I don't teach my kids to be racist

So there I was, with my wife and kids, in the living room one afternoon just hanging out. The television was on the Disney Channel as I'm sure many of you with small children and cable tv can relate. One show which gets its fair share of playback in our house is "The Suite Life on Deck". It is one of Disney's many sitcoms and is based on two, twin brothers and the hijinks which ensue on a cruise ship with school age kids. An episode began like so many others with the brothers, Zack and Cody, along with co-stars, getting involved in some mischief and having to work through it. This particular episode, titled "The Swede Life", as I've come to find out entails Zack and Cody's adventures in Sweden as they try to clear their family's ancestral name. Sounds like so many other television plots doesn't it? But something about it started to feel a bit off...

I suppose I could have began subconsciously pondering how the writers of the show arrived at the decision to make an episode based on Zack and Cody (Dylan and Cole Sprouse respectively) re-visiting their ancestors in Sweden. I mean, they are both white and have blonde hair right? So they fit the stereotype. And Disney felt no regret in applying that stereotype to the majority of the cast of "locals" for this episode.

I think it really got my attention when two of the co-stars, London Tipton and Bailey Pickett (Brenda Song and Debby Ryan respectively), tried to pass themselves off to some of the "locals" as being "one of them" by putting on blonde wigs, complete with braids no less, donning what looked to be a milk maids costume and speaking with what I'm certain everyone thought were very funny Swedish accents. (Sarcasm noted)

By now, I'm asking myself "Am I really seeing this?". So I sat and contemplated how no one at Disney caught this, seeing as how the company surely must be aware of their reputation for having produced other pieces with racist undertones that have been brought to light.

Regardless, the show continued. At the end, I was left wondering whether the folks at Disney had any idea about the message they were sending. More than that, however, is the question as to what kind of message my kids got out of the show. Honestly, I don't know yet. What I do know is that, next to family, media sources like television are the most influential in shaping the values of children who then carry those values with them as they grow into adults. And that started me thinking...

See, I don't teach my kids to be racists. Why would I? I want my children to be responsible members of society and to treat people fairly without regard to their race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. I think there are plenty of people in society who feel the same as I do. But here's the issue. I have never sat any of my kids down and said to them, "You can't trust [fill in the blank]. They're lazy, good for nothing, and just want to be given everything." I don't have to. There are plenty of other sources of influence that will do that for me. If I fail to talk to my children about these sources, about how they can make racism or sexism seem like just "good, clean, fun" where "nobody gets hurt", then I am not part of the solution. William Blake (1757-1827) said "Active evil is better than passive good". I believe that in order to make progress toward a society in which people are treated fairly, with dignity and respect, we have to be active and good.

I'm pretty sure by now, at least one person is scratching their head saying to themselves "I don't get this guy. It's a tv show. People have been doing comedy bits like this for years. What's the big deal?" So check it out, here is a little test that I often rely upon to determine whether the behavior in question (in this case, people using stereotypes to make fun of a Swedes) is what I claim it to be. Take our example of the two cast members using stereotypes for laughs as seen in the picture above. Now replace the category of people whom they are stereotyping with another category. Let's say, instead of stereotyping Swedes, they were stereotyping Latinos. What do you think the reaction would be if people of non-Hispanic ancestry, dressed up in stereotypical Latino/Latina clothing and did a comedy sketch using overtly fake accents? In case you're having difficulty imagining such a thing, or if you happen to be in denial that people would ever do such a thing, allow me to share the following images with you:

 The photos above were taken from a party held off campus by students of Clemson University in South Carolina the day before Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday observance in 2007. After the party drew considerable unfavorable attention, some of the students issued an apology stating they didn't mean any harm. Last year (2010), at the University of California at San Diego, another group of students thought it would be a good idea to commemorate Black History month by having a party called a "Compton Cookout". There are no photos, but you can read the invitation below or at this link:

"February marks a very important month in American society. No, i'm not referring to Valentines day or Presidents day. I'm talking about Black History month. As a time to celebrate and in hopes of showing respect, the Regents community cordially invites you to its very first Compton Cookout.

For guys: I expect all males to be rockin Jersey's, stuntin' up in ya White T (XXXL smallest size acceptable), anything FUBU, Ecko, Rockawear, High/low top Jordans or Dunks, Chains, Jorts, stunner shades, 59 50 hats, Tats, etc.

For girls: For those of you who are unfamiliar with ghetto chicks-Ghetto chicks usually have gold teeth, start fights and drama, and wear cheap clothes - they consider Baby Phat to be high class and expensive couture. They also have short, nappy hair, and usually wear cheap weave, usually in bad colors, such as purple or bright red. They look and act similar to Shenaynay, and speak very loudly, while rolling their neck, and waving their finger in your face. Ghetto chicks have a very limited vocabulary, and attempt to make up for it, by forming new words, such as "constipulated", or simply cursing persistently, or using other types of vulgarities, and making noises, such as "hmmg!", or smacking their lips, and making other angry noises,grunts, and faces. The objective is for all you lovely ladies to look, act, and essentially take on these "respectable" qualities throughout the day.

Several of the regents condos will be teaming up to house this monstrosity, so travel house to house and experience the various elements of life in the ghetto.We will be serving 40's, Kegs of Natty, dat Purple Drank- which consists of sugar, water, and the color purple , chicken, coolade, and of course Watermelon.

So come one and come all, make ya self before we break ya self, keep strapped, get yo shine on, and join us for a day party to be remembered- or not."

Do you think maybe Disney might think twice before approving that for release onto the air? So what's the difference? Is it alright to make fun of one group of people but not another? Is racism against black or brown folks only wrong because they're the center of so much focus regarding racism? I hardly think so, but here's my larger point: Where do you suppose these kids got the bright idea that it was acceptable to do this sort of thing in the first place? No, I am not placing the blame on Disney, although in my opinion they do have to take ownership for their share of the problem. And if I don't teach my children otherwise, then so do I.

Catering to the Lowest Denominator

It wasn't long ago that I was speaking with a co-worker about why a particular office display was inappropriate. The piece in question was a "Hurt Feelings Report" which is the topic of another post. The point of this post however, is directed at the response I received from having made this correction. After explaining how this display did not coincide with our organization's values and that it would need to be removed, I was presented with the rebuttal that as long as our organization catered to the lowest denominator, we would continue in a downward spiral.

I've encountered this rebuttal before in various forms and phrasing. The basic concept is that once upon time when people weren't so 'sensitive' or 'politically correct', folks along better because we (as a society, or organization, or whatever unit of measure you prefer) didn't have to be so concerned about others' feelings. Let there be no confusion on this point, because this is key. Because those who so often claim to be irritated at "all of this PC stuff", are really irritated because it's inconvenient. That's what it comes down to doesn't it? Having to stop and consider another person's perspective, or heaven forbid actually forgo some of the privilege that enables one to be 'irritated' about something like the civil treatment of another human being because that might require one to recognize that their behavior isn't as acceptable as they would like to believe. You see, not doing this presumably left people ample time to do other, considerably more important things, than say, improving interpersonal communication, work relationships, and other silly things of this nature. But I digress...

"As long as we continue to cater to the lowest denominator..."

          I take issue with this phrase. Mind you, we're discussing people. So what then, does one mean by 'the lowest denominator'? Well, in order to better understand, I looked it up. The majority of the non-mathematical explanations centered on the use of the phrase by certain educators to describe the lowering of standards in the classroom so that all students were on the same proverbial page. At this point, I should mention that while it may not have been the intent of those who originated the phrase, if this can indeed be considered the point of origin, the terminology used seems to reflect a bias that is rooted in the institutional racism which is part of many such classrooms. That also, is part of another discussion...

So, my understanding of the phrase to this point is that the people to whom the phrase refers are considered to be beneath other people by some measure. Additionally, the phrase objectifies them entirely by reducing them to a number and not only a number, but the lowest number. And that's not even getting into the intricacies of what 'Catering' means in this context, but that too strongly resembles privilege if you take a moment and give it consideration.

So, to be fair, I suppose I should try to understand the perspective of those who consider treating people with dignity and respect to be something not worthy of their time because the people to whom we so often refer are not really anything more than a small, little, insignificant number. Something about that just doesn't set well with me. How about you?

White Privilege

Over the past week or so, I have been trying to figure out what the topic of my next post should be. Over the past week, I have also been reading a book by Tim Wise, titled "White Like Me". While it is not my intent to make this post a review of Mr. Wise's book, I wanted to preface this post with that information because I have no doubt that some of the lessons contained within that book will be reflected here.

Before I get to that however, I would like to offer part of something that was developed by a woman named Peggy McIntosh. Mrs. McIntosh states that she used the following questions in order to work on how white privilege affected her daily life. In this regard, she is perhaps best known for her work "White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack". The true effect of answering these questions lies in comparing one's answers with those of people of color.

1. I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.

2. I can avoid spending time with people whom I was trained to mistrust and who have learned to mistrust my kind or me.

3. If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live.

4. I can be pretty sure that my neighbors in such a location will be neutral or pleasant to me.

5. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.

6. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.

7. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization," I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.

8. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.

9. If I want to, I can be pretty sure of finding a publisher for this piece on white privilege.

10. I can be pretty sure of having my voice heard in a group in which I am the only member of my race.

11. I can be casual about whether or not to listen to another person's voice in a group in which s/he is the only member of his/her race.

12. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods which fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can cut my hair.

13. Whether I use checks, credit cards or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial reliability.

14. I can arrange to protect my children most of the time from people who might not like them.

15. I do not have to educate my children to be aware of systemic racism for their own daily physical protection.

16. I can be pretty sure that my children's teachers and employers will tolerate them if they fit school and workplace norms; my chief worries about them do not concern others' attitudes toward their race.

17. I can talk with my mouth full and not have people put this down to my color.

18. I can swear, or dress in second hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty or the illiteracy of my race.

19. I can speak in public to a powerful male group without putting my race on trial.

20. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.

21. I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group.

22. I can remain oblivious of the language and customs of persons of color who constitute the world's majority without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.

23. I can criticize our government and talk about how much I fear its policies and behavior without being seen as a cultural outsider.

24. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk to the "person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.

25. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.

26. I can easily buy posters, post-cards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys and children's magazines featuring people of my race.

27. I can go home from most meetings of organizations I belong to feeling somewhat tied in, rather than isolated, out-of-place, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance or feared.

28. I can be pretty sure that an argument with a colleague of another race is more likely to jeopardize her/his chances for advancement than to jeopardize mine.

29. I can be pretty sure that if I argue for the promotion of a person of another race, or a program centering on race, this is not likely to cost me heavily within my present setting, even if my colleagues disagree with me.

30. If I declare there is a racial issue at hand, or there isn't a racial issue at hand, my race will lend me more credibility for either position than a person of color will have.

31. I can choose to ignore developments in minority writing and minority activist programs, or disparage them, or learn from them, but in any case, I can find ways to be more or less protected from negative consequences of any of these choices.

32. My culture gives me little fear about ignoring the perspectives and powers of people of other races.

33. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.

34. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.

35. I can take a job with an affirmative action employer without having my co-workers on the job suspect that I got it because of my race.

36. If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it had racial overtones.

37. I can be pretty sure of finding people who would be willing to talk with me and advise me about my next steps, professionally.

38. I can think over many options, social, political, imaginative or professional, without asking whether a person of my race would be accepted or allowed to do what I want to do.

39. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.

40. I can choose public accommodation without fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated in the places I have chosen.

41. I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help, my race will not work against me.

42. I can arrange my activities so that I will never have to experience feelings of rejection owing to my race.

43. If I have low credibility as a leader I can be sure that my race is not the problem.

44. I can easily find academic courses and institutions which give attention only to people of my race.

45. I can expect figurative language and imagery in all of the arts to testify to experiences of my race.

46. I can chose blemish cover or bandages in "flesh" color and have them more or less match my skin.

47. I can travel alone or with my spouse without expecting embarrassment or hostility in those who deal with us.

48. I have no difficulty finding neighborhoods where people approve of our household.

49. My children are given texts and classes which implicitly support our kind of family unit and do not turn them against my choice of domestic partnership.

50. I will feel welcomed and "normal" in the usual walks of public life, institutional and social.

I spend a considerable amount of time reviewing material related to race and racism. An element which is related to racism, and one which is necessary for any discussion about it, is that of white privilege. The irony in that statement is that while many white people will claim that they, and the society around them, have absolved themselves of racism, many white people don't have a clue as to what white privilege is. More disappointing is that, even those white people who have been introduced to the term, don't possess an accurate understanding of it. For some, this lack of understanding comes from privilege itself. They don't have to know; their lives will continue unabated whether or not they acknowledge this aspect of it. For others, there is an active resistance to the idea of white privilege because of the uncomfortable feelings with which the acknowledgment of privilege often brings. Some white folks have great difficulty processing the concept that their whiteness has afforded them things which are not afforded to everyone else. To acknowledge this requires that one also acknowledges that the reality which has been packaged and doled out to us is not, in fact, accurate. This is no small thing. For white people to come to terms with the fact that their perception of the world and how it works is not shared by everyone around them and that there are institutional systems in place which favor the majority [read: white folks] is a tough thing to get one's mind around. In fact, the normal initial reaction to a concept like white privilege is the triggering of one's coping mechanisms. Things like denial, rationalization, and minimization offer consolation to the endangered ego, until that person is in a position in which they can assimilate this new information. That is, if one chooses to assimilate the information. See, that's one of the more interesting points about white folks and privilege. We, as white people, have a choice after learning of white privilege. We can internalize the concept, learn both from it and about it, and actively resist it. Or, as Tim Wise so eloquently put it, "just go back to sleep" and forget it.

This post is by no means an in-depth exploration of white privilege and all of its complexities, nor did I intend it to be. Truth be told, this blog is the result of my privilege. It is because of my privilege that I can, as I stated at the beginning of this post, contemplate as to what my next topic should be. As if the social problems on which I comment are closer to fruit hanging from a tree waiting for me to pluck and offer my thoughts rather than real problems with which real people must engage every day. I know that privilege has afforded me this and I feel it is important for me to own that. In resistance to that same privilege, I have chosen to bring the concept out for others to examine. I would encourage everyone [read: especially white folks] to take some time and learn more on this topic. The least one might accomplish in doing so is to expand their knowledge of the human dimension. The most one might accomplish is perhaps to learn more of what is necessary to be human.