-
sponsorship
A post from DoubleX writer Beth Fertig:
In the new movie Precious, Clareece Precious Jones is
beaten by her mother and raped so often by her father that she’s
pregnant with his second child. She’s also illiterate.
I’ve spent the past three years profiling illiterate young adults, and I decided to take two of them to a preview screening.
Yamilka and her brother, Alejandro, now 26 and 24, are Dominican
immigrants. They’d gotten all the way to high school without learning
to read. After a hearing officer ruled in 2005 that New York City had
violated a federal law that’s supposed to protect them because they are
students with disabilities, the siblings received a combined total of
more than $250,000 in private tutoring.
Yamilka and Alejandro expected the movie to get the Hollywood
treatment. And they were fine with some of that, so long as they found
it generally believable. Yamilka—who was overweight and self-conscious
in school—related to the way Precious sat in the back of her class in
junior high. “I didn’t want people to notice me, to notice something
was wrong.” When she saw Precious guessing her way through a multiple
choice test, Yamilka said she had done the same thing ... (Read the rest of this article in DoubleX).
-
sponsorship
A post from DoubleX writer Lauren Bans:
There’s always been something a little obnoxious about French Vogue’s attention-pleading “artistic” endeavors. Two years ago, the September issue featured some devil-worshipping size zeros drawing blood crosses on goats and last April’s rebellious motherhood spread unsurprisingly had the mom-o-sphere’s collective panties in a bunch. So what was left on the roster to draw gasps this month? Blackface, obviously ... (Read more in DoubleX.)
-
sponsorship
The real root of the vampire trend, according to Stephen Marche at Esquire, is that straight women want to have sex with gay guys. It’s an interesting thesis, but I’m not buying it ... (Read more in DoubleX.)
-
sponsorship
Is Kate Middleton Britain’s Henry Louis Gates? That is to say: Is she a
public figure whose personal upheaval has lately sparked a national
conversation over deeply ingrained prejudices? That’s the theory bubbling beneath this Washington Post piece parsing the recent uproar over Middleton’s uncle, Gary Goldsmith, who was caught on tape prepping cocaine for consumption at the Ibizan villa he’s dubbed La Maison de Bang-Bang ... (Read more in Double X.)
-
sponsorship
Thanks, Samantha, for pointing out a tendency by some
white people to show, as you say, a “reflexive defense mechanism”
whenever another white person, usually one in a position of power, is
accused of showing racism. Coming from me, a black person, similiar
sentiments are often dismissed as biased. But aren't the white people
defending Officer Crowley and criticizing Skip Gates also showing bias?
The difference in perception is predicated on a simple fact: Most
white people have never experienced, and could never imagine, such a
thing happening to them or their loved ones. But if you’re black,
you’ve probably experienced an unpleasant, potentially dangerous,
encounter with white police, or know some other black person who has.
In my case there have been several such encounters ... (Read more in Double X.)
-
sponsorship
Just as upsetting to me as the Henry Louis Gates Jr. arrest, Emily, is the way that so many people have been responding, including in our own comments section ... (Read more in Double X.)
-
sponsorship
Italian Vogue is celebrating Barbie's 50th anniversary—not to mention the first anniversary of its historic all-black issue
(isn't that the most gorgeous photo of Naomi Campbell you've ever
seen?)—with a very cool little supplement called "The Barbie Issue,"
full of fashion shoots starring black Barbies. Jezebel has an excerpt; may I recommend it as a mid-afternoon pick-me-up?
As one commenter, dandelionbrowne, pointed out, one of the most
striking things about the spread is the wide range of skintones, facial
structures, and hair types on display. It sounds like the dolls are ... (Read more in DoubleX.)
-
sponsorship
We often talk here at Slate about how to have tough conversations. Whether it’s Bristol and Greta and their inability to be candid about teen pregnancy or Meghan’s stunning account of how badly we do at talking about death. Emily and I wrote several years ago about the brutal isolation that arises when you try to talk about pregnancy loss. So often the public call to real, brutal, and honest dialogue is met with a lot of earnestly nodding heads and a request to pass the remote. That said, it’s hard to ignore yesterday’s speech by Attorney General Eric Holder, who used the occasion of Black History Month to ask Americans to stop being “a nation of cowards” when it comes to talking about race. This was not a policy speech. Holder returned over and over to the idea that the “artificial” construct of Black History Month should be used “to foster a period of dialogue among the races.” The call here is for a public debate that is “nuanced” and “principled” and “spirited” and above all, honest. He doesn’t exactly tell us how to get there—he wants us to talk to our colleagues more and blend America's race history into our core curriculum. But it was an incredibly poignant speech about silence and the failures of political speech on hard questions. Here’s hoping it’s not met with more silence.
-
sponsorship
In the audio version of his autobiography, Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance, Obama takes on the role of his best friend in high school, "Ray." At upscale Punahou School in Honolulu, Obama and "Ray" were among the few multiracial students, and their friendship was an important one in terms of shaping Obama's racial identity in the making.
If you're interested in finding out what it sounds like when Obama swears, "Barack Obama is @#$% tired of this @#$%!" offers an earful. Between "Sorry-ass motherfucker ain't got nothing on me" and "Sure you can have my number, baby!" I think I just found my new ringtone.
Amid the motherfuckers and the shits, though, there's another provocative line: "You ain't my bitch, nigga! Buy your own damn fries!" So, I'm wondering: Is it OK if this POTUS uses the N word?
-
sponsorship
Last night I woke my 9-month-old baby—fast asleep in her Obama shirt—to watch the acceptance speech. My computer cord shorted out in a giant tumbler of champagne. I wept, and then wept again, and then wept again; Jesse Jackson's tears jerked my own the hardest. For the first time in my life, people took to the streets in celebration of something good, something I believe. If the adage is true that we get the government we deserve, then we have made ourselves, finally, to be something deserving, after all. It is the first time in my life I believe in my country. Barack Obama made me, and millions of us, do that.
"It's been a long time coming," he said last night. Those words lead off the refrain to Sam Cooke's "A Change Is Gonna Come," which has been playing in my head since, as I check and recheck the headlines to convince myself that this is history, not reverie. The song has sounded like a dream ever-deferred. Today, it feels more like a lyrical journey to what led us here and a reminder that just as we've crossed that distance, so we might advance more, after all this time moving backward. Holding my baby on my lap last night, I was most particularly moved, like Dahlia, by Obama's account of the century Ann Nixon Cooper has witnessed in her 106-year march to yesterday's vote.
I have no doubt that Obama has the deepest regard for the shoulders that he stands upon today. But if this is going to be a true victory for all of us, he must summon that regard not just to the black America that has endured a painful journey, from slave auctions, to the bullets that ricocheted through the Audubon ballroom, to this day. He'll have to address the continued erosion of civil and human rights. In the same country that has elected this extraordinary man, African-Americans constitute 49 percent of our prison population (compared with 13 percent of our total population). More black men are incarcerated than are in college. The average black life expectancy has declined to what it was in 1970. A recent study on the housing crisis concludes that "the subprime lending debacle has caused the greatest loss of wealth to people of color in modern U.S. history." Obama did not campaign on these issues, but to make good on the moral promise of his presidency and not just the symbolic one, he will need to focus on the specific challenges to African-Americans as well as all Americans.
The New York Times says today, "No Time for Laurels; Now the Hard Part"; I say this is a moment to bask in what we have delivered unto ourselves. I plan to keep crying and playing Sam Cooke for my baby for at least another few days. But in listening to Cooke's words, I must remember that this election hasn't closed the book. Rather, by turning the page, we're still pushing through the same narrative, chapter by chapter.
-
sponsorship
Dahlia, thank you so much for your piece; finally, the scales are falling from my eyes. I have been, I must admit, a bit bemused by the rise of the Angry White Woman (AWW) this year. That older white women should support Hillary Clinton with passion did not surprise me, of course. That they should decry incidents of sexism made perfect sense. Even that they should turn angry when her frontrunner campaign began to fail was no great mystery. After all, I came of age, and launched my career, in the time of the Angry White Male. Pissed-off white folks are old hat to me.
What confused me was the tone of that anger—the way it was consistently and passionately framed in terms of shock and woundedness. The way the words betrayal and abandonment have been hurled about, with their insulting implications of what was owed and to whom, of what battles were fought and on who's behalf they were so launched.
I also didn't get how so many white women could be so shocked that sexism still exists. Such a level of insulation seems a privilege in itself. When I am stopped by a white cop for driving in a white neighborhood, I am not shocked. When my neighbor tells me confidentially I am the least ethnic black person he has ever met and how happy that makes him, I am not shocked. My mother, a seventysomething woman who grew up in Mississippi being stomped by black men and white folks—male and female—alike, is not shocked. My sister, who rose to become a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army and who says quite clearly that sexism is far worse than racism in the military, was not shocked by this discovery. How could she be? Growing up black in Memphis had well prepared her for discrimination of any stripe. (One example: the white female guidance counselor who told her not to bother applying for college because she could not possibly do the work even if she got in. Result: one B.A. plus two masters' degrees, including one from Harvard.)
But now I see why I have been confused: This whole thing has nothing to do with me. This is a family fight between older white women and their daughters, and me and my mother and my sisters are not even in the conversation.
What a relief. Ya'll carry on.
-
sponsorship
About Clinton I have nothing to say. But I do want to give a shout out to my girl, Marjorie and say this: I've got your back! Anyone brave enough to write about the fallout from the gender wars for Newsweek, that magazine of Middle America, is going to need it. I mean, even conservative poster girl Condi Rice gets the smack-down when she dares to discuss the reality of race in America. (Thanks to The Root's Jimi Izrael for pointing me to this gem!) But don't worry, Marjorie. I'm pretty sure I can take Lou Dobbs if he comes sniffing for trouble. He looks a little soft around both the middle and the head.
On a different and more interesting note, I've been wondering around the meaning of this report by a nonprofit adoption-advocacy group that concluded that a decade of de-emphasizing race in adoptions might not have been such a win-win idea. The report examines the impact of the Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994, and finds that although there has been a small increase (17 percent to 20 percent) in transracial adoptions since the law went into effect, many of these children end up struggling with being "different" and face major challenges in their quest to develop strong identities. Meanwhile their well-intentioned parents have not been prepared by social workers for the racial and cultural challenges they are likely to face because the social workers fear violating the law.
Having covered the foster care system for the New York Times, I can tell you this much: It sucks. No child should be left to linger there one minute longer than absolutely necessary. Yet even with the law, African-American children are still disproportionally represented in foster care and remain there longer than children of other ethnicities. It seems to make only common sense not to discourage any qualified and loving family who wants to adopt a child from doing so. The problem is that, once again, we can't seem to find a middle ground on these issues. Either we insist on only matching like to like, and children suffer. Or we shove these families together, then close our eyes and stick our fingers in our ears and shout, "Love is colorblind! Love is colorblind! Love is colorblind!" until whoever is saying something we don't want to hear gives up and goes away.
-
sponsorship
Judith,
I think you make a great point that we can get a little too caught up talking about politicians' sexual peccadilloes when there are larger issues at stake. But I can't see even an imaginary speech by Hillary tackling some of the topics you address. And I think that illustrates some of the differences between race and gender that we've been talking about—I'm particularly reminded of Melinda's post, about the black woman who said she didn't have much in common with white women. There's a lack of shared experience. Most if not all blacks, regardless of their education or socioeconomic class, have felt the sting of racism at some point. And most if not all whites, for better or worse, right or wrong, have felt threatened by blacks, be it from ignorance, or angry rhetoric like that of Jeremiah Wright, or affirmative action.
In his speech, Barack Obama was trying to help each side understand where the other was coming from and get us past it. He called out the Rev. Wright and his own white grandmother. But some of the topics you suggest in a hypothetical speech on gender are still white-hot among women, and whatever Clinton could say would only be divisive. Abortion? Her long-established philosophy of "safe, legal, and rare" is something that I can accept, even as I disagree with her. She should leave it at that. Roughly half of all American women are anti-abortion, and we're not changing our minds. Subsidized day care? That's sure to stir up another battle in the Mommy Wars: Women who choose to stay at home aren't going to be pleased to see their husband's paycheck shrink (in the form of higher taxes) so that two-income families don't have to pay for child care. A shorter workweek? Well, OK, I could live with that. Let's at least make hiring a housekeeper tax-deductible.
That doesn't mean that the conversation about women's issues isn't vital or that we shouldn't be seeking out common ground among ourselves. I just can't picture a speech on these issues that would be sweeping, uplifting, and/or unifying.
-
sponsorship
Dahlia, I definitely agree that these "conversations'' on race and gender are no fun. Still, maybe the only thing worse than having them is not having them; we've been trying it that way more or less forever and where did it ever get us? Yesterday I was part of an online discussion on race and gender in the Democratic primary on Washingtonpost.com, and though the questions were great, I found it frustrating trying to snag at least a few of the balls whizzing by me when each one of them deserved a seminar-length give-and-take. One question I never even got to—because it was more than I could begin to address on the fly—I am still thinking about today. As I no longer have the questions, I'm paraphrasing here, but it was from an African-American woman who was writing in to say that she just doesn't feel she has that much in common with white women. Occasionally, there's a spark of connection over childbearing or -rearing, but in the main, she relates more to black men than to women of other races.
Now, that does make me feel sort of rejected—I feel like her sister and she doesn't feel like mine -- but it's interesting, too: Why is it that I'm imagining I'd feel kinship with women from Jupiter, and she doesn't see the female experience as all that formative? Donna Brazile told me the answer once, I think. This was when I was just starting to work on my book on how women make electoral decisions. (Short answer: Other-than-rationally, just like men do. Not unlike decisions in dating, really. Which is why our dutiful, "Oh, my top issue is health care,' answers to pollsters don't always mean that much.) Anyway, what Donna said was, you know, women don't vote as a block because we never had to go through something like the slave experience together. So the biological and cultural deal that I consider such a sealing bond just doesn't compare. (Does it?) My son who is mad for movies had us watch Sixth Sense for I think it was the 234th time this last weekend, and you know how the ghosts go away after the little boy finally listens to them? Cheesy, OK. But on race and gender, I do think there's a lot more we have to hear from one another.
-
sponsorship
I thought I was onboard with Emily about all the benefits of openly airing this buried anger and rage about race and gender. I’d been arguing for months that it was past time to lance this boil and just have it out in the streets about how mad everyone in the Democratic Party feels.
Perhaps I’ve read one too many livid blogs today or listened in on a few too many enraged racially charged debates this weekend, but I am starting to go a little wobbly at the ankles. Can someone remind me what’s truly served by a “conversation” about race and gender for its own sake? Are we progressing toward something better here? Is all this dialoguing fostering some new paradigm for talking about personal identity and politics? Or is this just the sort of conversation that always goes badly in the end? The kind that starts when some guy in a bar says, “Wanna hear what your real problem is?”
-
sponsorship
Rosa, I'm glad to know that Rev. Wright made it to the Clinton White House, but no, I don't think it's time to stop talking about him. Obama and the country are better off for his amazing and moving race speech, which Wright popping up on YouTube forced him into giving. All of this needs to be aired, and now, during the primaries. If Obama becomes the Democratic nominee, the Republicans are going to come back at him with another round or three of Wright. And if the party isn't ready to nominate Obama because he's got roots in the angry black community, alongside his message of hope, well, I think that's the wrong rationale, but let's get it all out there. No surprises. Or at least as few as possible.
-
sponsorship
In a newsroom, you see right away that a high percentage of people who would like you to write about them—people with serious grievances of all kinds, against the cops or the city or the hospital or whatever—are at least a little bit crazy. Unfortunately, this makes it harder for them to get any action, because they're written off: "Guy's a nut.'' Which is especially unfortunate, because in a lot of cases, if the story is even half-true, of course he's a nut; that's what injustice in the long term tends to do to people. Maybe we shouldn't be so surprised if the generation that ran into more brick walls of sexism and racism than is currently necessary has some post-concussive issues as a result; they are entitled to their tirades—and to our respect, though I don't think we honor their sacrifice by refusing to see that they actually did accomplish something.
-
sponsorship
Sorry to be late to Obamapalooza, but I didn’t get to watch his speech until late last night. Isn’t it fascinating to hear Obama apologizing for Rev. Wright in almost the same terms we at XX have used to apologize/make excuses for Gloria Steinem, Robin Morgan, and some of the other second-wave feminist heroines who now seem frozen into some rictus of '60s outrage? One of the ways Obama tried to humanize his pastor was by describing what Wright saw and experienced before the demise of legal segregation. It was that experience that, according to Obama, made it impossible for Wright to imagine change, just as Morgan, et al., can’t seem to conceive of a world that isn't consumed by perpetual gender warfare.
Hanna, you once made this same point about watching the video of “Germaine Greer and the rest of the feminist street poets take on Norman Mailer in that 1971 town hall”—that these women were sexy and ferocious and inspiring but also, in today’s terms, a little hysterical and cartoonish. Greer and Wright were on the front lines, and, as Obama explained yesterday, there is honor in having endured what they did, surviving it, and hacking down the barriers for those of us who came after. But Obama was also reminding us that we can be deeply grateful to that generation and also acknowledge that their stark language and relentless, perhaps terminal, anger also created massive divisions that need to be healed.
I find it fascinating at this new turn in the conversation—where we have to publicly apologize for our civil rights and feminist icons because, at least rhetorically, they’ve turned into Crazy Aunt Tessie, who gets drunk and drools all over the ottoman. I didn’t see it coming.
-
sponsorship
I'm with Maureen Dowd today: The Obama who talks of grays and of complicated legacies and long evolutions, not just of high hopes and change, is my kind of guy. See, there's a reason the campaign isn't over yet—we need to see this man dealing with more than adoring crowds. And he's clearly thinking not just narrowly and strategically about the superdelegate count, but broadly about what the pattern of his primary successes and failures so far tells us about the country. This speech was a response to more than a flap over Rev. Wright, I would say. It was Obama's admirable effort to speak to an electoral puzzle that Matt Bai pointed out in a fascinating piece in the New York Times Magazine this past Sunday. "To put this simply," Bai wrote, "Obama wins in major urban areas but can't seem to win in urbanized states, while Clinton wins in rural communities but consistently loses in rural states. Why?" Bai proposed a counterintuitive answer that says something important about race in America: Obama does well in areas with the least racial diversity—where there are either lots of African-American voters or very few (Wisconsin and Vermont). The actual experience of racial diversity—of living side by side, feeling hard-pressed, struggling, and competing for "a piece of the American Dream," especially during an economic downturn—may not build enlightened racial unity, but instead fuel skepticism about facile promises of harmony. It was exactly that sobering reality that Obama addressed head on in his speech. I call that audacity.
-
sponsorship
However Obama's speech plays out, Hillary Clinton's No. 1 surrogate, Bill, has weighed in again on race. He said the idea that he has said anything racially insensitive during the campaign (particularly comparing Obama's win in South Carolina to Jesse Jackson's) is "a myth" (what, not a "fairy tale"?) and a "mugging" by Obama's campaign. (Does this mean Bill Clinton is suggesting he has been mugged by a black candidate?—not to play the race card or anything.) He further went on to say, in that self-pitying style he is so very good at reminding us of, that he never played the race card against Obama, but that Obama's campaign played the race card against him. I hope Hillary will be asked to respond to this.