Butterfly's Chrysalis

Young, Black, Christian, and SINGLE

2007-10-07T22:25:00.000-04:00

This weekend many of the married couples at my church went on a marriage retreat to Williamsburg, Va. My church is a small one, so the absence of all the couples did not go unnoticed during today's worship service. As I walked into the church, I was greeted by one of the few people who was married but not away on the trip. He greeted me with a smile and said, "Welcome to the Single's Retreat!"

I laughed and kept walking but later I reflected on his comment. I scanned the sanctuary and actually took note of all those who were single in the room. We were in the majority, for once. I noticed that most of the "singles" were women, outnumbering the men by at least 8 to 1. I also noticed that most of these women were 50+, either divorced or widowed. When you subtracted those people, you were left with precious few who had never been married and who were under the age of 40. I was in that number.

I thought about the lack of support for single people at my church. Once I spoke with my boyfriend about the need for a single's ministry at our church. He said that it was not necessary and that single people had the men's and women's ministry to belong to. I disagreed. Married people can also be a part of the men's and women's ministries, but they also had the Married Couples Ministry where they could discuss issues, concerns, Biblical truths, and support each other as people with a common thread joined together for one agenda. I am still convinced that this needs to happen for singles at our church.

Today I felt the disconnect. I wondered that if the situation were reversed, if all the single people had gone away to a retreat for the weekend, would the married couples have seem so disconnected from one another? Or would the fact that they meet monthly and have rousing Marriage Ministry meetings have caused them to be a little more in tune with one another, a little more aware of each other? I truly believe it would.

A short while ago, a young (in her 70s) sister at the church said something that resonated with me. She was praying. She asked God to bless single people because "we don't have a disease." Or something to that effect. Her point was that we are people, too. Over time, I have learned that the Bible has a lot to say about single people. And one thing I know for sure is that Jesus did not relegate single people to the "back of the bus" so to speak when it came to doing the work of God, or just acknowledging the purpose of single people. Sometimes I think that we focus so much on marriage that we lose sight of singleness and all that it entails (the challenges, the fears, the hurts, the joys, the possibilities).

In my mind, a vision of singles ministry formed that is inclusive of all singles (young and young at heart). What I envision certainly would be something that would affirm and celebrate singleness, but not exclude the possibilities of marriage for those in whose life plan marriage will one day materialize. in fact, if a single's ministry is working the way it should, it would help to prepare single people for marriage, if that is their ultimate desire and it's in God's plan for them. I say this because a single's ministry, in my opinion, should be dedicated to the development of maturity, character, integrity, and stability in the lives of single Christians.

I don't necessarily know if I'm the one who is being called to lead this group, but it is so necessary. There is a growing number of people who are single by choice, some of them raising kids alone. And there are others for whom a life mate has not yet been given them. And all of it is okay. All of these are circumstances and life seasons that God can and does work within.

A quick scan of some singles ministry websites gave me some valuable thoughts to ponder, insight into why single's ministries are vital to the lives of many single Christians:

Though there may be a season (or two) in our lives when we are alone, that we should never be lonely.
There is nothing wrong with you if you’re single. (Refer back to the quote listed above from my single sister)
Your happiness today should NOT have anything to do with your marital status.
Your destiny starts today; don't wait (until after you walk down the aisle) to really start living.

What the list above represents is actually a listing of things that all singles should keep in their hearts and minds, regardless of whether a person is single by choice or by circumstance. And, if you look at the purpose and intent of many marriage ministries, you'll see that the fundamental purpose of the ministries are similar to singles ministries.

Anyway, I guess this long post is just to say that I'm single and tired of allowing society to make me feel like I'm not a part of some exclusive club. I feel that it's high time the church acknowledge and embrace single people fully and with the same care, concern, and interest that they do married couples. Surely, all of those married couples were not married from birth. At some point in their lives they were single and they had a journey through singledom that led them to the place they are today. When we ignore this part of the journey, we are ignoring a part of the lifelong pathway to God.

Invasion of the Blacks and Browns

2007-10-07T21:47:00.000-04:00

The County where I reside (Charles County, Maryland) has largely been a homogenous population largely composed of individuals of European descent. Over time, the people in this area became used to their way of life, used to seeing an image mirroring themselves when they went into a store, went shopping, entered a court of law, or patronized other places of business...even as they walked outside of their house in the morning to get the paper and waved to the next-door neighbor.

Well, times are a-changin'. Those same people may walk outside in the morning and see a Black or Brown face staring at them across the driveway. And, in some of the Mom and Pop shops where everybody knows everybody there are some new faces that don't resemble the ones who are behind the counter, or sitting at their customary table in the corner.

For some, change is difficult. It evokes a fear that the way of life that has been in place for years may one day no longer exist. There is evidence that the fear of change has permeated the area where I live because recent news outlets such as The Washington Post repeatedly reported, with alarming statistics, that African-American schoolchildren are now the majority in Charles County.

Stop the presses! The fact that this story has been published in at least three separate editions of The Post is a clear indicator of just how highly this particular news item is valued. The article poses such education-related questions as: will test scores now plummet with Black students being in the majority? But it also raises more questions than it asks and hints at more than it blatantly states. For example, the article states that: "Black enrollment in Charles grew by about 700 students this year, and white enrollment decreased by about the same number." By itself, this statistic hints at the Black migration pattern and the "White flight" that is also occurring in this historically rural County.

As I read the article, I could almost sense the growing panic of my European neighbors, wondering if this area would become overrun with the horror-stories they hear about on the news every night in places like D.C. and Prince George's County. It was almost as if I could hear the laments over the potential loss of the idyllic Utopian society that they had spent years building, and the simultaneous locking of doors to keep out the crime that more Blacks undoubtedly will bring to these safe suburbs.

Some might say that I am overreacting, that people aren't really interpeting this bit of news in this manner. Well, then the burning question is: why is this such big news? Why run it over and over again? There must be interest. There must be concern. There must be a sense of "they've taken over our schools, now what's next?!" There is a need to know that this trend is happening and that it's happening fast (According to The Post's analysis of recent Census data, Charles County is "the fastest-growing black population of any large jurisdiction in the nation except the Atlanta suburbs.)

For some, it is a slight comfort to know that the Blacks who are migrating to Charles County are people of means (translation: law-abiding, intelligent, affluent people of color who probably don't like hip-hop/rap music -- or don't play it loud). See, it's not so bad after all. And test scores haven't plummeted (yet) and in some areas, it has improved (of course, that's only because we've anticipated the change in demographics and made sure that we are helping these little Black kids to come up to the learning levels of their White counterparts).

Forgive my dripping sarcasm here, but this really concerns me. News is the appearance of gang signs and symbols. News is the racist graffiti that has popped up recently, and the spraypainting of mailboxes in neighborhoods with racial slurs. News is the lack of Black teachers in our school systems, the utter lack of diversity in the upper ranks of several institutions within this County. The trend of Black people moving in is not news. It is simply that we are finally becoming more diverse and that's a good thing.

Jena 6 and Others

2007-09-10T22:04:00.000-04:00

On the morning radio talk shows, I listen intently to coverage of Jena 6 and the situation with the six young Black boys in Jena, La. This morning on the Steve Harvey Morning Show, Steve talked with the Rev. Jesse Jackson. I admired his probing questions about what can be done, what purposeful action can be taken to make a difference where these boys' lives are concerned. And, while I am thrilled that a situation that for too long languished in obscurity, off the radar screen of the mainstream media, I think of all of the others who will not be known as the "Jena 6" or by any other name, but will suffer the same fate.

I am glad that Steve Harvey had to the wherewithal to call out the culprit of this injustice, the insidious force that caused six high school boys to be railroaded through the legal system. This same force caused them to be in this precarious situation of having to wonder and wait to see if their futures will be spent in freedom or behind prison walls, and all for what equates to nothing more than a schoolyard fight. That force, the culprit, the only person, place, or thing that should be standing trial right now is racism. Too many of our news reporters and media personalities are afraid to use the word. Thanks, Steve Harvey, for making it plain.

I used to work for an organization that had as its mission the promotion of racial justice and the proliferation of a racial justice movement in this society. I felt privileged to have as my career a position that required me to scrutinize the many ways that people of color are discriminated against, held back, held up, subjugated, and overlooked. In this day and time, people say, it is hard to believe that this type of injustice persists. I say, in any day and time, it is just plain wrong.

Unfortunately, I cannot be among those persons who will be traveling to Jena, La. on Sept. 20th to show support for Mychal Bell, the first of the six boys to face sentencing. I hope it is not too late for Mr. Bell. I pray that the spirit of God will descend upon the judge and anoint him with a sense of justice in delivering his interpretation of a fair and equitable punishment to fit the "crime." I pray that the judge will not use Mr. Bell's prior record or history against him as he levys the sentence. I pray that some of the pressure that has been applied by anti-racism and civil rights advocates falls upon his heart and his ears on that day as he renders the decision. Oh, for these things I pray unceasingly.

But I also pray for the other boys and girls--the nameless, faceless young men and women who are facing unjust persecution today because of the color of their skin. I pray that even though the world may never know them by name, that there are people who will take interest in them, who will care about them enough to help them in their time of need. And I pray the someday I will be able to look at my child, my grandchildren, my great-grandchildren and not think about the need to teach them about an ugly word such as racism because by then it will have ceased to exist.

In the meantime, I think I will write to Mychal Bell in prison, to send him some encouragement and uplift as he sits in jail waiting for sentencing. If you'd like to write to Mychal, send letters to:

Mychal Bell Inmate, A-Dorm LaSalle Correctional Center 15976 Highway 165 Olla, LA 71465-4801

I'm BAAAAAAAACK!

2007-09-09T18:53:00.000-04:00

It's been a long time. I can't believe how fast the months fly by. When I checked back to the blog, I noticed that I last posted in February 2006 and now it's almost the end of '07. Well, so much has happened since I last posted. I have a new job. I work for local government now. Went from the big city (D.C.) to a small town. And I went from the private sector to the public sector -- BIG DIFFERENCE! But as with all things, time allows for adjustment and I'm settling in ok. It's weird because people always said that working for the government there is so much job security. I mean, people said to me that you literally have to embezzle money or something outlandish like that to be fired. Not true. There are folks where I work that are so concerned about possibly losing their job that if you hand them a nice thank-you note, they look at you with fear and wonder whether there is a pink slip inside. It's real like that.

But a friend of mine (well, two friend, actually) sent me links to their blogs recently. They were my inspiration for getting back into the swing of things. And also, my new job allows me to get home much earlier than before. I have time to have a life again, to do something beyond commuting to and from work every morning and night. You'd think with all that extra time I'd be writing a book, or starting a business. Unfortunately, inspiration comes in waves with me. I'd rather attempt (for the 99th time) to go back to the gym on a regular basis, or just catch up with some reading (books and magazines) that I've let slide. The trick is finding balance. Taking time for me and not crowding my schedule with "too much" of any one thing.

Anyway, I'm going to try to write something every day -- whether it's an interesting thing that happened to me or someone I know, or an insightful analysis of something in the recent news headlines, or just some questions that may require us to pause and think. And if I am able to contribute something to this vast blogosphere that people find interesting and/or enlightening, then so be it. If not, that's okay too. But it will be fun just going through the motions.

God bless!

The Freedom Fight is Not Over

2007-06-19T21:39:00.000-04:00

Hallelujah, we are free at last! Surely the freed men and women in Galveston, Texas, who spent years in under the backbreaking yoke of slavery, shouted these words or something similar upward to heaven, when they received the jubilant news that their long-awaited day of freedom had finally arrived. But as they made the trek from the Old South where they lived in bondage to the North, which held the promise of new life and new beginnings, their overwhelming joy tinged with fear of the unknown paths that lay before them. And rightfully so; even though they had been loosed from the shackles of physical slavery, they were unaware that their generation and generations to come were standing at the precipice of a covert form of bondage plagued by racism, inequity, and injustice, and reserved for people of color.

Today, June 19, marks the 142nd anniversary of Juneteenth, which is the oldest nationally celebrated commemoration of the ending of slavery in the United States. Originating in Galveston in 1865, Juneteenth is an acknowledgement of a chapter in our country’s history that continues to shape and influence our society today. What the celebration of Juneteenth causes us to ponder, however, is what freedom truly means and it prompts us to look introspectively at whether we, as people of color, are truly free today.

Because Juneteenth is now nationally recognized, slavery can no longer be relegated to the back burner of history. No longer can America deny the existence or historical significance of this pivotal chapter in our nation’s history. But we can also no longer afford to turn a blind eye to those actions and institutions that, being advanced in the name of progress, actually hearken to the Jim Crow era days of slavery. The only difference is that now the “slaves” are not the Africans, who were forcibly transported to American soil, but the modern day “slaves” are the Black and Brown people who inhabit this land, pay taxes to the government, and make up the workforce population, but are overworked, overlooked, underpaid, underestimated, undervalued, and undercut every day.

Harriet Tubman, the feisty matron who risked life and limb to spirit hundreds of slaves to freedom via the Underground Railroad, said of her freedom experience: “I had crossed the line. I was free; but there was no one to welcome me to the land of freedom. I was a stranger in a strange land.” Her words resonate and ring with truth today because, even today, people of color are treated as strangers in a land that was built on and continues to thrive because of the sweat of our brows and the strength of our backs. With the Juneteenth commemorative ceremonies under way in at least 14 states across this country, it’s time to stop and think about the racial injustices that are hurting individuals and communities of color, identify the underlying problems, and take action to change. Without change, people of color will continue under the yoke of racism, unable to taste the sweetness of true freedom.

Whose News Is It Anyway?

2007-05-14T21:24:00.000-04:00

In the wake of the racist Don Imus commentary, Media Matters for America conducted a study of the race and gender diversity of hosts and guests on prime-time cable news programs. At the peak of the Imus controversy, program hosts pursued African Americans and other people of color for comments on the topic. Was this just an anomaly in the cable news world? Are people of color only invited to speak on subjects dealing with race and racism but overlooked as experts in other subject matters? The Media Matters study sought to address these and other tough questions and found a disturbingly familiar trend: while a significant number of Blacks were on cable news programs (CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC) the week of the Imus controversy, White hosts and guests dominated the airwaves both before and after Imus faded from the media spotlight. The data confirmed what we knew to be true—cable news media is still a world of White, peppered by people of color only as the need arises.

The study reported that “in none of the three weeks did Latinos, Asian Americans, or any ethnicity other than African Americans make up more than five percent of the guests on any network.” It is appalling how these programs tout themselves as being the expert source for news and frequently report and comment on issues of concern to communities of color, yet don’t consult with or feature the people affected.

When viewed in the context of these and other statistics about racial diversity in the media, we find an explanation for the racist, biased characterizations of Hurricane Katrina survivors in the news media as looters and criminals. These and other racially polarized news items are the products of a media machine that consists of White males pontificating about the plight of African Americans and other people of color while excluding the same from the discussion.

The media, as an institution, shapes the perceptions of how America views people of color. Without the voices of people of color, the media sensationalizes racial conflicts and controversies, such as Don Imus, without exploring the historical reasons behind these events. Without Blacks, Latinos, and Asian Americans as guests and hosts on prime-time cable news programs, issues affecting communities of color—urbanization, poverty, education, health care—are not given the attention they deserve and are analyzed from a one-sided point of view. It’s time that the news media recognizes that “the public” does not refer solely to White Americans, but that the persons reporting on and commenting about the news should be representative of the diversity of the American population.

Race Under the Rug

2007-05-13T21:23:00.000-04:00

A recent post on MyDD.com called “Hidden Racism” talks about a decision by CBSNews.com to disable the comment feature on stories about Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. Blogger Jerome Armstrong asserts that CBS is employing a double standard that is not being applied to the other candidates to hide the racist comments that are being made about Obama stories. Armstrong argues that instead of hiding these racist views we should be putting a spotlight on the ignorance of such racists, and he advocates “having a place where the sun can shine on these racists, and holding the politicians who cater to them accountable.”

The mere fact that CBSNews.com is receiving this magnitude of incendiary emails in response to stories about Obama tells us that racism is, indeed, a major factor in this presidential race, despite some arguments to the contrary. And preventing everyone from sharing their comments on the CBSNews.com website is only a panacea for a larger problem. Sweeping race under the rug isn’t the solution. By taking the easy way out—canning all comments instead of filtering the “trash” that is coming in—CBS is giving ammunition to these racist factions who would like nothing better than to see all coverage of Obama and his run for the presidency just disappear.

The general consensus of MyDD’s readers on this issue is that this was a bad move for CBS and they are missing out on a golden opportunity to raise awareness about and promote broad discussion about race. One commenter said that “racism is real and it affects the presidential race.” We say invest the manpower, CBS, in moderating the comments on these articles, ban the “loose cannons” who launch derogatory, personal attacks against Obama, and elevate the consciousness of the general public about the realities of race and its role in the 2008 election.

Getting Away With Murder

2007-05-08T21:37:00.000-04:00

The federal government is not going to be held liable in at least two of the hundreds of deaths resulting from their failure to respond to the crisis following Hurricane Katrina. Their public apology for the “errors” that were made after Katrina made landfall are little comfort for victims’ families who are seeking justice for the death of their loved ones.

If it’s not the government’s fault that their inaction left 91-year-old Ethel Mayo Freeman to die in the sweltering heat outside of the convention center in New Orleans, then whose fault is it?
Who will be held accountable for these and other untimely deaths? It’s time the government is held responsible for the way they ignored the poor, Black residents of New Orleans whose lives were devastated by the hurricanes.

In the wrongful death suit brought by Freeman’s son, the judge wrote in his decision: “one can only speculate at this point whether these mistakes caused the tragic deaths of the decedents.”

The word “mistakes” implies that the government’s actions were beyond their control. But, the government had the capacity to aid survivors but instead left people stranded for days without food or water. They were left to die. Deliberate inaction is as egregious as willful action.

No Time Limits on Justice

2007-05-06T21:29:00.000-04:00

The wheels of justice sometimes turn slowly. In the case of righting the wrongs that were committed during the 1921 race riot in Tulsa, Okla., it seems those wheels are grinding to a halt. The sponsors of a bill that would extend the statute of limitations and give living survivors of the riots more time to sue the city and state of Oklahoma for the massacre.

The Tulsa riot is one most marginalized chapters of civil unrest in our nation’s history. The riot began on May 13, 1921, the manifestation of public outrage from an incident that occurred one day prior. A Black man, Dick Rowland, stepped into an elevator in the Drexel Building where Sarah Page, a White woman, was working. A scream sounded from the elevator; Rowland ran out. Subsequently, he was accused of sexually attacking Page, though there was no solid evidence of wrongdoing.

On May 13, Rowland was arrested and jailed. More than 70 Black men gathered outside the courthouse, offering protection to Rowland but the sheriff refused. A melee started when a White man attempted to disarm one of the Black men. They wrestled over the gun and it went off. This event marked the beginning of the deadly Tulsa race riot.

When everything was said and done, Greenwood —an area of Tulsa known as “Black Wall Street”—was, quite literally, reduced to ashes. Although official death toll reports stated that 10 Whites and 26 Blacks were killed, unofficial estimates counted as many as 300 deaths.

Despite the magnitude and lasting effect of the riot on Tulsa and the lives of hundreds of people, it receives scant mention in history books, as if it is a memory that historians prefer to erase from our collective minds. Now, more than eight decades later, people of color who survived the riot are taking a stand to make sure that this significant event in African-American history is not forgotten. At the time of the riot, many legal avenues were closed to Black people. To ensure that those responsible for the Tulsa riot do not go unpunished, Mayor Kathy Taylor should advocate for extending statutes of limitation and act in the interest of seeing long-overdue justice served.

Lynch in the New Millennium (Part 2 of 2)

2007-05-02T21:32:00.000-04:00

In part two of our analysis, we explore another disturbing example of how the racist principles of power and control delineated by Willie Lynch—a British slave owner who taught methods for controlling slaves and preserving the subjugation of slavery to Virginia slave owners in 1712—are still being put to use today. Somehow the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Take for instance the recent decision by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to file a lawsuit against the Salvation Army for firing two of its employees for failing to speak English in the workplace. Sidestepping, for a moment, the valid and justifiable argument that the King’s English is NOT the native language of America, let’s focus on the fact that this country was built from the blood, sweat, and tears of immigrants who came from their respective home countries—some by force and others by choice—to form the diverse, multicultural Mecca that is the United States of America.

What the Salvation Army (and any other employer who attempts to adopt similar policies) is essentially doing to its Spanish-speaking employees is stripping them of their culture, requiring them to conform to a foreign tongue in a foreign land. Forcing immigrants to speak English or lose their jobs is an unjust, institutional barrier to employment and professional advancement based on race.

Willie Lynch well knew the power that is held by people who have strong ties to their native language. In his infamous speech, he warned Virginia slave owners that effective controlling and oppressing slaves required that they control the language spoken by African slaves. Lynch knew the power of the tongue was so mighty that he indoctrinated the slave owners on the urgent need to “ANNIHILATE THE MOTHER TONGUE” of their slaves.

Why did Lynch put so much emphasis on stripping slaves of their language and thus, their culture? Because the destruction of native language and culture is fundamental to discrimination, subjugation, and racism. Ethnicity scholar and philosopher, Horace Kallen, said it is “not only unrealistic, but cruel and harmful, to force new immigrants to shed their familiar, lifelong cultural attributes as the price of admission to American society.” In other words, immigrants to this country should not have to pay—the steep price of giving up their native language—to stay.

Willie Lynch made one true, insightful statement in his otherwise demeaning, racist diatribe when he said that language “leads to the heart of a people.” Language is, indeed, a matter of the heart, a part of shared, cultural heritage. Kudos to the EEOC for challenging the Salvation Army’s “Willie Lynch” mentality and its attempt to place immigrants at a disadvantage in the workplace.

Lynch in the New Millennium (Part 1 of 2)

2007-05-01T21:34:00.000-04:00

Is the racist ideology of Willie Lynch, a British slave owner who taught Virginia slave owners in 1712 about how to control slaves and preserve the peculiar institution of slavery, still relevant today? Absolutely. In the first of a two-part series, we look at 21st century examples of structural racism and how they relate to Lynch’s 300-year-old rant.

This week, thousands of marches were held in support of comprehensive immigration reform. The protests focused on the effects government raids—carried out as part of “Operation Return to Sender”—are having on families. The raids are putting undocumented immigrants, those with children who are legal citizens, in a tough position. The government is treating immigrants like animals, rounding them up and holding them captive, and many times their children are left with no one to care for them. The practice of separating immigrant children from their parents is a sad replica of how slave children were routinely separated from their families. The breakdown of the family structure benefits and supports structural racism because at its core, it’s all about power and control.

Willie Lynch underscored the importance of breaking down the family structure when exerting power over another group of people. He instructed his fellow slave holders to employ the same principles used in breaking horses to “break the spirit and independence” of slaves. He said,

“Whereas nature provides [slaves] with the natural capacity to take care of
their offspring, we break that natural string of independence from them and
thereby create a dependency status, so that we may be able to get from them
useful production for our business and pleasure.”

History is, in essence, repeating itself. Only now, the federal government is acting in the role of the slave owner, ripping apart immigrant parents from their children, using immigration status as a way to prevent them from caring for and nurturing their children.

During slavery, it was common for children to be separated from at least one of their parents. In fact, approximately one quarter of all slave children were raised in a single-parent household, while another tenth grew up away from both children. Not surprising, considering that 20 percent of all slave marriages were destroyed by a sale. Clearly, slaves were viewed as less than human, and slave marriages and family ties were not recognized by American law. But more importantly, they were weakened by alienation from their families.

We’re now seeing this same ugly practice rear its head again, this time in the form of the rights that immigrant parents and children have to remain together. According to the Pew Hispanic Center, more than 3.1 million children in America have at least one parent who is here illegally. Couple that with the fact that Immigration and Custom Enforcement removed 221,664 immigrants from the United States in the last year, an increase of about 20 percent from the year before, and the resulting catastrophe is clear: thousands and thousands of children will be without their parents, facing traumatic and unnecessary separation.

The New York Times recently profiled a boy whose mother had been deported back to the Honduras. The traumatized six-year-old now refuses to eat and suffers from earaches as a result of, in the words of his nurse, “acute sadness.” Why is this boy, along with thousands of children like him, being cruelly separated from his mother? Because in this country immigrants are believed to be second-class citizens and treated as such. This policy of irresponsibly separating children from their parents only demonstrates the intention behind the action.

Like the separation of slave children from their parents, separating immigrant children from their families only serves to promulgate the idea that immigrants are not equal citizens in our society. Treating immigrants like cattle, moving them place to place with no concern for their livelihood, or that of their families, is dangerous and calculated racism. Forcing immigrant parents to leave their children behind places these kids at a disadvantage in American society.

Just as Willie Lynch referred to African slaves as animals, work horses, and property—not as human beings—breaking up immigrant families doesn’t take into account the cultural ties and values that are passed along through families. While it’s a different group of people targeted, the hatred and racism, and the desire for power and control that fuels the actions remain the same.

Playing to Win

2007-04-19T23:04:00.000-04:00

This week the nation is celebrating the 60th anniversary of Jackie Robinson’s debut on a major league baseball team. Robinson integrated the sport by entering a professional baseball league that had previously been off limits to Blacks. Baseball teams and fans across the country are holding ceremonies to honor an athlete who broke color barriers and opened doors of opportunity for other Black athletes.

This pioneering moment in our history, which paved the way for Black athletes in all sports, also proved to the nation that Blacks were not in any way “inferior” to Whites in athletic ability. Robinson’s success as a worthy competitor and his achievement in baseball destroyed myths about Blacks and revealed a dark force at work behind the scenes that kept Black athletes out of the major leagues for so long: institutional racism.

And, despite the vast achievements that have been made in the world of sports by athletes and coaches of all races, if we look closely enough at some of the most popular, frequently broadcast, and highest paying sports today—tennis, basketball, golf and yes, even baseball—we will see that there is still an ugly, racist thread running through them:

America is still reeling over disparaging, racial comments made by radio announcer Don Imus about the Rutgers University women’s basketball team, a team demonstrated extraordinary athletic prowess to overcome great odds and compete in the NCAA national championship game.
Record-breaking tennis champion, Serena Williams, endured verbally abusive heckling recently from a spectator that crossed the line, shouting hate words and racial epithets at the veteran tennis player.
Although we are also celebrating the 10th Anniversary this week of Tiger Woods’ first Masters victory in golf, Woods remains one of only a few minority golfers on the PGA Tour.
On Super Bowl Sunday this year, football fans cheered on as two Black coaches battled for the highest title in the NFL. But it took many years for Lovie Smith and Tony Dungy to claim their well deserved place in the big bowl game, and the NFL was criticized for its historical tendency to promote White coaches over Black ones.

Despite the so-called progress we’ve made in the 60 years since a Black man first swung his bat on a major league baseball diamond, we are still sorely lacking when it comes to diversity in sports overall. Latinos, Asian-Americans, and African-Americans are still missing from many of the teams we cheer on from the stands, and certainly they are missing from leadership positions and ownership. Still, the sacrifices and struggles that Jackie Robinson made, at a time in history when Blacks were not welcomed with open arms into the major league, were not in vain. The legacy of Jackie Robinson is evident that change is possible, but only if we keep playing to win and dismantle the racism that is deeply embedded in the infrastructure of professional sports.

The Sins of Our Fathers

2007-03-15T23:00:00.000-04:00

History affects not just those who are there to participate in its making, but also those who reap the benefits (or endure the consequences) of decisions made by their forefathers. Well, apparently some Georgia lawmakers disagree with this school of thought. The Senate Rules committee voted unanimously in favor of establishing a Confederate heritage month, which speaks volumes to their belief that it is right to honor the actions of their ancestors through this legislation; but, on a sad note, the Georgia legislature opposed a measure introduced by Black lawmakers that would put forth an official apology for the state’s role in slavery and Jim Crow Era laws. It seems some Georgians would rather celebrate their good ol’ Confederate pride than apologize and atone for its contribution to and support of the oppressive, violent, dehumanizing institution of slavery.

How pious of Georgia to wave the confederate flag, knowing all it stands for, and plan to dedicate an entire month to celebrating and lauding this racist history when, in fact, Georgia has so much about which to be ashamed. By the era of the American Revolution, African slaves constituted nearly half of Georgia’s colonial population. And, it was Georgia that persuaded Thomas Jefferson to tone down his critique of slavery in and early draft of the famed liberation document, the Declaration of Independence. By the 1860s, Georgia had more slaves and slaveholders than any state in the Lower South and was second only to Virginia in the South as a whole.

It is understandable why Georgia does not want to endorse both measures simultaneously—to do so would be hypocritical considering that the reason Georgia seceded from the Union and joined the Confederate States of America was its leaders vehemently opposed ending slavery. Like their Confederate cohorts, they feared ending slavery would eliminate a lucrative business, and they believed keeping slavery alive and well was a right of the South.

But, Georgia lawmakers are making the wrong choice. Instead of taking a stand and showing their penitence for taking part in the abominable acts of cruelty that destroyed families and left physical and emotional wounds that are still healing today, Georgia is opting to hail to the colors of a flag that represents, not freedom or justice, but slavery, crimes against humanity, and a belief in racial superiority.

A New Twist on the One-Drop Rule

2007-03-11T23:02:00.000-04:00

In the early 1900s, many southern states passed laws to separate, along racial lines, those who had even the most miniscule percentage of Black (non-White) blood running in their veins. These laws became known as “one-drop” rules because, as the old adage goes, one drop of Black blood and you were relegated to the fringe of society, a member of the oppressed race.
So, for light-skinned Black slaves who were the product of the union of a White slave owner and a Black slave, regardless of how White their skin was if they had only one-sixteenth of Black blood, they were deemed Black and treated accordingly.

Native Americans were similarly oppressed, because they were also viewed as people of color. But, some Native Americans identified with White slave owners and emulated their behavior; these Native Americans purchased and owned slaves and produced children who were of mixed heritage—Native American and Black.

For more than a century, freed slaves whose ancestors were owned by Native Americans or were part of the Native American lineage were recognized as part of the tribal membership of their respective Indian tribe (Cherokee, Choctaw, Chicksaw, etc.) Membership in the Cherokee tribe was open to those who could prove they are descendants of those listed on census rolls issued by the Dawes Commission. The commission put forth two lists—one with the names of blood Cherokees and one with names of freedmen, which included Blacks who did and did not have Indian blood.

In March 2006, the Cherokee Nation Supreme Court affirmed the tribal citizenship of freedmen descendants, based on a treaty signed in 1866. Since that favorable decision, tribal citizenship of freedmen descendants increased by more than 2,000 persons.

Ignoring the court’s decision, the leaders of the Cherokee Nation voted recently to change the tribe’s constitution, revoking the citizenship of freedmen descendants and only recognizing those who are full-blooded Cherokee Indians. Thus, the old adage has a new twist: if you have too many drops of Black blood and not enough Cherokee blood—regardless of whether your family was owned by Cherokees, you speak the language, or your family has been a member of the Cherokee Nation for decades—you are relegated to the outside of the circle.

Once again, the rules have changed … and to the detriment of Black people. If a freedman does is not full-blooded Cherokee or a descendant of full-blooded Cherokee, he will be dropped from the federal commission listing of the Cherokee tribe members. The move appears to be an attempt by the Cherokee Nation to disconnect from its racist history of slave ownership and now denounce the ancestors of the very slaves it once eagerly acquired.

The Black faction of the Cherokee nation is being cast out now that it no longer benefits the tribe financially, as during the days of slavery when it provided an unlimited source of cheap labor. In earlier years, the Cherokee tribe struggled financially—now it has amassed revenue in the form of gambling money from casinos and federal funding totaling more than $22 billion, money that it does not want to share with the descendants of Black slaves.

A report in The Washington Post detailed the plight of J.D. Baldridge, who has legal proof showing that he is a descendant of a full-blood Cherokee. But, it is the Black ancestry in the lineage of Baldridge—who has fond childhood memories of times spent with in the Cherokee community among Native-American relatives and neighbors—that may result in his expulsion from the Cherokee tribe.

The actions of the Cherokee nation to expel Blacks from among their ranks mimics the discriminatory spirit of Jim Crow-era laws based on the percentage of "black blood" one had. It is obvious that the Cherokee leaders’ primary interest its safeguarding tribal resources, but the losers in this are thousands of Black men and women whose only sin is in their skin ( borrowing from the lyrics of a Louis Armstrong song).

Ironically, leaders of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)—whose federal funding comes from the same pool of limited Title V resources—are rallying in support of tribal colleges that are seriously underfunded and facing a 20 percent cut under President Bush’s 2008 education budget. This move denotes a level of solidarity between Black and Native Americans, just as the Cherokee Nation is voting simultaneously to expel slaves’ descendants from their rolls.

The most disturbing aspect of the Cherokee Nation struggle is that it is occurring between and among people of color. Instead of division and separation, there should be solidarity, unity, and common vision for these two groups who share a history marred by oppression, enslavement, and discrimination.

Remembering Bloody Sunday

2007-03-06T23:03:00.000-05:00

Forty-two years ago today, 600 Black Americans embarked on a 54-mile march to the state capitol, Montgomery, Ala., to protest voting rights discrimination. The march also commemorated the death of Jimmie Lee Jackson, who was shot three weeks earlier by a state trooper while trying to protect his mother at a civil rights demonstration. The peaceful, yet determined group of protestors were stopped short as they crossed the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Ala., by armed state police and sheriff’s deputies, who wielded billy clubs as assault weapons, threw tears gas into the crowd, and used cattle prods to attack the marchers relentlessly, despite the presence of the media onlookers who witnessed the unprovoked display of violence. Needless to say, hundreds of brave, Black citizens did not make it to their intended destination on that fateful day. Dubbed “Bloody Sunday” because of the blood shed by innocent people—who were trampled by horses and beaten with night sticks—refusing to be shut out the voting process any longer, the aftermath left 17 people hospitalized and more than 100 injured.

The march on Bloody Sunday was in opposition to discriminatory laws, intimidation and fear tactics, violence, and prejudicial ordinances used in the South to circumvent the mandates of the 15th Constitutional Amendment, which was adopted to ensure that a person’s race, color, or prior history as a slave would not be used to bar that person from voting. The problem of keeping Blacks from the polls was particularly pervasive in Selma, a city where African Americans comprised more than half the population but only two percent of registered voters.
But the indescribable pain and suffering endured by the demonstrators in Selma was not in vain; recognizing the importance of the march to make gains for Black people, Martin Luther King, Jr., galvanized support from civil rights supporters and quickly organized a second march, successfully leading more than 25,000 marchers along the same 54-mile stretch, only two weeks later. The demonstrations elevated the need for voting rights legislation for Blacks in the South to the top of the political agenda; five months after the Bloody Sunday tragedy, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law. Called the single most effective piece of civil rights legislation ever passed by Congress, the Voting Rights Act is the precursor of the modern Voting Rights Movement.

What transpired in Selma more than four decades ago left behind a bloodstained reminder of the struggle to secure the rights for all Americans to vote, regardless of race, education, or wealth. The protest on Pettus Bridge not only led to key voting rights legislation, but also paved the way for later reforms and eliminated barriers for Black people to make gains in politics, including Black presidential candidate Barack Obama, who is vying for the nation’s highest political office.
Bloody Sunday and other demonstrations during the Civil Rights Era produced fundamental reforms, but the goal of equality in civil or voting rights still has not been fully realized. As recently as 2006, the struggle continued with efforts to renew key provisions of the Voting Rights Act that were set to expire. These provisions were signed into law again in the name of three freedom fighting heroines and signify the renewed national commitment to a just democracy.

Yet, as the 2008 president election approaches in the wake of two consecutive, tainted presidential elections in 2004 and 2000, it’s clear that the cornerstone of our democracy—the electoral process—is in need of urgent repair. There is still much work to be done—several states have yet to eliminate permanent bans on voting rights for people with felony convictions and identification requirements in some states are disproportionately disenfranchising communities of color. But as we pause to remember what the right to vote meant for the African Americans who marched across the bridge on March 7, 1965, we are reminded that, just as King did forty years ago, we must pick up the baton and carry on the struggle for just democracy in America.

Bringing Killers to Justice

2007-02-28T22:48:00.000-05:00

More than 50 years after Emmett Till was brutally murdered in Mississippi after whistling at a White woman, there is still no justice to be found in this heinous, racially motivated slaying. A grand jury in Leflore County, Miss., has refused to hand down an indictment of Carolyn Bryant, the widow of one of the two men charged and later acquitted in Till’s murder trial. Carolyn Bryant is the White woman at whom Emmett Till allegedly whistled. She was allegedly with her husband and his cohorts when they kidnapped Till, shot him, and tossed his lifeless body into the Tallahatchie River.

Witnesses who were with Till on that fateful day in 1955 lament that the failed indictment is evidence that nothing has really changed in rural Mississippi over the course of 50 years. It certainly raises the question of whether there have been many advances in a county now infamous for overt racism. And now, with both of the original suspects dead, and Carolyn Bryant in her 70s, time has all but run out for ever realizing justice in the Till case.

Despite overwhelming evidence, witnesses, and the image of Emmett Till’s disfigured, decomposed body ingrained in their minds, the recent ruling continues a legacy of injustice in the Till case. This jury may not have been an all-White one like the jury that deliberated only slightly more than an hour and then allowed J. W. Milam and Roy Bryant to walk out of the courthouse, smiling and celebratory. Adding insult to injury, Milam confesses to the crime to a journalist who published his story in Look magazine. And still no justice. Now, the outcome is the same. An accessory to a civil rights era killing walks free. Another brutal hate crime goes unanswered.

Our hope for future justice rests in the 74 unsolved, racially motivated civil rights-era killings that were handed to the FBI for further investigation by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The FBI has already re-opened investigations into 12 civil rights era deaths, and nearly 100 unsolved cases are being reviewed in all. Despite the lack of closure in the Till case, at least families of those who lost loved ones in brutal fashion may one day take comfort in knowing that the ones responsible, who have escaped punishment for many years, may soon be brought to justice.

From Immigration to Imprisonment

2007-02-25T22:57:00.000-05:00

America—land of the free, home of the brave; a place where you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. That is, unless you are one of thousands of persons the federal government suspects has immigrated into the country illegally. Never mind that there is no proof to substantiate their suspicions. Usurping all of the inalienable rights that any person in this country should enjoy, the federal government has taken to housing immigrants in correctional facilities—in other words jail, prison, the big house, the slammer, the cooler, the joint. An injustice by any other name…

In Texas, the T. Don Hutto Correctional Center is one such facility that is intended to house persons who have been convicted of crimes but is now being used by the government to curtail what it calls the immigration “problem.” Families—men, women, children, babies, and toddlers—are being subjected to all of the degrading, dehumanizing accoutrements afforded to convicted criminals on “lock down.” Children are separated from their mothers at night, for hours on end, and are allowed only an hour of playtime outside of isolated prison cells. Wearing prison clothes is mandatory and pregnant women are forced to go without prenatal care. And the real injustice here is that the more than 22,000 immigrants being detained in this manner have not been charged with a crime!

The “inmates” housed at Hutto are involved in deportation proceedings—many are applying for political asylum from countries such as Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Somalia, and Palestine, according to a recent In These Times news report. Such imprisonment, which has been likened to concentration camps, is being justified by the government in the name of “keeping families together.” In reality, the government is treating these people like cattle. Just as raids by ICE and “shoot to kill” commands by border security patrols are justified as “protecting the people.”

It is an atrocity that has caught the attention of human rights groups, who are advocating for more human treatment of immigrants in Texas and nationwide. There is no reasonable justification for subjecting children to conditions under which they are becoming physically ill, or denying them the tiniest pleasure of a stuffed animal for comfort. The assertion of power over these people who have yet to be found guilty of any crime is truly disturbing. It appears as though the government is attempting to combine its immense power and ability to instill fear as a tool to threaten and/or remove immigrants from the country that prides itself on its “melting pot” image and the pursuit of happiness. The real crime here is the unwarranted and inhumane use of intimidation by our own federal government.

When BIG BROTHER Wants to Move, He Moves...FAST!

2007-02-14T22:57:00.000-05:00

Why is it when it comes to providing relief efforts to African Americans in New Orleans, the government moves like molasses, but when it comes to reclaiming emergency funds given to Louisiana families through their own faulty, botched distribution process, they move like lightning? Someone needs to get their priorities straight.

The government is hot on the trail of more than $300 million—and the estimated total is expected to increase—worth of Katrina money that they gave to households in Louisiana, some to homes that didn’t exist, according to FEMA data from the U.S. Census. Some households received double or triple payments. Pursuing those who may have received monies in error with gusto, the Justice Department has already logged more than 400 storm-related fraud prosecutions, recovering $18 million so far. Literally, JD has been going around arresting folks for holding on to money that was sent to them, in Louisiana as well as in states where Katrina survivors now temporarily reside, such as Texas and Mississippi.

Some attributed the government’s post-Katrina track record of being slow to provide aid to Katrina survivors as a byproduct of it being a bureaucratic entity that moves slow on all fronts. But, the speed with which Big Brother has started recouping the lost funds shows that it can pick up the pace when necessary.

Given the dire circumstances of those who remain displaced, it is understandable that families who received checks in the mail may not have questioned receiving the disbursements. Perhaps some families used the funds to pay for food, clothing, and shelter after their FEMA vouchers, which only lasted a short while, expired. And who could blame them? They were failed by a government that was supposed to help them after the storm, but instead deserted them during some of the lowest, most desperate days of their lives. Instead of opening doors to return to the city and rebuild their homes, this same government has closed and locked the doors to New Orleans, barring low-income residents from returning.

Instead of slapping handcuffs on the victims of the Katrina tragedy, the government would be better off directing its energies toward allowing displaced residents to return, rebuild, and restart their lives. In this way, they could make amends for the slow and mismanaged response to Katrina, and start moving in a positive direction—toward equitable recovery.

Forward Ever, Backward Never

2007-02-13T22:59:00.000-05:00

There is evidence that, in our lifetimes, we may witness a resurgence of violence rivaling the hate-filled, racist attacks that African Americans endured during the Civil Rights Era. One difference between then and now is that immigrants, rather than Blacks, may be the primary targets of assaults by White supremacist groups. Another is that the new-age White supremacy won’t be perpetrated by extremists wearing hoods and robes, lynching people in the streets; more than likely, the offenders will look like the average person on the street, sporting a suit and driving a nice car but have equally vile, yet more clandestine methods of spewing racial hate.

According to a new report from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), membership in the Ku Klux Klan (KKK)—a cluster of fraternal organizations known for using terrorism, violence, and acts of intimidation such as cross burning to oppress African Americans and other groups, is on the rise. The disturbing trend is that the KKK, a group that was viewed as being relatively dormant in recent years, is using U.S. immigration as a rallying point for recruiting new members. ADL Civil Rights Director Deborah Latuer said, “If any one single issue or trend can be credited with re-energizing the Klan, it is the debate over immigration in America.”

Even more troubling is that Klan meetings and rallies have resurfaced across the country, including southern, Midwestern, and Mid-Atlantic states. The new crop of KKK members employs the Internet to proliferate its hate messages, as well as public relations tactics such as radio broadcasts and fliers. And, KKK members are joining forces in increasing numbers with other “skinhead” and racist groups.

What this means for persons of color in America is that first, we must develop an awareness of the strategies being used by these hate groups. More importantly, it is imperative that we spread the messages of justice, racial equality and tolerance to counteract and neutralize the White supremacy beliefs under girding this culture of hate. This news should be a wake up call to teach us that extremist groups are alive and well, and looking to seize opportunities to thwart racial justice in America. It is confirmation that there is an urgent need to invigorate the racial justice movement, to advocate for effective hate crime legislation, to educate Americans about ways to combat racism, and to forge and strengthen alliances across racial lines so we can be a united force against radical groups who threaten to erode the forward progress gained during the Civil Rights Movement.

Split Decision

2007-01-30T22:32:00.000-05:00

In most U.S. states, counties differ in terms of economical, geographical, and racial demographics. These differences often preserve the local economy and keep it afloat. However, in one of the largest and most prosperous counties in Georgia—Fulton County—the fate of the local economy as well as that of the lower income people of color are in jeopardy. Although politicians and other county officials claim the move is not racially motivated, recent legislation has been proposed to split Fulton County into two separate, more racially and economically homogenous, counties. The newly created Milton County would consist of the White, affluent residents from the suburbs of Fulton, leaving the metropolitan areas of predominantly poor, Black neighborhoods to comprise Fulton County.

The proposed division seems to be clearly aligned along lines of race, class, and political affiliation. According to MSNBC, the new Milton County would be mostly White, affluent, and Republican; Fulton County after the split, on the other hand, would be mostly Black and Democratic, and would include some of the most poverty-stricken areas in the country. The split would also result in a large deficit in revenue for Fulton County, since currently Milton County’s future residents now make up only 29 percent of Fulton County’s population but pay 42 percent of the property taxes. And, since those taxes often pay for government services for the poor, it would likely result in a deduction of critical assistance given to Fulton County families in need.

Further, in what is a telling twist of fate, history reveals that Milton County existed until 1932, when it was folded into Fulton County because Milton County was suffering financially as a result of the Depression. So, Fulton County took on the financial burdens of a floundering Milton County when it needed help to regain its footing. And now that Milton County is revived and flourishing economically, its residents are ready to pull the rug out from under the county that saved them, and secede to re-form into a more “perfect union.”

An amendment to the Georgia Constitution is being sought to re-establish Milton County as its own entity within the state. The rationale for the split is that Fulton County is now too large to operate on the scale of local, county government. Yet, it appears the move would actually worsen problems areas—such as public transit and correctional facilities in need of repair and reform—because a lion’s share of the funding would be diverted into another jurisdiction.

Ultimately, a decision that benefits only one segment of the population, to the detriment of another, is not in the best interests of all.

Pesos for Pizza

2007-01-25T22:35:00.000-05:00

Cheers to a pizza chain headquartered in Dallas, Texas, for reaching out to its diverse customer base in a different way. The store is, for a limited time, accepting pesos as a form of payment. The story should end there but sadly, this move has sparked controversy, as some people are voicing concerns about the practice, even going so far as to accuse the restaurant chain of supporting illegal immigration!!

Pizza Patron, a Dallas-based chain, received hate mail and death threats for posting signs that said, “Aceptamos Pesos” [We Accept Pesos] at 59 stores in across Texas, Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, and California, according to an Associated Press report. Hopefully, the backlash they are experiencing will not deter the chain from offering its customers, 60 percent of whom are Latino, the option of using pesos to pay for their food. Not only is it potentially a wise business move for the chain, it shows that all customers are welcome and acknowledges the reality that immigration is real.

In no way does this gesture indicate that Pizza Patron supports illegal immigration. To the contrary, it signifies their recognition and acceptance of the diversity that characterizes their customer base. Further, the illegal immigration accusation is absurd, considering that showing a green card is not a prerequisite to purchasing a Large Pepperoni Deluxe. But, what the creative advertising does say speaks volumes. Although Pizza Patron maintains that their advertising campaign was not intended “to inject itself into a larger political debate,” what is happening at this local business begs the question, why isn’t this type of practice being replicated on a larger, national scale?

Is the nation is so focused on illegal immigration that we have lost sight of the fact that we are a country where people of all races and nationalities should be welcomed and accommodated? We hope not.

No Substitute for the Real Thing

2007-01-22T22:54:00.000-05:00

With courts striking down affirmative action in some states, race is no longer an option for determining school placements for students. As an alternative, a number of school districts are using socioeconomic status to assign kids to schools, according to a Gannett news article published in the Detroit Free Press . Is this growing trend a preview of the ramifications of affirmative action’s untimely demise?

Such disturbing reports only serve as confirmation of what we’ve known all along: affirmative action is being cancelled before its time and when, now more than ever, we have a need for it.
“Some Black leaders say a wealth-based system does not take into account the history of racial discrimination and inequality remaining from decades of segregation,” the article goes on to say. These leaders are right on in their analysis. It is as if everyone wants to pretend that slavery didn’t happen, or that its vestiges do not have an affect upon policies and decisions pertaining to children of color.

Like the No Child Left Behind law, the idea of assigning students to schools based on wealth to increase achievement and achieve diversity is a good one—in theory. In a perfect world, lower, middle, and upper-income students would be evenly distributed among the school district. No single school would have a disproportionate share of students in a particular socioeconomic bracket, and perhaps school funding would be allocated more evenly.

Yet, No Child Left Behind has been unable to accomplish its admirable goals and live up to the good intentions of the legislation. Instead, it has made matters worse. The key to its failure is poor implementation and lack of a sound, racial analysis. This circumstance is no different. A system of education centered on wealth will eventually cater to those that have the most financial resources—and leave the have-nots behind. And once again they’ll wonder why the poor kids aren’t performing at the same level as the rich ones. Imagine an era where sanctioned separate but equal is the norm.

Theodore Shaw, president of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said it best: “Class and race overlap but they are not the same.” In other words, there’s nothing like the real thing, baby.

Score One for the History Books

2007-01-21T22:36:00.001-05:00

Amid cheers from supporters (and jeers from opponents), the Chicago Bears and the Indianapolis Colts emerged victorious yesterday, earning themselves a spot in Super Bowl XLI. While die-hard Bears and Colts fans are celebrating the victory of advancing to the NFL’s highest level of play, a larger, historically and racially significant victory was won yesterday.

Two head coaches, Lovie Smith and Tony Dungy, respectively, have the distinction of being the
first Black head coaches in the NFL to lead teams into Super Bowl competition. This accomplishment is a major milestone for Blacks in the NFL, which has been 41 years in the making and is long overdue. An Associated Press article featured on ESPN.com acknowledges the racist history of hiring practices for qualified Black coaches in the NFL. Being a Black head coach was an achievement that was, until a short time ago, virtually off limits to Blacks.

Although three quarters of the NFL’s roster consists of Black athletes, Blacks were routinely excluded from top coaching spots. According to the news report, “When the time came to hire a new coach, [Black coaches] were passed over, time and time again. Meanwhile, White coaches who had done little to distinguish themselves in their previous jobs got additional chances. It was the old boys’ network at its worst.”

Last year, former NFL veteran Anthony Prior put his allegations of racism in the NFL in print in a controversial book titled, Slave Side of Sunday. In this work, Prior asserts that racism is an integral part of NFL culture and condemns “its dismal and pathetic record of hiring black coaches” as well as the dearth of Black ownership. Prior’s book offers a scathing indictment of the NFL and paints a vivid picture of a league that is not welcoming to coaches like Smith and Dungy, who have both had their fair share of being overlooked and undervalued during their long careers.

But, Smith and Dungy’s presence in the Super Bowl is a win for all minorities who aspire to be where they are, and the significance of this historic breakthrough is difficult to articulate in words. The doors of opportunity have finally opened for Blacks, breaking barriers within an institution that resembled a Whites-only country club and continued its practices of racial segregation long past the end of the Civil Rights Era and Jim Crow laws.

And if being in the big game isn’t enough, the country won’t have to bite their nails during the Super Bowl game in hopes that a Black coach triumphs as the Super Bowl champion—having not one, but two Black coaches in the Super Bowl guarantees it will happen. We celebrate this giant leap forward in progress toward racial equality, but also look toward the day when all races enjoy equal opportunity, and the doors open not just in the NFL arena, but on all the playing fields of life.

The Significance of the Symbol

2007-01-15T22:38:00.000-05:00

The White managers at 180 Connect in Nassau County, N.Y., a cable, telephone, and Internet installation company did not call James Jackson or any of its other Black employees the “N” word, but hanging a noose in an equipment area that is visible to the predominantly Black cadre of installers conveys the same racist message.

It is difficult to imagine the horror James Jackson, a Black employee of 180 Connect, felt when he arrived to work on Dec. 7 and found the racist symbol hanging in public view. And, when Jackson confronted Equipment Manager Dave Willie, one of only two employees—both White—who have access to the area where the noose was hung, Willie reacted with indifference. Even more appalling is the response of the Gary Murdock, the other person who had access to the equipment area, who allegedly told a Black installer who questioned why the noose was there that it was “to hang two Black employees,” according to a CNN report.

Perhaps the ongoing debate over the use of the “N” word needs to be expanded to include any and all racist language and symbolism. A message needs to be conveyed that racist language and/or symbolism of any kind that is offensive to a particular racial/ethnic group is unacceptable. During and since this serious incident, the reactions of 180 Connect—who claim that they have “zero tolerance for racism—fail to convey this message clearly:

It took a week of complaints for the hanging noose to be removed.
180 Connect suspended Equipment Manager Dave Willie with pay.
Despite alleged racist and violent comments, Gary Murdock, the White warehouse manager who said the noose was meant to hang Black employees, is still managing the warehouse for 180 Connect.

The noose is symbolic of lynching, a racist form of social control that has been used throughout history to terrorize and subjugate persons of color. From the 1800s to 1955, nearly 5,000 Blacks were lynched nationwide, according to a PBS special report. During slavery, African Americans were subject to this very public form of punishment because of the color of their skin. A noose is not only a haunting reminder of the thousands of Black people who lost their lives in this brutal way, but it is a symbol of the constant threat of death that slaves lived under.

Recently, comedian Michael Richards, of “Seinfeld” fame, shouted racist comments at a comedy show in Los Angeles. Richards said, “Fifty years ago we’d have you upside down with a [expletive] fork up your [expletive].” What Richards comment and the noose at 180 Connect have in common is that both actions are not only offensive, but an implicit, racial threat to the safety of others. This fact simply cannot be ignored.

Many of us reflected yesterday on the life and vision of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and his dream for people of all races, creeds, and colors, to live in peace with one another and to respect one another for the content of our character rather than the color of our skin. Though we have made great strides in realizing Dr. King’s dream, the incident described above demonstrates why we still have to remain vigilant in identifying and discussing racial issues, working toward solutions so that we can one day fully achieve true racial justice and equality for all.

Wal-Mart Strikes Again

2007-01-11T22:42:00.000-05:00

Well, it looks like the corporate giant has not learned its lesson. Despite public criticism and widespread backlash, Wal-Mart is once again in the hot seat for failing to adequately provide affordable, accessible health care options for its largely uninsured workforce, many of whom earn wages at or below the poverty level.

According to articles in both The Washington Post and The New York Times, on Wednesday Wal-Mart released the results of a health care survey, in which the company surveyed 200,000 workers to gather data on how many employees have health coverage and how many are enrolled in the company’s plan. Although Wal-Mart is touting the survey results—90 percent of Wal-Mart employees surveyed have health care coverage, but 43 percent are covered under non-employer sponsored plans—as a step in a positive direction, groups that are against Wal-Mart’s unsavory practices view the fact that Wal-Mart employees have to look elsewhere for health coverage as a failure.

Why isn’t Wal-Mart inquiring about the reason a considerable percentage of its employees choose not to take advantage of the company-sponsored plan? Wal-Mart seems content with the fact that its currently offered health care plan—with an astronomical $1,000 individual deductible or $3,000 family deductible that kicks in after only three doctor visits—is offered at all, ignoring the fact that perhaps the plan does not meet the needs (or the budgets) of its workforce as a whole.

Wal-Mart, who in recent years has been accused of discrimination against women in pay and promotion practices, racial discrimination against black truck drivers, and racial profiling its customers, is being closely scrutinized by the watchdog groups and the general public—and with good reason. The company has more than enough black marks to mar its record. And now, they are attempting to lure workers into taking health care under a plan that appears to be a bait and switch: enticing, low monthly premiums that disguise expensive deductibles and hidden costs.

The retailer’s executives would be wise to view this as an opportunity to demonstrate that they understand the needs of those they employ by directing the company’s ample resources into adopting health care provisions that truly meet the needs of low-wage workers, instead of looking for a pat on the back for missing the mark yet again.

Two Steps Forward, Ten Steps Backward

2007-01-09T22:43:00.000-05:00

Just as the celebration over Deval Patrick’s inauguration to the governor position in Massachusetts starts to subside and the buzz about Obama’s potential presidential run grows to a dull roar, news of the death of a newly-elected Black mayor in Louisiana raises questions about the possibility of foul play, evoking fear that people of color who ascend to leadership positions are walking targets for racially motivated hate crimes, even in 2007.

It seems convenient that the local authorities in Louisiana deemed Gerald Washington’s death a suicide so quickly, even though there was a dearth of evidence pointing to suicide as the cause of death, i.e., suicide note, closing out of personal affairs. According to news reports, Washington eagerly anticipated his new role and his family is adamant that he was not “depressed,” as the coroner and other officials allege. In fact, overwhelming the facts reported make a strong case for Washington being the victim of a racial attack.

Is it true that the further people of color gain ground toward a just democracy, the more incidents like this take away from the long-fought progress that has been won?

Unfortunately, at this stage however, much of the theories surrounding Washington’s death are only speculative. Thankfully, after impassioned protests from Washington’s family, the state authorities have agreed to conduct a thorough investigation to verify or refute the initial ruling of suicide as cause of death.

**Blog Update: An afternoon news report from CNN confirmed yesterday that shots were fired into the home of Ernest Lampkins, the first Black mayor of Greenwood, La., a town 150 miles away from Westlake, the Louisiana city where Washington died. With this second violent attack on a Black mayor in the same region within a few days time, the NAACP is calling for an FBI investigation of these incidents, which may both be related and racially motivated.

The Right to a Fair Trial: DENIED

2007-01-08T22:53:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, The Washington Post ran an article about deportation that illuminated the struggles and inequities that immigrants deal with when faced with expulsion from the country. The article gives chilling details of the injustices endured by immigrants who are forced to leave the country unfairly because they are unable to produce evidence that will warrant a favorable court decision.

Consider this for a moment: We live in a place where serial killers, rapists, and pedophiles are given the benefit of pro bono legal representation during trials, but men and women whose only alleged “crime” is being a foreigner in a foreign land, are left to navigate the judicial system on their own and serve as their own defense counsel? In criminal trials, the defendants face the possibility of life in prison or death; in deportation trials, the consequences can be lifelong separation from family or persecution in their homeland, which to some are fates worse than death. What happened to being guilty until proven innocent?

In a legal system that stands upon the principle of justice and fairness, how can we justify denying immigrants (legal or otherwise) the benefit of what is considered to be due process for others who face legal proceedings? It is a sad commentary on what it deemed fair and just in America. If the government is truly committed to the ideals upon which this country was founded, it would not endorse measures or practices that discriminate against immigrants, regardless of their citizenship status.

Sometimes When Art Imitates Life, It's a Good Thing

2007-01-04T22:45:00.000-05:00

Will Smith’s big screen role in The Pursuit of Happyness, which also features his adorable son, Jaden, is much more than just another box office hit. While its central theme is a complex tale (based on a true story) about the ability of the human spirit to overcome poverty and homelessness and achieve success, it is equally a positive film about a Black man who is a devoted father, which may serve to combat the negative, stereotypical depictions of Black men found in the media and on television daily.

For those that are unfamiliar with the movie’s plot, Will Smith portrays Christopher Gardner, a young, African-American father who ends up homeless, along with his 5-year-old son, after his wife leaves home due to the strain of financial burdens. In a series of unfortunate events to follow, Smith’s character loses his home, but not his will to survive. And, most importantly, he is a constant, positive force in his son’s life, despite their troubled circumstances.

The Washington Post reported on the movie recently, noting that “Smith … isn’t a superhero saving the world but a man totally devoted to his son.” The article also quotes entertainer and businessman Fatin Dantzler as saying, “Art often depicts reality, and the reality Hollywood directors see is what most people see in the media, Black men in negative roles.”

For instance, statistics published December 31 in The Washington Post painted a picture of Black males as criminals, the majority of whom are destined to spend their lives incarcerated. The “By the Numbers” brief stated that “in 2005, black males ages 18 to 24 were the most common homicide victims and offenders in the District. At the end of 2001, 1,936,000 black men had been to prison, representing 16.6 percent of the national adult black male population. In comparison, 7.7 percent of adult Hispanic males and 2.6 percent of adult white males had been to prison.”

Some may argue that numbers don’t lie, which is false. Quantitative data alone, when not supported by explanatory, qualitative information, can be misleading. The Post article does not mention that the disproportionate arrest rate of Black males vs. White males and the racial profiling that takes place in predominantly Black and Latino neighborhoods is largely to blame for these statistics. Many Black males don’t get the chance to be good fathers because they are unjustly targeted, accused, arrested, and convicted of crimes.

Pursuit of Happyness is a ray of sunshine, the rays of which will hopefully overshadow such statistics and characterizations of Black males that are prone to misinterpretation. What is most remarkable about the movie is that the good, Black father that Smith portrays is not relegated to a subplot, but rather is the focal point of the movie. The movie also does not shy away from scenes showing the racism that Mr. Gardner endured while he was homeless, including one scene in particular that takes place after he is accepted to an internship for aspiring stockbrokers. Of the several dozen young hopefuls in the program, we see that Gardner is the only Black candidate. He is treated harshly and unfairly by the course instructor, even asked to perform unnecessary personal tasks such as moving his car or fetching coffee. And let’s bear in mind that this did not take place in 1965, but 1983.

So, while some movie critics praise what they the movie because they say it is a “color-blind” of success based on merit, as a Black man, Smith works hard to excel in the internship and has to jump through hoops that his White counterparts do not, in order to compete for the same spot.
Director Gabriele Muccino tackled sensitive issues of race bravely in this movie. It’s the type of movie that may leave audience members thinking, ‘There are good Black men out there who care for their children, don’t take drugs or engage in criminal activities, and aren’t in jail.’ It just might help to deconstruct some of the myths people believe about men of color. And, if that’s the case, then we’re thankful that this work of art does, indeed, imitate real life.

A Child Shall Lead Us

2007-01-02T22:46:00.000-05:00

In December, the Southern Human Rights Organizing Network (SHROC), as part of its 10-year anniversary conference activities, held a student and youth summit in Houston, Texas. The founder of SHROC, Jaribu Hill, in a recent Chicago Defender article, described youth as “an integral part of the movement for human rights, worker and racial justice in the South.” We agree. Ms. Hill’s apropos comments should be extended to the nationwide racial justice movement. The time is now to recognize the necessary contributions of young people to the struggles for equality and justice in America.

But, this will not happen unless we impress upon our young people the importance of political action and participation. The Urban Institute held a workshop recently called “Generation Next,” with participants falling in the age range of 16–26 years old. The workshop addressed matters of civic and political engagement in this age group. An Advancement Project staffer who attended the workshop reported that in a word-association survey of Generation Next-ers on the word “politics,” the majority associated politics with “power,” “lying,” “corrupt,” “boring,” and “confusing;” “Ensures opportunity” got a sad seven percent of votes.

What are we teaching the next generation of freedom fighters? What values are we instilling in them about the role of political power in effecting change?

The workshop panel also concluded that Generation Next-ers believe being a “good person” is enough when it comes to citizenship, whereas Baby Boomers believe citizenship comes with special obligations—such as voting, paying attention to government & politics, and contacting legislators. Overall, Generation Next-ers volunteer—in soup kitchens and to help the homeless—but lack an understanding of how these social concerns connect with politics; They either don’t understand (or believe) politics or political engagement can help address the country’s crisis of homeless individuals, families, and children.

If these observations are true indicators of what the up-and-coming generation of Americans believes and feels toward democracy and action, we are in trouble. If our youth don’t have a sense of what they’re fighting for and why, how can they be expected to embrace the struggle for racial justice? If we don’t expose them to the work that’s being done to achieve racial justice goals, we can’t look to them to be the torch-bearers of tomorrow.

Lest we forget, youth have been responsible for some of the most pivotal social change actions in our nation’s history:

College students initiated and staged the sit-in at the Woolworth lunch counter in Greensboro, N.C.
Nine brave high school students—Ernest Green, Elizabeth Eckford, Jefferson Thomas, Terrence Roberts, Carlotta Walls Lanier, Minnijean Brown Trickey, Gloria Ray Karlmark, Thelma Mothershed-Wair, and Melba Pattillo-Beals—integrated Central High School in Little Rock, Ark., amid hostility and violence
In the Children’s Crusade in Birmingham, Ala., hundreds of children—some as young as six years old—emerged from 16th St. Baptist Church carrying signs and singing freedom songs. Twelve-year-old Anita Woods, who was arrested for demonstrating against racial segregation in Birmingham, was quoted as saying, “I’ll keep marching until I get freedom.”
Many young people led rebellions and entire Indian armies, such as Teedyuscung of the Lenape, Oceola of the Seminole, and Blue Jacket and Tecumseh of the Shawnee.

Today’s youth must understand that how and why their freedoms and basic rights are still under attack. They will be our leaders of tomorrow. As we take the racial justice movement to the next level, we cannot afford to leave them behind.

Assimilation by Force: Dismantling Our Cultural Identity

2007-01-01T22:49:00.000-05:00

USA Today recently interviewed members of the Arab Muslim community in America and found that while this group has felt threatened since the tragedy of 9-11, they don’t feel safer today than they did the day after the towers fell. As a result of this pervasive fear, many Arab Muslims feel compelled to “Americanize” themselves—not wear head scarves, change their names, and not speak Arabic in public. It seems this Americanization is fueled by the racially-motivated violence that makes them walking targets; reports of anti-Muslim incidents jumped 30 percent last year, according to the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

In history class, many of us learned about the Ford English School, one of the most famous instances of forced assimilation. The school was established by Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company, to teach his immigrant employees about American culture. At the school’s graduation, students entered into and then emerged from a “melting pot” meant to symbolize their leaving behind of their culture and their embracing of “American” culture.

Even language is being stripped away from marginalized groups, such as Latinos, who instruct their children not to speak Spanish in public. Legislators are lobbying for laws that would prevent immigrants from communicating and conducting business in any language other than English. Such efforts only serve to further alienate people from their culture and history. Those with the desire to preserve ties to ancestral lineage ultimately lose their indigenous languages altogether, and struggle to identify with their native culture.

This forced assimilation begs the question, what is “American” culture? True, the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock in 1492, but they were by no means the first people to arrive on American soil. If we truly want to embrace our “American” roots, shouldn’t we adopt the culture of Native Americans, who were the first to populate this country?

We reject the notion that America is a melting pot; a more accurate description is a “cultural symphony.” We live in a country made up of immigrants from myriad countries, and it our multiculturalism that makes this country unique. What would this country be like without ethnic enclaves like New York’s Chinatown or Little Italy that manage to survive despite enormous pressure to conform and assimilate. When groups are forced to reject their heritage and culture, through fear and other tactics, we all lose.

MVPs on the Field Are Least Valued on the Sidelines

2006-12-17T22:26:00.000-05:00

Although Black and White athletes together are contributing to the success of college sports teams that play in the top championship bowls, on the field is where the winning occurs for Black athletes. Off the playing field, they lose. In the classroom, statistics suggest that Black athletes are being left behind and forgotten while their White counterparts move up and out. Sadly, graduation rates between Black and White athletes at top NCAA colleges are marred by a growing divide. White athletes are matriculating through these colleges and universities at rates that far surpass those of Black athletes.

According to MSNBC.com, top-ranked Ohio State University has one of the lowest rates for graduating Black athletes, with only 32 percent of its Black players graduating. Yet, overall, the university graduates 80 percent of its athletes, with a whopping 85 percent graduation rate for White football players. The article goes on to talk about how new academic standards are being introduced to increase graduation rates, even noting that schools are shying away from admitting low-achieving students solely based on their athletic prowess. Of course, high standards are to applauded. However, there is nothing about helping the struggling Black athletes who are currently scoring on the field, earning prestige and accolades for their schools, but are not on target to graduate with their White peers. Its as if it’s acceptable that no academic support mechanisms are being implemented to help the struggling players.

It seems that the colleges and universities in question are content to address this issue as if race is not the determining factor in a significant number of athletes’ academic success. Apparently, the NCAA has issued a written statement that says, among other things, that a higher level of achievement in the overall academic success of student athletes is “critical, because very few of them will become professional athletes.” While this is true, what they fail to realize is that the Black athletes, in particular, need a strong academic background and to earn a degree to compete in a society that is systemically dismantling affirmative action in hiring practices, and in which Black men still trail behind Whites in earning potential and advancement in the workplace. Since only a small percentage of the Black athletes that compete at the college level will go on to the pros, they cannot afford to fail academically and walk into the world without a sports career and without a college degree.

The answer is not to deny opportunity to qualified Black athletes. Rather, the solution to this trend in top bowl schools lies in reaching out and providing much-needed assistance to Black athletes including mentoring, tutoring, and other programs to help them excel. During slavery, Black men were used for the physical strength, placed in the fields to work like animals, but not allowed or encouraged to learn. Today, Black athletes are recruited, trained, and exploited for their athletic ability but ignored and left behind in the classroom. Is history repeating itself? You make the call.

Black Firefighter Cries Foul, Not Wolf

2006-12-04T22:30:00.001-05:00

Controversy swirling around a Los Angeles fireman seeking justice because his dinner was laced with dog food stirs curiosity and raises eyebrows as we struggle to ascertain whether the incident was, indeed, racially motivated. The firefighters who committed the unpalatable prank were White; and, Tennie Pierce, the L.A. firefighter who filed a discrimination suit, is Black. The burning question: were the motives or intent of this disgusting action really racial? Or, as some suggest, is Pierce just crying wolf, playing the “race card” in hopes of a major payoff?

Initially, the L.A. city council voted to pay Pierce $2.7 million in hush money just to keep the case from every seeing the inside of a courtroom. Yet, Mayor Villaraigosa vetoed the settlement. At a most recent council meeting, according to the Los Angeles Times, all three Black L.A. city council members also voted against any settlement payment to Pierce for fear that the act “could be viewed as racist.”

Was Pierce just an unsuspecting victim of a firehouse tradition that, unfortunately, includes hazing at all levels? Considering the fact that the department has been under fire and sued in the past for subjecting Blacks to hostile conditions, the odds are against it. Though Pierce admitted to participating in such pranks in the past, he said that they were “good-natured,” and the men would hug when it was over. However, when Pierce was deceived into eating dog food, he was completely unaware and no apologies or conciliatory gestures were offered. Blogger Jasmyne Cannick eloquently points out that “it’s clear that Pierce participated on other pranks, but that doesn’t mean that he couldn’t be the victim of racial discrimination. If I follow their logic, then I’d also have to agree that a prostitute couldn’t get raped.”

In an emotional statement, Pierce recalls that his mother worked three jobs to support his family and not once did she ever feed them dog food. Pierce said White firefighters watched him eat the dog food and when he complained to superiors, he was ignored. Though we may never know the true intent of the White firefighters who reveled as Pierce consumed the tainted meal, breaking news of Fire Chief William Bamattre’s impending resignation makes the history of racial tension that has plagued the department difficult to ignore. The Los Angeles Black Firefighters Association has been fighting and complaining about the racism in the fire department for years. Given these facts, the odds are in Pierce’s favor that his discrimination claim is a legitimate instance of racially motivated foul play.

Speaking Our Language

2006-11-28T22:15:00.000-05:00

Hats off to Montgomery County, Md., schools for embracing the diversity of this great nation. According to a Washington Post article, some Montgomery County elementary students attend schools where English and Spanish languages are emphasized equally in the classroom in what is called dual-language immersion. The dual-language immersion program teaches youth at an early age the importance of communicating with people of other cultures. The goal of the program is to allow English-speaking and non-English speaking students to help each other become bilingual. Talk about breaking language barriers!

Contrary to what some politicians believe, who are advocating inane legislation enshrining English as the official language, we are a nation of immigrants who now share the same soil, a place where we can enjoy the freedom to speak in our native tongues. The article notes that in 2000, 17 percent of students enrolled in public schools were Hispanic, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. And, the numbers are steadily rising.

With the demographic shifts taking place in the United States, we can no longer ignore the widening strata of diversity that makes up the American population. The unique aspect of programs such as dual-language immersion is that Spanish is not treated as a second language. It is given equal billing with English, so Spanish-speaking students are not regarded as being behind the curve when it comes to learning. In the Spanish classes, they are the experts and have the opportunity to share knowledge of their native language with the English-speaking students. And, this is a growing trend in schools across the country, with 329 similar programs nationwide. We say, onward and upward, as the walls built by language barriers come tumbling down.

ICE Tactics Warrant a Meltdown

2006-11-14T22:16:00.000-05:00

Was ICE Director Julie Myers on the campaign trail? Her name did not appear on the ballot; yet, Myers is certainly politicking in her own way, having released an executive summary of ICE “accomplishments” in FY06—three months early and just days before Election Day.

With a lead-in that sounds more like a résumé than a report on the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activities in the past year, ICE wasted no time in tooting their own horn to divert attention from their cruel and unjust immigration practices. On the surface, the ICE report sounds like a fairy-tale, citing a laundry list of so-called achievements such as tripling the number of fugitive operations teams and targeting transnational gangs. But, reading between the lines of the ICE report we find that these “strategies” are nothing more than scare tactics and brutality. The report, and ICE activities, must be viewed through a lens of humanity, one that sees the faces of the undocumented immigrants ICE coldly refers to as “illegal aliens.”

In August 2006, the U.S. Government Accountability Office released a report that border-crossing deaths have doubled since 1995 and that border patrol efforts to prevent deaths have not been fully evaluated. Regardless of whether or not they have official documentation required for citizenship, these individuals are fathers, mothers, and children. They have loved ones who are looking forward to their safe journey or return. It is our responsibility (“our” referring to ICE), as citizens in the land of the FREE, to develop measures that humanely address immigration issues and enforce a policy of protection rather than prosecution and punishment.

Black Like You

2006-11-13T22:19:00.000-05:00

Stanley Crouch, in his article titled “What Obama Isn’t: Black like Me,” makes some harsh statements about what it means to be a Black American and who should (and should not) be included under this designation, in his view.

The essence of the article is an explanation of why a presidential bid by Barack Obama would give way to a “more complex understanding of the difference between color and ethnic identity.” First of all, it is difficult to understand why Obama’s presidential nomination would contribute to such an understanding. Tiger Woods, who is of mixed heritage, has achieved a mega-celebrity status and the public has raised few questions or made few assumptions about color vs. ethnic identity.

I’d like to take a moment to respond to some key points raised by Mr. Crouch:

Crouch: It was a “fascinating subplot” of the 2004 senate election in Illinois that Alan Keyes, Obama’s contender, was “unable to draw a meaningful distinction between himself as a Black American and Obama as an African American.”

Response: Keyes did indeed attempt to discredit Obama’s “Blackness” during the Illinois senate race, to no avail. But, why should we tolerate or elevate this type of racism, which the The African Sun Times referred to as “inter-cultural bigotry”? We should not celebrate Keyes’ misguided effort to divide and conquer along racial lines during the election. In the public view, both Keyes and Obama are, equally, Black. Over and over again, the media confirmed the public’s perception: CBS News called it “the first U.S. Senate election with two Black candidates representing the major parties;” USA Today hailed Obama as the “fifth black U.S. senator in history.” No, this was not a “fascinating subplot.” It was nothing more than an embarrassing display of a politician’s lack of racial consciousness.
Crouch: “Other than color, Obama did not—does not—share a heritage with the majority of Black Americans, who are descendants of plantation slaves.”

Whether we arrived here on a slave ship from Africa or journeyed here by some other means, we are ALL immigrants into this country, by force or choice. As Black Americans, we have a shared heritage of being structurally excluded in a country that has works within systems designed to keep Blacks out, down, and under. As immigrants to this country, we’ve fought together, sweated together, been subjugated together, and celebrated together. Today, although the “paper-bag rule” that slaveholders used to judge a person’s race based on how close their skin color resembled that of a brown paper bag, if you have brown skin, you are labeled as Black and treated accordingly. The difference between Black American and African American is preference in terminology.
Crouch: “In his new book, The Audacity of Hope, Obama makes it clear that, while he has experienced some light versions of typical racial stereotypes, he cannot claim those problems as his own—nor has he lived the life of a Black American.” Having not yet perused Obama’s book, we question if Crouch’s interpretation of Obama’s statements are true. If Obama does make this distinction, shame on him. Being subject to racial stereotyping isn’t the measuring stick for whether or not you’re Black, and to what degree. If Obama chooses not to associate himself with Black Americans, that’s his prerogative. It doesn’t make him any less Black in the eyes of Black America, or America in general.

Who made Crouch an authority on what Black is and what it isn’t? A former civil rights activist, perhaps he feels that his involvement in this movement gives him the credentials to determine what constitutes Blackness. Mr. Crouch must understand that membership in the intricate, interlinked racial group known as Black, also known as African American, is not earned. It is who you are, whether you like it or not. But, if his views are representative of Black America, it makes me wonder, where can I turn in my “Blackness” card?

Even a Child Can See It

2006-11-02T22:24:00.000-05:00

Recently, I marveled with a colleague about how even toddlers can understand and discern differences in skin color. My colleague pointed out that a three-year-old, while visiting her office, noticed a picture in which her skin appeared lighter due to a photographic technique. The child questioned the color difference, asking why the photo made her look “whiter” than her medium brown complexion, a product of her Latino heritage.

So, if small children notice skin color, certainly intelligent, reasonable adults should know beyond a shadow of a doubt that, yes, RACE MATTERS. Yet, amazingly, yesterday’s USA TODAY cover story featured an article that overflowed with quote after quote about how, in electoral races where African Americans are vying for seats that have never been held by a person of color, race somehow just “doesn’t matter” or “isn’t a factor.” Oh, if that were only true, it would be a paradisiacal world for all concerned.

Enough fantasizing. Let’s revisit reality for a moment, shall we?

People of color have made significant strides in the last 50 years in the political arena. We are no longer sitting in the back of the bus, or so to speak, in many levels of the political sphere. However, if color was no longer a factor and all things were truly equal, we would have influence and representation in all levels of government in equal numbers to Whites.

When will the pendulum swing in favor of people of color on the Supreme Court, the nation’s highest court of justice? Statistics show that 108 of the 110 Supreme Court justices appointed, or 98.2 percent, have been White; there has never been more than one African-American justice serving on the Supreme Court at a time. When those numbers become more racially balanced, perhaps then I will listen to claims that race doesn’t matter. At the governor level, only one African American, Virginia’s Doug Wilder, has ever been elected governor of a U.S. state. Tell me race doesn’t matter when at least half of the 50 states have governors of color.

Why is it that although it has taken decades for people of color to be able to break through the glass “race” ceiling and rise to positions of authority in politics and celebrate some key “firsts,” pundits are eager to denounce race as a factor in the electoral process? It may take decades for the playing field to be level, which is why in the meantime, we must keep race on the table, in the forefront, in the discussion. We cannot afford to ignore its impact on elections.

Those who insist that color is not a factor in the campaign of Democratic gubernatorial nominee Deval Patrick (or any other candidate of color, for that matter) are out of touch with reality. The electorate is not color blind. It is Deval Patrick’s race that makes his potential election in Massachusetts such a big news item—the news is that he would be only the second Black ever elected governor in ANY state.

The USA TODAY article is rife with contradictions. Reporter Susan Page writes, “to win, these candidates have to appeal to White voters, of course—and in a nation where race continues to resonate.” But, the article also quotes such “experts” as David Bositis, of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, who is credited with saying race would not be the reason that Black candidates lose on Nov. 7, but rather it would be because of the same challenges faced by White contenders. But, by virtue of being Black, those candidates have to overcome obstacles inherent to the political structure as they emerge from the starting gate, certain misperceptions and fears widely held by White society. And, the White contenders are wasting no time in capitalizing on those fears and misperceptions. Kerry Healey, Deval Patrick’s opponent, who is White, is catering to White fears in ads that resemble the racist, anti-Ford ads that the Republicans are running to discredit Memphis Rep. Harold Ford, Jr.

Contrary to popular belief, the Nov. 7 election is NOT a test to see how much race matters; through a child’s eyes we see that it still matters, and that’s all we need to know.

Democracy in Danger

2006-10-29T22:12:00.000-05:00

Unfortunately, this headline is not an empty warning or a misplaced threat. It is a fact. There is a burgeoning crisis that, if left unchecked, has the capacity to disrupt and debilitate the democratic system in America. At the center of this crisis are Americans, civic-minded individuals stepping forward to volunteer their time, talent, and energy to making sure elections are conducted fairly and efficiently. However, election officials have been remiss in supplying these individuals—poll workers—with adequate training and preparation necessary to get the job done. It’s like expecting a car to run smoothly without a well-oiled engine – good luck!

The poll worker crisis is particularly detrimental for people of color, who are at greatest risk of being disenfranchised in the upcoming Nov. 7 election. We need only look at the statistics regarding the training, recruitment, and retention of poll workers to understand why eligible voters being denied access to a vote and having their vote counted is often the ensuing result.
According to a wire news report, many poll workers earn less than they would flipping hamburgers. Other reports predict a “messy” election on Nov. 7 in 10 key states: Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Maryland, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Washington.

The problem of poorly trained poll workers is reminiscent of some direct disenfranchisement strategies—restrictive and arbitary registration practices—employed by Whites during the Civil Rights Era. In the South, voter registration was complicated in states requiring information that was unavailable to many Blacks (e.g., street addresses, because Black neighborhood lacked street names and numbers). Even though some Blacks were able to overcome these initial obstacles to voting, election officials would still deny the vote arbitrarily. Similarly, states that do not invest in proper training for poll workers are creating an atmosphere on Election Day that is not conducive to a fair election process, one that involves cumbersome voting procedures and chaotic scenes at polling sites.

If state and county election officials do not take immediate action to rectify the poll worker situation, we might as well post signs at polling places that say “Warning: Untrained Poll Workers Ahead. Vote at Your Own Risk.”

Blacks Still Unwelcome On (and Off) the Green

2006-05-10T22:10:00.000-04:00

People all over the nation mourn the recent loss of Tiger Woods’ father, Earl Woods. The patriarch of the Woods family, Mr. Woods left a lasting legacy for his son, a golf player who has opened some doors for people of color in a historically White-dominated, exclusive sport. Others, like Arthur Ashe and Althea Gibson, paved the way for Tiger to make his mark in golfing history.

But, unfortunately, there are racial barriers that have yet to be broken. Recent questions stemming from the appointment of the first Black president of the Eastern Section of the United States Tennis Association lead us to believe that racism is alive and well in the wide world of golf.
In a narrow election, Dale G. Caldwell, a 21-year golf veteran and nationally-ranked 40-and-over player, won a position previously held only by Whites. Now, his election is being challenged by a White tennis instructor from Albany, N.Y., the closest contender for the top spot, whose claims of miscounted votes and possible fraud are eerily reminiscent of allegations of voter fraud in recent presidential elections.

Though the tennis association has reportedly spent millions of dollars on outreach to people of color to promote diversity in its membership, Caldwell did numerous “anonymous” emails critiques with racial comments.

It seems that there is a message here that Blacks, or any people of color for that matter, while tolerated perhaps on the putting green, certainly shouldn’t expect to have the red carpet rolled out if and when they decide to hold a prominent position within highly-selective and exclusive, country club-style golf organizations; a distressing reminder of a time when Black people were allowed in back doors to cook and clean, but not allowed to mingle with the guests or sit in the front of the bus.

Columbus Discovered America, And Other Myths

2006-05-07T22:08:00.000-04:00

It seems that U.S. history is colored with instances where we “Americans” like to take credit for something we didn’t do FIRST. For example, Columbus Day is still celebrated as a holiday although we all know Christopher Columbus did not discover America—how can someone discover a continent that was already inhabited?

This notoriously false claim-to-fame is reminiscent of another, more recent attempt by our great nation to calls dibs on something that was never ours to begin with—the U.S. national anthem. It seems that several Senators are piping mad that “The Star Spangled Banner” has been translated into Spanish. Once again, we’re a day late and dollar short, acting as if we discovered “The Star Spangled Banner” and its history begins and ends with us. Meanwhile, indisputable data shows us that we have no basis for our righteous indignation:

The Library of Congress has on its website a Spanish-language version of the song prepared in 1919 by the U.S. Department of Education, 12 years before we adopted the English version as our official anthem.
The U.S. State Department website has four separate Spanish versions of the national anthem and it links to another website that includes several German versions of the song. They do this so U.S. embassies can use the translations in ceremonies so guests understand what is being sung.

Obviously, the Senators in question failed to check with their own government agencies regarding the matter before spouting off about the issue. Yet, we can sympathize with their confusion to the extent that their Commander in Chief chose to vocalize his unfounded objections in a recent BBC News Article.

ABC news reported that the Senators said the anthem and the Pledge of Allegiance should always be recited or sung in English because “what binds Americans together is not race, ancestry or origin, but a common language—English.” If we follow this misguided logic, then we are similarly “bound” with those in the UK or the Caribbean. Besides, did we miss the memo establishing English as the official U.S. language?

Translating the anthem into Spanish serves the same purpose as restaurant menus, automated telephone recordings, assembly directions, and signs, which are all now available in Spanish—accessibility and shared understanding. In a country where no group is indigenous to the area (except perhaps Native Americans who were here FIRST) it would behoove us to put our customs, our traditions, and certainly our national anthem, in a format that can be understood by everyone. If the anthem was presented in Braille, no one would be saying a word. What’s the difference?

Arguing for a Senate resolution calling for all statements of national unity to be sung or read in English, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) injected his opinion: “… translating our national anthem will actually have the effect of dividing us. It adds to the celebration of multiculturalism in our society which has eroded our understanding of our common American culture.” So, now multiculturalism is divisive??

Sen. Alexander, it is time you faced the facts: First, the very definition of the word multiculturalism (from the Latin “multus,” meaning much or many) is giving equal attention or representation to the cultural needs and contributions of all the groups in a society. Second, remaking the “Star Spangled Banner” is just another in a long line of remakes for the song. The melody was taken from “To Anacreon in Heaven,” the official song of the Anacreontic Society, a club of amateur musicians in London who gathered to promote an interest in music. The same melody was used as a Betelgeusean death anthem in the BBC production of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.

So, Senators, enough of your pious proclamations about preserving the sanctity of the anthem, it’s time to destroy our Columbus-mentality that our way is the only way, our language is the only language, and our history is the only history that matters. Let’s stop trying to claim first prize when we’re really the runners up and accept that there is no common American culture—we are a fabric interwoven with the cultures of many American immigrants.

High-Tech Hate

2006-04-30T21:49:00.000-04:00

Gone are the days of harmless, yet imaginative video games that sparked creativity and competition as we defended a galactic spaceship or gobbled cyber-dots with a yellow Pac-Man. Now, our children are being exposed to such degenerative forms of “entertainment,” the products of twisted minds. Even cyberspace is not immune to racism.

Imagine sitting at a computer playing a game called Border Patrol where you kill immigrants for sport by aiming a cyber-gun at pregnant women, called “Breeders,” as they run across the border, kids in tow, earning points when you hit your target and splatter their blood across the screen. Or, if that’s not enough “fun” for one day, you can download a game aptly-titled Ethnic Cleansing, described by its developer as “the most politically incorrect game ever made” where the object is to kill as many Blacks and Jewish people as possible.

National Alliance, the White supremacist group that created Ethnic Cleansing, comments on the intent behind the game’s creation:

"The whole intent of making this video game was to make a racially provocative
video game and if it does help promote the separation of the races, then it’s
been positive and that’s what we want."

You don’t have to search far to find these games on the Internet. News reports confirm that tailored websites allow visitors to download games for a minimal cost, but not before inundating them with propaganda about racist ideals and organizations. So, what we’re talking about here is more than a few minutes of video game play, but rather a platform for preaching racial injustice, a vehicle used to espouse misguided beliefs on racial separation, superiority, and genocide.

The games are targeted toward children and teens, today’s video game generation. Seventy-four percent of families with school-age children own video game equipment and school-age children play video games an average of 53 minutes per day, most of which is unsupervised by an adult.

But, even more tragic is the adverse effect these video games have on the minds of adults in positions to power, eager to undermine, oppress, and exclude people of color. We are still marching to gain equality for minority groups and the cyber-attacks on noncitizens and other people of color represent yet another hurdle we must overcome.

The fact that this type of commercialized racism is allowed to pollute the Internet is deplorable and destructive, to say the least. It took years to dismantle segregation and all of its ugly ideals and these products are evidence of concerted, premeditated efforts to return to separate and unequal. Even more disturbing is the portrayal of people of color and ethnic minorities in such a way that condones abuse and violence. What a sad commentary on the state of our nation when “games” that spew hatred and dehumanizing people of color, are allowed to proliferate in our society.

Beating Them at Their Own Game

2006-04-16T21:54:00.000-04:00

Remember the saying, “If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em?” Well, the phrase aptly describes the praiseworthy efforts of three women in Wisconsin who responded to racially bias treatment in the banking industry by building their own “legacy” of equity.

Chartered in 1999 by three African-American women, Legacy Bancorp is the only privately-held bank holding company in the nation organized by African American women, and is the parent company of Legacy Bank, a strong example of community banking in action. Legacy Bank is the result of people of color working together to tip the scales of power in their favor. Frustrated and dismayed over preferential treatment given to White males with regard to lending, capital, and money, the professional women used a large chunk of their own capital, and raised additional funds to cover the $7 million startup costs for this undertaking. According to an article in the Wisconsin State Journal , today, Legacy Bank boasts 35 employees and assets of $136 million.

A bank vice president with 28 years experience under her belt, Deloris “Dee Dee” Sims had her fair share of watching Blacks and other minorities being treated unfairly based on the color of their skin or their gender. The mission of the bank she started with two associates, one of whom is the former wife of professional basketball star, Bob Lanier, is to “be innovative in providing financial services to those who aren’t served well while building the economic base of the community.”

The bold business move by Sims et al. is in line with the eighth covenant discussed in Tavis Smiley’s newly-released bestseller, The Covenant with Black America , which outlines a national plan of action to address the primary concerns of African Americans today. In an essay titled, “Accessing Good Jobs, Wealth, and Economic Prosperity,” President and CEO of the National Urban League, Marc Morial, declares that “without the wealth and equity of homeownership and sound investments to fall back on, African Americans stand on shaky ground.” He urges the Black community to “take ownership of our own economic destiny as well as urge our leaders to develop policies to help working families.”

Considering the following alarming statistics, we must come face to face with the fact that the wealth gap between Whites and people of color continues to grow:

While the income gap between Blacks and Whites narrowed in the 1990s, the wealth gap actually increased during that same period.
By 2002, more than one in four Hispanic and African American families were asset poor, having no liquid financial assets, compared to six percent of Whites.
Fewer than 50 percent of Black families own their own homes, compared with more than 75 percent of Whites.
African Americans are 3.6 times as likely as Whites to receive a home purchase loan from a subprime lender and 4.1 times as likely as Whites to receive a refinance loan from a subprime lender. Subprime lending is usually one to six points over the prime rate and is reserved for lending to businesses that do not qualify for “prime” rates.
African Americans have a median net worth of $5,998, compared to $88,651 for Whites. Even more alarming, 32 percent of African Americans have a zero or negative net worth. (All statistics taken from The Covenant with Black America by Tavis Smiley)

One surefire way to guarantee that people of color will not be able to buy a home is to deny them home loans based upon prejudicial factors. Sims obviously had a front row seat to these and other racist and sexist practices, so much so that and by the end of her third decade of trying to work within the system to level the playing ground, she decided to venture into the industry and make her own rules – a gutsy move we hope will be a model and inspiration for others to follow.

We're Humans, Not Hondas

2006-04-13T21:56:00.000-04:00

State legislators are patting themselves on the back as a bill passes requiring all Michigan residents to purchase health insurance or pay a fine. To address the problem of the more than 43 million people in the United States without health insurance, Michigan has passed new legislation based on the state’s auto insurance policy requirements. So, in effect, the state has made it legally appropo to treat poor patients like automobiles.

How can any rational-minded person reasonably assume that slapping people who cannot afford or qualify for health care insurance with a hefty fine will increase their ability to get insurance or pay for it? The costs that taxpayers absorb to treat an uninsured person is significantly less than what it would cost to pay for the incarcerated uninsured, which is where they will end up, if and when they fail to meet the stipulations of this new law.

Perhaps Michigan needs to be reminded that uninsured people are just that – people. If poor people can’t afford to insure their automobile, they have the option of electing not to drive. They don’t have the option not to get sick. This legislation only adds insult to injury. It is our sincere hope that more states don’t follow Michigan’s human/automobile analogous model of health care reform.

Ethnic Cleansing on American Soil

2006-03-16T21:45:00.000-05:00

Brittanica’s concise encyclopedia online refers to ethnic cleansing as “the creation of an ethnically homogenous geographic area through the elimination of unwanted ethnic groups by deportation, forcible displacement, or genocide.”

No longer do we have to go to the Congo or Sudan to see the evidence and effects of ethnic cleansing at work; we need only turn our eyes to New Orleans, La., and there, in our own backyard, we can see ethnic cleansing in its worst form. The lack of progress in rebuilding less-affluent neighborhoods has been termed a policy of ethnic cleansing by inaction .

In New Orleans, people of color are being denied, through various political and economic devices, the right of return. Victims are not physically killed, but instead are sentenced to die a thousand emotional deaths in the every day hell of the reality forced on them:

Displaced to faraway places while their property is condemned and insurance companies and banks force them to remit property payments
Victimized by FEMA’s negligence and forced to endure repeated evictions without the prospect of stable housing
Separated from family members that remain missing
Denied fair and equal access to the electoral process

The face of New Orleans has drastically changed. In a city which was once more than 70% Black, people of color are scarcely visible. More than 400,000 residents, a majority of whom are Black , were displaced. Their voices have been silenced by natural and man-made disasters that washed them away from their homes.

Now, mostly Whites plan the fate of those displaced persons and all roads either lead away from New Orleans or have colossal roadblocks to return. Capitalizing on the involuntary migration of Blacks out of the city, “planners are advocating plans to reduce the city’s population, using the expression, ‘a smaller footprint.’ Properties have been condemned and slated for demolitions, and rebuilding plans call for making neighborhoods where people of color once lived green spaces, wetlands, or development zones. Under these plans, many Black residents would be unable to rebuild. The racially-biased “smaller footprint” is a move that threatens to systematically confiscate the right of return from New Orleans’ Black residents.

What is most disturbing is that those who would most vehemently oppose such a restructuring plan may not have the opportunity to make their voices heard because elections are to be held without providing easy access to the polls for displaced citizens. White politicians are crowding the ballots for election to key offices; of more than a dozen potential candidates in the mayoral race, less than eight are persons of color. This is particularly noteworthy considering New Orleans has had Black mayors since 1978. Current policies and guidelines make voting a cumbersome process for displaced voters; some prohibit participation altogether. Scattered throughout the country, those languishing without necessary assistance to return and repair their dwellings are now confronted with a mounting, racist attack on their democratic rights.

History appears to be repeating itself as the situation in New Orleans today mirrors political unrest in the city’s not-so-distant past. Standing on the shoulders of white politicians who, in the 1980s, tried to deprive black voters in New Orleans of the opportunity to elect a member of Congress of their choice, current New Orleans officials are poised to disavow a large, racially homogenous segment of the voting bloc of their right to vote.

In the 80s, political officials met in the Capitol basement in the night, excluded the Black members of the legislature, and drew a districting plan that included a district for New Orleans that the federal court found was shaped like Donald Duck. The landmark 1980’s case, Major v. Treen, is perhaps the most infamous voting rights violation of the post Voting Rights Act era, but the travesties of justice being perpetrated in modern-day New Orleans threaten to surpass historically racist agendas in severity and potential harm.

Today, New Orleans officials are conducting business in the open, redefining city boundaries without benefit of input from the displaced masses. A report from the Bring Back New Orleans Commission cites the recent Supreme Court Kelo decision, which permits the use of eminent domain to serve private interests, as a chance to rebuild New Orleans in their own image.” Unfortunately, “in their own image” refers to a brighter, whiter New Orleans, a city without the black and brown faces that are indigenous to the area. As US Congressman Richard Baker (Wall Street Journal-post Katrina) stated after the storm, "We finally cleaned up in New Orleans . We couldn’t do it, but God did.”

While there has been a genuine influx of compassion and concern for the plight of Katrina survivors, we cannot ignore the undeniable evidence that the New Orleans that is rooted in Black culture and history, is in danger of extinction. Amid debates over New Orleans’ new footprint, registered New Orleans voters countdown to the April election unsure as to whether restrictive voting measures will serve as barriers to voting. Meanwhile, in the absence of many Black voters, New Orleans officials are working quickly to advance their agendas and create a city based upon their ideal.

“Over much of the last century, Whites in New Orleans gambled that they could build a society of White privilege and Black disfranchisement, and do so with the help of the rest of the nation. Tragically, that is exactly what happened.” It is no coincidence that those in New Orleans who will benefit most from silencing the Black majority are not racing to make provisions for fair, equitable elections. It is a poignant example of ethnic cleansing, justified by American government and perpetrated on democratic, American soil.

Race in Black. White.

2006-03-14T21:48:00.000-05:00

The premier episode of the new, controversial television series on FX channel, “Black. White.” was enough to make me anticipate watching this week’s show. Admittedly, I enjoy television drama as much as the next person. So, the show catered to those of us that thrive on watching controversy and opposition on the small screen. On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, I give “Black. White.” an 8.5 for entertainment value. On the same scale, I rate it only a 3 for advancing the discourse on race in America.

The premise of the show is that two typical suburban families, one Black and the other White, agree to live together in a house and undergo intensive makeup sessions that transform them into members of the other race. In Black or Whiteface, the families venture into public situations to find out what life is like for someone of a different skin color.

In general, “Black. White.” does a poor job of depicting the realities of race relations in this country. While the White family’s ignorance to the most basic qualities and characteristics of Black people is similar to the White America’s ambivalence toward anything Black, it is obvious that these reality show “actors” have been coached to appear denser than most for the sake of controversy. For example, the White husband refuses to acknowledge that racism still exists. He repeatedly talks about how he is waiting for an overt racial episode, for someone to walk up to him and call him the “N’ word. His misguided thought pattern resembles the segment of society that believes racism was eradicated by the Civil Rights Movement. The Black family tries in vain to educate him about the fact that although the days have passed of Black people being sprayed in the streets with fire hoses, today’s racism is just as real, and ever-present. It is NOT a figment of our imagination.

The recent Oprah Winfrey Show, “Trading Races,” that featured the two families reflecting upon their experiences during the course of the show, foreshadowed the petty bickering that characterizes the show. Still, emotions remained raw, and it’s apparent that even though the taping of show is complete, deep feelings and conflicts about race remained. I was concerned, however, that the Black family, because of their persistent criticism of the White family, and the White family’s “can’t-we-all-just-get-along” response, will likely be dismissed by Whites as “angry Black folks.” However, discerning “Black. White.” viewers may look past the bitter façade to recognize the historical significance of the Black family anguish over racism.

One article on “Black. White.” compares the show to John Howard Griffin’s groundbreaking book, Black Like Me, which is a stretch. Despite the show’s success thus far, I caution viewers to keep the show’s primary purpose in perspective – entertainment. If Americans try to use this show as a measuring stick for the nature of race relations today, the analysis will fall far short of what is necessary to achieve racial justice. Regardless of the program’s inherent realism, often the ignorance of the White family to the most basic qualities of Black people seems staged. At times, both families appear clueless and hopeless, spouting narrow-minded views of the other race.

In the end, the redeeming quality of “Black. White.” is that it sometimes conveys the truth about race in this country – race still matters – albeit in an exaggerated way that, at times, borders on comic relief. My advice: prepare to be entertained and to yell at the television screen; consider it a welcome surprise if you are enlightened in the process.

One Honor Fits All?

2006-02-22T21:34:00.000-05:00

Roberto Clemente undoubtedly deserves recognition. With 3,000+ hits in his 18-year baseball career, two World Series appearances, the 4-time National League champion and MVP is one of the greatest athletes and humanitarians the U.S. has known; Clemente died after his plane, headed to Nicaragua to provide aid to earthquake survivors, crashed off the coast of Puerto Rico.

In Puerto Rico, his birthplace, the Robert Clemente Sports City, a 304-acre sports complex complete with a 12-foot statue in his likeness, stands as a monument to his achievements and legacy. On American soil, the Baseball Hall of Fame honored Clemente with the distinction of being the first player of Latin American descent inducted into the Hall of Fame.

Yet, with all of the accolades bestowed upon Clemente, a proposition to retire his number has raised debate across racial lines. The proposition faces opposition from an unlikely source – the daughter of legendary baseball great, Jackie Robinson. Robinson’s jersey #42 was the first and, to date, the only number retired by Major League Baseball (MLB). Sharon Robinson raises the question of whether achievements and awards given to African-American athletes like her father stand on behalf of Latinos as well:

"To my understanding, the purpose of retiring my father’s number is that what he
did changed all of baseball, not only for African-Americans but also for
Latinos, so I think that purpose has been met," Robinson told the newspaper at a
birthday celebration for her father in Times Square. "When you start retiring
numbers across the board, for all different groups, you’re kind of diluting the
original purpose."

Hispanics Across America President Fernando Mateo has launched a national campaign to get the MLB to retire Clemente’s jersey. At a recent Baseball Hall of Fame news conference, Clemente’s sons justified their father’s receipt of the honor, arguing that although Clemente wasn’t the first Latino player in baseball’s history, he was the first to “become an activist against prejudice, not only in baseball but also in society.”

This issue raises the larger issue of access and equality for Blacks and Latinos. While Robinson’s presence in the major leagues eliminated major barriers for players of color, Latino athletes faced their own set of challenges, inherent to their race. For instance, “the daunting language barrier was one Robinson and his fellow black pioneers never had to confront.” And, Clemente vehemently fought against stereotypes that Latinos were “lazy” and wouldn’t play when they were hurt.

Does this controversy relate to the growing divide between Blacks and Latinos? It is distressing to think that mounting tension between Hispanics and Blacks as they compete for resources and job opportunities has now extended to battles over one race’s accomplishments being representative of another. Rather than debating over whose jersey should be retired and why, the focus should be on coming together under the common umbrella of seeking equality and justice for all racial and ethnic minorities.

My Point Exactly

2006-02-17T11:07:00.000-05:00

Read my post from earlier today and then read below. This is EXACTLY what a sista is talking about! We need to get this stuff in check, black folks. It's not just the rap songs that need warning labels. What do White people think after they hear comedians like Mr. Mooney talk this way? I know, I know it's comedy, but the frequent use of racially derogatory terms is disturbing.

In yesterday's Washington Post Express there's an ad for controversial comedian Paul Mooney's upcoming show in DC. Now, maybe I'm clueless, but I hadn't heard of him before today. Anyway, that aside, his comedic style seems to fit right in with what is quickly becoming the theme of the week: race relations. I Googled him and found some interesting comments:

"Paul Mooney is the funniest n*gga in America. He may also be the most controversial. His take on race will leave you laughing your ass off or send you packing...Like Richard Pryor at his peak, Mooney talks straight, but unlike Pryor, whose repertoire ranged from imitating animals to inhabiting the minds of children to discussing male/female relationships, Mooney's a race man. Period." - Nicky Baxter, Comedian Paul Mooney Dissects Race at SF Show

In Baxter's article, he includes an excerpt from Mooney's stand-up routine (I cleaned it up a bit):

"As if I don't have enough to worry about bein' a n*gga, now I gotta worry about being bilingual. You must remember, standard English is a foreign language to black people. And I think we speak it [expletive] pretty well. For you [expletive] to have made it illegal [during slavery] for us to read or write, I think we do it real well. And the stupid a** white folks who don't get it [slavery], [expletive] you. Thank God, you white folks weren't slaves; you never woulda made it. [Mimicing whitespeak] 'Oh, I just can't go on; I'll get a sun burn. Call my lawyer, [expletive]it; we're not picking this sh*t.' Out there singin' 'Tammy'--niggas be 'Let 'em go.'"

On one hand, from what I'm reading about Mooney, he makes points on a lot of topics with regard to race. He just does so in manner that is often offensive and littered with expletives and the "N" word. I'm curious as to what others think about Mooney and other comedians like him (Pryor, Foxx, Murphy, etc.) We should be just as mortified and up in arms when other Blacks using this language as we are when Whites do it. Though his message may be sound, there has to be a better way to convey it.

To this day, I don't think my mother has watched Eddie Murphy's "Raw" because she can't get past all the four-letter words. (But she watched The Kings of Comedy when they came to town! Hmmmm...)

Trading Races

2006-02-17T09:48:00.000-05:00

I'm not going to continue the race & "N" word discussion ad nauseum (unless you all want to) but I had to write something brief about yesterday's Oprah Winfrey Show segment. I've borrowed the title of her show for this post. She featured the cast of a reality show that will be premiering on FX channel in March called "Black White." Now, I'm fully aware of just how unrealistic these "reality" shows can be - Producers whispering into the ears of the cast, trying to stir up controversy to improve their ratings; cameras following them around constantly. I question how realistic reality shows really are. (But, if we think back to Being Bobby Brown, as trifling as it was, unfortunately we got a more realism from that family than we bargained for. LOL!)

Nonetheless, the two families on Oprah struck me as being your average, middle-of-the-road Black and White families. Each family donned serious makeup that literally "transformed" them into persons of the other race. While I don't know how well the show will fare in the ratings, Oprah's show was very insightful and brought out some meaningful points. I noticed how the Black family was quite defensive and eager to blast the White family for any comments that could be deemed even remotely prejudicial. But, in some instances where the Black family became irate and shouted obscenities at the White family, it was quite a stretch to make the leap of labeling the words offensive and/or discriminatory. And, it was obvious that the intent of the White familiy was not malicious. I could sense the pain and frustration upon which the Black family based their assertions. They had obviously been the recipients of hateful, mean-spirited racial discrimination in the past and thus they were overly-sensitive to some well meaning gestures from this White family, simply because they were White.

As our conversation has continued and people have given me their insights (thank you to everyone for your contributions), I am now acutely aware of how far the pendulum of race and prejudice swings in both directions. While Whites have been guilty of heinous acts of racial discrimination throughout history and still today, 21st century Blacks are just as guilty of perpetuating stereotypes and condemning an entire race for the sins of few. As Black people demanding respect, freedom, and equality, we do need to take ownership of the fact that using the "N" word internally only perpetuates the stereotypes that White people hold about us. And, we must not allow the wounds of prejudice that have been inflicted upon us to discolor our perceptions of others within our race, or ALL White people. Each person, Black or White, is an individual and, believe it or not, genetically we are 99.9% alike.

If we're ever going to come to a place in society where racism is nonexistent, we must address the FEAR and IGNORANCE that keeps racism alive in our minds and hearts and keeps us in a perpetual stage of mental bondage . In doing so, we don't lose sight of who we are and we don't succumb to a distorted view of a "color-blind" society, because this is unrealistic. Instead, we find balance in knowing, appreciating, and celebrating our heritage, whatever that may be, while judging and discerning others first and foremost by the content of their character, rather than the color of their skin. This goes for inter-racial racism as well as intra-racial racism. Malcolm X spoke to this idea when he said: "I am not a racist. I am against every form of racism and segregation, every form of discrimination. I believe in human beings, and that all human beings should be respected as such, regardless of their color." The key here is the phrase regardless of their color. He acknowledges that we have different skin tones, but the emphasis of his statement is on human first, race second.

One thing we forget is that both Martin Luther King and Malcolm X had the courage to point out discrimination when and where it occurred - they did not turn a blind eye to injustice - but, like God, their top concern was with what is contained in a person's heart. Intent matters.

The Bible says "For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart." (Hebrews 4:12)

The Debate Continues

2006-02-16T09:40:00.000-05:00

In my email Inbox, there's a lively discussion brewing about yesterday's post topic, the "N" word and how we feel about it. Here's another brief excerpt (anonymous, of course) from my emails:

The word "Nigger" just has to much of background to it in my eyes. Our parents and their parents really know what it means to hear that word spoken...I don't separate myself from other blacks because I might have been afforded better opportunities. And I don't think anyone can understand why someone else does what they do until you have walked in their shoes...If I were having a conversation with [a white person] and it pertained to why certain black folks behave a certain way, I would ask them do you ask yourself the same question when you are around a bunch of rednecks?? Or mexicans? Bottom line is there are always gonna be cultural differences that separate us, that is just the way of the world, but seperating yourself from them or looking down on them doesn't allow for change or understanding, which to me is truly ignorant...What makes Tom Delay any different than your average drug dealer or hustler you might see on the street corner?? If this drug dealer happened to be black he would be a "nigger". Tom Delay probably lived his entire life with everything handed to him wound up becoming insanely rich and robbed hundreds of people blind behind their backs. But society doesn't have a stigma to attach to that type of person and lets be honest there are rich folks who have been doing this for a long time. Tom Delay also isn't viewed as bringing down a whole race or perpetuating a stereotype because that is just how society is they want to have something negative to say about blacks every chance they get and it is truly sad.

In response to this and other emails I've received on this topic, some of my comments: I don't believe that the majority of black people, regardless of income, education, or socioeconomic status, condone inappropriate behavior, violence, drug use, etc. The majority of what we refer to as "ghetto" or "niggerish" behavior comes from Black people who are products of their environment, and even moreso, products of the structural racism that is built into the very fabric of our nation. One only has to look at the welfare system, designed to keep the poorest and neediest citizens in a perpetual state of lack and want, to find evidence of racism that is built into the very institutions that make up America. If we want to be real about it, White people brought drugs into the ghettoes in an effort to destroy us because they knew that as long as we are denied jobs and pay raises at a greater rate than our White counterparts and remain under the thumb of Big Brother, that we would employ alternative means to sustain ourselves, to achieve the great American dream of big houses, fancy cars and piles of money. The plight of Black people today has everything to do with our history as a people - since slavery we've had to scratch and scrape just to survive. Yeah, our generation is doing a bit better than our parents' generation and so on, but we can't forget where we came from. Because when we do so we give license to false and destructive thinking that we are somehow better or different from our black counterparts.

We have to look at people as people and try to understand that we all have circumstances and obstacles that shape who we are at any given moment. It's difficult - sometimes, I struggle with it - but doable. In my journey to be more like Jesus, I've learned that He took company with lepers, beggars, and prostitutes, people who would have been labeled "niggers" in the Bible days, and viewed them on the same level as kings. It is my hope that we can come to a place where we do the same.

The "N" Word Debate

2006-02-15T08:50:00.000-05:00

It's been a while since I posted. Seems like I'm juggling 15 projects simultaneously here at work. Anyway, the buzz lately has been around a white teacher who used the "N" word when addressing a black student. I've received several passionate comments from friends and family after I circulated the email. So, I thought I'd post the link to the video news clip and to a fascinating article about the history of the "N" word, to spark some discussion here.

Watch the news interview with the English teacher...

Read about the history, meaning, and significance of the "N" word...

Read the 2/10/06 piece I wrote for work: "The 'N' Word By Any Other Name"

Personally, I still feel in my heart that the "N" word is a derogatory term. But, I have been enlightened about the fact that black people often use racially derogatory words, disguised as friendly slang, and it often occurs without backlash or repercussions. I pray the "N" word to loses its power and significance, but at the same time I don't agree that the way to accomplish that is for blacks to use the "N" word freely amongst themselves. When we do so, I believe we are perpetrating the stereotypes and negative images of ourselves that the white majority established during the Civil Rights era. If we want to refer to each other with a friendly greeting, why not use the word "brother" - it has multiple meanings, the greatest of which refers to our brotherhood as children of the MOST HIGH GOD.

And, I don't think that the way to overcome the negativity that is historically associated with the term is to simply become a "colorblind society" where we don't discuss the realities of race and its implications, and we don't teach our children about history, including the oppression and bigotry blacks have endured. Last night, I asked my son (who is 13) if he and his friends use the "N" word and he said no. I asked him if he would be upset & offended if someone (black or white) called him the "N" word and he said no. His response told me that he is unaware of the "N" word's history and significance, which is disturbing on many levels.

Here are some excerpts from comments I've received by email. Thank you to these persons (you know who you are) who took the time to respond from your hearts on this topic:

One of my best friends is white and we all joke with him that he isn't really white but merely light skinned due to the fact that he really feels comfortable being submerged in our culture. However, under no circumstances will [he] use the N (nigga or nigger) word even if he is telling a story about a black person who said the word. He knows the history of the word same as the teacher did...I can honestly say that the fact that [nigger] is such a common term amongst us only opens the door for stuff like this to happen and even allow people of other races to use it as justification...The history of the word really makes me cringe when I think about the fact that I have used this term before, even though it wasn't in a derogatory way.
I'm guilty of using the word to differentiate myself from other blacks that are socio-economically different from me...They were from bad neighborhoods, were lazy bad students, and spoke with poor grammar...Within the media and even my own family situations, I see these [negative] stereotypes alive and well and I still find myself making that separation...I feel like if they would just stop acting like "niggers" that maybe blacks wouldn't have such a hard time. Why give racist whites a living breathing picture of what they define as a "nigger?...I have adopted white America's definition of a "nigger" to describe blacks that are different from me. Not thinking that if they are going to see me as "nigger" it's not going to matter what I do. I could be President of the United States and in their eyes I'd still be a "nigger"...I do believe "nigger" is a word that's been given too much power. Although I believe that the word and all references need to be changed, I believe more than anything that the behavior and attitudes of those using the word, however they mean it, needs to change (myself included).

I stand accused and am rightfully judged as guilty for using the "N" word in the past. On some levels, I have also disassociated myself with the term. I don't feel like I'm better than anyone else, but I do feel that because I'm educated, speak a certain way, and conduct my life in a particular manner, I'm excluded from the group society has labeled as "niggers." I will definitely be more conscious of it now.

I look forward to reading your comments on the subject. The only way to eliminate the stigma associated with the "N" word is through open, honest dialogue; the possibilities for discussion are limitless...

The "N" Word By Any Other Name

2006-02-09T21:36:00.000-05:00

A teacher in Jefferson County, Ky., used some version of the “n” word when instructing a student to sit down in his seat. Although the article in the Courier-Journal paper is disturbing, arguably the WHAS Channel 11 video clip of the teacher defending his use of the word is more of an eyebrow raiser. In the clip, Paul Dawson, an English teacher with more than 20 years experience in Jefferson County Public Schools, defends his use of the word, detailing the differences between using the word with an “-er” or “-ah” ending, in which one is derogatory in meaning and the other a term of endearment. Yet, this thinking is flawed.

Historically, the word “nigger” has been used to refer to black people in a derogatory way. According to the African American Registry, “Nigger is the ultimate expression of white racism and white superiority no matter how it is pronounced. It is linguistic corruption, an attack on civility.” How can a teacher of the English language, whose profession depends upon the proper use of words and language, iterate such a racially offensive term without reservation?

Dawson justified his use of the word because the students use it often when referring to each another. He claims that, in this instance, the student said the “n” word first, and he responded in kind, which is akin to spanking a child to stop them from being violent. He readily admitted this is not the first incidence in which he has used such language when speaking to students in the classroom. Apparently, it is an accepted and conventional practice for Dawson. It is difficult to fathom that during his 20-year tenure in the school system, Dawson never discerned that racially discriminatory language of any type is demeaning.

Dawson would like us to believe that his remarks were not racially abusive and degrading. But, what he fails to understand is that using racial slurs, in any form, is offensive and unacceptable, not to mention unprofessional. And, the slap on the wrist Dawson received for uttering the racial slur, a mere 10-day unpaid suspension and a mandate to attend diversity training, demonstrates that this type of racial injustice is tolerated within the Jefferson County Public School district. Perhaps instead of enacting “zero tolerance” policies that disproportionately punish students of color, schools can aim for “zero tolerance” policies on racial attacks on students.

We can only hope that during his diversity training Dawson learns something most of us learned in grade school: no matter how you pronounce the word “potato,” it’s a potato just the same.

Speaking Truth, Remembering Reality

2006-02-08T21:39:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, America laid a civil rights icon to rest. As appropriate for a leader, matriarch, and activist of her stature, four Presidents and numerous celebrity guests eulogized Coretta Scott King’s accomplishments, work, and the virtues by which she lived her life. Thousands of mourners traveled great distances to say farewell to a woman who epitomized courage and grace in the face of opposition.

Sadly, the pristine service is drawing negative attention. Amidst their speeches, several dignitaries injected commentaries on national affairs, topics currently dividing Americans along political, cultural, and personal lines. Former President Jimmy Carter mentioned the inequities apparent in efforts to assist the mostly black Hurricane Katrina survivors; Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin denounced the war in Iraq and noted Mrs. King’s staunch opposition to violence; Rev. Joseph Lowery, co-founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, recited lyrics from a song heralding the injustices of war.

No remembrance of Mrs. King would have been complete without acknowledging her beliefs and the injustices against which she fought so vehemently. Thankfully, Rev. Lowery, Mayor Franklin, and former President Carter were sensitive and insightful enough to dare discuss race issues, although briefly, at such an important juncture. Posing such comments did not dishonor Mrs. King’s memory; if anything, their words reflected honesty and genuine understanding of Mrs. King.

If Dr. King were alive, undoubtedly he would have fondly remembered times shared with his wife, but surely he would also have been as outspoken and passionate about nonviolence and racial justice on this day as he was on all others. Mrs. King unabashedly devoted her life to advancing her husband’s objectives and preserving his legacy. Rarely, if ever, were her convictions left far from the platform.

Dr. King once said, “a time comes when silence is betrayal.” Ignoring the unfair and unjust policies and actions that are prevalent in America today is a betrayal of silence. He and Mrs. King shared a vision of a society rooted in justice and equality, one that offers a level playing field for all. They were passionate about these issues and on such topics, they refused to keep silent. And, we are grateful for their bravery and candor in the same way we breathe a collective sigh of gratitude for the courage of those who spoke at Mrs. King’s memorial service.

Bullied By Budget Cuts

2006-02-07T21:41:00.000-05:00

As if the jabs of a stagnant economy and high fuel prices are not enough to send us staggering, the House passed a 5-year, $40 billion budget-cut package that deals a financial uppercut to the poor, elderly, students, and minorities.

Jonathan Weisman reports that a “presidential signature is all but assured” for legislation that will adversely impact those needing a hand up, not a push down. In a narrow vote, the bill passed the House, with parties divided on the issue. Weisman describes the legislation as “the first effort in nearly a decade to try to slow the growth of entitlement programs.” The bill will disproportionately affect minority populations, particularly blacks and Latinos. In 2005, 9% of blacks and 4.9% of Latinos received 50% or more of their income from welfare programs, compared to one and a half percent of whites (statistical data from Indicators of Welfare Dependence, U.S Dept. of Health & Human Services Annual Report to Congress, 2005).

The cuts will truly test the resiliency of an already struggling group of Americans. The irony of it all is that the government somehow justifies imposing stiff sanctions on the poor, while giving tax cuts to the wealthy. In the past 20 years, the incomes of the poorest 20% of families nationally grew by an average of $2,660, or 19%, while the incomes of the richest fifth of families grew by $45,100, or nearly 59 percent (statistical data from Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Economic Policy Institute). It is painfully clear that this plan will increase these disparities between the rich and the poor, the haves and the have-nots, whites and people of color.

It seems the federal government has won this round by TKO. Dazed and tired but not defeated, we continue the fight…

Super Bowl's New Meaning

2006-02-06T10:11:00.000-05:00

Super Bowl Sunday. The big game impassioned football fans wait for all season. The culmination of months of grueling work, heavy hitting, and hard-fought struggles to be one of two teams that emerge to the top of the pile. I was among the millions of viewers of Super Bowl 40 yesterday. Though neither of the contenders were my team of choice, I cheered for the underdogs and booed when the Steelers earned the top spot. But, in the recesses of my mind, I was distracted by thoughts of my Dad. He died two years ago - Super Bowl Sunday 2004.

For the first time in my life, the big game was overshadowed by something larger, something that irrevocably changed my life forever. I struggled during the prior week as the anniversary of his sudden death (2/1), brought back memories that I thought were unrecoverable, having been buried so deep in my heart. Some were good - many were difficult to recall. The relationship we shared was no fairy tale. I'd given up long ago on the idea of a Dad who took me out for ice cream, and called me "Princess." My Dad called me "Evil Lynn" cause he said I was so evil when I woke up in the morning. My Dad drank to numb the pain of childhood wounds I'll never know or understand. Sometimes, he would fuss and fight and curse and scream at the top of his lungs sometimes. On good days, he'd be quiet, only muttering a few words in response to questions. But, good, bad, or indifferent he was my father.

I used to get so angry at him that I would think, If he died tomorrow, I won't be sad. I won't cry and it won't bother me at all. It sounds harsh, but the mind of a young girl who had endured years of confusion, chaos, and unrest because of her father's behavior, found Dad to be more than she could bear. But, my inner child has now realized how wrong she was. When Dad died, everything changed. Yes, we were free from the cursing and the rants. But, we also couldn't hear the sound of the television, cranked to full volume, penetrating the silence in the house. The heavy footsteps pounding the floors up and down the hallways, back and forth from the bedroom to the kitchen, were also conspicuously absent. Dad was gone - forever. A hard pill to swallow at any age.

Now, I fondly remember his laughter. I remember the way he poked fun at me. I remember the pride in his eyes when I graduated from college, and then graduate school. Suddenly, the good memories outweighed the bad. Now, I appreciate my father's wisdom and his passion for books and music, because I recognize those passions as his legacy to me, an avid book reader and music lover.

I also remember when Dad blew up at me after he found out I was pregnant, at the age of 17, only months after I started college. At the time, I believed he was the meanest person alive when he demanded that I terminate the pregnancy. Back then, I couldn't hear the pain in his voice. I couldn't understand the loss and disappointment and sense of failure he felt because his only daughter had strayed so far from the path and the dream he had placed in his heart for her. Now, I recall those moments with a greater awareness of who he was. And, while I'm thankful for this enlightened understanding of my father, I wonder why the revelations didn't arrive sooner. Why couldn't I have known then what I know now? If I had, maybe I would have appreciated my Dad just a bit more. Maybe I would have responded differently when he told me he loved me - instead of resenting the fact that he always did so while under the influence, perhaps I would have understood that he could only deliver this sentiment with liquid courage coursing through his veins. Perhaps I would have understood the illness, and appreciated him for who he was.

My Dad fought a valiant fight with the demons that tormented him for most of his adult life. His larger-than-life persona affected me more than I could ever imagine. How poetic that he would leave this world on Super Bowl Sunday - after years of suffering through his own grueling work, heavy hitting, and hard-fought struggles, he finally reached the "biggest game of his life," so to speak. He went down silently, but with fists clenched. Every year at this time I will pause to remember my father for what he was - flawed, but courageous; outspoken and bold; oppressed but not shaken. He was my Super Bowl champion. He was my Dad.

Robert Lee Hill

November 7, 1948 - February 1, 2004

Correction

2006-01-31T13:52:00.000-05:00

RE: 1/27/06 Bein' Jesus

My memory fails me again. (Being 30+ really takes a toll on you!) Mel Gibson did not portray Jesus in Passion of the Christ, but he did fund the movie. A more correct way of saying it would have been: Mel Gibson paid for a little known actor to don the crown of thorns in "Passion of the Christ" and no one said a harsh word.

Going Postal

2006-01-31T12:12:00.000-05:00

One of my favorite movies is Office Space. My brother turned me on to this offbeat, laugh-a-minute parody that pokes fun at life in the office. Every time I watch it, the jokes resonate with me because invariably I've experienced similar embarrassing, frustrating, or irritating moments as those portrayed in the movie. One of the funniest characters is a mousy-voiced, pimply-faced man who is always being overlooked. They change the location of his office so many times that he eventually ends up in the basement. All the while, he is muttering to himself: "They just don't know, I will burn this place down."

Have you ever felt like you wanted to just torch your place of employment? The big irritants pile up so high that little things like not getting a piece of cake at the office party take you to your breaking point? It's all fun & games when I watch "Office Space" or I dream about crazy stuff to get back at my boss. But, apparently, one female postal employee decided to turn her random thoughts into action after she was terminated from a California post office. Sadly, six people were killed during her violent tirade.

My friend's sister was telling me just the other day how she was under pressure from the powers-that-be at her job to fire four employees. Do these "authorities" not understand that these people have lives and families? If they didn't need extra personnel or they couldn't afford to pay their salaries, why did you hire them in the first place? When you try to be like God and control the future prosperity of others, be careful because it might come back to bite you - hard.

The Most Important Job

2006-01-31T09:26:00.000-05:00

This morning I read about the passing of Coretta Scott King. There are many words I can use to describe her but ultimately I must say she was a strong mother. She epitomized strength. She was the wind beneath her husband's wings during an era most wouldn't want to go back and revisit. After his passing, she assumed leadership of a household, raising four kids alone. (As a single mother I'm just trying to imagine all that motherhood entails and multiply it by four - SCARY!)

I wonder if Coretta knew what she was getting herself into when she married the good Rev. Dr. King. Was she prepared for the hatred that would soon be directed toward her and her family because of her husband's leadership? And then, after his death, the fight was only beginning for Coretta as she pushed for a federal holiday in honor of her late husband. I am awestruck by the efforts she made to preserve the legacy of Dr. King. She and her children helped to ensure that Dr. King's work and dream was not forgotten. And, in her strength and courage, she gave hope to woman, mothers all across the world.

Yet, unfortunately our society produces notable mothers (and fathers) who are not remembered for their positive contributions to society, as the late Mrs. Coretta Scott King. But, these mothers gain notoriety for their cruel treatment of young ones entrusted into their care. My heart weeps for the little children who are suffering at the hands of abusive parents (and baby daddies, and momma's boyfriends).

I pause for ROLL CALL: Rest in peace Quachon Brown, Nixzmary Brown, Angela Coleman, Tyreek Davis, Christian Norris, Crissmis Noelle Reese Jones, and La'Monica Douglas. (These stories of these fatal child abuse cases were reported in Washington Post news stories during the month of January.)

I'm so far from being a perfect mother. There are nights I'm too tired to cook, sometimes I yell and fly off the handle, I get impatient, I fuss and nag. But, at the end of the day, I take the role of parenting seriously. Despite my faults, I always strive to put my son first. I still feel shame for those times when I did not. I've learned the hard way that a mother must be watchful and mindful of the people she brings into her son's life. And, I've been to a place where I could understand the mindset of mothers who abuse their newborn babies - exhausted and weary, you're trying to comfort a screaming child whose relentless cries pierce you to your very soul. Oh, I've been there. You want to just throw the kid. But, instead you make sure your baby is safe in their crib or playpen, and you walk away for a few moments. You scream, cry, shout to the heavens, and pray for relief. And then you go back and try again. And you love.

That's mothering. It's the most important job title a woman can hold. Thank God for mothers like Coretta, and my mother and grandmothers, who show us what it's like to do it and do it right.

"God could not be everywhere and therefore he made mothers. " -Jewish proverb

Suffer the Little Children

2006-01-27T23:48:00.000-05:00

Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them. But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 18:13-14)

I'm grappling with the notion of "unexplained suffering" and why God allows it to happen. My Disciple bible study class studied the book of Job last week. We extensively discussed Job's reaction to being subjected to unbearable suffering although he was an "upright and blameless" man.

I haven't a clue about the righteousness and blamelessness of the Fla. woman who lost all five of her children and two nieces in a tragic car accident, not to mention suffered the death of her father who died of a grief-induced heart attack. Nor am I familiar with the spiritual walk of a saintly woman in my church who lost her 5 kids in a house fire. But, if I had to point to modern day examples of Job-like people, I would point to persons such as these. And, in each instance, their suffering seems unfair, severe, and is, undoubtedly, irreversible.

I find myself asking questions similar to the ones Job expressed after losing his family, prosperity, and physical health. The age-old question of "why do good things happen to bad people?" comes to mind.

And the kicker is, that at the end of Job's story, God Himself appears. God tells Job, in a nutshell, that HE IS GOD and Job does not have the authority to question Him. God completely shuts Job up by saying it's His world and Job is just a squirrel. When I was little and I would ask my mother a question and her answer wasn't affirmative, I'd ask why and she'd say "because I said so." That's what God told Job and the story abruptly came to an end.

Even as an adult, I can't stand not knowing "why." But, when we witness tragedies befall good people, we learn lessons about acceptance and gratitude. We learn to be patient. And, we are reminded that only God is sovereign and just.

Bein' Jesus

2006-01-27T15:09:00.000-05:00

I happened upon it today as I scanned the news. Right there, bright as day before my eyes was Kanye West posing as Jesus on the cover of Rolling Stones magazine.

I already predict that countless people will be up in arms over this most recent brazen display by Kanye, the rapper everyone loves to hate. But, I say, WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL?!? Mel Gibson donned the crown of thorns in "Passion of the Christ" and no one said a harsh word. Crowds cheered his adaptation of Jesus' last days on earth.

I'll save a full analysis of Kanye's rendition for after I've read the full article, in hopes of gaining clarity about his modus operandi. I'll refrain from jumping to the easy conclusion that this is another one of Kanye's ploys to self-promote (if so, SHAME ON YOU KANYE !) But, regardless of his motives, I pray there is no public outcry over Kanye-as-Jesus, because if so I'll be forced to cry discrimination.

What's in a Name?

2006-01-24T13:24:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, my friend and I had a rousing discussion that began with exploring race and how people in certain ethnic groups designate names for themselves. Specifically, we talked about Black vs. African American. Unfortunately, we disagreed on many points, including his point that one should not call oneself African American because it only serves to widen the divide between people of different races. He contends that we should all be lumped together under the umbrella of one all-encompassing category - American! While I agreed that we are all Americans living in America, that's about where our consensus ended. I 've always believed that pride in one's heritage or culture, whether reflected through the designation of a name or cultural activities, does not impede progress, nor does it lead to separation. In the instance of African Americans (or Black people, if you will), this is especially important because of our history. We were oppressed for so long by a society that claimed "White is right." We were treated as less than animals. Now that we can finally walk with head held high in this society, we are ridiculed for creating entities (publications, media outlets, etc.) that reflect our unique culture, heritage and BLACK faces. Why do people object to Black History Month and Black Entertainment Television?? No one objected when all that was taught in schools was European history. It's just that White folks called European history "History" thereby inherently identifying White history with the right history. All Black folks did was call a spade a spade. If we had created a television channel that showcased the talents and faces of people with brown skin but called it "Entertainment TV," the majority would still take issue with it because they would say that it doesn't feature people of all races. How many shows do I watch on television every day that only have White faces? Why is it that anything that's solely White is not exclusionary or segregationist or racist, but something that's all-Black is!?!

I also emphatically disagree with the Pollyanna-ish notion that Black people are now equal to Whites and the playing field is level. My friend tried to convince me that Black people just need to work harder and through hard work they will get their just reward. Spiritually speaking that may be true, but earthly injustices certainly persist and we cannot turn a blind eye to them. Racial profiling, felony disenfranchisement, housing and employment discrimination, disproportionate imprisonment, police brutality - these are real issues that are happening TODAY! According to an article by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Racial Justice in the 21st Century: New Remedies for Persistent Problems, "it would be a mistake to assume that because formal equality exists, current skin-color and ethnic discrimination does not. "

Fast forward to today - after I've had a few still moments to think: I still hold those views and pose those questions. But, I've also started thinking about some of the very salient points that my friend made. For instance, he questioned whether I truly believe in what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said in his speeches about freedom, nonviolence and equality. I most certainly do. However, I also contend that many of the ideals preached by Dr. King have yet to be realized in this country. As long as there are headlines such as this: Five Md. Cases of Racist Graffiti Linked: Black Churches, Schools Vandalized, we all should be wondering "What Would Dr. King Think?" I don't think Dr. King would be up in arms because Blacks called themselves African Americans - not when there are so many other unjust, unequal, and just plain racist acts taking place today. And, I mean, Black against White, vice versa, and everything in between.

One thing I can say is that my dear friend did make me pause and think about how I feel on certain aspects of race. My friend has a close childhood friend who is White and their friendship defies logic. They are in many ways stark opposites but they have found common ground over the years and now have a friendship more solid and supportive than many people of the same race. It is an inspiration and testament to loving people no matter their color. For the most part I'd like to think that I don't have an inner bitterness toward White people, but if I'm completely honest with myself I'd have to say that there are some feelings I need to address.

I think society as a whole is in need of self-assessment, instead of blindly holding views in need of fine tuning. Perhaps then the headlines will no longer feature example after example of pervasive racial justice. And Dr. King might rest knowing the "dream" about which he passionately spoke years ago has been fully realized.

"Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself." ~Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy

P.S. - So now, in case you didn't notice, I've changed my header to read: "Musings of a 30-something, Christian, BLACK single mother..." How about that?

Painting for Personal Power

2006-01-23T13:18:00.000-05:00

I know that house painting, while a bit challenging, can also be cathartic. But, I never bargained for an experience so utterly life-changing. Simply by tackling a home improvement project, which involved painting the walls of my townhome, I learned about myself and revealed strengths and weaknesses in my character I never knew existed. I'm tempted to write Oprah and suggest a show topic about finding yourself and discovering your inner power through house painting. (She really goes for the self-help stuff). And if this isn't enough reason to stop reading right now and pick up a paintbrush, I learned today that someone very special in my life witnessed traits in me that helped to change his perspective of me, to see me in a different light. In the midst of my project, which at times I felt less than qualified to complete, I connected with an inner strength I'd lost touch with some time ago. For me, it was a turning point in my life. And each time I sit in the comfort of my newly renovated living space, I remember the struggles and obstacles I encountered along the way. So, I realized, painting is much like life - although there are bumps in the road along the journey, what is important is staying the course and finishing the journey. Only then can you bask in the joy of a job well done and reap the benefits of endurance that come from running the race.

Blissful Ignorance

2006-01-22T12:00:00.000-05:00

Would someone please wake up our nation’s leader from his dream state? Then again, when it comes to rebuilding New Orleans, he’d probably rather sleep through it. The fact that he observed the devastated city in its present state and commented, “It’s a heck of a place to bring your family,” proves Bush was sleepwalking through his recent visit and loving every minute of it.

Opting to spend his time hobnobbing with political officials in the Garden District, a “neighborhood largely untouched by the floodwaters of Hurricane Katrina,” Bush’s motorcade cruised through the “nice” parts of town, avoiding the lower 9th Ward altogether. But, poor blacks shouldn’t complain about being overlooked during the presidential stopover since good ol’ Dubya equally ignored upper class white students in Jackson Square protesting for stronger levees. Now, that’s what I refer to as equal opportunity kissing off.

And why did it take three months for him to make a return appearance? No need to ponder how to evade questions about the city’s new rebuilding plan; he has such a strong role model for evasiveness in his alter-ego, Alito. The “visit” (and I use that term loosely) was just a pit stop to render a dramatic show of insincere goodwill to a place and a people that are of little consequence in his mind.

A vivid image comes to mind of the leader of the Free World sitting on his private jet headed from New Orleans to Palm Beach, Fla., where a multi-million dollar fundraiser for the Republican National Committee is about to begin. He turns to his adviser and exclaims, “Today, I learned that ignorance truly is bliss!”

Wanted: Realistic New Orleans Rebuilding Plan

2006-01-18T20:57:00.000-05:00

The headline reads: “Hostility Greets Katrina Recovery Plan.” No surprises here.

Rebuilding strategies proposed by the “Bring Back New Orleans Commission,” a panel established by Mayor Nagin in September, are outrageous. Apparently, the Commission is advocating for establishing a “powerful new authority that could use eminent domain to seize homes in neighborhoods that will not be rebuilt” and creating a new, downtown jazz district. And if those grandiose ideas aren’t enough, there are talks of creating a new light rail system to “spark redevelopment in areas of the city that were flooded.”

Families, living in hotel rooms or cramped in overcrowded houses with extended relatives or hospitable strangers, are battling with insurance companies for just compensation and yearning for heirlooms and keepsakes buried in New Orleans’ sludge- and debris-covered streets.

It is painfully obvious that the report from the Nagin-appointed Commission is another attempt to stamp out black neighborhoods, primarily those in the lower 9th Ward, and low-income housing areas in general. I mean, let’s look at the facts: the Commission’s urban planning chairman is a real estate developer and major fundraiser for Bush; the contractor who drafted the Commission’s plan was hired with monies from an unnamed, private foundation; and, the Commission’s redevelopment plan strips power from the City Council and redirects it to a newly-created, autonomous housing authority.

Conspicuously absent from the Commission’s seven-part report are viable solutions for the men, women, and children of color facing an arduous journey home. With FEMA funding nearing an end, and time limits expiring on temporary housing situations, New Orleans’ residents are running out of time. The single most urgent issue for thousands of survivors is returning to the city they call home and rebuilding their hurricane-ravaged homes. It’s time Mayor Nagin and his misguided Commission realized it.

Post-Mortem Justice

2006-01-08T21:07:00.000-05:00

Instead of choosing to give a political voice to 243,000 living Virginians, on-his-way-out-the-door Governor Mark Warner has decided he’d rather run DNA tests to prove the innocence (or confirm the guilt) of a dead man. Is it just me, or are his priorities a bit skewed in the wrong direction? In my estimation, when Gov. Warner thinks about his daily to do’s for his last week in this office, post-mortem activities should fall to the latter part of the list.

Governor Warner has the authority by executive order to restore voting rights, thereby sending a message of redemption to those who have served their time and paid their debt to society. And, I maintain that redemption is possible in America, despite what Stanley “Tookie” Williams’ execution in California leads us to believe.

With the stroke of a pen, Gov. Warner could grant thousands of residents the right to participate in the democratic process. If Gov. Warner busied himself with enacting critical legislation to benefit schoolchildren (the living, breathing types, of course) or increasing funding to social service agencies serving mentally disabled adults (with a pulse), my objections would be considerably less intense. There’s only one week left, what is he waiting for? If these same individuals were still incarcerated and scheduled for execution before week’s end, perhaps the odds of their getting on Gov. Warner’s closing agenda would improve significantly.

Freedom for Some

2006-01-04T21:06:00.000-05:00

The recent death of civil rights activist Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr.’s upcoming birthday are shifting our focus to the ongoing fight for civil rights in America. While it is no secret that we’re still fighting against racial injustices prevalent during the heyday of Parks and King, it is painfully aware that African Americans and Latinos are not the only targets on the battlefield.

I was struck by an article in the Metro section of the Post this morning (Off-Duty Officers Sued in Club Incident, B04) describing brutal attacks by two off-duty D.C. police officers on a Lebanese man in a D.C. nightclub. While hanging out with friends on a Friday night, as many of us in the DC Metro area like to do, this man was accosted by the officers who called him “al Qaeda” and beat him until he had to be rushed to the hospital. Did they think that the events of September 11, 2001 give them license to discriminate against and harm Middle Easterners?

I do not intend to diminish in any way the horror and tragedy of what happened that fateful morning of 9/11. The terrorist crimes committed that day are unconscionable. But, we can’t blame an entire group of people for the sins of a few. There are many decent, law-abiding Middle Eastern citizens who deserve the same respect we’d give any other person in this country. And, by the same token, these citizens deserve to be free from harassment by individuals who have sworn to serve and protect all people.

When Dr. King penned the words, “Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred,” he was speaking about freedom for all races and nationalities. He wasn’t talking about liberating a select group of people, or those with certain qualities. It’s time we recognized and respected the inalienable rights afforded to us in this democratic nation.