The Study of Racialism

Powell · Guru Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 2460 }

Matthews said:

Powell · Guru Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 2460 }

http://www.ajlmagazine.com/content/012007/davidmatthews.html

davidmatthews · New User Joined: 18 Jan 2007 {Posts: 26 }

sometime tomorrow, i will have the time to write a response, but for now, all i can do is wonder aloud what on earth is meant by the qualification "REALLY black." (?) as it pertains to me.
wow. that's unfortunate, but i will have a more thorough exegesis tomorrow.

fwsweet · Posted: Mon 22 Jan 2007 04:26 Post subject: Re: my take still pending

Powell · Guru Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 2460 }

Change "really black" to "of obvious sub-Saharan phenotype." Instead of focusing on this, can Matthews answer any of the questions?

Salsassin · SuperWizard Joined: 04 Apr 2005 {Posts: 3515 }

sagascend · Moderator-at-Large Joined: 17 Jun 2006 {Posts: 2413 }

First of all, I want to extend a warm and somewhat late welcome to David. What a treat for members here to exchange ideas and opinions on an author's work with the author.

I don't want to insert myself into the various streams of opinions currently discussed in this thread (especially since Paco has already cautioned the rulebreakers). What I do want to highlight is the courage that it must take for anyone to expose his/her life, to open his/her complex and multifaceted thoughts, emotions and opinions on race and racial identity to a relentlessly judgemental culture (cult, really) of racialism and polemical identity expression in the U.S. Very few people (perhaps none of us) here offering up their opinions and criticisms of David or his writings have offered up their own lives for public consumption and judgement (not saying they should, but it is an interesting observation). We often demand a consistency, clarity, and degree of self-actualization from those who share their personal demons, especially if these writers express opinions that we do not share. I wonder why we are not willing to examine our own lives and personal trajectories with the vehemence that we reserve for people who "put themselves out there?"

I don't know anything about David's life, other than what he has shared or some have written about it. What I do realize is this is ONE man's story, at ONE point in his life. We evolve and grow throughout our lives, so why should the childish scribblings, angsty adolescent texts and youthful adult ramblings define us forever? David, like all of us, is a work in progress, and our evolution isn't complete until we die. My point here is that what David reflects on now is perhaps not what he would in 5 or 10 years, and probably not what he would have reflected on 5 to 10 years ago.

David's story is not, nor does it have to be, representative of the broad experiences of other multiracial people. Perhaps those who contend that there are no alternative stories for multiracial youth to consume could offer up their own lives for scrutiny, praise and critique. Part of my problem with this discourse on racial identity is that the focus shifts too soon from personal expression to representation ("correct" or "incorrect" depending on the person). Imagine if we only represented ourselves and those who chose us as a group spokesperson? I certainly wish some public personalities would remember that the scope of their influence is smaller than they assume it to be.

And David, Tiger is exactly what he says he is. What other people believe is not his problem nor is it up to any of us to redefine him in terms that are perhaps more suitable to our own realities.

fwsweet · Posted: Mon 22 Jan 2007 16:09 Post subject:

Salsassin · SuperWizard Joined: 04 Apr 2005 {Posts: 3515 }

I always find stories like that of Gregory Howard Williams interesting contrasted to those of people like Wayne Joseph, who have the phenotype, but find out there is no historical African ancestry in their DNA.

yvette · New User Joined: 17 Jan 2007 {Posts: 16 }

yvette · New User Joined: 17 Jan 2007 {Posts: 16 }

fwsweet · Posted: Mon 22 Jan 2007 23:36 Post subject: Re: David Matthews

yvette · New User Joined: 17 Jan 2007 {Posts: 16 }

sagascend · Moderator-at-Large Joined: 17 Jun 2006 {Posts: 2413 }

Salsassin · SuperWizard Joined: 04 Apr 2005 {Posts: 3515 }

davidmatthews · New User Joined: 18 Jan 2007 {Posts: 26 }

Lively discussion, happy to be a part of it. As I’ve mentioned already, I have a few points of agreement, a few points of divergence—which I will try to address below, hopefully without belaboring any points, but I wouldn’t bet on that Smile

in the interest of time, I will simply post my responses to all posts I have a comment on by simply pasting the text in question, and not necessarily mentioning the author’s name, though I believe A.D. Powell and Salsassin will get the lion’s share of the attention—I trust they will be able to identify which posts are theirs.

But first, I’d like to establish a framework and establish a context for my remarks both made and forthcoming. I am not, nor would I ever claim to be a spokesperson or authority on mixed-race identity in American culture. While I was most certainly a “mixed-race” child, I lived as either black, or white, never both. This was due to many factors—cowardice; the crucible of a specific time and place in a specific culture; and, without dramatizing the point to much, plain old survival. My actual cultural influences were African American. I sought out what I considered to be a more mainstream “white” culture, for many of the aforementioned reasons; and for the sake of phenotypic expediency. I did what human animals have always done: I congressed with those who looked most like me. In my case, I was just able to do it. But just. In the world I came from, there were only two choices for those who looked like me; white or black. Despite the variegated ethnicities some on this board have suggested I resemble (not that I disagree), those options were not available to me. As I have mentioned before, the world is likely different now (though I don’t have as much faith in that sentiment as many of you, but I’m probably just a grump).
The question about my race, for nearly every day of my childhood and young adulthood (and I am not exaggerating) was: “what are you?” I am sincerely delighted that many of you, when/if faced with that same question, were able to answer “biracial” or “tri-racial isolate,” or whatever your lineage happens to be. In the major metropolitan centers in which I have lived/traveled, I have not seen this kind of flexibility on the part of white Americans. (As a methodology, and though it is reductive, since “white America” is by far the majority population, I occasionally shorthand “America” for “white America”—I trust the reader to intuit when I am making those jumps). I therefore differ in a foundational way from some of the posters on this board.
Here is how: many of you state that it is the individual’s right to assert whichever identity they so choose. Right on! But… I assert that this is solely an existential determination (though a worthwhile one) which may not address a lived reality. Tri-guy (big-ups, tri) pointed out to me that Tiger Woods—who, in a self-definition accepted by many on this board, identifies as “blasian”-- was tied to a tree by his idiot neighbors as a child. This anecdote illustrates, to me, that racial identity is every bit as meaningful when applied BY OTHERS, because racial (NOT CULTURAL) distinctions are surface qualifiers, whose only value is visual. Tiger Woods, while tied to a tree, could have pleaded to his tormentors that he wasn’t really “black,” but was actually predominantly asian— but is anyone fatuous enough to believe that would have gotten him untied? And is anyone fatuous enough to believe that had he been solely asian, he would have received the same treatment? Before anyone trots out a “similar” story of equivalent harassment of an asian, I’d urge you to be very, very, careful: the symbolism of Tiger’s neighbors using a tree and rope is not accidental, and these rituals, even played out by cruel children, have a 400 year old, a priori by this point, meaning.
This is perhaps my fundamental disagreement with some posters on this board, the notion that because one self-identifies, then the world’s assessment no longer matters. I argue that self-identification is good for the self, but will not protect you from harassment/discrimination. If some posters have had a different experience, and have had a life based solely on the content of their character, then I truly, truly, envy you. The “cultural” capitals of this country, where I have lived, are definitely years behind. So while I am not an expert on being mixed, or multi-racial—I do consider myself acutely aware of how race plays out in large social themes and trends—which is what I am interested in. I respect the “tri-racial isolate” populations, but however meaningful their stories, they are statistically negligible in terms of plotting the evolution of racism in this country. I purposely paint with a large brush, because we are dealing with large, and largely in-conflict populations, black (bet. 14-18%) and white (around 80%). If we took these tri-racial isolate populations, or the Creoles from La.; or the Lumbee, and placed them in extrinsic, more populated areas, my guess is that you would find they would (as virtually all humans do—hell, we all found each other on this site) gravitate toward people they most visually favored. In most places in this country, that means black. Wrong? Right? Reality, though not an absolute one.

What's the point here? One woman says you're NOT "black" and she's "racist" and the other woman says you are and that's proof of racism?

No, my point is that I have lived, purposefully, as a member, in hiding, among both white and black America, in heavily populated urban areas. (population trends have shown that the largest percentage of the population is centered around what we call “urban” areas). So while not an expert on “mixed” race identity, I do feel as though I have more than an oblique understanding of race in this country. There is NO substitute for living as part of the indigenous culture one wants to observe/critique. I have lived as/among overtly racist working-class whites, as well as/among liberal, middle-upper-middle class whites. I have lived as/among, poor inner city blacks, as well as/among the black “elites.” I found the degrees of racism, both observed and experienced, staggering, and following no discernable pattern.
Now, I do NOT believe that anecdotal evidence is all that useful in social commentary, which is why I observe the culture at large, and simply use my “heightened” awareness of race/class as a jumping off point. I (very humbly) view myself as part of a tradition which includes James Baldwin, Frantz Fanon, and Skip Gates. If your tastes run to the likes of Juan Williams, Shelby Steele, or Armstrong Williams, you will likely find much to quibble with in terms of my viewpoint. Back to the matter at hand. Once we remove our own personal stories from the mix, what are we left with? Social trends and easily traceable demographic data. So when I assert that I am black, and was treated as such, I am extrapolating a personal, into a hopefully much larger idea. This extrapolation is where an understanding of the (successful, racist) campaign against Harold Ford in the south may be understood in a different light; or where the upcoming candidacy of barack obama; or the failures of “no child left behind” can be discussed, not from the limned viewpoint of a “mixed kid who had a hard knock life,” but of a person who has had some access into the unspoken thoughts of black and white America. I hope that I do not have to address my so-called appearance again, but the reality was, I was viewed—because I was not typically “white"—as black; often. It took real artifice and guile for me to “pass” and often I was not believed. (I’m not interested in the anecdotal worth of my life in this case, rather an explanation that no matter what anyone on this board thinks, I was not always “assumed” to be white. I had to work at it.)
So A.D. Powell, I don’t need more than these two instances--(plus my own book full of them); having had my eyes open for 40 years, and having made scholarship of the last 400 years my job--to “prove” the permanence of racism. How much “proof” of racism would you like? I could give you a reading list if you’d like, because anecdotal evidence, yours and mine, is a bullshit minefield. A good place for you to start would be the 2000 census, which lists populations and their relative incomes; instances of matriculation; instances of mortality; instances of incarceration. Then you could mosey on over to the center for disease control; and look at the morbidity rates for newborns by race; the rates of hiv/cancer/heart disease/gum disease by population, and then, unless you are still “blaming the victim” you might find the time to note that among the leading causes of death among black men aged 14-25 homicide is usually number 1. With a bullet. Racism? Part of a racist country, to be sure.
A place where moral outrage and billions of dollars can be spent in defense of oil, but inner city schools (which are predominantly black) have to privatize, or maintain sub-standard equivalency tests in order to receive federal money? You will pardon me if I call that racism. (and no, I do not call it classism, though it has elements of that). Moving on, a point that’s been pestering me:

There seems to be a contradistinction being made on this board between what constitutes “black” and “white.” I would like to narrow the scope of my arguments, so that when I am referring to race, it is in an African-American/white, of European descent context . Luckily, or unfortunately, that will include other groups of dark-skinned peoples, as African-American is most notably, and most persistently how this country has dealt with “the other.” Which brings us to culture.
There is no monolithic “African American” culture, but there are many common threads. I’m not gonna go into them all here; but let’s just say, if you’ve had an “African-american” cultural upbringing, you probably know it. I apologize for leaving out other groups, but I want to cover large trends here, and quickly. (it can be done). Being of African American descent typically means that you have a sense--an historical sense of where in america’s paradigm you exist. You are aware of the legacy of slavery, and have at some point seen the evidence that the majority of the population views you as “other.” This “other” can mean the first one suspected; the last one hired, first one fired; or simply an assumption made as to your beliefs/proclivities/abilities. To all of you who have never felt the sting of said, congratulations! You’re in the minority. (I couldn’t resist). To anyone who is of an origin other than African American, your harassment/discrimination is no less real, but, with all due respect, is not the same psychological reality. Slavery in America soaks through the bedrock and informs the way black America feels about itself, even if we aren’t aware of it. No other populations bring this a priori baggage with them.

European ancestry is effectively denied and the false "black" identity is presented as a BIOLOGICAL reality.

European ancestry is not “effectively” denied; it is practicably disabled. When you are viewed by others as something you yourself don’t feel you are—who is correct? I mean correct in a demonstrable way? Ever been called “nigger”? did you change the person’s mind by declaiming your “European” ancestry? And I’m not suggesting that we lower ourselves to the hateful assumptions of others in defining ourselves; I’m just asserting that the world will do with you what it will, sometimes without your say. I fully agree that we should all call each other what we want. But that ignores culture. What is “European” ancestry? And how does one claim it? Most biracial people in this country are descended from at least second generation (US born) Americans. Most Americans become quickly assimilated after a few generations here. So this “European” ancestry thing is an anecdotal red-herring (one need only look at how many Americans speak non-english/non-spanish, and then do a subset search of how many black Americans speak non-english/non Spanish). What other arbiters of “European” descendancy would you use? The celebration of St. Patrick’s day by a half black half Irishman?
The thing is, being subjected to racism is something that most people who look non-white will suffer, and very few people who are white will. (I will address the somewhat otiose claims about how crime is an equal opportunity “racist” undertaking elsewhere). Again, I don’t doubt that you have strong ties to your European culture; but if you do, it would be a rarity in the history of this country’s immigrant population. So you’d like to be acknowledged for being a product of both? I’d like that, too.
We likely live in two very, very different worlds. When you see my picture, you see someone who looks “ethnic,” but not necessarily black. when I see your picture, I see a light-skinned black woman. I wonder what the world sees? You may say that’s not your problem. I only partly agree.
Having been subjected to racism is a comprehensively African-American phenomenon (I mean in our history as Americans). It is part of the cultural baggage that comes from living here.

How do the Puerto Ricans and Dominicans manage to avoid a forced "black" identification when most of them show at least SOME obvious African ancestry?

How? By dint of a common culture shared through language; by dint of the fact that they were not brought here hundreds of years ago against their will, and thus have not internalized notions of systematic inferiority; by dint of the fact that they have been able to sustain communities which are in many cases free from the needs or necessities of “assimilation.”

If you had sweet, loving white relatives (and many biracials DO; Obama is one) and no contact with black-identified relatives, would you say that this would make you legitmately white? If not, why not? Isn't that a double standard? Gregory Howard Williams uses the same argument: If any whites are mean to you, you are condemned forever to be "black," but black racial hatred against you should be dismissed and you should work harder to be accepted by them. That's the party line, right?

First, Obama is not of African American descent. That informs his personality (and I would argue his popularity) to a great degree. And yes, if I had been raised by white relatives and had no contact with black relatives I would say this would make me white IF: I had never been questioned/harassed/discriminated against by whites based on my skin color.
Once that kind of institutional marginalization occurs, one’s blackness is no longer up for self-determination, imo. Williams’ argument is correct, though I find it telling that you would use the word “condemned” to blackness. Blackness is a unifying principal, to many people who have felt the sting of racism. It is a place where one can take solace, and take comfort in knowing that many people have gone through the same mistreatments, and still managed to forge a history and impressive cultural legacy. I hate to belabor the point, but if “people” view you as black, you are black. Racial perception is cultural reality; though it may not be a personal one. People may view me as ugly, though I think I am cute. My definition will work up until I ask someone out and find that my estimation of self doesn’t jibe with a collective standard. (and I am NOT equating blackness with attractiveness: I’ll leave that to those who would conflate black with “doom.”) And black racial hatred is just as ugly as white racial hatred; though easier for me to understand. It’s about psychology. Blacks were taught that they were inferior, unless they were light-skinned; and then they were taught that they were “beautiful, ” the blacker they got. You’ve got a lot of complicated self-hatred going on there: light-skinned blacks are either viewed as elites or as compromised; dark-skinned blacks are either savages or authentic. Black hatred should not be dismissed, nor should white hatred. But my inclination is to give the abused a bit more wiggle room than the abuser. The wife, even if she stays, gets my sympathy, though I try to understand the wife-beater and what makes him tick.

What infuriates me is the fact that alternative views do not get a hearing. Young people trying to find their own identities are being told, falsely, that they have no choice but to become like David Matthews or Gregory Howard Williams.

I’m probably mad about this too, but I live in the world I live in, and not the world I wish I did. So for the record: THANK YOU FOR TRYING TO CHANGE THINGS. I mean that.

Former Triracial Isolates like the Melungeons are Southern Whites who are openly acknowledging their mixed ancestry. They are still white. They refused to be "black" and it worked. Why says that "white" isn't multiracial, too?

Actually, it depends on your definition of “worked.” They are a statistically negligible part of the country’s population (which doesn’t diminish their worth), which diminishes the demographic import of their “acknowledgment.” You need to get well into the millions in terms of populations before you begin to see any trends or impactfulness.

There are Jewish women who marry men who are REALLY "black" and Hispanics with more "black blood" than Matthews. Where did they come from?

I’ve addressed what I consider the patent offensiveness implied herein, as concerns my “black” status; so I’ll resort to the refuge of numbers and trends again:

Less than 4 percent of “interracial” marriages consist of marriages between black and white. (the percentages between asian/white; asian/black; are much higher, but still in the single digits) And I’ve already addressed the importance of culture; which goes a ways to explaining the “black blood” of Hispanics and its differences as played out in the American tableau.

There's also a significant but typical confusion regarding "race" and class. All "whites" are presented as rich and all "blacks" as poor.

And this confusion regarding race and class is chimerical: on a per capita basis, whites (and non-black non-whites) earn more and attend college in greater proportionate numbers. I will be even more reductive: whites and non black non whites have a higher standard of living across the board than blacks.
I will be still more reductive: it is easier to be white in this country than to not be white.

Didn't you say you couldn't pass? Sounds like you did. And phenotype is not the only give away that you don't belong. You were raised by your dad right? Then you had your mannerisms and speech that came from his side. You weren't raised in a Jewish community. They can tell if a person is gentile, even if they look identical to them, what makes you think they couldn't get a sense that you belonged? Only when you fully adopt the culture and religion will you ever be fully accepted. And trust me, I know plenty of Jews that look like you.

Wrong. I said that on occasion I couldn’t pass. And phenotype was the only indication, in my case. (god, I hate anecdotal evidence, but here goes): I was raised in a black household, but befriended many jews. Most of my friends were Jewish. Ashkenazi; not Sephardim and-- despite your (correct) assertion that Sephardim come from the Iberian peninsula--the meaning of the word has grown to include jews from Arabic or non-european lineage; imprecise though it may be, it is generally accepted. The first question any Jewish person asked me, before I opened my mouth, was “what are you?” In this, they were no different than gentiles. And when I did pass as a Jewish kid it was only among gentiles. And I know many Jews who look like me, too. According to Talmudic law, I don’t need to accept ANY Jewish laws or culture: all I need to do is be born of a Jewish mother. Their laws, not mine. And for the record, there is a new documentary a Jewish/black friend of mine is making, about the antipathy The Jewish mainstream (which is Ashkenazi by an overwhelming percentage) has held toward “black jews.” I recommend it.

And David, Tiger is exactly what he says he is. What other people believe is not his problem nor is it up to any of us to redefine him in terms that are perhaps more suitable to our own realities.

first, thanks for your warm letter of welcome! In regards to this point: Tiger is exactly what he says he is because he has the luxury to be “relatively” insulated by his fame. I’m sure James Byrd had some Indian in him. What other people believe can often be our problem. George Bush believed there would be WMD’s, that’s now a reality people are dying every day for, regardless of its determinate reality. I don’t mean to sound snarky, but this whole notion that we exist outside of a perceived cultural reality seems dangerously idealistic to me.

I always find stories like that of Gregory Howard Williams interesting contrasted to those of people like Wayne Joseph, who have the phenotype, but find out there is no historical African ancestry in their DNA.

This only bolsters my point. Joseph had a phenotype which (to his and his neighbors eyes) rendered him black. (he was actually mostly Indian and indo-european) Going with that assumption, he internalized and lived, experientially, as a black American. He looked as black as his Creole neighbors, and lived thusly. I see no contradiction, regardless of his actual “blood.” I have already asserted that race is an arbitrary, visual distinction. There’s a reason peurto-ricans (who often have a fair amount of African blood) feel free to call themselves niggers. Their skin means they’ve earned it. (I’ll leave the arguments about the propriety of the word itself to others).

Respectfully, I submit that both statements are racist… It is entirely possible to tell a person that they appear to be white or black or green (as in the case of FSweet's Martians), without also implying that pick-a-color is superior in some way to another.

For the record, the families of my Jewish ex-boyfriend boyfriends have always warmly welcomed me into the families, in ALL of my biracial glory, to the extent that I still keep in touch with them, years later. Being Jewish does not preclude also being racist, any more than it precludes anything else. It's simply that some humans are racist and some are not.

My point in the description of that lunch scene was that both parties brought with them a view of what race means to them: in the case of the woman who said her parents weren’t THAT liberal, I think the racism speaks for itself; in the case of the “you’re not really black,” statement, it comes with the patronizing assumption that because I wasn’t writing a def-poetry tinged tale of urban life, I wasn’t “representing.” I should have been more descriptive; but I think the racism shines through.
And I have many Jewish friends who don’t give a hoot about my blackness; but I know many who do. I tend to focus on parts of society that don’t work, in order that they might be fixed, rather than on the things that do; I’m a grump, as I’ve mentioned Sad

So, in a way, Dave's experience is the experience of being biracial in America. Unlike Dave, I felt that the whole world accepted me with open arms, but until I was an adult, it was difficult to accept myself.

Yvette, I think you rock. (seriously) And I’m really, really jealous of that part of your life experience. It is something I look for every day, the way an atheist looks for god without ever finding him/her/it. It has gotten easier in some ways, I’ll grant you that; but love is where I look for change, and there were more marriages between black and white in the 70’s than there are today, which is a major way I measure racial progress. When people commit to a love. A life with a person of a different race is where I get happy. But we have declined in that area since the kaleidoscopic days of the 70’s. That makes me blue.

To anyone who stuck around long enough to finish my rant, I thank you, and I hope that you understand that my assertions, (purposely) polemic though they may be, are not intended to be an exegesis on “multi-racial” America, but rather on biracial (the sub-grouping of this thread, after all) America, specifically white and African American.

And thanks to all who’ve written me saying they got something out of my ny times essay, “pick one,” from yesterday.
Very Happy

Salsassin · SuperWizard Joined: 04 Apr 2005 {Posts: 3515 }

sagascend · Moderator-at-Large Joined: 17 Jun 2006 {Posts: 2413 }

fwsweet · Posted: Tue 23 Jan 2007 04:35 Post subject:

fwsweet · Posted: Tue 23 Jan 2007 04:47 Post subject: Re: A few thoughts