Monday, March 23, 2009

invoke strangely colored people

Look, over there! Aliens of Color!



Do the following statements about race sound familiar to you?


On neighborhood crime: I don’t think it’s a problem with racial profiling or economic disadvantage or whatever other PC nicety we wish to throw around. Someone assaults you, it’s wrong. Cops gotta step up and do their jobs. Communities — black, white, brown, yellow, green, purple, I don’t care… let’s quit making it someone else’s responsibility — gotta come together and step out against these crimes.

On Mozilla's Blackbird browser: I think the last thing the world needs is a browser that supports segregation .. I don’t care if you’re black, white, brown, yellow, purple or green .. anything that promotes the concept that “I’m special simply because I’m (insert color here)” is just stupid.

On the election of Barack Obama: We're going to have a smart president!!! After eight years of Bush, we're going to actually have a smart president! I don't care if he's black, white, yellow, red, brown, or purple with green spots. Competence has returned to the White House. Everyone just be grateful and stop worrying about what color he is.

On "the race problem" in general: If parents now would raise their children with open minds and to accept everyone, no matter their color, religion etc, we could get past these problems. . . . All I’m saying is get over it everyone, black, white, purple, green, gold, brown, yellow, whoever. Martin Luther King is probably turning over in his grave at the way things are handled now, he didnt go about things like they are done today. He didnt show up everywhere someone said something racial and try to draw everyone in the country into it and make it more than what it was.


Who do you suppose is more likely to list groups of people like this--people of color, or white people?

Such multicolored people-listings are scattered all over the Internet, and it only took me a few minutes to Google the above examples. I've also heard this kind of "I don't care if a person is x, y, z or whatever!" statement in conversation many times, and in my experience, it's always white people who do that.

If this form of "colored-people" listing really is a white habit--a common white tendency--then why do a lot of white people do that?

I think the reasons vary, but that it's mostly an effort to avoid discussions of race, and sometimes to shut them down completely.

At her blog The Neon Season, Rachel M. Brown calls this list-making habit "the invocation of strangely colored people." She offers some speculation about why white people make these lists, describing it as an effort "to emphasize just how much they don't care about race."

Yes, these lists are a form of emphasis, aren't they? And again, what's being emphasized is the white person's dismissal of the topic of race.

This rhetorical tactic often functions like another common white expression: "Whatever!" I didn't care for the movie Lakeview Terrace, but there's a great moment where Samuel L. Jackson's character says to the young white neighbor that he's been harassing (and I'll have to paraphrase here), "Yeah, 'whatever, whatever.' You white guys are always saying that, 'whatever!'"

The utterance of "whatever" often accompanies a hand-waving gesture of dismissal, which can be insulting when a white person does it in response to something involving race. And that's one problem with these "x, y, z or whatever" lists of people of color. Not only do they usually include non-existent skin colors that compare identifiable human skin colors to those of space aliens (thereby basically relegating the people themselves to the non-human status of space aliens). They also dismiss both matters of race and the people to whom race actually matters, in part because it often causes them problems.

As Rachel Brown writes, "The invocation of purple, blue, green, or other alien people is offensive for many reasons, including but not limited to the fact that it's completely trivializing, turns a serious and painful topic into a joke, and compares people of color to fictional aliens."

When white people align actual non-white groups with purple and green aliens, they're often also making a claim about themselves, a claim that simply isn't true--that they're "colorblind." As the Internet commenter above wrote in the example about Barack Obama, "I don't care if he's black, white, yellow, red, brown, or purple with green spots. Everyone just be grateful and stop worrying about what color he is." That's pretty close to saying everyone should just ignore what color he is, but almost no one is going to do that.

And why should they? Is it so terrible for Obama to be the color he is, or for other people of color to be the colors they are?

Putting the issue this way brings up one more problem with these dismissive lists that usually include strangely colored people. They imply, paradoxically, that on the one hand there's no reason to even notice racial difference anymore, but then on the other, that there's also something bad about racial difference, which is also why the speaker wishes the whole topic would just disappear. It's often as if the white list-maker is trying to wave away a bad smell in the room, one that he or she thinks no one should be mentioning.

But again, what does that really imply about the racial status of the non-white people who almost always prompt such lists? The problem here is like the problem with telling a black person that you don't even notice that he or she is black. (Oh really? Then why did you mention it? And what's so bad about it, that makes you think it shouldn't even be noticed?)

These white list-makers should realize that, as the Angry Black Woman says more generally about people who claim they're colorblind, their words and actions basically translate to something like this:

I refuse to deal with how our culture and society treats people of color because it makes me uncomfortable. I don’t want to understand how having a different skin color or ethnicity affects other people because that means I would have to think and consider other points of view. What I want is to not have to think. I prefer to believe I live in a fantasy land where no one ever pays attention to skin color, ethnicity, culture, or religion.

In many cases, what white makers of "colored-people" lists are also saying is that the topic of race is getting under their skin, and that's just not necessary. "Since race doesn't matter at all to me," the thinking seems to go, "why are those annoying people making such a big deal about it?" Since most adults who encounter such thinking in children encourage them to learn how to take other people's thoughts and feelings into consideration, it's surprising how many white adults fail to do so when confronted with perspectives on race that differ from their own.

I'll leave the final word on this common white tendency to Kelly Zen-Yie Tsai, who addressed such list-making in the context of the presidential election in her poem "Black, White, Whatever."


64 comments:

  1. Wow...thank you for that perspective. I have to admit I have seen the usage of "strange colours" listed in seemingly anti-racial phrases and I always just thought it would be cool to have polkadotted people or purple people but I never really put the underlying racism and the phrase together until now. Total eye opener!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Macon D says,

    I've also heard this kind of "I don't care if a person is x, y, z or whatever!" statement in conversation many times, and in my experience, it's always white people who do that.

    Another gross generalization that attempts to conflate competing worldviews amongst "white people."

    Why are you so afraid of telling us WHAT KIND of "white people" are educated to do this type of thing?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Glad to have opened your eyes on this, gooblyglob.

    Why do you think I'm afraid of that, Thordaddy? What kind of white people do YOU think are educated to do this type of thing?

    As for me, I think the kind is, you know, "white Americans." We're all "educated" to think race isn't all that significant--to overlook how very significant it actually is, in different ways, in every American life.

    ReplyDelete
  4. i can't tell you how many times my very racist grandmother has used this...i first noticed it when i was telling her about my brother's prom date, and she asked, "well, is she black, white, purple?" i knew the only two colors she was concerned about were the first too--she has a habit of just throwing in an extra color to make it seem like she's not racist, but of course she is--the look on her face after telling her that my brother is with a black girl says it all.

    thordaddy--in case you haven't noticed, this whole blog is called "stuff white people do." that title in itself is a generalization. it doesn't really matter what TYPE of white people do this--if it applies to you, learn from it and change your behavior or understanding; if it doesn't, learn from it and move on.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Fitlhygrandeur says,

    it doesn't really matter what TYPE of white people do this--if it applies to you, learn from it and change your behavior or understanding; if it doesn't, learn from it and move on.

    I'm trying to learn, but no one seems to think what TYPE of white person does this stuff is worth learning.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm trying to learn, but no one seems to think what TYPE of white person does this stuff is worth learning.

    Maybe that's because they've already learned that. The type of white person who does most of the stuff described on this blog is usually someone who has yet to learn that he or she shouldn't be doing it. Occasionally, it's also someone who knows they shouldn't be doing it, but does it anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Good post. The purple people thing always seemed like a put-down to me but I could never say why.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Let them keep talking about blue, green or purple people. It lets me know when to tune out, I try not to listen to racist people any longer than necessary.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Macon D you and everyone that follows this blog should watch these videos:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qra6pcn4AOE&feature=channel_page

    that one is about the American genocide against Indeginious people in America (excludes Hawaii)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5S_044ABAM&feature=channel_page

    This one is about the aftermath from a native americans point of view.

    ReplyDelete
  10. ...and all this time I thought they were just science fiction fans... I'm so disappointed :(

    ReplyDelete
  11. This was an amazing post! I know you didn't intend to be funny, but I had to laugh because I'd seen and heard this but never really noticed it before. I hear the "strangely colored people" thing in my family of origin, a lot. Thank you for the quotes, the perspective, and the analysis. Spot-on.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Wow, thanks for posting this, Macon! I have had it with "colourblind" people trivializing and dismissing my skin colour with that analogy and am so glad that its finally been put into words.

    Also important to note is how this thing only works for POC and not for White people unless it glorifies them (i.e. "her skin was as white as pure snow" or "fresh milk" )it's just so obviously racist.

    ReplyDelete
  13. ive used the color lists in conversation before. probably wont again in the same manner! it certainly isnt because i am afraid to talk about race, or uncomfortable doing so.

    for me, i'd put purple in there because purple is .... REALLY different. more different than the others. and if i dont care if you're the wildly different purple, why would i care if you are black or yellow or brown?

    it feels to me like the usual lose-lose situation when it comes to race. if i say i dont care that im white and your black, well then i must be a racist. but if i say i DO care that im white and your black, well then i must be a racist.

    my skin color is on the outside too. i cant hide it. but it gets tiring having things you do and say interpreted solely upon your skin color without regard to the intention.

    ReplyDelete
  14. the 'strange colors' list does something else too: it reduces racial difference to color. when people invoke this list, its almost as if they are saying that ethnicity, genealogy, language, national origin, culture, history, etc., don't matter, but that racial difference is purely about skin tone and that if everyone could just ignore skin color, then racial difference would cease to exist. the "black, white, purple, etc." list has always bothered me for just that reason -- it isn't just that i am black, but that i have a whole cultural heritage that has been historically dismissed by white people in power. another thing that white people do: assume that black (or brown) is just a skin color.

    ReplyDelete
  15. 2 Erin.

    Yeah, you're in a lose-lose because you carry the privilege of the oppressor in this instance.
    I think it's about acknowledging that your porcelain complexion allows you privilege and caring that privilege is distributed, at times, based on race, ethnicity, class, gender, sex, sexual orientation, etc.

    one of my favorite quotes to try and help white folks get it:
    "I have been performing whiteness, and having whiteness
    performed upon me, since—or actually before—
    the moment I was born. . . . If I have changed the meaning of
    my whiteness, it is inasmuch as I have refused,
    whenever possible, to perform certain versions of it."
    —Ruth Frankenberg

    ReplyDelete
  16. i must say, growing up the youngest in a family of 8 kids, raised well under the poverty level by a single mother, going through periods of life without electricity, running water, or enough food, i havent felt a whole lot of this "white privilege" people talk about.

    but i did grow up with very limited exposure to issues that included race. due in part to the largely homogeneous community we lived in, and mostly to my mothers upbringing. despite living in an area that was 96% white, the people my mother worked with were about 60% non-white and were the same families whose houses we visited and whose children i played with.

    i wonder if humanity can ever reach a point where it isnt assumed that white skin means you've benefited from privilege. that can be just as false as assuming yellow skin means you're smarter and black skin means you're better at basketball. and to me, assuming someone is privileged/smart/stupid/athletic/whatever based on their race alone, is in itself a racist belief.

    ironically, ive been exposed to more racism in the past 18 months, since i moved to a much more racially diverse area, than ever in my life. and the majority of it has been black on white or even black on black racism. for the first time in my life, i've had racist slurs hurled at me, and by people i don't even know.

    all that is to explain why ive begun reading on this and other well known sites that delve into racism issues. because i am now trying to live and raise my own kids in a culture that seems to care more about the color of your skin than the person you are inside. and that goes for both sides.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Welcome Erin, I hope you stick around, and even read some earlier posts here. I recommend the sites on my blogroll as well.

    I'm not surprised that you haven't felt a whole lot of white privilege in your life. Even people much better off financially than you've been don't normally feel it, or think about it--we've been trained not to. It's like men thinking less about the significance of their gender than women do; if it's a set of advantages, rather than disadvantages, we tend not to think about it all that much.

    It sounds like you've suddenly become uncomfortable in your white skin, because it's brought you some negative attention. Interesting, isn't it, that it took negative attention for you to see that, while the relatively positive attention that you've received throughout your life because you're white has not registered for you as attention that you've often received, in part, because you're white.

    Longing for a race-free world can be an important source of hope, but it seems more important and worthwhile to me to realize that we're just not there yet. And that's certainly not because non-white people won't just let the issue of race drop. You may not see it yet, but white people are still the most empowered racial group, and the refusal of many of them to drop the issue, and at times to acknowledge the extents to which it still is an issue, are the refusals that most matter.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Thank you for this post! I've always avoided this phrase... it struck me as trying to present a racially inclusive stance, while actually protesting white people not receiving a perceived advantage/privilege/right that's being granted to another race. (Except we don't need it because we're ALREADY getting it and have been getting it by default for a while, argh. Anyway!) It's good to get more perspective on it.

    Also, I agree with JC about the strange-color list reducing racial differences to just skin color and ignoring cultural influence all together. I think this is where the basic school-taught anti-racism of "it's only skin color, we're all same on the inside" falls apart.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Prior to lambasting Burner culture in your most recent post, you chose to appropriate Burner culture in order to make a cute point. Hypocritical much?

    The heading picture you have used in this post is clearly from Black Rock City, the temporary/recurring site of the Burning Man festival. You have no idea who these people are or why they are wearing what they are wearing.

    Perhaps Burning Man culture is only of interest to you as a straw man, or a whipping post for whatever you think we are, or whatever you perceive our values to be.

    We are a diverse community, not the punchline to your parsimonious jokes. Please take this picture down, or obtain full permission from the people it features. If you can't find them, I'm a BRC Native - I'm pretty sure I can.

    ReplyDelete
  20. BTW, Macon - I am not f*cking around about the picture.

    Feel free to familiarize yourself with our regulations regarding photography.

    http://www.burningman.com/press/pressRandR.html#bmanRR

    ReplyDelete
  21. K V, I found this photo on a random search with Google, and had no idea it's from Burning Man, so no, I don't find the use of it hypocritical. And I didn't "lambast" the totality of Burner culture just to make "some cute point" in another post. I pointed out that what some Burners did was demonstrate a common white tendency; identifying common white tendencies is the main point of this blog. It isn't about producing "parsimonious jokes." I'm bewildered about what you're doing here if you don't even see that, and I implore you to read more carefully.

    As for taking the photo down, I see no good reason for doing that. I'm not using it here in a joking or disrespectful way (it's just a photo of "strangely colored people"), and as with many other images on this blog, it's already on the Internet elsewhere (on flickr), and it's linked to its original source, which my readers can go to by clicking on the photo.

    I see the BM regulations regarding imagery that you linked to state, The name "Burning Man" and all images of the Man, city layout, lampposts, street signs and commissioned theme artwork are protected under copyright and intellectual property laws, and cannot be used for commercial purposes without written permission of Burning Man.

    Is this photo from a "commissioned theme artwork"? It doesn't seem to fit the other other listed. Also, note that there are not ads on this blog--it's not a "commercial" site (ed's photostream doesn't appear to be either).

    ReplyDelete
  22. That second-to-last sentence should read, "It doesn't seem to fit the other listed categories."

    ReplyDelete
  23. The Artist Rights and Responsibilities (toward the bottom of the page, keep reading), clearly state:

    * You have the right to protect the image of your artwork or performance.

    * You have the right to be credited for authorship of your artwork wherever possible in any commercial use of your work, and perhaps to receive a payment.

    * You have the right to enforce copyright and trademark ownership of your unique work.

    * Photographers and videographers should obtain your signature on a release or license in order to make any use of images of your work for commercial purposes. Images used in editorial works (e.g., news or editorial articles) may not require a signed release. However, any image that contains identifying features of Burning Man (e.g., the Man, lampposts, street signs, other art, etc., or where Burning Man has funded the work of art), must also receive permission from Burning Man and/or affected people and artists.
    (The lampposts are CLEAR in this photo - it's how I identified the location)

    * In cases of editorial use, such as news or editorial magazine articles, (that's you, D) Burning Man encourages the media to credit specific artists.

    If you are still unsure whether the use of this photo is unethical, perhaps I can call attention to YOUR appropriation over on Tribe, we'll get the whole neighborhood up in here, and we'll see what the kids all think. You've been warned.


    Your cavalier attitude toward "some" Burners, dismissing us as "white romanticizers," "dipping into other peoples' cultures" in order to distance ourselves from our own "whiteness" just goes to show how very ignorant you are. Have you ever even met a Black Rock Citizen?

    I appreciate the way you are drawing attention to damaging behaviors that people do not generally identify as racist. Cultural appropriation is arguably one of these behaviors.

    At the same time, please appreciate the VAST differences that exist between where you live, and where I live (California - from whence the majority of Burners hail). What looks like appropriation to some well-meaning honky from the midwest may be a genuine reflection of a person's upbringing in LA or SF.

    In other words: No cornfed good ol boy tells me where to put my f*cking Henna. And guess what? some of us can actually speak and read chinese.

    Check yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  24. K V, I think you should check yourself. By that I mean, if you yourself approach other cultures in sincere, knowledgeable, and genuinely respectful ways, then my critique of a common white tendency as apparently enacted by some Burners isn't about you. And if some other Burners do that too, then it isn't about them either. You sometimes seem to speak of Burners as if they're a monolithic group, but although (to answer your question) I've never met a self-identified Black Rock Citizen, I don't see them that way. Those who dismissed the Native American anger described in David Downs' article, though, might get something of value from what I've tried to point out, while those who sincerely listened and reconsidered those apparently appropriative practices probably already know what I've tried to point out.

    Thanks for the further details on photo rights. I understand and sympathize with the desire to avoid ridiculing and otherwise inappropriate use of BM-related imagery. However, I wonder, first of all, if many readers of this blog would even identify the photo accompanying this post as a BM performance. And then, even if they did, if they would see this photo, in the context of this post, as an attempt to ridicule the performers, or anything else related to Burning Man--I doubt it. As I said, they're just "strangely colored people," not people I mean to mock in any way. I actually think the photo is pretty awesome, which is one reason I chose it. I have no interest in dismissing the totality of BM culture.

    I appreciate your earlier offer to seek out these artists so that I can obtain their blessings for the use of this photo. If that was a sincere offer, I'd like to take you up on it, and if they object, I'd be glad to remove it.

    As for getting all the "kids" from Tribe over here to see what they think, that sounds great. I'm not saying that in a "Bring it on!" way. I welcome all readers, especially if they're open minded. But you, and they, needn't feel so threatened--as I said, if they're white and they're willing to be self-aware about that, and about common tendencies likely instilled in them by the broader American social order, and if they're also sincere, knowledgeable, and genuinely respectful when they dip into other people's cultures, then the things I'm pointing out on this blog about common, objectionable white tendencies may well not apply to them. And if they do apply to them, then what's wrong with coming to a better understanding of one's own culturally instilled proclivities?

    ReplyDelete
  25. "K V, I think you should check yourself. By that I mean, if you yourself approach other cultures in sincere, knowledgeable, and genuinely respectful ways, then my critique of a common white tendency as apparently enacted by some Burners isn't about you."

    That's not a bit what you wrote. You defined our community thusly:

    ""Burners"--a particular kind of mostly white folk, and a kind who usually try really hard to get away from their normalized whiteness"

    This is extremely offensive. You claim not to view Burners as a monolithic group, and indeed we are not. But your introduction exposes your bias. You wouldn't make generalizations about "certain kinds of mexican people." You shouldn't make generalizations about "certain kinds of Burners." Especially if you have never met anyone from our city.


    "Thanks for the further details on photo rights. I understand and sympathize with the desire to avoid ridiculing and otherwise inappropriate use of BM-related imagery. However, I wonder, first of all, if many readers of this blog would even identify the photo accompanying this post as a BM performance."

    One did, and that's all it takes.

    " And then, even if they did, if they would see this photo, in the context of this post, as an attempt to ridicule the performers, or anything else related to Burning Man--I doubt it."

    Different colored aliens?? You dont know these people. You don't know why they were dressed that way. You don't know what kind of art they were making. I suspect that if they knew their image was being used on a blog with such a low and uncomplicated view of their city, which they helped to build, they would not be overjoyed.

    "As I said, they're just "strangely colored people," not people I mean to mock in any way. I actually think the photo is pretty awesome, which is one reason I chose it. I have no interest in dismissing the totality of BM culture."

    No. Just the parts you don't understand.

    "I appreciate your earlier offer to seek out these artists so that I can obtain their blessings for the use of this photo. If that was a sincere offer, I'd like to take you up on it, and if they object, I'd be glad to remove it."

    I'll see what I can do.

    "As for getting all the "kids" from Tribe over here to see what they think, that sounds great. I'm not saying that in a "Bring it on!" way. I welcome all readers, especially if they're open minded. But you, and they, needn't feel so threatened--as I said, if they're white and they're willing to be self-aware about that, and about common tendencies likely instilled in them by the broader American social order"


    Here's the thing. I, and many in the burner community, do not identify as white - even though YOU would probably identify us as white.
    This is why "critiques of whiteness" couched in terms of racial theory are interesting to me (and others), because there are so many people out there who can't wait to tell us what we're really thinking. The "broader American social order" is a nonsensical term in places like Los Angeles and San Francisco.

    "and if they're also sincere, knowledgeable, and genuinely respectful when they dip into other people's cultures"

    You still don't get it. If you're raised in a neighborhood of, say Taiwanese or Mexican immigrants (as I was) - you're not "dipping in" to "their" culture when you express it in your tastes, behaviors, speech and sensibilities. It IS your culture. This is a trifling example of the kind of synthesis that has led to a project such as Burning Man.

    I don't expect to be able to explain these nuances fully in this space. But perhaps you would like to become familiarized with some of our customs before telling us all how *desperately* we're trying to escape from ourselves.

    ReplyDelete
  26. "Here's the thing. I, and many in the burner community, do not identify as white - even though YOU would probably identify us as white."

    So you don't have or enact any of those things Macon calls "common white tendencies"? Just because you don't identify as white? What sort of extensive training did you undergo in order to excise from yourself the tendenices installed in white Americans? I'd like to take that course, or retreat, or institute. Sounds to me like some of the Burners did enact some common white tendencies (no matter how much they identify with being "white"), when they planned a Native-themed party and then some of them blew off actual Native objections to it.

    "If you're raised in a neighborhood of, say Taiwanese or Mexican immigrants (as I was) - you're not "dipping in" to "their" culture when you express it in your tastes, behaviors, speech and sensibilities. It IS your culture."

    Hmmm. . . okaaaay. Leaving that problematic appropriation aside, what about when you paint yourself with henna?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Well, uhm, KV, unlike Macon D, I live in the Bay Area (although, I have never attended a Burning Man--the thought of frolicking around in the desert heat for no other reason but to be frolicking in that "ungodly" heat, is not my idea of a fun time or a good use of my time), and have been/am exposed to Burners, and I can confirm that the majority (probably over 90%) of those folks are white--both on the outside and the inside (speaking culturally).

    ReplyDelete
  28. "So you don't have or enact any of those things Macon calls "common white tendencies"? Just because you don't identify as white? What sort of extensive training did you undergo in order to excise from yourself the tendenices installed in white Americans?"

    Wow, your question makes no sense at all. Installed? Are you suggesting they make honkies in a factory?

    I grew up speaking three languages, and have never "enjoyed" being part of an ethnic majority (not that there is anything to be enjoyed in that) except for two semesters in Chicago. I got my "training" from las calles de la valle san fernando.


    "I'd like to take that course, or retreat, or institute."

    So many would. That's why the traffic is terrible here - everyone wants to come.

    "Hmmm. . . okaaaay. Leaving that problematic appropriation aside, what about when you paint yourself with henna?"

    When you grow up doing it, when henna is available at the fucking five and dime, you are't thinking about romanticizing "foreign cultures" or "exotic rituals". You're thinking about whether you're going to decorate your fingertips with tiny flowers or tiny stars... or both.

    And tell me: is being raised in a diverse community, adopting the attitudes teachers and neighbors modeled for you as a child, then entering society as a functional adult with those values a "problematic appropriation"?

    Fucking white people.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I grew up speaking three languages, and have never "enjoyed" being part of an ethnic majority (not that there is anything to be enjoyed in that) except for two semesters in Chicago.

    Unfortunately, that isn't the way it works. The best example I can think of is a little convoluted, so bear with me a moment.

    Imagine you're a Caucasian born and raised in Japan. For all intents and purposes, you are culturally Japanese; you speak the language, you live the values, you embody the mannerisms. But you still sometimes get other Japanese people asking you "wow, where did you learn to speak such good Japanese?" and "where did you come from before Japan?" When tiny, back-street bars have signs saying "No Foreigners Allowed", they're talking about you, and sometimes when you go to restaurants and the wait staff pretend you aren't there, it's probably because of your skin. That's part of being in a ethnic minority.

    I'm sure that you're fully aware of all that. So let's inverse the example;

    You're a Japanese person who grew up in a community of French and American Caucasians living in Japan. They were your neighbors and your friends, and their cultures have influenced you just as deeply as your native culture. Inside, you identify as cross-cultural.

    But other Japanese people will NEVER ask you "where did you learn to speak such good Japanese?", no matter how fluently you also speak French. You will NEVER get asked "where did you come from", no matter how many times you visited Paris and believe it to be your true home. And businesses with signs saying "No Foreigners Allowed" will NEVER refer to you no matter devotedly you celebrate the 4th of July instead of Golden Week.

    This is being part of a majority. It has nothing to do with how you identify yourself and everything to do with how the dominant culture/race identifies and treats you.

    Because you DO self-identify with certain minority groups, while at the same time being socially identified as part of a majority, this puts you in the perfect position to help your minority friends and communities. You have all the power of the majority at your disposal --- to be the voice of change some of your friends don't have the social power to be --- and instead you want to avoid it so that you don't get blamed for anything, or associated with the negativity of being a "privileged white person".

    You really aren't helping anyone.

    ReplyDelete
  30. sadieko,

    Your comment is spot on and bullshit-free! Not convoluted, at all.

    Thanks for writing it. I learned a lot from it. You've shined a light on the reason why whites, such as KV, disgust me, and in the end, pretty much always, turn out to be false friends. They are the whites who think that just because they've grown up, spent a lot of time, around my kind that that makes them "my kind." They are cowards, and very rarely have your back, because when the situation suits them they easily shed their ethnic skin to be a part, take advantage of the privileges, of the majority.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I wrote:

    They are cowards, and very rarely have your back, because when the situation suits them they easily shed their ethnic skin to be a part, take advantage of the privileges, of the majority.

    Correction:

    They are cowards, and very rarely have your back, because when the situation suits them they easily shed their adopted racial/ethnic skin to be a part, take advantage of the privileges, of the majority.

    ReplyDelete
  32. You can be racist and non white. You sound racist, in reading this blog. You are making judgments about people based on their race. If you don't know, thats racism.
    Lighten up and dance your life. judgments fall on those who judge.

    ReplyDelete
  33. amanka, I don't know if you'll be back, but if so, please read more carefully. If you do, you'll notice that the author of this blog is white (it says so in the upper-right corner of every post). I'm also not being judgmental in what I write. I'm pointing out objectionable white tendencies, many of which I still have myself, in the hopes of eradicating them.

    ReplyDelete
  34. This is always an interesting subject for me because I am a bi-racial (Hispanis and American/Jew of Polish descent. yes, I know Jew is not a race, but it gives the reader a slight view of cultural tendencies that I have aquired through my father), dark colored girl who has never experienced first-hand a negative racial issue. I am getting my masters in urban education from USC, and we discuss racial issues every day in my classes. Everyday.

    What I have come to realize is... there needs to be an awareness of the deep racil scars we are inheriting as a people, racial scars that have created an institution that is rift with inequalities based on color of skin.

    The good news is this: The white people who don't care about white, yellow, black, or purple have (to some imaginary extent) moved beyond (and have taken pride in moving beyond) judging someone based on the color of skin. The days where one assumes the black person in a suit is going to rob you no matter what are (to a certain degree) past us. This is not a bad thing, to me. It's freeing. The bad news is, when everyone starts to indulge their pride by congratulating themselves on this step forward in racial tensions, they forget the legacy that previous racial injustice has left behind. They forget that the racial inequalities DO happen, and are still happening, and the day we don't care about race is the day certain races are not grossly under-represented in business and education, and grossly over-represented in our jails.

    I also think that focusing on race has left some people to forget a different type of racism that I like to distinguish and call "culurism." Perhaps (oh, only perhaps), the days have gone by where we judge people by merely the color of their skin, but what about the cut of their clothes, or the heaviness of their accent, or the extent of their jewlery or the braid of their hair? These cultural stigmas are racially linked, and we cannot forget that. Perhaps a black man is president (and I cannot help but feel proud to know that), but he could not have become president if he sounded like Old W. Only W's white priviledge could get him past the white house doors with that ridiculously poor manner of speaking.

    These lines and distinctions, to me, are very important. I believe that those "white people" who want to move past race are just, perhaps innocently, perhaps not, forgetting the ongoing legacy that we must work together to fix. I think that is where their crime is.

    As for Burners... I am one. I am one who identifies a Hispanic, one who recognizes the priviledge I have had because my English is perfect, I was a straight A student, and I was racially unidentifiable. I believe much of what you say on this site is tongue-in-cheek, a subtle reminder to look at ourselves and realize the ironies that pervade our decisions. Admittedly, I did not know the Burning Man symbol was appropriated from Native American culture, but then again, that was not why I went to BM. My reasons were completely different, therefore, I took no offense to your remarks.

    I actually know a great deal of non-white burners, definitely more than ten percent. And I do believe that there are some people who seek out culture because they feel they have none, and turn to Burning Man, turn to creating culture. I also think that it takes some intimate experience to understand the allure of BM, and the reasons behind why so many people do it. And franky... there are idiots in every circle. BM has plenty of idiots. I choose to ignore them in favor of the freedom of self-expression i feel when I am at a BM related event. Some Burners are fakers... and some are really just grateful to find a place where they can express whatever freak lies within.

    It's all about just being self-aware, isn't it?

    Sorry that was so long.

    Not. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  35. I hate to burst your bubble, Lillian, but Hispanic is not a race. Hispanic is solely a connection that many people, who call themselves such, have with the Spanish language, and that of Spanish culture, in the Americas and the Caribbean, because of Spanish colonialism and slavery. The connection being that you are a descendant of the colonizers/rulers/slaveholders, or the enslaved Africans, or the indigenous people [of the Americas and Caribbean] whose land and bodies were conquered. Of course, many Hispanics are a combination of two of the three described, or all three. Therefore, one can have brown skin and be Hispanic. One can have black skin and be Hispanic. And one can have white skin and be Hispanic. Most Hispanics are Catholics; although there are some, such as the Sephardim, who are Jewish. And of recent decades, Protestantism has been on the increase in many Catholic Spanish-speaking (Hispanic) nations.

    Also, you said that you are a "dark colored girl who has never experienced first-hand a negative racial issue", then you state that "I was racially unidentifiable." So, what kind of Hispanic are you, really? It seems to me that you ain't got no dog in this fight, except insofar as you need to acknowledge your white privilege, which allows you, when it is convenient for you and [perhaps] makes life easier for you to live in these United States, to choose to acknowledge your connection to Hispanics--the ones whom are discriminated against because they cannot "pass" into white society, as you seem to be able to do.

    ReplyDelete
  36. As a person of non-European heritage, born and raised in California, having engaged in solidarity with indigenous peoples both within and outside the U.S., and being part of the Burner community, I have found this discussion quite illuminating, and also disappointing, though not surprising.

    I really liked Sadieko's example, and Redcatbiker's earlier comments: I think they help give context to people who due to their upbringing really have difficulty understanding how racism functions.

    As a friend of Lillian's who randomly stumbled here, I can assure you that when she says "unidentifiable" there is no way you'd confuse her for looking white, nor for her to pass as white; she clearly has a multiracial heritage. However, I have experienced racism personally; no one would confuse me for white either.

    What saddens me is the extent to which the vast majority of Burners who have commented on Tribe about this incident are either defensive or dismissive. This tends to support Macon D.'s interpretation, unfortunately. However, there are many angles to Burning Man, both positive and negative; it has potential for social transformation among those who experience it, although obviously some who go there still think that it is OK to exercise their privilege to treat non-white cultures in a caricatured fashion AND then to attack people who object to that behavior.

    I know many, many Burners who are genuinely respectful toward all peoples, but I can also definitely say that there are some who openly don't, and unfortunately others who when a racist incident comes up, are more focused on defending those who made the mistake than trying to learn from it. Unfortunately, this does not surprise me, both because some Burners are very self-absorbed to begin with, and because it is reflection of our society at large. That does not mean that the majority on the playa are like that, but I do remember a number of postings on the ePlaya bulletin board last year that were very bigoted both toward people from the Middle East and Muslims (which are not the same, obviously); perhaps the people who post online are not representative of the Burner community at large.

    Growing up in LA or SF does NOT make you a non-racist! Just listen to talk radio out here. While these are places where there are more opportunities to grow up in a non-racist way, I remember the 1992 riots in LA: the racism among many white people toward black people was very clear. Things are better now, and many people of European ancestry here really do "get it," but I still encounter "white" people in non-white communities who may seem respectful at first, but they'll make comments that reveal otherwise.

    ""Burners"--a particular kind of mostly white folk, and a kind who usually try really hard to get away from their normalized whiteness"

    Actually, I think that can be a very good thing. Tom Hayden has written books talking about reclaiming his Irish heritage as a part of transforming his "white" upbringing. If more folks who have grown up "white" could learn more about their own heritage and its global context, I think that would help substantially.

    I have noticed that first generation immigrants from European countries today usually interact with "non-white" people fairly similarly to how they interact with white people, not to minimize the issue of racism in Europe, but to note that "whiteness" is not something that is innate, but is socially developed and perpetuated.

    That said, even someone who has fully overcome racism in their upbringing still maintains a degree of privilege based on how others perceive and treat that person. Racism is not merely a personal phenomenon, it is first and foremost a societal phenomenon reflecting the enforcement of power.

    So to get away from a normalized state of racial privilege is neither good nor bad: if the goal is to embrace the full humanity of all peoples, including one's own heritage and those of others, then that's great and helps everyone. If it becomes a parasitic behavior appropriating from other people's cultures while disrepecting those people - like the way Visionary Village initially treated Native Americans who expressed concern about their event - then it becomes destructive. I am generally favorable toward the Burning Man community, but also aware of its many limitations.

    ReplyDelete
  37. As a white person who attends Burning Man, I'd just like to say "AMEN" to the Anonymous that posted right before me.

    While Macon's summary of Burners COULD be interpreted as stereotyping and offensive, the people that react to it defensively are merely illustrating their natural human tendency to identify with and defend a certain group. While they may have chosen a particular group (in this case, Burners) because of its openness and inclusion of all walks of life, they're still reverting to the same tribal/racial mentality from whence most racism and classism comes.

    I think all caricatures deserve to be ridiculed to some degree, and spend as much time supporting the 'Burner Community' through work and art as I do ridiculing the self-righteous and hypocritical members of it. I'd say the same could be said for many groups that I'm associated with, whether ethnic, social, or economic.

    There is nothing wrong with white kids liking and celebrating aspects of different cultures, whether they're urban hip hop, Native American or Chinese herbalism, or Polynesian Fire Spinning. Those are just three examples from my life. However, I fully expect for some people to judge me because as a cracker, I don't fit their preconceived notions of the type of person who is interested in those things. They're entitled to their opinions, and I'm entitled to my interests. Fortunately, hip hop culture is colorblind to an extent, and the history of fire spinning is obscure enough that I rarely encounter much crap for it. But if I do, I understand that as a white person the onus is on me to justify or explain why I have those interests (though NOT to apologize for them).

    As for my interest in plant medicine, I'd never identify or promote myself as a medicine man or a shaman. White people that do so are generally abhorrent. However, native Americans do NOT have a monopoly on human-kinds relationship with plants, and interacting with other-than-human people predates any race, culture, or religion. Its when that relationship is relegated to a style, marketing, or fashion statement that it becomes offensive, not just to indigenous people but to anyone who values nature.

    I guess my point is, white people have every right to be interested in culture and customs that they are not biologically related to, but due to our privilege we should not be surprised when the people that come from those cultures question our motivations. If you have a genuine interest in honoring those traditions, you don't have to apologize for it, but explain yourself. Don't get defensive either, because in doing so you're ignoring all the people that co-opt other cultures for purely selfish reasons and acting just as selfishly.

    ReplyDelete
  38. And yet people like you, redcatbiker, believe that you understand "my kind" because you have spent your life watching television shows full of rich, pretty "white" people.

    Perhaps you should have some face-to-face interaction with the "other" that disgusts you so much. You might find that you learn something.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Also important to note is how this thing only works for POC and not for White people unless it glorifies them (i.e. "her skin was as white as pure snow" or "fresh milk" )it's just so obviously racist.Well, I remember reading "Addie Pray" by Joe David Brown, where a black maid describes her cruel white employer as "she's that little white shit on top of chicken doodle" or words to that effect. I'm sure there are more examples out there, but that's the only one I can recall.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Macon D said...
    " I'm not surprised that you haven't felt a whole lot of white privilege in your life. Even people much better off financially than you've been don't normally feel it, or think about it--we've been trained not to. It's like men thinking less about the significance of their gender than women do; if it's a set of advantages, rather than disadvantages, we tend not to think about it all that much."

    A bit like the way you rarely notice class, even here where it's been all but explicitly mentioned you don't seem to notice it. It's just that some are 'better off financially'. There's no deep structural inequality of power that gets replicated from generation to generation then?

    ReplyDelete
  41. There's no deep structural inequality of power that gets replicated from generation to generation then?

    Of course there is. That happens in terms of class, and race, and gender, and sexuality, and religion, and so on, and they're all working "intersectionally," as they say these days, often all at once. But this blog is called "stuff white people do," not "stuff upper-class white people" or "lower-class white people" do. (At the same time, as the blog's subtitle implies, the posts are rarely about something ALL white people do.)

    If you see specific posts where attending to class matters would sharpen or clarify the point being made, then please do point that out in a comment, instead of unhelpfully plunking a broad charge like that in the middle of things, seemingly at random.

    What, for instance, is the connection between social class and the particular post you chose for placing your comment, the tendency of some white people to say things like the following? "I don't care if a person is black, white, red, green, or purple, I'll love 'em all up and down 'til the cows come home!"

    Are you saying that's something said more often by members of some certain class than by others? If so, again, I'd appreciate hearing your explanation and evidence, as well as why you find that worth pointing out.

    ReplyDelete
  42. @Macon_D

    Fair enough, my comment didn't in any way relate to the original post, it was triggered purely by the comment and your response, so in that sense it was entirely off-topic (and a bit snippy).

    It bothered me that you didn't even use the word 'class' in your reply, when the original post seemed simply to be pointing out that there are other forms of privilege than racial ones. You simply compared a working class or poor white person's unawareness of racial privilege with that of an upper-middle class person's - and there is also a difference to be acknowledged there as well as a similarity.

    But one thing that does bother me at times about your blog (which I sometimes find informative and sometimes annoying) is that this intensive analysis and concentration on language and reading the right academic books, sometimes seems to turn 'anti-racism' into a marker of class. Those with the wealth, time, education and articulacy can carefully learn all this stuff and claim the moral highground over the less well-read plebs - while not actually changing the economic structures. As some of your (rather ferocious) critics here have said, it sometimes seems to stray close to 'etiquette training'.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Anonymous, does it take all that much time, wealth and so on to read this blog?

    As for those who have such priveleges I think they should indeed be becoming more aware of what's white about themselves and their ways.

    Also, have you noticed that a lot of poc read this blog? What good do you think it might be doing them?

    ReplyDelete
  44. You're over-analyzing the multi-color comment. I was raised to know and believe that there are good people and bad people from any culture or background. Give a person a chance to show you their talents and their personality before labeling them because of outward appearance. My comment on the other post came from that background. I don't know any other perspectives on race, because I only have my own experiences and influences in my life. I don't internalize other people's lives because I'm happy with my life, family, friends. I care for others and treat others as I would like to be treated. I believe that there is still alot of racism out there, but the race gestapo tactic of taking every seemingly innocuous comment and bending and shaping it into something evil is wrong and usually stems from someone who doesn't have confidence in themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Jeff,

    You're not proving to be a very careful reader. Look again at these lines in this post, and then think about how they apply to what you're doing here and in other comment threads:

    If this form of "colored-people" listing really is a white habit -- a common white tendency -- then why do a lot of white people do that?

    I think the reasons vary, but that it's mostly an effort to avoid discussions of race, and sometimes to shut them down completely.


    What have you got against a focus on whiteness?

    ReplyDelete
  46. Another interesting topic. I never thought about the reason for white people doing that in that context. I myself have heard it numerous times. Maybe it's a way of disarming any racial aspect of the conversation in advance? That makes sense for some of the posted statements, but perhaps not all of them.

    It is odd this going beyond actual skin tones into blue, gold, orange, etc. I think specifically, this might be an expression of subconcious dismissal of PoC. I mean why else place fictional skin pigment in with the conversation? It seems like a racist undertone.

    ReplyDelete
  47. To the hordes of angry racially charged people -- what do you want? Please describe your ideal world to me. Because as that poor poster above mentioned, sometimes it really feels like you just can't please everyone. (I'm talking about the girl who described her miserable living conditions growing up, to be condescendingly chiding for not realizing her "privilege").

    If you simply want to be angry and left alone with your anger, that's fine. But it might be beneficial to you to consider a more optimistic outlook on life and people in general.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Tom, I won't speak for others in the "hordes" you're talking about, but what I want is for white people (myself included) to realize that they still live in a de facto white supremacist society, and to stop doing stuff that supports that aspect of their society. I want them to realize that because of that aspect of their society, they've got it generally better, in an uncountable number of ways, than non-white people do. I'd also like them to realize that they often behave, usually without even realizing it, in ways that better their own lives at the expense of others, and they often do the wrong thing toward POC when they think they're doing the right thing. I basically want them to realize that being classified as "white" has a hell of a lot more to do with who and what they are than they usually realize.

    I actually do agree that "you can't please everyone." But I don't agree that that means you should only please yourself (as white people are typically taught to do).

    ReplyDelete
  49. I support your goal but I guess I just don't support your methods. From reading both your blog and the comments, it doesn't seem like what you are doing here is helping you reach this goal.

    Instead, I think that you are simply further driving a wedge between "white" people and POC. From the comments I think it is pretty obvious that many people don't respond kindly when being told how bigoted they are. I'm not saying bigoted behavior is acceptable, but approaching the subject from a more genial angle might encourage self-reflection instead of a knee-jerk anger reaction.

    For example, the obviously inflammatory blanket statements about "white people" you insist on throwing around. Statements like this immediately alienate most people and put them on the defensive. As a result, they are far less open to hear any further points you have to make.

    If you stick to concrete examples and use them to illustrate problematic behavior (e.g. "My friend Tom invoked strangely colored people yesterday. I feel this is insensitive because..."), you won't come off as immediately attacking the majority of white people.

    In short, I think this blog could encourage self-reflection in many people if it wasn't so focused on condemning and alienating white people.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Tom: Google "tone argument." Also, why on earth should anyone put themselves out to make white people (like me) feel okay about bigotry and subconscious racism? I read this blog because the comments make me uncomfortable. The system we live in, one which privileges white people, makes POC uncomfortable (and worse) every damn day. If I find out that I'm doing and saying things that support that oppression, even if I don't mean to, I SHOULD feel uncomfortable.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Becky, just because someone has written a dismissive response to an (admittedly often dismissive) "tone argument" doesn't invalidate it.

    Please read back in my comments and find the parts where I say people should "make white people feel okay about ... racism" ? On the contrary, I believe I said that a better way to make people understand the insensitivity of their actions would be by proxy (that is, use a concrete example and let the reader consider the similarities of their own lives to the example). I'm not saying they should feel okay; I'm saying that beating them senseless with anti-white mantras is not the best way to produce this feeling of discomfort that often leads to self-reflection that I think is the ultimate goal of this blog.

    Now, back to the "tone argument". The response to the tone argument is usually "white people don't get it"/"we have every right to be mad". In one sense, yes, POC have every right to be mad. And it is probably healthier that they have several mediums in which to vent their anger lest it cause physical or mental problems later on (as bottled up emotions tend to do).

    That being said, the "tone argument" is often thrown out in what people like to refer to as "discussions of race". Now, as I understand it, a "discussion" is a lot like an informal debate. That is, there is a topic or problem that people are talking about, and people put forth and support several differing viewpoints to better resolve the problem. The problem with the common response to the tone argument in discussions of race, is that the discussion quickly devolve into a groupthink convention.

    Imagine a debate where one group of people is immediately dismissed as not understanding the topic based on the color of their skin. This group is essentially told that if they don't agree with what the other people are saying, they are simply wrong. Furthermore, they are evil! To me this sounds more like a witch-hunt then a debate. If you want to bash whites, I respect your right to do that. But don't dress it up as a "discussion" when it is nothing of the kind.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Tom: I think we're talking about different things. You were asking for a space that wouldn't alienate white people. I'd have to double check, but I'm pretty sure that's fairly easy to find elsewhere. This is meant to be a space in which PoC can freely voice feelings, thoughts, and opinions without having to worry about hurting my precious white feelings. That's not so easy to find, and nobody has any right to step in and ask people here to start self-censoring so they don't make me feel bad. If you don't like hearing the things people here have to say, nobody's forcing you to read them.

    The "tone argument" comes up all over the fucking place. Virtually any time a group of oppressed people have a safe space to talk freely, somebody will come in and say, "You guys would have more success if you weren't so hostile!" But you know what? If somebody's going to refuse to become an anti-racist/anti-sexist/anti-homophobic/anti-transphobic/etc. ally because oppressed people don't much enjoy the experience of oppression and occasionally say so in less-than-polite terms, that person wouldn't have been much of an ally anyhow. If I feel defensive in response to something I hear, here or elsewhere, that's my problem.

    And as far as the "white people aren't allowed to disagree" trope: people here are saying "this is how racism affects me. These are my experiences, and these are my feelings and my thoughts." Nobody's allowed to disagree with that. I mean, people can, but denying another person's reality doesn't actually make it unreal. It just makes the denier, at best, willfully ignorant, or, at worst, an asshole.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I believe I said that a better way to make people understand the insensitivity of their actions would be by proxy (that is, use a concrete example and let the reader consider the similarities of their own lives to the example). [Tom]

    Huh? Am I missing something here? The original post gives at least 4 specific examples. How many more would you like? Do you have a specific number in mind?

    ReplyDelete
  54. @Other Becky

    Yes, I guess I just saw that the author was white and assumed that meant this was a place for people of all races to discuss racism (unlike sites like AngryBlackWoman which are more obviously places for PoC to vent). The author's response to my post further supported this belief, as he made it sound like his goal was to help white people take a deeper look at racism / white privelege. This goal seems to necessitate the inclusion of white people in the discussion. That being said, if I am incorrect I apologize and withdraw my criticism.

    Again, I understand that it is necessary for people to have safe places to vent, and I am not trying to encroach on this privelege. However, I think the tone argument has some validity when used in the context of what is supposed to be a discussion among multiple viewpoints. It is imperative that all people involved in such a discussion feel comfortable sharing their true feelings, otherwise it is unlikely that any progress will be made. A discussion is not one group lecturing and another group biting their tounges.

    If you know of any sites that encourage such unrestrained discussion I'd be excited to see them, but I would be surprised if many existed, for two reasons:
    1) Most people don't really want to discuss/debate but simply want others to confirm the views they already have. They have no intention of changing their opinion, regardless of what anyone else says.
    2) Due to the anonymous nature of the internet, I can see most of these discussions devolving into violent hatemongering on both sides.

    @fromthetropics

    Upon reading back I didn't make my point very clear. What I'm critiquing is not the lack of specific examples, but the addition of blanket statements against "white people" that I find unnecessary and in fact detrimental to the author's proposed cause. I think the examples provided are sufficient to spark a discussion without needing anything else.

    ReplyDelete
  55. @Tom:

    The problem with your argument, as well meaning and well thought out as it may be, is that right now you aren't discussing racism. You aren't discussing the ways in which a racial majority intentionally or unintentionally represses the minority. You aren't discussing how invoking inhuman skin colors alongside human skin colors is dismissive. You aren't even discussing the various other points about racism brought up by other commenters.

    All your argument does is say that you -- and those you speak for -- refuse to learn anything not told to you nicely. That it has to be carefully structured to make you feel included and safe and not made out to be the bad guy, or you simply won't learn. You'll insist that this is about racism, that you are trying to learn, but that "no one is helping you" and no one is telling you want you want to hear. After all, no one can blame you for doing something wrong if no one will teach you what's wrong, right?

    And once you're done with your argument here, whether you've gotten someone to agree with you or accepted that no one will, I highly doubt that you'll start discussing racism. You'll pick up your toys and go home.

    That's the problem with ALL "tone arguments". They hijack the discussion, turn it into "this makes me feel defensive because it's not clear that it isn't calling me a bad guy" and the original point, no matter how important or unimportant, is lost completely. You don't want to talk about racist behaviors or actions. You just want to talk about how having racism pointed out makes you feel.

    Everyone who has sincerely tried to further their understanding of racism and what it means to be anti-racist will tell you this:

    It is a bitter, bitter pill to swallow. It will hurt going down. You will confront things about yourself, your family, your race, and your country that you don't like. If you were raised a liberal Democrat like I was and always patted yourself on your back for your open-mindedness, the realization of how much internalized racism you have or racist actions you unthinkingly perform will be very, very hard. No one can make this easier for you. It's no one's JOB to make this easier for you.

    The rest of the world is not your mother.

    ReplyDelete
  56. @sadieko

    Determining the best way to encourage a multicultural discussion on racism is a very important first step to discussing racism. Which is exactly my point -- that you are NOT having a "discussion" here. You are holding a lecture from two groups of people, namely the group of whites who agree with macon d and apologize for their actions, or the group of PoC who agree with macon d and are offended. Any other viewpoints are quickly and viciously dismissed. Sure, I could try to put forth my viewpoint on the topics posted. But because I watched the previous commenters either fall in line or be dismissed without a moment of consideration, I realize that would be futile. Which is why I chose to start from the beginning.

    I object to your immediate assumption that I have not learned and am refusing to learn anything. On the contrary, I think the fact that I was obviously actively searching for and reading through blogs about racism indicates that on some level I would like to learn more.

    And I have learned a lot. Specifically about the types of people who make and comment on blogs like this. You've formed an "in crowd" of people who agree with you, and catalogued all possible responses to your position for easy dismissal (see derailingfordummies.com). I'll bet you have half of your response to my comment in your head already, even though you haven't finished reading. You are so ready to condemn and dismiss anyone who doesn't fall in line that it will be almost impossible for your viewpoint to change.

    Of course this happens with almost all internet communities. The regulars eventually become so sick of trolls that they develop an array of quick and dirty responses to anything anyone else might say. It's not isolated to discussion on racism. I've seen the same behavior on forums ranging from video games to physics to weightlifting. In terms that you can understand -- you (and posters like you) immediately attempt to assert your superior knowledge of the topic over newcomers by dismissing their arguments and talking down to them (e.g. "The rest of the world is not your mother" , "you'll pick up your toys and go home").

    Ultimately, this blog serves a purpose, even if it wasn't what I was looking for. There are some people who do need ideas bashed into their skulls, and others who need bandwagons to jump on. You can kick me off your wagon, and laugh at me rolling around ignorantly in the dust, but in the end we're all headed the same direction.

    Cheers,

    Tom

    ReplyDelete
  57. @Tom:

    -- did you just link me to derailingfordummies.com to suggest that I'm using stock phrases from that to kick you around, or to imply that I'm derailing you?

    Just to be clear to make sure I'm reading you correctly, this is my understanding of your words;

    1) You felt the opinions of other posters who disagreed with Macon were dismissed without being listened to, so you want to establish a proper situation in which you'll be listened to.

    2) I see myself themselves as better than you and lecture down to you with my superior knowledge, much like any other type of "in crowd" who wants to show off how much better they are.

    3) You also feel that my goal is to condemn and dismiss you, and I will reject any stance or argument you take that disagrees with me, regardless of whether or not it has a valid point. That I'm not going to listen to you or acknowledge what you have to say.

    4) You are honestly trying to learn or at least, feel that I should accept that you're trying to learn because you are reading/commenting on a anti-racism blog in the first place.

    5) You found my snide comments about taking your toys home and the world not being your mother dismisses and talking down to. And yes, they totally were. I freely admit I find the "this needs to be said right or no one will learn" argument irritating, frustrating, and completely derailing, but you're still right to call me on being a bitch about it.

    Tom, my attitude -- and while I can't speak for all of my, um, "in crowd", whoever they may be, I'm sure this goes for many of them too -- comes from the fact that I used to think exactly like you do. Like, some of your wording makes me flinch because I've said the same things and gotten my feathers ruffled in exactly the same ways. You are right in that most of what you say isn't going to make me change my viewpoint to be more amiable to your stance, but part of that is because it's a viewpoint I've already moved away from.

    And to round this all back up around to my original statement: you still aren't talking about the original point of this post OR racism. You're talking about how you aren't willing to talk, express your points, or yes, learn, unless you feel safe and included.

    Because I didn't say it before: there isn't anything wrong with that. It's natural. So natural that it constantly takes over and derails racism threads all over the internet.

    Also, thanks for saying I'm jumping a bandwagon here, that so made my day, you have no idea.

    ReplyDelete
  58. In my experience, it isn't used as a way of dismissing anything, or saying "I don't want to talk about race because it makes me feel uncomfortable", but more that, if you say black/white, then you're dismissing asians etc, so then you include yellow, and red for Native American people. But that sounds ridiculous because peoples' skin colours aren't actually black, or yellow, or red. So if you say "black, yellow, red" it can already seem like you're using ridiculous colours to refer to people, so you may as well include purple as well so people don't jump on you with "YELLOW!? How racist! Asians aren't actually yellow!!".

    ReplyDelete
  59. fzgg,

    That common white tendency you're enacting there makes me think I should expand this post.

    ReplyDelete
  60. I also have been irritated by the tendency to add strange colours, but not been able to articulate why, thanks. I think I can link that forced "whatever" to straights holding forth on the topic of gay marriage "I don't care if someone can marry a man, a woman, a donkey, whatever!"

    ReplyDelete
  61. Wow. I thought of using this once, e.g. "I don't care if she's green!" when someone apologetically told me that a prospective caregiver was brown. I just thought it emphasized that I *really* don't care, which is in the end what I did say. I didn't see it as racist, which I guess is my cultural blindness, although race is not nearly the issue where I live that it is in the U.S. I'll be more conscious in future.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Great stuff. I am becoming sensitive to my blindness, or lack of empathy. In fact, I am scanning through my past looking at ways in which I uncomfortably shut down the entire subject of race in an impatient way considering that I was above such simple behavior as my perspective is focused on the merits of each individual that I come in contact with. In fact, the broad swathe of egalitarian logic that I operate under is really just a screen to keep the unpleasant realities from shaking my core being.

    Interesting. This blog post and even more so the great posts have given me a key of sorts to march out from under the monolithic umbrella and open up the world. Of course I said key, which means that this process will not be easy, as I must begin developing a part of myself which has been underdeveloped due to being warmly wrapped up in the subtle blanket of privilege.

    I have prided myself in having authentic connections with other races as I have a talent of treating people with basic respect and fresh slates, but I have been one dimensional and in fact a manipulator of sorts. I manipulate sincere behavior as a means to disarm others and attempt to lead them to my level of thinking, irresponsibly without thinking about the suffering and the need for a narrative. It seems that language and narrative are important tools for making sense of this almost invisible dialogue that is taking place.

    I will embrace this subject and learn more about myself and others. Of course I am a neophyte and whatever my thoughts now, I am sure something more mature will develop out of this development. Thank you, I am amazed at how ignorant I have been to this reality.

    ReplyDelete
  63. One early episode of the sitcom "The Big Bang Theory" inadvertently does this with sexuality. One character is basically asexual, and when he's out of the room another character asks about him, "So, what's his deal? Is he into girls? Guys? Hand puppets?"

    On the surface the joke seems harmless, but there's an underlying implication that "hand puppets" is a sort of "humorous extreme" on a scale from heterosexuality to homosexuality to hand puppets; so the joke is an example of heteronormativity. (Especially in context of the subsequent joke, but that's tangential.)

    This is a related part of what's going on with "strangely colored people". "White" is normal. "Black" is abnormal. In order to establish that I'm so un-racist, I just have to inform you that I wouldn't even care if the person was green, which is so abnormal it puts "black" in the middle! Top that, person-accusing-me-of-racism!

    Meanwhile, there's a comment by late comedian Mitch Hedberg about it which I can't decipher as anti- or pro-racist. He brings up that people say this, and he adds "Hold on. Purple people? No way, man, you gotta draw the line somewhere." My optimism drives me to the "anti-" side, that his joke is basically that bringing up purple people is ridiculous because they don't exist. But I'm not sure. It's maybe one of those awful attempts at "ironic racism", or something else entirely.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Tangent - Way late to the party here, but Mozilla did NOT put out Blackbird. Mozilla's Firefox is an open source browser, which means anyone can copy the code and redistribute it. The company 40A, Inc is the company that created Blackbird - http://gizmodo.com/5105846/blackbird-web-browser-because-firefox-is-too-navajo-for-black-web-surfers

    (as someone who works for Mozilla, it hurts that people would associate this segregative act as coming from this company).

    ReplyDelete

Please see the "commenting guidelines" before submitting a comment.

hit counter code