Links – 2009-03-12
The American Prospect – NAACP Takes a Stance Against Prop 8
The NAACP has been walking a tightrope on gay rights. Polls show that African Americans overwhelmingly oppose gay marriage, but much of the high-level leadership of the nation’s oldest civil-rights organization opposes legal efforts to deny gays the right to marry. Last week, the national office of the NAACP leapt into the fray when it sent a letter to California legislators urging them to support legislation that would repeal Prop. 8. After meeting with the National Black Justice Coalition, a black LGBT-rights group, and the leadership of the California State Conference, NAACP Chairman Julian Bond and NAACP President Ben Jealous agreed to come out publicly in support of repealing Prop. 8.
I still ask myself how I finally broke out. Jamal, the slumdog in Danny Boyle’s award-winning movie, did it the traditional cinematic way, via true love, guts and good luck. People keep praising the film’s “realistic” depiction of slum life in India. But it’s no such thing. Slum life is a cage. It robs you of confidence in the face of the rich and the advantaged. It steals your pride, deadens your ambition, limits your imagination and psychologically cripples you whenever you step outside the comfort zone of your own neighborhood. Most people in the slums never achieve a fairy-tale ending.
The Washington Post – Top Officials Expand the Dialogue on Race
Nearly six in 10 Americans said Obama’s presidency will do more to help race relations in this country, according to a January Washington Post-ABC News poll. But whites and African Americans start out with widely divergent views on the racial climate in the country. Overall, about three-quarters of those surveyed called racism a problem in society today, with one-quarter labeling it a “big” problem. Twice as many blacks (44 percent) as whites (22 percent) called it a big problem.
Shapely Prose – On Squeaky Wheels
Kate recently defined privilege as “the luxury of not thinking about it much,” which I think is perfect. One of the consequences of privilege, then, is that if you want people to be inclusive of you, you often have to remind them that you exist. It sucks to have to do this all the time, which is part of why so many people — particularly those struggling to understand their own privilege — confuse privilege with prejudice or ignorance. Even if you’re not actively oppressing those who lack the privileges you have, you are oppressing them by failing to consider them part of the status quo, by requiring them to make explicit requests for basic representation or consideration. We need to be aware of that when it comes to the privileges we have — do you, by default, consider everybody or only the people whose experiences you find familiar? But when it comes to privileges we lack, it’s worth remembering that as much as it may suck to have to ask explicitly for consideration, you get to ask for it. Even if you’re not a born activist, you can still be an advocate — for others, and just as importantly for yourself.
Shakesville – The Language of Immigration, continued
Last night, Iain and I were talking about yesterday’s thread on immigration, and how he isn’t called (or regarded as) an immigrant, when he made this well-observed point: “Oof coourse I’m noot an immigrant,” he said wryly, with one raised brow. “I’m an ex-pat.”
Such a spot-on observation. In between the disparate uses and meanings of “immigrant” and “ex-pat” (expatriate) falls everything that underlines the racism, classism, and xenophobia of the immigration debate in America.
White, (relatively) wealthy, and English-speaking immigrants are ex-pats, with intramural rugby leagues and dues-drawing pub clubs and summer festivals set to the distant trill of bagpipes.
Non-white, poor, and non-natively English-speaking immigrants are just immigrants.
The Kitchen Table – Chris Brown and Rihanna
March is Women’s History Month and there is no historical thread more consistently visible in tapestry of women’s lives than violence.
I know I am copping out a little by not providing a deep feminist, political analysis of the multiple issues involved and evoked by this celebrity drama, but I am having a very hard time writing about this issue. Instead of analyzing I am just admitting that it is hard, that it hurts, and that I am exhausted and angry that black women must watch a young sister be beaten. I am pissed that other men are brokering the mending of this relationship (P. Diddy apparently had the couple in his home to talk and reconcile). And I am devastated that Rihanna’s soul and spirit are so broken that she is returning to her abuser.
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
Ugly Deaf Muslim Punk Gurl! wrote:
Regarding the Slumdog link, so true. I’m almost done reading a fantastic book called THE WHITE TIGER by Aravind Adiga, about a lower caste, angry Indian cab driver in Delhi who hates rich, upper caste Indians. I think it’s much more authentic than Slumdog Millionaire.
check it out if anyone is interested in Indian culture or loves Indian literature.
Posted 12 Mar 2009 at 12:16 pm ¶
PPR_Scribe wrote:
I have been pondering this move by the NAACP. Although I am encouraged by it (as well as other recent high profile statements by veterans of the Black Civil Rights Movement) I wonder what effect it will have on larger attitudes. The NAACP has been questioned about its “relevance” for years now. Many still have a “wait and see” attitude about the new president of the organization. Also, I have heard a perception in some quarters that the organization and other big name Civil Rights figures are “caving in” to some (mythical) powerful and monied LGBT cabal forcing them into political correctness…
I suspect there would be greater impact if major Black youth-oriented organizations and younger Black public figures would come forward in an organized and high profile way about marriage equity and other issues related to LGBT rights.
Posted 12 Mar 2009 at 12:34 pm ¶
Donald wrote:
Skin whitening and Asians might reveal why some feel the way they do about black Americans. From Nat Turner’s Revenge.
http://natturnersrevenge.blogspot.com/2009/03/why-some-asian-south-asians-dump-on.html
Posted 12 Mar 2009 at 12:41 pm ¶
Notebook wrote:
On the topic on Chris Brown/Rihanna, I’ve pretty much had to take a break from all of it, especially discussing it on other forums [although that in itself may have not been a good idea to begin with]. Being accused of being a “wannabe/quack therapist spewing nonsense” just because you say that domestic abuse is a complex topic that involves more than abusees “being stupid” and getting ganged up by others is really soul-defeating, though I probably should’ve expected it. What’s worse is that said person kept claiming that he “knew everything about abuse” and then when I tried to call him on it accused me of saying the same thing when I never even claimed anything like that. It was almost as if he pretty much wanted to reject any kind of definition of domestic abuse outside his own, limited view.
Chances are, that may have been the case.
It’s hard to see so many people fall for the myths about domestic abuse. Sometimes trying to fight against it seems impossible. I know I’m just a black male, but seeing other black men encourage this type of behavior is just sickening, especially when they blame the woman. It’s just soul draining. While I wasn’t the world’s most optimistic person, I still had some hope that the world could change, but after all this I really wonder if world really can change at all.
Posted 12 Mar 2009 at 1:39 pm ¶
Fiqah wrote:
@Notebook: You poor thing! Other forums = viper pits. People do not go on them to engage in intelligent debate. They go to sound off and/or pick fights, and if you get two comments with half a bit of sense out of 500, then it’s a “smart thread.” ::: shakes head ::: No thanks. I like it here, where the comments are intelligent – even brilliant – and the Editrix regulates.
Posted 12 Mar 2009 at 2:45 pm ¶
Jess wrote:
On the immigration link, I think a distinction that should be made is that expatriates, for the most part, go home.
I worked in a group of expats, and while not all of them go home, a significant fraction — controlling for age and marital status, among other things — do.
An immigrant, buy contrast, plans to make whatever country his home. That’s a different commitment than an expat makes. I was an expat in England, as I never planned to live there permanently. Had I planned to do so I’d probably have had a different attitude towards the culture and language and everything else. But I never felt particularly rooted there, and as importantly, did not allow it to happen. And many of those from England (mostly) I used to work with in NYC all had the idea that they’d go home eventually. A few got green cards, but overall not all that many.
People who plan to immigrate are going to learn the language, raise kids, and do all that other stuff that makes you part of whatever society you are in (I realize that nonwhites especially might be excluded in any number of ways, but they still have to pay taxes, send the kids to school, go to work and take the bus just like everybody else — unless you are Amish you can’t really separate from the society at large).
The line isn’t a bright one, as some expats do end up as immigrants, though I’ve usually only seen it happen if they marry someone. Those are also people who are more serious about learning the language and culture.
But until very recently, if you came from a poorer country than the US, say India or the Philippines, or even Ireland, (we tend to forget Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Greece were so much poorer back in the 60s and 70s that they were often classed with the developing world) you probably weren’t going back. That was the whole point, as it were.
One big change for more recent arrivals is that travel to other countries has become cheaper in real terms. Expensive as it is to get here from, say, Asia (which automatically selects out certain groups — really poor people haven’t got the money for tickets) it is nowhere near the relative cost of a ship journey to Europe circa 1930.
[A $200 3rd-class steamship ticket from Europe would be the equivalent of $2500 today, and you had to pay for your food for three weeks to a month aboard ship, making it more like $3,000 in today's money. A plane ticket from Mumbai is a third of that, sometimes less.]
Cheaper travel/ communications changes the dynamic a lot, I think, as immigration is no longer the one-way only journey it used to be.
In that sense, it seems to me that the language simply hasn’t caught up to reality yet. Expats are no longer solely those doing stints from the US, UK, or France for some company that will send them home later. They could be from China, India, or Brazil these days too. And coming from, say, Brazil no longer automatically means you want to stay in the US. Especially if you are one of the guys who makes loads working for a big multi-national.
There’s simply a huge gap between relatively privileged white-collar workers — such as the Wall Street analysts I used to know (who came from a wide variety of places) — and the guys who I see scrubbing windows or the women who work in hotels. Much of the language we use doesn’t capture that.
Posted 12 Mar 2009 at 6:10 pm ¶
Onely wrote:
Muslim Punk Girl,
I put The White Tiger on my list, thanks.
Re. Slumdog, I’ve been wondering why fewer people are talking about how the movie basically downgraded Latika to a chronically victimized woman who even at the very end is saved by Jamal–when in the book she actually becomes a lawyer and saves *him*. So here the book was less realistic than the movie, but I think that the movie would have sent a more powerful message if it had allowed Latika to be more empowered, the way she was in the book. I mean, if they are going to make Jamal unrealistically successful in his ascension out of the slums, they might as well give that same kind of unrealistic victory to Latika too, *especially* because the original book did! But the moviemakers committed the double sin of unrealism AND sexism. Wheeeee! Looks like Oscar time to me!! –Christina at Onely
Posted 12 Mar 2009 at 9:49 pm ¶
Nathan wrote:
The link about the term expat is great and very true. Australians are a bit more sour on the term after long history of ‘whinging pom’ English immigration/emigration/immigration cycles, but it, and it’s distinctions, are still there.
I can’t think of a time I’ve heard of an arrival from the subcontinent or East Asia referred to as an ex-pat, but its certainly a term claimed by a lot of first-generation English immigrants. Of course, I want to be careful treading here, because there are a LOT of stereotypes in play in regards to that English immigration that messes around with perception (and I should avoid giving voice to my brooding resentment of the English).
Oddly though, I can’t really recall my mother (American-born) ever being referred to as immigrant or ex-pat. Maybe because she was from America, maybe because she was married to an Australian man. The persistent American accent has earned her the evil eye more than her fair share over the last decade though.
Posted 12 Mar 2009 at 10:39 pm ¶
Joyce wrote:
Jess, you make a good point about the distinction that most ex-pats go home, whereas immigrants usually intend to stay. It is, most likely, that very reason, that “immigrant” has much more negative connotations than “ex-pat”, although many would probably not be able to articulate it on that level.
The usage of “ex-pat” is not restricted to Western countries, though. Having spent quite a bit of time in Asian countries, more specifically I encountered the term “ex-pat” for the first time in Taiwan, that term carries over to those countries as well. It’s most likely a self-imposed category, meaning, since most of the people from the so-called Western countries have their own little sub-community in Asian countries (as tends to happen with people in new and unfamiliar environments), they use the term quite freely and consider themselves as such, because they’re usually living in said Asian countries for business reasons. (Wow, that was a long and confusing last sentence. Apologies.)
I do also want to make the distinction that as the term was used in Taiwan, it was used to refer to anyone from European countries (e.g. Germany, Switzerland), not just the English-speaking countries.
Funnily enough, I never heard the Asian people who were there for business reasons refer to themselves, or be referred to, as ex-pats. I’m thinking specifically of a Korean businessman and a Japanese businessman I knew. When referred to, it was always clarified they were in Taiwan because their company sent them there, thus getting back to the distinction between being an immigrant and an ex-pat, but the term “ex-pat” never came into the mix at all when speaking to or about them.
Posted 13 Mar 2009 at 1:31 am ¶
Jess wrote:
@Joyce — might be that there is a term equivalent to “ex-pat” in Japanese that the folks you met don’t use because in English it wouldn’t translate?
For instance, the very term “expatriate” hasn’t got an equivalent in Russian– they just use the (Russianized) English/French cognate (French expatrie). So maybe if you delved a bit deeper they’d agree, but it may just not be something that crossed their minds automatically. (?) I don’t know if you were operating in Japanese, Chinese or English.
I could see how the word would get used on Europeans a lot, tho.
Ayhoo, another interesting thing about expatriates generally is that they tend to be a privileged group. There’s only a small segment of the working population that is in a position to get sent somewhere else to work (and go home), and they aren’t sending janitors.
Posted 13 Mar 2009 at 8:49 am ¶
Rchoudh wrote:
Re: expats and immigrants- I find it interesting how some Americans regard H1-B workers as immigrants, even though the visa is meant to be temporary thereby designating such workers as ex-pats rather than immigrants. While some H1-B workers may later on decide to apply for the green card that’s not the case for all of them. So why aren’t the ones who don’t plan to stay in America forever regarded as expats? Because to most Americans they’re suspected of secretly wanting to settle in America, even if they say they don’t plan to. And also H1-B workers are usually stereotyped as being all Asians.
Re: Slumdog article. I found that particular Newsweek article to be interesting and unique in that it highlighted one person’s journey which mirrored that of Slumdog Millionaire’s storyline. I’m glad he pointed out that majority of slumdwellers never get to live out their dreams in reality because of the harsh circumstances surrounding slum life (in case anyone out there really believed that to get out of slum life all a person had to do was dream big and get out through their hard work and determination). As far as Latika being portrayed as the damsel in distress…that’s mainstream cinema for you. Keep storylines as simple as possible with the same recurring themes surrounding characters who are not white males.
Posted 13 Mar 2009 at 6:15 pm ¶
pmb wrote:
Re: ex-pat/immigration – A friend of mine is from India living in the US for over 10 years. She was told by other Indian ex-pats to never let anyone know how long she was going to stay in the US. The implication – once “they” know you are staying for good, they treat you differently.
I’ve heard that from others, too.
Posted 14 Mar 2009 at 8:26 am ¶
lucy wrote:
In defence of Slumdog Millionaire, I read one interpretation of it that I really liked. Yes, the ‘destiny’ thing is unrealistic. Completely magical, requires a series of ridiculous coincidences…etc.
But…in this depiction is it actually quite an interesting subversion of the ‘bootstraps’ cliche? Wherein a plucky hard-done-by character lets us know that you can achieve anything you want if you really want to and have the drive to do so. Is that story (completely opposite to Slumdog’s destiny theory in its dependence on individualism rather than wider forces) really much more realistic?
Posted 15 Mar 2009 at 5:50 pm ¶
PatrickInBeijing wrote:
@Jess, I generally agree with your comments. Some of us weren’t sent, but found our ways. My income is similar to a local person with the same skills, and quite different from those who consider themselves expats.
@Joyce, for me, expat is the negative term, not immigrant. See below….
Personally, I hate the term ex-pat and don’t consider myself “one”. The term reeks of imperialism (British, since that it is the language), and conjurs images of wealthy Europeans completely separated (by their choice!!!) from the cultures they are living in and exploiting.
In modern Beijing (and I am asking for trouble here, hehehe), I think of people who call themselves “expats” as those who see themselves as superior to the local folks (Ummm, Chinese, if this was not clear) based on some imaginary thing or another.
They are usually ready to tell local folks that everything they think and know is wrong, and the correct way of doing things is the way things are done in the expats home countries. (At this point, we begin to argue, often politely.)
(Fortunately, I stay away from such folks, and walk away from the arguments, though I recall being chased around a campus by two imperialists who were demanding that I say something bad about China. It was almost scary.)
My other image of expats is of the folks who live in segregated communities, with Chinese servants, of course! They touch the local culture as little as possible (once in a while attending a culture event out of a sense of nobless-oblige).
Anyway, the number of expats in China is fairly large, the number of people who consider themselves immigrants is smaller. The local folks call us all “laowai” (meaning foreigners), and probably don’t distinguish amongst us the way we do (we may be deluding ourselves, though I hope not!).
Americans are, sadly, completely hypocritical about the whole thing. We (as a group) tend to feel that we have the right to travel freely and live where we will, but that others do not (certainly in regards to our home country). Amazing, really, sometimes I wonder that I can walk and chew gum at the same time…. (err, on second thought, not sure I can).
Posted 17 Mar 2009 at 10:06 am ¶