simply because he is a black man.

Will Hillary Clinton be taking a stand against Susan Smith, the white woman who murdered her children a year after the Simpson-Goldman murders and blamed their disappearance on a mysterious black man? Should she be expected to? The idea is ludicrous and so is any notion that black people always need to answer for the behavior of people who share their skin color.

Once again during this election cycle, a feminist proves that there is no shelter from racism, not even in supposedly progressive communities.

I don’t need Barack Obama to be the second coming of Andrea Dworkin or a Black Panther. As a black person and a woman, I need to know that, as president, he will move this country closer to equality for all people. That means helping to close the wage gap between women and men, and white women and women of color. It means ensuring committed gay couples have the same rights as committed heterosexual ones. It means ensuring that kids in poor inner-city and rural areas are guaranteed a good education just like rich kids in the suburbs. I’m not arrogant enough to think that I am the only person on earth to face inequality, and I am not entitled enough to think that a president’s work need be all about me. I wish some of my fellow American citizens felt the same way.

Latoya’s Note: I am pissed enough to spit nails at that crappy post. Check out this gem, from the same piece:

    The kids recently pulled my junior high school yearbooks off the book shelf. Ellis Junior High, 1974, was the kind of mixed-race, mixed-class public school I don’t think exists anymore. Hard by the crumble-down projects in Elgin, Illinois, it served black and Latino kids on welfare, and lower middle class white kids like me, but was close enough to country club suburbia to draw students who fox-hunted and would soon head off to East Coast prep schools. The black guys came to school with picks in their huge Afros, and joints in their pockets, and we danced with them to Bootsy’s Rubber Band, in parentless, pot-scented, subsidized living rooms.

    We never imagined that in our lifetime, we would someday be competing for the spoils of dying-Empire America.

    Looking at those yearbooks, I realized I have no idea what happened to any of those young black men. Did they get lucky, draw the affirmative action straw and get into private colleges and law school, get promoted up the EEOC ranks of a multi-national? Or, are they delivering mail, pounding nails, in jail?

Because obviously, black men benefit from an “affirmative action straw” pull and EEOC programs or they are condemned to jail time. Fuck that noise!

(Photo Credit: US News)

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. danbouchard.com » When Will Barack Obama answer for the bad behavior of his brethren? on 27 May 2008 at 11:32 am

    […] from Racialicious via Tami’s Blog That said, it would be nice to see some glimmer of feminism coming out of our […]

Comments

  1. Sarah J wrote:

    Wow.

    Just…wow.

  2. Hilary wrote:

    That is so upsetting. I still consider myself to be a feminist (or a womanist) and I am sick of people trying to draw some sort of feminist line in the sand with Barack Obama on the other side.

    I remember Bill Clinton’s campaign - he courted the rock n roll generation. I don’t remember any apologies for the excesses of heavy metal videos. Does John McCain have to apologize for Motley Crue’s “Hot for Teacher” video? How about Drew Peterson?

    Sheesh. This polarizing treatment of liberal issues is what is keeping liberals from being more successful politically.

  3. Caro wrote:

    That woman seriously says that stuff and tries to call herself a feminist in the same article? What the hell is wrong wit her?!

  4. nati wrote:

    man. that was hella ridiculous.

  5. nati wrote:

    “The black guys came to school with picks in their huge Afros, and joints in their pockets” ????????

  6. lemure wrote:

    Arggh! Things like this that make it harder and harder to dialogue with some white people and kill my desire to talk to them as a group. This is willful, deliberate and extremely ignorant and racism.

  7. Treacle wrote:

    Obama is not campaigning to be the President of black people in the United States.

    He’s campaigning to be the President of the entire United States and he’s acted accordingly.

  8. kim h20s wrote:

    “interesting” article on so many levels. the author strays to the all to typical white liberal female anecdote of “i dated black boys”. hmm, why is that anecdote never “i had a black female friend”. then she assumes that the only way those black men will succeed is through affirmative action?? Without affirmative action, those men are doomed to careers in construction (union job) or the post office (government job). Both of which are perfectly acceptable career paths. Did she ever ask any of these black boys their views on feminism as they danced in pot scented public housing?

  9. Mickey wrote:

    *slams head on keyboard*

    This obsession with Obama and his manliness (sp) is getting out of hand at the Huffington Post.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sylvia-welsh/the-shrinkage-factor_b_103068.html

  10. Cara wrote:

    FYI….Obama did speak about OJ simpson on ABC in ~ March. It was before he gave his “race speack.” It was featured on the ABC evening news and it was before the Ohio Debate. So he’s already made a statment about OJ…he said he believed he got away with murder…He made the comment while speaking about race and the perception of black males in American Society. So this person is definitely out of the loop.

  11. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @Mickey,

    You know, I just read an article in Vanity Fair about how Barack Obama is not living up to the black male sexual stereotype.

    Reading lines like this “Yet, Obama’s certain fidelity is somehow troubling me” really trouble me. Seriously? You’re pissed that a politician has the nerve to be faithful to the person he married? He can’t win either way, can he?

  12. Cara wrote:

    here is the link to the abc news interview:

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/03/barack-obama-th.html

  13. Dan wrote:

    Yet more proof positive that most white people need to just shut up when speaking on racial matters.

    First, why would Obama denounce rap? If 80% of rap consumers are white, shouldn’t Hillary be more responsible for denouncing it? After all, if the whites who make up 80% of rap purchases that results in billions of dollars in rap sales, thus making the misogynistic undertone of rap profitable, why are we placing the blame and the responsibility at the feet of black men and the rap artists themselves who are doing what you are supposed to do in a capitalist system (a system which is a thoroughly European creation), which is respond to market demand no matter the social consequence.

    Second, why would Obama vilify OJ Simpson when Simpson was acquitted?

    White people sure as hell didn’t vilify Mark Fuhrman or ask questions about the shady situation of a racist cop being the lead detective in a case and the one who discovers blood evidence implicating a black man accused of killing two white people.

    Nooooo….Nina Burleigh surely didn’t look at the O.J. Simpson case in THAT manner…because if she did, she would have realized that her statement:

    “…the countless black males who actually didn’t murder the white woman, but were hanged anyway?”

    …mirrors the circumstances in the Simpson case identically!

    Oh Nina…just shut it. Please. You’re embarrassing to those of us whites of rational minds.

  14. Mickey wrote:

    @Latoya Peterson

    You hit the nail on the head. All I could think of when I read both articles was:

    Mandingo!

    He’s not the stereotypical Black male oozing sex out of every pore.

    I got a chance to see Obama in person during a Senate vote. He is a very good looking man; he’s also “sexy” in that way EVERY woman loves: he’s confident.

  15. Celeste wrote:

    What the hell? That got me so angry! Why does this only apply to minorities? Was he suspected of killing anyone? Is he involved in the music industry? Then what culpability does he have in relation to either.
    And no she didn’t just say affirmative action! As far as I know AA helped more white women than black men. Did she get to pull the straw.
    Having said that, after reading the article I don’t think that the only point was to make Obama answer for the crimes of black men. She had some okay points at the end of the piece but it’s weighed down by all that other crap she wrote.

  16. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    Celeste -

    That was a lot of crap to wade through for some pieces of quartz.

  17. Juan wrote:

    EW! Just… ew! What the hell is wrong with white people?! And why did I click on links in the comments? Just made it worse.

    *headdesking away*

  18. Mary wrote:

    What the fresh hell? Do white politicians have to “answer for” lynchings or cross-burnings? I mean if we *really* want to go all the way with this racial collective guilt crap, it seems like white Americans have a lot more to answer for than any other group. Native Americans, calling on line 1!

  19. gatamala wrote:

    What does having supporters that spew such bullshit say about the candidate?

  20. Big Man wrote:

    I”m going to have to blog about this. This is atrocious.

  21. Keren wrote:

    @ Mickey
    “I got a chance to see Obama in person during a Senate vote. ..he’s also “sexy” in that way EVERY woman loves: he’s confident.”

    So there is an attribute in a man that EVERY woman loves? News to me. Why are you even talking about how good-looking he is?

  22. nezua wrote:

    i’m still waiting for bill clinton to denounce and reject the massacre at wounded knee. i mean…is he honorable enough to stand up for the anti-massacre crowd?

    ah, well. i fear we’re in for a lot more idiocy. but what’s new.

  23. gatamala wrote:

    OJ Simpson!!! I still can’t get over this!! OJ!!

  24. Jaye wrote:

    Obama is definitely not my type, but his even-handedness, his calmness, that fact that he is not quick to anger yet is able to stand up for himself when needed…those are attractive qualities. The way he stood up for Michelle, with a smile on his face…that was beautiful. I think we’re so used to philandering Democrats and Republicans who don’t cheat on their wives but are in resentful marriages with undercurrents of disrespect…that it’s amazing to see someone who could be president in an actual happy, respectful marriage. Not that being in a good marriage means you’ll make a good leader, but it’s nice to see someone who would make a good president also actually be in love with his wife (or husband if that were the case - which it isn’t).

    That someone could find Obama’s fidelity “troubling”…what I find troubling is the fact that Republicans are able to use their faithfulness towards thier wives as stand-in’s for actual respect towards them. They think respecting women only means not cheating on them, and then they don’t have to do the real work of treating women as actual complete human beings on issues like equal pay, abortion, physical abuse, etc.

  25. Lyonside wrote:

    >What does having supporters that spew such bullshit say about the candidate?

    I dunno, but there are some scary Obama-supporters too out there (or so they claim online - as with anything online, who knows?), spreading the vitriol on Shakesville and other sites. To all the insane nonobjective supporters of all the current political candidates for POTUS, I’m sure a healthy majority are thinking, “Dude (or Lady), stop HELPING me, OK?”

  26. Lyonside wrote:

    Sorry, that last comment was for gatamala ;)

  27. Elizabeth wrote:

    Besides simply having a racist bias ( it took me a minute to see what OJ has to do with feminism at all), Ms. Burleigh seems to also be making the burdening demand that Obama prove to her that he doesn’t fit her prejudice thinking, that by default all black men are misogynists.

    It makes me sad to read these comments and find that she is effectively persuading others to have similar default low-expectations of whites.

  28. Black Canseco wrote:

    if this post were some isolated rant, I’d laugh it off. but this meme and related perspectives has been so rampant on so many mainstream feminist blogs, fem mags and spewed by so many loud-n-proud feminists over the years, that at some point you have to ask yourself if this is simply a cornerstone of mainstream feminism ideology.

    It’s a white male patriarchal society. And white women are screwed worst and first and anyone who doesn’t subscribe to this doesn’t know their proper place, specifically men and women of color.

    And how long will O.J. be the feminists’ poster child for all things black male/female abuse-related?

    I guess i have to wait for a white male of some social stature to abuse his wife and kill a woman before the OJ-as-BoogeyMan to fade away.

  29. Black Canseco wrote:

    This just in: Sharon Stone blames the earthquake in China on “bad karma”. The Chinese government is bad to the tibetans, so karma sent a killer quake to straighten ‘em out.

    gotta love celebs.

  30. G.D. wrote:

    what’s more distressing is that until Tami’s response in the comments, people didn’t seem to notice the myriad problems with Burleigh’s column.

    my head hurts.

  31. Persia wrote:

    I have had people insist that Barack Obama has ‘nothing’ about women on his website (not true), that he should speak up against misogyny because otherwise he is one (ugh), and that the use of ‘periodically’ is an anti-feminist dogwhistle. Some people just will not be satisfied.

  32. Joseph wrote:

    Who is Nina Burleigh you ask?

    A former Clinton White House reporter who is most famous for her recollection of playing cards with Bill on Air Force One while wearing a short skirt. I am not even a little bit kidding.

    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C03EED9103AF936A15757C0A96F958260

  33. Raina wrote:

    I get downright angry about how mightily we are abused by so called progressives. Especially white feminists who only use or “support” the causes of other minorities only in so far as they align with their own interest. The second that they don’t the veil falls and reveals a racism and hatred of any other kind you can name. Hillary Clinton embodies this spirit as for some reason unclear to me she feels entitled like many other white women feel entitled to whatever position they are after.White feminism today is a strange mixture of the cult of sacred white womanhood and so called feminist ideals which are supposed to include equality and choice. Why else would this blogger bring up the long dead case of OJ Simpson? If Obama is required to apologize or acknowledge the death of this white woman (regardless of what one could say of her) should we force her and the white feminist cult to apologize for the countless black men who were exterminated when white women either lied or decided it was convenient to claim rape or harassment? Or for the fear instilled in my grandfather and his generation forced to walk by white women with his head down for fear of what might happen to him? Or would she and her feminist buddies like to apologize for their daily indictments of black men as they clutch their purses and press themselves against walls when black men pass them in hallways?

    Somehow white women can be on the attack and then retreat to victimhood at her convenience. Many seek to emasculate but somehow want their femininity celebrated. Its really pretty sick and twisted.

  34. Roxie wrote:

    It’s amazing she forgets he’s biracial. So does that mean he needs to answer for all the wrong, negative, bad things that white people do too?

  35. Raina wrote:

    Other possible apologies include but are not limited to:

    -portrayals of black men in major television shows and movies (even more so for their relationships with black women) by “socially conscious” white female producers

    - treatment of young black males in education from pre-k - high school and beyond actually

  36. Nadra wrote:

    Black Conseco, you said:

    “I guess i have to wait for a white male of some social stature to abuse his wife and kill a woman before the OJ-as-BoogeyMan to fade away.”

    How about Robert Blake?

  37. A. wrote:

    This is why I cut off my ties with feminism long ago. So many (though certainly not all) feminists use their status as feminists to go on the attack against everyone, but god forbid they get some criticism or face the same thing. Then it’s an attack against white women as a whole.

    Honestly, feminism, when you get sick of showing WoC and PoC the shaft, we’ll start giving a shit about YOU.

  38. allheavens wrote:

    First Obama had to reject Louis Farrakhan, and then denounce Jeremiah Wright, all to quell white America’s fear of the Black man. Now he must denounce O.J. and all misogynistic behavior by Black males or be labeled such.

    God, it is articles like this written by feminists that make me want to open a vein.

    Does she not realized how absolutely demeaning and downright hateful this article is?

    Are these women so angry that Hillary is no longer the front-runner (sorry Gloria but women sometimes are the front-runners) that they are willing to do and say anything to destroy the person they deem responsible for their lost hopes and dreams?

    This makes me both sad and angry. It makes me sad because as a women it just perpetuates the “feminist as emasculating bitch” myth while increasing the chasm between white feminists and feminists of color.

    But, as a WOC this shit just pisses me off. Nina thinks she can just throw this crap out into the universe and feel perfectly justified in doing so and without fear of any meaningful consequence. Why? Because as the much oppressed white female in a white male patriarchal society it is just one of her many “privileges” to do so.

  39. NancyP wrote:

    Who is this Nina Burleigh? Not a top-ranked pundit (there aren’t any progressive female pundits in the top rank). Not second-rank. Third? Fourth?

  40. Black Canseco wrote:

    @ Nadra,

    I know about Robert Blake and others. that was my attempt at sarcasm…

    White Men are not answerable for the actions of other White Men—unless it’s political season, then one or two individuals might get lumped together. Same applies to White Women. And once the election is over, the lumping tends to stop.

    Black Men will be answerable for OJ, R. kelly, Michael jackson, 50 Cent from now, till the end of time.

    The next time White Women with no professional or personal affliation are held accountable for the actions of Jenna Jameson or Lindsay Lohan, or the words of Gloria Steinem or any female pundit will be the first.

  41. Mickey wrote:

    @ Keren
    Just as you have the right to question why I would bring up his looks: because Ican.

    And I stand by my statement: confidence is sexy. Maybe not for EVERY woman, but for this woman it is.

  42. Black Canseco wrote:

    Mickey,

    was it sexy when Bill had to disclose his boxer or brief preference? if not, then you’re a sexist pig!!!! Leave Hillary alone!

    Lol. kidding.

  43. jsb16 wrote:

    I just looked for mentions of women’s issues on Obama’s website. I found a reference to the pay gap under civil rights, but that was all I could find. Nothing on abortion rights, or the right to be free of sexual harassment. Does Obama have a statement somewhere that clarifies the “women should have some control over their bodies” comment he made? Because, frankly, that comment worries me.

    Of course, so did his comment that HRC launches attack ads “periodically, when she’s feeling down.” To me, that sounds like “you know how women get, periodically *winkwinknudgenudge*,” just as “he’s so articulate” carries the unstated but still heard addendum “for a black man” from years of history.

    Are these examples as outrageous as Clinton’s racist comments? Absolutely not. But I expect that the candidate I voted for in my state’s primary will be better, policy-wise and as a person, than the candidate I voted against. I don’t want to go into the voting booth in November to vote for the lesser of two evils yet again, hoping that my ideals won’t be too terribly sold out by the candidate I’m voting for, because I know that the other candidate will surely sell me and mine to the first bidder to come along.

  44. Black Canseco wrote:

    jsb16,

    i think checklist politics is wrong.

    does every politician need to say “women’s bodies are theirs” in order to believe it or protect/enact legislation to support it.

    this is akin to equating flags and flag pins with patriotism. Is obama a apatriot? i dunno. Does where a flagpin = patriotism? nope.

    what if obama had all these pro-women’s issues talking points on his website and then you found out his voting record in the senate ran counter to his website’s claims. then what?

    I don’t need HRC to invoke MLK, Jr to determine how she views african americans and affirmative action; what i can do is check her track record, speeches and legislative opportunities to see if they verify any pro-black claims that she may make.

    no more checklist politics.

  45. sfsinger wrote:

    jsb16 - You need to do a little more research. Check his voting records. He has an endorsement from NARAL’s PAC. Sorry, but you’re just being lazy to justify your choices. Name a way Clinton or McCain support an anti-racist agenda for women of color.

  46. jvansteppes wrote:

    “the countless black males who actually didn’t murder the white woman, but were hanged anyway? In all cases, remember, the woman was actually dead.”

    Actually she wasn’t always dead; sometimes they just lynched those men without looking for a body. Sometimes the white woman wasn’t dead, she was off crying somewhere because that black man was her boyfriend.

  47. Renee wrote:

    Am I actually the only one that is thinking this…enough of the white female, black male war. You are not the only minorities to be marginalized on the western hemisphere. Neither of you are even on on the bottom tier of the racial and social hierarchy. It sickens me watching feminists and black men playing identity politics while scrambling for a seat at the table. All I can think is that at least you get a voice, while WOC are busy filling being your supporting cast, silent victims in this ridiculous tug of war.

  48. eric daniels wrote:

    Welcome to the new “Racial Correctness” if Obama wants to be President then he has to criticize African- American Men because White Men, Women,other Americans of all races have made Black Men “the greatest threat to the future security of the nation” while White Feminists like Gloria Steinem have tagged Black Men as the most sexist, homophobic and the blame why HRC can’t take he rightful God- Given right to be the first White Woman POTUS.

    Obama should condemn all Black Men (even those in the womb) for any past, present of future behavior and we should be tagged with a coded number like Ham so we can only be allowed to ‘breed’ Black Ballplayers, singers, and Porn Stars. Would that make Nina Burleigh happy? I know some brothas who could “hook her up” with a Bootsy album , Ole English ,and some Chronic. Racial Correctness WHAT A COUNTRY !!!

  49. Keren wrote:

    @ Renee
    No, you’re not the only one thinking it. I totally agree with you, and I’m also becoming increasingly frustrated with their competition. Just checked out your blog, I like it a lot.

  50. Mickey wrote:

    @ Black Canseco

    LOL!

  51. gatamala wrote:

    click on Joseph’s link! It dovetails quite nicely with TCS’ post on sexuality.

    Not only a lousy writer, but a g.d. hypocrite too.

  52. bertie wrote:

    @Renee

    Really. I see this “war” as between white feminist of differing generations with rare side skirmishes with feminist of color. I haven’t seen to many black male bloggers, pundits or media types engaged in the “competition” between which “ism” is worse. To be honest I haven’t seen to many black women engaged in the which “ism” is worse competition either–except maybe to say that such arguments are counterproductive (as Latoya has done many times on this site). But I have yet to reach the end of the internets, so I could very well be wrong.

  53. gatamala wrote:

    Am I actually the only one that is thinking this…enough of the white female, black male war.

    Nope!! It’s like they both want to score the # 2 position in society but leave a trail of WOC in their wake!

    Bertie, to some men, there is no problem. Thus, no competition.

  54. bertie wrote:

    Well, I guess I just don’t get the war then. Is this the war about which “ism” is worse—as characterized by Gloria Steinam’s “Women are never frontrunners” essay? If so, I don’t see how BM are in a”war” with WW for the #2 spot, as this seems to be a very one sided argument pushed by a certain type of feminist. Seems to me, in Steinam’s essay and similar arguments made by folks such as G. Ferraro, BM are used merely as a props or strawmen to make a greater point about how much worse sexism is–and thus why women of all races should vote Hillary. BM never had a voice in this “war” and are there in name only. Much like Ferraro’s allegation that their is a cabal of BM journalist spewing sexism against Hillary–this WW/BM war is just a rhetorical tool whip up the women (originally all women but now just white women over 45) to vote for Hillary. To be honest, a real assessment of how race and gender affects folks was never really the point of the “war”–it was always about making sure women tow the line for the female candidate.

    I guess I get a little sensitive hearing that I some how have left a trail of woc in my wake by fighting war I didn’t realize I was in and haven’t had a real voice in.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.