Comments

1. Lisa J wrote:

   What??!! He told you to open your mind? It boggles the mind sometimes how truly ignorant some people are and how brazen they are. How dare he ask you what is “wrong with you” You asked a personally reasonable question, and that guy who was on the panel who said “oh well I’m Jewish and off-white” I mean how lame is that? You were right to follow up with the question about white skin privilege b/c in that situation his being Jewish was irrelavant. It is also funny how these people would come to an event with that kind of subject matter to pooh-pooh the racism of others and then get upset when their own lack of diversity is brought to their attention.

   So sorry you had to have such an infuriating night and had to start it off with the insulting window display. It looked really half-assed anyway, I think that manager needs to take window dressing 101 in addition to thinking through his use of other ethnicities to sell something as mundane as boots and mocassins.

   Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 10:41 am ¶

2. Eva wrote:

   Good that you said something about the display in the window, it was racist and tacky.

   About the photo exhibit, I’m a bit confused. I mean if it was publicized, why wouldn’t people of color come? I live in Harlem but that doesn’t mean I won’t see an exhibit if it’s not in Harlem.

   Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 10:41 am ¶

3. Lisa J wrote:

   Meant to say perfectly reasonable.

   Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 10:42 am ¶

4. CVT wrote:

   Thanks for posting this. Your experiences in just this one night pretty much sum up why people of color don’t speak up every time something happen – because we’re so often shot down or ignored when we do so, which makes it even more frustrating than the original problem. But it all still needs to be said, so I applaud your willingness to do so, in spite of all the reasons not to bother.

   Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 10:54 am ¶

5. Lola wrote:

   someone from the majority telling a minority to open their mind? WTF minorities have to walk between multiple worlds and acknowledge other people’s issues every day

   Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 11:21 am ¶

6. Sooz wrote:

   I get the impression that a lot of stuff like this is more for us Privilege types to go look at something and say, “Hey check out how awesome we are because we’re not like that!”

   Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 11:23 am ¶

7. Maysie wrote:

   Jessica, that’s quite a ridiculous experience you had, from the store window display to the film screening. Sadly it’s not surprising from the “white progressives” of Toronto, where I live as well. Racist bullshit from start to finish. Glad you survived both ordeals.

   Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 11:31 am ¶

8. Celeste wrote:

   That was a lot of anti-racist heavy lifting for one night for one person. I’ll try to think of your example the next time I have to choose between the path of least resistance and confronting a problem.

   Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 11:43 am ¶

9. Taryne wrote:

   I wonder where the event planners advertised the event, if it was announced in only in the arts/university community or if there was an effort to reach out to communities of color. Your suggestion of presenting the exhibit in community centers is a great one. People would even be more likely to bring their children-if it were appropriate.

   Conversations about privilege are difficult ones because it is so hard to clear our lenses of the world view that our privilege has formed. How could anyone presume to say to a person of color “open your mind to issues of color” when they live it every day?! Relating privilege to power has gotten me somewhere in a few conversations, but it can be hard for some people to get beyond debating Jewish or Irish oppression in the U.S. and understand that those groups, in the sphere of the West, have power and have been “whitened” by history.

   I really hope that continuing to have the conversations and continuing to present exhibits such as this one, even to largely white audiences, will challenge people to question their own experiences. I am sorry that you had to bear the burden of speaking out alone that night, but I am sure that your points reached people who otherwise might not have questioned.

   Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 11:45 am ¶

10. Daomadan wrote:

    What an absolutely infuriating experience and talk about the “non-answers” you got from the photographer and director.

    “Open your mind” my ass. Only proving that the people who need to open their minds are the ones with them sealed shut.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 11:51 am ¶

11. Joseph wrote:

    @Jessica Yee
    “Then Paul Saltzman replied, “First of all, I’m not sure why we’re still labeled White. I’m Jewish, and I’m more of an off-white, beige I think,” to a room now full of chuckling.

    No, he did not just say that. Did he not learn while filming in Mississippi about why the term White is still used?

    “Do you want to get into a conversation about White privilege because of the skin colour you walk with in this world?” I pipe up.”

    Hm. Yes he did say that. I would have said the same thing but perhaps I would not have been as polite about it as he was…Are you actually suggesting that the experiences of people who do not fit easily into a black/white binary are less relevant than those who do? Would you have said the same thing to a fair-skinned First Nations person? A mixed or multi-racial person? Latin@? An Arab like me? How about an Armenian? Where is your cut-off point Jessica? And more importantly who elected you racial gate-keeper? Because I did not vote for that.

    Look, I appreciate your frustration and I share many of your concerns re: “equity-seekers.” But just because you look out into a room and see a “sea of whiteness” doesn’t mean that those of us who are not immediately visible to you do not exist. I do not know Paul Saltzman or his work but the fact that you thought to “educate” a Jewish guy about the “white privilege” he experiences IN MISSISSIPPI tells me that you have gotten waaaay ahead of your own critique. Can you really be so color-struck that you don’t even see the systematic oppression of people whose skin color you summarily dismiss? Do you know nothing of history?

    I applaud your intervention re: the “Indian Village.” As an Arab American I often find myself in the same situation and I know very well the internal conversation that goes “do I say something and make a fuss or just let it go?” In fact I had that conversation with myself before responding to your post. But I decided that this is my community too and the best way I know to work for change is to call bullshit when I see it. Even when that sentiment is directed at people who ought to be my allies.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 11:55 am ¶

12. fireeyedgirl wrote:

    that entire situation sounds heinous.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 11:55 am ¶

13. gail wrote:

    Awesome post. Thank you for brining your frustration and honesty to this blog. Your experience rings true, and your integrity shines through. If I had been in the audience when you spoke your truth to power, I wouldn’t have been able to stop myself from breaking out into applause.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 12:29 pm ¶

14. Erica wrote:

    It IS a lot more comfortable to say “I’m not a racist because I would never do THAT TERRIBLE RACIST THING”, rather than acknowledge one’s smaller but still serious problems. Saltzman’s answer is practically a textbook example! It’s very disappointing he didn’t learn more from that project. Lisa J and Sooz are right — examining massive, obvious injustice helps “progressives” feel good and lets them ignore backhanded or minor injustice. They’re addressing the BIG PROBLEMS, so obviously there’s nothing wrong with THEM…

    This is why I slapped the radio far too hard this morning when it started discussing an upcoming NPR show, the theme of which will be “Now that Barack Obama’s been elected, do we still need to talk about race in this country?” I’m almost afraid to listen, afraid there will be people going on about how we’re all post-racial now.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 12:31 pm ¶

15. Gloria wrote:

    To Jessica: Your efforts do not fall on deaf ears, thankfully, as Joseph and many others attest to. It is Joseph’s response which intrigues me, not unlike the others, but for a different reason than the others. I more often wonder myself, what the cut off point is with the bleeding effect of racial discourse, or more to the relevance of your piece Jessica, is the space in which to claim it being available or not. There will be protests against any words put through any racial lens, as Joseph eagerly put forth. This in a way denies your own. Injecting one indignation over another, misses the point on both messages. This is bothersome; it is suggesting that speaking equity involves not pointing out facts attributed to discourse between brown versus white, or black versus white, or just being different shades amongst a group of people, without taking the words into context. Canada does have a minor difference to the United States and racism – the Indian Act which still exists – and since Joseph referenced history, I would like him to explain what really we missed in our own? What I know about Canadian history, is that it was a battle for land between the British and French, the briefest momenst in support of but mostly against the Indians. Simple. Jessica, your point being in this writing of seeing it’s continuation perhaps is what is being overlooked. Joseph, I do not think Jessica does not know “her” history, she knows it quite well, but if we are going to split hairs here, the true underlying point and message, which I got blaringly well, because I am a First Nations woman, is that this type of racial divide kills Indigenous women. It is on this ground of indignation that racial segregation has, since the first country wife was deserted for England and her “English Roses” that the trauma associated with Jessica’s words haunts me but not you. I guess if you could see the world through a dark skinned woman, you would hear exactly what Jessica was saying. All my relations – Gloria

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 12:46 pm ¶

16. Jessica Yee wrote:

    Thanks everyone for your support and allyship!

    @Joseph

    Appreciated your opinion. However, the “visible” and “invisible” colour lines are an important discussion to have. There is a certain amount of privilege you walk with based on your skin colour, if it’s lighter/Whiter. It’s an uncomfortable conversation to have, but it’s true.

    I was absolutely not dismissing Paul Saltzman’s history and what he had to say. Absolutely the folks in his community have suffered oppression, to the extreme. What I am annoyed with (and not just by him) is that people are reluctant to come to terms with the fact that we are received and perceived differently in society on how we look.

    There are many people in my own community who look White, but are not White, or have mixed ancestry. But guess what? I have been places with them all over North America where I have been treated differently – that is to say with less respect and dignity – because my skin is darker. Sorry to disappoint you Joseph, but that’s the world we are living in and yes, you do walk with more privilege in this world if you look White.

    I do not think of myself as the “racial-gatekeeper” whatsoever. I shared my experience, and it certainly wasn’t for you to have to like it either.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 12:55 pm ¶

17. Big Man wrote:

    You are mad patient. You should get an award for that ish. ‘Cause, that convo with the random white dude at the end would have pushed me over the top. I wouldn’t have been able to contain my eruption.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 1:35 pm ¶

18. Shelby wrote:

    I like how whenever POC point out racism and other fucked-up-ness to white liberals WE’RE the ones who aren’t being accepting enough. “Open your mind?” Ugghhhh!
    And I commend you for speaking up. I’m taking a “spirituality” course at my university and, let me tell you, the bullshit comes in droves. I spoke up once about appropriation and it ended in tears (mine). I really don’t think I have it in me to speak out anymore…

    Anyways, Happy Black History month?

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 1:47 pm ¶

19. Jess wrote:

    Jessica–

    This was a really interesting and insightful read. Though I have to say I wouldn’t have gotten so upset i the exhibit had mostly white people in it — I mean depending on the neighborhood, adverts, all that jazz, you’re going to get a certain amount of self-selection, no? I wouldn’t expect too many black folks to show to an exhibit in some neighborhoods in Staten Island (in NYC) just as I wouldn’t expect all that many white people at one in Washington Heights. It seemed like you were getting mad at something that you really can’t do much about and doesn’t necessarily highlight the racism, you know? That said, your suggestion about putting it up in community centers was spot on, and just shows that the organizers weren’t thinking outside the box.

    The “Indian village” display was simply, well, saddening. Did you ever find out anything about Laurentide Chiefs? Was the display set up by anyone who knew anything (or not)?

    And, in some defense of Saltzman, I have to say I can sort of see where he was coming from.

    I mean, I identify as a Jew. And let me tell you, it’s very uncomfortable in some parts south of the border here, you know? I may have a load o’ privilege with whiter skin, but “passing” when one is Jewish can be a little, well, disconcerting. Especially when you hear certain things. I have been to the South in places where Jews are a bit thin on the ground, and I am thinking on the one hand, I get to be white, and on the other, I am not “white” (or maybe more accurately, not really one of them).

    That may be what he was trying to touch on, and to have (in that grand Jewish tradition) a sense of humor about it, and show that white is, as many things are, a social construction. In that sense, he is absolutely trying to come to terms with the fact that he is treated differently for how he looks — by pointing out how little sense it makes.

    So I’m saying the situation isn’t so simple as it looks, and were I you I’d have gotten into it a little more, maybe, and teased out what he was thinking. Sometimes people aren’t just trying to shut you up, but might not want to get sidetracked into another discussion, important as it might be. What if he answered, “Yes, I ave privileges being white. What do you think that means?” And what does it mean? He can’t change that and he didn’t make it that way.

    This is not to deny how you felt, by the way, really. But maybe I am just an old fart who can’t feel much outrage anymore, as I try to approach these things.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 2:14 pm ¶

20. AintIAWoman wrote:

    Hey Jessica,

    First of all, kudos to being so brave and standing up on these numerous instances especially to OWM (old white man) who insists that you ‘open your mind’— majorly cringe-worthy.

    But I am sort of wondering about things that Joseph was talking about, or what Paul Saltzman was talking about– yes, people who ‘look white’ do experience more privilege than those who don’t. definitely. But I do think there are more things to ‘looking’ or ’seeming’ White other than skin tone.

    And I think those things can be extra sensitive for people who *know* they aren’t totally White. For instance, my Jewish best friend has frequent instances where someone remarks on her “Jewish nose”- its often meant in a ‘joking way’, but it still emphasizes her otherness.

    Or Saltzman’s last name– I know a handful or non-so-aware individuals that will remark on someone’s name appearing Jewish– as if they are also ‘not one of us’

    Or my boyfriend (biracial)- whose hair is remarked upon, for being “too thick” or “dark” or “curly”

    I’m not saying you didnt have a right to feel that way, but I sort of think Saltzman and Joseph, etc also have a right to feel like you aren’t giving enough credit to their sensitivities about constantly being ‘othered’ in different ways.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 2:36 pm ¶

21. Joseph wrote:

    @ Jessica Yee
    “There is a certain amount of privilege you walk with based on your skin colour, if it’s lighter/Whiter. It’s an uncomfortable conversation to have, but it’s true.”

    I am not uncomfortable having a discussion about the relationship of social privilege to skin color. And I’m completely fine with discussing the difference in our experiences as we move through the world. That is why I am here. However, I am not okay with being spoken to dismissively, as you have done here and in your original post.

    “I am annoyed with (and not just by him) is that people are reluctant to come to terms with the fact that we are received and perceived differently in society on how we look.”

    And I will say here what I always say when someone says trots this out this argument uncritically: How we look to whom? To you? To white people? Which white people exactly? Jews, Arabs, South Asian Indians, Iranians, Latin@s, Armenians etc. etc. are all technically “Caucasian” but if you think that means we glide through the larger world in a safe envelope of white privilege then you are operating from an enormous ignorance of western history. Semitic people, for example, have long, tragic histories of colonial oppression that do not fit into your metric of fair skin=privilege. And in a moment when people who look exactly like me are being legally kidnapped and tortured at Guantanamo Bay (which is still open for business) and CIA prisons all over the globe (ditto) I am less inclined than usual to let sentiments like those you express in this post pass.

    “Sorry to disappoint you Joseph, but that’s the world we are living in and yes, you do walk with more privilege in this world if you look White.”

    No, that is the world YOU are living in. You don’t know me or my world or the struggles I face. Even a little bit. If you did you would think before you spoke. If you really aren’t interested in being a gate keeper Jessica, then don’t be one. I am happy to read about your experience–as I said, we have many things in common and I can learn from the ways we are different. But I am not interested in you trying to tell me what my life is like.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 3:01 pm ¶

22. cocolamala wrote:

    I think redirecting the focus to his own beige presence missed the point of the question. Was the movie about religious segregation or racial segregation? Was the movie audience racially integrated or not?

    If not, recognize that fact. Don’t cover up a total indifference to the type of audience your film is about. Is the filmmaker actually concerned with integrating communities or just making a compelling movie?

    And, of course skin tone matters when talking about race. Skin color is a primary racial marker. In fact, its one marker that cannot be divorced from whiteness, unlike hair, religion, ethnicity, etc. Whiteness has been redefined several times to include more ethincities, but has always retained a boundary based on skin color. If Saltzman can pass for white, his privilege is not impacted the same way more visibly brown people are.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 3:06 pm ¶

23. cocolamala wrote:

    passing does impact your privilege, one of the reasons african americans are a protected class when it comes to discrimination legislation is because skin color is immediately recognizable and also immutable.

    i cannot marry to change my race, or change my name, or straighten/dye my hair, or get a nose job.

    at the most, i can embark on a multi-generational genetic crusade, but my children and their children and their children are going to be black. but how does a 70-year plan to someday, somehow, have someone with my last name be “white” compare to the instant ability to blend in? and not be harassed, and get that apartment, find that job?

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 3:18 pm ¶

24. Thea wrote:

    Hi Jessica!

    Oh geez, I saw that display myself just before I left Toronto. I should really get more into the habit of speaking out when I see things like that, and I admire so much the way you are able to.

    And what a horrible night! Gah, sometimes it does seem like f-ed up things happen in multiples. Maybe I’m just bigoted, but everything you described just sounds so much like a part of Toronto I hate – where people say ridiculous things like “well, people in Regent Park just don’t have anywhere to showcase this kind of thing.”

    I can’t totally agree with Joseph’s comments. I do think it’s important to not make assumptions about people’s race off the bat. It can be very painful for people of colour who “look white” to be excluded from discussions about race and power, or to feel like their experiences are not valid.

    At the same time, as someone who is half white and who experiences prejudice from communities of colour from time to time because of it, I can totally totally recognise that I get a lot of privilege from
    a) being light-skinned
    b) being half-white.
    I didn’t ask for that privilege, but it’s there, and in order to be honest with myself I need to recognise that when people talk about white privilege or light-skinned privilege, as much as I experience discrimination, I also benefit from white and light-skinned privilege. I can’t be a good or honest anti-racist activist if I can’t admit that.

    Also as you are talking about an event that was very much about skin colour, and about the privilege we get from looking white, no matter what we actually are. For example, at the segregated proms in Mississippi, which prom did the light-skinned students attend, whether they were Jewish or mixed race or…Maybe some of them went to the prom for black kids, maybe some of them went to the one for white kids. The fact is they had the privilege of choice, which is exactly what the black kids did not have.

    Many light-skinned people come from tragic histories where they have been oppressed over and over. But in the context of the segregated proms, and in the context of the event Jessica attended, being light-skinned is a privilege.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 3:28 pm ¶

25. brownstocking wrote:

    ARGH!!! I am so torn! I really want to see this film, but Saltzman is officially on my arse list. that whole, descriptor thing, I get it, but it’s disingenuous, IMO. Classy, dude.

    I was actually on edge about why this was premiering in Canada, because I do think exhibits like this “grant” white people from other countries a “license” to feel superior to US whites and our collective history/memory. So, is Saltzman Canadian? The film, I just learned, is a Canadian film.

    But how DARE anyone tell another person to be open. How about YOU be open to the possibility that the answers and forums were BS?

    Jessica, you’re far calmer than I was, and I’m so glad you spoke up. I, too, now have a frame of reference when I see offensive caricatures.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 3:41 pm ¶

26. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @All –

    Bring it down a sec.

    Jessica/Cocomala –

    Hear where Joseph and Ain’tIAWoman are coming from. We all feel our own pain the most keenly, and while those of us who are marked feel a certain kind of pinch, it doesn’t mean others don’t as well.

    Matt Egan and I have had some good conversations on Jewishness as a kind of queerness (one I hope to get on the site soon) where you technically pass, but actually don’t. And it creates that strange, stressful situation when passing when you could be “exposed” at any minute – even when you’ve been upfront about who you are. The category of “whiteness” is a complex, convuloted thing that also defies easy categorization. And while we tend to use the term “white” as a cultural short hand, it really isn’t the end of the story. Check out the past posts “The Pintele Yid” and “Irish Twins” for a little more conversation on whiteness.

    @Joseph/AintIAWoman –

    Okay, now your turn. Really sit with what Jessica said in the piece. She wrote:

    Okay, so yeah, this whole thing seems pretty interesting, but let’s be realistic and take a good look around the room. This event was advertised as the start to kick off Black History month, it’s about two races coming together, it’s about the history of oppression, and what I see is basically a sea of whiteness in here. What is that saying about us? Oh sure, we think because we live in Canada, we’re so much better, we have federally legislated multiculturalism policies, but in fact, this just proves that we’re one in the same. Where is the gathering between the communities tonight you say you so strongly support?”

    A few moments of silence linger, until Catharine Farquharson says “I agree. Yes these photos are about a larger issue happening far away from us, but my real hope is that people look at them and challenge their own prejudices in their own lives.”

    I appreciated what she said. Then Paul Saltzman replied, “First of all, I’m not sure why we’re still labeled White. I’m Jewish, and I’m more of an off-white, beige I think,” to a room now full of chuckling.

    One of the largest obstacles to coalition building is to get people to stop excluding others long enough to understand where there is common ground. And it’s hard to get to that common ground if you raise a serious point about racial dynamics and someone responds with a joke that minimizes what you are saying.

    It is also harder to take that joke when it comes from a person with higher levels of skin privlege than you, and they used that privilege to shut you down or shift your conversation.

    One of the ongoing battles in the anti-racist community is the issue of trust. Who can you trust to be on your side with things? Who can you trust to understand? I am sure there are plenty of Jews who grapple with issues of race and skin privilege – and those who never give a thought to it at all. Same as with any other group, there are those who are racially aware, those who are anti-racist, and those who think things are just fine the way they are.

    And, there are also far too many people who have white skin privilege (be they from whatever part of the globe) who feel entirely too comortable reinforcing the status quo.

    Our struggles may have similarities, but they are not the same. And when people try to act like “this is just like that,” you’ll notice that’s when the most vitriol starts spewing between groups.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 3:42 pm ¶

27. Sarah wrote:

    For me a significant facet of this debate is that the people making the documentary are not people of color themselves and are geographically and culturally very distant/different from the folks on whose lives they are commenting. I think the point about showing the film in community centers and enabling greater access is an excellent one, but I also question rather a white Canadian film maker’s work on an African American community in Mississippi is going to draw members of the black community (and other non-white communities) of Toronto. Might it seem patronizing for this director to try to target a specific demographic that he thinks needs to see the film?

    There is a point in the memoir Brothers and Keepers by John Edgar Wideman where a white fellow student condescendingly tells Wideman that he really should be listening to the Blues, and Wideman becomes justifiably enraged. I think white people should be on guard about preaching to other groups about what parts of their cultures and histories are worthy of study/preservation/celebration, lest we be like well-meaning versions of this obnoxious kid.

    I’m not questioning this director’s right to make this documentary or the quality of the film itself. But to me the insider/outsider stuff is very interesting. It’s a topic I’m genuinely curious about. I study and teach American literature and often find myself teaching non-white lit. to non-white people and wondering about issues of authority and authenticity as I do it (I’m white).

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 3:44 pm ¶

28. JC wrote:

    Sounds like you ran into a bunch of white liberal types patting themselves on the back, Jessica. This happens all the time in the US… look at the so-called liberal white Hollywood type holding fund-raisers for Obama while at the same time relegate POC to token roles in their movies. Sometimes I think the liberals and the conservatives are just two sides of the same racist coin.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 4:01 pm ¶

29. AintIAWoman wrote:

    @ Latoya
    Yeah, all that makes sense. I really wasn’t even trying to contradict what Jessica was saying, I think this whole article is great. I just read what Joseph wrote and really thought about how he might take offense at her words, they way she chose them. I never tried to make a point that her struggles are the same- not at all- but I just know that, at least with the people in my life, they don’t react always well to being told they’re White when all their lives they’ve heard otherwise.

    @Joseph:
    Semitic people, for example, have long, tragic histories of colonial oppression that do not fit into your metric of fair skin=privilege

    this is all true. But knowing history of colonial oppression is NOT the same as lookism/racism in Canada or the US. Thats what Jessica is saying & shes right (I think).

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 4:26 pm ¶

30. CaliRo wrote:

    Jessica, I can totally relate to how you feel; Growing up in an all white area and speaking up against peoples’ ignorance and racism and dealing with the responses it warrants. I’ve had a (Caucasian) guy I was dating once tell me that I was racist because I focused so much on race and racism that isn’t there, while I’m thinking “I’ve lived it, asshole”.
    cocolamala and Thea, so well said and I agree with you both wholeheartedly.
    I am a Latina woman and I don’t consider myself white but I am light complected compared to some Latinos and Chicana friends of mine have pointed out to me my “white privilege” in Latin culture as well as blending more easily into the white world and passing at times. I recognize it and don’t get offended when people discuss it.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 4:44 pm ¶

31. AintIAWoman wrote:

    @CaliRo: I’ve had a (Caucasian) guy I was dating once tell me that I was racist because I focused so much on race and racism

    ughhhhh I have had this exact argument with white males and its really frustrating. I’ve also had the “you’re actually being sexist” (or reverse sexist? i love when they say that) thrown at me too. Progressive, liberal white males, too.

    Which seem to be the type at this Black History Month Event.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 4:57 pm ¶

32. Whit wrote:

    Joseph, I know that the racial surveys in the US at least, classify latin@s as caucasian, but the majority of us have some indigenous heritage. Just because we’ve been disconnected from it via diaspora and colonization doesn’t mean that we’re white.

    As someone who often has passing privilege, both jewish and latina, I’m pretty comfortable saying that white people’s opinions are the ones that matter when it comes to passing. If a white person decides that someone looks ‘white enough,’ then they are often rendered white to that person.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 5:04 pm ¶

33. Ruchama wrote:

    I just know that, at least with the people in my life, they don’t react always well to being told they’re White when all their lives they’ve heard otherwise.

    Yes, this. “White” in the US very frequently has an implicit “Christian” in it. This is especially true in the South.

    I went to a large university in the South. (I grew up just outside NYC.) Once, while I was sitting in a dorm common room, I overheard someone saying, “Why don’t you ask Ruchama? She’s Jewish.” I asked what they wanted to ask me. The question, it turned out, was “Are you offended by the Confederate flag?” I said yes. She then asked me to clarify, “But are you offended as Jew, or are you offended as a Yankee?” Turned out, she was trying to decide whether it was appropriate to give something with a Confederate flag on it to a Southern Jewish friend. While the Confederacy itself certainly included Jews (including their Secretary of the Treasure, Judah Benjamin), the Confederate flag has become a symbol not just of the South, but of Southern whiteness, and that whiteness does not include Jews.

    There was a book that came out several years ago about this topic, called “How Jews Became White Folk” or something like that. I never read it, but it looked interesting.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 5:19 pm ¶

34. A.D. Nix wrote:

    @Joseph:
    Jews, Arabs, South Asian Indians, Iranians, Latin@s, Armenians etc. etc. are all technically “Caucasian” but if you think that means we glide through the larger world in a safe envelope of white privilege then you are operating from an enormous ignorance of western history.

    Conflating “white”and “Caucasian” is dangerous territory. All squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares. By that I mean, there is more to “whiteness” than being “caucasian.” Black Latin@s? Indigenous Latin@s? I don’t think anyone is calling them “white” or “Caucasian.” East African Jews? Caucasian too?

    The construction of whiteness relies a great deal on skin privilege – whatever is done with and or to the classification “Caucasian.”

    @ Jessica:
    I run into the issue of the absence of POCs at events and in groupings where people are consuming the output or stories of POCs and it troubles me. Deeply. I am forever pointing this out and people are forever squirming and then giving the old what-are-you-gonna-do? 95% of the time, the absence isn’t a matter of happenstance.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 5:29 pm ¶

35. AintIAWoman wrote:

    @Ruchama.
    Yup, I’m from the South. Which is probably why this stuck out to me! I’m not Jewish, but ive seen situations like that about 100000000 times.

    Again. Not saying that its the same struggle. Just something to ponder.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 5:29 pm ¶

36. Joseph wrote:

    @Latoya
    I have had my own adventures with white liberals–as you know– and I empathize with the anger Jessica expressed in her original post and what some of the others have said. Once again, I am NOT “offended” by discussions linking skin tone to social privilege–although it is not exactly a revolutionary insight. But if the only way you can tell your story is to pretend that mine does not exist then we have a problem. I am NOT “injecting one indignation over another” as Gloria suggests or trying to dismiss the experience of darker skinned people. Or trying to claim that one experience is just like another–just the opposite. What I am saying is that when Jessica (or whomever) globalizes a North American Black/White binary onto the rest of the world she is silencing important voices. And that is not okay. Even the uncritical use of the term “passing” in this context just serves to reify the binary. This is my face. I am not pretending to be anything else. And putting my experience into the context of black/white passing is offensive.

    And my original question remains unanswered: who decides where the cut-off point is? If race is in the eye of the beholder then who is doing the beholding? Arguments like these are a slippery slope into an essentialist reading of race, which never leads anywhere good.

    Is it really so difficult to take a more subtle, reflective position? And why the assumption that if you do you will lose something about your own story? When Jessica marginalized my experience and talked down to me she was doing to me just what that blustery white guy at the movie was doing to her. The irony is not lost on me.

    I’ve said what I thought needed saying and I don’t want to derail this thread so unless there is something directed at me specifically, I’ll bow out.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 5:51 pm ¶

37. CaliRo wrote:

    @AintIAWoman, it’s always the one’s labeling themselves “progressive” and “liberal” that have issues with discussing equality. Let’s pretend like these problems doesn’t exist! I feel like a lot of the times people hide behind these labels to mask their own racism.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 6:47 pm ¶

38. Whit wrote:

    @Joseph, passing doesn’t require ‘acting.’ I refer you to AngryBlackBitch for further elucidation about the problem with accusing POC of ‘acting white.’ http://angryblackbitch.blogspot.com/2008/06/on-acting-white.html

    And as for the rest, you haven’t addressed the argument made by Latoya about the use of a joke by Saltzman to redirect the direction of the dialogue and silence Jessica. That was wrong of him, there is nothing to defend on that count.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 7:33 pm ¶

39. Whit wrote:

    Btw, Joseph, I did answer your question about who determines passability.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 7:35 pm ¶

40. Jessica Yee wrote:

    @Joseph

    I guess Western notions of polite discourse really differ than my own. I wouldn’t say I was talking down to you whatsoever, I’m expressing my opinion and experience, which of course will be received by other people quite differently.

    I’m wondering where I said I diminished your history, or Jewish history all together. I didn’t in fact. I didn’t even say that to Paul Saltzman, and as Latoya said, his answer in total was not helpful at all. I’m also not interested in playing Oppression Olympics, so don’t get me started on the rates of anything that happen to us as First Nations on the same land you live on.

    I’m also not lumping in all White people together in so far as I’m expressing what happens quite frequently to those of us who are visibly racialized. When I’m talking about “the world we live in” I’m talking about mainstream society and those who still have the most power and privilege in the world as we know it in North America; and that’s White people.

    Looking at “the sea of whiteness in the room”, I wasn’t expressing that even if there were invisible racialized folks in the room, their presence didn’t count. We all count. That doesn’t negate from the fact that I was still one of the three people of colour in the room who can be visibly racialized, and guess what? The film is about Black and White.

    So what I haven’t heard from you yet, which is more what the post was about, was what are you saying about where the Black folks were?

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 7:37 pm ¶

41. Ruchama wrote:

    And as for the rest, you haven’t addressed the argument made by Latoya about the use of a joke by Saltzman to redirect the direction of the dialogue and silence Jessica. That was wrong of him, there is nothing to defend on that count.

    Yes, that was wrong. No argument from me there.

    The point that I was trying to make was that, especially in the South, white Jews experience whiteness differently than white Christians. In much of the South, Jewish people who look white are sometimes grudgingly accepted into “white” when the only options are “white” and “black,” but when asked, “Are Jews white?” many people would answer no.

    (And, after four years in the South, I still couldn’t figure out how a lot of people were determining race, anyway. I’ve got dark coloring and olive skin. In the north, when people ask me about my ethnicity, the usual assumptions are either Italian, Hispanic, or Indian. In the south, I was asked several times if I was black. Aside from the rudeness of random strangers asking me my ethnicity, I never figured out what it was about me that telegraphed “maybe black” in the south, but not in the north.)

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 8:31 pm ¶

42. ahimsa wrote:

    Re: “technically passing” as mentioned by Latoya above (#26), this is a great phrase. In addition to the situations mentioned above it also applies perfectly to those of us who have an invisible disability.

    I’m not trying to hide anything, nor am I embarrassed about my physical limitations, but I’m also not going to immediately announce all the things that make me different when I first meet someone. So, I end up “technically passing” in a lot of social situations (and not just on this issue but it’s probably the biggest one).

    Anyway, thanks for that phrase.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 8:31 pm ¶

43. cocolamala wrote:

    @Jessica,

    yes,
    because what are the odds that in a roomfull of people the only other black people there (besides me) will be light enough to pass?

    i have never seen a classroom of black students where even the majority just happened to be light enough to pass.

    never been in a black church where this just happened to be the case either.

    what black community can you go to where a random selection of 10-20 people will not include more than 3 people visibly displaying african american features?

    it’s not really common in my experience. and when it does occur, (in organizations, groups, social clubs, fraternities, sororities…) it’s usually not just chance. It could be just where I live, or something…but I haven’t seen that.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 8:35 pm ¶

44. AintIAWoman wrote:

    As to where the black people were. Well I really don’t know. But I think this is a pretty telling response:

    Well, that’s a good point. But you know you need somewhere to show it, those places probably don’t have anywhere.” was his answer.

    Sounds like liberal progressive white ignorance. Sounds like no one really cared to promote or include the exact population that should have been included. Sort of seems like white people patting themselves on their back. Same white people that got testy when you, a POC spoke up. Meh.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 9:36 pm ¶

45. JC wrote:

    @ Ruchama
    Perhaps it’s not what part of you signaled your blackness, but the fact that you don’t look 100% white, and thus can’t easily pass for white.
    I agree that Jews are not the same as whites; I just wish that the Jewish producers and directors in Hollywood help their fellow minorities out a bit more.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 10:06 pm ¶

46. morgan wrote:

    Very interesting…

    I’m a white women, but I also notice that many of these super-progressive Toronto events are VERY racially segregated, and it makes me feel terribly uncomfortable: i would imagine a racialized person for feel much worse. It’s disconcerting to go to a film about native issues in Canada with an almost all-white audience and then come out on the street where native people are begging for change.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 10:16 pm ¶

47. Suzy wrote:

    Jessica, you are awesome. Keep fighting and keep speaking your mind. You do and will make a difference. Today I had to explain to a co-worker why saying “How” (complete with requisite hand gesture) is offensive…. I appreciate that you too are working to break down stereotypes and ignorance. Thank you for being an advocate for Native people!!

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 10:26 pm ¶

48. Restructure! wrote:

    Joseph,

    What I am saying is that when Jessica (or whomever) globalizes a North American Black/White binary onto the rest of the world she is silencing important voices.

    How could Jessica be globalizing a North American black/white binary, when she herself is Native and Chinese and mixed? Living in North America, wouldn’t she be aware of how she does not fit into this binary every day?

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 10:27 pm ¶

49. Joseph wrote:

    @Whit
    Our posts crossed paths, I wasn’t intentionally ignoring you. I think the problem with ceding the ultimate judgment on racial identity to white people (besides the obvious) is that the bases for these designations shift continually. Sometimes some groups are counted white and sometimes not. Passing is a particular, intentional performance of whiteness. People who aren’t easily placed racially are not “passing”–we are just walking around having our lives. How other people do or don’t see us is not our problem.

    As far as Saltzman’s “joke” was concerned it is hard to comment because I wasn’t there. It is entirely possible that Jessica is right and he was being a douche. But maybe he referred to his own ambiguously “white” status not to shut down her inquiry but to open it up. She asked why there were so many white people in the room and he said…”Not sure why I’m still called white.” A different sort of person might have seen the opportunity in that and asked if that was the source of his attraction to making a film that explores black/white race relations. In the US the ambiguous whiteness of Jews led them to being some of the most important allies to African Americans during civil rights. Does Saltzman see himself as part of that tradition or as more of a white anthropologist, moving among the savages to capture their stories? No way to tell because Jessica didn’t ask. I wouldn’t write off the film until I had a sense of why he made it.

    @Jessica Yee
    I think despite the tense exchanges between us there have been some interesting things to come up in this thread. Getting caught up in a tit-for-tat with you would only prevent those from continuing and that is not my intention here. Even though I can empathize with the situation you described (not a big fan of the White Liberal Gathering) there is no question that your post rubbed me the wrong way. (And, honestly, you still are. Your Oppression Olympics comment is typical of the way you have interacted with me on this thread. If you really don’t think you are being rude then we were clearly raised very differently.)

    So I suppose I will answer your question about where the black folks were (which is completely impossible to know– although others have offered excellent guesses) by asking you a question: why is it important that there were black people in attendance? Would that have validated the theme of the film for you? If white people are the final arbiters on racial matters then maybe they are the ones who need to see a film like this in the first place. Nobody likes to play a rousing game of Make the White People Uncomfortable more than me but really, what was the point in attacking this guy before you even saw his film?

    Maybe a better question would be: why did you go?

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 10:41 pm ¶

50. inkst wrote:

    I feel like this thread has taken a huge turn towards the discussion that Joseph initiated, which is interesting, but I was personally interested in the inaccessibility of the event. I work with primarily African-American youth and we are located just a few miles from an affluent white, liberal town, and this kind of thing happens all the time. A really cool screening, gallery, event, you name it, happens in the white town, in a nice gallery or theater, and it is a “sea of whiteness.” Sometimes we will bring young folks, and I always feel like people extend my agency the invitation because we bring a little color to the crowd. I feel really ambivalent to the whole experience. On the one hand, I always appreciate being able to to offer opportunities and experiences to the youth we work with, but I also can’t help but feel a little gross or weird about filling a sort of unspoken quota.

    Had this event taken place in my area, it would have played out just the same. The incredible irony is that a film exploring blatant modern segregation cannot generate discussion about segregation that is not as “official” as the Mississippi proms. In my experience, no one wants to have those discussions, because racial segregation usually correlates directly with economic segregation. It’s easier to drink champagne at a fundraiser for something happening at a distance than actually take ownership of your own privilege and think about your responsibility.

    It always seems like a good idea becomes hijacked by white-collar (pun intended) philanthropy at which point it loses its real impact. Of course, the only way to drum up any real funding for anything is with a champagne and caviar event.

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 10:45 pm ¶

51. Joseph wrote:

    @Inkst
    You make good points and I have had similar experiences through work. I was once brought in to teach a workshop at an overwhelmingly white private girls school in Evanston Illinois. In order to facilitate “diversity” (the theme of the workshop) the school officials actually brought a group of black girls up from Chicago in a kind of surreal, reverse busing move. The working class black public school kids thought it was a hilarious and many refused to participate. While the white girls insisted that their school was already “pretty diverse” because they had two South American girls from wealthy families. It was a grotesque spectacle. So, based on this experience and others I guess I am not sure whether the physical presence of black folks at this opening would have done anything at all except perhaps convey legitimacy to a project whose intentions seem unclear (at least to me).

    Posted 11 Feb 2009 at 11:14 pm ¶

52. NancyP wrote:

    A suggestion: for cultural events or objects that can be reproduced easily, a city-wide event can be preceded by neighborhood exhibits or a book read by interested people all over the city. St. Louis has a “read St. Louis” program, in which a selected book is announced, and then programs at various public library branches have discussions, speakers, movies, exhibits related to the book in question. Last year the book was “Farewell to Manzanar” (pertinent because some of the largest WWII internment camps were located within 100 miles of St. Louis), and this year the book is “To Kill A Mockingbird”.

    The sad fact is that most people will not participate in events that are hard to reach or are outside their neighborhood or comfort zone.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 1:09 am ¶

53. Andrea Canales wrote:

    Wow! WTF? And yet, i’m not at all surprise. The whole frigging comments about the different shades of whiteness and the tokenistic approach to collaboration is quite sickening. I say enough already!! Why is it that it has to be, time and time again, a racialized/indigenous person who has to point to the obvious, who has to continue “educating” the privileged crowd, who btw are so privileged in their position of power, to bother to even looking around a room and/or recognizing exactly what’s happening in front of their very own eyes. Yes, it’s normative for them to be surrounded by look alike people: this is not an excuse at all! It’s sickening!! Jess, what a night and I celebrate you for your fire and your unwillingness to back down.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 2:11 am ¶

54. cocolamala wrote:

    i don’t know, i think extending an invitation to an event like a movie showing or a talk is different than busing a group of people someplace where they might be the exhibit.

    the first situation is outreach, and that’s good because it spreads your message among a wide group of people. and that’s the point.

    the second situation is more questionable. was the education one-way or two-way? what lessons were the city girls supposed to draw from visiting the suburban school? were any suburban girls bused into the city to their school?

    is it like that one friend who always wanted you to come over to her house, but never really came over your house to play?

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 3:17 am ¶

55. Luis wrote:

    “Matt Egan and I have had some good conversations on Jewishness as a kind of queerness (one I hope to get on the site soon) where you technically pass, but actually don’t. And it creates that strange, stressful situation when passing when you could be “exposed” at any minute – even when you’ve been upfront about who you are. The category of “whiteness” is a complex, convuloted thing that also defies easy categorization. And while we tend to use the term “white” as a cultural short hand, it really isn’t the end of the story. Check out the past posts “The Pintele Yid” and “Irish Twins” for a little more conversation on whiteness.”

    This is a baller paragraph Latoya, and merits being reposted. I have some thoughts form a NY perspective. Excuse the essay-ish language.

    The unique position of off-white groups, Jews, Irish, Italian, etc. created a few archetypal responses to white privilege. Some turned to consolidate their whiteness by vociferously rejecting non-whites and performing whiteness. Others took the other tact and used their unique position to build coalitions and solidarity, and Jews in particular stand out in this way. Jews like Abel Meeropol, the songwriter and activist, were sensitive to the precariousness of societal privilege and became midwives of the Civil Rights movement.

    Even in those days, however, Jews were being recast from a racial or ethnic minority into a religious minority. Abel Meeropol’s famous song about black Americans, “The House I Live In,” was re-employed in a Frank Sinatra movie of the same title which focused on religious and white inter-ethnic difference and ironically completely left out blacks from the equation. Today, that is the prevailing mainstream thought. Even modern anti-semitism is usually phrased in religious or ethnic terms, rather than racial ones. Of course, the KKK is still up and running, so old theories still abound.

    Additionally we can point to the old Irish and Italian stereotypes floating around to understand the ways in which the whiteness of off-white ethnic groups is still challenged, usually inviting further performance of assimilation and racial solidarity. This doesn’t mean that the targeted group is not white and doesn’t receive skin privilege, it just means that they occupy a sort of buffer zone of whiteness, an imaginary border. The analogy to queerness works because in both cases over-performance of difference can result in having that border pulled inward, leaving the individual suddenly outside of the imaginary community.

    Damn. This. Got. Me. Thinking.

    Regarding Yee’s article, we can all agree that it is very ironic that a documentary about Southern institutional segregation is shown to an all-white audience during Black History Month in a city rife with classic Northern de facto segregation. There are ways in which the North* applauds itself on being integrated, but in fact is full of geographic and social boundaries that segregate cities. Seek to change the world, for sure, but don’t forget to tend to your own house. Toronto is 46.9% visible minorities (Canadian term). The fact that a venue could even have a practically all-white audience is crazy. Seriously bananas.

    *In this I include the Northeast and East Central United States and Eastern Canada.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 6:46 am ¶

56. Maysie wrote:

    If anyone who is white or “ambiguously white”, (which includes myself as a light mixed race Chinese/Jewish woman), there’s an easy and simple way to distinguish oneself from the “sea of whiteness’.

    1. DON’T chuckle along when the director makes a comment that is clearly meant to minimize the point of one of the few racialized people in the room who’s had the courage to speak up.

    2. As a general policy, speak out (and this is a truly radical idea) when something racist/offensive happens or is said, when it seems that there are ONLY white folks in the room.

    Being allies across and around the “colour line” matters, and if we’re to work and fight together against oppression, this is one thing we lighter folks can do.

    Jessica would have mentioned it, if #1 had happened. It clearly didn’t.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 6:53 am ¶

57. Rob Schmidt wrote:

    I’m a different shade of white too…pure white.

    This discussion of the “off-white” confrontation at the reception has been fascinating. But back to the Indian “village” for a sec. I’d just like to remind everyone that people experience tens of thousands of similar Native stereotypes in our culture every day. Sports mascots, product packaging, statues and paintings, movies and TV shows, and the list goes on and on.

    We’re almost inundated with the notion that Plains Indian chiefs and teepees from the distant past represent all Natives. Including the Inuit who make mukluks, apparently. To me THAT is what’s annoying here.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 7:27 am ¶

58. PatrickInBeijing wrote:

    The window display was beyond beyond, thanks for speaking up Jessica!!!

    In terms of the photography event, where were the POC? Why shouldn’t we question segregation when we encounter it? And for a Black History Month event to be almost all white, pah!!!

    There are many excuses, but they are all just excuses. Where were her allies when Jessica questioned the event? People should have been embarrassed. They were defensive because?????? They felt guilty?? BS.

    If they had really wanted to build a multi-racial event for a Black History Month, they would have made the effort to do so. The fact that they didn’t, gives me chills. They needed to be called on it.

    As for Saltzman, is he suggesting that Black History Month is not about Black folks, that’s my reading. WTF. Does the Toronto version of “post racial” mean without POC?? Scary stuff. Jessica, thanks for speaking out, glad you got out of there safely.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 8:33 am ¶

59. Amy wrote:

    I find it ironic that Jessica is being accused of racial gatekeeping.

    My first encounter with Jess was taking part in a workshop she was leading on indigenous roots of feminism. She and I had a conversation about race. I appear white. The only people who have ever interacted with me on any other basis, have been a few First Nations women I have encountered since moving to Toronto. I’ve now been asked twice by Native women if I am Mohawk, and once if I am Mi’kmaq. A few other people, seeing particular pictures of my father, have also occasionally asked me if he was part Native. I never knew what to say. I was raised with the knowledge of my Scottish, English, Irish and Danish ancestry, and from a very young age was told by my grandmother that I am a WASP; a White AngloSaxon Protestant. Even if I did have Native blood, my class and race-conscious paternal grandmother probably never would have admitted it. Since she and my father have both passed away, I may never know with absolute certainty.

    The reality is that my family have been on this continent for about 20 generations. It’s actually quite likely that somewhere along the line, I do have some First Nations blood in me. In fact, the more I’ve thought about it, the more convinced I am that I probably do have some Mi’kmaq ancestry. (Mi’kmaq because 18 of those 20 generations lived out east, in areas like Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.)

    In the context of the workshop however, I was actually feeling a bit odd giving ANY opinion about Native issues, based on the fact that I am near-universally perceived as white. It feels like it would be an insult to Jess, some of my visibly native clients, and my former First Nations girlfriend, for me to claim Native heritage. It’s not as though I’m ‘half’ or even ‘one quarter’ Native. I fully pass as white to all but a few insightful Natives. (It’s not unlike my passing as straight to most straight people, though other queer folks are more likely to perceive that I’m actually queer.) Visibly, I overwhelmingly pass as a straight white woman.

    It was actually Jess that said to me that there is no cutoff for ‘how much’ Native ancestry one must have, or how recently, to identify as having First Nations heritage. This is why Jess being seen as a gatekeeper of sorts struck me as odd.

    But yeah, I’m very aware that Jess can’t ‘pass’ for white, and I get why the detracting discussion of beigeness upset her. Jews are often perceived as white. Jess never is. And this line of comments served to detract from her very legitimate concerns, IMHO.

    Peace.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 9:21 am ¶

60. Whit wrote:

    I’ve got dark coloring and olive skin. In the north, when people ask me about my ethnicity, the usual assumptions are either Italian, Hispanic, or Indian. In the south, I was asked several times if I was black. Aside from the rudeness of random strangers asking me my ethnicity, I never figured out what it was about me that telegraphed “maybe black” in the south, but not in the north.

    Ruchama, based on my experiences in the south and southwest, I’d hazard a guess that it’s got to do with the texture of your hair, your skin tone, and the shape of your facial features. My face and hair set me off right away as “not quite white” even when I’m the palest pale in the dead of winter. Like now. People are very good at parsing the physical indicators of race, class, and the butch to femme spectrum, among others, even if they aren’t aware of consciously doing it.

    Plus, your name is unusual (if Ruchama is the name you use offline as well; e.g. Rachel may be more likely to indicate “christian”).

    Sorry for the previous comment, I’m trying to figure out which html works here.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 10:18 am ¶

61. Amy wrote:

    I found this comment surprising:
    “…Arabs, South Asian Indians, Iranians, Latin’s, Armenians etc. etc. are all technically Caucasian”

    I’ve never heard this. Is this a theory proposed by people who only believe in four races : Caucasian, Negroid, Asian and ‘Aboriginal’ or First Nations people (apparently as one worldwide group, from the Aztec or Inca, to the Maori to the Lakota, to the Inuit)?

    In the UK, South and Southeast Asians were considered black, when I was helping them self-classify on application forms for social support services there.

    My Indian and Pakistani friends here in Canada refer to themselves as brown.

    Many Latino/Latina folk have indigenous ancestry.

    What authority defines them as white or caucasian?

    (I’ve also certainly heard reference to ” the Jewish race” and “the Arabs” as a race, not just an ethnicity).

    I’m really curious to hear more about the source for the categorization of who is caucasian!

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 10:39 am ¶

62. gatamala wrote:

    I give it up to you Jessica for speaking up that day. The lack of facilities is a bullshit excuse (no school auditorium/community center?).

    By not using the opportunity to bring together various Toronto communities and draw out discussion, this became another opportunity for the Yankee (in the broad sense) wine and cheese set to mock the backwards American South and their Eternal Victims.

    Yes, Saltzman definitely deflected to a cackling audience. FTR, he doesn’t get the definitive say of what his role is. The “targets” of his “concern” do.
    ****
    I think this other conversation is worth having. My experience in the American South is that there is definitely a whiteness pecking order.

    A Palestinian Muslim will have a different experience from a Lebanese Maronite who will have a different experience from a Swiss-German Jew. However, the experience of an Af-Am or mestizo Mexican-Am at the hands of the aforementioned usually does not differ from their experiences with a Scotch-Irish Presbyterian.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 10:49 am ¶

63. Whit wrote:

    I think the problem with ceding the ultimate judgment on racial identity to white people (besides the obvious) is that the bases for these designations shift continually.

    Yes, it shifts because race is socially constructed.

    Passing is a particular, intentional performance of whiteness.

    No, it’s not. We all perform behavior that is used along with physical indicators and socioeconomic background to categorize everyone into a race. But, there is a spectrum of human behavior, and to say that all POC of X ethnic background perform in such and such a way, and performing outside of those boundaries is an intentional performance of whiteness, especially by mixed or lighter skinned people, is well… stereotyping. I refer you back to AngryBlackBitch on the subject. She said it better than I can.

    People who aren’t easily placed racially are not “passing”–we are just walking around having our lives. How other people do or don’t see us is not our problem.

    When I did a study abroad in central Italy during high school, I “passed” for an Italian (with a somewhat odd fashion sense compared to my host sisters), after a while, until I opened my mouth, and spoke with an accent. Passing isn’t always intentional, especially when an observer only has the opportunity to use the physical indicators and not more complex behaviors to parse someone’s racial identity.

    So, if someone is observed briefly, and there aren’t enough indicators of non-whiteness, they are often assumed to be white, by whites. That’s not intentional passing on the POC’s part. And that’s why I said that whites, in general, are who define whiteness and passing privilege. They confer passing privilege on some POC who appear racially ambiguous.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 11:01 am ¶

64. Lisa J wrote:

    @ Joseph, wow, I know I don’t have a dog in this fight, and should just keep my mouth shut but I can’t help it. To me it seems like Jessica has been fairly polite and respectful and it is you who are trying to do a tit for tat and accusing Jessica of silencing you and dismissing you when it seems like your original comments to herand some of your follow up were an attempt to dismiss what she went through and the situation she was in. Also, even if there were one or two people of color who were not obviously white in the crowd, that doesn’t discount that most of the people in the room were white because it is highly unlikely that the majority of the people in the room were people of color who happened to appear white at first glance. She made a valid point and I don’t see what you find so wrong about her pointing out that it was odd that an event to kick off BLACK history month that highlighted modern day segregation in the south in North America was purposely or coincidently almost all white and located in a venue where few people of color go. It is odd and I think it should have provided food for thought so that perhaps they might try to find a more diverse setting in the future. I don’t think her pointing out that regardless of being Jewish, Salzman experiences white skin privilege, it isn’t to the same level as a blonde-haired blue eyed nordic type but it is more than more obvious people of color and in some quarters he would never be remotely questioned as white despite his own dual awareness (and I’ve known blonde blue eyed Jews and gentiles with “Jewish sounding” names so you can’t just go on looks or last name) . If Saltzman was interested in opening up the debate he would have made his “joke” and followed it up with a meaningful comment about the situation or why he thought so few people of color were present. It almost seems like you are purposely trying to pick a fight with Jessica and shame her.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 12:09 pm ¶

65. Persia wrote:

    I’m pretty comfortable saying that white people’s opinions are the ones that matter when it comes to passing. If a white person decides that someone looks ‘white enough,’ then they are often rendered white to that person.

    It reminds me very much of a few times in Confederates in the Attic, when the author reveals that he’s Jewish and the people who’ve been talking to him are either stunned or decide he’s not one of ‘those’ Jews. It’s a different position.

    I hope you find out more about the Laurentian Chief shoes, Jessica, they look lovely and it’d be nice to support an indigenous craft. And I was pleased to hear that the store clerk you spoke to agreed with you and saw you as an ally.

    Not much other good stuff that day though. Ugh.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 12:29 pm ¶

66. Luis wrote:

    That said everybody, I just looked at a trailer of Saltzman’s film and it looks like real talk. Definitely worthy of full support.

    Now the organizers and proprieters of the event in question need to start thinking about their community outreach. For sure.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 2:38 pm ¶

67. Nelly wrote:

    gatamala wrote:

    A Palestinian Muslim will have a different experience from a Lebanese Maronite who will have a different experience from a Swiss-German Jew. However, the experience of an Af-Am or mestizo Mexican-Am at the hands of the aforementioned usually does not differ from their experiences with a Scotch-Irish Presbyterian.

    I think this is an excellent point; I also think it is fairly applicable to most of the country, not just the South.

    On another note, I must say I find the classification of Irish-Americans as offwhite interesting. I know that the Irish faced persecution in this country and still have to endure drunken stereotypes. I’m not minimizing their history. But, I think they’ve been “assimilated” into Whiteness in a way that Jewish Americans and Italian-Americans haven’t. For instance, Giuliani’s Italian heritage got much more “notice” than McCain’s or Dodd’s Irish heritage ever did. No one every challenged Giuliani’s patriotism (like they did Obama), but the fact that he’s Italian was still worth commenting on. McCain and Dodd were never Irish-American candidates. Giuliani was sometimes an Italian-American candidate. Obama was always an African-American candidate.

    Irish-Americans are one of the two largest ethnic groups in this country. When you add the number of people who claim Scots-Irish heritage, Irish-Americans displace German-Americans as the country’s largest self-reporting ethnic group. I think it’s worth pondering that despite sometimes being considered offwhite, Irish-Americans represent a plurality in this country. What effect does that have on the way we talk about privilege? And, Latoya, thanks so much for the post on “Irish Twins.” I found it illuminating.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 3:43 pm ¶

68. BlackDahlia wrote:

    My God…will the Native Americans EVER catch a break? Why are these noble people, whose land we so GRACIOUSLY occupy, still be subjected to this kind of crap? I always wondered why Natives just don’t say, “You know what…how about this? How about you get the hell out of MY land…and take all the squatters you brought along with you?”

    I know why…because they seem to be decent people through and through and the European doctrine mindset in this country often mistakes kindness for weakness.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 4:22 pm ¶

69. Sobia wrote:

    @gatamala:

    I’m a little confused with this statement:

    “A Palestinian Muslim will have a different experience from a Lebanese Maronite who will have a different experience from a Swiss-German Jew. However, the experience of an Af-Am or mestizo Mexican-Am at the hands of the aforementioned usually does not differ from their experiences with a Scotch-Irish Presbyterian.”

    What if the Palestinian Muslim, the Lebanese Maronite and the Swiss-German Jew don’t identify as white? Then how do they fit into the “whiteness pecking order”? Maybe I’m misunderstanding what you’re saying.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 4:43 pm ¶

70. Wolfe Tone wrote:

    The term ‘white privilege’ has always struck me as idiotic for the following reasons:

    A. It implies that all whites in general are rolling in wealth and privilege which simply isn’t the case; what about the caucasians in trailer parks who are stereotyped as ‘white trash’ and ‘redneck’? (Redneck btw is an anti-Celtic slur with sectarian overtones it originated overseas and was used to refer to the Scots-Irish because presbyterian dissenter ministers wore red collars.) So it amuses me to no end how people routinely use an ethnic slur thinking it’s harmless. I’m a lower middle class Irish-American and I’d love some of that white privilege.

    B. It comes from a domestic terrorist group (the weathermen) I’m pretty sure we can come up with something better that wasn’t used by self hating bombers spouting leftist cliches.

    C. Whites in this country have not functioned as one sole group so it’s not historically accurate.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 6:30 pm ¶

71. Wolfe Tone wrote:

    “I know that the Irish faced persecution in this country and still have to endure drunken stereotypes. ”

    That’s only one of countless Irish stereotypes out there; these days we’re stereotyped as terrorists, terrorist supporters (despite the fact that only a minority of Irish-American funded the IRA, I happen to hate republican and loyalist paramilitaries), thugs and other idiotic cliches. For example I was Veronica Mars with my little sister (yeah it’s a terrible but cut her some slack she’s only 10;) and the Irish were either thugs and in one case an alcoholic old man. We’re also not exactly too popular with the ‘white powa’ f*ckwits; stormfront is loaded with anti-Irish sentiments. Plus people these days are found of labelling any member of the diaspora who shows an interest in Ireland as a ‘plastic paddy’ (another favorite insult of the stormfront crowd).

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 6:39 pm ¶

72. Wolfe Tone wrote:

    Personally I don’t identify as white because it’s just a skin color; I prefer to identify with my actual culture. Plus I don’t wannabe lumped in with the WASPs (please note that I don’t hate ‘em or anything since the days of the know-nothing-society’s over).

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 6:46 pm ¶

73. Whit wrote:

    And it seems the conversation’s jumped the shark.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 8:03 pm ¶

74. morgan wrote:

    Class and race intersect in interesting ways…

    I’m mostly Irish, and to unearth a past when the Irish were non-white, I had to read a lot of history or ask my grandparents pointed and specific questions about anti-catholic discrimination. In today’s world, Irish is white… maybe the memory discrimination might help understand racism as it functions today. But I can’t say that in my life I have ever experienced anti-Irish discrimination. (my sister, who has natural red hair, wouldn’t be able to say the same however)

    I don’t consider myself privileged, I grew up poor and am still poor, mostly because I have to support my family. But I HAVE been privileged by my race. I was one of the only kids in my kindergarden class who spoke English as a first language: I’m sure that was a factor in my being the best student in class. I’m sure I’ve got jobs because of my race. And even though I don’t have money, I can clean up and wear a nice outfit and no one knows the difference.

    Being poor sucks, and it effects you your entire life, and ‘white trash’ shows us the boundaries of what ‘whiteness’ is supposed to be. But, as a white poor person you are better off than a racialized person with the same finances. Because at least you don’t have to deal with constant racism in addition to being broke. This does not, however, mean that every white person is privileged with respect to every racialized person, or that race is the only dimension of prejudice. But it’s an important one. Every white person, including me, benefits invisibly from being white.

    Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 8:39 pm ¶

75. Gerald wrote:

    Sister, I always loved your perspective on things because you really understand the ignorance privileged people. Your right about that. I understand that because I am here in the states and I go through racism everyday. I find myself the only person of color in almost every single class I am in. We should all take a big step back and see if we really are being diverse enough. If this so called equality is actually living in the world. I have yet to see it. I’m glad I have you in my life to see new issues because it really opens my eyes to understand what people are really like. Just keep being yourself and speaking your mind. You are a strong woman and a wonderful sister. Don’t let anyone bring you down. If we have people like you, then we can move forward in this world.

    Posted 13 Feb 2009 at 1:53 am ¶

76. Luis wrote:

    @Nelly

    For sure, the groups I mentioned don’t have the same experiences. There are still ways in which the Irish can have the figurative rug pulled out from under them, especially in areas like Boston or parts of New Orleans, where there is a longstanding historical component to their racialization. That said, it’s all about context.

    Speaking of context, I want to address the points made about not identifying with whiteness. The unfortunate truth about colorism is that you don’t have to. Race isn’t just about identifying, it’s also about being identified. It’s a two-way process that is constantly being contested and defined, even with people who are “obviously” of a certain background.

    The process of being identified can have deadly consequences. There have been a recent slew of cases where Ecuadorian immigrants have been killed due to anti-Mexican sentiment. The slurs employed were not generically anti-Hispanic, but targeted to the known Mexican community in the areas. There is the classic case of Vincent Chin, a Chinese-American who was killed due to anti-Japanese sentiments in 1982.

    On the other hand, there are ways in which light-skinned people of color can receive skin privilege due to being misidentified as white. No matter how much they identify and stand in solidarity with their background, unless they “out” themselves they unintentionally receive the day-to-day benefits of passing. The realization of this can make people very uncomfortable and resentful.

    So when considering identity, remember that it is a dialogue, which means that part of process is outside of our control.

    Posted 13 Feb 2009 at 3:12 am ¶

77. Luis wrote:

    Morgan, I really like your comments. Very dead on.

    Posted 13 Feb 2009 at 3:14 am ¶

78. Beth wrote:

    @Wolfe Tone #(70) I think Morgan explained this well, but to piggyback on what he said…
    The “privilege” in the term “white privilege” isn’t about class or wealth. Indeed, the entire point of the term is that there are forms of privilege that are not class based. Some have explained this with the metaphor of driving on a smooth road. If you’re driving on a smooth road, and have always driven on smooth roads, and have never encountered potholes, you don’t think of yourself as fortunate for driving on a smooth road. That is to say, part of white privilege is about the things that you *don’t* have to deal with (like racial profiling, for example).

    The term white privilege doesn’t mean that their aren’t economically disadvantaged, or that class doesn’t matter. When you google privilege, one of the definitions you get is, “a special advantage or immunity or benefit not enjoyed by all.” All advantages are not economic.

    Posted 13 Feb 2009 at 11:26 am ¶

79. Restructure! wrote:

    @Beth: Thank you for responding to Wolfe Tone, and also for explaining it so well.

    Posted 14 Feb 2009 at 6:44 pm ¶

80. Luis wrote:

    @Beth
    COSIGN!

    Posted 16 Feb 2009 at 4:05 am ¶

81. Adrianna wrote:

    @ Joseph Before the Europeans colonized other global South countries they colonized each other. Yes Caucasians colonized other Caucasians . Look what the Irish and other Eastern Europeans have gone through (genocide, famine). but like cocolamala and others have said whiteness has come to encompass a lot of other ethnicities and POC can‘t pass or hide. Sometimes I wonder if someday being a white Arab or a white Latino won’t matter cause you will be just white. It happened for the Irish , the Italians and other southern Europeans when they came to America. People of color did not make the rules . Other white people did. It‘s not Jessica‘s fault , but the racist white supremacists rules of society and it‘s damaging racial construct. As a black women and for other POC we will always be judged by our skin color, pushed out by our skin color, punish for or skin color. The darker you are the more shitty you get treated regardless of the country. In My own country of Haiti Light is right. I am reminded when I go to the store. We won’t ever experience that kind of privilege. We are walking targets.

    I imagine that it must be hard flying while Arab or Persian . I get that Jews experience prejudice regardless of their skin color My own Jewish friend wrote a piece on the police harassment he experienced in America and while visiting Israel and He looks white. Another Jewish boy in my old High school told me he “hid” his Jewishness when he and his family went on vacation in the south of France ( I was told it was because Anti Semitism is so repent and it can get dangerous for a Jews visiting there.. But here it is, because of his white skin he could “hide” it.
    When I travel. I can’t hide being A black women . That ‘s what makes me a target for Violent racist people and a whole other slew of things. Sorry I can’t pass for nothing but black. I’m not in dismissing your experiences I’m saying you have a choice. No matter how uncomfortable that makes you. You believe that the world outside of North America don’t see themselves In white/ black binary. In terms of skin color yes it does. Even amongst people of color. Light white is better than dark in some circles.

    @ Jessica some white people only feel at home in other white places and surrounded by other white “progressive people“. This does not surprise me. Segregation is back folks! Wait ..I’m sorry it never left! I hope they took down the store display. Keep the hope and the courage alive.

    @Wolfe Tone is the KKK burning crosses on your front door ,because of your Irishness? Does the police follow you and pull you over? Do you get followed at stores? Do you go to job interviews and not get it ,because of the color of your skin? White people are not some monoracial group, People like the KKK may have decided it was true, but it ain’t. There is still ethnic conflict in Europe. Goodness knows I ‘d love to not have to worry about these things when I travel to majority white countries Poor or rich I still be discriminated against because I don’t look like them.

    @morgan “ Gingerism “is so messes up. WTF is wrong with people. Even red hair gets you discriminated against.

    Posted 22 Feb 2009 at 3:42 pm ¶