blueAlto

Check out this amazing article written in September of 2007 posted to Lifelube, the HIV prevention blog. Unfortunately, I just came across the piece recently.  In it, David J. Malebranche, MD, MPH, Assistant Professor at the Division of General Medicine at Emory University’s School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, writes about gay black men, HIV prevention, and the systemic race issues and racism that continue to cause devastation in the lives of gay and non gay black men in America.

The issues are complex and multi layered, and in my view, many of them can only be addressed by someone familiar with, and most importantly, part of the community they are trying to reach. Dr. Malebranche is that individual, and he offers wisdom, insight, and a keen understanding of racial dynamics in framing and setting out priorities for black, gay men's health. 

From The Truth in Black & White by David Malebranche:

All of this is not new and neatly plays into age-old stereotypical notions of Black masculinity that emphasize heterosexual and physical/athletic prowess over traditional masculine definitions like education, employment and responsibility that are reserved for White men. These definitions began with slavery, where our only roles we to work and breed, and it continues today on the auction blocks of professional sports’ drafting process, where predominantly Black athletes are bought and sold to predominantly White owners of sports franchises.

But one needs to look no further than the media to see how, particularly in this field of athletics, the predominantly White media still manages to establish double standards that brainwash Black men into believing that everything they do is wrong, while White players can act in a similar fashion and not be punished or held accountable for their actions with a similar level of public scrutiny and outrage.

Great stuff here that really gets to the heart of issues involved in black gay men's health and lives. 

It may seem like I am endlessly beating a long dead horse with this entry, but it does a very good job at getting to the heart of what is happening in these debates between women of color and the larger feminist movement.

Sitting down to put this entry together, I had not yet heard of the latest mistake to hit the feminist / women of color debate. This one is beyond the pale. Yes, I used the tonal reference purposefully. Deciding I don't have much to add to the latest BS, I am going to stick to my original plan and answer a question many have asked in email regarding the original issue.

A question about what was stolen, how exactly was it stolen, and was it direct plagiarism or not. This is an edited comment I submitted to the website Feministe, and I think it may explain and demonstrate exactly who is hurt in these debates when activist work, and previous research, go completely without attribution. I make the point that appropriation or plagiarism isn't the point. Silencing a movement, is.

I think Amanda Marcotte has made her position abundantly clear with respect to engagement on this topic. It is clear as hell to me that Amanda is not going to engage, period. Too wrapped up in the velvet cape of histrionic offense, talking about greater themes and patterns is not a good move for someone if they instead can maintain the focus on a discussion that will never go anywhere. Concentrating on what was never said, through the word semantics of personal offense, does a great job of keeping the focus off the actual grievance. The one that so far, still needs to be addressed.

So....if we are serious about a conversation that speaks to racism, that speaks to privilege, and speaks to an all too common dynamic of flawed thinking when we take time to consider our otherwise progressive outlook; the one that affords many of us with a false belief in our ability to understand dynamics of minority experience, we then begin to have a conversation which may be of benefit.

My main point being, idea appropriation or not, plagiarism or not, what we need to center this discussion and future discussions on, is the actual grievance, as articulated by the injured party. After making certain I am fully aware of just what that is, I will now ask Amanda Marcotte to answer my points below, clearly and minus the previous invective.

Amanda, how is it that in an online and real life activist culture which specifically deals with the issue of immigration and sexual explotation, and with the majority of people who work for, and fight for those organizations being the exact people this issue effects, how is it possible that a major article by a popular, well read and recognized feminist, has completely ignored and denied that entire community? 

By not linking, by not referencing, and by failing to mention that community, you not only invalidated them, you stole their voice and used it for your gain. Make no mistake, there are years and years of documented work and historical precedent done by local grassroots activists. The offense is not just “one woman who writes one blog who is throwing a hissy fit”. That is a complete mis characterization and is grossly unfair to not only that woman, but more so, it is abuse of that community that your derailing side arguments over semantics and picking the best "framing", for your supposed offense. Once again Amanda, your actions and aggressive disregard of the way this issue plays out, has served to ignore and invalidate minority experience.

No matter how you cut it, what did not occur was an acknowledgment and a reference to the people who do this work day in and day out and have been doing it in a time frame measured in years. Secondly, you have harmed the individuals that this issue takes advantage of. Invalidating people who are already often invalidated without any help from you, does nothing but ensure their continued subjugation and abuse.

This is light years more serious than the appaling way you attempt to frame this Amanda. Get over yourself, and just do the right thing for a change. Because hopefully what is becoming clear to you, is that your framing is pretty damn off at the moment. Good luck with that.

The very important issue that I have been writing about for the past couple of days, the active silencing of women of color bloggers, is finally gaining some momentum, and blogger Ico has written an open letter to the white feminist communityy, asking them to, quote, stop fucking up! She is amazingly on point in this letter:

The icing-on-the-cake, the piece-de-resistance, the ginormous-cherry-on-the-sundae-of-hypocrisy. If the issues concerned a bunch of women and men in arguing over whether something were sexist or not, there would be no question of who was right. When you have a group of men ganging up and claiming that the women in the room are being over-sensitive and irrational and seeing sexism where there is none (we have all been in this room before, I think), we all know the men are full of bullshit. It is an egregious show of male privilege.

So when all the WoC in the blogosphere are telling us that there are problems in feminism…

Um… yeah.

It's an uncomfortable, but highly required, long time in the coming message, and it is something that needs to be treated as a priority. If you would be interested in supporting the cause, then go to the site linked above and leave a comment, asking to be included and signed off on the letter.  

When I made the very scary decision to leave what was a rather cushy position in emergency medical research, and return to grad school for my MFA, it was with a lot of thought and some obvious goals. All of which were in some way based on my experiences reading literature and non fiction that had the ability to move me, change me, or make me consider something for the first time. If you stop to think about those things, and just what it means when those experiences happen for us, it can be overwhelming.

I have always been deeply affected by a personal narrative, the act of an author writing and expressing a strongly felt declarative statement. When the prolific blogger brownfemininepower took down her website recently, the blog world lost a very strong, powerful voice. One that I really wish more people had a chance to read. I remember when I first stumbled onto her site almost a year ago, the first article I read was discussing her initial experience with women's studies, and her first experience with the brilliant and cutting edge Andrea Smith, author of Conquest: Sexual Violence and American Indian Genocide.

While I had never had the opportunity to hear her lecture, or experience the teaching of Ms. Smith, I had read her books, and I had very specifically garnered much of my pedagogical ethic of student safety, from her writings and philosophy. What became increasingly clear to me as I read brownfeminepower's essay discussing Andrea Smith, and the ensuing comments, was what that particular community of women of color bloggers had more of than any other blog community I had come across. In a few very large and meaningful ways, they were rich.

Odd you might say, given the dynamics that have been laid out over the last several months, it seems like a somewhat contradictory thing to say. And if we were just talking about acceptance and validation from the mainstream, I would agree, they are anything but rich. Though what I was feeling, what I was seeing, and what I am trying to get at, is the community that these women have created with and for each other, is extremely rich.

It's something that you can't help but notice and it's a flavor that runs through all the women of color blogs that I have read. They are there for one another, they support each other, they hold each other up, and when it gets bad, as it has lately, they have each others back. And no, they don't always agree. Though there is always a core respect, and a core support. And it's something that makes me angry when I think of some of the darker reasons for that highly developed trait I see in women of color.

That is something I envy, and it is something we in the liberal mainstream blog world - feminist, gay, anti racist, pick your theme, we could all do a bit better at. The following video We Belong: Women Of Color & Online Feminism is one made by Sudy, who also writes a great blog. I think the video does an exacting job of conveying my point here. It was shot around the recent WAM conference (women and media) and when I first saw it, I was overwhelmed by the genuine support that it demonstrates so beautifully. I think it's a great, inspiring way to close out this topic. 

I know myself well enough to know that at the moment, anything constructive I could hope to offer in explaining to the seemingly vast number of vacant and clueless white "progressive" bloggers, how they are actively silencing voices of women of color bloggers, would come off as nothing less than a smug, pedantic, lengthy and fucking fed up screed, I'm going to pass on that option. For today.

No, not because I just couldn't live with myself if I perhaps hurt a stupid white persons feelings. Instead, because anything I hope to constructively add, is going to take some time to decrease the current level of boil.

So, in a very intentional departure from the negative, I'm going to take the higher road and tell you about some great sites you probably haven't seen before. Funny enough, they all discuss issues of race in America very candidly, and through a frame and lens that actually mirrors the reality in which we live. Though I will warn you. For all the sites I am going to recommend, if you want it to be a good and productive experience, you need to allow yourself to be open to the following.

1. Above all else, make a real and honest attempt to listen, and to hear what it is the author is saying.
   
2. Understand that what they are telling you is something they know on a personal level.
3. If you still feel the need to discuss and engage, and if someone tells you that your perspective may in fact be racist, remember; they are not calling you Hitler! Don't bring on the fucking histrionics. What they are asking you, is to consider the possibility that your perspective may contain an inherent bias. A blind spot. If they suggest that to you, please, trust me on what I say next. If someone says that to you, you need to consider it a gift. Then you need to sit down and listen.
   

I will say again, if you truly want to begin to understand racism in America, the only way that will occur, is to listen to the people who know something about it.

The following are all blogs I link to, and they are ones I recommend as excellent places to begin to listen, and to learn. These blogs are written by smart, engaged women and men of color who are passionate, focused, and making a difference in the things they care about. I highly recommend you give them a read, because you will be better for it.

Though I will ask that if you have something negative to say; just don't! But, if you simply must, then please do it here. They are more than capable of sparring with you, yes, but on your first visit, you have to agree, it's just bad form.

In my "offline life", one of the things that I have done over the past four years, is help facilitate anti racism awareness sessions. Mainly an introduction to the topic for people who are interested in the idea of racial justice and ending oppression on the basis of race and  / or skin color.

It's something I am planning on doing more of. Because one, it's needed, and two, it can be highly rewarding as well. Seeing someone "get it" for the first time, whether it be finally understanding a concept that had been difficult in the past, or more often, hearing for the first time, an experience of discrimination in the first person. There is huge power in that. Our personal stories of differences, and much of the pain and misunderstanding that ignorance of those differences can unintentionally cause, when worked through, can be intensely liberating.

One thing that has become clear to me when doing this type of work, is that it can go along way to help us work through all that, when we are at least talking the same language, and using the same terms. The language and meanings behind the terms that are inherent to anti racist work are specific, and often, they don't carry the same meaning or level of importance the word may be given in general society. In going over several of the comment threads for as long as I have been discussing the issue here, one thing became overwhelmingly clear. Some of us are talking the same language, and many of us are not. 

Where this became concerning, was when I considered the idea that several of the misunderstandings and comment thread flame wars, could have potentially been avoided if we had perhaps clarified terms. This is a problem that is universal across the online world, and it is even a bigger problem in the field of anti racist work. We are all opinionated and strong minded people, and we want to get our points out there and be heard. I'm as guilty as anyone, I'll be the first to admit it. Though i am realizing now, there may just be a better way to be seen and heard.

Therefore, I have decided to start what I'm calling the Defining Terms project. An ongoing thread with an open and very specifically directed comment thread that speaks to one thing - definitions of terms frequently used that have the potential to lead into misunderstanding. There is no right or wrong answer here. My point, is to seek clarification regarding exactly what people mean when they use certain words. My hope is, that the answers we see when this thread is over may help all of us have better and more effective discussions over the important things we need to talk about.

Please, if you comment here, often or hardly ever, or even if you don't, your participation would be appreciated and defiantly of value.If you choose not to identify yourself, please be assured your comment will be kept confidential.

My goal is at the end of this, is to have a working definition of racism that we (all of us) can agree we are using, when we engage in discussions that reference race.

Please comment on the following word, both in terms of what that word means to you when you hear it used, as well as when you use it yourself.

What does the term(s) "racist / racism" mean to you? 

Guidelines:

1. The comments need to address the specific question being asked in terms of how *you* understand the question and how *you* define the word. Not "some people in society think", the amswer is meant to reference only what you think.
2. Please do not use specific groups of people identified by race in your answer. For example racism is not "X race doing this to Y race". If you need to reference things like dominant culture, oppressed minority, please do so without identifying a specific race.
   
3.  The purpose of this specific comment thread is materially different from others. This is not meant to be a debate or discussion of responses. Consider it to be a poll.
4. You can sign your name, not sign your name, or create an identity. That is up to you. All that is being asked, is that you answer the question honestly.
5. All answers that don't follow the guidelines above will be deleted. I will say in advance, this is not a comment thread for racist attacks or pontification of any stripes. It is meant to define a term, in the hopes we can all participate in discussions, and be heard more effectively. Specifically when those discussions are by nature, sensitive and personal ones.

Thanks for commenting. If you haven't commented yet, please do.

If we hold the view that cinema can be a lens into the world in which we live, then with regard to anti racism dynamics and white liberal intellectuals, Manderlay is a most revealing, if not troublesome film.

Picking up where the Lars Van Treer film Dogville left off, that film being one of my favorites, Manderlay asks fundamental questions about motivation, assumptions, and ally affiliations that American cinema is neither equipped nor positioned to ask. Suggesting perhaps, that the white, liberal, progressive score card has some potentially concerning, and sometimes racist, agendas. At least in the way our race issues currently play out in 2008. While not completely agreeing with what I take as the answers to the questions posed, the questions are in fact, being posed.

The following video showcases the song used to close Dogville and open Manderlay, David Bowies Young Americans. Another in the "Al's favorites" category. The photographic stills shown while the song opened and closed the films were a wise and interesting addition, as they hint at a class distinction being fundamental to those oppressed by race, and also to the oppressors, who more often than not have been disenfranchised economically. A clear feeding for scraps narrative, it maintains an appropriate ethical line through not either excusing, nor being overly simplistic via attempting to explain the problem away.

Trigger Warning:

Video contains photographic stills of 1950's racist realities, ie. KKK images, race demonstrations etc. Nothing overtly violent. 

And Other Modern Day Fairy Tales

One of a few notably positive things this presidential race is potentially offering the country, besides the opportunity for some substantial change, is an opportunity to re engage, or, depending on your perspective, begin to engage, the dialog on race relations. Something that as a country, we have collectively failed on each and every time we have made the attempt.

So I find it very interesting that with every call for a new discussion on race, there seems to be a louder, more reactive cry. In the last several weeks, often in response to "the speech", there have been increasing rumblings on conservative blogs and web sites, and sound bites popping up in the MSM that, yes, we do need a new discussion, but one where we look at the new oppressed minority in America - the straight, white, able bodied male.

Can we please take a few moments, spending time with our thoughts and quiet reflection, while we remember these oppressed, victimized and exploited white men from all across this land. Thank you.

Interesting theory I suppose, but if you talk to Devah Pager, a sociologist at Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill., he will disagree with the idea of the new American victim. Vehemently. In late 2001, Devah recruited 250 recent college graduates for a study. Half were white, half were black, all were conservative in style and presentation, possessing a personable demeanour. Each man was considered to have equal qualifications and similar backgrounds, and would have been considered a model candidate as a companies new hire.

The study sent pairs of these men (one white, one black) out to a range of low skilled employers in the region, each applying for the same position. As I indicated, all variables were considered equal, with the one exception being a criminal conviction assigned to one of the men, but not the other. The history was considered serious; a felony conviction for the sale of cocaine.

The recently released study had some very telling results regarding this new era in Americas racial understanding, and alleged white, heterosexual male oppression. The study showed that the black men with no criminal history experienced call backs for a second interview significantly less often than the white ex con drug dealer. Who, it would seem, is thriving, despite the suffocating choke hold of oppression.

My own hope is that any discussion this country has over race, will be mindful of this and other studies that demonstrate very clearly, that while we may be having a discussion, it is only helpful if we are willing to acknowledge the reality of the current, and past experience of which black men in this country have been acculturated into. And lastly, if that discussion is not a comforatable one for White America, then good, we are at least begining in the right direction.

Well, I thought it was funny even if many others did not. Here I refer to both an off the cuff comment in a faculty meeting, as well as what seems to be a career stunting move of not accepting an offer to teach in a new university department. One that not only myself, but a few other colleagues have had an experience with as of late. Let me back up.

The university where I teach a combined cultural studies and modern literature course, is, as of next semester, adding a new undergraduate major to the department of cultural studies. One that I, as well as every other mid level instructor in the department has been asked to teach in. So far, not one person has confirmed an acceptance of the offer.... Why? Because who really wants to teach in a department of critical whiteness studies?

You heard me. The study of being white, and examination of the culture of the white race. Lest you think that it could be thought of as KKK 101, or Introduction to privilege: an experiential analysis; well, supposedly you (and I) would be wrong.

"Whiteness studies", as it is commonly known, is an attempt to think critically about how white skin preference and privilege has operated systematically, structurally, and sometimes unconsciously as a dominant force in American—and often in global—society and culture. The goal is said to be one of positioning the study of whiteness from an anti racist perspective. So far, I'm more than on board with that idea.

Because on the surface, it sounds like it is an educational pursuit worth merit, similar to African American Studies, Women and Gender Studies, Queer Studies etc. But is it? In the examples I mentioned, the perspective is always from the experience of an oppressed minority, and the collective narratives both from, and about that specific group in a greater societal context. In other words, being the underdog, and being the "other", is a central and unifying hallmark of the critical inquiry.

One of the most common and concerning criticisms of whiteness studies, has been its obvious exclusion of oppressed minorities in the development and execution of curriculum. Indeed, the inclusion of that missing perspective has been shown in theory and application to prevent the inevitable derailment that will occur when that perspective is lacking. Picture if you will:

A well intentioned but reasonably defensive bunch of white people, sitting around with a whole bunch of other well intentioned but reasonably defensive white people, as they attempt to define, identify, and deconstruct issues of racial and class power and privilege. Are you picturing the train hurtling off the cliff, crashing on the rocks below?

Because that is what will always happen if the grounding voice and direction of those that whiteness has oppressed, is not a central and referential point of the process, and discussion of whiteness. Without that present, it quickly becomes a gross misuse, and exacting example of the dynamic of white privilege at play.

And really, as my astute, fair skinned and blond co instructor whispered to me in today's faculty meeting, "What the hell is 'white culture' anyway"?

Knowing my co instructor like I do, I was reasonably sure she was on page with me when I offered a rather snide, "Hotdogs, Nascar, and the mullet", which of course caused Samantha to snort just a little too loud.

My decision to not share that answer with the rest of the table, I'm guessing, was a smart one.
 

The image is black and white; the grain slightly fuzzy. For a picture this old, it is in excellent condition. Given the style of dress, I assume it to be from the thirties or forties. It could be a picnic, a family outing, a Sunday Easter celebration perhaps. Though something confuses me, and the feeling leaves me unsure.

In the image everyone is smiling. All ages are represented, and everyone seems to be having a wonderful time. The little girl who can barely contain her smile is speaking to an older man. She is no more than ten. I notice the girl is pointing to something up in the large oak tree. Showing the older man what clearly, she is fascinated with. He's smiling too, having been permitted to share in the girls secret. I'm still unsure what it is they are all looking at, but whatever is in the tree is difficult to distinguish.

As I look at the image and the mans figure comes into full view, it takes a few seconds to process. I shudder slightly at the stark and visceral image, as I fight the reflexive revulsion that rises. Attempting to cast the image out of my minds lens is futile. Because what the little girl was smiling at deep in the tree, was the carcass of a man. A dead, black man hanging from the tree, hands hog tied behind his back, a blindfold covering his eyes. The deep gashes on the flesh of his back are still fresh, likely the result of being whipped prior to his demise at the end of a noose.  

Though it is a central narrative in American history, this is the first picture I have seen, much less held, of a black man lynched and hanging from a tree. With smiling white people gathered around, clearly thrilled with their catch, as the morbid display that was the culmination of last nights ride hangs motionless above the heads of the good people of Little Town Anywhere America.

It was spring of 2000, and  David and I were in LA for a few days. The new exhibit Blood on Your Hands, was showing at the Museum of Tolerance. It was one I had been hearing about for a while, and had wanted to attend. Just after three on the afternoon of our last day, we found ourselves standing in one of the tiny exhibit halls, deep inside of the vast Smon Weizenthal centre.

Setting the image back on the table that is covered with deep red cloth, I turn away from the other macabre effects sharing space with the picture. Whips, a cattle branding iron, hoods sewn from pigs cloth, are all too obviously prominent on the table. Made much more prominent with the voice coming from an unseen recorder, as it intones names. A short pause between the name and the manner of death. It doesn't stop once or repeat a name during the full twenty minutes we are in the room.

"Lynched".

"Beaten".

"Raped, sodomized, set on fire".

The voice continues.

The most effective result from this display is both powerfully and cruelly clever. Though I have to wonder if it was consciously intended. As we wait for the pre timed door to open at the other end of the room, the tension is palpable and toxic. Eyes cast down, hands shuffling, we are the people who could have, and most likely would have been, at that Sunday picnic fifty years ago. Laughing, relaxing, enjoying a feast, pointing to the catch in the tree as we reach for seconds. Today, we are literally itching to leave that room. Because away from that room we are safe.

The reality is close and it is awkward, yes. But it also coolly and artfully abstracted. Discussion outside the room is natural, warranted even, we tell ourselves.

"A dark, dark part of history".

"What in God's name were people thinking"?

Standing outside that room, I silently wonder if those phrases are as viciously offensive to others as they are sounding to me. The fact that question is a new one for me, is far more troubling than the question itself.

Everyone of us, every white face that leaves that room, has over time, and with silent mentoring from those that have gone before us, become quite adept at a specific positioning. One that exists just safely to the side of an exacting intersection. An intersection consisting of historical atrocity and a collective moral agency yet to be claimed. Scanning the faces that have left the room it is clear; few if any of us have made the claim. David and I move to the front door quickly, and I distinctly recall being both conscious of, and shamed at my relief over the lack of a mirror.

That day in 2000 was the very shaky beginning of a long and most uncomfortable process of accounting and reckoning. Complicated would not begin to describe how to integrate a history that I share, with a present that I control and must be accountable for. It is a task that is never ending, and one I am required to take my part in. That is also not by any means to say it is near completion. The past cannot change, and I am aware this journey is often beset with the self righteous cry of my fellow white skinned citizen. The never ending non reference to a shared history we painfully contort around and never really speak of beyond self referentially.

"But it wasn't me that did those things"! 

"I can't change the past"! 

I'm sure the man in the tree would understand. It wasn't you. I'm sure he would understand the abstraction, the concerned tones, the reflexive shaking of the head, the nods, and the appropriately held pauses. I'm sure he thanks you for the glib, tacit support you give to the cause. Before retreating into a white existence in which you are free to luxuriously massage yourself endlessly and forcefully with sharp admonishments of stupid, angry white people in silly, white hoods. Those people. Certainly all of the white faces at your dinner table would agree.

"My God, who cares about a color. It doesn't matter what color a person is. For all I care they could be red, yellow, blue or purple"!

The full support and warm smiles from the other non accountable around your table is a potent narcotic. Once again you are wrapped in the lazy, hazy cape of unspoken denial. Made by the name brand that is the current rage. White Liberal Progressive.

And once again, an intersection of historical atrocity and yet to be claimed personal, moral agency takes place just outside of your front door. As it always does, with those self identified as non accountable, positioned safely out of a clear direction. Their specific stance held to avoid the trajectory that occurs thousands of times a day in this place we call land of the free. In Little Town Anywhere America.

In 2008, I loudly and with full awareness, claim my personal, moral agency and deem myself newly accountable. Accountable to the burden that is my ethnic history as a white person who exists in an America that is anything but equal. Accountable to the reality of an uneven playing field, and the reality of my specific positioning on that field by virtue of the current social order. My moral agency, has been claimed. My behavior now and forward is conscious and purposely thoughtful. It is also open and accepting of critique. Most importantly, newly accountable means the process is not one with a completion date. It is both a lived reality, and when it needs to be, it is an actionable reality.

It is also, just a start. 

I ask a simple but pointed and direct question.

As a white person in 2008, where are you in relation to historical atrocity and your singular moral agency, if it is yet to be claimed?

In my way of looking at it, an answer is mandatory from each of us.

The following are just some initial thoughts on something that occurred today. They should not be taken as any type of substantive opinion or stance on the topic. Those I imagine, will be forming for a while.

The begining of this semester marks two important events in my academic career. The first being, it the final semester of the MFA creative writing program that I have been working towards for the past two and a half years. It is also the first full semester where I am instructing an undergraduate course outside of the realm of TA (teaching assistant).

Today marked the first day of classes. As usual, the day began with a core departmental faculty meeting. At which, something occured to me. After looking around the room several times, I was struck with an idea that has festered all day, resulting in some questions I know I will be wrestling with for quite a while. The answers are complex, and the reality of the bigger picture is not at all a comfortable space.

This is nowhere near formed, and my ideas are random at best, but I will mention what it was that I noticed when looking around that stuffy faculty meeting. A distinct lack of color. Or more accurately, a complete absence of color. And I'm not discussing the interior design. I'm discussing the five other people in the room that included two TA's, a tenured professor, the department head, my co instructor, and myself.

The breakdown is as follows. Four women, two men, we are all glaringly lily white individuals in our early thirties to late fifties. We are all either employed by, or current top of the class graduate students at one of this countries leading universities. Sitting in a room, discussing a course we are responsible for teaching, entitled Identity & Experience: minority representation in modern literature. A course that specifically focuses on the way in which the experience of oppressed minorities has been portrayed, or more accurately, not or rarely portrayed, in popular works of fiction over the last century.

The glaring question that cannot be avoided in that scenario is obvious. It also demonstrates a fundamental problem that is endemic in most institutions of higher learning in North America. That's the easy part. The point at which it becomes difficult, is what do we do about it. I wish it was for me to answer, however this is a problem that will only be corrected with major, sweeping changes at the core of academia. An institution that prides itself on advanced theory and critical thought. However, as was so obvious to me today, it is when that advanced theory and critical thought intersect with a lived reality, that academia needs some major work.

In terms of the issue, it's certainly not something that I was unaware of. In fact I have always been on the rather vocal side of pro diversity policy debates etc. Though before today, it was something that existed as an abstraction, a theory I had informed and strong opinion on. I suppose I finally got a dose of "theory intersecting lived reality". I'm not at all enjoying the fit. Obviously, there will be more to come.

White Privilege:

1. A right, advantage, or immunity granted to or enjoyed by white persons beyond the common advantage of all others; an exemption in many particular cases from certain burdens or liabilities.
2. A privileged position; the possession of an advantage white persons enjoy over non-white persons.

A phrase that, when applied in a specific context, it is as if it had been written in Arabic. Because of both the vacant and puzzled stares that seem to always follow an acknowledgment of power and privilege, and because anytime there is a suggestion that white people benefit from those concepts, there are the rapid fire assertions of "not me, I don't have unearned advantage".

So let me begin with a bold assertion. If you are white, able bodied, heterosexual, have an income that allows you to function in the world, and especially if you are male, you have unearned power, privilege, and entitlement. And yes, it benefits you. It benefits you, while hindering the access and opportunity of others. Period.

Don't worry, the intention of this article is not a "down on the evil and oppressive white man" rant. it's discussing some cultural concepts that as white people in North America, we have been specifically socially conditioned to not recognize. Because our culture likes to believe it operates on ability, we then deny that those concepts are unearned.

That's why we like to avoid the reality of white privilege, and when we have to acknowledge it, we dismiss it, or accuse those suggesting the concept of being "overly sensitive".

Because, describing white privilege, by mandate, makes one newly accountable. As in women's studies work that acknowledge male privilege and ask men to give up some of their power, one who writes about having white privilege must ask, "having named it, described it, and acknowledged it, now what"? What can you and I do, as white people, to lessen or end it?

In the third year of my undergraduate program, when I had just turned twenty one, I took my first women's studies course, as well as my first course in racial dynamics. And so began the foot stomping, breath holding, and never ending justifications that "I don't use my maleness, whiteness, reality of being able bodied, etc. etc. as a benefit! I earn what I accomplish."

I really didn't let that one go easily. Because if I did, what would that be saying about the entire structure of this culture I am part of, and have grown up in? I really didn't like the answers.

Up until those courses, my upbringing, education, and life experience knew racism as a bad, evil, violent thing. It gave me nothing useful in understanding the core of North American racial dynamics; the ability to see myself as an oppressor, as an unfairly advantaged person, or as a participant in a damaged culture.

Largely, I grew up believing that my individual ethics and morals depended on my strength and individual moral will. My education followed a very specific pattern: As a white man, I had been taught to think of my life as morally neutral, normative, and average, but also ideal. and that is one of the quickest ways to engender racism in our culture. Because when we then work to benefit others, that's the template we know, and the only one we follow. "It worked for me, it can work for you with just a bit of effort"!

Peggy McIntosh, is the associate director of The Center For Research On Women and Ethnicity, at Wellesley College. It was reading her essay White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack, that I began my growing awareness that culturally, historically, and socially, our society operates from the reality of favoring things that are "like" we are. We reward conformity because it is easy, it fits well. We eschew diversity, even if we say we don't, because it is ill fitting, and can be difficult to understand. and thirdly, it offers a significant benefit to those who have the power to define what is ill fitting, and what is not.

Consider the following fifteen experiences documented by McIntosh, things we would normally identify as common ones in our lives. Things we experience daily, and don't even think about. These are merely fifteen examples of what today, I ask my students to list when looking at unacknowledged power and privilege. When they do this exercise, if they can't list fifty examples off the top of their head, then they have yet to understand white privilege.

My White Reality:

The following link offers several great resources on white privilege, power, and cultural entitlement, if you wish to know more.

So now that we have at least acknowledged white privilege, the question becomes, are we going to do something about it? And if so, what? Ideas welcomed!

The publication date that appears below this entry signifies the date of initial publication to sb, my former website.

It is a rare event when a  Saturday evening finds David and I enjoying it at home. Due in part to my still painful, rather unappealing looking, swollen and purple yellowish ankle. And as I've come to discover over the last several hours, Saturday night TV completely bites, So with nothing mass marketed and packaged from Hollywood, I decided to clean up a draft of some ideas I'm presenting at a meeting tomorrow night.

Since early 2004, I have sat on a volunteer community watch dog committee; one set up to liaise with the local police force in their treatment of hate crimes, GLBT concerns, as well as issues of potential sexist and racist bias in the way that police facilitate investigations, and the manner in which relevant community policies are carried out. To grossly generalize, it is a committee set up to act in an advocacy role for routinely oppressed minorities.

Four weeks ago, during our once monthly meeting, we had the opportunity to listen to a speaker from the local anti poverty action group. A sub theme of this woman's speech involved the frustration she has experienced when people make assumptions based on stereotypes of class, status, gender, and in her case specifically as a black woman, on issues of race.

During the question period, one of the officers who serves as our "police liaison", offered up this little snippet of vacant, fresh, idiocy. "With all due respect, as a black woman aren't you just really hyper sensitive to "racism", where in fact none may exist"?

When the woman graciously offered counter opinion and examples of her experience, she was rudely interrupted, and met with this dismissive comment from the officer.

"Well, fine, that may be your experience, but my experience is that minorities are hypersensitive, period".

I'm sure you can visualize the collective cringe.

After much committee discussion, for whatever reason, it was suggested that I compose a draft to address the demonstrated lack of understanding with regard to co operation, mutual respect, and acknowledgment of experience, when dealing with individuals and situations that one does not have the experience to directly speak to.

After much thought and reflection, I've decided my response will be a new one for our group. Instead of several long winded paragraphs of the usual "racism, sexism 101" that I am frankly very tiered of explaining to those that seem to simply reject it, I went with a fresh approach, and employed the less is more concept. In the form of ten points and a tip. Though with a goal that serves to offset the full dose of stinging sarcasm brewing in those specific points. Therefore, I'm presenting them in a role playing exercise, one that is disguised in a kind of light and "friendly teasing" vibe. A vibe that, thankfully, works very well with our boys in blue.

Al's ten simple points:

1. When dealing with one who's experience you do not share, make an earnest attempt to learn something new above all else.
2. Listen to what is being said.
3. Respectfully, shut the fuck up.
4. Make a sincere effort to hear without judgement what is being said.
   
5. Assume what they are telling you is nothing less than sincere.
   
6. Listen some more.
7. Examine your feelings with an intention to be as honest as you can, regarding why you may be defensive, why you feel as you do.
8. Understand that as white, financially secure, gainfully employed people, and as men specifically, we are ALL, largely ignorant on issues of racism, sexism, heterosexism, and issues of status and class, as they are completely absent in the majority of our experiences.
9. Understand that specific ignorance (if we grew up in North America), has been one we ALL have been socialized and acculturated in.
   
10. Therefore, understand that when we try to speak in a position of expertise and power against someone who lives the experience being discussed, we will more often than not come off as a pompous, self involved, blowhard

BONUS TIP of the evening: Now, and only now, think about offering a respectful and carefully considered opinion. Though more often than not, it would be wise to refrain, and instead, with an intention specific to comprehension, keep listening.

Those inevitable things known as age and end of current experience caught up with Rosa Parks