If not a nation of cowards, then certainly a nation in denial
by Carmen Van Kerckhove, originally published at CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 blog
In a speech at the Department of Justice yesterday, Attorney General Eric Holder declared that when it comes to dealing with the issue of race, we are “essentially a nation of cowards.”
While his choice of words was harsh, he was absolutely right in pointing out the fact that honest, authentic, and productive conversations about race rarely happen in this country.
Following his historic speech on race last spring, Barack Obama was castigated by some cable channel talking heads for “throwing his white grandmother under the bus” because he had the audacity to point out that his own flesh and blood — the grandmother who had helped to rear him and loved him like a son — had herself been guilty of internalizing and reflecting racist stereotypes.
Should Obama’s revelation have come as a surprise? Not really.
We’ve been conditioned from an early age by advertising, pop culture, and the news media. We’re surrounded 24/7 by images steeped in racial stereotypes. There’s simply no way for us not to be influenced by them.
So why the denial? For the reason Holder explained: Once we open this particular Pandora’s box to the light, we’re going to expose notions and prejudices most people fervently wish we could put behind us.
Unfortunately, trying to relegate racism to the past is premature. We’re just not there yet.
Just look at the reaction to Holder’s comment. Instead of acknowledging his (somewhat obvious, really) remark about race with a silent, knowing nod, many are rushing to call Holder a troublemaker for stating an inconvenient truth.
People are far too eager to proclaim how colorblind and post-racial they are. Last summer, a Washington Post-ABC News poll posed the question “If you honestly assessed yourself, would you say that you have at least some feelings of racial prejudice?” Only three in ten of the respondents answered yes.
Apparently, many Americans of all backgrounds have convinced themselves that they are not any part of the problem, even though racism continues to deny people of color a level playing field in just about every aspect of our society.
We’ve fallen victim to denial because in the past twenty years, there has been far too much emphasis on “celebrating diversity” at the expense of taking a hard look at race and racism.
As Latoya Peterson recently wrote on our blog Racialicious, “The history that we currently teach is hopelessly sanitized to the point where people are still unsure exactly what happened at a lynching, and are unaware of the historical meaning of behind leaving nooses as ‘a prank.’”
School textbooks gloss over the unsavory realities of genocide, slavery, and other systematic forms of institutionalized racism. Every February, black history is boiled down to little more than a series of Trivial Pursuit™-like facts about who invented peanut butter.
What Holder said hit many as hard as it did because, down deep, we know he’s right. We don’t dare face our own deepest, darkest prejudices and bring them into the light where we might re-examine and eventually obliterate them.
Professing to be “colorblind” is not an answer; it’s a dodge. We need to stop pussyfooting around the issue and face it head-on.
It’s time for us to have a real conversation about race.
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
Ugly Deaf Muslim Punk Gurl! wrote:
everytime I want to talk about my identity, my culture, my race, my ethnicity, my religion, my nationalist pride, a lot of white people, for the most part, would tell me why I’m wasting my time talking about such “trivial issues” and insist that we are all equal human beings.
Has anybody ever been told that same crap over and over before?
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 1:27 pm ¶
Cathy wrote:
This makes me think about people’s reactions to my moving to the UK in March, another predominantly white country and the area to which I’ll be moving isn’t London and from the two times I’ve visited, I already know that I won’t see much diversity at all. I’ve had at least two people wonder if I’m not worried about moving there being that I’m black and run the risk of facing racism. I kind of thought, well, they make it sound like it doesn’t exist over here, too.
I’m moving over to be with my fiance, who has told me that I am the first black person he has ever known on a personal basis in his life. That worried me at first and so I waited for the ignorance and insensitive comments but they never came, and so I was left wondering how a person never so intimately exposed to a person of color could manage that. In reality, racism is something that my fiance cannot tolerate and as laidback as he is, he has always said that racism is the one that that will get his blood boiling.
England is not free of racism by any means but two things came to my mind when I thought about the ways in which they combat it. For one, in terms of soccer, where they have had horrible racist incidents in the past, I saw an anti-racism ad that very blatantly in bold black letters said “Say NO to Racism.” I thought about the message. To me it seemed so much more effective than showing a billboard full of happy smiling people of all colors joining hands. In a perfect world, that would be happening, but until we reach that, there needs to be a clear message that says “we think this shit is wrong, stop doing it.” Also, a commercial came on for a show called “Hustle” which featured a black man as the main actor. Towards the end of the commercial, I realised that the other actors on the show were white and I couldn’t think of one show that I’ve watched in the US that’s featured a black lead actor to a cast of white people. Please feel free to point out examples, my mind is a blank at the moment, but I’m so used to seeing black lead actors with predominantly black casts. Now, I haven’t watched the show, but if it is anything like how I think it will be from the commercial I saw, I think the UK has taken steps that are really progressive towards correcting racial intolerance.
That being said, I understand the UK isn’t perfect and I will no doubt face prejudice as a black woman when I move over there. I just use this as an example to point out a difference I see. I think the problem is mostly with the US constantly thinking of itself as a progressive melting pot. So many have bought into that idea that to challenge it would mean that the country isn’t really what everyone thought it to be.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 1:30 pm ¶
Sara wrote:
I absolutely agree with you. Eric Holder’s comments were extremely significant (although Melissa Harris-Lacewell had a different take on them, arguing that an AG had a responsibility to prosecute institutionalized race discrimination, rather than just attribute it to a lack of conversation. I think both are important). I read Racialicious and I try to educate myself about issues of racism in our society, in feminism, in pop culture, in the economy – but I absolutely do have racist thoughts. I walk home and see a couple of latinos – and I’m more nervous around them than around two white guys. It’s not fair and it’s not right and I’m not proud of myself – and until everyone starts to acknowledge that this sort of thing happens every day, in little and big ways, it’s going to continue to be a problem.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 1:31 pm ¶
Ric Reyes wrote:
I think you’re right
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 1:39 pm ¶
Myles wrote:
This reminds me of all of the times that I have had people tell me “that’s not how racism works,” or “come on, stuff like that doesn’t happen.”
I think people don’t want to take responsibility for their actions, or acknowledge the actions of those around them. I think issues of race in the US have become so complicated that it’s like a minefield that everyone would just rather walk around and pretend that it’s not there.
I still remember what it was like when we learned about Native Americans in 2nd grade, and remembering what I learned at home and how that had been so glossed over and how the look my teacher gave me when I looked around the room mouth gaping, trying to decide if I should say something or not.
We do need to have a real talk about race in the US. But I think everyone just wants to pretend that things are so wonderful now. And having an actual conversation about racism makes people “too uncomfortable.”
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 1:39 pm ¶
Carmen Van Kerckhove wrote:
> although Melissa Harris-Lacewell had a different take on them, arguing that an AG had a responsibility to prosecute institutionalized race discrimination, rather than just attribute it to a lack of conversation
Yeah, Melissa Harris-Lacewell’s piece was excellent. And I’m not just saying that because I’m a total MHL fangirl.
It’s here, for those of you who haven’t seen it yet:
http://tinyurl.com/bfpdgs
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 1:59 pm ¶
blah wrote:
I keep hearing people chastise Holder for using such harsh words. If he hadn’t would people even being talking about this?
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 2:19 pm ¶
Eva wrote:
I think his comments were on point. Racism is like alcoholism, if you don’t admit you have it, you can’t get treatment for it and you can’t do anything until you can break out of your denial.
@Cathy, my mom didn’t even know what a homosexual was until she was a grown woman and today she can’t stand people who are homophobic.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 2:36 pm ¶
Kavita wrote:
loved the MHL article. one more arena where discrimination and racism run rampant: the criminal justice system! until our AG acknowledges and addresses that, his other words are going to sound kind of hollow to me.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 2:45 pm ¶
Fiqah wrote:
Excellent post, Carmen. Thank you.
It kinda made me remember part of Barack Obama’s inauguration speech last month. I’m not going to give a verbatim retelling, but he said something parelleling the histrocal immigrant experience – where people came to this country, even if it was under extreme duress, by choice – with the arrival of captive Africans who became slaves upon their arrival. Basically that whole stupid we-are-all-from-somewhere-else-but-we-all-are-Americans-hope-change thing.
My heart sank when he said it, because I feared in that moment that President Obama was essentially outlining what his approach to racial discourse was gonna be: facile glossing-over, false correlation drawing, multi-culti p.c. avoidance. The horrors of massive genocide, displacement, slavery and its accompanying evils are NOVELS, not footnotes. Pussyfooting around it (<– thanks, Carmen, that’s precisely what it is) is beyond insulting.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 2:56 pm ¶
Monie wrote:
The problem is that racists don’t always see themselves as racists. They think the ridiculous beliefs they hold about people of other races are actually true. So they think that precludes them from being bigots.
Denial is a powerful drug.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 2:58 pm ¶
Smudge wrote:
[Mod Note – Review the comment moderation policy before you post. Little digs generalizing entire groups will get you deleted. Same for posting comments where you are blatantly trying to make a point and not engaging with the piece. Just make your argument, you don’t need all the extra crap about “the liberals” or “the PC police” – though I would suggest, if you are using those terms, you’re on the wrong blog. – LDP}
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 3:23 pm ¶
macon d wrote:
I think it’s great that you got this message out on a big board like the AC 360 Blog.
I wonder, who the “we” is in this piece? Surely a lot of white people are more cowardly and in denial about race than are a lot of other people, many of whom are not in denial about the realities of race, because they suffer through those realities, instead of benefit from them? Many of whom are not in denial because, sometimes, it’s a matter of sheer survival for them to know about the realities of race? So, is whiteness left unmarked in this piece? Shouldn’t white folks be called out more for their denial than others?
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 3:32 pm ¶
Smudge wrote:
LDP-
I scrubbed for little digs at generalized populations. Found several in previous posts and scrubbed them from my own.
Thanks,
First, great speeches, like Gettysburg, “I have a dream”, Booker T Washington’s “Atlanta Compromise”, or “The only thing to fear…” come at times of great challenge to our nation or our humanity. Obama’s “great race speech” was damage control because Rev. Wright was running amok. And it wasn’t that great, “segregated schools were and are inferior schools” (nevermind that he and Hillary went to gender segregated colleges or that historically Black colleges provide excellent educations.)
Second, he said of his mother “…but a woman who once confessed her fear of Black men who passed her by on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.” What he didn’t say is what those men looked like. Were they dressed like Ice Cube with threatening scowls on their faces? Or were they dressed like Urkel or Colin Powell? We’re they walking toward her with a threatening, unrelenting posture? Or did their body language indicate that they would yield the sidewalk for her? Our brains’ ids are programmed to recognize threats. “Can this entity hurt me?” it asks. And that ain’t racism. To say “my mom is scared of walking Black men” is a purposeful and gross over-simplification; it’s throwing her under the bus. If I see a person, walking at me with a look and manner that translates, “dangerous,” I’m crossing the street, regardless of his/her race. Certainly young people (and I suppose people of all ages) dress and act in ways that their peer groups will find acceptable. Fine. If your peer-group is gangsta (or faux-gangsta) I’m slotting you in “dangerous” regardless of your race.
Third, “I can no more disown him than I can disown the Black community.” Until a week passes that is, when he disowned him. And which Black community was he referring to? The gay, Black community that Black Christian churches embrace so warmly? Or is it the community of non-union Black business owners who were just shut out of every penny of the stimulus at the stroke of Obama’s pen? Or perhaps it was the small community of Black Jews that Rev. Wright thinks so highly of. Which was it?
Last, I believe the real source of racial discourse cowardice comes the fear of being accused and convicted of thought crimes by those whom have anointed themselves the arbiters of racial discourse. Shelby Steele was recently being interviewed about race, and he said (to his white interviewer): “Racism exists in America, and it’s about number 8 of Black America’s top ten problems. And I’m willing to talk about it if you’re willing to talk about… (the other problems).” And the interviewer said “I’m not,” indicating that to do so is too dangerous.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 3:33 pm ¶
A.D. Nix wrote:
I was kind of shocked by Holder’s candor but his statements were ruthlessly elegant and on point. It wasn’t something I really expected to hear from him, I have to say.
@ Cathy
I lived in the UK for a while (London and Nottingham) in the early 00s and it was . . . interesting. It was the first time I ever experienced being called a “nigger” to my face (more than once). I was invited to a dinner party because one of the guests had never met a black person in real life (it was a very white relatively posh neighborhood in Nottingham, the guest was from Poland originally and I didn’t know why I was invited until near the end but everyone thought it was just delightful). I won’t even get into the BS that happened at the few matches I went to. Or some of the hilarious encounters with older people on the bus! Or the crazy racist beat downs that two friends suffered in two separate areas and two separate events. A broken arm, one nearly lost eye and a knife wound between them.
Those ‘No to Racism” signs are like ‘Quiet Please’ signs in the library – it’s fine to be loud, just not here.
I still love England! I had really great times there – even went back to live for a few months after that stint. And I hope you have a great time too. But just . . . the shape of the discourse might take some getting used to.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 3:53 pm ¶
A.D. Nix wrote:
@ Smudge
How can you categorize Obama making mention of his grandmother’s fear of black men as throwing her under the bus, because it could be about the way they were dressed (! I’ll come back to this), when you yourself don’t know how she discussed her fear with her grandson?
And if you think that what constitutes ‘threatening’ either in expression or dress is untouched by culturally-specific and often racialized thinking, you’re quite mistaken.
I think most people in the world should be more afraid of those dressed like Colin Powell than those dressed like Ice Cube (is it the dungarees that are a problem?)
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 4:04 pm ¶
Smudge wrote:
Cathy-
“…I couldn’t think of one show that I’ve watched in the US that’s featured a black lead actor to a cast of white people. Please feel free to point out examples, my mind is a blank at the moment…”
How about Oprah, with her audience and guests as the white cast? Doesn’t count? Maybe not.
How about race-neutral movies with a black lead and mostly white cast? Man on Fire and Gothika were both great popcorn movies.
Is the absence of black/white mix in television “racial intolerance”? Or is it answering marketing preferences? Or is that the same? Is Tyler Perry racially intolerant? Doubtful, but he creates for his target demographic, and is rich for it. People want to see themselves reflected in their entertainment especially TV where we develop a “relationship” with the characters that keeps us coming back week in and week out.
By the way, “The Unit” is excellent if you like the military action genre. The lead is the awesome Dennis Haysbert. Only he and his character’s wife (Regina Taylor) are Black. It’s on CBS. There were co-leads in “In the Heat of the Night” (Carroll O’Connor and David Hart). It ran for six or seven seasons. Those are two just off the top of my head. Oh, and Benson. Oops and Guillame’s “Sports Night”.
Regardless of this short list, as long as identity politics reign supreme, entertainment will fall along racial lines. For instance movie makers can’t populate a race-neutral script with an all black cast or the signal will be sent to the movie-going public that “this is going to be about the ‘black experience’”. I would suggest that white people didn’t avoid the movie “Soul Food” because of racism. They avoided it because it wasn’t targeted at them. (I saw it. It was so-so.)
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 4:05 pm ¶
Fiqah wrote:
@Smudge:
“Second, he said of his mother ‘…but a woman who once confessed her fear of Black men who passed her by on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.’ What he didn’t say is what those men looked like. Were they dressed like Ice Cube with threatening scowls on their faces? Or were they dressed like Urkel or Colin Powell? We’re they walking toward her with a threatening, unrelenting posture? Or did their body language indicate that they would yield the sidewalk for her? Our brains’ ids are programmed to recognize threats. ‘Can this entity hurt me?’ it asks. And that ain’t racism.”
Oh, man. You must be new.
Alright, while the other posters sharpen their knives, I’m going to go ahead and address the excerpt above. What exactly makes a Black man non-threatening? How exactly does an adult Black male (or even a merely adolescent one) not scare White people? By wearing a suit? Or smiling? Or, even more dignity-destroying, by smiling when a White person indicates that some aspect of your person (BTW, it’s NOT the clothes, bro…God, I can’t even believe you said that) threatens them in order to reassure them of your harmlessness? In other words, how many concessions do Black men have to make in order to escape the Brute Negro trope? Sorry, Smudge, that’s racism.
My little brother is 6′4″, 250 pounds, muscular, broad, sweet-tempered and not particularly inclined to purse snatch. He began experiencing police harrassment at 14, and with Sean Bell and Amadou Diallo and Oscar Grant and so many others now dead because of the persistence of the notion of the always armed, always dangerous, criminal Black male, statements like yours send chills down my spine.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 4:13 pm ¶
Lola wrote:
@ Smudge
the suggestion that only physically imposing or shabbily dressed black men are considered intimidating/fear inducing is nonsense
a black male friend of mine is about 5′5″, shy, quiet, clean cut, and well mannered yet white people still cross the street when they see him coming
when nonblacks recoil in fear at a black man small enough to wear my clothes it is nothing but racism and racist media conditioning
why should he be expected to emasculate himself in order to make strangers more comfortable with his existence
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 4:24 pm ¶
blossom culp wrote:
I read Holder’s words with such pride and satisfaction; they were harsh, but they were certainly not telling us anything we didn’t know. But, as I read comment after comment on blogs covering the story, my heart sank. Holder’s notion that Americans needed to interact with people of other races and cultures outside of the workplace were met with comments like, “how dare he tell me what to do with my weekends!” Really? That’s all you got from his statement?
How can I be surprised? I am a 32 yr old African American woman and my step-father, the man who helped raise me since I was five years old, is White. We have endured all kinds of racism, from hospital workers not believing he was my father when I was brought to the emergency room at age 11, to a cop pulling us over when I was 15 because he thought the father picking his daughter up from school was a john picking up a prostitute. And yet still, our family has never truly discussed race. It was like, everyone else in the world treats us like aliens, so we damn sure are not going to let it into our home. So, to a very small extent, I understand the desire not to confront that kind of pain, to ignore it and especially in this Obama era, to deny its existence and choose an “all for one” mentality.
We can certainly move on and move forward, but what happens to all the pain? Are POC suddenly supposed to wake up not feeling inferior, after generations of conditioning that we are less than white, animals even? Are we not to feel angry about the ignorance we have had to endure or the ways we have been forced to change ourselves and acclimate to the norms of another culture just to get jobs, feed ourselves, have a good life? When someone damages you, you still deal with the ramifications of what they did on a daily basis. A person can certainly forgive their rapist, or the person who killed their child…does that mean they stop having trouble engaging in future intimate relationships or they don’t have to go to therapy every week to heal? No. You do not get to decide when someone else “moves on” and “stops re-hashing” the things that you and your race did. True healing arrives with an apology, a public acknowledgement, individual acknowledgement and a continuing commitment to change the behavior that led to the pain in the first place.
And on the other side, do all people just stop having racist feelings? And when did this happen, on November 4th? Did every person everywhere just stop thinking the way they’ve been thinking their entire lives? What exactly has changed that has made Old America suddenly New America?
I love my step-father, but he is exactly the type of person who was offended by Holder’s statement. He is ready to be outraged, but not ready to make it better. That would be painful.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 4:43 pm ¶
Smudge wrote:
AD Nix-
For sure, I don’t know the greater context of their discussions on race. My point is, I doubt that she feared all black men. I interact with many Black men (and women) regularly. Each individual interaction elicits an individual reaction: admiration, boredom, laughter, humility, indifference, etc. Individual reactions to individuals. But Obama’s statement comes off as categorical: “My grandmother feared black men on the street.” Certainly their physical size, manner of dress, posture, overheard discussions, all contributed to her fear. Likewise, I bet she feared large scowling aggressively postured men of all races. The average person will see such men as a threat, regardless of race. Hence, urkel (skinny Black dork) would not elicit fear, but a member of House of Pain (big scowling white guy dressed like a gangsta -circa 1992) would elicit fear.
“And if you think that what constitutes ‘threatening’ either in expression or dress is untouched by culturally-specific and often racialized thinking, you’re quite mistaken.”
“Racialized thinking” is not the same as racism. And culturally-specific doesn’t correlate perfectly with race. Are Colin Powell and Ice Cube from the same culture? I’d say no. Are Pablo Escobar, P. Rubio (my old boss, born in Mexico) and Salma Hayek from the same culture? Well, they were all born in Mexico and have European ancestry, but I’d still say no. Nonetheless, your point is taken. Expression and dress are choices. Participation in a culture (for adults) is a choice. There may be peer pressure, but it’s a choice. If you choose to dress and express yourself like a gangsta, and I meet you on the street, I will slot you under “threat”, regardless of race (ROR). That particular manner of dress and expression is specifically intended to make me fear that person. It works. If you choose to express yourself and dress like a Rastafani, ROR, I will slot you under, “not a threat”, because that manner of dress and expression specifically suggests other, non-threatening things. A guy, ROR, coming down the street in Boston in longshoreman gear: no threat. And so on.
“I think most people in the world should be more afraid of those dressed like Colin Powell than those dressed like Ice Cube.” With respect to their effect on geo-political affairs, perhaps. As an imminent threat to life and limb to a little old lady on the street, definitely not.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 4:55 pm ¶
Alyssa wrote:
@Cathy
I don’t think the Say no to racism signs would mean anything in America. The problem isn’t that people think racism is okay; the problem is that they deny that it even happens. The vast majority of Americans think of KKK/Nazi style racism when they hear racist. So when it is anything more subtle (especially if they may be guilty of it temselves), they find any way they can to call it something other than racism. We don’t need to be told racism is bad, we need to be able to recognize suble acts of racism as the racism it is.
@Smudge
The reason he didn’t mention how the men were dressed is because it doesn’t matter. Why is it we are worried about how the black men are dressed but we aren’t worried about how the white men were dressed? And no it isn’t throwing her under a bus. He was making a point that even people with friends/family of a different race have racial biases. We can’t escape it.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 4:56 pm ¶
Alpha Asian wrote:
Interesting piece. It reminds me of when I was in grad school for Ethnic Studies. I had a classmate who told me, “Love shouldn’t be color blind. True love sees all colors.”
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 4:59 pm ¶
Smudge wrote:
Fiqah-
Since when is, smiling and wearing a suit is “dignity-destroying”? If your dignity is destroyed by being well dressed and smiling, Obama’s dignity is in grave peril.
I basically answered most of this for AD Nix.
The treatment of your brother is shameful. Stories like those of Bell, Diallo, and Grant are horrific.
I still think Obama’s grandmother went under the bus in the speech.
And Carmen- It wasn’t the audacity of pointing it out. It was that Obama equated the ugliness of Rev. Wright’s hate-filled delusional rants to his grandmother’s fear, which he categorically ties to “black men.” Maybe she was more racist than David Duke, but the point made way back in the original post by Carmen was that Obama didn’t throw is grandmother under the bus.
He did.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 5:17 pm ¶
Smudge wrote:
Hi Lola-
“the suggestion that only physically imposing or shabbily dressed black men are considered intimidating/fear inducing is nonsense.” I didn’t say “only” I said Obama made a categorical statement about his grandmother.
“A black male friend of mine is about 5′5″, shy, quiet, clean cut, and well mannered yet white people still cross the street when they see him coming.” All white people cross the street? I wouldn’t. In fact I bet most don’t. But let’s ask Obama if his grandmother would. He never told us. Just that “she fears black men on the street.”
“recoil in fear?” Really? Not to exaggerate. When Anthony Perkins pulled the shower curtain back, Janet Leigh recoiled in fear. I have this image in my head of the sidewalks clearing like the Red Sea in front of Moses. But, according to you, just the white people.
“Why should he be expected to emasculate himself in order to make strangers more comfortable with his existence?: He shouldn’t. And please show me where I suggested that anyone should emasculate himself.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 5:20 pm ¶
Lola wrote:
@Smudge
http://www.racialicious.com/2008/10/09/quoted-uestlove-on-the-little-things/
this might help
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 5:24 pm ¶
Daniel wrote:
Well, there’s so much I want to say, but to crudely summarize, for people in the US to really have honest, open dialogue regarding race, there has to be some discussion involving history and different cultures+ideologies with an empathetic ear.
I had a lot of classmates in college, just 5 years ago, who had very “un-PC” remarks and negative reactions to discussion of race mainly because they couldn’re relate to it. I saw some validity in their statements but on the whole, it wasn’t fruitful and quite detached. Relatively speaking, the concept of race in terms of how many people today define it, is still quite historically recent.
However, one cannot denied it’s impact. I don’t know much about other countries, but a couple of reasons why a lot of Americans have been uncomfortable with this is in the past, and in some cases today, race has been heavily associated with violence and government intervention. Any involvement by the authorities in general is going to be a big issue.
A big overlooked problem is that some might take an extreme reaction, like it’s all or nothing. Personally, I think we should be “colorblind” in terms of people’s self worth, dignity to live and pursue goals, but to be totallly colorblind isn’t realistic nor healthy for relationships in general. IMHO, my personal goal regarding race would be that people can get past superficial layers, but not denied it’s existence, and face reality with credible knowledge. However, I think this is something that many thinkers have tried to done for generations.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 5:43 pm ¶
AintIAWoman wrote:
I feel like Smudge needs a Racism 101.
Anyway. I, too, am a MHL fangirl but I didn’t completely agree that his speech was “a failure”– I think trying to have these conversations can be good in general. I don’t think he meant that’s ALL that would be done. And calling out America for cowardice takes bravery.
When white people get called out for racism, no matter what their intentions, we act like 6 year olds when our parents are scolding us for somehting we’re both ashamed of and in complete denial of. We plug our ears with our fingers and zone out. We have the pettiest comebacks ever. It’s always someone ELSE’s problem, right? Especially if we consider ourselves ‘liberal’ or ‘aware.’ Its hard to take the blame so we ignore it. And not just whites, honestly, everyone.
But also to go off what Monie was saying, SO many people HONESTLY don’t see themselves as racist in the slightest. Or they play the “But one time a black man robbed me so really, that was racist against ME” game. So thats what makes it so hard to address. People aren’t understanding of what racism really is. Maybe we will get there eventually but we need a giant shove in that direction.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 5:48 pm ¶
jvansteppes wrote:
@Smudge: why should a man automatically ‘yield the sidewalk’ to a woman and how does failing to do this make him dangerous? And to say that someone simply looks to see if a stranger ‘looks dangerous’ fails to account for the fact that for some people blackness/brownness automatically connotes danger.
Being honest or seeking dialogue about a parent’s racism (or their misogyny or homophobia or ableism or transphobia etc) doesn’t mean that you love them any less or are ungrateful for their good sides. Interracial kinship/friendship is most likely to fail if we aren’t allowed to address incidents of racism.
I find that image of throwing someone under a bus especially violent and offensive considering the (perhaps unconscious) link to the story of Rosa Parks. It’s like “well, now that you don’t have to sit at the back of the bus you’ve gone crazy and are throwing the other passengers under it!”
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 6:21 pm ¶
Baiskeli wrote:
@Smudge
You can tell a lot about a person’s attitude based on their unquestioned assumptions. By going through your post, especially the part about scary black men, its obvious that one of the assumptions you seem to be operating under is that by default black men are dangerous and therefore the onus is on us to display markers of non-threateningness (don’t know if its a word but it fit). Is this so? Do I need to dress like Urkel, kow-tow and even maybe step off the sidewalk when a white person approaches in order to be considered non-threatening? Cause if you are, this is an asinine argument and you’re totally missing the concept as far as what racism and prejudice are.
Or am I mis-reading your post?
5,11 geeky looking well mannered black male who sometimes gets treated like he’s carrying a howitzer.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 6:32 pm ¶
Eash wrote:
Yes, racism is real. A lot of white people are racist and are not ashamed, around other white people, which is despicable in my opinion.
I’m a 6′3”, 200 lb white male, I tend to wear all black with a motorcycle jacket. Sometimes people are visibly indimidated by my presence.
Sometimes complaining about how white people are afraid of you comes off as self-flattery. Imagine if white people complained about being stereotyped as wealthy and educated, I doubt they’d find much sympathy.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 6:45 pm ¶
Bobby wrote:
I think the backlash against Holder proves his point.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 6:47 pm ¶
foshothoyo wrote:
when everybody is in the same financial boat, then we will have real discourse, because everyone will need everyone else on board to survive. Until that happens, why should white people bother to engage in understanding their privilege in the history of this country or deconstruct their own racism or address glaring disparities? As long as they don’t have to, they won’t. The question is: what will force them to do so?
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 7:02 pm ¶
Fiqah wrote:
@Smudge:
“Fiqah-
Since when is, smiling and wearing a suit is ‘dignity-destroying’? If your dignity is destroyed by being well dressed and smiling, Obama’s dignity is in grave peril.”
Way to miss my point. I meant that smiling at someone who does something like, say. cross the street to avoid you, is dignity-destroying. And until you’ve actually experienced it, it’s really hard to truly grasp how it feels. Please take a look at Lola’s link to a piece posted here some time ago.
@AintIAWoman: “I feel like Smudge needs a Racism 101. ”
WORD.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 7:21 pm ¶
A.D. Nix wrote:
@ Smudge
You missed so many points and misread so many others. It’s very likely that Obama’s grandmother said “I’m afraid of black men.” I’ve had people say this to my black face – not “scary black men” (redundant!) not “black men in big pants.” Black men. You’re just going to have to deal with this possibility regarding the incident in question. We don’t know that this was how it happened. But it is a distinct possibility. Accept. So, for you to question the account of the person who was on the receiving end as if it couldn’t possibly be true is rhetorically bankrupt.
“Culturally-specific” was not linking Ice Cube and Colin Powell rather referring to the context in which they each exist and what each signifies exists. And you know what? They are part of the same culture whether you’d like to believe it or not.
The rest of what you wrote shows a serious lack of understanding on matters of social constructs, racial priming and, as important, fashion.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 7:23 pm ¶
timarasa wrote:
great article, already made my comments on the CNN site. i suggest others should do also before the commenting thread is closed; there’s a lot of tomfoolery being spewed over there, and more voices of reason are needed.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 7:30 pm ¶
DivergentDana wrote:
One thing Smudge isn’t getting — that certain once neutral articles of clothing/aspects of appearance can become “threatening” based solely on their association with/widespread adoption by young black males… the goalposts keep moving. Cornrows used to be known as a common hairstyle for little girls, and now they’re associated with “thugs” in mainstream society. Most black males don a variation 0f the standard issue American uniform — T-shirt and jeans. The idea that because of the fit or brand that they automatically go from the “normal” to the “threatening” column is pretty ridiculous, and so is the idea that youths/men whose jobs don’t require them to should regularly don suits — extremely formal clothing — if they want to be less scary. That’s above and beyond what’s expected from other kinds of men, and you’ve got to know that, Smudge.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 8:00 pm ¶
cocolamala wrote:
@smudge
how do you know what a gangster looks like?
does it look like a black man in “hip hop” clothes?
does it look like al capone?
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 8:41 pm ¶
Lxy wrote:
Last, I believe the real source of racial discourse cowardice comes the fear of being accused and convicted of thought crimes by those whom have anointed themselves the arbiters of racial discourse.
Yes, you are right–but not in the sense that you intended.
Like every other political issue, the Mainstream corporate media dominates discussions about race in America.
In terms of race, this capitalist media largely represents the interests of Anglo-American elites in particular and White America in general.
The idea that “politically correct” minorities or activists have the power to arbitrate discussions of race in the first place is laughable.
This delusion is based upon a willful political ignorance of the US capitalist domination of the media.
Who has the power, resources, and ability to reach hundreds millions of people and shape the terms of debate–on race or whatever issue?
Minority activists and bloggers?
Or America/Western corporate media behemoths like AOL-Time Warner, Disney, Bertelsmann, Viacom, and News Corporation that are massive in their power to influence, global in their octopus-like tentacles, and obscene in their wealth?
It’s the latter that are the true “thought police” and self-anointed arbiters discussions of race in all but name.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 9:25 pm ¶
JB wrote:
Eash
One would only have that concept of “flattery” if they got off on being “intimidating” maybe you think people being spooked by you is some sort of pat on the back, and if that orc-mentality persists for you so be it…but for me I grow tired of people clutching their purses, getting off elevators and looking back at me over their shoulder in a parking lot…the implication isn’t that all black men think they are Bad Ass as you seem to imagine it, it is that a lot of honest non-criminal black men don’t like people reacting to them as if they are criminals.
Yeah, it isn’t “my” problem how people react, but it is very taxing, the first time I went to my local gun shop, everyone in there tensed and then ignored me except for the arab/armenian guy from NY, when he got off the phone and who didn’t seem to think that a blk guy buying a cowboy action .45 was out of the ordinary…If that guy wasn’t there, would the other two guys have helped me? No. Not unless I forced the issue by asking 4 or 5 more times because they said they would get to me but then didn’t seem to busy talking to eachother.
Anyhow tangent aside…
You wear your black clothes and gear, but if you change into a suit the majority of the population wouldn’t view you as a potential criminal, I can’t change my skin, and that regardless of the clothing I wear, it still seems to make people think I am planning on snatching their purse or raping them or some other nonsense.
Now do I have white co-workers and friends who don’t react that way? Of course…why? They KNOW me…the thing is that strange people THINK they know me based on my skin color, they same way they THINK they know you based on yours…and act accordingly to their preconceived notions.
Once again your clothing gives people an impression that might make some wary (not me because of my social circle, not your friends who are used to you) but my skin trumps my clothing. It is a generational thing too…I can head out in jeans and a black T with the eye of horus on it and people my age will ask where I got the shirt…I wear a suit headed out to the airport or a mall parking lot and I’m treated like a criminal (Once to the point where the mall cop stopped me outside of my car for suspiciously checking my tires)…go figure
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 11:01 pm ¶
David Cone wrote:
@ Eash,
I read your post, particularly this part: “Sometimes complaining about how white people are afraid of you comes off as self-flattery. Imagine if white people complained about being stereotyped as wealthy and educated, I doubt they’d find much sympathy.”
Self-flattery? Are you kidding? I didn’t see a smiley face to denote that you were making a funny.
White folks as a whole wouldn’t trade stereotypes with blacks if their lives depended on it. We’ll take “Puritan work ethic/hard-working,” “wealthy” and “educated.” You can have “jumps real high,” “lazy,” “drinks Kool-Aid,” and “ignorant.” If you think being denoted as wealthy and educated is a negative stereotype, you’ve lost touch with reality. Even if a white guy was from podunk, if he gets the ASSUMPTION of being well-to-do and educated walking in the door, it’s better than having someone assume that if you have an African-American sounding name that you’re automatically inferior.
Come on, now, Dude. You really aren’t exactly exuding the whole “white folks is intelligent” thang right about now.
Posted 20 Feb 2009 at 11:37 pm ¶
Colleen wrote:
I think we have seen, in the recent New York Post cartoon, what a discussion of race led by News Corporation would degrade into.
And I wouldn’t want to trust the other media outlets, either.
There should be a class in every high school called Ism 101. We are all in or will be in one of these groups that is discriminated against.
It should give a clear picture of what it looks like (lynchings, genocide, seamstresses burning to death in a locked factory, women living in poverty, the aged dying poor and alone) what causes it (human nature at its worst) and what the acceptable response is.
Everyone has prejudices. The things that matter are whether or not you act on them, and whether or not you tolerate other people expressing this basest of human behaviors. That has to be taught.
Posted 21 Feb 2009 at 1:59 am ¶
Evie wrote:
“If you think being denoted as wealthy and educated is a negative stereotype, you’ve lost touch with reality. Even if a white guy was from podunk, if he gets the ASSUMPTION of being well-to-do and educated walking in the door, it’s better than having someone assume that if you have an African-American sounding name that you’re automatically inferior.”
Are there ANY stereotypes which are actually “positive”, instead of just seeming to be? I would argue that any stereotype involves reducing someone to your preconceived notions of the group/s they belong to, and is therefore negative.
Surely, stereotypes about Whites being “hard-working/intelligent/well-educated/wealthy/successful/natural aptitude for the liberal arts ” are just as negative as stereotypes about Asians being “hard-working/intelligent/well-educated/wealthy/successful/natural aptitude for maths and science”.
I am not implying that Whites face comparable racial discrimination to that faced by Asians. I am merely drawing a parallel between the ostensibly “positive” stereotypes about each group.
Posted 21 Feb 2009 at 7:38 am ¶
Jack D. wrote:
re “School textbooks gloss over the unsavory realities of genocide, slavery, and other systematic forms of institutionalized racism.”: Usually by employing passive verbs, at best — the text may say something bad was done to a group of people, but never who committed the atrocities.
Posted 21 Feb 2009 at 9:18 am ¶
Dee Dee wrote:
I applaud Attorney General Eric Holder for making his very accurate and very public statements about our being a nation of cowards on the racial front. He couldn’ t hear me, but I was a few states away saying “Hallelujah” as he poured truth into our nation’s ears.
However, many of those who perpetrate racism may never examine themselves thoroughly until their economic status is snatched from them; and even then, their arrogance may prevent them from dissecting their racism at all.
I simply wish people were willing to explore the depths and complexities of the Attorney General’s words. Because as a black woman, I’ve experienced racism from many OTHER people than just American whites. (Please read Carol Chehade’s book, Big Little White Lies) Latinos, Asians, Arabs, Middle Easterners, Persians, white Europeans and even some black Africans and blacks from the Caribbean have blessed me with their own special brands of racial hatred. (Yes, I understand that racism doesn’t just happen to black people, but I’m speaking from my particular experience at the moment.)
Some of these people refused to pick me up in cabs, some were sleeping with black men and using that as a cover and excuse for their racial hatred, some made digs about what they BELIEVED to be my lack of educational status, some were attacking my alleged lack of beauty and the list goes on and on and on.
While I’ve let A LOT of foolishness slide in the name of rising above and focusing on my goals, I now see that it will benefit me to speak up and speak out and much of the ignorance that surrounds me. Unfortunately racists won’t ever realize the extent of their racism until they’re called out on it in a very public way.
In fact, a great question to ask is “Are you TRULY ready for a post-racial society or are you still spewing BS?”
Posted 21 Feb 2009 at 10:41 am ¶
Chris wrote:
Colleen: “There should be a class in every high school called Ism 101. We are all in or will be in one of these groups that is discriminated against. ”
YES. This kind of education is IMPORTANT. I feel like I’ve learned more crucial life info from reading this blog and feminist blogs over the last few months than I ever did in high school.
Posted 21 Feb 2009 at 4:09 pm ¶
Nelly wrote:
“I couldn’t think of one show that I’ve watched in the US that’s featured a black lead actor to a cast of white people. Please feel free to point out examples, my mind is a blank at the moment, but I’m so used to seeing black lead actors with predominantly black casts.”
Cathy, the first show that came to my mind was “The Unit,” starring Dennis Haysbert. Interestingly enough, two kids’ shows immediately came to mind as well: True Jackson, VP with KeKe Palmer and Cory in the House with Kyle Massey.
In two of the shows I listed – save True Jackson, VP – the main character’s families are pretty visible on screen. So, Haysbert and Massey aren’t the only Black actors in their shows’ main cast. Palmer isn’t either; her character has a Black co-worker. But, these actors still lead predominantly White casts on shows that aren’t considered “niche” in the way that House of Payne and Girlfriends are.
And, although That’s So Raven had a predominantly Black supporting cast (3 of the 5 are Raven’s family members), I think it stands as one of the very few shows with a Black cast that wasn’t only marketed at Black audiences. It ended up being the Disney Channel’s most successful show ever. I never thought I’d find myself praising Disney, but there you go.
And I know the show is old, but would Homicide: Life on the Streets count? It had a large ensemble cast, but I think Andre Braugher was considered the lead actor (if not a co-lead with Kyle Secor). Psych features 2 leads of color, although the half-Mexican and half-White James Roday plays a White character on the show. Based on media attention, I assumed Jennifer Beals was considered the de facto lead of The L Word’s ensemble cast. Her character on the show is biracial with one Black parent and one White parent.
I’m kind of a media junkie, in case you couldn’t tell! I’ve only read about Homicide, The Unit, and The L Word in magazines, so an actual fan of these shows could probably give you better information.
Posted 21 Feb 2009 at 5:22 pm ¶
Miles Ellison wrote:
Yaphet Kotto was in Homicide in the early years.
Posted 21 Feb 2009 at 7:19 pm ¶
Nelly wrote:
Dear Racialicious, team, please disregard my last 2 posts. I’m having major glitches with my computer.
Now that I think about it, Cory in the House doesn’t have a predominantly White supporting cast. It’s maybe 50% White and 50% People of Color. But, I guess it still counts as an example of a Black actor leading a cast that’s not all-Black.
For the most part, I can’t think of shows with one Black lead and an all-White supporting cast. But, I can think of a few shows -like Homicide, as Miles Ellison pointed out – where actors of color lead predominantly White casts or diverse, multiracial casts.
Posted 21 Feb 2009 at 9:02 pm ¶
David Cone wrote:
@ Evie,
I get where you’re coming from, OK? Sure, if the prevailing stereotype of black folks was that we’re smart and competent in the workplace and there was some dumb bunny who wasn’t, sure, you’d be right.
But we both know how stereotypes for non-whites work. And that’s the point.
Again, you ask any white guy that’s working an executive job for a Fortune 500 firm to trade the white stereotype of being “hard-working” for “jumps real high/dances real good,” trust me: he’d obviously find being stereotyped as “hard-working” much more palatable. Come on, now.
Posted 21 Feb 2009 at 11:49 pm ¶
Dinger wrote:
I’m going to disagree with Carmen and AG Holder on this one; I don’t think we as a country are ready to talk about race. Because if were, we would (and we haven’t, and one AG’s speech isn’t gonna change it). What we can do is have private conversations in small groups, where people feel comfortable with each other and can talk candidly without fear of judgment or ulterior motives. I’m going to point out the obvious – these groups are going to be racially homogeneous. And there has to be a real impetus behind these discussions, which, for me, is success. We are living in a more interconnected world, and people who wish to be divisive (how I love that word!) and cling to their -isms should learn that they will be passed over for promotions and earn lower pay.
Posted 22 Feb 2009 at 1:10 am ¶
Elton wrote:
Related Digg article with infuriating comments:
http://digg.com/political_opinion/Talking_About_Racial_Prejudice_A_Nation_of_Cowards
I propose we make a cheat sheet with the most common arguments about racism and summary counterarguments. I’m not saying that answers to racism are short and easy, but I keep seeing the same inane, clichéd statements over and over and over again, on the Internet, in daily conversation, on TV, in movies, etc., especially from deniers of racism who have a fundamental misunderstanding of what racism even is.
I think if there is to be a dialogue on racism, we must require people who don’t know shit about racism, who have never experienced it, who, indeed, benefit from it, to SHUT UP FOR ONCE and let people who have something to say say something instead of having our voices eternally stifled and marginalized. That censorship, in itself, is at the core of the systematized oppression that is racism.
Can we please agree that racism is not just about blacks and whites? Can we agree that racism is not just about you and me as individuals and our personal experiences, but rather, that things exist whether or not we’re personally aware of them? Can we all begin by making sure we’re on the same base about facts like white privilege and the racial injustice integral to the history of the United States?
If we can’t form a basic, fundamental launching pad of factual information about racism in the first place, I’m afraid “discussion” of racism is going to continue to take the form it’s taken for hundreds of years–denial and hypocrisy. “Discussion” will only serve as a way for stereotypes and personal prejudices to become reinforced, swept under the rug, and even more subtle than they have already become.
Posted 22 Feb 2009 at 5:43 am ¶
Reiter wrote:
@ Evie
“Surely, stereotypes about Whites being “hard-working/intelligent/well-educated/wealthy/successful/natural aptitude for the liberal arts ” are just as negative as stereotypes about Asians being “hard-working/intelligent/well-educated/wealthy/successful/natural aptitude for maths and science”.
I am not implying that Whites face comparable racial discrimination to that faced by Asians. I am merely drawing a parallel between the ostensibly “positive” stereotypes about each group.”
—
Stereotypes like these are often bent to serve the purposes of the privileged (ie, whites). It’s stuff like this that allowed certain colleges to try and limit quotas to Asian American student applicants by holding them to higher test scores than whites in entrance exams.
That is, until these schools were caught for their underhanded practices. Their excuse? Well, Asian American students are “supposed to be” smarter and more studious and hard-working than white students. (And, of course, because Asians are “invading” US campuses, especially on the West Coast. A sea of yellow faces in American universities is scary to many white folks, apparently.) Even so-called positive stereotypes are a double-edged sword and can be used against POCs.
As for Obama’s comment concerning his grandmother, I don’t see him throwing her under the bus. On the contrary, I see him painting her as flawed and, thus, human. People are not perfect. His grandmother was not a saint, but she did her best in helping to raise him and that’s what he appreciated about her, is what I gathered from Obama’s statements.
I’m sure most folks can attest to having a relative from an older generation who still adheres to racial stereotypes. My own grandmother (I’m Chinese-American) was not all that fond of my decision to date a white girl a few years back. “White people are dirty. Why can’t you find a nice Chinese girl?” she’d say. People are people, but I still care about grandmother, flaws and all.
Posted 22 Feb 2009 at 10:11 am ¶
gail wrote:
Regarding stereotypes…
Stereotypes are never uniformly positive. They always include a stigmatizing trait. For whites that trait is “racist.” For most white people this is not a desired identity, and their communication behavior—including avoiding conversations about race and racism, or minimizing the importance of ethnic/racial identity—reflects an effort to avoid encountering this stereotype. Race privilege means that most of the time they are successful in their efforts.
Posted 22 Feb 2009 at 11:43 am ¶
Stephanie wrote:
I think you’re right – here in England there’s a lot of promotion of ‘multi-culturalism’ and ‘diversity’ but we need to tackle racism head on. There is a lot of bad feeling in England about racial tension in different parts of the country in different communities. I think although the govt might have had it’s heart in the right place promoting multi-culturalism it has failed in tackling racism head on. As, for example the Macpherson report points out there is still institutional racism within the police force – the attitudes and internalised racism need to be tackled as well as well as promoting diversity and equal opportunities in the police force.
Posted 22 Feb 2009 at 11:45 am ¶
Anonymous wrote:
i just read ?uestlove’s joint that Lola posted (#26), that ish broke my heart. yall need to read it if you haven’t.
Posted 22 Feb 2009 at 3:18 pm ¶
Elizabeth wrote:
Conversation about race is important as long as it’s conversation. I live in a very diverse community where people are accused of being racist if you disagree with the minority (which is actually the majority) power structure. Too often conversation breaks down to “you’re so racist…no I’m not”.
Posted 22 Feb 2009 at 8:53 pm ¶
NancyP wrote:
Sometimes people forget to address the subconscious component of racism that fits under the general categories of “fear of the unknown” and “need for feeling in-group cohesion, expressed as hostility to out-group”. Many white people have sufficiently little social experience with people of other races that the unending stream of crime stories featuring blacks (or Hispanics) becomes their mental image of “black people”, leading to, or reinforcing previously learned, fear. Those with more experience may consider themselves less racist because they have decided in their conscious minds to do so, but will still have immediate reactions reflecting socially transmitted fear as well as “natural”* fear of the unknown.
There are some ongoing psychological studies testing immediate reactions that do show some disconnect between conscious and subconscious attitude in dealing with “other group” interactions as measured by split-second association of head-and-shoulders passport-style photos with words having good or bad associations. (I know, obvious!).
It takes a long time to *unlearn* subconscious prejudice, as opposed to
1. becoming sufficiently familiar with individuals from the group of prejudice that the fear response is gone
2. learning self-censorship by rote (don’t say the n-word, people around me don’t approve)
3. bringing the specific prejudicial reaction to consciousness and noting and censoring it.
Maybe subconscious prejudice instilled early in life can’t be unlearned completely.
BTW, regarding “fear of black men, is it related to clothing?”, I’d say that we take in a large amount of visual and auditory info in a second, and that clothing, body language, and voice can all be matters modifying prejudice in initial reaction.
*which is actually vestigial, compared to immediate reactions of some other mammalian species that are prey species (small omnivores or herbivores). I’d say that we (and other higher primate) as species have likely “been selected for” a wide range and relative balance between fear of unknown and seeking out the unknown.
Posted 22 Feb 2009 at 10:09 pm ¶
Dee Dee wrote:
Nancy, I believe I understand your position on the racial matter. But the truth is that this “fear of the unknown” argument doesn’t seem to fly when considering that the “unknown” group (African Americans) has been present and participating in the American country since it’s very beginning.
It seems to me that many whites have used more of a willful ignorance stance. Or to be perfectly accurate, a “we’ll pretend they don’t even exist” stance. There’s a difference between fearing that which is truly unknown and holding onto prejudices for that which is accessible and fully capable of being known but which challenges your overinflated sense of self and entitlement.
If dress contributes to whites’ racism, then how do you account for the thousands of so-called “well dressed” African Americans who are strip searched in malls, followed around in stores while shopping, sexually assaulted by the police and made to endure unethical and unlawful behavior? Surely their dress should override these nasty circumstances, but alas it does not.
The true question I must ask is why do whites need everyone to look exactly like them for there to be a modicum of respect and dignity in their actions? Blacks, Asians, Hispanics and Native peoples can accept and adjust to those of a different hue. I assume that whites can do the same.
So what excuse is there really?
Posted 23 Feb 2009 at 2:42 am ¶
Nora Regis wrote:
I think part of the problem is people think just because they don’t use slurs or are overtly racist like Obama’s grandma, they aren’t racist. I really think people think like that. Far far too many people have never heard of white privledge. Not only do they not know they’re apart of it, they don’t know even what it is. And often times, people think that its the system but not them on an individual level, which I think results in so many people saying they aren’t racist.
Posted 23 Feb 2009 at 2:53 am ¶
neil wrote:
here’s a link to melissa harris lacewell’s take on the speech: http://princetonprofs.blogspot.com/2009/02/why-eric-holders-race-speech-was.html
i agree with her viewpoint.
Posted 23 Feb 2009 at 11:32 am ¶
deb wrote:
It’s funny how whenever some people are confronted with the uncomfortable topic of race/racism the topic starter gets branded a troublemaker.
Just think: If we all had a dollar for everytime this happened, the nation’s budget woes would be solved.
I think some people want to believe that if we just stopped talking about race/racism, it would go away.
Posted 23 Feb 2009 at 2:55 pm ¶
Brandon wrote:
@ Dee Dee:
NancyP isn’t trying to justify racism. She is simply looking at why people feel subconscious racism. It doesn’t make it OK… but white people need to recognize their own subconscious and “hidden” prejudices before they can change. White people need to understand that it’s there, it’s not OK, and that they CAN do something about it. Psychology keeps demonstrating that the conscious mind can correct the prejudices of the unconscious mind.
That’s not offering up a defense of racism… it’s a blueprint for how to beat it back. It acknowledges that we all have it… and so now what are we going to do about it?
Good link from Great Good magazine on prejudice:
http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/greatergood/2008summer/Fiske351.html
Finally, I can’t believe that you had the audacity to say that POC accept people of different hues as if racism is simply a white problem. Yes, in this country, racism starts with white people… but it certainly doesn’t end there.
Posted 23 Feb 2009 at 3:05 pm ¶
Dee Dee wrote:
@Brandon
Maybe you misunderstood me. I wasn’t saying that racism is simply a white problem. I was responding to Nancy’s statements concerning white racism and that is why I chose to position my response in that manner.
However, when viewing racism from a power structure and examining who it has benefited time and time again, I’m alarmed that you want to equate the racism of POC with the racism of whites.
I don’t believe it was POC who fashioned someone like myself as 3/5 of a person in the original U.S. Constitution. I don’t believe it was POC who used “science” to try and prove their racist bias against the mental capabilities of certain groups and then use this as an excuse to dismiss them in the classroom and the workplace. I don’t believe it has been POC who have continued to treat certain groups as less than during medical examinations EVEN when they fit economically into middle and upper middle class categories.
From my point of view racism has been about power. To try and equate biases and prejudices of POC, with the racist policies that whites have implanted firmly into this countries makeup is to severely skew the source of the problem.
When has the “racism” of a person of color caused a white person to be denied work, housing, proper medical care, educational opportunities or equitable treatment within the justice system?
Are you seriously going to tell me that the playing field has been equal? Now is NOT the time for denial!
Posted 23 Feb 2009 at 4:09 pm ¶
NancyP wrote:
I am not addressing the obvious historical racism in my comment. I am interested in how racism is learned, if there are any “temperament” characteristics that affect that process, and how racism can be unlearned. Brandon has my intention right – what is the best approach for whites to become conscious of already learned racism, how does one keep a child from absorbing racism in the environment, and so on. Racism per se is not inherited, although we inherit a “social instinct” to form groups, a perceptual apparatus capable of quick recognition of human physical similarities and differences, ability to mirror emotion of another (which can be turned into empathy), and may well inherit some tendency toward a specific place on the spectrum of fear vs attraction to out-group humans. Can the discipline of social psychology provide different strategies for teaching fearful people or people who simply aren’t curious about those people outside their own group?
This all falls into the category of working on one’s own problem.
I have some interest in the topic because I am aware that I am sufficiently different from the majority of other people that I am prone to misunderstand and miscommunicate with (and v.v.) certain other personality types. I am shy in person (used to be pathologically shy), tend to seek out the unfamiliar for intellectual contact, poor at reading emotion (less so now), not very emotional person so I have to think out situations – how will the other person react? Put me together with an impulsive and emotionally intuitive type, and there’s bound to be some confusion. At any rate, to me it would seem likely that different people need different ways to unlearn racism.
Posted 23 Feb 2009 at 10:36 pm ¶
NancyP wrote:
Re: clothing
We humans pick up on a lot of detail about another human in the first second of seeing/hearing him/her/zie. We are pretty much wired to have *some* sort of immediate response: avoid, ignore, seek. We don’t have an instinctual filter for making those snap decisions (aside from the obvious response “get out of the way” when anyone or anything approaches you at high speed). So, how is the filter acquired, how is it modified to fit real life threats, opportunities, neutral noise?
The sales clerk, at a posh suburban “oriental” rug store, who followed and gave the evil eye to a middle-aged, somewhat boringly (ie, age-appropriate) dressed deliberative black man*, missed an opportunity to sell to a possibly serious (and certainly well connected) customer (*Prof. Gerald Early of Washington Univ. St. Louis, Plaza Frontenac Mall, 7 or 8 years ago, documented for our civic embarrassment in our local paper the Post-Dispatch).
I suppose this would be most properly directed to the webmistresses, but how do you train people to act right? (Thinking right would be nice, but acting right in situation X ought to be an achievable short-term goal.) A lot of people view workplace diversity training as an opportunity to fall asleep.
Posted 23 Feb 2009 at 11:26 pm ¶
Dee Dee wrote:
@ NancyP In reference to your statement –
Racism per se is not inherited, although we inherit a “social instinct” to form groups, a perceptual apparatus capable of quick recognition of human physical similarities and differences, ability to mirror emotion of another (which can be turned into empathy), and may well inherit some tendency toward a specific place on the spectrum of fear vs attraction to out-group humans.
I fully understand that your intention is not to address the historical racism but I’m not sure if the psychological rationale fully makes sense in the present day. When you consider that people in the ancient world didn’t have hang-ups around race but were aligned religiously, ethnically, nationally or for reasons of warfare (i.e. Atilah, the Hun) you can begin to glean the absolute evil genius of what has happened in present day.
Exploration, conquering of lands and conquest always brought different groups of people together. These people had to overcome language barriers, religious differences and learn new modes of technology in order to truly begin to “understand” one another. Yet in today’s society, we have a relatively easy access to many different types of people through work, commutes, community outlets and the like. I know for myself personally, that engaging in inquisitive conversation has allowed me a glimpse into the lives and insights of people who are different from me. So it would seem that the desire to place someone on the the fear end of the spectrum would require an immediate and palpable threat to one’s safety in a highly rationale world.
In addition, if we are to speak about psychology, there seems to be a four-pronged mode for questioning how racism comes about. (I’m sure there are probably a hundred prongs but work with me.) The first would be, How, where and when did I learn this mode of thought about certain individuals? The second would seem to be, What is it that I believe about myself that allows me to accept those stereotypes/racist beliefs so readily? A possible third and fourth could be What fears am I projecting onto the other group(s)?</i? and If I have no curiosity about this group, is it possible that I believe that I know everything there is to know about them (i.e. do I think them to be simple or complex).
I’m no expert in psychology, but I think that the adamant belief in duality can only continue to perpetuate our problems. Even within all of the beautiful differences commonality and similarities can be found. Goals and ideals can be shared. Maybe we can realize that we are ultimately reflections of one another.
Posted 24 Feb 2009 at 3:20 am ¶
G.K. wrote:
@Smudge
FYI, Obama didn’t throw his grandma under the bus—as much as he clearly loved her, he was calling her out on her racism—keep in mind that he was talking about growing up in segregated Kansas in the 1960’s—his grandma was scared of black men PERIOD, it didn’t matter HOW they were dressed. And she was talking about men that looked like HIM, so of course that was disturbing—even his grandfather thought so,enough to apologize to him for it. Exactly how the hell was that throwing her under the bus? You really don’t know what you are talking about. And except for the paranoid comments about AIDS, Rev. Wright didn’t say anything a lot of black folks (myself included) have felt for years—and he had every right to say whatever he wanted to say, considering that he’s a veteran and had to deal a lot of predjudice back in his day. BTW, white people also go to his church, so how can you still call him a racist? There’s nothing delusional about anything he said, it’s the truth considering how this country has treated black folks/folks of color from the moment we set foot here. Only white people who are ignorant of this country’s true despicable history toward its non-white citizens (and live in an all-white neighborhood/city/state/world where they have the privilege of never having to question or challenge their worldview) would find what he said even remotely troubling or reactionary. Just goes to show you how we live in complete and separate worlds most of the time. (BTW, at least half the white activist folks in the group I protest with agree with what he said).
Posted 24 Feb 2009 at 8:12 pm ¶
NancyP wrote:
Dee Dee, I assume that the majority of whites don’t think about the existence of racism and don’t find it odd to be in an employment situation or social circle that is 99% white. These people aren’t motivated to think about racism – they don’t perceive that there is a benefit to themselves in immediate practical terms (jobs, neighborhood improvement projects, whatever). Often it’s merely an “out of sight, out of mind” phenomenon. How does one get this group of people interested?
A smaller group of whites, for whatever reason (curiosity, proximity at work or in neighborhood, abstract desire to do the right thing, relative dating person of different race, etc.), are inclined to learn about racism.
I think that we can agree that human beings in general do not behave in a highly rational manner, especially as regards “snap decisions”. I think that there can be a gap between the abstract belief that “racism is a bad thing” and actually behaving in a non-racist fashion consistently. My interest in social psychology as a way to look at the learning and unlearning of racist belief and practice is pedagogical. How do we change? What’s the most effective means?
Your “four prongs” sound like a good start.
Maybe there’s some good timing to my rambling on about this – it’s a few hours to Ash Wednesday.
Posted 25 Feb 2009 at 12:04 am ¶
Attorney at LOL wrote:
As a white person doing less than my share of anti-racist work, I absolutely agree. I was taught as a child to go, “Who, moi?” at accusations of racism and take them as personal attacks. I’m now 22 years old and I am sad to say that I only learned in the last few weeks how not to be insane about being accused of saying racist things.
But we have such a culture of deeply-ingrained racism, and such a culture of individualization (”I have to prove that [i]I[/i] am one of the good guys”, “why can’t [i]he[/i] get a well-paying job? Why is [i]he[/i] so lazy?”), that, IMO, it’s going to take years of public conversation about race and racism for many of us to start to “get it”. And public conversation about the issues is so hard precisely because those of us who have learned to parrot the classic quasi-apologies sometimes honestly believe that racism is over.
It’s a Catch 22: we deny the reality of racism because we haven’t listened to the real story, but we can’t hear the real story because we deny the reality of racism. We must evolve past empty platitudes…but damn if I know how.
Posted 25 Feb 2009 at 6:38 am ¶
Lisa J wrote:
@GK, cosign on your Rev Wright comments. I had an arguement with a friend who used that tired “Obama sat in a racist church for 20 years crap” and tried to tell her he was making a foreign policy and larger critque, but she would have none of it. Rev Wright and Father Pfleger were both right on the money. At first I was mad a O-man for distancing himself from the Rev but I came around and got the fact that he could not win if he didn’t. And for the record I HATE the term “throwing someone under the bus”. Where did that even come from? Now everyone says it all the time. Grrr
Posted 25 Feb 2009 at 11:39 am ¶
G.K. wrote:
@Lisa J
Thanks! Now, Rev. Wright did make it clear in his interview with Bill Moyer that he understood why Obama had to break ties with him, so he wasn’t even upset about that whole matter. I like Father Pfleger,too—-I laughed at his whole calling-out of Clinton becuase THAT was the truth also—-as usual, a whole lot of white folks didn’t want to hear it, so they called him all kinds of racists and he even got called the “white Rev. Wright” on YouTube.
BTW, here’s some info as to where “throwing someone under the bus” originated from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Throw_under_the_bus
Posted 25 Feb 2009 at 9:36 pm ¶
Nathan wrote:
@GK
“BTW, white people also go to his church, so how can you still call him a racist? ”
I agree with you on the Reverend Wright matters, but are you sure that’s the way you want to phrase the defence? “I’m not a racist, I have black friends” is pretty much the same rhetorical device.
Like I said, I agree with you. Just think its worth pointing out that may not be the argument you want to pull out in a debate, cause that could spin bad on you.
Posted 25 Feb 2009 at 10:19 pm ¶
Lisa J wrote:
@GK, thanks for the link. I did see the Bill Moyers interview and that started to be the turning point for me getting over being mad at Obama. Though I didn’t like that Obama further distanced himself from the Rev.
Posted 26 Feb 2009 at 11:45 am ¶
Spinster wrote:
Excellent post.
Posted 28 Feb 2009 at 6:51 pm ¶
Spinster wrote:
And by the way, I can definitely acknowledge having racist/prejudiced thoughts…… against EVERYONE. I’m at a point in my life, however, where I can understand that it’s irrational and quickly correct it.
Eric Holder was spot on.
Posted 28 Feb 2009 at 6:55 pm ¶