Why Can't We Talk About Racism?

It only takes one well-armed racist to make a tragedy. In this case, that well-armed racist murdered nine black men and women (mostly the latter) in cold blood. The killer was white and had quite the history of racially charged statements. When he was getting ready to gun down his victims, he made the statement, "you rape our women and you're taking over our country." He has an "us vs. them" mentality that is plain for all to see. His car had Confederate plates and, according to his roommate, he favored segregation. 

The killer was undoubtedly racist and had an agenda that included the brutal murder of black men and women. This is beyond clear. Why is it, then, that we are so bad at acknowledging this? Why has the governor of South Carolina posted a statement in which she muses on the fact that "we do know that we'll never understand what motivates anyone to enter one of our places of worship and take the life of another"? Why are Fox News and Senator Lindsey Graham trying so hard to redirect this crime towards that of faith rather than skin color? 

Why can't we talk about racism? Because we don't want to. I suppose this seems like an overly simplistic and vague answer to a question that demands a much broader explanation, but it's the answer that many people (white people, in particular) need to hear. It's the answer that reveals the protestations for what they are: childish stubbornness. We don't want to talk about racism because we've created the myth that it doesn't exist. We've built up this myth so much that we actually believe it. We've so wholeheartedly embraced this myth to the point where we have started whitewashing history. It doesn't take a historian to note that. Just look at South Carolina, the state where this most recent massacre took place. 

Flying the colors of a former (and failed) seceding nation that fought on the side of racism is an excellent example of this collective mindset of willful ignorance. Ta-Nehisi Coates has already broached this subject much more eloquently than I ever could here. But his call for the take down of this symbol of systemic racism has unfortunately, for now, fallen on deaf ears. 

We like to think that racism is dead, killed by the Civil War Amendments and buried by 1960s legislation. We like to think we've kicked a nasty habit of our forefathers and that we live in a new progressive world of forward thought and color blindness. But it precisely this post-racial mythical world that we have fashioned for ourselves that perpetuates a racist mindset and prevents us from pinpointing racism when we see it. It's uncomfortable and incriminates ourselves as assets to the crime. 

I can't do anything about the collective consciousness of anachronistic white folk and a media that likes to avoid discomfort at all costs, but I can throw in my support as an ally and step forward to say this: I am sorry. I am sorry that we are so bad at talking about racism and I am sorry that I have contributed in any way to its perpetuation. 

I am sorry that one guy with racist ideas and a gun killed nine of your sisters and brothers. Their names are here: 

Sharonda Coleman-Singleton 

Rev. Clementa Pinckney 

Cynthia Hurd 

Tywanza Sanders

Myra Thompson 

Ethel Lee Lance 

Daniel L. Simmons 

Rev. Depayne Middleton-Doctor

Susie Jackson 

(Buzzfeed has actually written up a beautiful memorial for them here.)

I am sorry this tragedy happened, especially because I know it could have been avoided. The first step to avoiding any more massacres is admitting to ourselves that racism is alive and that it is extinguishing black lives. From there, we can work towards further progress. Please, please, please spread the word. Inform your friends and family. Have the uncomfortable chat. Let's talk about racism until it truly is dead and buried. 

On Liberal Academia

No doubt, you've come across the Vox article written by a "liberal professor" by now. The professor, writing under the pseudonym Edward Schlosser, offers up an incredibly unpopular opinion, claiming that his liberal students scare him and that their passion for social justice has made them aggressive towards anything contrary to the preferred status quo.

In response, a Vox writer and former adjunct professor posits that Mr. Schlosser's opinion is skewed by personal experience with very little in the way of evidence to back it up. She dedicates her article to pointing out how ridiculously difficult the job market is for those in academia, citing that a majority of adjunct professors live below the poverty line. Her point is that professors shouldn't be afraid of their students but that they should take issue with a "university system that treats students as customers and faculty as the interchangeable means of production."

Finally, again on Vox, Koritha Mitchell wrote an article in response to the whole ordeal. She wrote of her experience as a black woman teaching in a white male dominated field. More so than this, however, she offered up a concept that had yet to have been discussed:

"It is worth asking, Who can most afford to teach in ways that are least likely to inspire controversy? Those who are not immediately hurt by dominant ideas. And what's the most dominant idea of them all? That the white, male, heterosexual perspective is neutral, but all other perspectives are biased and must be treated with skepticism."

She believes the most important way to discuss controversial issues is to discuss the power dynamic present in each situation. This is, perhaps, the most important point made throughout this whole discussion and it bears rumination.

The first writer, ostensibly a white man, is disturbed by his colleagues being admonished for even broaching the discussion of offensive or unpopular ideas. He portrays his students as sensitivity police, always on the lookout for toes breaching the line. Personally, I don't believe he is entirely off base here. Stepping outside the world of academia for a moment, comedian Jerry Seinfeld recently made a few remarks about political correctness and how he believes that it is "killing comedy." In particular, he claims that he won't perform at colleges for this very reason, a move made by fellow comedian Chris Rock last year. Both comedians bemoan the easily offended natures of young college students with Seinfeld making the claim that younger people these days are throwing words like "sexist" and "racist" around without really knowing what it means.

They both have sort of a point. It's the same point that Mr. Schlosser makes in his article and, like Ms. Mitchell's, is worthy of some thought. The point that overzealous liberals are making it hard to discuss issues is sound. There are certainly instances in which unpopular ideas are drowned out entirely in favor of emotion. The culture around shutting down opinions because they are uncomfortable is an existing one. But I am hesitant to acquiesce to the idea that is a dominant one. This is where power dynamics come in.

Koritha Mitchell posited that white heterosexual men suffer from the misconception that their skin color and position in life have no effect on their actions, rendering them neutral. In this idea she further makes the point that white men make a habit of offering their ideas without paying mind to their privilege while turning around and reprimanding minority opinions as those borne from emotion rather than fact.

This presents an interesting and complicated (as you've probably already seen) issue. On the one hand, you have a particular sect of the college population that does take social justice to the limit and that does often make it difficult to have an actual discussion. But on the other hand, you have people in positions of power that have always been in power that are now questioning their "safety" from these passionately socially conscious students. Unlike network news, I won't tell you that there's a right or wrong answer. This is not an issue or black and white (well...you know what I mean) but an issue of grey, where all of the above people dwell yet cannot seem to find one another. All of them, in one way or another, are making a worthy point. It's up to you to decide which points are founded and which are not.

In short, I offer this: never discredit someone's opinion because of their background, but always take that background into account. Use it as a gauge, not a gag. Similarly, waving off young people as a group of overly sensitive whiners is a very limited and narrow view of the world that could benefit from reading opinions by those in minority positions. Read books and articles written by black women and gay men and transgender people. Do your best to empathize with those that live entirely different lives from you.

The world is full of nuance and is way too confusing. Take heart in the fact that this is a universal problem.

Please Ignore the Duggars

The Duggars are a family embroiled in controversy and I'm not entirely convinced that they don't want to be there. Reality television stars by nature, the family of 19 (and counting) is well known for making headlines for their shitty opinions and much sought after presidential stamp of approval. The latter seems to be at thing of the past with even Mike Huckabee dropping the family from his endorsements, but they're certainly still milking the hell out of the former. 

And why wouldn't they? They've all seemed to have collectively decided to throw Josh Duggar under the bus and just come out and accept the molestation charges as true. That's good, I guess. The overwhelming evidence sort of forced them into this situation, but the honesty is appreciated regardless. This doesn't mean they aren't spending a good amount of time downplaying Josh as a sexual offender, however. As long as they can continue getting air time and internet space, they're going to continue weaving a disjointed narrative with an ever-growing and enraptured audience.

This is America's annual summer criminal case! One of this country's favorite things to do is watch someone spiral towards a very humiliating and very public downfall. Admittedly, it's hard to feel any sympathy for this one. But, the scumbaggery notwithstanding, this case is not worth following. This doesn't mean it's not worth addressing. Certainly, prosecute this piece of shit to the full extent of the law. If only to burn every last shred of credibility this family might have had, make an example of Josh Duggar. But the media doesn't need to be frothing at the mouth for a story every five minutes. It's sensationalistic bullshit and has very little to do with preserving integrity and very much to do with racking up easy viewers. 

Fox News, national champs of sensationalizing, has already dedicated two news segments to sitting down with the Duggars and letting them ramble on about how Josh is misunderstood and being vilified by the media. They certainly have the second one right. The media has taken Duggar to task for what he's done and, really, that should have been the end of it. But news outlets live and breathe hollow controversies that affect a small amount of people and they've managed to drag out every minute facet of this case and examined them in excruciating detail. 

I'm not implying that details should be overlooked or that molestation is not a serious crime/topic of discussion. But if we're going to talk about molestation that occurs between young siblings in families, let's talk about that and not the Duggars. The latter, while a prime example of a power structure in place that allows for this sort of thing, has too big a name attached to it to produce any worthy discussion. The issue is marred by celebrity and any possibility of serious investigation is overshadowed by blaring CNN headlines and TMZ reports. For any issue to be honestly and seriously examined, the element of entertainment has to be removed. 

This case and the controversy attached to it are just an extension of the Duggar's reality show. This is the best episode they've ever aired and they haven't had to pay a cent. Ratings are through the roof, the audience grows nightly and there isn't a network on television that would turn down the story. A nation that complains about the evils of reality television sure is spending a lot of time watching it right now. Caught up in the drama, we've forgotten what news is supposed to look like and accepted the showy theatre that it's become. Stop supporting the Duggar's fame. Make this the last post you ever read about that useless fucking family and go read a goddamn book. 

How We Talk About Caitlyn

This was bound to happen. We all knew it would. I mean, shit, if the world can barely talk about gay rights, how on earth did we think we'd be able to discuss any other letter on the LGBTQ spectrum without some transphobic bumps in the road? Admittedly, people are handling this better than I expected. As Jon Stewart pointed out, the mainstream media (typically a bastion of ignorance) has, for the most part, handled this issue fairly harmlessly, albeit with the occasional incorrect pronouns.

And, hell, even Fox News (with the exception of professional Mr. Potato Head, Neil Cavuto) has been tame in this matter. But it's not hard to imagine that Fox News, a money making machine from the get-go, is learning to appeal to a younger, more socially-conscious crowd.

This all being said, people are still generally fucking awful and the internet is here to tip the scales back in favor of ignorant stupidity. Twitter, Facebook and similar brain-drain sites have happily delivered the kind of transphobic nonsense one would expect from the mostly uneducated public. But this is par for the course. There is no end to hateful shit on the web and to expect otherwise is the quickest path to disappointment.

Ignorant, grammar-challenged troglodytes spewing disjointed insults via their iPhones don't really concern me much these days. It's their slightly more evolved cousins that do the most damage. These creatures, bubbling to the surface of the primordial ooze, sneak in to the modern world using misdirection and sensationalism. They know openly hating is passé and that the cool thing these days is to passively disapprove by offering up a completely unrelated subject.

For example, the Arthur Ashe Award. The award, given by ESPN at the ESPY's, is an award for courage, something that no one can deny Jenner has shown. In lieu of being able to openly condemn Caitlyn Jenner, a particular element has taken to bitching about her receiving the award over other candidates.

Specifically, Total Frat Move, a trash website run by former frat guys who hit their peak Junior year of college, has published a stupid article about the whole thing, whining that Jenner is getting the award and that Iraq war veteran, Noah Galloway, is not. The fact that this is purely based in rumor and has been completely disproven aside, this argument has been a huge issue for those championing social justice for years. It's the age-old argument of "you don't support the troops!"

Americans have quite an aptitude for public shaming (and yes, it goes both ways). But the classic dodge of "there are more important things" is an ignorant one and one that has become a real issue. It affects reasonable people in an unreasonable way, convincing the more gullible among the population that maybe LGBTQ issues ARE worth putting off until we honor every single enlisted military member with a throne of gold and endless praise. Make no mistake, being in the military is a great sacrifice and a great service. But because it is worth noting does not cancel out the importance of all other issues.

There is no priority to honor troops. There is no huge lobby against those in (or formerly in) the military and no cultural stigma against it. Sure, you had people hurling slurs like "baby killer" at Vietnam war vets and, yes, there has been a pretty poor response to soldiers coming home with PTSD and other mental issues. But, again, this does not disqualify the importance of transgender awareness.

Transphobia is real. Things may be getting better, but it is still out there and it is still affecting lives, sometimes in a deadly manner. Caitlyn Jenner, no matter what you think of her family, has made an incredibly important step in her own life, and in the lives of transgender people all across the world. She's on the cover of Vanity Fair for chrissake! What a fucking achievement and I applaud her for it. But this isn't the "we have a black President in the White House!" sort of deal where we get to pretend like we "fixed" an issue. There is still ignorance to combat. Please do so if you see it online. Speak for a group that, until very recently, didn't have much of a voice of its own.

And for god's sake, please use the correct pronouns.