*With all due respect to Keli Goff who wrote an excellent article for The Loop about racism and our right wingnut friends, I don't want folks to ever get the impression that it (racism) is only limited to the right side of the ideological spectrum. The fact of the matter is that some of our ideological soul-mates can at times be guilty of racism as well.
A liberal democrat is just as capable of being a racist as a conservative wingnut. I suppose the difference is that the liberal doesn't really think he is a racist and doesn't want to be painted as such. The wingnut, on the other hand, embraces his racism, and indeed wears it like a badge of honor.
My man Greg Fuller sent me an interesting article from Melissa Harris-Lacewell, who wrote it for The Nation which I want to share with you. After you read it tell me what you think.
"For weeks the media have been covering "racism in health care reform opposition." For the most part I've found this political moment to be an interesting opportunity to discuss the meanings of race, the history of racial exclusion and violence, and the ongoing realities of racial inequality in America.
But I have also been a little baffled as to why so many liberal white Americans are shocked about the sometimes explicit, but far more often, simply implied racial bias that has infected some of the opposition to the Obama administration. My scholarship and teaching center on issues of race, blackness, and African American politics, and while I believe "racism" is interesting and important; it is not exactly breaking news. Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune laughingly suggested that he was telling his white liberal friends who were aghast at the vitriol aimed at President Obama, "welcome to my world."
My surprise that "racism" has dominated the news cycle for so long turned to tangible anxiety when President Clinton appeared on Larry King Live. Former President Clinton made a compelling case for health care reform and when asked about the racial motivations of the opposition he said:
"I don't believe that all the people who oppose him [Obama] on health care -- and all the conservatives -- are racists. And I believe if he were white, every single person who opposes him now would be opposing him then."
I agree with Clinton that the opposition to President Obama's plan is about health care reform, not about race. Any Democratic president who introduced health care reform was going to be met with vicious, organized opposition. No one knows this better than the Clintons whose own health care reform efforts were effectively shut down by organized efforts on the Right.....
But the part of the interview that worries me comes next, when President Clinton said,
"While I have devoted my life to getting rid of racism, I think this [health care] is a fight that my president and our party -- this is one we need to win on the merits."
This statement required a double take. President Clinton said that he has devoted his life to getting rid of racism? And no one challenged this assertion?
"While I have devoted my life to getting rid of racism, I think this [health care] is a fight that my president and our party -- this is one we need to win on the merits."
This statement required a double take. President Clinton said that he has devoted his life to getting rid of racism? And no one challenged this assertion?
President Clinton has a very checkered past involving racial innuendo, stereotypes, and racialized political strategies. When he first ran for President in 1992 Bill Clinton attacked hip-hop artist Sister Souljah during his speech to Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition. He likened her to former Klansman David Duke. After the 1984 and 1988 defeats of Democratic candidates, Clinton knew he needed to signal his independence from Jesse Jackson and the racially progressive wing of the Democratic Party. His unprovoked attack on Souljah was part of that active distancing. But, Clinton's strategy was complex. During that same election, he also appeared on the Arsenio Hall show where he played the Saxophone. Clinton has always been masterful at both embracing and pushing away from black communities, black voters, and black interests based on his own political needs at the moment. Some have accused President Obama of using similar tactics.
Clinton used welfare reform and crime legislation to cement his position as a moderate "new" Democrat. Clinton's policies made life substantially more difficult for poor black mothers and led to the incarceration of tens of thousands more black men. Repeatedly during his presidency Clinton found his way to the center by ignoring the material needs of black communities. He refused to fight for his nominee and law school friend Lani Guinier who was viciously and inaccurately labeled a "quota queen." And when his wife was battling Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination last year, President Clinton's own voice sounded shrill in precisely the same ways as some of Obama's current opponents.
Despite his office in Harlem and his efforts in Africa, I am unconvinced by President Clinton's assertion of a lifetime commitment to battling racism. "
Now what this author is asserting could be viewed as blasphemy in some left wing circles. I mean that is the "first black president" she is talking about. But is she wrong? And do you want to give her a "you go girl" for writing the following?
"The point is that some members of the GOP, the health care industry, and some people in the crowds are using strategies, language, and images that are meant to stoke racial fear and anxiety. Many have principled opposition to the reforms being proposed by the administration, but that opposition is swimming in a sea of racial ugliness.
But when I heard President Clinton's revision of his own political racial history it struck me that the biggest issue may not be uncovering racism on the Right, it may be that we are providing cover for racism on the Left. If opposing Obama means you are a racist, then supporting Obama must mean you are not a racist. No need to worry with substantive efforts to compensate historic injustices or address contemporary inequalities, just keep wearing your Obama '08 shirt and you can have a free pass on racial politics.
Racism is not the the sole domain of Republicans, Conservatives or Southerners. Not all racists pepper their conversation with the N-word or secretly desire the extermination of black and brown people. Racism is complex, multi-layered, and deeply rooted in the American story. Name calling is not helpful in uprooting racism, but neither is a false sense of moral superiority. "
I know that I do.
*Pic courtesy of The Nation.
141 comments:
@Field -- You gotta be kidding about that being blasphemy in leftwing circles. Hating Bill Clinton has always been a hobby of leftwing circles -- it started in the 92 primaries when he had the audacity to come from nowhere and beat their picks and it's never ended. He was just a redneck boy from Arkansas who didn't belong with their kind and whose southern stink meant he could never be trusted. The only folks who raise an eyebrow to someone bashing Bill are common folks of the democratic persuasion. However, neither black nor white elites, bougies, or liberals have ever had a problem calling Bill everything but a child of God.
His record is imperfect and deserves scrutiny but I can count on my fingers the number of leftwing elites who've ever actually given it a dispassionate and total evaluation. It just doesn't happen.
The blasphemy is giving him a fair hearing in context of the times and political realities he faced. Evaluate him fully without coming from a place of venom and you'll get eaten alive.
--j
first!!!!
RIGHT ON MELISSA!!...I love this sista's lisp and her crystal clear assessment of politics, racial politics and Bubba Clinton's spotty record wit black folks.
And here, many of you negroes thought ole Billy was the cat's meow when he was prez...at least with Carter you have a man who really tries to live his life as a Christian. Bill on the other hand preaches but aint nuttin but a ho.
Oh hell, field, you don't have very many white people willing to wade in here and say shit people don't want to hear while using a recognizable moniker, so I guess I ought to play my frequent role as punching bag and do the white man's defensive rap.
So here goes.
It's true that white people don't like to be called racists. It's just as true with the wingnuts, or at least most of them. I'll bet you that most of the people carrying the racist signs convinced themselves that they are not racists, but would argue they were simply engaging in vicious political attacks, using whatever ammunition was at hand.
Now, here's what I think is a big part of the psychology: No one likes to be cornered.
If you actually manage to "convict" someone of being a racist, you essentially destroy them. They are redlined out of public life altogether, forever. It's a bright red line that Thou Shalt Not Cross, and therefore those accused of it fight the accusation like hell.
I think a more effective way to combat it is with a lighter touch, at least in a bunch of cases. I mean, if someone's carrying a sign showing Obama caricatured as a monkey, well, there's no soft-pedaling it. But if, say, a cop flies off the handle and arrests Henry Louis Gates, it might be smarter to measure the response in proportion.
You need to give people a way out of their predicament, a way to say, essentially, "Yeah, I screwed up," without having to plead guilty to a career-ending, respect-ending offense.
This, from white persepective, is the downside of racism accusations. This is, at present, a sort of nuclear bomb. If David Duke is a racist (and he is), and if Bill Clinton is a racist, there ought to be a way to distinguish between the two of them.
There are some other problems with the indiscriminate use of the racist label. One is related to what I've been saying, and that's that you do nothing but piss people off by nuking them for stepping on a crack in the sidewalk. It's even worse if they think the label is completely misapplied.
This is part of the reason why Obama is waving away the race angle on healthcare. If he and other proponents of reform were to attach the racist label to the opponents, even the assholes at the town meetings, it would be seen as unfair by most whites and you could absolutely kiss health care and a second Obama term goodbye.
Another hazard is that, if it's used too often, the racist label will lose its power. White people will yawn, or worse yet, they'll say, "Okey dokey, then I guess I'm a racist then. Fuck 'em." And I really don't think that sort of reaction is in anyone's interest, because it leads to some really, really, really bad places.
Say "racist" too often, and you risk incurring the "Boy Who Cried Wolf" response. Time could come when you really need people to give a shit, but they've been numbed.
Now, you can all throw things at me. Well, not everyone. That would be stereotyping.
To put it differently: "Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee."
The Clinton's behavior during the Presidential primaries proved they value winning over any allegiance to Black people.
But I will say that I have seen some of the same throw Black people under the bus stuff from Obama.
Those responsibility speeches Obama gives in front of Black people are really for White people. He wants them to know he won't be giving us anything.
So I def agree that there are similarities between Clinton and Obama in how they use Black people to gain support amongst the majority population.
"Name calling is not helpful in uprooting racism, but neither is a false sense of moral superiority. "
Niiiiccceeeee.
L
Hmmm,
Her name is Melissa Harris-Lacewell, i tell you, i do bang that smart nigger bitch till all my balls falls off. She is HAWT! and SMART!
Damn! Just look at her
You dont mind, do you field? I want her hard and sore.
Her name is Melissa Harris-Lacewell, i tell you, i do bang that smart nigger bitch till all my balls falls off.
All seven of 'em huh, you mutant freak?
Field, I really need some encouragement!! It's a default position to be a lifelong student of American racism when you're born black in A-merry-ca. After all these years I, yup that's me, have "reverse-engineered white racism" in this country. I have been able to take the confusion out this subject to MY OWN SATISFACTION. The help I need is to capture this in a reasonable size publication. Normally the amount of material required to cover the subject of American Racism would be dwarf that required for a two semester college course. In other words, a ton of writing folks.
OK here's a starter. Racist attitudes among American whites towards American Negros should not be called racism, but realistically should be called what it is, NEGROPHOBIA! Webster defines two types of Negrophobics; those who FEAR Negros, and those that HATE Negros. (Sorry white folks there is no Mr. in between.) The respective type of Negrophobic a white person is will determine their attitude and the associated behavior exhibited by that white person upon encountering a racial situation. (Keep in mind the animal instinct in humans causes us to express our fear as anger.) Negrophobia also explains the great discomfort most white people have with discussing anything dealing with race.
Ms. Harris-Lacewell is right on when she raises the question concerning President Clinton's attitude and behavior relative to the race question in America. Racism is an American problem, but Negrophobia is the white American's problem. Only white people themselves can relieve the white population of this three century old burden.
One last word, Negrophobia is a learned psychosis and so it can effect white folks from every station of life in A-merry-ca, even Bill Clinton(Previously annointed as "our first Black President" by Toni Morrison). Hillary, as a former "Goldwater Girl" in Barry's campaign for President, obviously had her Negrophobic indoctrination early in life.
Barack's initial army of campaign workers were all youhg enthusiastic and white. This is a clear indication that in recent times far less Negrophobic indoctrination is being passed on thru the generations. However, there are still many whites who FEAR that institutionalized Negrophobia will not continue to be perpetuated through the generations. And they are using any occasion to give voice to those fears. Hence, the Town Hall chants of "Give us our country back".
Negrophobia also explains the attempt to connect President Obama's image with every well known fearful personage of the past, like Hitler and Stalin. Painting Obama with these terrible personages is a crude attempt to restore the fear aspect of Negrophobia. Those people carrying these types of signs are Negrophobics who were devastated when they saw millions of white folks cheering Barack Obama when he won the Presidency. It is their own pathetic little contribution to the mission of bringing A-merry-ca back to their viewpoint, the right perspective on the world.
I often don't agree with Dr. Lacewell....but I have to agree with her on this one.
Clinton.... some sort of standard bearer or stalwart working against racism? Please!
I never really liked Clinton. Never understood what crazy Black folks saw in the man. The way he stood by while tens of thousands of Rwandans were slaughtered was one of his lowest points. A President is supposed to answer those big moral tests....and he failed. And he wasn't simply indifferent... he ,along with his Sec. of State Madeline-Not-So-Bright (who ironically was herself a Holocaust Survivor and had family members killed by the Nazi's)....they didn't give a ****....and made it known.
Yet they jumped into a Civil War in Yugoslavia just a few years later after the deaths of a few thousand European Whites.
I'm still trying to understand what he saw in terms of a difference in value between White skin and Brown skin.
Now he's an anti-racism crusader? Please.
Dr. Lacewell didn't make that exact argument but she made good points in her commentary.
I wish Blacks would stop viewing Clinton in some sort of special context that bears no resemblance to reality. It has always been a hoax.
Grinder,
Racism is not a label, it is a description. You totally misunderstand, when we call out a racist, it is not to give us power, it is to make the fact known. It is not a gotcha statement. We want the person to know their intentions are totally understood and we will act accordingly. At times, we will call for resignations, other times, we will call for action for ourselves.
@Monie -- IMO, Barack and Bill are ideological twins and political soulmates in all the good and bad ways.
IMO, if you take away the specifics the Democratic love affair with them both goes something like this: They brought us hope. They break our hearts. They bring out the best in us and inspire and then turn around and compromise at the wrong time and on the wrong things. It's not that they don't deliver. Bill delivered when you look at the whole term and I think Barack will too. It's that they both show so much godblessed potential that most of us feel deep down inside that they compromise too much, too soon, and that maybe they're holding something back from us. We've got them but not all of them. To our everlasting frustration, part of them is always seeking the other team's approval and sometimes at our expense.
Unlike other pols, they really are like family. They drive us crazy and make us so damn mad because there's nothing we can do to make them change and we can't just quit them like we do other pols.
--j
Anon@9:24 - I feel you. I've never been a big Clintonista like my parents were in the 90's -- my politics are somewhere between Gore and Chomsky, particularly on the environment. But, lefty high minded folks have never like Clinton -- particularly the Birkensock, Pacifica listening granola PhD crowd. I remember liberal elites bashing Clinton as far back as '91 when I as still in junior high. As you said, he was always seen as a redneck hayseed.
And to be honest, lefty elitsts have the same sort of hate on for the O-man. Hillary and Kerry were the choice of the mainstream left-center elites -- not some skinny Black surfer boy from Chicago. And don't get me started on the fore mentioned granola PhD Green party types who have written Obama off as some Clinton in Blackface (he's not). Does anyone remember a certain consumer advocate and chronic Presidential candidate calling our current President an Uncle Tom.
The left has plenty of racism, but its the condescending "treat the darkies like 5 year olds with down syndrome" form or racism.
"I wish Blacks would stop viewing Clinton in some sort of special context that bears no resemblance to reality. It has always been a hoax."
For centuries, Blacks have looked for a great White Hope to bring justice and save them. Bill Clinton was their imaginary guy and they honored him as their "first black President". I felt quite embarrassed when I learned of that.
It's unfortunate, but collective 'wishful' minds are deluded and blind. Blacks tend to be suckers and ignore what's being done to them while they foolishly honor the person who is hoaxing them.
I hope Blacks are not being suckered and hoaxed again.
Billl pumps up his achievements because the guy who followed him was so awful. There was an expansion of the Black middle class & home ownership with Clinton, because there were some reasonable if not spectacular economic gains during his years. Although he should have paid attention to finance reform.
But I think President Carter is much more aware of the complexities of race relations. Carter grew up in a totally Jim Crow culture in which his family was, by comparison, somewhat enlightened, & he knows he played race politics in Georgia elections. If he hasn't fully owned up & apologized for it (What's the point?), his post-presidential career has been useful in ways large & small. & Black Baptists appreciate his troubles with Southern Baptists.
Hathor said,
"Grinder,
Racism is not a label, it is a description. You totally misunderstand, when we call out a racist, it is not to give us power, it is to make the fact known. It is not a gotcha statement. We want the person to know their intentions are totally understood and we will act accordingly."
Hathor, what is this "we" stuff? Speak for yourself. There are Blacks who don't agree with you.
I think it's hard for some people to admit that this is just NOT about the Health Care Bill, so some try to cover it up with(oh, if it was a White man it would be the same way) NO! it would not! this is about RACISM!
Melissa is young, she will understand this thing by and by, this young lady can teach history but, she has not been around long enough to live it, she has read Black History book's no doubt, she was taught what it was like to be in the Civil Right's Movement! but, she had no part in it!
I think for some young Black's and so called White Liberal's they thought all was well in America, they thought once Barack was elected everything would be fine, but, no, they forgot about the other side, they thought sooner or later all American's would come to accept the President, but, not so! Racism is not going away because we have a Black President, if anything it has ground in leap's and bound's!I don't know what Gun's has to do with a Health Care Bill! did White folk's carry gun's when Clinton was trying to pass his Health Care Bill?
Melissa can pick out Clinton's fault's as a WHITE man but, that's just it, he is a White Man! and whether they are Republican, Conservative or Democrat, White Men have a loyalty to their Race, why do you think that Health Care Bill has not Passed? White men from all Party's are holding it up! they are afraid to say YES! they are afraid they will have to answer to other White men if they do the right thing!
Grinder, I am sure I didn't put my Punctuation in the right place, but, I hope I got my point across!
iseeisee
grinder, it looks like you are getting a good workout this evening. Well, at least they are capitalizing your name. LOL
Part I
grinder said...
"Oh hell, field, you don't have very many white people willing to wade in here and say shit people don't want to hear while using a recognizable moniker...."
You'll get no praise from me: a self-serving move at best, so that all whites aren't painted "racist."
"It's true that white people don't like to be called racists. It's just as true with the wingnuts, or at least most of them."
Here's what's true: They don't like being called out on it. They don't want it called "racism". They want us to see it as protecting their culture, their history, their power, and their racial purity.
"If you actually manage to "convict" someone of being a racist, you essentially destroy them. They are redlined out of public life altogether, forever."
I don't know what in your mind constitutes "conviction," but the outcome is not always as you define it. Frankly, it's rarely so.
For every example of white
"redlining" as you call it, I can give you an example where it didn't substantially hurt that person's career, and might be said to have contributed substantially to their success.
Rush Limbaugh vs. Donovan McNabb
Although Limbaugh faced a barraged of attacks, he was still unrepentant, and his show is still the pinnacle of radio talk shows, and the one every republican pundit aspire to have.
Imus' "nappy-headed hos" remark vs. Rutgers University women's basketball team
Don Imus will join Fox Business Network starting October 5, 2009.
Redlining didn't destroy Imus' career.
"You need to give people a way out of their predicament, a way to say, essentially, 'Yeah, I screwed up,' without having to plead guilty to a career-ending, respect-ending offense."
You must be kidding. Racists should stop screwing up, and stop with the "career-ending, respect-ending offense[s]."
Field, I resent the Picture Word Association of Lark. She has been there for you all of these years and this is how you treat her?
This might surprise you but Lark still has a lot of miles left.
Anon 11:32 p.m., I think there was a whole lot of truth in what you wrote. "Negrophobia." That's a good one, and you're not far off.
Part II
Where were their empathy when racists attacked me, and I wasn't hired because of the color of my skin.
Give me a break! Why should I be more empathetic to racists than they are to me?
"This is, at present, a sort of nuclear bomb. If David Duke is a racist (and he is), and if Bill Clinton is a racist, there ought to be a way to distinguish between the two of them."
You make the damn distinction! Why are you asking me to ease up on one for being racist, and come down hard on the other for the same thing?
A racist is a racist is a racist. Let racists consider the magnitude of their remarks. Don't ask me to.
"[Y]ou do nothing but piss people off by nuking them for stepping on a crack in the sidewalk. It's even worse if they think the label is completely misapplied.
That's their problem. I don't care if I piss off racists. When did racists give me that level of respect? We have a black woman who was beat down by a burly white racist, in front of her child, for asking him, politely, to be "careful."
And they're always going to think the label, "racist," is "misapplied." So what else is new?
"This is part of the reason why Obama is waving away the race angle on healthcare. ... [It] would be seen as unfair by most whites and you could absolutely kiss health care and a second Obama term goodbye."
I say: do the right thing. Don't ask me to kiss up to you to invoke it.
Better to preserve white presumption of race neutrality than risk the ire of all by calling one a racist.
Got to love it. Whites stick together right or wrong.
"Another hazard is that, if it's used too often, the racist label will lose its power. White people will yawn...."
They're yawing now. Your remarks here is a big "yawn." They're far from empathetic, focused as they are on: "Here's what you negroes need to do, not to upset, and piss off the support you're currently getting from some whites."
Keep your damn support! Who needs support that comes with a caveat, or a truck load of conditions.
"Time could come when you really need people to give a shit, but they've been numbed."
Grinder, I don't won't people to give a shit, that I don't give a shit, unless I follow their useless shit, so as to avoid the shit they warned me about, because they wanted to dictate to me what shit I should give a shit about.
Keep your shit to yourself!
I swear, day by day, you're sounding more and more like an apologist for white racial excess. To sum it up: racism is a white problem; don't ask me to accommodate it.
@The Angry Independent said: The way he stood by while tens of thousands of Rwandans were slaughtered was one of his lowest points. A President is supposed to answer those big moral tests....and he failed. And he wasn't simply indifferent.{SNIP}
Yet they jumped into a Civil War in Yugoslavia just a few years later after the deaths of a few thousand European Whites.
First, we'd been in Eastern Europe/Bosnia deployed with NATO and doing airstrikes when violence in Rwanda broke out. Second, Republicans had raised holy hell over our involvement in overseas missions, especially since Somalia/Black Hawk Down had taken place only six months prior. However, the reason we didn't go into Rwanda was that it couldn't be done from the air as we were doing in Bosnia. Clinton conditioned our involvement in Bosnia upon air-strikes as he was unwilling to risk American lives in a ground war that was little more than a civil war.
When Rwanda's situation was evaluated it became clear that (1) air strikes wouldn't work (2) there was no way to avoid heavy US casualties. Clinton, as President of the United States of America (and that part is very important mind you) was not willing to send our servicemen and women into a slaughter when the US had no strategic or national interests there. IOW, he wasn't willing to have our kids killed in a civil war for no reason other than the kindness of his heart.
It may sound great for America to make that gesture but we're talking about telling American families that their child is going to be sent into harm's way and quite possibly to die in a strange land for no national goal or interest -- we're sending YOUR kid out of the kindness of our heats. Vietnam was a war very much premised on that. And we all know Bush followed the humanitarian hawk logic (freeing Iraqi's from Saddam's many tyrannies and genocide attempts) straight into Iraq.
Now, Clinton says he regrets Rwanda but I'm not so sure it was the wrong call. It was an absolute horror for the world but it would be an injustice for our working class and poor kids to die for no national interest and Clinton was president of US not president of the world.
Until we establish a humanitarian branch of the US military (and this is a serious proposal by me) where our soldiers can specifically and wholly voluntarily sign up and change their mind at any time for humanitarian conflicts like Rwanda where the US has no national interests but there's a compelling human interest like an ongoing genocide that these volunteers choose to participate in ending, we absolutely must stay out of those conflicts. It's simply not moral to ask our citizens to die for anyone other than our country and its interests.
There was an American skin evaluation that boiled down to (1) can we do it from the air? and (2) how many American casualties will there be? In Rwanda, ground troops were required and casualties too high (not to mention the mood in congress). In contrast, we fought Bosnia from the air with NATO and also had a compelling national interest in making sure former Soviet states with nukes didn't become unstable or rogue.
Humanitarian hawks, much like their Neocon counterparts, often forget that those are real American lives they're sacrificing for whatever cause they've decided to champion and not pieces on a game board.
The failure of Rwanda, imo, is our continued failure to put in place a military apparatus designed to handle stopping genocide. The UN isn't set up for it and no single country should be solely responsible for the blood sacrifice to support such an effort.
--j
@LACoincidental -- Agreed except for the degree to which Obama was rejected. I think he was rejected but soon gained acceptance even as they're back to presently rejecting him again. For a long time they wanted Hillary but ultimately the fad that propelled their like of her wore off too. Kerry's about the only one blue blooded and boring enough for them. I don't think Obama's Bill in blackface but I do think they're ideologically twinned. That said, I think that Bill's ideology like Obama's is largely misunderstood. It's pragmatic and often infuriatingly incremental but it's far more progressive than he was ever given credit for and it's real world expression was chained to the times which were much more conservative. Regarding leadership styles and a host of other things, they're very different.
And I'm with you on the political scale. I know I'll never be completely happy with anyone who can actually get elected.
--j
Field, Rush Limbaugh is on Jay Leno's show, and Jay Leno has been throwing Racist Joke's Barack's way, he brought up the fist bump! but, this is not new, this is tit for tat! Letterman had the President, and now Leno has Rush!!!!
iseeisee
Anon@11:32 P.M. "OK here's a starter. Racist attitudes among American whites towards American Negros should not be called racism, but realistically should be called what it is, NEGROPHOBIA! Webster defines two types of Negrophobics; those who FEAR Negros, and those that HATE Negros."
It's another way to frame the problem, but I think it leaves much unsaid.
If a person is Negrophobic, it is probably for two reasons: a fear, imagined or otherwise, that blacks will retaliate for previous ill-treatment by whites (Obama will elevate blacks above whites), or because their parents have impressed the belief that blacks are born with a tail, and will eat their liver (to reduce black-white interactions).
I still believe that Negrophobia is an outgrowth of racism. Racism needs a base, something to undergird Negrophobic behavior, and racism fits the bill.
"If you actually manage to "convict" someone of being a racist, you essentially destroy them. They are redlined out of public life altogether, forever."
"Say "racist" too often, and you risk incurring the "Boy Who Cried Wolf" response. Time could come when you really need people to give a shit, but they've been numbed."
Grinder,
You say that as if our point of view about what is racist isn't legitimate. Whites being numb to our views on racism has already happened. And it is not our responsibility as black people to worry about the feelings of those who would dismiss our experiences as "crying wolf" or those who view us as less than anyway. Our ONLY responsibility is to call them on it and then to prove them wrong by perservering as we always have. I could give a damn about how a racist FEELS about be called a racist. Or anyone else for that matter.
Here's what's true: They don't like being called out on it. They don't want it called "racism". They want us to see it as protecting their culture, their history, their power, and their racial purity.
I see it differently. I think people hate to be cornered with no way out. Doesn't really matter who they are or what they're being cornered for. Back someone into a corner, and weird shit's gonna happen.
Although Limbaugh faced a barraged of attacks, he was still unrepentant, and his show is still the pinnacle of radio talk shows, and the one every republican pundit aspire to have.
Imus' "nappy-headed hos" remark vs. Rutgers University women's basketball team. Don Imus will join Fox Business Network starting October 5, 2009. Redlining didn't destroy Imus' career.
You got me on Limbaugh, but I'd note that Imus did a shitload of groveling.
A racist is a racist is a racist. Let racists consider the magnitude of their remarks. Don't ask me to.
Hey, even homicide comes in about six or seven degrees.
To sum it up: racism is a white problem; don't ask me to accommodate it.
Brave theory but practically useless. I could say that I refuse to accommodate homophobia, but the reality is that I accommodate it all the time.
Look at the shit the current president has pulled on that front. He hasn't done a single thing for gay people. Nada. Zilch. I could go on.
It's a lot easier to write in absolutes than it is to live that way. It's a messy world out there.
You say that as if our point of view about what is racist isn't legitimate. Whites being numb to our views on racism has already happened. And it is not our responsibility as black people to worry about the feelings of those who would dismiss our experiences as "crying wolf" or those who view us as less than anyway. Our ONLY responsibility is to call them on it and then to prove them wrong by perservering as we always have. I could give a damn about how a racist FEELS about be called a racist. Or anyone else for that matter.
To boil it down, I think all I'm really saying is that people ought to be able to differentiate between degrees. David Duke and Bill Clinton are not two sides of the same coin.
@J:
"It was an absolute horror for the world but it would be an injustice for our working class and poor kids to die for no national interest and Clinton was president of US not president of the world."
Well, it was a "horror" that the world would, and could, accept. If the world was so horrified why didn't the nations of the world (all those people in horror) step up and do something about it?
I hear you about our "national interest," but there's a greater interest: the interest of conscience.
How many times have we condemned others for failing to get involved on an individual basis (when someone is being brutally attacked by a husband, boyfriend or stranger), and they chose not to, because they would be sticking their neck out for someone they didn't know.
When other Rwandas occur, the world (all nations) must bring their moral, economic, and military might to bear.
When we can stand back and say it's their problem and not mine, then we relinquish something greater than our life. Our collective souls hang in the balance.
@grinder said:
To boil it down, I think all I'm really saying is that people ought to be able to differentiate between degrees. David Duke and Bill Clinton are not two sides of the same coin.
Realizing that even the author of this piece explicitly said she didn't think Bill Clinton was racist might help. Very few sane people think Bill's racist. What folks' argue is whether or not he exploited race and/or how much. ;)
It still sounds like you want to call a racist something that doesn't hurt his/her feelings. People make distinctions all the time. Hell, they refer to racist behavior as opposed to labeling someone. There's also bigot and prejudiced. English is versatile language. Use it as the situation warrants.
--j
@Black Diaspora -- I do agree with you which is why I advocate the creation of a humanitarian apparatus that can handle such a conflict.
--j
@Grinder: "I see it differently. I think people hate to be cornered with no way out."
See it anyway you like, but I'm not compelled to make racists comfortable, or their racism tolerable.
"You got me on Limbaugh, but I'd note that Imus did a shitload of groveling."
Groveling is not the same as paying a life-time price. Imus's not going to suffer as you suggested he would.
"Hey, even homicide comes in about six or seven degrees."
Then, let God sort it out. I refuse to. I feel no obligation to a racist to treat one differently from another just because one stepped on my toe and the other bashed my head with a hammer.
Let the racist beware! If the burden of racism becomes too hard, and too heavy, to bear, let them give it up.
Don't ask me to differentiate, and treat one differently than the other.
It's all sordid business, and I'll not accommodate it.
"I could say that I refuse to accommodate homophobia, but the reality is that I accommodate it all the time."
Then that's the difference between us. I won't accommodate racism, and I urge you not to accommodate homophobia, either.
There're things more important in this world than your earthly comforts, and safety.
"Look at the shit the current president has pulled on that front. He hasn't done a single thing for gay people. Nada. Zilch. I could go on."
President Obama's nine months into his presidency. Time is on your side. I'm not gay, but the issue is important to me, and I have already written him about the pace.
"It's a lot easier to write in absolutes than it is to live that way. It's a messy world out there."
You're telling me!? I've been black all my life, so don't tell me about how "messy" the world is.
Perhaps you should live life more in the "absolute," if you're accommodating homophobia.
I've stood up to racism, have called it out, and have endangered myself in the process.
I can't tell you how much those acts have extended my life.
If I had died in those moments, I would have lived an eternity in those moments.
I would have died as I chose to live. And that's better than a million years of living, and not living out of choice.
Anonymous said...
"@Black Diaspora -- I do agree with you which is why I advocate the creation of a humanitarian apparatus that can handle such a conflict."
--j
Wasn't that one of the reasons for the formation of the United Nations?
"My surprise that "racism" has dominated the news cycle for so long turned to tangible anxiety when President Clinton appeared on Larry King Live."
That's a puzzling statement. From surprise to "tangible anxiety"?
Why? What did Melissa feel President Clinton would say or do?
Her choice of words are a bit worrisome, and she offers no explanation for them, except to suggest that Clinton might say something about race that would expand her "surprise," as it would certainly continue to spur media coverage--and, certainly, she couldn't have foreseen Clinton's revelation:
"While I have devoted my life to getting rid of racism, I think this [health care] is a fight that my president and our party -- this is one we need to win on the merits."
She seems to suggest that the media coverage of race at this time was counterproductive in some way, perhaps seeing it as an impediment to President Obama's legislative agenda.
I can't say for sure.
Why she's willing to dismiss racism as a component of the opposition to healthcare reform, I'm not so certain:
"I agree with Clinton that the opposition to President Obama's plan is about health care reform, not about race...."
Interestingly, her statement is not what Clinton said at all. He said that he didn't "believe that all people who opposed him [Obama]..."are racist," implying that some were and are.
I concur: racism crosses party lines, and no party is racism-free, as both parties have a sufficient number of whites (and, yes, other ethnic groups) that would make it practically assured.
What right does a so-called "white" person have to become defensive when accused of racism? I mean, really? No matter how much you may have tried to re-program yourself and rid yourself of the insidious influence of America's white supremacist culture, it can't help but infiltrate your psyche and thought processes. If a person of color tells me, a "white" woman, that what I said or did was racist, I'd better shut up and listen. If I do, I might learn something. If I don't, it's hubris--common among those who oppress others for their own selfish ends.
It's the same as when a woman accuses a man of sexism. His best bet is to shut up and LISTEN. What possible good comes from a defensive argument? A man, regardless of how enlightened he is, doesn't get to decide if his behavior is sexist toward a woman---that's a woman's call.
And a so-called white person doesn't get to decide if his or her behavior or words are racist. That call goes to the person of color. If a so-called white person really cares about whether or not he or she is perceived as racist in attitude or behavior, he or she will want to have that behavior called out so as to be informed and work toward becoming a less racist human being.
Getting defensive means making it ALL ABOUT YOU, and isn't that the core of oppression? Putting on blinders and jumping to your own defense is hypocrisy at its finest.
(deep breath. . .) btw, I agree wholeheartedly with the points made in your post, field. In case I hadn't made myself clear :D
Bring it.
"Hmmm,
Her name is Melissa Harris-Lacewell, i tell you, i do bang that smart nigger bitch till all my balls falls off. She is HAWT! and SMART!
Damn! Just look at her
You dont mind, do you field? I want her hard and sore."
President Clinton, what are you doing trolling black web sites in the middle of the night?
Seriously, and you all wonder why I don't ban people. If I did, how would you know that folks like White Power exist?
Grinder, the thing I like about you is that you are at least trying. I might disagree with you 90% of the time, but I love the effort.
Read what Hathor said again. I know she doesn't speak for ALL black folks (no one does) but I like her analysis.
Now Grinder, I have Race Traitoress on line one for you. She doesn't sound too pleased. :)
Anon 11:32PM. "Negrophobia" huh? I like it. Reminds me of Francis Holland's classic thesis on the word race. If you ever get a chance shoot me a copy of your thesis.
AI, I feel you on Bubba and Rwanda. That was a human tragedy, and a stain that will always be on his legacy.
BD, as usual, you are on point. I love that fact that you contribute to this blog. You and some others always seem so thoughful in your analysis of things.
The anti mr. r, and Frank. Everything needs a balance. :)
Anon12:29,
I think most people are intelligent to know that using we in that context does not mean every single Black person.
Race Traitoress speaks for me.... another white woman......
Grinder, I understand what you are saying, but in the end, you are lifting up arguments that minimize or excuse the behavior. This is the wrong venue to be having a discussion about what we white folks need to be saying to each other to challenge racism amongst our fellow white folks.
BD is right. Racism is our problem to solve...Do not ask her to abide by what is being forced upon her....
Race Traitoress gave the example of sexism and you homophobia... lets try this....
Racism is as destructive and wrong as Rape/Sexual Assault/Improper Sexual Contact.... those are all the legal terms that one can be charged with for "gradations".... kinda like your analysis of racism has different levels.... But, I think you would agree... they are ALL offensive, wrong, unacceptable. AND, society does not expect the targets of rape/sexual assault/improper sexual contact to somehow accommodate the perpetrator, ever.
@Monie "Those responsibility speeches Obama gives in front of Black people are really for White people. He wants them to know he won't be giving us anything."
i agree, its really about making whites feel comfortable. it was also disgusting watching O go to africa to condesendingly lecture blacks, then to europe to praise whites.
i don't know who is really running this country, but i'm damn sure its not Obama. He is just a sock puppet.
Anon@1:18,
You have a few basic factual errors in your comments, particularly regarding the former Yugoslavia. So your understanding of events may be skewed. I won't get into a drawn out debate about Rwanda...
I would just suggest that you read the reports, books, and articles from the UN commander in Rwanda at the time, General Romeo Dallaire.
I would also suggest that readers view the documentary "Ghosts of Rwanda" and the other documentaries that have come out since.
Field,
Yes you should have banned Mr. White Power.... We already know they exist.
And thanks for recognizing the Clinton hypocrisy.
It still sounds like you want to call a racist something that doesn't hurt his/her feelings.
There is first degree murder, second degree murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, and negligent homicide. If those distinctions can be made in the taking of lives, I think there can be gradations of racism too.
Then that's the difference between us. I won't accommodate racism, and I urge you not to accommodate homophobia, either.
It's easier to accommodate homophobia when you can blend in.
President Obama's nine months into his presidency. Time is on your side. I'm not gay, but the issue is important to me, and I have already written him about the pace.
The fact remains that Obama's policies with respect to gay people have been virtually identical the Bush's policies. He has done nothing, and shows no sign of doing anything, for us. Nada. Zero.
Of course he still has time. But there will come a time when I re-evaluate Obama on that and other issues. If he and the Democrats wind up staying in Afghanistan, keeping Gitmo open, failing on health care, renewing the Patriot Act, and perpetuating Bush's wingnut social policies, then what reason will there be to vote for him instead of Mitt Romney, the likely Republican nominee, in 2012?
You're telling me!? I've been black all my life, so don't tell me about how "messy" the world is.
Yes, I am telling you. And I will keep on doing it. Being black doesn't make you some supreme goddamn authority on everything. You are one person. A smart person, but still just one. Better be careful not to fall off of that horse of yours, as high as it is.
And a so-called white person doesn't get to decide if his or her behavior or words are racist. That call goes to the person of color.
Go tell it to Al Sharpton and Tawana Brawley. There is plenty of egregious bullshit to go around.
Didn't Clinton make a special trip back to Arkansas during the 92' campaign just to make sure some retarded black dude got executed???
Always thought there was something I liked about Slick Willy...
Frank
Here's another bit of "change" not made: indefinite detention of terror suspects, using the same "legal" rationale that Bush did.
My first thought after reading this post was the classic line from one of my favorite comedians, my man Paul Mooney:
"Everybody wanna be a nigger, but don't nobody wanna be a nigger."
The "problem" with racism or any critique is that "certain people" - you know who - are often defensive. When challenged they see it as an attack on their character. Which is something that is understandable because often the challengers attack the person and not their actions.
If anyone were to say that Bill Clinton was racist. I can guarantee you that Negroes would be in an uproar over that. How dare anyone say that the first Black president is racist, right?
Combating racism as this blog does (aside from some of the ignorant commentary I read here daily from trolls)is about critiquing and holding actions to account. And yes, we must never forget that the "ism" that is race, is something that is part of the DNA that is America. Though not exclusive to this continent, we must also remember that it's also not exclusive to political ideology - it's a human issue, and social construct.
We talk shit about Republicans as being racist because they employ racist tactics. And why wouldn't they? They've learned that it is probably the one issue that's most polarizing in our country.
That said, checkout this latest bit on George W. Bush. Certainly he's not racist as Kanye West asserts. But when you read this next bit one can see that he may not be a crackhead although he acts sorta crackish...
Who said George Bush don't like Black people!
fn:
ditto!!!
i never called bubba a bm!
and i hated every black person who did....but i hate the black people who suddenly became amnesia victims and forgot they ever did so when obama surfaced way more!...
bubba is a wm and he has never been a saint...as no prez will ever be
bubba also executed a severely retarded bm named ricky ray rector
http://www.executedtoday.com/2008/01/24/1992-ricky-ray-rector/
BUT
bubba also left us with a surplus, he evaded wars, and he was not gwb 2.0 as obama!
that makes him MUCH better than obama/gwb 2.0 in every significant way in my book!
fn:
ps:
i also hated that bubba was such a whore
and
like all racists wm/clarence thomas, bubba fetishizes black females...
and he has a black son
see his son here:
www.stormfront.org/truth_at_last/danny.htm -
Ditto, AB!!!
And Field, your posts lately have been on fiyah!
hey fly!
ditto!...fn rocks the net always!!!
i missed u!
have a great day!
see more on ricky ray rector and racist democrats here:
http://www.isreview.org/issues/06/dems_death.shtml
all politicos are generally the same...irrespective of the labels they choose
especially those who wade as deeply through the muds of politrickal corruption required to become prez
see ricky ray rector here
http://webspace.webring.com/people/fs/savepenry/
No no no Anon 1:02 AM,those are "crushed"cars. Crush,get it? You have got to get deep with these picture word associations:)
I really don't get this black folks..
Who would you have rather had?
Reagan, Bush Sr. Bush Jr or Clinton?
This is a nation with an ugly racist past and tenuous racist present.
Clinton, had to walk a fine line between whites and blacks in order to first get elected and pursue a progressive agenda,
As Field mentioned, Obama HAS TO employ many of the same tactics else white folks will turn him into OJ and he'll be out after one turn.
Contrast this with the Repubs who made no pretense about their antipathy toward blacks, the civil rights movement, retributive justice and progressive politics.
This is the political calculus in Ameery-ca.
Yeah Clinton played race games but he also appointed more blacks to senior positions in Government than any POTUS before or since.
Appointed more black judges to the federal bench as well.
Compare that record to Reagan and both Bushes and it aint even a contest.
ditto us!
bubba was as racist and flawed as most humans...but he was also an excellent prez overall
and he was MUCH better than obama!!!
____
fly:
see more on bubba the whore here:
http://www.geocities.com/ambwww/REAL-SEX.htm
@grinder
And a so-called white person doesn't get to decide if his or her behavior or words are racist. That call goes to the person of color.
Go tell it to Al Sharpton and Tawana Brawley. There is plenty of egregious bullshit to go around.
OH NO YOU DIDN'T.
You counter a criticism with the old "but he did it too" defense? We call that the "two wrongs make a right" fallacy. Behavior like Sharpton's in the Brawley affair is a direct result of white racism. Truly, grinder, you can't see this?
Racism is a white construct, a white problem, and has to be dismantled by "white" people.
Unless they really don't want to, because it serves them in some way.
Hmmm?
@Jody - thanks for the support
With all due respect.... I have seen unchallenged, statements that Obama is the same as George Bush.... excuse me, but bull shit.....
Uptownsteve has a point and I would argue the same can be said about Obama v Bush......
I do not agree with every damn thing Obama has done... but I am very happy that in 9 months he has:
1.Signed the Ledbetter Amendment for equal pay for women (Bush did not)
2. Had a Presidential Proclomation for LGBT Pride Month in June and has said he is opposed to and is working to repeal dont ask dont tell (I believe him) Just last month he put out a statement against the In Defense of Marriage Act and he has appointed more LGBT folk than Bush and Clinton combined.
3. Yesterday, he made history by not only calling for a Special Session of the UN Security Council but chairing it himself with a US drafted document to Abolish all nuclear weapons AND said we are signing on to the Test Ban Treaty (Bush and Clinton would not) AND that we are signing onto the fissile materials treaty...Again, something Bush would not do.
4. There is a definite time-line to close Guantanamo and for all troops to be removed from Iraq AND a closing of all bases in Iraq... Bush DID not
5.March of this year, I, someone who makes low 40s income, got a tax cut! And so did everyone else who made less than $150,000... DID NOT HAPPEN UNDER BUSH!
6. I predict that by the end of this year we will have health care reform that will provide health coverage to almost all americans.. and reduced costs for those of us who have coverage, and most importantly, an end to Insurance Co policies of denying and dumping people. BUSH DID NOT EVEN TRY FOR HEALTH CARE REFORM AND CLINTON BLEW IT.
7. Under Obama, we are signing on the the Climate change treaty and he has said we will abide by the Kyoto protocals... Obama has, through the stimulus plan, targeted moneys for urban areas to fund for green jobs and green policies..... We are already reaping the benefits here in Philly with increased funds for urban farming, weatherization funds have increased and there are now tax incentives for people to "green their homes." BUSH DID NONE OF THESE THINGS!
So, in closing. I repeat, I do not like everything Obama has done, but I sure as hell Like everything listed above! And there are more things I approve of that are not listed here.
Obama is NOT Bush.
jody:
obama is MORE elitist than bush
and MORE warmongering and TOTALLY puppeted BY GWB!!!!
bush never bilked the poor for trillions of bailout funds
gwb never bought a car co/oil co etc
gwb never tried scamming a health care hoax to bilk all for RX cos
obama is ESCALATING 3 wars waaaaaaay beyond the 2 illegal wars bush started
gwb hated gays but never flagrantly bromanced rabid gay haters like the gay donnie m or the demonic rick warren or the infanticidal tony dungy
gwb never made any promises to gays...obama has brazenly broken every one of his!
obama has GUTTED hbcus
gwb never did so
gwb spent far less cash than obama
OBAMA HAS ROBBED GENERATIONS TO COME IN ONLY 8 MOS!!!
ETC.......
so
I DISAGREE VEHEMENTLY!!!!!!!
FYI
jody
ps:
obama and his ilk are FAR MORE secretive and MUCH LESS transparent than even bush
ETC.....
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/obama-doj-worse-than-bush
http://blog.amnestyusa.org/waronterror/transparency-still-an-unfulfilled-promise-by-president-obama/
http://www.exposeobama.com/tag/white-house-guest-list/
@Jody
I'm not entirely happy with Obama either, but I agree with the points you made.
You counter a criticism with the old "but he did it too" defense? We call that the "two wrongs make a right" fallacy. Behavior like Sharpton's in the Brawley affair is a direct result of white racism. Truly, grinder, you can't see this?
If I had played the card of offseting one wrong with another, you'd be right to call me out for it. But that's not even remotely what I did.
You had written that no white person can ever defend himself against an accusation of racism made by a non-white. In other words, to be accused of racism is to be guilty of it. Whether you know it or not, this is the same standard of "proof" applied during the Spanish Inquisition to accusations of heresy. To be accused was to be guilty; to protest one's innocence was to be even guiltier. That's where the torture came in.
Anyway, my rebuttal is that black people are perfectly capable of false accusations of racism. If you don't believe it, go have a chat with that lying buffoon, Al Sharpton, and his mentally disturbed pawn, Tawana Brawley.
Oddly enough, I'm not nearly as down on Brawley, even though it was her phony accusation, as I am on Sharpton. See, young Tawana was a pathetic and damaged girl, mentally ill. She deserved mercy. Sharpton was an adult, and knew better. He was the guiltiest party. No mercy for him.
Jody
Great Post.
"Oddly enough, I'm not nearly as down on Brawley, even though it was her phony accusation, as I am on Sharpton."
The racial dynamics in this country never ceases to amaze me.
Grinder like a lot of white Americans, is filled with righteous indignation toward Brawley and Sharpton after almost 20 years and since that time we've had racial hoaxers who actually killed people like Susan Smith and Charles Stuart.
And don't forget the McCain Campaign worker who falsely claimed that a black Obama campaign worker beat her up.
But somehow that doesn't get the same media play.
There were scores of white plagiarists before and after him but everyone remembers Jayson Blair.
Latrell Sprewell attacks his (white) coach and it's national news for months yet Rob Dibble can beat the shit out of his manager in front of ESPN cameras and it barely touches media radar.
Oh, to be white in Amerryca!
Jody, I likened Obama to Bush in a few ways. I am frustrated by the lack of progress, and I flat-out oppose some things he has done.
It's absolutely true that nine months is too soon to render a final verdict, but I don't think it's a good idea for progressives to just shut up, either.
Obama ran on a platform of "change," with a lot of specific promises. He won 53%-46%, with 375 electoral votes. Had he been a white Democrat, I think it would've been more like 56%-43% or maybe higher, depending on how talented a candidate that white Democrat had been.
My point isn't that Obama is damaged goods for being black. I enthusiastically supported him, including donating $2,300 (the max) to his campaign. My point is that the country was so fed up with Bush and the Republicans that the Democratic Party, much to its credit in my view, was able to make a ground-breaking nomination and pave the way for a genuinely new era in American political life.
My point is also that, as I look at Obama's clear victory last year, I mentally handicap those numbers and ADD points to Obama's margin when it comes to interpreting the "mandate" implied by the results. Democrats not only put a black man in the White House with a comfortable margin of victory, but they have an 80-seat cushion in the House and 60 of 100 Senate seats.
Given all of that backdrop, I think it's reasonable for lifelong, passionate, true Democrats -- something that, for all my screwups, I proudly call myself -- to want the 2008 election to a whole lot more than a goddamn fucking fashion statement.
There are a lot of critical problems. I like Obama's style. Correct that. I love Obama's style. His steadiness under pressure goes beyond being impressive. It is inspirational. I've been a political junkie for a long time, and it's been forever since I've seen a president who genuinely inspires me with his personal qualities.
However, in the final analysis, this isn't American Idol and it's not a national church. The man has got to get shit done. He does not have to dot every I and cross every T. If you get two-thirds of what you want in politics, you're having one hell of a great day. But it's simply not enough to really like the guy. I really liked Jimmy Carter, too. But he failed as president, and look what we got as a result.
And don't forget the McCain Campaign worker who falsely claimed that a black Obama campaign worker beat her up.
I didn't forget her. At the time, I compared her directly to Tawana Brawley. I thought (and said, here) that I regarded both of them as deranged young women in need of mercy and kindness. I reserved my real scorn for their handlers and promoters.
You make good points, though, about disproportionate responses depending, to some degree, on the race of who does something.
I'm not much of a pro sports fan (love the games themselves, but it's too commercialized and frantic), so all the details of Sprewell escape me. I do know that about half of my childhood sports heroes were black, led by the greatest home run hitter ever, Henry Aaron.
White people aren't lying in wait to see how black people can fuck up today. Well, maybe some are, just as some black people are on a hair trigger to see how they've been jammed today. But I think most people aren't in that mode, in either race. It's two steps forward, one step back. It's been that way throughout my life. The 2008 election was about 10 steps forward, but it needs follow through.
jody:
ps
gwb had no love/promises for latinos either...yet obama has also BRAZENLY betrayed latinos ALSO!!!
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/25/navarrette.obama.immigration/index.html?iref=newssearch
&
we all had lots of fun joking about functionally literate gwb's slacker grades at yale....yet who has even seen a SINGLE gpa from any of obama's allegedly superior academic records?????
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=100613
obama blatantly lied, pimped our votes bashing bush, then SWIFTLY became a blackish clone of bush
we have all been duped and we are all doomed!!!
and for those daring to demand that poor people EXCLUSIVELY remain endlessly patient with obama/gwb 2.0
your suicidal serenity will never protect you
know this:
obama/gwb 2.0's worst deeds are yet to come!!!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/25/marc-faber-capitalistic-s_n_299720.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/may/18/us-economy-food-stamps-hunger-poverty
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/nyregion/28homeless.html?_r=1
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20090530/BUSINESS/905309961/1350?Title=Alt-A-loans-Second-wave-of-foreclosures-ahead
Filled Negro:
White Supremacy and Black Inferiority are two sides of the same coin.
A "right wing" White Supremacist might be inclined to physically intimidate Black folks.
A "left wing" White-Black Inferiorist - will make sure that the Negro never becomes mentally conscious enough to see that a STRONG PEOPLE has NEVER been built up by looking toward an external force to deliver their 'SOCIAL JUSTICE RIGHTS' but instead they build up the COMPETENCIES among those who are within their "FRENDS AND FAMILY CIRCLE"
Translation:
"Instead of talkin bad 'bout massa, y'all need to stop havin so many babies and smokin so much crack."
CF you need a new set of talking points.
This shit is passed tired.
Did you know there are a couple of black billionaires?
Then there's that Obama fella.
yes us:
and that obama fellow has financially ENSLAVED blacks and their progeny to CENTURIES of debt and poverty akin to any "massa"
as the NWO is in progress, gwb 2.0 is indeed a global MASSA
what is even more "tired" is how the same field slaves that massa obama betrays are STILL blindly cheering on their very own slaugters!!!
crack/turbo babies are weak poisons compared to the undying and suicidal love that obama nazi fiends display!
Jody:
1) WHEN will you start holding Obama accountable for the Unemployment issues? (Bush was held accountable for the security lapses that lead to 9/11 - 9 months into his term.
2) With the MACHINE that Obama sits atop of in monopoly control of Philly, Baltimore, Detroit, St Louis, Memphis, Cleveland and Newark - and them in control over the Federal Legislature (for the past 3 years) HOW IS IT that you can focus ONLY on Obama rather than THE MACINE?
3) How is it that Obama's former assistant campaign manager can attack evil Bush for increasing the federal debt by $5,000 billion over his term YET Obama is projected to balloon the deficit by $9,000 billion.
Things that make you go "Hummmmm", right Jody?
Former Prince Georges County police officer sentence for Child Porn
You all sure know how to pick your law enforcement officers
http://www.gazette.net/stories/09102009/prinnew182448_32531.shtml
Yeah CF.
Criminal cops are unique to PG County.
It's black run you know.
You are one sad negro.
the only thing worse than obama and gwb's legendary 9-16 yr war mongering plots set in place is how amerikkka abuses its vets!!!
those who do not become cannon fodder are becoming as poor/jobless/homeless as the rest...
shame!!!!
http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/
09/25/homeless.veterans/index.html
cf:
ditto!!!!!!!!
i also often wonder when obama nazis will awaken
what will be their collective epiphany?
i have no idea when...
but i do find peace in knowing that even they will be FORCED to awaken someday....
even if they only do so just mere moments before they perish/are evicted/jobless/homeless/imprisoned etc...
shame how long it is taking!
even as obama bothers less to don a mask/feign at being clandestine with escalting gwb's agenda each day...
jody:
i am unsure that gwb can even use a pc...but obama is policing the internet as NEVER before!!!
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/24/squashing-internet-freedom/
grinder
"Another hazard is that, if it's used too often, the racist label will lose its power. White people will yawn, or worse yet, they'll say, "Okey dokey, then I guess I'm a racist then. Fuck 'em.""
You mean they don't do that already?
@grinder
You had written that no white person can ever defend himself against an accusation of racism made by a non-white. In other words, to be accused of racism is to be guilty of it.
Certainly, grinder, a white person CAN defend against an accusation of racism made by a non-white. And it's a leap to say that to be accused of racism is to be guilty of it.
I asked what possible good can come from a defensive argument, or attitude, for that matter. I said a "white" person would be better off to shut up and listen.
If I'm accused of something I feel quite sure that I am innocent of, there is no reason for me to become defensive. However, if I listen with an open mind I might just learn something that had escaped my notice. Where is the harm in that?
We're not talking the Spanish Inquisition, here. We're talking about an oppressive "white" majority with hundreds of years of racist history and demagoguery and the subgroup within that is trying to throw off the mantle of unearned privilege and racist ideology. We "white" folks are NOT the picked on ones. And just because some of us say, and believe, perhaps, that we are no longer influenced by the pervasive lie of white supremacy, if a person of color insists we are, we should shut up and listen. Why not? What is one possibly mistaken perception against millions of acts of violence?
How can one blame people of color for seeing racism everywhere when RACISM IS FUCKING EVERYWHERE?
Anyway, my rebuttal is that black people are perfectly capable of false accusations of racism. If you don't believe it, go have a chat with that lying buffoon, Al Sharpton, and his mentally disturbed pawn, Tawana Brawley.
Brawley's accusations were of rape and sexual assault against unknown assailants. That's a far cry from an individual person of color calling out or interpreting an individual "white" person's actual behavior. Regardless of the veracity of Brawley's claims, the media (and white public) treated her without dignity or regard for her youth, and a clear argument can be made for that treatment being motivated by racism. Your example is a straw man.
I do believe, though, that you and I, as well as several other conscientious "white" folks who read and respond here (hi, Jody!) are members of that subgroup fighting against the oppression and violence of racism. I just think we should second guess ourselves (at least!) before we go on the defensive.
You mean they don't do that already?
Some do, some don't. There are about 150 million white adults in this country. Kind of hard for anyone, me included, to make too many blanket statements.
Everything happens on the margins. I guess the real question is whether you want more of them to yawn and/or give up. It's all a matter of the balance.
Look at it as a product market exercise. Which group do you think is larger:
Door #1 - The number of whites who will respond to a 2-by-4 in the forehead over every case of racism, regardless of how minor.
Door #2 - The number of whites who will respond to a more carefully tailored approach, which still comes down like a ton of bricks in clear-cut cases, but backs off to one degree or another when it's less severe and/or ambiguous?
Now, you can take Black Diaspora's approach and say you don't give a shit about persuading anyone of anything. Or you can take Obama's approach and say, we've got a shared future so we've got to find ways to talk to each other.
I'm obviously standing behind Door #2, but hey, that's just me and about 50 or 60 million other people, or so I imagine. I don't think the constant alarm approach will do much more than preach to the choir. And seeing as how I ain't much of a churchgoer ...
Grinder,
You're obviously debating from a white male perspective.
What I see is the white right playing the hell out of the race card and cleverly attributing "racism" to any black who calls them out.
It's a finely honed tactic they've perfected over the last 30 years.
Beck can call Obama a racist, Limbaugh can openly call for segregated buses in the "age of Obama", Palin campaigners can bring Curious George Monkey dolls with Obama stickers around their heads to gatherings, a redneck congressman can call the black President a liar during a Congressional event (never before had a President been treated that way) and the Tea Party Organizer Mark Williams can call Obama an "Indonesion Muslim turned Welfare Thug" and if a black protests the righties call the blacks "racist".
Where are the white "woodsmen" here Grinder???
Maybe blacks wouldn't be so quick on the trigger and highstrung about this stuff if decent white people spoke out against it.
You see the slime the right is throwing at Jimmy Carter.
Oh well, since we're talking about race like we always do. How about this:
FBI pays White Supremacists to incite racial violence...
here is an excellent column on why obama and his ilk LOVE voters' patience and ignorance and laziness...:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/new-rule-if-america-cant_b_299383.html
Brawley's accusations were of rape and sexual assault against unknown assailants.
You forgot about the part where they (allegedly -- turned out to be a fabrication) they smeared her with dogshit and wrote "KKK," "nigger," and "bitch" on her chest in charcoal.
This was not presented as simply a rape. This was presented as a racially motivated horror story that went well beyond sexual assault. But it was all made up.
Like I say, I bear relatively little grudge against Tawana Brawley, who was a seriously screwed up young kid. But Al Sharpton was (and is, in my opinion) a cheap hustler in it for fame and a buck.
Your example is a straw man
I don't think so. It's an example of a false accusation, widely reported. It's a reminder that these accusations need to be treated with skepticism. It has happened on both sides, the Charles Stewart case in Boston being an example in the other direction.
When you grant exalted status and a presumption of truth to racially-tinged accusations, you create an incentive for unbalanced people to make them, and for cynical bastards to spread them. When these things crop up, people need to take a deep breath and look carefully at the evidence.
What I see is the white right playing the hell out of the race card and cleverly attributing "racism" to any black who calls them out. It's a finely honed tactic they've perfected over the last 30 years.
Not so sure about the finely honed part, but I definitely agree with the rest of what you wrote.
Beck can call Obama a racist, Limbaugh can openly call for segregated buses in the "age of Obama", Palin campaigners can bring Curious George Monkey dolls with Obama stickers around their heads to gatherings, a redneck congressman can call the black President a liar during a Congressional event (never before had a President been treated that way) and the Tea Party Organizer Mark Williams can call Obama an "Indonesion Muslim turned Welfare Thug" and if a black protests the righties call the blacks "racist".
Yup, and that shit is disgraceful and flat-out racist. I have written here before that I consider the so-called "birthers" to be racists. Nothing I have written in this thread contradicts that, nor does it somehow mean that I don't think that shit ought to be ignored or downplayed.
I think virulent racism of the kind you've mention should be called for what it is. My issue isn't with "first degree murder," but with manslaughter (voluntary or involuntary) being dressed up as serial homicide.
My point is NOT that blunt and blatant racism has vanished. My point is that if you treat all questionable expression in the same way, the denunciations of the nastiest shit will lose their power.
Maybe blacks wouldn't be so quick on the trigger and highstrung about this stuff if decent white people spoke out against it. You see the slime the right is throwing at Jimmy Carter.
But isn't that what is happening? Jimmy Carter put that turd on the table, stuck a Confederate flag in it, and said to the country, "Here it is, folks. Now smell it." Of course the racists got pissed off, but I think Carter's statements have had an impact, and will continue to. We'll see.
I, for one, very strongly agreed with what Carter said, and said so in a prior thread on this blog.
I'm a troll, I'm a troll, I'm a troll!
"Brawley's accusations were of rape and sexual assault against unknown assailants.
You forgot about the part where they (allegedly -- turned out to be a fabrication) they smeared her with dogshit and wrote "KKK," "nigger," and "bitch" on her chest in charcoal.
This was not presented as simply a rape. This was presented as a racially motivated horror story that went well beyond sexual assault. But it was all made up."
_________________________________
Grinder,
why then did the da and police botch the investigation so badly? She was not initially given a rape kit and a lot of evidence was compromised, and in addition, I sort of remember that one of the accused police officers later committed suicide. The real truth is that the public will probably never know the real truth.
On the white racism topic, hmm, we get ingrained ideas from schools, family, media, so that racism becomes invisible if you are white, and racist thoughts or actions are not noticed if not pointed out, I actually do believe it;s like a mental disease, yes, whiteness and white racism is the problem that we white people need to resolve, but I just don't see a whole lot of white people willing to do the sometimes emotionally laden work to unravel oneself.
RT, I agree about the listening part, thanks for that.
@Grinder: "You're telling me!? I've been black all my life, so don't tell me about how "messy" the world is." BD
"Yes, I am telling you. And I will keep on doing it. Being black doesn't make you some supreme goddamn authority on everything. You are one person. A smart person, but still just one. Better be careful not to fall off of that horse of yours, as high as it is."
You're right about one thing: I am a "supreme goddamn authority on everything" related to me, and that includes my blackness.
You're coming across angry, bitter, and with a chip on your shoulder.
And you're sucking up a lot of the oxygen around here, an attention grabbing move that's compensating for only God knows what.
That was for the "horse" comment.
Grinder, you're not an honest debater; you're inclined to throw tantrums, and go off on tangents.
I'm counting the reasons why I should continue to debate you. So far, I've come up "zilch," "nada," as you're fond of stating it.
I'll leave you to Jody, Race Traitoress, and others. They know where you live. I'm just visiting.
all i can say is "you go, girl."
and if anyone needs a refresher to the Clinton race-bating last year, go here: http://clintonattacksobama.pbworks.com/Incident+Tracker#TheIncidents
@grinder
You forgot about the part where they (allegedly -- turned out to be a fabrication) they smeared her with dogshit and wrote "KKK," "nigger," and "bitch" on her chest in charcoal.
No, I didn't forget. No need to patronize. If you refuse to see my point and insist that you're NOT talking apples and oranges here, I don't think there is much else I can say to enlighten you.
This was not presented as simply a rape. This was presented as a racially motivated horror story that went well beyond sexual assault. But it was all made up.
How is this remotely the same as a Black person calling ME, personally, on behavior or attitude that he or she perceives as racist? Seriously? I'm not defending Al Sharpton, but to use this one incident by this particular provocateur as your argument against my point is, truly, vacuous.
I concede defeat in my attempt to help you see my point. I'm sure the next time you claim a heterosexist person has exhibited vile bigotry toward a gay person, and he or she insists on innocence and a right to his or her opinion, you'll part ways peaceably with a fond "to each his own." Because how could YOU know more about the subject of heterosexist hate than a straight, gay hating person? Right?
I give up.
those big ole eyes are damn spooky
Field,
To your original question: Is Lacewell-Harris' analysis on Clinton and the Social/Racial climate correct?
This 35-year old white man is no expert on the landscape of race relations in the U.S., but I believe she is correct in her analysis.
If anything, Lacewell-Harris exposes the fact the (D) party is as hypocritical as the (R) party is appalling.
More later...
Adam
No, I didn't forget. No need to patronize.
No patronization intended. Only accuracy. You presented it as a rape case. It was a rape case, but it was a lot more than that.
How is this remotely the same as a Black person calling ME, personally, on behavior or attitude that he or she perceives as racist? Seriously? I'm not defending Al Sharpton, but to use this one incident by this particular provocateur as your argument against my point is, truly, vacuous.
I'm not against black people calling out anyone for behavior they find objectionable. I tend to write in what the school teachers call "the active voice," which comes across as aggressive and all-knowing. But I do listen. Look at my responses here. You might not agree with them, but I think it's hard to argue that I am not engaging people's views. To do that, you must listen to them.
That much said, I don't feel compelled to plead "guilty" to everything. If you're looking for that, you won't get it from me.
I'm sure the next time you claim a heterosexist person has exhibited vile bigotry toward a gay person, and he or she insists on innocence and a right to his or her opinion, you'll part ways peaceably with a fond "to each his own." Because how could YOU know more about the subject of heterosexist hate than a straight, gay hating person? Right?
I tend to reserve that for unambiguous cases. You haven't seen me on gay boards asking for the details before hopping on the bandwagon. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
That much said, I do see your point. If you're in a class of people that's traditionally been despised, you've got a sensitive radar. I know I do. It's not so much a question of picking up the signals, but of what comes next.
I'm counting the reasons why I should continue to debate you. So far, I've come up "zilch," "nada," as you're fond of stating it.
I am genuinely sorry to see those words, because even when I disagree with you I respect your viewpoint and (to the extent possible in cyberspace) hold you in high regard. I think one of the strongest signs of respect is detailed argument.
Grinder, you're not an honest debater; you're inclined to throw tantrums, and go off on tangents.
Oh, I think everyone here goes off on tangents, but you're right about me. I try to use those tangents as illustrations of a point I want to make, but we all miss our target on occasion, and that includes me.
I hope you will stay engaged. You have a lot to say that I find worthwhile and useful.
@Black Diaspora said...
Wasn't that one of the reasons for the formation of the United Nations?
Sorta. The UN was set up to prevent stable nations from warring with each other but it doesn't have the capability of acting on a situation like Rwanda. The UN demands stability before they'll even send in troops and their troops don't really do anything.
@The Angry Independent said...
Anon@1:18,
You have a few basic factual errors in your comments, particularly regarding the former Yugoslavia. So your understanding of events may be skewed. I won't get into a drawn out debate about Rwanda...
I would just suggest that you read the reports, books, and articles from the UN commander in Rwanda at the time, General Romeo Dallaire.
I would also suggest that readers view the documentary "Ghosts of Rwanda" and the other documentaries that have come out since.
Thanks for the suggestions. I'm not sure how got any timeline wrong but the time is less important than the rest of what I wrote. Rwanda and Bosnia bring up a glaring fault in US and world foreign policy. The US can't be expected to do it all but if we don't no one does and we get blamed for a war we had nothing to do with.
But all that could be solved if we seriously considered something along the lines of my earlier proposal.
--j
Alicia... you leave so many links it is dizzying.. so i am going to respond to the last..... First off, the source is the washington times... second, what Obama supports is Net Neutrality... .something I whole heartedly support, and as someone who obviously spends an aweful lot of time on the internet, I would think you would too...
Net Neutrality is the FCC proposal to PREVENT cable providers and internet providers from controlling what is "free" and charging for websites and bandwidth. Who oppposed Net Neutrality? The big corporate providers and big corporations that want to profit off of the internet. Who supports Net Neutrality? Grassroots groups and non profits who use the internet for organizing and media activists who do not want to see corporate control over access....
So, this is yet ANOTHER good thing the Obama administration is doing that I whole heartedly support. And, another example of how Bush and Obama are different... Bush opposed Net Neutrality (most republicans do too) and Obama supports it.
Off-topic: Missing Black woman
Mitrice Richardson Arrested, Released, then Disappeared: Are the Cops to Blame?
Mitrice Richardson, 24, was reportedly intoxicated and unable to pay her $89 bill at Geoffrey's restaurant on Pacific Coast Highway in Malibu about 10 p.m. Thursday, Sept. 17, the newspaper reported.
Deputies arrested Richardson at the Malibu-Lost Hills station, where they booked her on suspicion of not paying for the meal and possession of less than an ounce of marijuana, sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore told the Los Angeles Times.
She was released about 1:25 a.m. the next day, he said.
The woman's mother said deputies told her nearby residents had called to say a woman was sleeping on porches, indicating to her that Richardson was stumbling around a nearby residential neighborhood early Friday, the Times reported.
Richardson is a graduate of Cal State Fullerton and recently moved to Los Angeles to live with her grandmother near the area where she planned on teaching.
------------------------
Matrice has not been heard from since last Friday when she was released from police custody in the middle of the night.
The more people that post about this the better the chance that the MSM will pick-up the story. And we all know that the MSM doesn't often pick-up stories about missing Black women.
Story link:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/25/crimesider/entry5339581.shtml
Also you can just link a blurb on your blog to my post about Mitrice on my blog. Thanks
alicia banks said...
hey fly!
ditto!...fn rocks the net always!!!
i missed u!
have a great day!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Girl, 2 promotions in 3 months (this last one to Director) and my plate runneth over with blessings that keep me busy!!!
But I see you're still holding it down here, so keep on keeping on!
Peace!
------
I'm just wondering how many folks here are wishing a fiscal conservative like McCain was in the White House.
grinder, "I am genuinely sorry to see those words, because even when I disagree with you I respect your viewpoint and (to the extent possible in cyberspace) hold you in high regard. I think one of the strongest signs of respect is detailed argument."
You have shown genuine respect and a level of willingness to debate and talk about racism that is to be admired. FWIW, I don't think you have been debating dishonestly at all and anyone claiming so might be trying to project their own dishonesty on you or wants you to bow to their perceived moral superiority. You have done neither and to be admired for it.
Either way, I appreciate your candor and your efforts and I always look forward to your comments, whether I like them or not. You help me to question my own presuppositions about race, and racism. Thanks.
fly:
kudos!!!!!
enjoy!!!
thanks
why are these haters still playing???
You have shown genuine respect and a level of willingness to debate and talk about racism that is to be admired. FWIW, I don't think you have been debating dishonestly at all and anyone claiming so might be trying to project their own dishonesty on you or wants you to bow to their perceived moral superiority. You have done neither and to be admired for it.
Either way, I appreciate your candor and your efforts and I always look forward to your comments, whether I like them or not. You help me to question my own presuppositions about race, and racism. Thanks.
Thank you.
I am not willing to dismiss Black Diaspora's comments as dishonest, etc. She's pissed off. I have been there on this board. It happens. I came back and rejoined the discussion, and I hope BD won't stay away from debating with me.
I'm not bs-ing when I say that I value her perspective. There are some people here whose knees jerk like crazy, but I have not ever thought that about Black Diaspora. I almost always learn something from what she posts.
Something else to say is that, as a gay person, I am intimately familiar with the phenomenon of being damned if you do and damned if you don't. The straight world is just full of "helpful" suggestions about how my tribe ought to behave if we are to be accepted.
Depending on who you listen to, gay males shouldn't complain so much, or they shouldn't be so mousy and gutless. They are too feminine. They are too self-consciously hyper-masculine. They try too hard to fit in by imitating heteros. They wall themselves off in gay ghettos.
(Lesbians are too masculine. Or they are too invisible. Etc.)
We are too quick to take offense. We don't accept the world the way it is. We are too quick to call attention to our sexual orientation. We are secretive and not out front about who and what we are.
I have heard all of those objections, and many more. With some people, you just can't win. It is this way with people of color, except that with people of color, they can't exactly "pass" for white, all efforts (mainly in the past) to the contrary. You are visible, all the time, whether you want to be or not. I am very aware of this.
So, Black Diaspora and others, I am not presuming to hand out instructions to anyone here about "how to be black." If it seems like I have, and if my words have conveyed that message, I repudiate it. I have sought to cast a narrower net and discuss the gradations of racism.
There are gradations of homophobia, too. I respect and understand, the milder forms. People don't want to have it in their face all the time. I understand. Yet, as it escalates, my skin crawls and my fight-or-flight response kicks in, as I realize that at any moment I can very quickly become an alien from outer space in many eyes. At that point, I have to figure out what the hell to do. Ain't always so cut and dried.
I don't have all the answers. I am thinking out loud, which means that some thoughts go astray. We are people, not machines. We are not perfect, and it's often impossible to say what we really mean. Sometimes, we don't even really know our own minds.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/09/the-latest-insanity.html
Interesting article.
The Furby troll is hilarious!
But, you forgot to abuse the words "herein" and "ditto."
Monie, I will put that story out there. I heard about it earlier today. Thanks for putting it out there again.
Furby troll, you are a trip. :)
I have been enjoying this debate between folks like BD, Grinder, AB, Jody, and J. Great stuff!
Adam, thanks for your honesty.
Rippa, is that link a joke? Wait, let me check it again....
grinder, "..I am not presuming to hand out instructions to anyone here about "how to be black." If it seems like I have, and if my words have conveyed that message, I repudiate it. I have sought to cast a narrower net and discuss the gradations of racism."
I did not think that you were telling me how to be Black. I am not that sensitive. And it does not mean that Blacks and Whites have nothing to offer each other. We are all human beings first.
"We are people, not machines. We are not perfect,..."
We are not God and therefore imperfect. We must make allowances for our mistakes and be willing to give each other benefit of the doubt when coming to the table to discuss racism, instead of immediate condemnation.
Otherwise, why bother to discuss it? I am grateful that you are willing to come to the table. It's Whites like you that give me hope for ending racism. Again, don't let someone's anger stop you from coming to the table to discuss racism, esp. if you are genuinely trying to make yourself a better human being by facing your own racism. Also, there are Blacks who are also trying to make themselves better human beings.
IMO, you have had your clumsy moments, but so has everyone else on this blog. I find it amusing that there are Blacks who are busy judging you and acting morally superior but missing their own ugly shit.
Racism is not an easy subject to discuss, especially for Americans. Blacks and Whites have been emotionally enmeshed with each other for centuries, and it's a bitch disentangling ourselves-slavery, Jim Crow, fear and the lack of desire (and skill) by Americans to face racism tends to do that.
But we must untangle ourselves, it's too painful to keep this up.
Anon 8:09PM
Black Diaspora and Race Traitress, you two made some strong points. Black Diaspora, I don't recall ever seeing you so annoyed. When engaging with grinder, this is bound to happen. I've been there many times. I don't think he's able to see pass a certain distance, and he's really not willing to step out his comfort zone. It's a dead horse.
Anony 8:09 pm, grinder can get very disrespectful, especially when you don't sugar coat him on his defensiveness and denial. It also amazes me to see when you hit a sensitive nerve, he goes into a name calling tantrum.
Anonymous said...
"But, you forgot to abuse the words "herein" and "ditto.""
fyi... You people are making me do the snort laugh. Just stop it already why don't you. LOL
Race Traitoress, sorry I misspelled your tag.
Thanks FN
@ La <3 Incognita
Thank you--I appreciate your feedback. No apology necessary.
Oops--I thought maybe that would make a heart. Oh well, you get the idea.
@La♥Incognita: "Black Diaspora, I don't recall ever seeing you so annoyed. When engaging with grinder, this is bound to happen."
I agree. Here's what annoyed me. Grinder chooses to accommodate homophobia (His admission, not mine). I, on the other hand, choose not to accommodate racism, and have confronted it, even when it was perilous to do so.
I think my admission miffed him, especially when I said:
Then that's the difference between us. I won't accommodate racism, and I urge you not to accommodate homophobia, either.
In response to Grinder's statement,
"It's a lot easier to write in absolutes than it is to live that way. It's a messy world out there,"
I wrote this:
You're telling me!? I've been black all my life, so don't tell me about how "messy" the world is.
Perhaps you should live life more in the "absolute," if you're accommodating homophobia.
I've stood up to racism, have called it out, and have endangered myself in the process.
And his response to my response:
You're telling me!? I've been black all my life, so don't tell me about how "messy" the world is.
"Yes, I am telling you. And I will keep on doing it. Being black doesn't make you some supreme goddamn authority on everything. You are one person. A smart person, but still just one. Better be careful not to fall off of that horse of yours, as high as it is."
By characterizing me as superior, and perhaps arrogant for choosing to confront racism differently than the way he confronts homophobia, he revealed an underlying reluctance to meet homophobia head-on (A desire for social acceptance? fear? Only he knows.), betraying an internal struggle that reveals itself as hubris, and the occasional smack down.
I won't be his whipping boy!
I don't care how he confronts homophobia. It's his business, and his alone.
It's true: I have no interest in talking down a racist, or entering a dialog with them.
For those sincere whites who wish to integrate into our world (for too long it was the other way around, and highly inappropriate, because whites didn't want us in their Lilly-white world), I say great, let's talk.
(Let me say this, lest I'm misunderstood. Integration served a purpose, because "separate but equal" was never equal, and it gave blacks access to the level of education that whites enjoyed.)
I say it was "highly inappropriate," because it should have been whites pushing for integration, not blacks.
And that's where Grinder and I clash, our bone of contention, as it were.
He believes that blacks should jump through racial hoops, and downplay our "call out" of racism, so as not to anger those good whites that would love to support us, but for our constant reference to racism, and our unwillingness to moderate it, and to see it in some gradational way.
I say to hell with that!
I'm not obliged to end racism. I didn't start it. I didn't maintain it. And I'm not a racist.
But I have been the object of racist hate, scorn, and racial power.
Ending racism, therefore, is the sole responsibility of the racist, not the victim of racism.
To shift that burden to me, as though I'm equally burdened to assist in its demise, is to misrepresent the problem, the solution, and my historical role in all of it.
As such, I, personally, will find no way to talk about it, but will not turn down those whites who wish to discuss it in good faith.
I, personally, will not implement solutions, although I'm more than willing to discuss, and formulate solutions.
I, personally, will not be cast as the problem in no form or fashion, but will assist those whites who are eager to overcome the problem that they've created.
Dr. King said "we shall overcome," but certainly he tied our "overcoming" to that of whites. Unless whites overcame, as we overcame, our victory would be certain, but it wouldn't be complete.
By characterizing me as superior, and perhaps arrogant for choosing to confront racism differently than the way he confronts homophobia, he revealed an underlying reluctance to meet homophobia head-on (A desire for social acceptance? fear? Only he knows.), betraying an internal struggle that reveals itself as hubris, and the occasional smack down.
The reason I went after you at that point was when you wrote: "don't tell me how messy the world is." That's what annoyed me. I am just as qualified as anyone else to talk about the world being a messy place. You don't need to be black, or gay, or a minority of any kind, to see it.
He believes that blacks should jump through racial hoops, and downplay our "call out" of racism, so as not to anger those good whites that would love to support us, but for our constant reference to racism, and our unwillingness to moderate it, and to see it in some gradational way.
And you say I debate in a dishonest way. Doctor, heal thyself!
I, personally, will not be cast as the problem in no form or fashion, but will assist those whites who are eager to overcome the problem that they've created.
Sounds like you want whites to come a-crawlin' to your altar. Good luck with that.
@Grinder: "Sounds like you want whites to come a-crawlin' to your altar. Good luck with that."
Grinder, one last time: You're not hearing me:
I don't want whites to do a damn thing.
If they want to be racist, they can be racist. If they want to overcome racism, they can overcome it.
At bottom, it's in their hands, and not mine.
Frankly: I have no preference. But that's too hard for you to accept. Yet, for their soul sake, whites just might want to have a preference.
It appears that you would prefer I crawl to a white "altar." But why would I do that? I have nothing to be forgiven for; I have nothing to make amends for; I have nothing to be ashamed of, or guilty of.
Now, I can't say that for all whites.
And for the record: I captured your position pretty damn well, more than you're willing to admit.
A little bit of hubris goes a long way.
@Anon 8:09PM: "I find it amusing that there are Blacks who are busy judging you and acting morally superior but missing their own ugly shit."
Either you're not reading very carefully, or you don't know all the players. Grinder is catching as much criticism here from whites, as blacks.
And I find it amusing that you see black "ugly shit," and not white "ugly shit."
Curiouser and curiouser!
"Racism is not an easy subject to discuss, especially for Americans."
I'm not sure which Americans you're talking about. Race is discussed here often, and both sides, white and black, weigh in.
If it were difficult for whites, they didn't let on. Grinder, for one, speaks freely, sometimes too freely, and we have our resident trolls that spew racist crap daily.
"But we must untangle ourselves, it's too painful to keep this up."
Painful for whom? I'm not in pain. We don't need to do a damn thing.
Whites can stay racist as the day is long, and I will remain pain-free and happy.
Now, if their racism is weighing heavy on their collective souls, or their individual souls, and they wish to discuss their "pain" with me, then I'm all ears.
I will bring to that elusive "table" my lifetime of experiences living out the "black experience," not to win their sympathy (I require none.), not to evoke guilt (There's no penalty for racism I can impose.), but to give impetus to their goal of being racist-free.
Harris-Lacewell is a bright woman. "I voted for Obama" seems to be the "I'm not a racist" card of this era the way "I'm fought for desegregation" seems to make people think they don't have a racist bone in their bodies.
Clinton's comment in SC after Obama won reminded me of his "checkered past" on race, that he is a political strategist who uses race and racism as means to an end that suits him.
I am inclined to agree Melissa Harris-Lacewell when it comes to her analysis of race and politics.
BD "I'm not sure which Americans you're talking about. Race is discussed here often, and both sides, white and black, weigh in."
I recognize that you do not know which Americans I am talking about. There is no way for you to know where I am coming from and I certainly don't know where you are coming from. From my experience as an American, talking about race and racism IS difficult. It is a national problem that Americans and even the President want to avoid talking about. Those who do try, often have mild to acute angry meltdowns, as you did with grinder.
@BD "Painful for whom? I'm not in pain. We don't need to do a damn thing."
What's with the "we" bit? YOU don't have to do a damn thing because YOU are not in pain. When you assume others think like you do, you set yourself up to be disappointed because not everyone will agree with you.
Imo, it is self-evident that Blacks and Whites have been in pain for centuries in our country because of racism. (Except for you, of course).
Throughout American history, NOTHING has been a more painful ordeal than racism. Apparently you have managed to avoid feeling any pain about it. Is that "why" grinder got under your skin, because you don't feel pain?
Either you have risen above us mortal human beings or you are in "profound" denial. Judging from your reaction to grinder, I have concluded that you are human, and you are in denial despite painful evidence to the contrary.
The solution to racism is not a one-way street where Whites must do it all by themselves and come to you. That is a childish and angry arrogant attitude that leads to 'no-where'. We are all fallible human beings, not Gods. Knowing that, it ought to be somewhat humbling to give up immature false pride and strive to help one another instead of sitting back thinking, "it's YOUR problem, not MINE." That kind of thinking is absurd.
All Americans-Black, White and Brown must step up to the plate to end racism together. Why? Because we are interdependent and interrelated like all of nature.
Considering your claim to feel no pain, it makes perfect sense that you would boldly and unabashedly state that you 'don't have to do a damn thing' about racism.
Imho, you are coming from the place of a vacant heart.
@Black Diaspora
Ending racism, therefore, is the sole responsibility of the racist, not the victim of racism.
To shift that burden to me, as though I'm equally burdened to assist in its demise, is to misrepresent the problem, the solution, and my historical role in all of it.
Beautifully said. All of your post was reasoned and measured, but the eloquence of these few words especially resonated with me.
Either you have risen above us mortal human beings or you are in "profound" denial.
Ima go with "risen above us mortal human beings." In my correspondence with you, and in reading your thoughtful, steadfast, reasoned opinions, I've constantly been educated and often inspired by your clear explanations and moral high ground---even when what you have to say may make me, as a "white" person, wince. It's what I need to hear, though. I'm very thankful for your voice.
"Those who do try, often have mild to acute angry meltdowns, as you did with grinder."
I just knew the "angry" and hysterical "meltdown" accusation was coming.
"Imo, it is self-evident that Blacks and Whites have been in pain for centuries in our country because of racism."
On that note, I have concluded this anony to be another dead horse. Who started the pain, and what type of pain is there for white people because of racism? The pain of having to hear about it? The pain of having to finally do something to eradicate it? I am just curious about what pain you're talking about.
RT said to BD: ""Beautifully said. All of your post was reasoned and measured, but the eloquence of these few words especially resonated with me."
I agree, and I am learning so much from this discussion. BD, this was excellent, It's baffling how the anony actually thinks he/she has you pegged. It adds to the meaning for pulling straws. You have been nothing but patient and fair towards grinder. I just love it when you come around to share your high quality of wisdom.
@BD "Painful for whom? I'm not in pain. We don't need to do a damn thing."
What's with the "we" bit? YOU don't have to do a damn thing because YOU are not in pain. When you assume others think like you do, you set yourself up to be disappointed because not everyone will agree with you.
Imo, it is self-evident that Blacks and Whites have been in pain for centuries in our country because of racism. (Except for you, of course).
Throughout American history, NOTHING has been a more painful ordeal than racism. Apparently you have managed to avoid feeling any pain about it. Is that "why" grinder got under your skin, because you don't feel pain?
Either you have risen above us mortal human beings or you are in "profound" denial. Judging from your reaction to grinder, I have concluded that you are human, and you are in denial despite painful evidence to the contrary.
Of course BD is in pain over racism. Plus she's really pissed off at me, which of course comes as good news to La Idiot, who has regarded me as a white devil bastard from the start. Now L.I. sees a kindred spirit, and her heart is joyful.
But Black Diaspora's words have to be seen as a rhetorical statement of defiance and anger. I don't take her denial of pain literally. You can't be angry without being in pain about something.
@La Incognita
cosign
"Imo, it is self-evident that Blacks and Whites have been in pain for centuries in our country because of racism."
On that note, I have concluded this anony to be another dead horse. Who started the pain, and what type of pain is there for white people because of racism? The pain of having to hear about it? The pain of having to finally do something to eradicate it? I am just curious about what pain you're talking about.
By this logic, rapists are "hurt" by rapes they commit, murderers are hurt by murders they commit. . .wtf?
I guess, if I really stretch, I could say that this "white" girl is hurt by racism because it sucks to be associated with racist oppressive misogynistic arrogant fools, but, still--that's not the fault of any Black person or Black people in general.
What color did you say that horse was? Lolz--
Word Verification: Cowshet
"But Black Diaspora's words have to be seen as a rhetorical statement of defiance and anger. I don't take her denial of pain literally. You can't be angry without being in pain about something."
Of course BD is angry and in pain. It is obvious. But it is possible for BD to not be aware of it. Human awareness varies from dull to bright.
Part i
@Anon: "From my experience as an American, talking about race and racism IS difficult. It is a national problem that Americans and even the President want to avoid talking about. Those who do try, often have mild to acute angry meltdowns, as you did with grinder."
Again, my friend, you haven't read me very closely; you have resorted to platitudes rather than giving me a fair hearing.
But that's your choice.
It's interesting that you characterized my dialog with Grinder as an "angry meltdown." Again, you're at choice to see it as you choose, rightly or wrongly.
I'm afraid that you don't know all the players here, or you wouldn't have jumped to such a rash conclusion.
With Grinder, I made a choice: I wouldn't be his "whipping boy," as I believe I described it.
If you choose to rescue him, so be it. That, too, is your choice. What I have found over the years is that people react as they did the day before, and the day before that, when certain stimuli is present. That way they don't have to do much critical thinking.
I think that is your case.
I can't speak for the nation, but I have no problem talking about racism, and it has been my experience that many whites who post here are not reluctant either.
"What's with the "we" bit? YOU don't have to do a damn thing because YOU are not in pain. When you assume others think like you do, you set yourself up to be disappointed because not everyone will agree with you."
I wish I could accommodate you and say that I agree with your assessment of some perceived "pain," but I would be lying.
But it appears that you have a vested interested in making me wrong on the subject.
I'm not disappointed, and I don't ask others to agree with me. That, too, is there choice. I'm not diminished if they don't, nor am I elevated if they do.
I'm just not that ego-driven.
Part ii
I say this: We, the blacks of this nation, don't have to do a damn thing about racism. If blacks choose to do something about that, over which they have no control, so be it. It's their choice.
But for my part, I'm not so self-sacrificing.
And, I'm not in "pain," because I choose not to be in pain. Pain has never served me. And if it serves you, then have as big a go at it as you desire.
And for the record: I've probably experienced more racism than you'll ever know, and I'm still not in pain, won't be in pain now, or in the future.
Racism is not my sickness, nor my malady, and I refuse to suffer from an illness not my own. If that's your choice, you have my blessing to suffer as much, and as long, and as often, as you choose.
But don't ask me to.
"Either you have risen above us mortal human beings or you are in "profound" denial. ... I have concluded that you are human, and you are in denial despite painful evidence to the contrary."
You really believe that don't you?
It's really important for you to believe that, isn't it? You can't fathom a black like me: neither in denial or pain.
You really have to sum me up according to your own experiences, where blacks must be in pain, or be in denial. Your "evidence to the contrary," is of your own manufacturing. If it brings you a measure of satisfaction, contentment, or ease, embrace your "evidence to the contrary," wrap your soul in it.
"The solution to racism is not a one-way street where Whites must do it all by themselves and come to you."
Whites can do it anyway they choose, if they choose. I'm not asking for anything. Whites-- haven't you heard me--can choose to be racist, or not.
I have no preference. I need no preference. Nor, do I have a need for whites, or, anyone else, to come to me. They have themselves, and that's all they need, and that's enough.
"That is a childish and angry arrogant attitude that leads to 'no-where'."
I'm not sure where you wish for me to go, or where you wish to lead me.
Call my attitude what you wish. You say, "childish." Yes, I'm as innocent as a child. And I'm not a racist. You say, "arrogant," yeah, I confess. I have an abundance of self-worth. If you think I'm overbearing, so be it. I make no apolgies. I am who I am, and I embrace all of me.
You say, lead to "no where." Again I have to agree. Just move the letters around a bit, let them now read "now here."
I'm "now here," and that not a bad place to be. Because I'm "now here," I can't be said to be "no where."
Part iii
"We are all fallible human beings, not Gods. Knowing that, it ought to be somewhat humbling to give up immature false pride and strive to help one another instead of sitting back thinking, "it's YOUR problem, not MINE." That kind of thinking is absurd."
Absurd to whom? Why should you, would you, care who or what I am?
I don't care who you are! You can be prideful or not, helpful or not, fallible or not, humble or not, and yes, racist or not.
It's when you presume to tell me who or what I should be, that you rob me of self-determination. And I won't, can't, give that which is not yours to command.
Look, I wish I could be all the things that would give you contentment, that would make me more like you, that would make me less a maverick and more like the herd, but I have a higher authority to which I must answer: ME.
I must also admit, I'm not willing to "step up" and call another's problem, my problem. That would be absurd: The height of absurdity.
And you have misrepresented me. I've never said that I wouldn't assist another who asks, as long as they're earnest seekers.
But I don't feel a moral, ethical, or conscienced obligation to do a damn thing.
I won't seek out racists to convert. I won't seek out racists to dialog with. I won't seek out racists to sit across the table from and exchange experiences, pleasantries, or means whereby we may coexist in our piece of the world we call America.
"All Americans-Black, White and Brown must step up to the plate to end racism together. Why? Because we are interdependent and interrelated like all of nature."
That's a tall order. I had no part in starting racism, why should I be compelled to assist in the ending of it? Blacks weren't "together" with whites in the beginning of racism, why must we be "together" now, in some supposed effort to end it.
If we're "interdependent and interrelated like all of nature," then why tinker with all that togetherness and oneness. Ending racism is not going to bring us closer together, than interdependence, and interrelatedness.
I'm just not that fond of racists.
If you desire such a task, such a goal, such a mission in life, have at it.
I will not "step up to the plate to end racism together," separately, or any other fashion you may devise. I will not take the initiative to change anyone, nor will I turn down anyone who's sincerely seeking to divest themselves of the racial scourge we call racism.
"Considering your claim to feel no pain, it makes perfect sense that you would boldly and unabashedly state that you 'don't have to do a damn thing' about racism."
"Imho, you are coming from the place of a vacant heart."
I don't have to do a damn thing about racism. It's not my problem. If you wish to make it your problem, be my guest, but don't invite me to follow your folly.
And just so we understand each other, let me reiterate: I feel no pain. I'm happy just as I am, and I would change nothing in my life.
And further, I'm not going to do a "damn" thing about racism. It's not my problem. If I'm asked by those whose problem it is, to assist them in overcoming, I will give my utmost effort.
I've spent a while here chatting with you. I think you have a good heart, but your perception is a bit cloudy. And you're not the only one: There are many who see things as you see them. And that's a pity.
But I don't fault you. I say it's a pity, not as a put down, for I have no desire to diminish, but to uplift. You're coming at this all wrong. And yet, I have no wish to make you wrong.
You think you can change that which you didn't create. You think you can solve that which is not your problem. You can proffer answers, to be sure, but the solution is in the hands of the problem-maker--in the working out of the problem, given the answers.
In that, you cannot participate.
@La♥Incognita: "I just love it when you come around to share your high quality of wisdom."
Thank you. I think I'll stay for awhile.
@Race Traitoress: "I'm very thankful for your voice."
And I'm thankful for yours. Yours is a voice "crying in the wilderness." Some are hearing you, while others are content to hear their own voice.
But speak, we must!
"Of course BD is in pain over racism. Plus she's really pissed off at me...."
Now, that's funny. On both accounts, Grinder, you're wrong. But believe what you choose. I don't give a damn.
"But Black Diaspora's words have to be seen as a rhetorical statement of defiance and anger. I don't take her denial of pain literally. You can't be angry without being in pain about something."
Why would you deny me my own words? They don't belong to you. They're mine.
I say what I mean, and mean what I say. No rhetorical flourishes. No dialectic subterfuge.
And if I did choose to be angry at you, that would be my choice, too.
Grinder, I can be whatever I choose to be--with, or without your approval.
Let's see: Anon posted here at 8:22PM. You posted here at 10:32 PM.
Riddle me this: If I'm so pissed off at you, why would I post over at your blog on/at September 26, 2009 2:50 PM?
I would have responded here sooner, had I not been out most of the day.
I don't know where your new sidekick, and now, army buddy, showed up from, but s/he's squarely in your corner. A little wet behind the ears, but Granny will straighten him/her out.
Young whelp!
BD "I'm just not that ego-driven."
Only an ego would make such a self-serving statement like that. BD, you are All ego-driven but you wouldn't know it because, well, you are ego-driven and consequently blinded by it.
@BD "I'm afraid that you don't know all the players here, or you wouldn't have jumped to such a rash conclusion."
If you are referring to your followers-RT and LI- I have no interest in knowing them or their opinions. They can't cover for you, or how you come across. They cannot validate your warped thinking by calling it wisdom. Your little gang of space cadets don't influence me and I am sure there are others who feel the same way.
You prove nothing except that the three of you are like emotional invalids joined at the hips. You are like puppies in a litter huddling together out of fear.
You three are so enmeshed that you probably can't go to the toilet without determining who needs to go. Do any of you ever disagree? I imagine that would be too frightening for all of you. Your little cult would fall apart.
@BD "I don't know where your new sidekick, and now, army buddy, showed up from, but s/he's squarely in your corner. A little wet behind the ears, but Granny will straighten him/her out."
I am not anybody's sidekick and I don't stand in anybody's corner unless they are right.
But it is clear to EVERYONE that 'BD' needs a lot of "sidekicks" on this blog. It is a good thing because you DO need it, to protect your faulty thinking and weak opinions.
Now you are drawing Granny into the mix? Boy, you are really bringing out the big guns, aren't you? You must be really afraid.
How many are in your gang? four? five? ten? You come off as some child crying out for her grandmother for consolement when your feelings have been hurt-and you are frightened.
At your age, don't you think it's time you learned to stand on your own two feet? Or are you so old that it's too late to learn anything new?
Two pieces of advice for you BD, although you are too prideful to accept advice:
1.Give up your denials and accept your anger and resentments as being human.
2.Try being human and join the rest of the human race on earth. Don't let your prideful "ego" get in the way of being human. That's what you are here for.
The benefit of the above advice is that not only will you feel better, you will become a better person. Besides, everyone can see your flaws anyway, except you and maybe your band of followers.
And stop using Granny for your own ego needs. It makes you look like a jerk.
Got to disagree with your post - I love President Clinton - he's the best President this country has had in my lifetime.
Yes, he had faults - "loved" women a little too much, but to insinuate that he is racist is going too far.
If Clinton is the best you can do to show that the left also has racists, you're not doing too well.
You three are so enmeshed that you probably can't go to the toilet without determining who needs to go. Do any of you ever disagree? I imagine that would be too frightening for all of you. Your little cult would fall apart.
Bwahahahahaha!
I think this is the first time La Incognita has EVER agreed with me, and while I do love to share an agreeable concept with a like-minded thinker, I won't hold my breath for it to happen again! She is 100% her own self, which I admire and appreciate, though I don't often see things her way.
As for Black Diaspora--she makes me think, she speaks clearly, she does NOT suffer fools gladly, and she cuts through bullshit with a terrible swift sword. I've grown to appreciate what she can teach me, and perceive her to be one of the wisest scholars I've ever known.
You crazy, anonymous whoever-you-are. At least grinder has the eggs to adopt a handle and jump into the fray honestly.
Anon: "The benefit of the above advice is that not only will you feel better, you will become a better person. Besides, everyone can see your flaws anyway, except you and maybe your band of followers."
You've been a lot of fun, and I've enjoyed the exchange.
I know where the trail ends, and you've brought me closer to it.
Up ahead, there's a sign in the road...!
Why would you deny me my own words? They don't belong to you. They're mine.
You can have any words you want, but you can wind up revealing what you never intended to reveal.
"The poet knows where he is going, though he doesn’t always know he knows. He works in showing what he didn’t know he knew." – Ned Rorem, New York Diaries
I don't know where your new sidekick, and now, army buddy, showed up from, but s/he's squarely in your corner.
Ha ha! Sidekick. Like I need one. BD, thanks for today's laugh!
grinder "The poet knows where he is going, though he doesn’t always know he knows. He works in showing what he didn’t know he knew." – Ned Rorem, New York Diaries"
great quote and it suits BD. Yeah, that sidekick stuff by BD is laughable considering all of the sidekicks she has.
But as Anais Nin used to say, "We don't see others as they are, we see them as we are."
Nevertheless, it's been fun roasting BD and her admirers.
I respect BD. Some of the others, not so much.
grinder "I respect BD. Some of the others, not so much."
I admire your heart. Obviously you feel BD has earned your respect. Good luck with that.
I admire your heart. Obviously you feel BD has earned your respect. Good luck with that.
She can also un-earn it, but it'll take some time for that. Tempers are running high at the moment.
visit HEELSNCLEAVAGE for fantastic information and products for increasing your height.
HEEL LIFT
HEIGHT INCREASE INSOLES
HEEL LIFTS
HEEL PADS
HEEL PADS
ADJUSTABLE HEEL LIFTS
A HEEL LIFT
NIPPLE COVERS
SHOES INSOLES
SHOE INSOLES
BRAS
NIPPLE COVERS
NIPPLE PASTIES
SOLE PROTECTORS
ARCH SUPPORTS
SHOE STRAPS
HEEL GRIPS
Post a Comment