Allen, White Privilege, and Rambles (There'll Always Be Rambles)
"And on your left, we have the categorical, ultimate, unwavering adamant denial of racial slur usage in college by Senator George Felix Allen, citing the accusations as 'ludicrously false!' Is this indeed our fantasy, or are we shaking our moneymakers to the right tune? On your right, we have the adamant classmates slugging it out with these denials, testifying that Allen did use the epithets! The rehash of the past is brewing, folks! How many cafeteria workers can they find! How many helmet cleaners can they unearth? How many people in the yearbooks can be interviewed? Let's get it on!"
This is becoming indisputably disgusting in some ways. I worked my tiniest of circles in the blogosphere, sending the article on Salon.com to MSNBC and Keith Olbermann specifically. I e-mailed Jessica Valenti of Feministing.com, hoping maybe she could include something there, and I also sent something by the way of Feministe by linking to it within one of the political discussions there. I also spread it around some progressive areas in my livejournal, hoping someone would do something to determine the truth or falsity of these statements. Maintaining impartiality regarding an issue of racists in office is making me batshit insane. I can't do it. I want to scream, to punch, to kick...it's almost as if my soul's being attacked by some unnamed, ominous assailant. Asses need kickin', folks. I know there are probably a lot of politicians with racist sentiments that are just good at keeping their goods under the fig leaves, but...my God, this was obvious. Allen walked into a tarpit with his "macaca" shit because he knows a lot of Americans wouldn't know anything about it and he could get away with it. He had a cheering crowd in front of him, and for God's sake, he welcomed the guy to America. "So what?" Within that context...and in our political climate where any day now, a House of Un-American Activities Committee could pop up on the tip of a needle...I don't trust it. I don't like it. If politics has become a popularity contest and a likeability game, then this man showed a very odious side of him that would have him sitting alone in any cafeteria I chaperone.
A few additions and interesting articles:
The ever famous/notorious article about white privilege that's paraded around everywhere as creamy whipped tip of the privileged sundae: Peggy McIntosh's "White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack." When I first read this article, some of those old jokes from Def Comedy Jam and Comic View played in my head. I don't remember them word for word, but they went through the whole "why are the green olives in the jar, but the black olives are in the can?" description of daily life. (Especially when we get to the band-aids discussion; I never thought about how boldly my injuries appear when a milky-tan bandage stands on my brown skin! Everyone can see it all, my empire of dust...I hurt myself today...) But is it a good starting point? Yes. It gets you thinking.
Another article is one aptly named "A Pistol Called History" by livejournal user daysofthegun. This particular discussion offers a challenge to the knapsack metaphor offered by McIntosh. I always got this veiled idea that reading McIntosh always implied on a deeper level that if you just gently got rid of everything in that knapsack and recognized your privilege, BAM ANTI-RACISM WORK OVER. What time is it? Gap Time!
Is that true?
Of course not. But I can always see how the Amateur Reader With No Available Intellectual Engagement Time (ARWNAIET) could reach such a conclusion. Anti-racism requires a level of critical thinking that most schools lack the time and resources to pound into our heads. A person can arrive at these thoughts instinctively with enough knowledge and training, and God bless those people who do. The work for anti-racism does surpass the superficial grazing of the intellectual pasture on the subject. I want to work on an ongoing compilation of sources to read for people who fall into here and for myself. (Probably more for myself. I'm selfish.)
We know "lefty loosey, righty tighty," but do we know the proper rules for skilled and effective debate on racism?
...*cough-here's-another-article-on-that-subject* Livejournal user coffeeandink's discussion is a lot more entertaining than the other two (no offense), but it shows the answer to that question and LOTS MORE! It's a satirical piece, aptly titled "How to Suppress Discussions of Racism." I'd buy what she's selling because it's been proven by 9 out of every 10 conversations relating to any -ism, but definitely racism in particular.
I think I've gone and done all I could for the time before class. I'll return to add more when my cognitive processes aren't trapped in the closet of legal analysis, research, and writing.
This is becoming indisputably disgusting in some ways. I worked my tiniest of circles in the blogosphere, sending the article on Salon.com to MSNBC and Keith Olbermann specifically. I e-mailed Jessica Valenti of Feministing.com, hoping maybe she could include something there, and I also sent something by the way of Feministe by linking to it within one of the political discussions there. I also spread it around some progressive areas in my livejournal, hoping someone would do something to determine the truth or falsity of these statements. Maintaining impartiality regarding an issue of racists in office is making me batshit insane. I can't do it. I want to scream, to punch, to kick...it's almost as if my soul's being attacked by some unnamed, ominous assailant. Asses need kickin', folks. I know there are probably a lot of politicians with racist sentiments that are just good at keeping their goods under the fig leaves, but...my God, this was obvious. Allen walked into a tarpit with his "macaca" shit because he knows a lot of Americans wouldn't know anything about it and he could get away with it. He had a cheering crowd in front of him, and for God's sake, he welcomed the guy to America. "So what?" Within that context...and in our political climate where any day now, a House of Un-American Activities Committee could pop up on the tip of a needle...I don't trust it. I don't like it. If politics has become a popularity contest and a likeability game, then this man showed a very odious side of him that would have him sitting alone in any cafeteria I chaperone.
A few additions and interesting articles:
The ever famous/notorious article about white privilege that's paraded around everywhere as creamy whipped tip of the privileged sundae: Peggy McIntosh's "White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack." When I first read this article, some of those old jokes from Def Comedy Jam and Comic View played in my head. I don't remember them word for word, but they went through the whole "why are the green olives in the jar, but the black olives are in the can?" description of daily life. (Especially when we get to the band-aids discussion; I never thought about how boldly my injuries appear when a milky-tan bandage stands on my brown skin! Everyone can see it all, my empire of dust...I hurt myself today...) But is it a good starting point? Yes. It gets you thinking.
Another article is one aptly named "A Pistol Called History" by livejournal user daysofthegun. This particular discussion offers a challenge to the knapsack metaphor offered by McIntosh. I always got this veiled idea that reading McIntosh always implied on a deeper level that if you just gently got rid of everything in that knapsack and recognized your privilege, BAM ANTI-RACISM WORK OVER. What time is it? Gap Time!
Is that true?
Of course not. But I can always see how the Amateur Reader With No Available Intellectual Engagement Time (ARWNAIET) could reach such a conclusion. Anti-racism requires a level of critical thinking that most schools lack the time and resources to pound into our heads. A person can arrive at these thoughts instinctively with enough knowledge and training, and God bless those people who do. The work for anti-racism does surpass the superficial grazing of the intellectual pasture on the subject. I want to work on an ongoing compilation of sources to read for people who fall into here and for myself. (Probably more for myself. I'm selfish.)
We know "lefty loosey, righty tighty," but do we know the proper rules for skilled and effective debate on racism?
...*cough-here's-another-article-on-that-subject* Livejournal user coffeeandink's discussion is a lot more entertaining than the other two (no offense), but it shows the answer to that question and LOTS MORE! It's a satirical piece, aptly titled "How to Suppress Discussions of Racism." I'd buy what she's selling because it's been proven by 9 out of every 10 conversations relating to any -ism, but definitely racism in particular.
I think I've gone and done all I could for the time before class. I'll return to add more when my cognitive processes aren't trapped in the closet of legal analysis, research, and writing.
posted by Sylvia at 12:55 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home