Dear White Family Members...You are Contributing to My Oppression

Dear White Family Members,

As your oldest biracial family member, I’m terrified of showing up at Christmas dinner. Terrified.

I’m scared to hear why you support individuals who have murdered Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice and too many others to name.

At Christmas, it’s horrifying for me to face a room full of people who make it so clear that they believe that some lives (white ones) are worth more than others (black ones).

I know that you don’t think that you participate in racism. In your post-racial worldview, the only racists left in America in 2014 are in the KKK, and as Christians you could never tolerate their level of violence. But the everyday acts of aggression that you have perpetrated repeatedly against me and against other people of color are indeed acts of racism.

When you tried to erase my identity as a black woman, that was anti-blackness.

When you have repeatedly silenced my opinions on the grounds that as a black person I was “overly sensitive”, that was anti-blackness.

When you “joked” that I was getting a Ph.D. in “ebonics”, that was anti-blackness.

When you mocked me for campaigning for Barack Obama, that was anti-blackness.

Now that you’re passionately defending Darren Wilson for murdering Michael Brown, that is anti-blackness.

You may think that our issues are political and not racial; I have to tell you that those things are inextricably linked. People of color are angry because the state-sanctioned murder of Michael Brown was just the latest example of the fact that we live in a system that was never designed to be equal. Slavery morphed into Jim Crow and Jim Crow morphed into the present-day prison-industrial complex. This country was literally built on a system that exploited black bodies for financial and political gain. The fact that you have trouble seeing that is also part of the system; racist policies are designed to encourage white communities to deny the very existence of the system itself.

When you refuse to recognize that we are living within a system designed to abuse and denigrate people like me, you are contributing to my oppression. When you defend George Zimmerman, Darren Wilson, Daniel Pantaleo and their ilk, you are contributing to my oppression. I’m mad as hell at the injustice that black people have been enduring for hundreds of years, and because you’re not, you’re directly contributing to my oppression.

I love you and I wish that you could try to understand why my heart is breaking.

I’m outraged because the reality that some lives are considered worth less than others was upheld in our so-called justice system.  I’m upset because I realize that maybe it will never be ethical for me to bring a black child into the world to live in a country that has made it so clear that their body would be property, to be disposed of as the powers that be see fit.

I’m devastated because we know that some racist police murder black women too, and if that fate ever befell me, I’m fairly certain you’d side with the police.

For years, I have endured Christmases, Thanksgivings, and all other manner of family gathering, all the while knowing that my presence as a black body was seen as disruptive and problematic.

And despite all of this, I’ll see you at Christmas dinner.

I’ll be there because I love you. For me, showing up to Christmas in this black body is a revolutionary act. Even if you forcibly silence me, my presence means that you’ll have to face blackness and the consequences of anti-black racism in your own family. I promise that this is an important step for both my liberation, and for your own.

I’ll see you at Christmas dinner.

-Nicole

On "Senseless Violence" and the Narrative of White Supremacy

Yesterday, Racialicious published a wonderful piece by a guest blogger named Harsha Walia, entitled "Hate Crimes Always Have A Logic: On The Oak Creek Gurudwara Shootings". In this piece, the blogger makes the excellent point that referring to hate crimes as "senseless acts of violence" ignores that they're rooted in discrimination and in this country, that includes the idea of white supremacy. This has been especially apparent in the media coverage of the violence that occurred on Sunday at a Sikh Temple in Milwaukee. Walia makes an excellent point that I think bears repeating here, so I'll leave it in her words: 

While these murders were abhorrent, they were not ‘senseless’. The ad nauseaum suggestion that the killings were senseless attempts to construct the shooting as random and without logic, when in fact racist hate crimes operate through the very deliberate and precise logic of white supremacy

Whenever there's an act of violence of any kind, it's tempting to refer to it as "senseless", maybe to psychologically shield ourselves from the reality that there are many, many people out there to whom the act made perfect sense. She goes on to dissect why this argument relies on (white) supremacy:

White supremacy, as a dominant and dominating structuring, actually necessitates and relies on a discourse that suggests that hate crimes are random. Otherwise, whites might just have to start racially profiling all other young and middle-aged white men at airports or who are walking while white. Whites might have to analyze what young white children are being taught about in schools and in their homes about privilege and entitlement. Whites might have to own up to and seek to repair the legacy of racialized empire, imperialism, and settler-colonialism that has devastated and continues to destroy the lives and lands of millions of people across the globe.

I actually hesitated to share this article on Facebook, or to blog about it, because I know that for many, this type of argument seems unnecessarily inflammatory. It's not...it's the real honest truth. The most dangerous thing about privilege is that its benefactors are largely unaware of its existence. Even for those who don't participate in the white supremacist movement, the fact that it's such a part of modern American culture acts as a protective shield around them. As long as these acts are "senseless", no one has to face the fact that this nation was built on white supremacy. More to Walia's second point, they also don't have to consider the real repercussions of what it would mean to restructure our nation so that this was no longer the dominant narrative. As she notes, recognizing white supremacy would mean that white people would have to take on some of the burdens that are now shouldered only by non-whites: things like teaching their children about race and colonialism. Even more challenging, they'd have to start seeing each other as the demonized "other"...the source of so much fear and "senseless" violence.

On "Two Classes, Divided by 'I Do'"

On Saturday, the New York Times posted a piece entitled "Two Classes, Divided By 'I Do". Based on the title, I prepared my righteous indignation (my favorite emotion, natch) and braced myself to be offended by the sexism and slut-shaming that was sure to come. Yes, some of those things were in there, but mostly I walked away with the following 2 feelings: 1. Sheer disappointment with our cultural and political system,  and 2. Utter terror.

The article tells the story of 2 women who work in management at a daycare center in Ann Arbor Michigan. The two women are almost identical in every way, except for that one is the boss who finished college and got married (Mrs. F) and the other is her underling who dropped out of college to raise to her children (Ms. S). The article is intended to make us feel that the poor, tired, long suffering Ms. S could have the Mrs. F's idyllic suburban lifestyle if only she were married and had a two-income household. It even (not-so-subtly) hints at the fact that the poor Ms. S's 3 children will underperform in school, fall in with the "wrong crowd" and never finish college themselves, unlike the married Mrs. F's healthy, well-adjusted wunderkind. Upon finishing the article, here were my thoughts:

Reaction 1: Sheer Disappointment

Is it true that children that come from two-parent households perform better academically and socially? Sure, the article provides plenty of data to back that up. But how much of this has to do with the advantages of having 2 incomes and twice as many people who may be able to shoulder the burden of shuttling children to and from extracurriculars and helping them with their homework? Does it have to be this way?

The short answer is that it doesn't. It does indeed take a village to raise a child, but if we lived in a society where everyone took on the responsibility of caring for the next generation, single mothers like Ms. S would have a lot more help. Her children would have access to free or very affordable tutoring and extracurricular activities. Neighbors and friends could help her look after her children, so she didn't have to bring them to work with her every morning. If she had a living wage and good benefits from her employer, she wouldn't have to scrape by with food stamps and worry about what to feed her children. The truth is that some of the disadvantages that her children have are the fault of all of us. We don't demand a living wage. We let our politicians dismantle our social safety net. We do nothing about massive education cuts and ignore the massive achievement gap that all but ensures that Ms. S's children will not attend a school good enough to prepare them for college. Finally, we've watched college get so expensive that even if her children did make it there, they could likely never afford it. If we really cared about her children, we'd demand better for them, and for all of us. We'd also stop looking the other way when we see struggling kids in our own communities, and start volunteering to babysit, tutor, or do whatever it takes to help families who could use a little more support.

Reaction 2: Utter Terror

As a black twenty-something young woman who is constantly bombarded with the message that there are no available men interested in marriage in the world, this shit is profoundly scary. Almost weekly I read something about how educated black women never get married, black men only want to date white women, and non-black guys aren't interested in us. Don't get me wrong, I think a lot of this so-called "marriage crisis" is manufactured and blown out of proportion. Not everyone wants to get married (and not everyone can yet (we're working on it, LGBT community!) and lots of children turn out just fine with just a single-mother (I did!). However, the data don't lie and the more that one tries to date in NYC, the harder it is to believe that people out there are still forming committed relationships. Trust me, it's crazy out here. I, like many people, would like to have a long-term partner (whether legally binding or not) and someone to help me raise kids, but it looks like sometimes you just gotta do it yourself. The true feminist in me hates the idea of waiting around for some mythical Mr. Right, but the realist knows that since I want a serious career, it would be a heck of a lot easier to share household and child-raising responsibilities with someone else.

The bottom line is basically this: the Times article places a lot of blame in the wrong places, and ignores some of the cultural problems that make Ms. S's life more challenging than Mrs. F's. That said, is it easier to move a couch with 2 people than with one? Yep. The same principle seems to hold for raising children. However, instead of pointing fingers and placing blame, let's work on the inequalities that make it so damn hard for people like Ms. S. In the meantime, I'll be on the picket line and near the voting booth chipping away at the those who make the policies that make it harder on women like Ms. S. Who knows, maybe I'll even meet that seemingly elusive creature who doesn't hate black women and may be interested in splitting childcare responsibilities someday?

On Why Online Dating is Like Choosing Desserts in a Sucky Diner

Online dating is weird. It's like having a menu of people to choose from, then deciding that you're in the mood for something warm, wholesome and nice (the person equivalent of a slice of apple pie), ordering it, and then discovering that the apple pie isn't in the mood for you.

Or maybe the apple pie is in the mood for you, but it is still entangled with vanilla ice cream it used to go out with.

Or perhaps you order the apple pie and everything seems to be going well, but then you decide that really apple pie isn't for you, so you send it back and order the brownie.

It's an endless cycle of culinary and emotional disappointment, and it's worse than dating in the real world because having a menu of options so clearly laid out allows people to maintain a certain level of detachment. Don't like the dessert you ordered? Don't worry, there are thousands more out there waiting to hear from you.

One thing that makes all of this even harder is when you really can't decide what you want. I seem to go out with two types of desserts...the sweet, sensitive, artistic type who's not afraid to cry in front of you (think pint of Haagan-Daaz) or the more stereotypically masculine guy who subscribes to traditional gender roles but isn't so emotionally present (think plain old chocolate cake). I'd kinda like some combination of those....like an ice cream cake or something.

Is it too much to ask for a non-artist, sensitive enough (but not too sensitive), brilliant, funny guy who also watches baseball and knows how to fix things? That might be a tall order in NYC..

3 (Personal) Questions I Wish Strangers Would Stop Asking Me

So earlier I posted about the professional questions that irritate me to no end, but I think these personal ones are worse. They're mostly irritating due to lack of tact...it's one thing to be inquisitive; it's quite another to be brazenly inconsiderate. Here they are, in no particular order:


1. Are you (Dominican, Egyptian, Puerto Rican, Mexican, etc.)? Not that I love the "What are you" question, but it's better than reckless speculation about my race/ethnicity. It's even worse because people are usually disappointed when I'm not whatever they think I am. Sorry, I know you think I look just like your cousin, but no dice.
2. Oh you're from Ohio....isn't it boring/stupid/country/fat there? Yep, Ohio has its fair share of ignorant, boring people but not all New Yorkers are the pinnacle of open-minded progressive ideology either.
3. Can I touch your hair? In short, the answer I'd like to give is "Bitch, no...I'm not a zoo animal and the racial implications of people asking me this all the time make me want go all 'angry black woman' on you".


I was going to post 5, but those 3 really took the cake. Part of blogging (and life) that I'm working on is learning when to stop talking.

5 (Professional) Questions I Wish Strangers Would Stop Asking Me

Admittedly, I'm not the most patient person in the world but I am outgoing and friendly, and I usually enjoy introducing myself to new people. Except for when I get one of the following questions about my work...if I never had to answer any of these ever again, I think I could die in peace.


1. So a Ph.D huh? What do you want to do with THAT?
What do you think I want to do with it? Cashier at Wal-Mart? Be your IT person? Sing on Broadway? There aren't a whole lot of options outside of academia (especially outside of STEM fields) so what else would does it seem likely that I'd want to do?
2. Oooo linguistics....how many languages do you speak?
The bane of career questions for most linguists...but I never get sick of being sick of answering it. I'll be answering this one for the rest of my life.
3. So will that actually pay money?
Thanks for your concern about my future finances, but I've got it under control.
4. So you basically study ebonics? I mean, why would anyone bother with THAT?
See: ignorance, racism, and Standard Language Ideology
5.You must be really smart, huh?
How the heck am I supposed to answer this without sounding like an arrogant jerk or a person completely devoid of self-esteem? Not that I spend a lot of time quoting bad movies, but see Natalie Portman's character in No Strings Attached for my perfect response: "Sometimes my neck gets sore...because my brain is so big".


Stay tuned for the (Personal) Questions I Wish Strangers Would Stop Asking Me

On Trayvon Martin, Biracialism and Who Suffers When We're Divided

About this article: http://open.salon.com/blog/chauncey_devega/2012/03/19/trayvon_martin_and_life_lessons_for_young_black_boys


I was originally just going to share this on my Facebook wall, but the feelings were too complicated. The author makes some excellent points about the culture that allowed Trayvon Martin to be murdered so callously:
"Whiteness and White privilege involve the luxury of being able to decide how, in what ways, and under what conditions, you will be allow yourself to be uncomfortable. White privilege also involves the luxury of not having to have a conversation with your kids about how to avoid being murdered by the cops because of your skin color. In many matters of life and death, white supremacy remains, in many ways, unchallenged. Black and brown folks, if they are responsible parents, cannot avoid such conversations with their children. The foot-dragging by the police in regards to the murder of Trayvon Martin reveals this ugly truth".


But she also goes to far in the process: 
"By implication, young black and brown children must be made to understand that they are not "special," "biracial," or part of a racial buffer group that is going to be given "special" privileges because one of their parents is white. These "multiracial" children are some of the most vulnerable and tragic when they are finally forced to confront the particular challenges which come with being a young black boy or girl in American society. In post civil rights America, this notion is politically incorrect. Nonetheless, it remains true".


As a biracial (no quotes, please) person, I resent the idea that I somehow grew up feeling "special" or like "a racial buffer". I've been aware of my blackness since the first time my white mother plopped me down in a black salon where they attempted to "tame" my hair with toxic chemicals. I was 5, and this went on for 10 years. I was probably even aware of it before that, but I can't really remember. Since then, I could probably recount to you thousands of occasions where other people felt it was their duty to make damn sure I knew I was black. Asserting that mixed people are "vulnerable and tragic" when it comes to this type of challenge is not only incredibly offensive, it also distracts from the issue at hand. ALL brown and black people have the potential to be the target of this particular type of violence. Instead of sniping at each other about "who gets to be black", and "who has to be black", we'd do better to band together to stop this injustice from happening to each other.