Newly Minted

Newly Minted
Right after I was hooded

Monday, January 11, 2010

Oh Harry...and other random tangents

I am watching MSNBC's Morning Joe, my husband watches so I watch against my will. In the process of reviewing the new book Game Change: Behind the 2008 Election, Harry Reid's comments were front and center. Morning Joe had the good Reverend Sharpton on this morning talking about the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's racialized indiscretion. Sigh... The allegation leveled by the republican co-host is that both the President and the good Reverend consistently forgive democrats for their racialized indiscretions; while someone like Imus is held accountable for his racism. Reverend Sharpton tried to argue that what Reid said, and was forgiven, could not be compared to what Imus said, which was unforgivable. Granted, I am at the beginning of my new relationship with the word Negro, but how in any context is what Reid said...forgivable. I cannot tell others what to forgive, but Joe gave a really good argument that might call both the White House and the NAACP to better examine their 'forgiveness policies'.

I may be missing the point on ALL of this, but why isn't anyone talking about why our President has to make the decision to forgive anyone at all? Morning Joe actually said at one point "Reverend, shouldn't you be more concerned about what those in your own party are saying". The reverend's response, honestly, made absolutely no sense to me but he ended it saying something like "I am concerned...he [Reid] consistently ends up on the right side of important issues..." So saying racialized things about our President is apparently not an "important issue". Moving on...

What President Obama endures as a man of color and the first black president; in particular a mixed race multicultural black president, is heart breaking to me. The reason I specifically mention Obama's mixed race and multiculturalism is because of the particular way those of us who occupy that socio-racial location are called on to be that bridge and to be the forgivers. My empathy for the president comes from being that bridge myself. One day I told my husband I wished I had become a botanist. Many days I feel battered. I study race. I teach race. I mediate race. and I live race. Flowers would just be less painful and less personal. I know what it is like, as do most people of color in social/political positions, to choose moving forward over personal social justice. Why don't we say "America, we are killing this man" or a simple "knock it off it is 2010 damn it". And Reverend Sharpton, I am talking to you too.

It seems to be endless, and I really need to turn the TV off, but I can't. At one point Morning Joe offered up a quote from Bill Clinton to Senator Kennedy; something like "a few years ago this guy would be getting our coffee" wherein Clinton is alleged to be referring to Obama. Even Blagojevich got some play with his comment "I am blacker than Barack Obama" which was simply dismissed by Morning Joe, because...well, "it's Blago". I had to get off my elliptical and throw up. This weird framing of these comments and the lack of empathy for President Obama's emotional well being? If I am throwing up, what is he doing? AND DON'T suggest he has or needs to have a thick skin. Thick skin can only protect the soul from spears that are unable to pierce that skin. Thick skin can only keep you from bleeding in public.

According to the online news magazine Daily Beast(thedailybeast@e.thedailybeast.com)"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid engaged in some serious damage control Saturday, after a leaked passage in an upcoming book said he called Barack Obama a "light-skinned" African American who lacked a 'Negro dialect.'" The good Reverend's position is that within the context of Mr. Reid's entire comment this was not the racialized indiscretion republicans are trying to make it out to be. Lawrence O'Donnell, who suggested playing a tape of Jesse Jackson and Obama to see if there was a difference. "We would hear a certain "black cadence", and Pat Buchanan appear to agree with Rev. Sharpton. Maybe racialized statements about our President is the only place our politicos can build consensus? I need to tell you that my position, since I am not invited on national TV (probably a good thing), is that this comment and all the other comments President Obama has endured - including a few from our black leadership if I am not mistaken - are not okay.

More soon...

Sunday, January 10, 2010

The 2010 Census, Negros, and Me

Apparently I stand corrected, at least on my initial reaction to the "Negro" category. It would seem that a) there is a portion of our community that does prefer "Negro" as a self identifier; and b) that most Americans do not find "Negro" offensive or are not sure if it is offensive as evidenced in the online poll below.

POLL - Do you think the term “Negro” on U.S. Census forms is offensive?(1159)
(42.28%) YES - It's offensive
(43.49%) NO - It's acceptable
(14.24%) I'm not sure

http://www.thegrio.com/2010/01/the-word-negro-in-2010-census-form-offends-some-blacks.php

I have had some fantastic conversations in the last three days about the census form. I for one am still overwhelmingly upset. I get a knot in the pit of my stomach every time I think about it; not the word per se, but the power that I believe this word will give racism at the local level. I imagine, as a student affairs professional, the following scenario:

A young person of color ends up in my office via judicial affairs. There has been a fight and in this fight the student of color has physically assaulted a white student. Upon further investigation we find out that the student of color alleges that the white student had uttered a racial epithet which resulted in the physical assault.

I have experienced this scenario over and over; both at the institution I work at and with my own sons. Different interpretations of the law, and application, have yielded different results legally. What I can say is, regardless of consequence, every incident has deemed racial epithets unacceptable AND inciteful.

How and where do we locate "Negro" when that is the word that was used in the above scenerio instead of "Nigger". I tread softly here as I have heard compelling reasons NOT to blithely connect those two words. However, my initial reaction and that of most of my peers suggests that the interpretation of "Negro" by the bottom three generations might well equal the interpretation of the word "Nigger". What I am certain of is that we don't want to create a social acceptance of generally calling people of color "Negro". But, now that the United States Government has reintroduced "Negro" as an acceptable term, in a way it has not been since about 1960, can we stop "Negro" from sliding over into contemporary and acceptable linguistics.

A wise woman, a couple generations ahead of me in her life journey, pointed out a couple important facts about the word "Negro". First, that her own birth certificate lists "Negro" as the race of herself and her parents. Second, Martin Luther King's (as well as other civil rights writers) writings use the word "Negro" as an acceptable term. If nothing else I have come to see this conversation/debate/concern as an intergenerational one. I tip my hat to the generations before me who have seen things and endured things that I never have. I do live in fear, however, that in my or my children's lifetimes we may suffer those same events again. Going back in time strikes me as a particularly dangerous proposition for the Black, African Am., or Negro community.

The one thing I will NOT take my claws out of, regardless of the excellent reasons offered by my mentors and peers for including "Negro" in teh 2010 Census, is that congress made this choice in relative secrecy. I am completely unable to find any mention of this move to add "Negro" to the 2010 Census before about January 4... 2010. I am talking about a popular culture, quasi-political, media trail of this conversation/debate; like the one we usually see when race intersects with social behavior and/or consequence. I am unable to find mention of the bill passing in congress; let alone any mention of a public/private or legal debate about the matter. I also am unable to find mention of the study that produced the data that is loosely referred to in the Census Bureau's response to inquiry in the past week. This I am not going to accept. The addition of "Mixed Race" or "Other" to the 2000 Census was public and unavoidable.

All I am asking is who had the conversation preceding the inclusion of the "Negro" on the 2010 Census? Who are we representing in the addition of "Negro"? Finally, if the intention is to make sure more people are represented accurately and in a way that compels them to self-report via census why do I have to write in my racial identity - Mixed Race, still, because it is not represented on the Census and never will be. Mixed race is NOT acceptable. Negro is???? Apparently myself and my family don't deserve the same representation in the counting of brown bodies as those who identify as "Negro" and I want to know WHY!

More soon...