1. Discomfort is the Starting Point, Not the End Goal

2. Proceed with the Best Intentions

3. Be Honest and Inclusive

4. Facilitation Matters

5. Solutions Include Confronting Racism Wherever We Can

 a book every educator ought to have in their bookshelves: Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? by Dr. Beverly Daniel Tatum. “

(For an in-depth look at color-blind racism, I recommend Racism Without Racists by Eduardo Bonilla-Silva.)”

deletingunfollowthis

Tea Party group called “True the Vote” plans on posting white operatives in black voting precincts on election day to challenge those voters’ authenticity.

blog-anglophonic:

If you would not like to be approached by a hostile white person

who wants to “see your ID” before you even enter your polling place, you might want to contact these scumbags now and tell them to fuck off. They are planning to be out in full force on election day, mainly in areas which are majority nonwhite, and they plan on doing whatever it takes to keep you from getting into that booth.

http://www.truethevote.org

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-rachel-maddow-show/48773662#48773662

-

#true the vote     #voter suppression

lizziegoneastray

On Race in the Golden Era of Disney

simpledisneythings:

**Heavy sigh**

OK, here we go.

Read More

BackstageMagic did a terrific job of summing up all of my thoughts into one big post. If any of you have the time, please read this because I find that it’s important to get your facts straight. I am honestly sick of getting messages about these accusations and I hope that this puts it to rest. 

Look, please do click through and read this, because it’s got some good information. And I do have to say, that given how much Walt relied on the Sherman brothers should be a pretty good sign that he wasn’t much for anti-semitism. (If you don’t know who the Shermans are, go rewatch Bedknobs and Broomsticks and Mary Poppins again. Find a DVD version with extra features.)

I do, however, have to take issue with the apologia for the crows in Dumbo and the entirety of Song of South. Let’s also add to the list: the Indians in Peter Pan, the monkies/apes, especially King Louie from Jungle Book, the siamese cats from Lady and the Tramp, and I’m leaving out the new golden-age stuff (Aladdin, Little Mermaid, etc.)

In fact, here, go read Cracked.com (generally not the best source, but this article is quite worth it) on The 9 Most Racist Disney Characters.

Look, Walt was a really nice guy. I know that. And I’m sure he tried with Song of the South. But it was racist. It really, really was. Even the fact that he made it was racist. The whole patois of Brer Rabbit and Brer Bear/Brer Fox is a white person’s imitation of slaves/former slaves.

We need to get over the fact that admitting something was racist somehow kills it. We need to stop trying to apologize for racism in an earlier era by saying things like, “well it was just a different time.”

No.

Stop.

Admit that it was racist.

Just do it.

Because once you do that, we can then move on to talk about what it says about racism in our history and what we can do to avoid repeating those kinds of mistakes.

The crows in Dumbo are racist. They really are. They present a “jive-talking” stereotype of Blacks that reinforces the racist ideas of the “lazy Black man” and the “entertaining Black man”.

And you see, once we’ve unpacked that racism and identified it, it allows us to do two very important things:

1) Appreciate the message of Dumbo as a story about believing in yourself, while identifying the problematic nature of the depiction of race.

2) Note that racism generally functions in “invisible” ways because that particular portrayal of African American stereotypes was, as the apologists put it, “just how things were”. Exactly. Now that we have identified both the racism and its historical invisibility, we can being to understand how institutional racism functions.

This is probably about as far as I can manage to go with this for right now, but it basically boils down to two things:

1) Walt Disney can still be an inspiring person, even when we acknowledge his shortcomings.

2) Disney movies can still be appreciated and beloved, even when we acknowledge their shortcomings.

So, for the love of all that is holy, please stop trying to write apologias for Disney and his movies. They are flawed, and that is OK. We just need to admit these things.

I’m sad to say that I’m not surprised that a black man is the target of this kind of treatment. That is not to say that this kind of thing does not happen to people of all races all over this country, but I believe that the racial motivation exists here whether anyone in the executive office wants to admit it or not. They use statistics to derive their formulas for cutting patients off, and they probably have years of statistics - that they themselves created through their own policies - that show that black men are more at risk of being a liability in these situations. No one at BCBS will be able to publicly admit this, but we all know it is the truth.

lord-kitschener

Angwe says: Top-posting that I do think a whole hell of a lot of white people need to read this. Most of it is perfectly true and illustrates a whole lot of the problems of white people (of which I am one) and their attitudes about racism. Here’s the big caveat: I have a huge problem with one item. Scroll down to see what I mean. (That is, I’m going to bottom-post it.)

olypunkboi:

dumbthingswhitepplsay:

I’m sure every white person and their brother knows by now, if you say the n-word, you will be immediately be pegged as racist and be side-eyed for the rest of your natural life by even other racist white people.

But did you know that there are things you can say that AREN’T racial slurs that can…

where has this tumblr been my whole life?!?!

This one, right here, pisses me off:

—Have you ever thought that your input was necessary in conversations of racism?

If you answered YES to any of these questions, congratulations, you’ve done something racist!

No. Fuck you. Here’s why you’re wrong about that one question. If white people are not participating in the conversation about racism, if they’re not listening, learning, and trying to contribute to the conversation, how do you expect them to change their attitude.

I am white. I am privileged. I will listen carefully when you explain your experience of racism. However, I will also contribute my thinking and analysis of the situation. I will attempt to better understand what is going on by reformulating and expressing myself so that I can work toward dismantling the structures that perpetuate racism in our society. That is a necessary part of my participation in the fight against racism. It is a sign that I am trying to learn and grow as a human.

I will always consciously try to avoid taking over the conversation, derailing, side-tracking, or starting an apologia, but I will always be prepared to participate in the conversation simply because I feel that it is vitally important to become part of the conversation.

If you think my contribution is unfounded or unnecessary, I welcome you to say so and I will continue to listen carefully. My experiences are not those of PoC. I may claim to have found a way to analyze a situation, I’m an academic-minded person, it’s just something I always do, but if I am wrong, I want to know why. I want to know that I am wrong and why so that I can better create strong and coherent arguments against other white people. The best way to do that is for me to participate in the conversation about racism.

I’m not here to get an “ally cookie”. Fuck that. I just want it to be known that I participate in the conversation to become a better person and to help fight against racism, and that, in and of itself, does not make me racist.

early-onset-of-night
Really poor children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works. So they literally have no habit of showing up on Monday. They have no habit of staying all day. They have no habit of ‘I do this and you give me cash.’ Unless it’s illegal.

Newt Gingrich, asshole and possibly our next president. (via early-onset-of-night)

Really? Fuck you, Newt. I’m using bad language here because I just cannot stand this bullshit. No one who works? Really? Have you opened your eyes lately? When caregivers in the ghetto are working 2 and 3 crap-ass jobs with no living-wage and no insurance and you’re saying these kids don’t see anyone working? Because these same 2 and 3 job caregivers also have to take food stamps because they make so little. You, sir, are a blind douche. Get the fuck out of my country, you white-blind, middle-class and poor-hating, self-righteous fucker. I pay my fucking taxes. I suspect you don’t. I suspect you’ve got an accountant or three and some lawyers making sure you don’t pay a dime. Therefore, I claim this country as more mine than yours, so get the fuck out of here and go live on the off-shore oil-rig that pays for your campaign funds. They’re probably the only people who could stand you.

Oh, and in case you’re wondering, here’s video of him saying it: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/111201/newt-gingrich-kids-republican-gop-debates-child-labor-video

watsoniananatomy-deactivated201

Police ‘killed deaf cyclist with stun gun after he failed to obey instructions to stop’

watsoniananatomy:

angwe:

Police ‘killed deaf cyclist with stun gun after he failed to obey instructions to stop’

dopegirlfresh:

karnythia:

darkpuck:

peak-society:

A police officer killed an elderly, deaf and mentally disabled man riding his bicycle by shooting him with a Taser stun gun after he failed to obey instructions to stop.

Roger Anthony, 61, was killed as he made his way home in Scotland Neck, South Carolina, after officers responded to a 911 call about a man who had fallen off his bicycle in a car park.

The caller told dispatchers that the man appeared drunk and that it looked like he had hurt himself.

Officers said they repeatedly told Mr Anthony to get off his bike, but when he didn’t respond, they shocked him. 

The state Office of the Medical Examiner hasn’t yet determined a cause of death.

Family members claim Mr Anthony had hearing problems and suffered from seizures. Now they’re considering whether to file a lawsuit against the town. 

His brother Michael said: ‘What did they tase him for? It’s hurting me. It’s really hurting me.’”


I knew even before I clicked the link that Roger Anthony was a black man.

Fuck the police.

As soon as I saw that they’d been called to help him & wound up killing him I knew the deal.

fuck.

Instead of saying fuck the police, remember that the police are human, therefore not all police are good. And these sort of things happen. There are good policemen, too. Yes, it’s sad. But we’re not all good.

While I understand your point completely, the object being to avoid harmful generalizations, you may be missing the linguistic nuance of “the police” in the phrase “fuck the police”. While, on the one hand, this does refer to specific officers in specific incidents as individuals, on the other hand, the larger sense aimed at here is the institutional racism practiced inherently in the policing of society. The roots of the phrase “fuck the police” in this sense stem from the history of the phrase in African American resistance movements. It has, however, become a meme-phrase on tumblr to mean “I do what I want”, clouding the meaning conveyed the by the phrase in the usage I meant.

Institutional racism is a broader concept than any one act of racism. It speaks to the detrimental racialization that occurs, seemingly without any willful act (except willful ignorance) on the part of those involved, when a system is constructed in such a way that the rules are already biased against a racial or ethnic group.

The classic examples of this in the realm of criminology are mandatory drug sentencing and capital punishment. In the case of drug sentencing, there are two places where institutional racism comes into play. In the first place, in the guise of helping a specific racial or ethnic group who is “caught in the ravages of drug X1”, the minimum sentencing for possession of drug X1 becomes grossly disproportionate to the sentencing for similar drug X2, which is usually found to be more popular among white, middle-class people. This sets up those who it is meant to protect to therefore fall harder when they are convicted of drug crimes related to X1. Secondly, the minimum definition of “possession with intent to sell” becomes a much smaller quantity, again in order to “protect” people from dealers. This is used to determine if a person who is arrested gets sent for rehabilitation instead of jail time or if they are prosecuted as a “dealer” who gets hit with minimum sentencing guidelines. Again, by making the rules different, the system sets up those who are more likely to be users of drug X1, a racial or ethnic minority, to end up being more likely to be prosecuted as “dealers” of drug X1. A statistically similar amount (relationship to dosage/street price) of drug X2 would not make a person a “dealer”, again creating a situation in which those who are white and middle-class are less likely to get harsh jail terms than the racial or ethnic minority.

In the case of capital punishment, and even with sentencing as a whole, the situation becomes more complicated, but still obvious when viewed in the aggregate. When a poor person, usually a person of color, is being charged with a crime, they cannot afford lawyers whose first priority will be to have them tried for a non-capital crime, perhaps by offering to plead guilty of a lesser charge. (This assumes, of course, that there is sufficient evidence to convict them of the crime in the first place.) A secondary consideration here is that many public defenders are overworked and may not have the time to review each case as fully as a private lawyer would, and could easily miss clues that the evidence against the defendant is scant at best, or collected in such a way as to create serious doubt as to the guilt of the defendant. Either of these situations keep those who can afford private lawyers generally off of death row, while the poor, and especially poor PoCs, are disproportionately represented on death row.

Finally, moving out into the larger realm of sentencing, I’m going to pull this quote from an abstract of an article published recently (March) in a law journal:

Racial bias within legal institutions is a long-standing concern among sociolegal scholars (Trubek 1990). This scholarship has made clear that racial factors shape legal outcomes through a complex interaction of individual-level, group-level, situational, and structural forces (Haney López 2006; Ward et al. 2009). Within criminal law, a large and methodologically diverse body of research indicates that racial and ethnic bias against nonwhite defendants continues to affect criminal case outcomes in multiple and complicated ways (see, e.g., Everett & Wojtkiewicz 2002; Kautt 2009; Sommers 2007; Steen et al. 2005; Steffensmeier & Demuth 2000). These biases are especially problematic in death penalty cases, where jurors are exclusively empowered to render life and death sentencing verdicts. Although some of the racial disparity in how death sentences are meted out is the product of prosecutorial decisionmaking in seeking the death penalty (Baldus, Woodworth, & Pulaski 1990; Paternoster & Brame 2003; Radelet & Pierce 1985), studies continue to demonstrate that jurors’ death sentencing behavior is significantly affected by the race of the defendant and the race of the victim in the case.

1. Mona Lynch1, 2. Craig Haney2

Article first published online: 16 MAR 2011

DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5893.2011.00428.x

angwe

Occupy Wall Street: A teaching moment for racism in America

angwe:

Stick with me on this.

First, I’m going to admit, front and center, that I’m a white, middle-class, cis-male. I have privilege, and if it comes out and screws up my reasoning, tell me to check it.

Second, I’m going to say that I support what Occupy Wall Street is trying to say about wealth disparities in this country and about the rampant, rapacious capitalism that we as a country have been encouraging for centuries.

Third, I’m going to say that I’m not at all surprised by the way the police, especially as they get support from banks and others who hold wealth and political influence, are reacting to these protests.

Wait! What did you just say? I can hear you ask.

I am not at all surprised by the way the police are acting based on the kinds of political and monetary clout and support being wielded in this conflict.

Now, here’s where it’s going to get tricky. One thing I’ve seen repeatedly on my dash is people of color (PoC) reacting to the outrage over police brutality with, “Uh, have you seen the way they treat us every single goddamn day of our existence?

This is why I think this is a teachable moment.

In the horror of, generally white people’s, reactions to the police brutality, we see a largely ignorant (because privileged) section of the populace finally confronted with an open example of institutional racism. That is an extremely difficult concept for a lot of people to understand. PoC live with it every day, and, often, white-folk who don’t want their feelings hurt by having their privilege pointed out to them dismiss it with phrases like, “Well, it’s not like they have something against you personally” or “It’s not like they have some kind of policy against black people, that’d be illegal.” That’s not the point. Institutional racism is insidious precisely because it is screened out of the perception of those who don’t face it as “normalcy,” while those who are constantly presented with it must suffer the consequences without any easy way to point out the racism in action because it is embedded systemically.

So, why would I say that this offers a teaching moment? The blatant classism coming out in the conflicts around Occupy Wall Street is born of exactly the same fundamental “Othering process” that operates in instances of institutional racism. This is institutional classism, and it has long existed before this, but usually it was proxied in various ways by racism, sexism, cis-sexism, colonialism/imperialism. For once, class warfare is out and proud to be so.

Do I think this means we shouldn’t be appalled at what the police are doing? No.

Do I think this means we shouldn’t support the Occupy Wall Street movement? No.

Do I think this means we need to hold onto this outcry against the media and police and carry it with us? Yes. Until we cling to these kinds of atrocities, prepared to hurl them back into the faces of authority every single time they happen, no matter who they happen to, we will continue to divide ourselves in the face of power and money that wants nothing more than that those who are disadvantaged, even in the slightest of ways, should continue to fight each other instead of focusing on the real systemic problems.

Peace, y’all.

Reblogging myself for the later crowd.

Occupy Wall Street: A teaching moment for racism in America

Stick with me on this.

First, I’m going to admit, front and center, that I’m a white, middle-class, cis-male. I have privilege, and if it comes out and screws up my reasoning, tell me to check it.

Second, I’m going to say that I support what Occupy Wall Street is trying to say about wealth disparities in this country and about the rampant, rapacious capitalism that we as a country have been encouraging for centuries.

Third, I’m going to say that I’m not at all surprised by the way the police, especially as they get support from banks and others who hold wealth and political influence, are reacting to these protests.

Wait! What did you just say? I can hear you ask.

I am not at all surprised by the way the police are acting based on the kinds of political and monetary clout and support being wielded in this conflict.

Now, here’s where it’s going to get tricky. One thing I’ve seen repeatedly on my dash is people of color (PoC) reacting to the outrage over police brutality with, “Uh, have you seen the way they treat us every single goddamn day of our existence?

This is why I think this is a teachable moment.

In the horror of, generally white people’s, reactions to the police brutality, we see a largely ignorant (because privileged) section of the populace finally confronted with an open example of institutional racism. That is an extremely difficult concept for a lot of people to understand. PoC live with it every day, and, often, white-folk who don’t want their feelings hurt by having their privilege pointed out to them dismiss it with phrases like, “Well, it’s not like they have something against you personally” or “It’s not like they have some kind of policy against black people, that’d be illegal.” That’s not the point. Institutional racism is insidious precisely because it is screened out of the perception of those who don’t face it as “normalcy,” while those who are constantly presented with it must suffer the consequences without any easy way to point out the racism in action because it is embedded systemically.

So, why would I say that this offers a teaching moment? The blatant classism coming out in the conflicts around Occupy Wall Street is born of exactly the same fundamental “Othering process” that operates in instances of institutional racism. This is institutional classism, and it has long existed before this, but usually it was proxied in various ways by racism, sexism, cis-sexism, colonialism/imperialism. For once, class warfare is out and proud to be so.

Do I think this means we shouldn’t be appalled at what the police are doing? No.

Do I think this means we shouldn’t support the Occupy Wall Street movement? No.

Do I think this means we need to hold onto this outcry against the media and police and carry it with us? Yes. Until we cling to these kinds of atrocities, prepared to hurl them back into the faces of authority every single time they happen, no matter who they happen to, we will continue to divide ourselves in the face of power and money that wants nothing more than that those who are disadvantaged, even in the slightest of ways, should continue to fight each other instead of focusing on the real systemic problems.

Peace, y’all.

The color-blind fallacy at work, ladies, gentlemen, and non-binarians.
dealingwithdragons:

Dragon: All of the commentary (well except for the first person’s. 
Look people have trouble realizing what privilege means. I like to put it this way: If you can say you are “color blind” then you have it.
Privilege is the privilege not to have to think about color or race every where you go. Ani DiFranco once said something about being a feminist that I’d like to use here: “Every time I move/ I make a woman’s movement.”
When you are not white EVERYTHING you do and EVERYTHING you see is filtered through race and class. And every move you make becomes, in the eyes of the world around you, a colored or racial move.
Even if you just want to watch a movie about a princess with your daughter, or your mom.
isabelthespy:

robot-heart-politics:

lightning—struck:

I agree, actually. It’s not Disney’s job to make a minority princess just so you don’t feel insecure. I love all the princesses, and would be thrilled to see more, but a minority princess shouldn’t be made just for the sake of being a minority.

I hardly think people want to see Disney characters (or any characters) who aren’t white because they are “insecure.” I think most people would just like it if their children could see someone who looked like them or shared their background when they turn on the TV or watch movies or flip open a story book. I know it may seem silly to you, but many children of color grow up seeing very few images of people of similar racial backgrounds anywhere in the media, unless it’s on the 6 o’clock news, and most of the images they see there are not flattering. They overwhelmingly only have negative representations of people like them, and very few positive ones. As a parent, wouldn’t you be upset if your children had very few positive images of people who were like them in the media?
I think being white, we take it for granted that all of the TV shows and movies that we watch, all of the characters in storybooks look like us. It’s not something we ever have to think about. But imagine how alienating it might be to live in a society where you rarely see any positive images of people who look like you and come from a similar background. Imagine how upsetting it would be to have major movie studios say that stories that reflect people with background like yours aren’t even worth making, because that’s how little people like you matter to society. 
If race isn’t that big a deal, then why should it be such a hardship on Disney and other producers of media to create images of and stories about people who aren’t white? Why would they be reluctant to create characters who represent someone other than white people regardless? If race weren’t a problem, media companies like Disney would be making such stories pretty regularly without needing extensive prodding from their non-white consumers. It would just be considered another story, another TV show, another movie. Race does matter, though, and I don’t understand why anyone would have a problem with another person calling out one of the largest producers of children’s media for having a racial bias when it comes to what media they produce.
In children’s media, there are thousands, if not millions, of representations of white people available. There are strikingly few representations of people of color. In my opinion, the people who are insecure in this situation are not those asking for a better balance of representation in media, but the white people who think that any encroachment at all from people of color in their almost exclusively white media is an affront.

yes to all of this, and also: one of the things that bothers me most about this sort of criticism of “political correctness” is that it basically precludes the possibility of any legitimate reasons for having (say) a black princess. that’s so aggravating to me, that literally anytime something like this happens people are like BLAH BLAH BLAH ART NOT POLITICS and it’s like… well, how could someone possibly tell a story about (say) a black princess without you getting upset about it? ugh i’m not explaining this well. but basically this viewpoint is saying “only white people can be art, anything else is politics and immediately suspect.” which is false in both directions.
or in other words: if you don’t care about the race of the latest disney princess, then why are you getting so upset about the race of the latest disney princess?

The color-blind fallacy at work, ladies, gentlemen, and non-binarians.

dealingwithdragons:

Dragon: All of the commentary (well except for the first person’s. 

Look people have trouble realizing what privilege means. I like to put it this way: If you can say you are “color blind” then you have it.

Privilege is the privilege not to have to think about color or race every where you go. Ani DiFranco once said something about being a feminist that I’d like to use here: “Every time I move/ I make a woman’s movement.”

When you are not white EVERYTHING you do and EVERYTHING you see is filtered through race and class. And every move you make becomes, in the eyes of the world around you, a colored or racial move.

Even if you just want to watch a movie about a princess with your daughter, or your mom.

isabelthespy:

robot-heart-politics:

lightning—struck:

I agree, actually. It’s not Disney’s job to make a minority princess just so you don’t feel insecure. I love all the princesses, and would be thrilled to see more, but a minority princess shouldn’t be made just for the sake of being a minority.

I hardly think people want to see Disney characters (or any characters) who aren’t white because they are “insecure.” I think most people would just like it if their children could see someone who looked like them or shared their background when they turn on the TV or watch movies or flip open a story book. I know it may seem silly to you, but many children of color grow up seeing very few images of people of similar racial backgrounds anywhere in the media, unless it’s on the 6 o’clock news, and most of the images they see there are not flattering. They overwhelmingly only have negative representations of people like them, and very few positive ones. As a parent, wouldn’t you be upset if your children had very few positive images of people who were like them in the media?

I think being white, we take it for granted that all of the TV shows and movies that we watch, all of the characters in storybooks look like us. It’s not something we ever have to think about. But imagine how alienating it might be to live in a society where you rarely see any positive images of people who look like you and come from a similar background. Imagine how upsetting it would be to have major movie studios say that stories that reflect people with background like yours aren’t even worth making, because that’s how little people like you matter to society. 

If race isn’t that big a deal, then why should it be such a hardship on Disney and other producers of media to create images of and stories about people who aren’t white? Why would they be reluctant to create characters who represent someone other than white people regardless? If race weren’t a problem, media companies like Disney would be making such stories pretty regularly without needing extensive prodding from their non-white consumers. It would just be considered another story, another TV show, another movie. Race does matter, though, and I don’t understand why anyone would have a problem with another person calling out one of the largest producers of children’s media for having a racial bias when it comes to what media they produce.

In children’s media, there are thousands, if not millions, of representations of white people available. There are strikingly few representations of people of color. In my opinion, the people who are insecure in this situation are not those asking for a better balance of representation in media, but the white people who think that any encroachment at all from people of color in their almost exclusively white media is an affront.

yes to all of this, and also: one of the things that bothers me most about this sort of criticism of “political correctness” is that it basically precludes the possibility of any legitimate reasons for having (say) a black princess. that’s so aggravating to me, that literally anytime something like this happens people are like BLAH BLAH BLAH ART NOT POLITICS and it’s like… well, how could someone possibly tell a story about (say) a black princess without you getting upset about it? ugh i’m not explaining this well. but basically this viewpoint is saying “only white people can be art, anything else is politics and immediately suspect.” which is false in both directions.

or in other words: if you don’t care about the race of the latest disney princess, then why are you getting so upset about the race of the latest disney princess?