Are African-Americans Black Enough or Anglo Americans Too White?
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
This year, perhaps more than any time in the past, Americans are reminded of race relations each and every day. On televisions, on the radio, airwaves are filled with talk of the current Presidential campaign. For the first time in this nation's history, a viable Presidential hopeful is not a white. Barack Obama is a Black man; he is profound and has purpose. Early on, Anglo Americans, and even some people of color, wondered if Obama authentically represented African-Americans. Countless inquired of Obama's experience, not in Congress, but in the ghettos of this country. The prominent periodical, Time Magazine, published a cover story titled, "Is Obama Black Enough? As Sociologists assess, there is reason to believe another question is apt, "Are Caucasians white enough, or are they too white to understand the Black experience?"
The Black experience is as all other occurrences. Each is unique to the individual. Nevertheless, in a society where clear delineations are evident, we can observe, life as an African-American is not as easy. Circumstances common among Blacks are unthinkable to Caucasians. Anglos rarely appreciate persons of color are not truly different, only the conditions they live under vary.
While white Americans are happy to acknowledge that the Black man or woman they work with, as a singular person, is wonderful, Caucasians are quick to avow, that the individual they know is not like the rest of "those" people. Pinkish people do not understand. Hence . . .
Whites Underestimate the Costs of Being Black
Columbus, Ohio – How much do white Americans think it “costs” to be black in our society, given the problems associated with racial bias and prejudice?The answer, it appears, is not much.
When white Americans were asked to imagine how much they would have to be paid to live the rest of their lives as a black person, most requested relatively low amounts, generally less than $10,000.
In contrast, study participants said they would have to be paid about $1 million to give up television for the rest of their lives.
The results suggest most white Americans don't truly comprehend the persisting racial disparities in our country, said Philip Mazzocco, co-author of the study and assistant professor of psychology at Ohio State University's Mansfield campus.
“The costs of being black in our society are very well documented,” Mazzocco said. “Blacks have significantly lower income and wealth, higher levels of poverty, and even shorter life spans, among many other disparities, compared to whites.”
For example, white households average about $150,000 more wealth than the typical black family. Overall, total wealth for white families is about five times greater than that of black families, a gap that has persisted for years.
“When whites say they would need $1 million to give up TV, but less than $10,000 to become black, that suggests they don't really understand the extent to which African Americans, as a group, are disadvantaged,” Mazzocco said.
What Anglos do understand are the generalizations they hold dear. Black persons are different than whites, and they are, in large part because a society that favors people of pinkish paler hues has created a cast system that bars African-Americans from achieving as they might.
Incomes are lower, access to adequate educational facilities are few. Health Care coverage is out of reach for those with limited opportunity and wealth. Discrimination against those whose color differs from the main is ample. In the abstract, Anglo Americans grasp that those placed lower on the socio-economic ladder suffer. White Americans know they would not wish to live as a Black American does.
[I]n one study, whites were told to imagine that they were about to be born as a random white person in America, but they were being offered a cash gift to be born as a random black person. Once again, white participants requested relatively small sums to make a life-long race-change. In addition, some were given a list of some of the costs of being black in America, such as the racial wealth disparity. The result was that whites in this latter scenario requested significantly higher amounts than those in the previous studies – about $500,000.Finally, some participants were given a similar scenario except all references to blacks, whites, and America were taken out. They were asked to imagine they were born into the fictional country of Atria, and were born either into the “majority” or “minority” population. They were given a list of the disadvantages that the minority population faced in Atria (which were identical to the real disadvantages faced by blacks in America). In this case, white participants in the study said they should be paid an average of $1 million to be born as a minority member in Atria.
“When you take it out of the black-white context, white Americans seem to fully appreciate the costs associated with the kinds of disparities that African Americans actually face in the United States,” Mazzocco said. “In this case, they asked for a million dollars, similar to what they want for giving up television.”Mazzocco said blatant prejudice was not the reason for the findings. Results showed that whites who scored higher on a measure of racial prejudice did not answer significantly differently than others in the study.
Often those who are out of touch with what is true for another are not knowingly bigoted. As children, we learn to believe as we do. Most Americans are oblivious, no matter how well informed they, we might be.
However, if we are honest with ourselves, people know what is philosophically true for them personally, may not be valid. We are each similar, yet, never the same. A human desire to categorize places us in jeopardy. When we define others, or ourselves as Black or white we cripple our communities, as evident through statistical data. The numbers speak volumes, so too do people if we bother to ask them of their values.
Social Scientists surveyed those of disparate groups, and discovered what we could know intellectually. Those who physically do and do not resemble us share our values. Although experiences may be divergent, we need only think of our siblings to realize the adage "All men are created equal," does not mean every being is identical in appearance; nevertheless, essentially we are related. My blue eyed-sister is not as I am. She sees the world through her own lens. A brown-eyed brother cannot think, say, do, feel, or be as me. Still, we are akin. Biologically persons may be similar. They are never the same; nor are there stark contrasts.
Every human values principles that honor all men, women, and children unvaryingly. Innately, two-legged creatures crave caring connections. We all want to have the rights reverence affords, just as our brethren do. Every person is made of blood, sweat, and tears. Humans have inherent worth. Shared ignorance does not allow people to act on our deepest beliefs. the essence of our beauty is not just skin deep. It is part of our being whether we are Black or white.
Researchers remind us, in November 2007, it is time to "Redefine What It Means to Be Black in America." The Social and Demographic division of Pew Research Center, in conjunction with National Public Radio surveyed a large group of Americans, a large portion of those who participated were Black. This fact alone sets this report apart from earlier examinations which most relied on data from white Americans. The review titled, Blacks See Growing Values Gap Between Poor and Middle Class, Optimism about Black Progress Declines, we discover the times and trends are changing, or perhaps our awareness of what is has been altered. Many African-Americans do not identify themselves with the accepted definition of Black.
A Single Race?
Another revelatory finding in the Pew poll is that 37 percent of African Americans now agree that it is no longer appropriate to think of black people as a single race. A little more than half of the black people polled, 53 percent, agreed that it is right to view blacks as a single race. And the people most likely to say blacks are no longer a single race are young black people, ages 18-29.Forty-four percent of those young black people say there is no one black race anymore, as compared to 35 percent of the 30- to 49-year-old black population, and 34 percent of the black people over age 65.
The split in the black race comes down to a matter of values, according to the poll. In response to the question, "Have the values of middle-class and poor blacks become more similar or more different?" 61 percent of black Americans said "more different." White Americans agreed, with 54 percent saying there is a growing values gap between the black middle class and the black poor; 45 percent of Hispanics agreed, too.
At the same time, 72 percent of whites, 54 percent of blacks, and 60 percent of Hispanics agree that in the last 10 years, "values held by black people and the values held by white people (have) become more similar."
While the ethos may appear equivalent, upon closer examination a variance among respondents emerges. In nationwide telephone interviews, with a representative sample of 3,086 adults, conducted from September 5-October 6, 2007, we learn what an "over-sampled" total of 1007 African Americans, 388 Hispanics, and 1671 Anglos believe.
Big gaps in perception between blacks and whites emerge on many topics. For example, blacks believe that anti-black discrimination is still pervasive in everyday life; whites disagree. And blacks have far less confidence than whites in the basic fairness of the criminal justice system.
Over the past two decades, blacks have lost some confidence in the effectiveness of leaders within their community, including national black political figures, the clergy, and the NAACP. A sizable majority of blacks still see all of these groups as either very or somewhat effective, but the number saying "very" effective has declined since 1986.
These statements may correlate to what is real for too many African-Americans. Income Gap Between Blacks, Whites Expands. The Brookings Institute in cooperation with National Public Radio revealed in a recent report, while Black Americans can no longer be thought of as a distinct group, if they ever were, as a whole, people of color have not benefited from a "free and open" society, as Caucasians have. Anglos remain oblivious. Intolerant attitudes inform whites. The same bigoted perspectives hinder an ability to relate, and recognize how different the Black experience is.
Again, in November 2007, Americans were given an opportunity to assess the clash bias has created. In a culture, founded on the principles of equality, Americans prefer to practice prejudiced policies. In the United States, people whose skin is dark are not afforded the opportunities bestowed upon their counterparts, Caucasian Americans.
Economic Mobility of Black and White FamiliesIn brief, trends show that median family incomes have risen for both black and white families, but less so for black families. Moreover, the intergenerational analysis reveals a significant difference in the extent to which parents are able to pass their economic advantages onto their children. Whereas children of white middle-income parents tend to exceed their parents in income, a majority of black children of middle-income parents fall below their parents in income and economic status. These findings are provided in more detail below.
Median family income for both black and white families has increased over the last 30 years, but income gaps still persist.
Between 1974 and 2004, white and black men in their 30s experienced a decline in income, with the largest decline among black men. However, median family incomes for both racial groups increased, because of large increases in women's incomes. Income growth was particularly high for white women.The lack of income growth for black men combined with low marriage rates in the black population has had a negative impact on trends in family income for black families.
There was no progress in reducing the gap in family income between blacks and whites. In 2004, median family income of blacks ages 30 to 39 was only 58 percent that of white families in the same age group ($35,000 for blacks compared to $60,000 for whites).
Black children grow up in families with much lower income than white children.
White children are more likely to surpass parents' income than black children at a similar point in the income distribution.
Overall, approximately two out of three blacks (63 percent) exceed their parents' income after the data are adjusted for inflation, similar to the percentage for whites.However, a majority of blacks born to middle-income parents grow up to have less income than their parents. Only 31 percent of black children born to parents in the middle of the income distribution have family income greater than their parents, compared to 68 percent of white children from the same income bracket. . . .
White children are more likely to move up the ladder while black children are more likely to fall down.
Startlingly, almost half (45 percent) of black children whose parents were solidly middle class end up falling to the bottom of the income distribution, compared to only 16 percent of white children. Achieving middle-income status does not appear to protect black children from future economic adversity the same way it protects white children.Black children from poor families have poorer prospects than white children from such families. More than half (54 percent) of black children born to parents in the bottom quintile stay in the bottom, compared to 31 percent of white children.
Perhaps, the way in which the Black population experiences income inequity and discrimination, accounts for the lack of confidence in African-American leaders among the population, or did until very recently. In the Fall of 2007, before the first caucus in Iowa or the initial primary ballots in New Hampshire were cast, people of color in the United States expressed a glimmer of hope. While many people whose skin cast a brownish-purple hue were devoted to the Clinton campaign, they recognized that Barack Obama shed a powerful light on the issue of color. Again, the Pew Research Center, Social and Demographic Trends division concluded . . .
The most newsworthy African American figure in politics today - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama - draws broadly (though not intensely felt) favorable ratings from both blacks and whites. But blacks are more inclined to say that his race will detract from his chances to be elected president; whites are more inclined to say his relative inexperience will hurt his chances.
Three-quarters of blacks (76%) say that Obama is a good influence on the black community. Even greater numbers say this about Oprah Winfrey (87%) and Bill Cosby (85%), who are the most highly regarded by blacks from among 14 black newsmakers tested in this survey. By contrast, just 17% of blacks say that rap artist 50 Cent is a good influence.
Months prior to these results a conversation ensued that may have helped to alter a long accepted perception. The son of a white woman from Kansas, whose father was native to Kenya, Barack Obama was asked, "How important is race in defining yourself?" Perhaps, esteemed Senator, and Presidential candidate, Obama spoke for many African-Americans, most of whom understand their bloodline may be mixed. He might have also addressed what Anglo Americans understand, if not consciously. No matter the color of our skin, few of us are purebred. While people may presume to know who we are based on a preconceived notion, we are all more than our appearance. [If only as a society, we acted on this veracity.]
Obama: I think all of us in America and particularly African-Americans have to think about race at some point in our lives. The way I like to think about it, I am rooted in the African-American community, but I'm not defined by it. I am comfortable in my racial identity and recognize that I'm part of a very specific set of experiences in this country, but that's not the core of who I am. Another way of saying is that's not all I am . . .One of the things that helped me to resolve a lot of these issues is the realization that the African-American community, which I'm now very much feel a part of, is itself a hybrid community. It's African. It's European. It's Native American. So it's much more difficult to define what the essential African-American experience is, at least more difficult than what popular culture would allow.
What I also realized is that the American experience is, by definition, a hybrid experience. I mean, you know one of the strengths of this country is that we have these people coming from, you know, all four corners of the globe converging, and sometimes in conflict, living side by side, and over time coming together to create this tapestry that is incredibly strong.
And so, in that sense, I feel that my background ironically, because it's unusual, is quintessentially American.
Americans of any race know that their ancestry is likely mixed. Whites are not pedigrees; nor are Blacks. Yet, pinkish people feel they can or must delineate when they define a dark complexioned person. Too often, in the United States, an African-American is described by their visible lineage, set apart because of the color of their skin. Yet, what of whites? How do we classify a paler person who may be part Irish, Italian, German, or English?
Apparently, a year ago, in February 2007, 60 Minutes Host Steve Kroft thought he knew what it meant to be Anglo or to be raised among white people. Mister Kroft made repeated references to the candidate's Caucasian mother, and Obama's childhood history. He said, "You spent most of your life in a white household." "I mean, you grew up white." "You were raised in a white household?" These statements were presented as though they were significant. The presumption was, in a white home people think, say, do, feel, and are different than those in a Black family. The evidence says this is not so. Yet, the myth remains firm. Hence, the journalist offered an observation, odd as it may be to some.
Kroft: [A]t some point, you decided that you were black?
The answer might have informed Black and white alike. The response may have encouraged African-Americans to be more vocal by the time they were surveyed nine months later. Possibly, the response had no influence. After centuries of racial discrimination, Black person may just be sick and tired of being sick and tired.
Whatever the reason for the realizations that emerged in the Pew Research report, finally, there is an incentive to believe. Hope is alive. A Black American, or many African-Americans, together, can change the persistent culture.
Presidential aspirant, Senator Obama spoke a truth that rattled a rigid reality. Stereotypes are exactly that. They need not characterize any of us, nor do we, as a nation need to endorse what divides us. Barack Obama explained . . .
Well, I'm not sure I decided it. I think if you look African-American in this society, you're treated as an African-American. And when you're a child, in particular that is how you begin to identify yourself. At least that's what I felt comfortable identifying myself as . . .[T]here is racial prejudice in our society that we do continue to carry the historical legacy of Jim Crow and slavery. We've never fully addressed that. It manifests itself in much higher rates of poverty and violence and lack of educational achievement in minority communities. But I know in my heart that there is a core decency to the American people, and that decency can be tapped.
I think America is at the point now where if a white person has the time to get to know who you are, that they are willing on average to look beyond race and judge you as an individual. That doesn't mean that they've stopped making snap judgments. It doesn't mean that before I was Barack Obama, and I was just Barack Obama, that if I got into an elevator, a woman might not clutch her purse a little tighter. Or if I'm walking down the street, that you might not hear some clicks of doors locking, right. I mean, there's still a host of stereotypes that I think a lot of people are operating under. But I think if they have time to get to know you, they will judge you as they would judge anybody else, and I think that's enormous progress.
We've made progress. Yes, things are better. But better is not good enough. And we've still got a long way to go.
Indeed, America has much to do as a nation if we are to heal what has harmed us as a people. If this country is to be truly healthy and authentically honorable, we must act as equals. To allow Black Americans to suffer at the hands of "compassionate" Caucasians, to deny the similarities, and amplify the differences does not bode well. A man, woman, or child must be judged by the quality of his character, not the color of his skin. Let us have the courage of our convictions. It is time to create a culture of community.
~ Soren Kierkegaard [Danish Philosopher]
Sources and Stereotypes . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on February 18, 2008 at 01:45 PM in American Dream, Americana, Being Black in America, Black History, Past/Present, Black Men, Civil Rights, Communities, Economics, Education, Effects of Poverty , Income Inequity | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Race Relations in America; Colormute, Not Colorblind
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
In any Presidential election year, we hear of the race. Yet, discussions of "race" are void, or are since a truce was tendered. Americas would like to think of themselves as colorblind. We are not. Citizens of this country embrace “colormuteness, a term coined by Mica Pollock, Associate Professor of Education at Harvard University. What Professor Pollock observes in classrooms and in the hallways of schools throughout the nation occurs each day on the campaign trail. Children who wish to achieve excellence in the classroom are restricted by conventions they learned at an early age in our nation's communities.
When a young Caucasian child encounters a Black being, if they have never seen a person with a dark complexion, may point, tug at the a parent's trouper, point, and say, "Mom, Why is his skin so brown?" A lass might inquisitively exclaim, "Daddy, What is wrong with her complexion? Characteristically, Mother or Father will say, "Shush! It is not polite to point." Then the parent will pass on the message that they learned at their parent's knee. That communication will vary dependent on the family. Nonetheless, what is true, no matter who the guardian might be, the tone will be hushed. The tot will learn, we do not discuss the differences in skin tone or facial features.
What we were taught in our youth resonates in adult life. We see it on the campaign trail. Certain topics are acceptable and the one is forbidden. This etiquette is evident in our most recent election. Criticism is fine, as long as we do not broach the single most sensitive subject, "race," as it relates to the color of one's skin.
Candidates compete as they sprint towards the White House. They rack up the votes, and rail against their rivals. As Presidential hopefuls run for the Oval Office, they find themselves embroiled in discordant campaigns. Whatever they might say, the electorate will react. A delicate balance must be maintained.
Attack advertisements will fill the airwaves. Hurdles will be jumped in an attempt to make an opponent look or sound bad. The war veteran is no hero, and the soldier who stayed behind did not truly serve. In cyberspace, the calculations are conventional. The conversation can be extremely cruel. Religion will rule if he or she becomes President. His or her faith is not "right." His wife, her husband is [fill in the blank.] Can a damsel deliver as Commander-In-Chief, or will a drama result in her distress. However, the question that is addressed tentatively is, "Is America ready for a Black President?"
Americans are intimately familiar with the scandals. Constituents have witnessed what a little gossip can do. Within each campaign, people observe divisiveness. The demise of a fellow Democrat is fine. A rival Republican can ridicule another with reason. All is fair in love and war. While an aspirant may be fond of Party loyalty, in a Presidential campaign, faithfulness and friendship are not generously applied to adversaries. It is important to focus on differences if a candidate wishes to be the nominee for his or her Party, as long as the variation in skin color is not mentioned.
Our countrymen think it vital to understand Mitt Romney is a Mormon. The public believes it is important to contemplate, Mike Huckabee is a Preacher. It is grand that Hillary Clinton is a woman, but do we need to say aloud, Barack Obama is Black.
Sure, the words are said and the response is consistent. "It should not make a difference." Yet, it does. No one wishes to be labeled a bigot. As adults, individuals recall what their parents said, "African-Americans are people too," or one would hope they were thought to be in the United States. Still, each citizen of this country understands, Black people fight for parity. Even when conditions and circumstances improve for African-Americans, a few thrive, most struggle to survive.
Our Constitution claims "all men are created equal." However, in the States it seems that has never been the case. While Americans are proud of the fact that finally they can choose to vote for someone who is not white, they do not wish to speak of "race," only of the race. Ah, how well-trained Americans are.
Supposedly, citizens have progressed beyond our repressive roots. However, in truth, racism is rampant. Just as Americans have done in past Presidential election years, and do each day of our existence, we place one "race" above another.
Being Black in the United States is a topic discussed among those who are, and balked at by persons who rather believe themselves without bias. Carefully colormuted Caucasians do not wish to admit that that the sight of a dark skinned person can cause them to tightly clutch the pocketbook that hung loosely at their side. Anglos do not wish to confess that they feel an the urge to clench a fist, or place keys between their fingers, just in case they need to use the pieces of metal as a weapon when in the presence of a person whose complexion is a purplish-brown.
Few white individuals will tell of how they tremble when near an African-American stranger. Fortunately, many need not think of what they might do if a Black individual was near. In the United States, numerous neighborhoods are segregated, sometimes subtly, often overtly.
"Is it true that "Anna" stands for "Ain't No N*gg*rs Allowed?" I asked at the convenience store in Anna, Illinois, where I had stopped to buy coffee."Yes," the clerk replied. "That's sad, isn't it," she added, distancing herself from the policy. And she went on to assure me, "That all happened a long time ago."
"I understand [racial exclusion] is still going on?" I asked.
"Yes," she replied. "That's sad."
~ conversation with clerk, Anna, Illinois, October, 2001Anna is a town of about 7,000 people, including adjoining Jonesboro. The twin towns lie about 35 miles north of Cairo, in Southern Illinois. In 1909, in the aftermath of a horrific nearby "spectacle lynching," Anna and Jonesboro expelled their African Americans. Both cities have been all-white ever since. Nearly a century later, "Anna" is still considered by its residents and by citizens of nearby towns to mean "Ain't No N*gge*s Allowed," the acronym the convenience store clerk confirmed in 2001.
It is common knowledge that African Americans are not allowed to live in Anna, except for residents of the state mental hospital and transients at its two motels. African Americans who find themselves in Anna and Jonesboro after dark — the majority-black basketball team from Cairo, for example — have been treated badly by residents of the towns and by fans and students of Anna-Jonesboro High School.
Towns like Anna and Jonesboro are often called "sundown towns," owing to the signs that many of them formerly sported at their corporate limits — signs that usually said, "N*gge*r, Don't Let The Sun Go Down On You In ____." Anna-Jonesboro had such signs on Highway 127 as recently as the 1970s. In some areas, these communities were known as "sunset towns" and, in the Ozarks, "gray towns." In the East, although many communities excluded African Americans, the term "sundown town" itself was rarely used. Residents of all-white suburbs also usually avoided the term, though not the policy. . .
The overlooking of sundown towns, stands in sharp contrast to the attention bestowed upon that other violent and extralegal race relations practice, lynching. The literature on lynching is vast, encompassing at least 500 and perhaps thousands of volumes; at this point, we have at least one book for every ten confirmed lynchings. Still the books keep coming; Amazon.com listed 126 for sale in 2004.
Yet, lynchings have ceased in America. Sundown towns, on the other hand, continue to this day.
Nonetheless, the threat of such an act looms large in the United States. In the enlightened era of the Twenty-First century, Americans have discussed or dismissed the appearance of nooses throughout our homeland. More than a year passed before the mainstream media reported on the appearance of three nooses hung on a tree in Jena, Louisiana. Naturally, the incident was said to be a Southern phenomenon. However, weeks after a march on the city, in support of Civil Rights, another hangman's rope was displayed on the office door of a Black faculty member at the Teachers College at Columbia University. At a prestigious, Northern educational institution of higher learning, Americans were subject to lessons from the past. In this nation, Blacks, regardless of their economic status, or social stature are not safe; nor are they respected as peers.
Granted, the goodly among us will state as Lee C. Bollinger, President of Columbia University, declared, “This is an assault on African-Americans and therefore it is an assault on every one of us;” however, unless we speak of the unmentionable, those not victim to an attack, cannot imagine the wounds. Niceties do not heal the invisible and deep scars. Wounds are easily opened for they were never attended to. Colorblind as Caucasians allege to be, they are not cured of the ills of prejudice.
Only weeks ago, Americans again observed how easily we move from the topic of racial discrimination to decrees of settlement. No harm done, no words of division will be uttered. The offender and the offended do not discuss inequity, injustice, insults, and intolerance; the reality of race relations is left behind. School grounds, the campaign scene, and the world of sports are as the streets of America, battlegrounds for bigotry. Yet, in each of these venues, participants replace the actual topic with another. Apologies suffice. Our parents would be proud. Americans can admit when they are wrong and move on, or pretend to.
When Golf Channel commentator Kelly Tilghman joked on-air during the second round of the Mercedes-Benz Championship that ambitious young players should "lynch (Tiger Woods) in a back alley," she set off yet another incidence of the stagecraft that passes for racial discourse in this country, with a tragic moment followed by the requisite scenes of accusation, remorse and demands for the protagonist's head, all backed by a chorus of conflicting voices echoing to the rafters.There were plenty of soliloquies but distressingly little dialogue and no catharsis. For her part Tilghman was held accountable through a public scolding by the punditocracy and a two-week suspension by her employer; but for me, there's another, far more interesting character in this drama — Tiger Woods. . . .
Whether Woods likes it or not, the episode serves to remind him, and everyone else, that regardless of how he attempts to transcend race with his accomplishments on the golf course, he can never fully escape his status as a person of color.
Much the way the fried-chicken-and-collard-greens joke Fuzzy Zoeller made at the 1997 Masters pushed Woods into the role of African-American Golfer, Tilghman's gaffe reinforces his heritage and its burdens, lumping Tiger in with the estimated 5,000 men who were lynched in America between Reconstruction and the Civil Rights movement of the '60s. . . .
For his part Tiger was quick to forgive and forget, saying through his agent, Mark Steinberg, that the incident was a "nonissue" and later releasing a statement that said, "Regardless of the choice of words used, we know unequivocally that there was no ill intent in her comments."
Rarely does the individual who delivers a racist epithet mean to offend. The child who points does not intend to hurt someone's feelings. The parent who speaks in hushed tones purposely attempts not to insult. For those raised in a world where in the privacy of a home, unkind comments in reference to people of color abound, such assertions seem sound. Empathy escapes those who are not victim to the wrath of whites.
Anglos do not understand how a seemingly innocent statement can slice an African-American to the core.
To suggest that a successful Black man might need to be put in his place, or lynched, is to acknowledge a truth that is always apparent to an African-American gentleman or lady. A dark-brown-complexioned person who is perceived as one who does not know his or her station can expect to be reminded regularly, he or she is not equal to whites.
Decidedly, a dark-skin man or woman may do well in school or in the work place. A gentleman or a lovely lady may excel beyond all belief. A few elite Afro-Americans might be invited to live among Caucasians in an all white neighborhood, even in a Sundown Town. A token or two is always welcome. One with fame, fortune, and finesse may actually be appreciated. After all, a community must make a good impression. No locality would wish to be labeled intolerant, just as a parent, or child, does not desire to discriminate aloud. Consider cities in the Northern region of the United States. These humble townships have long maintained a noble image, false as it maybe.
Outside the traditional South—states historically dominated by slavery, where sundown towns are rare—probably a majority of all incorporated places kept out African Americans. . . .Ironically, the traditional South has almost no sundown towns. Mississippi, for instance, has no more than 6, mostly mere hamlets, while Illinois has no fewer than 456.
Appearances are a lovely illusion. Indeed, the presence of a Black person in a white world can be wrought with peril. Driving While Black is a common crime. Even so, in an automobile, there is some protection for the brownish-purple complexioned person passing through a predominantly Anglo section of town. If a Black man, or women, were to walk alone in an alley, in an affluent area, or in a slum, unaccompanied by an entourage, his or her life could be in danger. Tiger Woods, [Michel Jordan, Denzel Washington, Venus and Serena Williams,] in casual clothes, without the cameras, or a gold plated golf club to identify him, could easily become a casualty of racial chauvinism. Anglos, when alone or amongst an allied group of racists, are not colorblind. Nor are they colormuted. Whites will see, and say, as they truly believe. Indeed, if a successful man or woman, whose facial features, and color, are not characteristic of a Caucasian, they may well find themselves in a position to be attacked. In all likelihood, a Black person will be assaulted.
At times, the barbs will be verbal. On occasion, physical jabs will be offered. Perchance, a Black person may suffer a slight. Most who react to 'race' are subtle in their approach. However, it is rare when a white American does not express the bias that has been building for centuries sooner or later. What simmers and stews within eventually will come to a boil. The pain that hate gives rise to will spill out. As a culture, when we pretend to be colorblind, and act on colormutedness, we give no air to what is real. Racism has caused us to rot from within.
Intellectually, Anglos know that to diminish the worth of those whose complexion is a brownish-black, to scorn or snub an African-American merely because their appearance is considered less "acceptable," or to suggest that someone of color might be lynched is outrageous. Yet, as long as Americans refuse to acknowledged the roots of racism, and recognize their own bigotry, intolerance will flourish. If conversations are hushed, as they have been in this year alone, what we have witnessed will continue to burgeon.
Within days of the Tilghman incident, Golf Week Magazine glorified the schism. The sportscaster and her employer were the cover story or were meant to be. So much for these intentions, be they ill-willed or wise.
Golfweek Noose Elicits Strong Reaction
By Doug Ferguson
The Associated Press
Friday, January 18, 2008; 12:18 AMThe editor of Golfweek magazine said he was overwhelmed by negative reaction to the photo of a noose on the cover of this week's issue, illustrating a story about the suspension of a Golf Channel anchor for using the word "lynch" in an on-air discussion about how to beat Tiger Woods.
"We knew that image would grab attention, but I didn't anticipate the enormity of it," Dave Seanor, vice president and editor of the weekly magazine, said from the PGA Merchandise Show in Orlando, Fla. . . .
"Look at the executive suites at the PGA Tour, or the USGA, or the PGA of America. There are very, very few people of color there," he said. "This is a situation in golf where there needs to be more dialogue. And when you get more dialogue, people don't want to hear it, and they brush it under the rug. This is a source of a lot of pushback." . . .
Asked if he regretted the cover, Seanor paused before answering.
"I wish we could have come up with something that made the same statement but didn't create as much negative reaction," he said. "But as this has unfolded, I'm glad there's dialogue. Let's talk about this, and the lack of diversity in golf."
Golfweek Editor Seanor may have thought the conversation vital; however, the mainstream, the average Joe and Joanna, the persons in power, and those who have none, would rather not discuss the disparity that envelops us. Remember, etiquette is essential. Colormuteness and colorblindness are cool. Those who do not heed these calls are not. Editor, Dave Seanor was replaced one day after a racially insensitive graphic, a noose, 'graced' the cover of Golfweek.
Any lack of compassion, when public, can cause quite a controversy. When the same deficit is subtle, there are few problems, that is, if the offender's skin is pinkish in color. This contrast is sharply evident in this election season, just as it was in Elementary School. Our Presidential candidates and political Parties, like Mom and Dad, endorse colorblindness and colormuteness. The electorate embraces a truce that prohibits colorful conversations.
When race relations are discussed, the Democrats wish to appear more compassionate than the Conservatives. While it may be a tad true that the Democrats did better for Black America than the Republicans have, still, every Administration since America became a nation, did not authentically embrace equality. The statistics, even when improvement is apparent, reveal an awful truth.
The Conservative Agenda: Serving African Americans?
By Tim Westrich and Amanda Logan
Center For American Progress
January 17, 2008How have African Americans fared since conservatives have been in charge of the economy? Not very well. Their increases across key economic indicators have been slower under Bush as compared to the 1990s. Here’s a look at the numbers:
African Americans’ median income declined by an average of 1.6 percent per year under the current administration.
In 2006, African Americans’ median income was $32,132, which is actually $2,603 lower than their median income of $34,735 (in 2006 dollars) in 2000. This is an annualized average growth rate of -1.6 percent. In contrast, this number increased at an annual average growth rate of 3.2 percent from 1992 to 2000. And African Americans’ median income is still substantially lower than Whites: In 2006, their median income was $32,132, as compared to $52,432 for Whites.Under Bush, the percent of African Americans without health insurance has increased from 18.5 percent to 20.5 percent.
In 2006, 7.9 million African Americans were not covered by health insurance. The rate of African Americans not covered by health insurance increased by an annual average percent point change of 0.30 between 2000 and 2006. This is a much different picture compared to the 1990s. From 1992 to 2000, the number of uninsured African Americans decreased from 20.1 percent to 18.5 percent, an average annual percent point change of -0.20.The employment to population ratio for African Americans has declined faster than that of the Whites under the current administration.
In 2007, the employment to population ratio - the percentage of the civilian population that is employed—for African Americans stood at 58.4 percent compared to 63.6 percent for white Americans. Between 2000 and 2006, the employment to population ratio for African Americans declined by an average of - 0.4 percent each year after increasing by 0.8 percent on average between 1992 and 2000. The employed share of the African-American population grew faster than the employed share of the White population throughout the 1990s, but has shrunk faster than Whites since then.The increase in African-American homeownership has been slower under Bush than the 1990s.
The homeownership rate for Whites increased three times faster than the homeownership rate for African Americans between 2000 and 2006. During this time, the homeownership rate for African Americans increased by an average annual growth rate of just 0.1, from 47.2 percent to 47.9 percent, whereas Whites’ homeownership rate increased by an average annual growth rate of 0.3 percent. This trend is in part because African Americans have actually seen their rate decline since 2004. Compare this to the 1990s, when African Americans’ homeownership rate increased by an average annual growth rate of 0.8 percent from 1994 to 2000. Whites' rate was 0.6 percent during this time (homeownership data by race are not available before 1994).More African Americans are in poverty under Bush.
More African Americans were in poverty in 2006 than in 2000, just after we saw a vast improvement the 1990s. In 2006, 24.2 percent of African-American individuals were in poverty. Compare this to 2000, when 22.5 percent were below the poverty line, a percentage point change of 0.28. Poverty among African Americans decreased substantially from 1992 to 2000, going from 33.4 percent to 22.5 percent, or an annual average percent point change of -1.36.
The number of impoverished persons of color frequently increases. At times, it decreases. On occasion, it remains the same. Yet, no matter who is in the Oval Office, Americans worry less about the fact that the dark skinned among us are more likely to live in poorer neighborhoods. African-Americans are less likely to have adequate Health Care. Doctors discriminate.
Schools are segregated along racial lines. Citizens of this country understand that a person who lives on the wrong side of the railroad tracks is probably Black. Sundown Towns may have begun to allow Afro-Americans in; however, these persons better realize, they have their place. Dark-skin people are encouraged to believe they are powerless to create genuine change, and Anglo Americans like it that way.
There was hardly a rumble when the former First Lady, and Presidential aspirant explained, "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964," Clinton continued. "It took a president to get it done." This statement seemed reasonable to those who have deterred the dreams within the Black community. Rival candidate, and Senator Obama softly declared the comment "unfortunate and ill-advised"; nonetheless, he too was willing to remain colorblind and colormute. A Black person knows better than to incite a riot. African-Americans, in the childhood are taught as well as whites.
In this country, citizens of all colors accept the truth and dare not drastically change it. It is for this reason the electorate is barely disturbed by statements from a former President, his aides, or allies. Even prominent Black Americans, grateful for small favors, and Presidential appointments, will stand by the side of a spouse and a former Commander-In-Chief when he states bigotry is believable and logical.
Voting for president along racial and gender lines "is understandable because people are proud when someone