Jay Smooth goes into a nice, rational explanation of how to have a very awkward conversation.
Unfortunately, most of the people involved in said conversations are not rational and will immediately start with the derailing process. *sigh*
that was racist against pick-pockets…
Really cool!
Couldn’t say it any better. Nice post!
That was wonderful. So well put and a very useful tool for discussion.
I loved this video. I think that it is a great guide in how to engage in conversations about race. If they key is to point out that the action or behavior was wrong we need to stay on point to not allow the person in question an opportunity to disengage and control the conversation.
He was very organized
Oh man, this is GOOD. Thanks for sharing this with us. I’ve already reblogged it!
This is great and he’s so right. If you say ‘You’re a racist’ you’ve taken the focus off what the person said, which is what you’re supposed to be focusing on. No one knows what goes on in someone’s head, but you can talk about words or actions.
Jay Smooth always kicks ass.
By focusing on the statement or issue at hand rather than a critique of the person, we can also leave open the possibility that the offender will reconsider what they’ve said. I understand that it is unrealistic to drop other things to become “an educator” at every turn, but when the other person is someone we what to reach out to, Jay’s advice to remain focused is prudent. No one likes to be corrected or called out, but a personal attack shuts down the communication because defensiveness or “judo moves” take over. Now if I could just find my voice…
Sigh.
Just as I am showing my ass on the other thread Jay here breaks it down for me. Okay Universe, I get it.
I’ll try and do better.
“Then the conversation becomes a rhetorical Bermuda Triangle, then dissolves into a discussion on Hip Hop music…” Indeed, indeed! Although it has been my experience that when you confront people on what they’ve specifically said or did, they often try to blunt or deflect the direction of the conversation with the patented “But that wasn’t my intention to sound or look racist, sexist, rude, mean, etc…” Still though, this was a great video!
I have a question for everyone. What if you point out that what a person said was racist (ok, you didn’t use the word racist but said that what she said reflects white privilege) and consciously make sure you don’t attack the person but her statement, but the person comes back and says she’s not a racist, that you’re a racist for saying that her comment was racist and that she’s worked with people of color for ages? Then she’s proceeds to say that you brought up race, not her, and that’s she’s really colorblind.
@ Faith
You should put on a Malcolm X shirt, slap her in the face, and call her a cracker. *Obviously joking*
This is just my take. I’m sure there will be much better advice from other commenters in here.
I think that in order to calm her down, you should reassure her that you do not think that she is racist nor are you accusing her of being such (even if you do think that she is a racist).
Next you should explain to her that simply talking about race doesn’t make you a racist (Conservatives love to play that trick on us). Point out that your intention was to shed light on an area that doesn’t get much discussion–privilege. Also explain that there are different types of privilege. Since she is a woman, you may be able to find some common ground by drawing a parallel between white privilege and male privilege. Although it is not necessarily true that she will be receptive to either, it’s worth a try. Attempt to explain to her how privilege and discrimination go hand and hand; that you cannot have one without the other. If she denies that discrimination exists then there is no hope for her at this point! If she listens to you then I’m sure you can have a tense, but productive discussion about race. The important part is that she thinks about these issues critically and is able to accurately analyze hers own privilege and how it may or may not affect others.
A few years ago I did a study measuring awareness of white and male privilege that had an interesting outcome. This was just a delightful result that came as a result of the scale we used. Definitely didn’t intend to find this, but I’m glad I did. I’m definitely going to do some more research on this in grad school (please don’t jack my idea. I’d like to get this published). Anyway, on the scale we used there were two statements:
1. Given a limited amount of resources, if group A gets the majority of the resources then group B will be disadvantaged.
2. If Whites are given the majority of the resources, then Blacks will be disadvantaged.
Logically, both statements express the same idea. The only difference is that one describes the conditions in terms of non-distinct groups and the other uses “racial group.” Although there is some variation between the ways in which the statements are posed (that’s why a follow up study will need to be done), we would expect that the responses to both questions would be similar. We actually found that Non-white participants gave similar answers to both questions while Whites gave less consistent answers. This suggested that the racial categorizations caused something in white participants to trigger when answering the second question. The next step is to figure out what is actually going on with our logic when talking about race. We also did the same thing with male privilege, but the results weren’t statistically significant.
@ faith -
at that point, you grab a rolled up copy of the new yorker and proceed to slap her, as we like to say, upside her head. tell her it’s satire.
sorry, latoya… i know there’s a more educated response to this but damn if i can’t think of it.
Oh, Faith. If you’re offended, you’re offended. That’s like your boss puts his hand on your ass and you called him out on it for being inappropriate and he says, “but I’m not sexist, and it’s not harrassment. It’s just a tap, like on the basketball court, between pals.” “you brought up harrassment, not me, so you must be the sexist one”. Does that make sense? No.
And just because she’s worked with people of color for ages that automatically makes her statements free from racist untertones? If her words have a negative tone, and you’re offended, you have every right to bring it up. If she’s too dense to listen to what you have to say, well, I’m sorry you have to deal with an imbecile. And I hate the “I’m colorblind” phrase. Unless you are clinically diagnosed blind, um, hate to break it to you but you’re not. Everyone sees color, and everything else that distinguishes a person from another. But the kind of person you are is determined by how you treat others based on what you see.
That man could explain butter melting and it would sound interesting. Definitely lives up to his name, and a well-thought out analysis.
@Thomas: LOL!!
Another excellent video from Jay Smooth. The man is brilliant. Or should I say, the words he uses are brilliant 
I would not want to be the person he has this conversation with. That person would get buried. He’s one of the best speakers I’ve ever seen. And I’m not just saying “one of the best speakers on the blogosphere” or any other limited sets like that. I hope the man goes places. Big places.
Nice. I’ve actually used this approach in real life, and while I anticipated and was prepared for all and sundry derailments, they didn’t occur. With my mother, I intermittently use both approaches — sometimes I contest the verity of the statement she’s made and address that, and sometimes when I couldn’t be bothered, I just let her joke/retelling of an Esther Ku joke (who she refers to as “that Chinese girl” despite the fact that her whole routine is about being Korean American) dissolve into awkward silence or call her an “ol’ racist.”
sorry, but i think that all white people are inherently racist due to the white privilege they have in a racist society. so its not their fault, and they might even be working on it and try to have good race politics which is great, but they still cant escape that fact.
i dont like some white boy telling me how i should be having conversations about race, expecially when it’s conveniently excusing himself from being labeled a racist. but white people gotta hear that, and some do acknowledge this reality. its not just about being PC and your inner intentions, “jay smooth”, its about your privilege.
@ ava
I was actually wondering what Jay Smooth’s ethnic background was. I did a quick internet search but couldn’t find a bio.
To me Smooth’s race doesn’t make this video any less valid. I do think white folks can be as effective anti-racist activists as folks of colour and I totally welcome white allies.
Though I agree that it would be just that much better if he dropped mention of his own privilege – if he is in fact white! He could be mixed or First Nations or…
@ Ava
I must admit that the tone of your comment bothered me. It seemed as though you are implying that Whites have no place in an active discussion about the ills of racism in America. Please do not take this the wrong way, but privilege doesn’t necessarily equate to being racist. By your logic, any person who experiences privilege is inherently labeled as [Insert ism here].
I’m a straight black guy. Does that make me a non-racist, sexist, homophobe? I hope that you reassess your comment and understand the sweeping generalizations that you make about white people or anyone who may experience privilege. Would the opposite be true for those who do not experience privilege? Would you agree that all PoCs are not racist simply because they may not directly benefit from white privilege?
“i dont like some white boy telling me how i should be having conversations about race”
Your comment bothers me because it seems particularly racist. You maintain that by virtue of Jay Smooth’s race he himself is endemically racist. I would venture to say that is a problematic and flawed assessment of the elegant instruction that Jay Smooth offered about navigating the dangerous seas of public discourse regarding race. It would be useful for some if he mentioned how one could insert acknowledgement of privilege while having these conversations, but I think that would be too much for one session.
I’m more on the side of discussing actions and consequences, wherever possible, rather than privilege. I’m not saying privilege discussions are bad at all, it’s just the concept tends to get stretched to abstract extremes sometimes.
For different situations you can apply at least three entirely different frames: action/consequences, privilege, intentions. The intentions frame is often used egregiously and defensively — “I didn’t MEAN to be racist” — but that doesn’t mean that all discussion of intention is bad.
I guess Jay Smooth is a case in point for the “white racially ambiguous” post!
“sorry, but i think that all white people are inherently racist due to the white privilege they have in a racist society. so its not their fault, and they might even be working on it and try to have good race politics which is great, but they still cant escape that fact.”
I agree, and I don’t think there’s anything in my video that says otherwise, or excuses anyone from scrutiny/accountability..
In fact, it’s precisely BECAUSE nobody should be excused from accountability that I believe the approach I describe is preferable. The “you are racist” framing perpetuates the myth that being racist is an all-or-nothing binary like being pregnant, and you either categorically are or categorically are not. Which, as you say, is not the case because nobody categorically is not!
Whereas the framing I describe is better suited to working towards a discussion of how all white americans (and not only white people, but white people especially) always have ongoing work to do regarding their privilege and the prejudices with which we are constantly indoctrinated in America.
So far from excusing people from scrutiny, I’m saying the “what they did” conversation is a better way to establish that nobody is exempt. In fact this is one of the things I was planning to address in future videos, so apologies if y’all see this comment repeated verbatim lol.
And yes Thea, I am mixed, black dad/white mom. 
Faith @12:10, you’re exactly right. What he says sounds so great that you really want him to be completely right, but alas…
Thanks Jay Smooth for both the video (which I’m also reposting on my blog tomorrow) and your comment (#25).
I absolutely agree that as an anti-racist strategy/practice, calling people on their words and actions is preferable, for me, than calling them on what I think they are, because I think most everyone is racist–either due to white privilege and supremacy (for the non-poc) or due to internalized stuff from living in a society that has imbued us with white supremacy thought.
I teach issues of race and try to cover as many other “-isms” as I can (because they are often interrelated) but one thing I do on the FIRST DAY is tell my students that we aren’t going to call each other racist. It’s not productive. It derails classroom discussions. It makes people feel guilty and ashamed, and from a teaching pov, this isn’t what I’m after–what I *hope* is for that light bulb that goes off in a student’s head when s/he recognizes that they’ve been living in a pretty racist society and that they have a chance and a choice to do better.
But I have to say, related to Faith’s question (#13) that when I’ve confronted people on their racist statements, and then they get offended/defensive and call me a racist…I want to hurl heavy sharp objects at them. I’d like to *hope* that despite the initial defensive reaction that we have helped to lodge a nugget of doubt in their brains that will enlarge and expand their mind until they realize what a jackass they were for making that racist statement and turn to the light and start some anti-racist work. Wishful thinking, I know, but at the end of the day, I am a teacher and I have to try to practice what I preach. Even though I want to scream and yell and hit them hard with a rolled up copy of The New Yorker.
@everyone
i apologize for assumptions i made regarding jay smooth’s race. the reason i assumed he was white was due to the lack of any reference to privilege in the video. obviously mixed race people have a more complicated relationship regarding white privilege. i’m looking frward to future videos where this can be addressed, and perhaps it’s been mentioned before. however, this is the only video from his blog ive seen thus far, and when taken out of context (which is how many people like myself will come to see it) it seems really lacking. even in conversations about specific things people have said, privilege is still an issue that at least should be given mention since its the basis for the world in which the comment was made. any productive conversation needs to address this, or else it just becomes a matter of being PC. still, thanks to jay smooth for the thoughtful response.
as for the person who accused me of being racist…. no, i don’t think i have that kind of power. the whole reverse racism argument is pretty much bullshit that’s brought up to avoid dealing with the real issue of white supremacy.
yes, i also think that all men are sexist, and that all straight people (including myself) are heterosexist. i dont think that i’m incapable of being an ally to non-straight folk through my actions, and it’s not my fault for the way the world is, but that’s just something we have to accept if we’re ever going to make any progress. and obviously, since i believe that all men are sexist yet am still hetero, i think different people can still get along as long as we understand that our relationships can never be completely equal.
C’mon Ava. You got off to a great start with your apology…We do live in a racist, sexist, hetero-normative society. We are steeped in it’s messages and we all have to confront our internalized prejudice. Which is why being brown does not make me unable to be racist and does not make racial slights from other minorities less racist as I’ve experienced them.
You pointed out as if to explain your earlier statement that all men are sexist. To continue that analogy, all women are sexist too, even though they are not the beneficiaries of sexism. It’s not hard to look around and find women who have internalized the message of their own inferiority, who seek to blame rape-victims or who participate in slut-shaming or believe women and not men are the natural care-takers. Being female doesn’t excuse me from needing to check my own sexist assumptions.
Philly Phil wrote:
“at that point, you grab a rolled up copy of the new yorker and proceed to slap her, as we like to say, upside her head. tell her it’s satire.”
actually, that’s the best response i’ve heard for TNY-cartoon so far.
I am really interested in the subject being discussed but I don’t know what Jay Smooth actually says b/c I have an old computer with broken sound. I know that others can’t make noise at work and at least one frequent poster here(deaf feminist punk) also can’t participate fully because she can’t hear. A transcript or at least a summary would be really nice.
Wow . . .first Time Wise, and now Jay Smooth comments here. *excited* Who’s next, PoC Jesus?
As always I really like the video. I was going to comment a lot earlier, but maybe I sensed the video maker would actually read it and kept my silliness to myself.
Thank you Jay Smooth for making and thank you Racialicious for posting this. It’s so hard for me to try and confront people when they make racist statements. I try to avoid calling them a racist, but they generally deny that there’s anything wrong with what they said. (”Because it’s true” — ah, my favorite racism-denying line.) It’s always an uphill battle. ><
@ Ava
As I did in my first comment to you, I hope you don’t take this as a personal attack; however, I would have to vehemently disagree with the notion that whites are inherently racist, men are inherently sexist, etc. I think that you are making a big jump here without addressing some major truths about the nature of inequality. I’d like to get some things straight.
1. “as for the person who accused me of being racist.”
I did not call you a racist. I simply stated, “Your comment bothers me because it seems particularly racist.” I said that your comment was racist, not you. Jay Smooth just offered a great dialogue about focusing on the comment not the person.
2. “no, i don’t think i have that kind of power. the whole reverse racism argument is pretty much bullshit that’s brought up to avoid dealing with the real issue of white supremacy.”
Please don’t cast my comment in the toilet with the term “reverse racism.” I hate that term! I said that your comments were racist because “You maintain that by virtue of Jay Smooth’s race he himself is endemically racist.” The problem with the idea that, “…all white people are inherently racist due to the white privilege they have in a racist society,” is that it disregards that fact that we are all subject to biased imagery. A person is not inherently racist simply because he or she is white. A person of any race can fall victim to the racist images that bombard us on a daily basis. Being a PoC does not grant you an automatic “I’m not racist card!” A PoC is just as able to harbor racist feelings as a white person.
There was a study that found that both white and black police officers were more likely to shoot a black target holding a non-threatening item (i.e. a cell phone) than they would a white target with a threatening item (i.e. a gun). This study speaks to the notion that all of us are socially programmed to view particular groups in certain regard. (Below is a link…I’m not sure if it’s the original study, but it’ll do.)
The challenge is to acknowledge the degree to which we fall victim to this phenomena. Once you can acknowledge that even you, a non-white person (I assume), has probably fallen victim to these racist and sexist images. However, I would not jump to the conclusion that you are inherently racist. If you were t o say that we all are reared in a racist, sexist, heterosexist society I would agree. But to make the jump that the reality in which we live is rigid and unchangeable is a rather grave outlook. Having racist, sexist, and heterosexist thoughts will likely, not necessarily, happen to everyone. Challenging those inaccurate thoughts is what allows us to progress.
3. “… and obviously, since i believe that all men are sexist yet am still hetero, i think different people can still get along as long as we understand that our relationships can never be completely equal.”
I would assert that a PoC and a white person are able to share an equal relationship with one another. Our current reality is that there are advantages that a white person may enjoy that a PoC may not in our society. The same is true for a man and a woman; however, this truth does not necessarily directly impact a personal relationship. My fiancée is a Filipina American and I’m black. We have a great relationship. The fact that we both may face discrimination in the outside world does not mean that we cannot view each other as equals in our personal relationship.
I do appreciate your comments because they do hit key issues. Privilege, discrimination, and inequality are the topics that I study and it is interesting to note that America is inherently racist, sexist, and heterosexist. It’s funny that while I do acknowledge that, that I have a difficulty saying the same about people in dominant groups. I will say that as America has progressed that your statement would not hold true today, but at one time it was an absolute truth.
I’m too tired to think about this anymore tonight. Perhaps some more intellectual sparring tomorrow.
Clever, concise, equal parts wise and cool – this is why I adore Jay Smooth.
Hm. Between some of the straight-up ignorance over on the not-quite-white thread and now this…spectacle that culminated in forcing Jay Smooth to racially categorize himself (!) I am left with a bad taste in my mouth.
You want to know why the “mixed” folks don’t come around so much anymore? Yeah, this’d be why.
“I did not call you a racist. I simply stated, “Your comment bothers me because it seems particularly racist.”
(said to a homosexual) “I did not call you a sinner. I’m merely saying you did some acts that seem sinful.”
Most people (at least most of us) would recognize that that’s completely insincere, and that that is pretty much as bad as calling them a sinner regardless of whether you phrase it that way.
Besides, you do think they’re racist. “Framing the discussion” not to say something which you obviously believe and which obviously influences what you do say rarely fools people.
“1. Given a limited amount of resources, if group A gets the majority of the resources then group B will be disadvantaged.”
I’d suggest an alternate explanation: the word “disadvantaged” is ambiguous. Saying that a group is disadvantaged could mean that they have less power on an absolute level, or less power proportionately.
Explicitly mentioning black and white would lead more people to use the second interpretation, since that’s usually what it means when talking about race. If that’s not how they would normally interpret the word, then their response to the two questions may very well be different. (If black people usually read race into the first question more often than whites do, they may show less difference in their answers.)
In other words, logically, the statements might not express the same idea, if the reference to race leads to a different interpretation of an ambiguous term.
@ Ken
Sigh….I’m sorry you feel that way. I guess you didn’t watch the video either. I have to disagree with you. I wasn’t “framing the discussion.” If I truly thought that Ava was a racist I would say…Ava, you are a racist! I come to this site to because I enjoy active discussion that challenges me to reevaluate my ideas about a topic. I went out of my way to ensure Ava that I wanted to engage in constructive discourse. I don’t think that she took it any other way (at least I hope not). If I didn’t want to talk about a topic with her, I wouldn’t respond to her. ). As learned as I think that I am, I know that I am not half as knowledgeable as most of the people who come to this site. I come here to learn about things that I don’t know.
(to self) …breathe…
In an effort to show that I will get off your inaccurate assumption about me, I would like to rebut your comment.
“Most people (at least most of us) would recognize that that’s completely insincere, and that that is pretty much as bad as calling them a sinner regardless of whether you phrase it that way.
Besides, you do think they’re racist. “Framing the discussion” not to say something which you obviously believe and which obviously influences what you do say rarely fools people.”
I am assessing her comment, not her personal beliefs/ideas. There are times when I have looked at something and not thought that it was offensive. Upon further reflection and education about the situation, I have come to understand why it is offensive (i.e. the recent Bernie Mac joke at the Obama rally discussed on this blog last week or so. I would argue that a distinction can be made between an action and a sentiment. I think that a person can engage in a “homosexual” act and not be a homosexual. Maybe it’s naivety, but I hate the fact that the men have to announce “No Homo” before they say or do anything that may be perceived as gay. (Said in a group of straight guys) “Wow Dave, you look nice….No homo.” I can say that I think a guy is attractive. Does that make me gay? I think that we often fall victim to the logic that if someone says something, then it must reflect that person’s sustained state of being. It doesn’t lend credence to the idea that people’s ideas are fluid. (I try to make a distinction between ideas and beliefs. I think that ideas are generally more malleable than beliefs.) If people’s ideas aren’t fluid, then what is the point of Racialicious? I like when people challenge my ideas or my statements, but please do not make presumptions about me when you know absolutely nothing about me. (Blood pressure beginning to rise again) Attack my statement…make me back my shit up, but do not make an assumption about my integrity based on your own personal projection!
@ken: he clearly phrased the comments in such a way as to elicit conversation, which is far from the example you compared it to. and he addressed it exactly like the video that started this thread! but see now i’m doing it like you were … if i was on my game i’d try and point out your words as simply stating “oh no you didn’t” instead of talking about the difficulties in separating folks’ words from their actions both in practice (because when it matters most you’re prob both heated) and in practice (even when folks tell you that your WORDS were dumb it still seems like a direct condemnation of your own intelligence, thus an ineffective distinction).
@ava: i can never cosign on the idea that a man is always sexist, white are always racist. i’ve always felt like its more real to acknowledge that the perspectives we have are filtered by the skin that we’re in and the lives that we live. and inequalities don’t fall in a straight line.
white folks have the luxury of not feeling othered by their skin, straights have the luxury of not being othered by their love and sex lives. men don’t get othered by their reproductive necessities, able-bodied people don’t get othered by their inability to navigate stairs. and these othered states are dependant on location. an asian person can feel a different sort of othered in rwanda than a indian person.
you gotta be careful not to pimp your inequality is all i’m saying, or you trivialize both your strengths and the comparable inequalities of others.
@ Ken
“I’d suggest an alternate explanation: the word “disadvantaged” is ambiguous. Saying that a group is disadvantaged could mean that they have less power on an absolute level, or less power proportionately.
Explicitly mentioning black and white would lead more people to use the second interpretation, since that’s usually what it means when talking about race. If that’s not how they would normally interpret the word, then their response to the two questions may very well be different. (If black people usually read race into the first question more often than whites do, they may show less difference in their answers.)”
Agreed. That was some of the critique that I received when I presented the poster at a conference. I think there can be some fine tuning done in terms of how consistent the statements are with one another. Def appreciated the insight.
“I have to disagree with you. I wasn’t “framing the discussion.” If I truly thought that Ava was a racist I would say…Ava, you are a racist!”"
You’re right, I was confusing you and Jay, who in comment 25 did agree with a statement that all white people are racist, and said that he was framing the discussion so as not to emphasize that. I shouldn’t have quoted you there.
Is it bad that when I saw Jay Smooth commented on this thread I went completely fangirl and got the strong urge to leave a “OMG!! I <3 Jay Smooth!!! Jay Smoothz dah best!!! ahh!!!” type of comment?
No?
Sweet. Just checking.
And I love the “what you did was racist” line of argumentation. I consider everyone racist by default so attacking a person’s actions/statements has always worked really well for me. That is…it’s worked really well when the other person doesn’t perceive me as Angry Black Woman and go into shut-down mode.
My current problem though is that I’m studying in a foreign country and don’t have the language skills to tell my professors (it’s not real safe for me to engage ppl on the street) when they’re being racist . I’ll try to form an argument occasionally, but most of the time I just give them my “I can’t believe you’re stupid enough to say that” look. Not sure if they know what that look means, but it just makes me feel better to glare at them.
PS: I totally heart u Jay Smooth!!! illdoctrine is my favorite vlog evahh!!! Woot!! (Yeah, I couldn’t help it. Sorry)
Though I like J- Smooth’s message and it is rational in every way, I am sick and tired of talking with people who ought to know better. Most people know they are saying outrageously racist things, thjey just hope they will get a pass on their words. I assume everybody American’s a racist, sexist, homophobic,xenophobic jerk-off until proven otherwise. That means I don’t have to be shocked when you say something utterly stupid and what Jay- Smooth’s saying racist.
P.S. I love it when White Americans call me a racist especially those whites and others who like to be “politcally incorrect” when itr comes to race.
@Shelby – lol! Me too, I barely restrained myself! Sorry to hear you’re having a language barrier problem. Any chance of switching languages long enough to discuss the problem?
@Joseph – yeah I hear you, Mr. Smooth having to racially catogorize himself bothered me too. But then I decided that he didn’t HAVE to catogorize himself, he could have chosen to ignore that part of the comment. I would have backed him on that. I suspect he wanted to address it because he is proud of ALL of his heritage as most multi and bi racial people are. I hope this doesn’t detract from other multi and bi racial people enjoying this blog. I know I’ll be back.
I know I shouldnt but Ive givin up on one friend who is by definition is racist, yet doesnt see me as her ‘black’ friend, just Angie.
Ive talked to her several times and she dosent get it. Im just waiting for the next time she uses a term like ‘wetbacks’ or ‘chinks’ to describe someone and watch her get her @ss beat.
C-Marsh, the study you referenced sounds fascinating. I only read the abstract, being loathe to purchase things over the Internet unless absolutely necessary. But from the table of contents and abstract, it seems to say that at least part of that is because, apparently due to the darkness of skin, that an object in the hand of a Black man is actually more likely to be mistaken for a gun PERCEPTUALLY, not just mentally, especially at night.
This strikes home for me. A Black man was shot to death by police here awhile back (one of the policemen that killed him was himself Black). I work at a firm that does forensic video analysis for the police, and I personally saw the whole footage, not just the part shown on the news. At one point, the black man held his cell phone like a gun, so that its antenna was pointing like a barrel, and was waving it around towards the policeman. This was at night.
Now, video cameras these days are considerably more sensitive to dim light than human eyes are, and more particularly do not suffer either from the loss of color perception nor from the reduced central vision (the sharpest area of our vision) that we all suffer at night because our cone cells in the center are not as sensitive as the rod cells in our more peripheral vision, and the rod cells are much lower in resolution and cannot distinguish color.
Even so, on the video, the cell phone was easily mistaken for a gun, partly because of the way the man was holding it. But also, the blackness of his hands could easily be mistaken for the grip part of the gun, which would be much less likely for a lighter-skinned man.
I wonder if the man was deliberately trying to commit “suicide by cop”? I can’t think of any other reason anyone would hold a cell phone that way towards police, at night. It was very definitely threatening-looking.
Ava said-
“i dont like some white boy telling me how i should be having conversations about race, expecially when it’s conveniently excusing himself from being labeled a racist.”
Any productive conversation about race should preclude disparaging language such as “white boy”. .
Barbara B., re: Ava’s comment: more to the point, any productive conversation about race should preclude not just disparaging langauge, but, more importantly but pre-assuming (or even REQUIRING) that all “white boys” be racist (“…especially when it’s conveniently excusing himself from being labeled a racist.”
Pre-assuming anything about anyone is, BY DEFINITION, prejudice. Pre-Judging. It’s what the word MEANS. It’s what the PARTS of the word means.
To Ava and others here who have expressed similar beliefs, including, unfortunately, Jay Smooth himself (LOVED your video, man!): If you automatically assume that all white people are racist, or all heterosexual men are rapists (per certain self-proclaimed radical feminists), or whatever, you’re committing prejudice. By. Definition. Just as assuredly as any stereotype that has been applied by any haters to any ethnic or other group that you consider yourself part of.
I had written a much longer post on the subject this past weekend (shortly before the one of mine that appears first in this thread), but it didn’t get approved for whatever reason (probably too long).
Just a quick note then I’m done. Good to have you back Latoya:
@ ComaLite J
“it seems to say that at least part of that is because, apparently due to the darkness of skin, that an object in the hand of a Black man is actually more likely to be mistaken for a gun PERCEPTUALLY, not just mentally, especially at night.”
I think that the explanation and the example that you give is plausible; however, I am tempted to consider the converse. If it is more difficult to distinguish a cell phone from a gun in the hands of a darker skinned person, wouldn’t it be easier to determine between a cell phone and a gun in the hands of a lighter-skinned person? It has been awhile since I’ve actually looked at the study, but what I do remember is that officers were less likely to shoot a white or lighter-skinned person with a gun than they were a dark skinned person with a non-threatening object. There was actually this site where you could do the simulation yourself. It was a computer simulation that had images of blacks and whites with threatening and non-threatening objects. You had a split second to choose whether or not to shoot the person. The environments were also varied (i.e. malls, suburbs, projects, street corners, parks, etc.) The environment also played a factor in priming people’s actions, but overall the pervasion of racial stereotypes was evident from the numbers. I doubt the site is still up, but if I come across it I’ll post it. You should also try taking the Implicit Association Test (IAT). This also speaks to some of our biases unconscious biases.
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of New Demographic, a diversity education firm. Her perspectives on race and diversity have been featured on CNN, MSNBC, NPR, USA Today, and The New York Times.
Tensegrities » Blog Archive » Great video on engaging racism on 25 Jul 2008 at 10:25 am
[...] Here’s a great little video that makes the important point that we should be focusing on “what people did” rather than “who they are” if we are really going to make a difference around racism. It also reminds me why a study of rhetoric is such an important part of theological education. (Hat tip to Racialicious) [...]
Bisexual dating site “does not support” trans member, part 2 « Bi-Furious! on 27 Jul 2008 at 10:45 am
[...] (This goes back to a conversation I’ve had several times recently, even before I saw it on Racialicious and Feministing, about how much more useful it is to talk about the fucked-up things people say and [...]