Get Rid of Affirmative Action to Shield Minorities from the White Man's Crazy

'Cause these UTexas law students brought the crazy in buckets filled with "bling":

A group of first-year law students at the University of Texas at Austin has been chided by the dean for participating in a “Ghetto Fabulous”-themed costume party and posting pictures from it online.

They were law students, of all people. These people will have influences on the legal system of the United States in three years' time. Critical Race Studies & Legal Positivism for the win!

Nick Transier, a first-year student who attended the party in September and posted pictures on his Web site, said nobody meant to offend anyone of any race.

“We had no intention by any measure to choose a group or class of people and make fun of them,” said Transier, 26, of Houston.

Do people know what the word "intent" means any more? Especially law students who study criminal law? Maybe I should break this down a little bit. You know how there are those situations where a guy's aiming a gun at a woman, and saying, "If I can't have you, no one will," and then the gun goes off? From what that guy says, he may not have intended any harm, but his actions don't quite match up with that shoddy declaration of making her his BFF. Uhhh, Bueller?

Also note: this article says "26" and not "2+6," so our expectations of a mature apology...should be gone. What happened at this shuck-'n'-jive suaree, we wonder?

But the photos — in which partygoers carried 40-ounce bottles of malt liquor and wore Afro wigs, necklaces with large medallions and name tags bearing traditionally black and Hispanic names — upset some black law students, said Sophia Lecky, president of the Thurgood Marshall Legal Society.

Hmmm...maybe they're making fun of...umm...Alcoholics-Anonymous-evaders-who-have-
not-cut-their-hair-in-a-really-long-time-and-have-participated-
in-high-school-track-at-a-Harlem-nightclub...

Yeah, that's it.

Surely these can't be regurgitated negative stereotypes of "ghetto" black and Hispanic folk! Can't be! Why on earth would the white man make his burden any heavier? Blessed be! Now, just how many minorities attend this school? Because if this happened in Pale Folk Po-dunk Academy of Legalation (PFPAL), perhaps we can understand. It's always prudent to blame "rednec ks"/"po' white trash"/"KKK"/"CIA"-- oops, that slipped; I meant "Appalachia," wild typo there -- for their lack of book-learnin' and hatin' the darkies.

About 70 of UT’s roughly 1,300 law students are black, according to preliminary enrollment figures. There are about 800 white students, 225 Hispanic students, 75 Asian students, 55 foreign students and 75 whose ethnicities were unknown.

Umm...you mean even diversity couldn't stop the fashion violence and increase the peace? Affirmative action, what have you done?! I bet the kids at this party will be the same ones castigating affirmative action when the topic arises for debate. 'Cause, you know, blacks and Latinos (the noticeable brown folk in the classrooms, excluding some of the Native Americans, often interspersed amongst the white women, Asians, and other-people-who-probably-shouldn't-be-there) just waste their scholarship money on a strong Afro pick, a case of 40's, and a bullhorn for when they cruise into Con Law shouting, "SHOW THEM MY MOTTO!"

Chimps. We are governed by chimps.

However, I am not thoroughly depressed. Robert Jensen, an educator in Texas (and elsewhere, thanks to the internets), put the smack on down and singlehandedly brought thought provoking sexy back:

When one of the first-year University of Texas law students who participated in a "ghetto fabulous" party posted pictures on the web, we saw the ugly face of white privilege and the racism in which it is rooted. But the depth of the problem of white supremacy at the university -- and in mainstream institutions more generally -- is also evident in the polite way in which the university administration chastised the students.

...It was kinda like that scene in Team America where the gang shitbombs some location on faulty intelligence. And Spottswoode turns to their supercomputer, I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.E.N.C.E., and he says, "That was bad, I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.E.N.C.E. Very bad I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.E.N.C.E." And I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.E.N.C.E. replies, "Sorry:"

...First, Sager suggests that some students "might be seriously offended by the party, and especially by the pictures taken at the event."

[Translation: Why the fuck did you take pictures? We could've just said the darkies were hallucinating again, but you took pictures! No tangible evidence! That's it: all you fuckers are taking criminal law over again!]

...Second, the email suggests that the partygoers didn't consider "the potential harm they were causing to UT Law" by doing something that could make some people "feel uncomfortable simply because of who they are."

[Translation: We're not supposed to make the darkies sad DIRECTLY. Tact is key. This party lacked tact and a PR speech in its pre-planning. Don't worry; we go over "covering your ass" in third year. Hey, maybe we should put that in the prospectus...]

...Finally, and most important, the dean's message warns the partygoers that they failed to consider "the extraordinary damage they could do to their own careers" in a society in which those who employ lawyers might not want to hire people who engage in such conduct. Sager warns that it is "genuinely foolhardy to engage in conduct (and even more foolhardy to proudly disseminate proof that you have done so) that could jeopardize your ability to practice law."

[Translation: DO NOT SAVE PROOF DUMBASSES GODDAMNIT WHY DID WE ADMIT YOU-- I mean, people will probably still hire you...but you'd have a lot of sucking up to do to those token darkies in the copy room. A looot...damn, y'all. Hahahaha. You fucked up...but we can fix it. Just...NO PICTURES on the INTERNET. GEEZ.]

Jensen then goes into areas that some people would describe as deep:

The motivations and views of participants may vary, but these parties have two consistent features: (1) white people mock African American and Latino people through stereotypes of the residents of low-income urban areas, while at the same time enjoying the feeling of temporarily adopting these looks and poses; and (2) the white folks typically do it without pausing to ponder what right they have as members of a dominant racial class to poach in this fashion on the lives of people of a subordinated racial class.

In other words, white people find pleasure in insulting non-white people while at the same time safely "slumming' for cheap thrills in that non-white world, all the time oblivious to the moral and political implications.

So wait...I thought white people were colorblind, gender-blind, and damned near vision impaired. Getthefuckouttahere. They actually JUDGE people about whom they essentially know NOTHING?! And negatively, no less? I thought they memorized the "content of their character" part of the King speech! "I Have a Dream," people? No? Surely this behavior is new!

(Sarcasm aside...do these people have to be future lawyers? Seriously? No, seriously?)

Here's what we should say to students: The problem with a racist "ghetto fabulous" party isn't that it offends some people or tarnishes the image of UT or may hurt careers. The problem is that it's racist, and when you engage in such behavior you are deepening the racism of a white-supremacist culture, and that's wrong. It violates the moral and political principles that we all say we endorse. It supports and strengthens an unjust social system that hurts people.

Preach, preacher! I mean...erm...kumbaya. (I love how he writes "that we all say we endorse" 'cause I can feel it in my heart and it's good. And I think for the others, it probably tastes like burning.)

These incidents, and the universities' responses, also raise a fundamental question about what we white people mean when we say we support "diversity." Does that mean we are willing to invite some limited number of non-white people into our space, but with the implicit understanding that it will remain a white-defined space? Or does it mean a commitment to changing these institutions into truly multicultural places? If we're serious about that, it has to mean not an occasional nod to other cultural practices, but an end to white-supremacist practices. It has to mean not only acknowledging other cultural practices but recognizing that the wealth of the United States and Europe is rooted in the destruction of some of those cultures over the past 500 years, and that we are living with the consequences of that destruction.

We white people can't simply point to the ugliest racism of the KKK as the problem and feel morally superior. We can't issue a polite warning to a few law students about being thoughtless and think we've done our job. The problem is that most of us white people -- myself included -- are comfortable in white spaces, and we often are reflexively hesitant to surrender control of that space. Real change -- the process of truly incorporating a deep multiculturalism into our schools, churches, and businesses -- is a long struggle. The more I make some progress in my own classes, for example, the more I see how much I have left to do and the more aware of my mistakes I become.

I emphasized parts of this section because I've heard people isolate affirmative action to skin color and racial discrimination to skin color way too many times. I've heard people advocate colorblindness in the same breath I've heard them refer to skin color as "trivial," and I'm always overreacting or hypersensitive or too scary black when I mention the fact that I am black. I've heard talks about tolerance and diversity more than I'd care to disclose. I have a revelation to share: white folk, all the other people whose skeletons you try to gaze at when you're putting us down -- you know, the people of color -- we've been tolerating your asses for years. Toleration runs thin. You tolerate bad smells in crowded rooms. You tolerate foul language at casual social gatherings. You tolerate the occasional pop quiz in a subject you like. It's really fucking condescending and veiled to apply such a practice to people. To be honest, we don't like toleration (even if you guys kinda deserve it), we don't want it, and we don't want to give it.

We want respect, and we want it while you can still see our respective skin colors, our respective cultures, and our history. We want to walk into a room and speak to you without feeling like we're representing for "our people." We don't want to choose between uplifting a collective and fighting for our own survival. We don't want to use your cultural standards to determine whether ours are good enough. We don't want to be your lowest common denominator.

We don't live so you can put on your fresh new private trendy minstrel shows or buffet-pick from our traditions, fashion, and standards of existence -- all traditions that we're proud of creating. We're human, damnit. Remember all those male-normative definitions of people and their multifaceted identities and creativity? WE HAVE THAT TOO. We want credit for it. We want credit for being human and beautiful and free. And god-fucking-damnit, we don't want to walk into a place defending ourselves where we're supposed to be still developing ourselves. Growthefuckup. We've survived this long; do you really think we've done it without effort? We just coasted through? After the rope, the whip, the firehoses, the dogs, the spit, the shame, and the degradation? The "border patrols," the internment camps, the black/yellow/brownface, the forced migrations, the massacres, and the segregation?

Cocaine really must be one hell of a drug.