Read a story the other day about how black people are more "hostile" towards gay folks than any other racial group in America. That statement sort of surprised me.
The thesis was supported by statistics showing our resistance to gay marriage in larger numbers, and the fact that more of us go to church more often than any other group. That was the entirety of the proof provided for labeling black folks hostile to homosexuals. Seemed like a pretty flimsy connection to me, but it made me think.
Apparently, in addition to be being hyper-sexual, violent beasts, black folks have now added "homophobic idiots" to their character traits according to Holy Bible of Public Opinion. The backlash against black folks has been harsh, just as it was in the wake of the passage of Proposition 8 in California, and that's unfortunate. It's unfortunate because as the conversation has devolved into a rash of "nigger" and "faggot" spewing, a chance to learn something has been lost.
The truth is both sides have compelling, flawed arguments. Take the homosexual stance that likens the struggle for their rights to that of black folks. Many of them are understandably disgusted by one marginalized group turning so vehemently on another. While this makes sense on an intellectual level, if actually fails the smell test.
After all, isn't the history of America littered with stories of marginalized groups turning on each other despite common interests. Don't we call that "divide and conquer"? Why would black people be held to higher standard simply because they have suffered so much? Isn't that a sneaky way of introducing the Magical Negro trope into the discussion, and denying black folks their humanity in yet another way?
In addition, when what you perceive to be bigotry in others spurs you to bigotry of your own, no one holds the moral high ground. This may sound strange coming from a man who has tossed around "Crackers' with the best of them, but it's true. You cannot justify your bigotry by pointing to the actions of others, and when slurs and stereotypes fly from your lips whenever black folks thwart your plans, well you have a serious problem. You might want to address that on your own.
Yet, the anger that homosexuals feels is understandable. After all, there are parallels between the two struggles. There is no equality in them, but they are connected. And it is hurtful to have someone you assumed would be a supporter turn into an enemy. (Although there is some question as to why black folks were assumed to be supporters. Have we ever assumed that homosexuals would support black people in their struggle, and criticized them when they did not? No we haven't)
Gay marriage has little impact on the lives of others. It has no more impact than rampant adultery or fornication and no one is lining up to outlaw those two sexual sins also mentioned by God in his holy word. That is the hypocrisy that angers gay folks. Particularly when it comes from group with an out of wedlock birthrate of like 70 percent, and the highest homicide rate of any race. As the popular song once said "Sweep around your own front door before you sweep around mine."
Unfortunately, black folks, and many white folks, see homosexuality as a special sin. There is very little Biblical justification for this stance, but it persists. As a "special" sin there is a belief, which I have witnessed firsthand, that providing a stamp of approval for anything associated with this sin will have greater consequences. How black people can make this argument with the rampant homosexuality in many black churches is confusing, but it is true. Moreover, many homosexuals seem hellbent on driving home the point that if you do not agree that there is nothing wrong with who they sleep with you are a terrible human being.
Neither side is willing to concede that sometimes you just have to let people be who they are without judgment. You have to let gay people marry in services they create because ultimately it won't impact you. You have to let black folks think homosexuality is a sin before God because ultimately it won't impact you. That simple belief has limited power. It's only when beliefs shape actions that a problem occurs. And preventing that particular problem is easily accomplished by using the law.
It's not that difficult to find a consensus if everyone stops demanding they be recognized as completely right.
Share
Pay Attention
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Excuse Me As I Justify
As the attempts to discredit Trayvon Martin have grown in intensity and frequency since his death something has become obvious. It is not that George Zimmerman had no reason to fear for his life during his brief encounter with Trayvon because he might have truly been in danger. It is not that Al Sharpton's name is still an epithet to many white folks. That is beyond obvious.
What has become clear as pundits and amateur sleuths have tried to fine some way to slander Trayvon is that white people believe deeply that their fears are justified. They believe that their mistreatment of minorities is beyond reproach. They believe, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they and their ancestors have mostly made the right decisions.
That is why Trayvon's memory has been attacked. Though the rationale offered is about balancing sympathetic media coverage, or discovering the truth, that's a smokescreen. Martin's history wasn't known to Zimmerman as he walked through that neighborhood. There is no evidence that he was "high" or stealing. He was just walking. And that action, combined with all the "truths" known about black men, is what led him to be deemed suspicious.
Trayvon may have enjoyed marijuana. He may have postured like a gangsta with friends. He may have even stolen things on occasion. But George Zimmerman did not know that as he approached him on that rainy street. Besides his "gut" feeling that Trayvon was trouble and he had no other reason to deem the teen suspicious and initiate contact.. But, the truth is that many white people think that gut feeling was perfectly reasonable.
This was evident in the blatantly racist column written by John Derbyshire that outlined exactly how white children should handle black folks. It was obvious in the comments made by conservative pundits railing against the unfairness of the whole situation for George Zimmerman.
Behind the calls for truth and transparency is the belief that Trayvon deserved to be questioned and feared. Geraldo basically made that point when he ranted about hoodies. Despite statistics that show that most white people are victimized by other white people, certain folks believe that they know the face of crime, they've always known the face of crime and that face doesn't look like them.
That belief justifies certain "precautions". It justifies certain laws and practices. Racial profiling isn't racism, it's good police work. Discrimination isn't immoral, it's just nipping problems in the bud before they can truly blossom. Trayvon Martin's death may have been a tragedy, but you can't make an omelet without hurting Humpty Dumpty.
This mindset inflames and poisons racial discussions. It causes people to defend positions that are illogical and immoral. Ultimately, it just makes things worse. But the blame for that rarely falls on white folks, instead it gets placed on the backs of black people. White people are behaving sensibly, black people are behaving emotionally.
And that's how evil gets justified.
Share
What has become clear as pundits and amateur sleuths have tried to fine some way to slander Trayvon is that white people believe deeply that their fears are justified. They believe that their mistreatment of minorities is beyond reproach. They believe, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they and their ancestors have mostly made the right decisions.
That is why Trayvon's memory has been attacked. Though the rationale offered is about balancing sympathetic media coverage, or discovering the truth, that's a smokescreen. Martin's history wasn't known to Zimmerman as he walked through that neighborhood. There is no evidence that he was "high" or stealing. He was just walking. And that action, combined with all the "truths" known about black men, is what led him to be deemed suspicious.
Trayvon may have enjoyed marijuana. He may have postured like a gangsta with friends. He may have even stolen things on occasion. But George Zimmerman did not know that as he approached him on that rainy street. Besides his "gut" feeling that Trayvon was trouble and he had no other reason to deem the teen suspicious and initiate contact.. But, the truth is that many white people think that gut feeling was perfectly reasonable.
This was evident in the blatantly racist column written by John Derbyshire that outlined exactly how white children should handle black folks. It was obvious in the comments made by conservative pundits railing against the unfairness of the whole situation for George Zimmerman.
Behind the calls for truth and transparency is the belief that Trayvon deserved to be questioned and feared. Geraldo basically made that point when he ranted about hoodies. Despite statistics that show that most white people are victimized by other white people, certain folks believe that they know the face of crime, they've always known the face of crime and that face doesn't look like them.
That belief justifies certain "precautions". It justifies certain laws and practices. Racial profiling isn't racism, it's good police work. Discrimination isn't immoral, it's just nipping problems in the bud before they can truly blossom. Trayvon Martin's death may have been a tragedy, but you can't make an omelet without hurting Humpty Dumpty.
This mindset inflames and poisons racial discussions. It causes people to defend positions that are illogical and immoral. Ultimately, it just makes things worse. But the blame for that rarely falls on white folks, instead it gets placed on the backs of black people. White people are behaving sensibly, black people are behaving emotionally.
And that's how evil gets justified.
Share
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Just Say It
If a man treats women like second class citizens simply because they have a vagina, it's easy to call him a sexist. When someone fondles little boys or little girls, no one hesitates to use the word pedophile. Someone who practices domestic violence is an abuser. Someone who tells lies is a liar. And someone who steals is a thief.
But, a person who practices racism can't be labeled a racist unless you know exactly what's in their head the moment they do their dastardly deed. Without that knowledge of their "hearts" it's impossible to label them a racist.
Am I the only one confused?
There are few things I hate more in this world than the belief that it's unfair to call someone a racist simply because they behave like one. Few other activities receive this sort of blanket protection. In fact, I'm hardpressed to think of any. Everyone understands that the surest way to gain insight into someone's character is to assess their actions, except when you're trying to determine whether or not they racist. That's when you have to break out the telepathy.
The common practice of requiring mind reading to levy a claim of racism is asinine. It sets an impossible standard for discussing a serious and prevalent problem, and pretty much insures that racism will be allowed to flourish and grow. There is no way to confront racism because no one is a racist.
As I've said before in this space, this is a byproduct of our society's inability to apply critical thinking to discussions involving race. Moreover, it's more proof that when white people are uncomfortable, the world has to change. White people don't like the word racist, and now everybody in the world is skittish about using it because they want white people to pay attention. It's one of the most incredible examples of white privilege you'll ever run across.
The truth is, I don't care about what's in people's hearts. I'll never know what's in their hearts. I can only judge them based on the way they behave. And if they behave like racists, we need to be willing and able to call them racists. Otherwise, what's the point?
Share
But, a person who practices racism can't be labeled a racist unless you know exactly what's in their head the moment they do their dastardly deed. Without that knowledge of their "hearts" it's impossible to label them a racist.
Am I the only one confused?
There are few things I hate more in this world than the belief that it's unfair to call someone a racist simply because they behave like one. Few other activities receive this sort of blanket protection. In fact, I'm hardpressed to think of any. Everyone understands that the surest way to gain insight into someone's character is to assess their actions, except when you're trying to determine whether or not they racist. That's when you have to break out the telepathy.
The common practice of requiring mind reading to levy a claim of racism is asinine. It sets an impossible standard for discussing a serious and prevalent problem, and pretty much insures that racism will be allowed to flourish and grow. There is no way to confront racism because no one is a racist.
As I've said before in this space, this is a byproduct of our society's inability to apply critical thinking to discussions involving race. Moreover, it's more proof that when white people are uncomfortable, the world has to change. White people don't like the word racist, and now everybody in the world is skittish about using it because they want white people to pay attention. It's one of the most incredible examples of white privilege you'll ever run across.
The truth is, I don't care about what's in people's hearts. I'll never know what's in their hearts. I can only judge them based on the way they behave. And if they behave like racists, we need to be willing and able to call them racists. Otherwise, what's the point?
Share
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Things White People Say...
This is a list made in response to how some folks have handled Trayvon Martin's death. I present:
Fifteen things white people say when they would rather say "Fuck Whining Niggers".
1. You know Arabs owned slaves right?
2. Black people did too.
3. If he wasn't guilty, why did he run?
4. Why not just let the police search you and your car if you're innocent?
5. Why don't black people march for black-on-black crimes?
6. My ancestors didn't own slaves, I don't see why I can't get a job or go to school because of Affirmative Action.
7. Maybe if you didn't look so dangerous you wouldn't have so many problems
8. Of course racism is still kind of a problem, sort of.
9. I can't be racist, I have black friends.
10. Black people are more racist than any other race.
11. You don't hear the Asians and Mexicans whining about racism, they just go to work.
12. Why can't black people try to be colorblind like me and my friends?
13. Stereotypes are based on facts.
14. I don't have all the facts and I think it's unfair to make a decision without all the facts.
15. Look like a thug, die like a thug.
Share
Fifteen things white people say when they would rather say "Fuck Whining Niggers".
1. You know Arabs owned slaves right?
2. Black people did too.
3. If he wasn't guilty, why did he run?
4. Why not just let the police search you and your car if you're innocent?
5. Why don't black people march for black-on-black crimes?
6. My ancestors didn't own slaves, I don't see why I can't get a job or go to school because of Affirmative Action.
7. Maybe if you didn't look so dangerous you wouldn't have so many problems
8. Of course racism is still kind of a problem, sort of.
9. I can't be racist, I have black friends.
10. Black people are more racist than any other race.
11. You don't hear the Asians and Mexicans whining about racism, they just go to work.
12. Why can't black people try to be colorblind like me and my friends?
13. Stereotypes are based on facts.
14. I don't have all the facts and I think it's unfair to make a decision without all the facts.
15. Look like a thug, die like a thug.
Share
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
