...which I only picked because I am still amused at how the label "African-American" applies more exactly to him than usual, and therefore doesn't apply at all.
I enjoyed the comments on TWiB about gentrification.
Tiger Woods, a sportsman not normally known for political commentary, made some interesting comments about Obama being "multi-racial" and "representing America" on CNBC.
I'm sure you know which way I voted on this. You're right, choice of identity is important.
I can guess ;). And yeah, I don't think of Woods as someone who talks about race a whole lot (but most of what I know about him is filtered through other people, since I basically don't follow sports, and def. not golf in particular).
The gentrification bit was my favorite part, too. Well that and the throwaway bit about Snuffy at the end.
I think the most important thing for white people to think about is that, on the whole, black people and white people don't talk about race the same way. I mean, obviously there are exceptions, but I think this is a fair generalization. I suspect this is part of why conversations about race are so frustrating -- we're not starting from the same priors. And it'd be hard to, especially when we're so de-facto segregated. It's easy for white people never to come across a black person talking openly about his/her experience with race and racism. I mean, if I were black I don't think I'd go there with whites -- too much potential for aggro. Especially if you're the only black one in the room; it's easy for everyone to just kind of stare at you waiting for the Black Perspective. Or so I imagine.
That's why I think Obama's speech in the spring was so important -- he went there, and now seems to be the time to deal with it.
I have been wondering in my head for the last day what mileage can be gotten from an analogy to America's problems in talking openly about sex. I mean, it's not really a problem today, or at least not the same problem...! But certainly a few decades ago it was pretty taboo. The similarities I see: they are high-stakes conversational topics with a lot of moral and social judgment riding on responding in the "right" way; and what you were brought up to believe may not actually be very helpful in the heat of the moment when you're clumsily trying to share yourself with another person, because they may have been brought up to believe different things, which they also might not know how to talk about. Clearly there are differences too; I'm just thinking out loud.
People are scared (apes are fearful). Scared of what others might think if they say the word "black." A reaction to the 1960's? Is this like how ashamed Germans are of association with the Nazis? I feel like there is some complacency after the Civil Rights turmoil and this has slowed down The Discussion. A plateau.
I know I'm not alone in feeling that the black clergy and other prominent leaders have failed to acknowledge parallels with the struggle for homosexual equal rights. There have been some good political cartoons lately that address that.
So, I didn't answer the question because, while I do support people's right to self-identify into whatever group they prefer, I'm deeply uncomfortable with the way that America views racial identity. Like Jews in pre-WWII Europe, there's this sense that even a drop of blood from the minority group sets you apart: in other words, taints you. So Obama, who is 50% white genetically (to whatever extent race is in genes, which is very tiny!) AND raised in a predominantly-white environment, gets labeled as "black" by anyone who sees him.
I didn't check "isn't really black," because I don't want to deny his self-identity. But at the same time, I feel like the automatic instinct to call him black promotes a social understanding of race that can be deeply problematic.
... or, choosing not to call him that denies a social understanding of race that is the one we're living with, and therefore is a choice to ignore an important aspect of reality.
I think both you and cos are right to some degree: it is problematic, but it's a problem we inherited and can't fix by changing the labels. Especially not when the labels are so linked to community.
You know what racial labeling I find far creepier? The identity cards for Natives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_of_Degree_of_Indian_Blood). In some ways, I think the concept of "taint" is given more play when you do talk specifics of what races and how much of each.
Or to America of the past where there were terms for different degrees of "white blood" in a slave. And the idea of "passing as white" if you were "really black" but say only a sixteenth and thus "looked white".
I think race as we use it has many elements. There is the issue of identity, which race you identify with. There is also the issue of how you are perceived. If people look at you and think "white" your experiences will be different than if people look at you and think "black". Then there is also the issue of culture. Then there is the issue of genetic heritage... the racial divisions we make are kinda crap from that perspective, but there are some medical things known to be correlated with race, and if you're working out what medical care to have with your doctor then you care a lot more about the genetics (and maybe the culture if environmental effects are relevant...).
There may be other issues as well. but that's what comes to mind. I actually first saw listings like that breaking down the components of an identity using categories like that for sexuality, but I think it can apply to a lot of ways in which we loabel people.
We think the labels are simple, but they never are.
But then, I still am not sure what answer to give if someone asks me if I'm Jewish, since Jewish is used to mean multiple things.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-12 11:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-12 11:43 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-13 12:02 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-13 12:17 am (UTC)www.thisweekinblackness.com. It's only four minutes; you totally have time to watch it and enjoy the awesomeness.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-13 12:57 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-13 02:19 am (UTC)Tiger Woods, a sportsman not normally known for political commentary, made some interesting comments about Obama being "multi-racial" and "representing America" on CNBC.
I'm sure you know which way I voted on this. You're right, choice of identity is important.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-13 03:05 am (UTC)The gentrification bit was my favorite part, too. Well that and the throwaway bit about Snuffy at the end.
I think the most important thing for white people to think about is that, on the whole, black people and white people don't talk about race the same way. I mean, obviously there are exceptions, but I think this is a fair generalization. I suspect this is part of why conversations about race are so frustrating -- we're not starting from the same priors. And it'd be hard to, especially when we're so de-facto segregated. It's easy for white people never to come across a black person talking openly about his/her experience with race and racism. I mean, if I were black I don't think I'd go there with whites -- too much potential for aggro. Especially if you're the only black one in the room; it's easy for everyone to just kind of stare at you waiting for the Black Perspective. Or so I imagine.
That's why I think Obama's speech in the spring was so important -- he went there, and now seems to be the time to deal with it.
I have been wondering in my head for the last day what mileage can be gotten from an analogy to America's problems in talking openly about sex. I mean, it's not really a problem today, or at least not the same problem...! But certainly a few decades ago it was pretty taboo. The similarities I see: they are high-stakes conversational topics with a lot of moral and social judgment riding on responding in the "right" way; and what you were brought up to believe may not actually be very helpful in the heat of the moment when you're clumsily trying to share yourself with another person, because they may have been brought up to believe different things, which they also might not know how to talk about. Clearly there are differences too; I'm just thinking out loud.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-14 12:51 am (UTC)I know I'm not alone in feeling that the black clergy and other prominent leaders have failed to acknowledge parallels with the struggle for homosexual equal rights. There have been some good political cartoons lately that address that.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-13 05:32 am (UTC)I didn't check "isn't really black," because I don't want to deny his self-identity. But at the same time, I feel like the automatic instinct to call him black promotes a social understanding of race that can be deeply problematic.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-13 07:08 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-13 12:49 pm (UTC)You know what racial labeling I find far creepier? The identity cards for Natives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_of_Degree_of_Indian_Blood). In some ways, I think the concept of "taint" is given more play when you do talk specifics of what races and how much of each.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-13 05:30 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-25 02:23 am (UTC)I think race as we use it has many elements. There is the issue of identity, which race you identify with. There is also the issue of how you are perceived. If people look at you and think "white" your experiences will be different than if people look at you and think "black". Then there is also the issue of culture. Then there is the issue of genetic heritage... the racial divisions we make are kinda crap from that perspective, but there are some medical things known to be correlated with race, and if you're working out what medical care to have with your doctor then you care a lot more about the genetics (and maybe the culture if environmental effects are relevant...).
There may be other issues as well. but that's what comes to mind. I actually first saw listings like that breaking down the components of an identity using categories like that for sexuality, but I think it can apply to a lot of ways in which we loabel people.
We think the labels are simple, but they never are.
But then, I still am not sure what answer to give if someone asks me if I'm Jewish, since Jewish is used to mean multiple things.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-13 07:06 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-13 12:25 pm (UTC)