i touched on this sort of kind of in another post previously. but it was a much more personal one. this post is mainly inspired and written for a loyal QCP reader who brought this topic up to me in the first place.
correct me if i’m wrong, but when it came to the showdown between mccain and obama, the question and subject of race was not as prevalent or heated as when it was obama versus clinton.
nevertheless, race was still brought up. it always struck me that… pollsters had to break down the the vote of races. who were the hispanics in line with? were the blacks backing up obama? what about those asians? were native americans even mentioned?
when one looks at barack obama, how is he identified? black male. yet immediately following that, there were outcries of, he is not all that black. so what does that phrase mean exactly? does it bother people that something like that had been said about him?
it bothers me. back in august when i talked about identifying with my chinese roots, cultural heritage, identity, i wondered if race was the only factor in producing my identity? it shouldn’t be. but when someone looks at me, they immediately think chinese, not american. look, i’m not particularly good at math, i drive just fine, but yes i love having rice for dinner and i happen to know how to play the piano AND the violin. do any of those above mentioned things make me more or less chinese? apparently it does depending on who is talking to me.
barack obama went to an ivy league law school, is in fact biracial, well spoken, highly intelligent, and doesn’t live in the projects. for some, those factors automatically make him less black (and implicitly, more white?). less black than who exactly? someone who is poorly educated, had two black parents, spoke in ebonics, unintelligent, and does live in the projects? i would like to question those who have a need to question how authentic a black man barack obama is. identifying with your race, as much as it is an in-your-face-obvious-for-anyone-to-see should not be something that is challenged by anyone. excuse me, but it seems to me that someone is out there claiming that they are blacker than obama by saying he is not black enough. so what are the qualifying factors?
how much further do we want to push stereotypes? and who gets to decide?
i think what president elect obama proved by winning this presidential election, among many other great things of course, is that race (we won’t even get into gender) actually isn’t the sole identifying factor for a person’s, well, identity. in my perfect world, i would not be labeled as automatically chinese the minute someone meets me. and what i do, where i live, what i’m good at or bad at, shouldn’t be racial identifiers. perhaps the same could be said for him. the true substance of who i am, what i stand for, and what i believe can and will shine through by the multitude of other attributes that i show to outside world.
at the end of the day, we who truly know who we are, simply do. no one else can challenge that. no one else can dare take that away from us.
cindy
Genevieve
theshrew
Erin
qcpguestblogger
erin f.
6 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 20, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Brinstar
I read an interesting article about this issue. One of the interesting points made in the article is that this kind of nuanced discussion about race in the American public wouldn’t even be taking place 10 or 20 years ago. I think it’s good that America is actually talking about race, but I’m really disappointed that people think racism is dead now that we have a mixed race President.
November 24, 2008 at 9:24 am
theshrew
So just like I know nothing about “economics,” I am going to qualify this comment by saying that I know just as little about “race.” There are experts out there, and they probably have a stance on this. I’m just talking from the gut here.
I have to disagree with it being a good thing to be talking about race. All it does is connect some of those factors Cindy mentioned (skin color, socioeconomic status, education, capability-or-lack-thereof-at-math, which on a tangent NPR was talking about the other day and it was quite fascinating), and tie it to a single word.
Why not talk about “socioeconomic status”? We’re talking about it a TON anyway with the economy. How did the “families with single parents and more than one kid making less than the poverty level” vote in the election? What about “where you live”? Okay, that isn’t the right term, but how did Americans in “rural areas in the southern states” vote? And is it still that divided, that we really need to know how “black” vs. “white” Americans in rural areas in the southern states voted? If those are two completely separate communities, then yes, I suppose we still need to be talking about race, but that really makes me sad.
No, racism is not dead, but I don’t think dividing everything into race helps kill it. Look at the $*$i$@%!#& (I don’t know what word that is, but think of it as a really bad one) bigots like Tony Perkins (www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTySVskUcrU) trying to pit the “black voters” against other groups because of their choices on November 4th! It’s just a new and somewhat vanilla way to keep racism alive.
November 24, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Brinstar
I don’t want to make undue assumptions, theshrew, but are you white? If you are white, then one of the reasons that you can afford to say that you don’t think it’s a good thing to be talking about race is that your race probably has a negligible detrimental effect in your everday life. In fact, if you are white, your race probably gives you unearned advantages — privileges — that you would not have if you had been born brown or black or any other non-dominant race in America.
You say that you don’t think you know much about race. The concept of privilege in race relations is incredibly important to understanding the situation that minorities face everyday, as well as in being a good ally and friend to people of colour. Peggy McIntosh’s essay on white privilege is probably one of the most famous writings on the concept, and I encourage you to read it.
The decision to discuss race as compared with other issues isn’t mutually exclusive. Talking about race is important. Talking about race and racism doesn’t necessarily mean that the discussion has to be about division. It can be one of learning and understanding. You yourself said that you know very little about race. Well, why not challenge yourself to learn more about it? Racism will never die if misguided people continue to cling to the stupid concept of being “colour blind”. Being colour blind doesn’t work, because at the end of the day, white people are the dominant race in the United States and so far being colour blind hasn’t solved anything. What is important is discussion, understanding the perspectives of minority groups without feeling defensive, building relationships, forming alliances.
When white people do racist shit in the media, other white people have to call them out on their shit. It can’t all be black and brown people telling them, “Hey this is wrong”. Until white people start to critically examine themselves more, racism will never die. People like Tony Perkins will continue to be racist shits. If black people told him that he was being racist, do you think he’d listen? No, because he’s a racist asshole. He’ll only listen to people he considers to be peers — other white people. Even then it might not get through, but little by little change will happen.
November 24, 2008 at 6:52 pm
theshrew
Agreed Brinstar – being “color blind” isn’t what I was getting at. What I was trying to say, is that the ways in which we are currently talking about race…and I don’t know that I’d so much say we were “talking about” it as using it as pivot points during this election…seem to be more divisive than helping solve the issue of racism. Yes, I am a white person. And the idea that I am in any way similar to the “white people” I am lumped in with when we talk about the “white vote” – those who voted for Palin, who yelled “Kill him” at McPalin rallies, who brutally murdered a gay man and dragged a black man behind their car in Texas – makes me angry. Being “white” doesn’t automatically make me a racist piece of shit, but the way we talk about demographics in this country makes it seem that way.
Yes, I am speaking against people like Tony Perkins, but that doesn’t mean I think we should be talking about this election in terms of race. If you want to talk about the “Mormon vote” for Prop 8, that makes total sense. In the grand scheme of things, one chooses to be Mormon. One does not choose to be a particular race. If we are assuming that “black” and “white” and “Latino” and “Native American” are each blanket terms for an entire culture, we’re behind the times. As Cindy said, “race isn’t the sole identifying factor” of a person.
I will definitely read that essay when I get a chance. White privilege is a whole ‘nother issue!
November 25, 2008 at 7:59 am
cindy
i dont believe that talking about race can and should be a divisive issue. it is only as divisive as you or the person you’re conversing with makes it. and it’s best to adopt an attitude that is not defensive. one problem in regard to talking about race that i see is that a) people get automatically lumped together… you say “white” and any white person in the room thinks, “is he talking to/about me?, etc. and b) it often perpetuates negative stereotyping that is already so prevalent and fast to spread in our media centered world.
race shouldn’t be such a taboo subject. and while talking about it some is better than not talking about it at all, the way we have been talking about race has seemingly been more divisive than constructive. so theshrew, i
on the other hand, it’s best not to be ruled by cynicism when discussing race. ingrained social problems and issues shouldn’t be dismissed because they are seemingly too difficult to solve or address. those, especially for those reasons, should be looked at and mulled over ten times more.
December 2, 2008 at 9:22 am
bill
I believe our individual differences should be appreciated and celebrated. It’s unfortunate we are forced to defend against those who use stereotypes or express otherwise ignorant race-based views.