Wednesday, September 14, 2016

Following up on ally-ship

I've been thinking some more about the issue I discussed in "Who to contact, what to do: ally-ship for #blacklivesmatter"....in July. (Sorry; went to KY and got stranded in the Southwest cancel-a-thon, and then everything in the house broke [slight exaggeration], and I've been swamped with organizing roofing and water heaters and trimming dead trees and so forth.)

And a few things have occurred, or occurred to me.

Thing that occurred to me: I was really struggling with the whole issue of black folks not having to explain things to would-be allies. And I still think it's important, as allies, to remember that folks of color are really the ones "driving" this movement, and so asking is still good. But I guess the resolution I came to is that racism is not a problem that just affects folks of color. White folks like me also have an experience of racism....but it's an experience of normalizing racism, not seeing it, not exploring it, and not realizing--willfully or otherwise--the ways in which we are implicated in it or in which it is enacted through us (or not prevented by us). So I don't need to ask a person of color about the sorts of racism that I experience, as a(n unintentionally-) constituting party or factor: I should be able to figure at least some of those out myself.

So definitely still ask, when the opportunity is there. But also examine your own experience for things you haven't done for equality and civil rights. It'll be painful, but there are parts of this that we can figure out, and that we don't have to have folks of color explain to us. (Unless, any people of color who might be reading this, you want to.) And we can start working on those parts, through ourselves, in addition to supporting the movement with black leadership.

And related-ly, I am reading Eduardo Bonilla-Silva's Racism Without Racists (4th ed., now with a chapter about Obama!), and trying to take it in the manner in which it was intended--as a "good, honest, and painful sermon," to quote Samuel Pepys. I'm still reading and processing, but he is making the case for the notion of "I don't see color" as "color-blind racism," which is to say, a more covert and insidious form of racism that essentially relies on claims of neoliberalism (competition; a free market of candidates, schools, housing, etc.) and the fact that things used to be worse to undermine any further progress on social justice and civil rights. So far, I'm having trouble figuring out if and how what he's arguing--which makes sense, as a description of the general system--has to do with me, daily, on the ground. (And note: I don't think 'I don't see color,' because obviously that would be to ignore the ways in which structural, and otherwise, racism still impacts folks of color.)

Basically, as I understand his argument, I think that he doesn't believe that any decision, really, is innocent of race. I shouldn't put words in his mouth, but throughout the book he has claimed skepticism of white folks saying things like "it's just the way things are, race had nothing to do with it" (as in, "I just happened to grow up in a neighborhood that was all white"). Systemically, he's right, although I think you'd be hard put to blame someone for being born into a family that lived in an all-white neighborhood. The existence of the all-white neighborhood clearly is suspect and has roots (if not current support) in racist policies; being born into such a household does not make you suspect. I think it's an open question if purchasing a house in said neighborhood makes your decision suspect (because of implicit biases?). I suppose the point is, if race does not figure into your decision, it creeps in by virtue of your not consciously addressing it.

And speaking of implicit bias, one other resource I should have mentioned in my last related post: ProjectImplicit. I've taken several of the tests and think it's good for a person to do so--the results are interesting, although certainly you may question yours, but the most important aspect for me is feeling my brain's inner conflict between what it knows to be true (e.g., non-biased approaches) and the socialized-but-often-false neural pathways of "what everyone knows" (e.g., biased approaches). And I say that just to acknowledge that we all have biases, we may have them even as we logically know they're wrong, and we have to keep working to dismantle them in ourselves. I really, really loved Nonprofit With Balls' take on this issue, and strongly recommend their article "Hey, You Got a Little Racism Stuck in Your Teeth."

And in the news:
So we all know about Kaepernick and refusing to stand for the national anthem. I have a fraught relationship with American football. I kind of enjoy it. I come from a place where we're terrible at it. (Only 6 months until March Madness! Let's go, Cats! And Cards!) I feel dirty when I watch it because of the relatively-recent discoveries about its implication in brain damage and early death of professional athletes. And for several weeks Kaepernick has been using his profession as a stage from which to attest to the fact that #blacklivesmatter. And of course there's a huge kerfuffle. 

I remain surprised that folks who I thought would support his nonviolent protest were profoundly NOT supportive. Kudso to the NFL for not suppressing a legal and nonviolent protest. And I really love the #VeteransforKaepernick hashtag that was trending. I think his point is not a slap at veterans, but rather, something akin to a claim that he, too, sings America

All this is old news, at this point, but this was on my mind again because it's happening closer to home, with the Broncos' Brandon Marshall. He's doing his own protest, and for doing so in a positive way: protesting on the field, but also engaging our local police chief in conversations and using his own personal wealth to invest in community organizations who are addressing some of the issues Marshall, Kaepernick, et al are trying to highlight through their protests.

No comments:

Post a Comment