Zora Says: What Would White Folks Think?

At this point, you have all figured out that Chauncey, Gordon and I differ a lot in our writing styles, in our sense of humor, and in our perspectives on the politics of race. This isn't something that typically bothers us; indeed, in the great Negro tradition, we glory in our diversity. However, there is one area that we continue to struggle with -- What do White folks think? and Do we care?

I have to say that from the early beginnings of this blog, I have always been conscious of how White readers would interpret our posts. My concerns have had to do less with whether or not they will see them as acceptable nee respectable, and more to do with them misinterpreting our project. We all know that there are things that we might say among ourselves that we would never say in mixed company. (I think that this must be true for every racial or ethnic group in America, including Jews, Desi, Chinese-Americans, etc.)

Alexyss Tylor has been the subject of several Chauncey DeVega posts. And, to quote Monty Python's Pontious Pilot, Alexyss is indeed "wisible." I have never been completely comfortable highlighting her on this site, however, because I don't think that White folks get the joke. Do they see truth where we see irony? In order for something to be ironic, it has to have some basis in reality. If our White readers have a skewed understanding of African-American life in the first place, how can they ever get our jokes? This is the conundrum that Dave Chapelle found himself in: are they laughing with me, or are they laughing at me?

Being a respectable Negress, I also worry about how certain images and narratives will reflect on the African-American community at large. We actually have a post label titled "politics of respectability" that we attach to postings that either challenge negro respectability or engage it in some way. Among our "dislikes" are malt liquor, Tyler Perry and ghetto literature. Why? Because they either confirm or reinforce negative racial stereotypes. Chaucey recently wanted to post pictures from You Know You Dead Ass Wrong on our blog and I flat out refused. I don't want any part of promoting negative images of Negroes, for there is an abundance out there already. On this subject, Gordon often loses his patience with me. He feels no attachment to the figures on sites like Hot Ghetto Mess. His sense of linked fate does not extend to them. He and Chris Rock share the sentiment that there is a difference between "niggers" and black people. Gordon may have a valid point, but do White people get that difference?

Finally, I don't like double-standards. How would we react if we found out that Hot Ghetto Mess was produced by a bunch of elite, White kids? Or, better yet, by Republican operatives? Can we refer to ourselves or to others as "niggers" and then get upset when someone White does the same thing? Can we be essentialist about other races and ethnic groups and then protest when we are essentialized? Does it matter if we are "just joking?"

"It's a very delicate line to walk," says David Allen Grier in discussing his new show Chocolate News. "...It's one thing to put on a dress and be that sassy black woman, which is a negative African-American female archetype. Now it's another thing to comment on just that phenomenon ... There has been a genetic mutation ... that the only way black men can be heard is by dressing like fat black mamas."

Both Chauncey and Gordon often say that we shouldn't waste our time concerned about how others will interpret our work. We simply can't control what readers, Negro or not, will take away. Even while they say this in the context of this blog, I also know that they are strivers who study and work in circles where they are often "the only one." No matter what they say, they have to care what White people think.

What do other Negro bloggers think? How are you all navigating this terrain? Who's your audience? And for White bloggers and readers, what do you people think? Am I underestimating you?

Negro History Week is Pre-empted by our Racial Id's

We desperately tried and wanted to share our "respectable origins." Unfortunately, because Zora our resident voice of reason is AWOL, Brother Gordon and I are reverting to our normal semi-respectable ways. With our voice of reason temporarily absent, our racial ids have run amok once more. You see, Zora would intervene and beg us not to proceed, but without her civilizing and compassionate influence we are left to our own devices--our own inner Bill Cosby's.

We have had these photos for some time but decided not to post them. They were gathered during one of our trips to the local ghetto mall, you know the one with the dress codes, the security guards, and hoards of ignt's engaged in their local mating rituals. Our compassionate souls restrained us, but our racial ids have compelled us forward. Part of my psyche said, "they know not the evil the do," but the other part said, "these folks just want to be 'hood celebrities." You, our respectable negro patrons can decide if these photos are 1) sad; 2) depressing; 3) funny as hell; or 4) tragic.

We are Respectable Negro's exhibit number 1

This picture represents a number of troubling possibilities. From least worrisome to most...

1. This is a picture for grandma. Here, grandma is much older. The kids in the photo, and the mother, are just a little young but we will let it pass.
2. Maybe grandma is in her 30s and the folks in the picture are her "grands" and her daughter. This is troubling because the daughter was in her teens when she got knocked up and the kids are damn too young.
3. The kids and mom are in the same cohort as noted above, but they are dressed like "little men" and "little women." You know that pathology where among the ingnt's children are made adults. That is a bit disgusting and sad. Moreover, little kids are not adults. And little boys made into "little men" become medium sized men whom grow up to be prison inmates. Finally, toddlers should not be dressed like junior gang bangers--sorry for being insensitive.
4. Troubling, maybe this is mom and these are her kids? So, mom had her kids in her mid-teens? I don't like that.
5. Most troubling, maybe this is grandma, and these are her grandkids. As Chris Rock said, "if you call momma Pam, and grandma mom, you are going to prison."

We are Respectable Negro's exhibits 2 and 3

1. I am speechless.
2. Could this be an effort to simply find acceptance amongst one's peers? However sad? Among some social classes maybe showing pregnant bellies is cute?
3. Maybe distended pregnant belly buttons are sexy? Am I a prude?
4. Maybe among some ignt's (and others) to be pregnant is to be proud, and to be pregnant and to display one's body on tacky posters, in photos, and on inexpensive t-shirts is praiseworthy?
5. Baby Phat? Yikes...

I will play devil's advocate. Are these photos any more or less tacky than this magazine cover?

Or this sculpture?

You all tell us...

Chauncey DeVega says: Reductio ad adsurdum--A Response to Victomology Blues

Reductio ad adsurdum

(Latin: “reduction to absurdity”), in logic, a form of refutation showing contradictory or absurd consequences following upon premises as a matter of logical necessity. A form of the reductio ad absurdum argument, known as indirect proof.

reductio ad impossibile, is one that proves a proposition by showing that its denial conjoined with other propositions previously…

These conversations about gender and race make me really nervous. I know I can't win. I know I can't help but lose. As a man, I benefit from sexism by default, in much the same way that white people, regardless of their personal politics and ethics, benefit from white privilege.

As a black man that loves black women, I often feel that I am damned if I do, and damned if I don't. This is an immutable truth that transcends race, national boundaries, language, ethnicity, and class. We men folk want to say the "right" thing, and by doing so affirm the women we love in our lives, and to offer support to those women who have mentored and guided us. I for one know that if not for the black women in my life, and those loving, interested, and caring white, brown, and yellow women that have shared wisdom, love, and guidance with me, that I wouldn't be the sexual tyrannosaurus that I am today...Ha ha! had you going for a second with that black male feminist crap didn't I?

Seriously, when men and women talk about gender, and specifically, when I talk about gender as a man who happens to be black, I feel like the character Moleman on the Simpsons: I just keep getting hit in the balls regardless of what I say, and I keep getting hit over and over and over again. I know I can't win, but hell, I will keep trying:

For the record, Zora and Gordon, I think you both capture a significant part of what is problematic about these conversations regarding WAOD, black popular culture, and the politics of gender in the black community. I also think you point to a need in the black community to have a serious conversation about what a "progressive" black political agenda would look like (something we will certainly address on this site).

Deploying the absurd, I center my first set of observations on my worry that groups such as "What about our Daughters?", groups who point to hip hop and popular culture as a primary source for societal evil, are advancing an agenda based upon a fallacy--not one simple fallacy, but rather a big, one legged, crooked one--which is the myth of the strong black woman, and that women are under "assault" by hip hop and black popular culture. Extrapolating from this logic, black women are strong women. By extension, strong women are under assault by black popular culture because they, and we all, should expect affirmation from popular culture. Moving forward, strong black women need to respond to this affront because popular culture impacts their life choices and life chances. Black women are under assault which compromises their strength and so we need to resist this attack by popular culture. But, black women's strength is both "natural" and "necessary." Doesn't this almost sound tautological?

What is a strong black woman? How do you know her when you see her? What are her attributes? More importantly, what are the implications of this "strong" black woman myth for "regular" black women?

Is a strong black woman as strong as Wolverine's claws and the adamantium from which they are made? Why isn't the strong black woman included on this list of fictional super metals? What is a strong black woman? Can she break watermelons with her thighs?

Damn that got me excited.

Does a strong black woman have superior physical strength?

Is the strong black woman as strong as this white queen?

I love black women. I love strong women. I especially love strong black women like Nichelle Nichols:

Maybe the women at Supersistas got it right? Maybe, we need to counter the assault on black women with lots of affirmation and with videos such as this one:

Be careful supersistas because this approach may backfire, as there are lots of men who would love to be punished and dominated by you.

Maybe the brothers at blacktown.net have some wisdom to offer on this issue?

Guess not. But, I just love saying "blacktown.net". It has a ring to it, doesn't it?

I don't know what a strong black woman is. I know it is a slogan on the T-shirts sold at the Korean owned hood hair care product/clothing/shoes/miscellaneous items store in my neighborhood. I know it is something that harpies like these miserable souls throw about like so much spare change when they try to dispel the myth of the "angry black woman." I also deeply suspect that the narrative of the strong black woman hurts black women (and women more generally who subscribe to it) because this myth encourages women to make poor choices in their lives, and to play the victim in a cycle of despair. The narrative of the strong black woman also prevents vulnerability and forces black women to take on unreasonable burdens.

But, I am confused because I know many black women who I would label as strong. I also know many women that I would label as weak. As a social scientist, I also know about the difficulties faced by women who have to negotiate the often vexing combination of sexism and racism. Ultimately, while I am confused by this all, I know something about the idea of the strong black woman just doesn't sit right with me, and I suspect it may not sit well with many of you as well.

Yes, you are a woman.

Thank you for this passionate, intelligent reply, Sister Zora.

I will respond to a few of your most relevant points, but I will address the bulk of them in the next installments of the Victimology Blues posts.

First, I never suggested that Civil Rights injustices be fought primarily with positive images. WAOD’s explicit goal is to combat negative media depictions of black women. If McCauley and her supporters believe that media and popular culture are the main battlegrounds, then their chief strategy should be publicizing as many stories of positive black women as possible, not publicizing crimes in which black women are victimized.

Moreover, I don’t think that McCauley is really framing these crimes and their handling as Civil Rights issues, which is surprising given that she’s a lawyer. If McCauley and co. had decided to highlight the policing and legal ramifications of these crimes, I might feel differently about WAOD. McCauley makes clear, though, that WAOD is mainly a matter of cleaning up a poisonous culture.

Some lip service notwithstanding, the thrust of the site is not, “Let’s do everything we can to 1) help the police locate and arrest the perpetrators, 2) support these black women victims financially and legally, and 3) mobilize political change to our corrupt law enforcement and judicial systems.” It’s “see, black women are victims too!” WAOD is treating the crimes themselves, not the surrounding legal issues, as newsworthy. Without question, these crimes are significant to the victims and the communities where they occur; however, I don’t see how they are significant beyond their local contexts, and it’s not because the victims are black women. Frankly, I don’t think that any such cases deserve attention from national media. For instance, why spend airtime on stories about JonBenet Ramsey and Natalie Hollaway, who have been dead for years? And what about the current media fixation on Stacy Peterson? The mainstream media is disingenuously stating that their coverage might bring Peterson home, but that’s nonsense: they are assuming that she’s already dead. I’m sorry, I just don’t see why this case has merit as a national news story.

You are right to note the importance of publicizing injustice, and yes, I think that all symbolic victim-based activism is exploitative in a sense. But some forms of exploitation are more defensible than others: it all comes down to the wider implications. In the iconic Civil Rights era crimes you mention, law enforcement and the state was supportive of (and often involved in) the crimes and the legal cover ups. That state governments engaged in total disenfranchisement and the federal government looked the other way meant that black residents had no legal way to remedy the systemic injustices. The entire political, social, legal, economic, system was rotten. Wells, King, etc. worked to fight systemic collective injustice. These missing or brutalized woman cases are matters of personal, localized injustice. The notion that these crimes occur because our popular culture devalues black women is nonsense. Allow me to revert back to Social Science mode for a moment: correlation does not = causation.

Violence has been a fundamental reality throughout recorded human history. Rape and physical abuse were around long before the advent of mass media. I don’t deny that negative images have an adverse affect on the perception of certain groups, but removing these images from public and commercial spaces will not get at the heart of the problem. Entertainment isn’t really the relevant battleground. The problem is that consumer-citizens are treating songs, movies, and TV shows as a valid source of information about groups of people. That has almost nothing to do with the “negative” content; that has to do with short-circuits in peoples’ social interaction and perhaps in their cognitive ability. Don’t those of us interested in progressive social and political change always say that we need to attack the roots of problems? It’s easy to point a finger at the big corporations for spreading trash; it’s not as satisfying to shift responsibility toward families and other social institutions that should prevent and/or correct these short-circuits.

It’s true that I defend people’s right to disrespect black women, but that’s somewhat misleading. I defend people’s right to disrespect anyone—that’s the very essence of freedom of speech. Still, I’m less concerned with defending bigots than I am with fighting the effects of censorship. Black people from previous generations endured far worse in terms of public vilification and were stronger for it. I believe that we’re breeding a society of psychological weaklings whose first impulse is not to engage and defeat offending voices, but to silence them. Just to clear up any confusion, this is a problem throughout societies, not one limited to any specific identity group.

I’m glad you mentioned “Girls, Girls, Girls” because it not only highlights our disagreements, it also recalls my issue with TAN. In the song, Jay-Z frequently conflates Indian (from India) and Native American stereotypes; he attributes french braids, french kissing, and french fries to France; the part about the African woman is lifted directly from Ed Murph’s stand-up comedy special Raw, which is, I’ll admit, one of the most misogynistic screeds from a man who clearly has issues with women …unless they have penises.

I don’t take from the song that Jay-Z disparages black women in comparison to other women across the world; I take from it that Jay-Z works with dominant cultural stereotypes to reveal their inherent ridiculousness. As such, “Girls, Girls, Girls” is one of Jay-Z’s most clever songs. But it wasn’t popular because people understood its satirical bent; it was popular because listeners like to revel in stereotypes and the beat was catchy as hell. The problems with the song’s reception are the same problems that led to Chappelle’s crisis: people don’t like to acknowledge that popular cultural texts can mean different things to different audiences, and the base meaning normally overshadows every other meaning. I don’t think Jay-Z cares; after all, no one outside of Dyson-types really considered him a social critic. Chappelle definitely cares, though, which is why he was never meant for long-term stratospheric popularity.

Sister Zora, yes, you are a woman, but I think black women’s desire to be treated like white women is unhealthy. Sojourner Truth was speaking in the middle of the 19^th Century. Much has changed since then. Your call for black men to defend black women’s honor and your wish for black women victims to receive the kind of national media attention reserved for (usually young, blonde, middle-to-upper class, and relatively attractive) white women shows a surprising attachment to gender orthodoxy. It’s accepted wisdom in our line of work that when men talk about defending female honor, they are usually providing a justification for controlling not only women’s bodies but also ideas about gender roles in society. The history of the rhetoric surrounding lynching and war is all the evidence one needs to confirm this.

I understand that black women don’t even have the luxury of being “overprotected” and that the concern about having ones honor exploited underscores the privilege of upper class white feminists. But let’s say that you get your wish and black women are afforded the same victim value that white women receive. Better to be a victim than a ho, right? Well, yeah, of course, but you’re still a victim. You’re still an abstraction. You’re still an archetype. You’ll never be a woman, a human being with inherent worth and agency, as long as you’re only important as a victim, a caretaker, or a Jezebel (all in the service of men).

Finally, you can say that this isn’t about hurt feelings, but that’s hard to believe. How else do you explain the popularity of the tired “Why don’t black men love us?” topic cluttering magazine racks, bookshelves, TV, and the net?

Zora Says: Ain't I a Woman?

That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or gives me any best place! And ain't I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And ain't I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man - when I could get it - and bear the lash as well! And ain't I a woman? I have borne thirteen children, and seen most all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother's grief, none but Jesus heard me! And ain't I a woman?
-- Sojourner Truth at the Women’s Convention in Akron, Ohio 1851

Ain’t I a Woman? When Sojourner Truth asked this question in 1851, I doubt that she would have expected it to still be relevant over a century and a half later. Within the African-American community, it is easy for us to identify white privilege. We all know that white people will never understand the sense of powerlessness that comes with “driving while black;” that they will never understand that no matter how hard we work and how many degrees we earn, African-Americans are still measured against the lowest element in our community; that they will never acknowledge that they can be mediocre at best and still find success, but that African-Americans have to be the best in order to be acknowledge as simply adequate. The privileges of whiteness are real and indisputable.

What is more difficult for us to identify as a community are the privileges of masculinity. For decades and decades, African-American women have been asked to set aside gender issues in order not to detract from the “larger” struggles of race. Those who have not have been labeled as self-centered, as race traitors, as pawns of white women … From our earliest history in this country, our bodies and our sexuality have never been broadly accepted as our own. As a result, not only are African-American women not respected by mainstream society, we are also not fully respected within our own communities.

Over our history, African-American women have been molested, raped, beaten and kidnapped without so much as a whisper in the mainstream newspapers. There have been several recent cases where accomplished young, African-American women have disappeared with no public alerts. Only God knows if, given adequate news coverage and police man power, they could have been returned home to their families. Even mainstream journalists acknowledge this problem. One of the reasons why we fail to receive the coverage that white women receive is that we don’t have the privilege of being victims. Whatever happens to us as African-American women is our own damn fault: If one of our little sisters is molested, how often is she accused of being “fast?” If one of us is date-raped and reports the crime, how likely will we be charged with being “stupid in the first place” or, if the man is rich and famous, a “gold-digging whore?” If someone raises a hand to us, how often do others wonder what we did to deserve it? No, in America, only white, virtuous maidens have the privilege of being victims. For African-American women, we simply need to “get over it;” for we are not worthy of the same outrage and respect.

Brother Gordon argues that bringing attention to African-American female crime victims serves to further exploit them and undermine their worth. I am grateful that Ida B. Wells-Barnett did not share a similar sentiment. She knew that unless the entire world was confronted with the knowledge that African-Americans were being regularly victimized with lynchings, strange fruit would continue to swing from trees across America. Mamie Till, in all of her grief, would not allow herself to be silenced when her son was brutally murdered. She demonstrated courage and self-sacrifice in allowing her son’s battered body to serve as a testament to white brutality. Martin Luther King, Jr., too, understood the power of the media and the need to publicize injustice. (Let us not forget that many whites accused him of being self-serving, of playing the victim). I refer to these figures not to suggest that McCauley is in their league, but merely to suggest that sometimes a crime or injustice is a part of a phenomenon and is larger than one individual – that it can reflect, implicate and impact entire communities. When this is true, privacy and individualism only serve to hide and support the crime. Is Brother Gordon suggesting that civil rights injustices could have better been addressed with more positive images? Were Wells, Till and King "media circus-driven race crusaders?"

Sexual and physical abuse are real problems in the African-American community -- problems that a lot of folks prefer not to address for fear that we will look bad. What they fail to realize is that we look much worse by failing to be honest about the problem and not taking steps to address it. (Saudi Arabia is a good example of this: its not that it’s the only country where rapes occur, but it is one of the few countries that so steadfastly ignore it and choose to instead isolate and blame the victims). How can we address difficult problems if we do not look them squarely in the face? By putting forward only positive images, we create a false narrative that the problem doesn’t exist.

In discussing the problems of rape and physical abuse, we cannot diminish the role of popular culture and media imagery. African-American males, in both the professional and working class, know full well the impact of persistent stereotypes that affect their day-to-day experiences and larger life chances. African-American men are less likely to be selected as teaching and research assistants in graduate schools because of irrational fears stemming from media stereotypes. The growth in gangsta glorification in hip-hop, urban films, ghetto lit and reality shows is having an enormous impact not just on white perceptions of us, but unfortunately also on young, black men's own perception of themselves. Popular culture and the media have a huge impact on our lived experiences and on how we perceive the world … this is why the entertainment industry is one of the most lucrative areas of our economy … why politicians invest so much in campaign ads … why Rupert Murdock is one of the most powerful men in America.

I know that you know all of this Gordon, and that you have thought about it. For this reason, I cannot understand why you are so quick to dismiss how negative images can and do affect the lived experiences of African-American women – especially when there is very little positive balance. African-American women constantly have to battle the idea that they are whores and that their bodies are accessible to everyone (that is when they are not perceived as sexless maids). It is already terrible that whites often perceive us this way, but it is even more terrible that increasingly black men are seeing us this way.

As a community, we are increasingly internalizing the idea that African-American women are unworthy of respect. I remember hearing Louis Farrakhan give a speech at Columbia University in the 1990s. He lamented that black women used to be referred to as the Supremes, the Dolls and the Royalettes, but that now some of us ask to be called Bitches With Problems. I was surprised when I listened closely to Jay-Z's Girls, Girls, Girls. He praises women around the world for their attributes, but when he talks about black women he takes on a different tone:

I got this black chick, she don't know how to act

Always talkin out her neck, makin her fingers snap...

I got this African chick with Eddie Murphy on her skull

She like, "Jigga Man, why you treat me like animal?

"I'm like excuse me Ms. Fufu, but when I met your ass

you was dead broke and naked, and now you want half

I got this ho that after twelve million sold

Mami's a narcolyptic, always sleepin on Hov'

Gotta tie the back of her head like Deuce Bigalow...

What is going on in the head of Jay-Z and others like him? Isn't it a sign of sickness that he sees African-American women (his sisters, his mother, his aunts) so negatively? I don't argue that he doesn't have the right to say whatever he wants, but let's not pretend that what he says does not impact others.

Please know that this is not about the low self-esteem or hurt feelings of African-American women. Perceptions and treatment of African-American women are inseperable from the growth of the African-American community as a whole. The value of a segment impacts the value of the whole. Oh, if only the Black Panther leadership could have understood this. What is going on in our communities that we so freely disparaged and disrespect black women? Why are some African-American men so quick to defend the rights of their brothers to disrespect the sisters? Why are they not as quick to protect and defend the honor of African-American women?

Have we progressed so much that we no longer have to think about the community as a whole? As long as my children know better, as long as my wife is not gang-raped, as long as I am empowered enough to take advantage of opportunities, as long as I live in a community where positive African-American role models abound ... What happened to taking pride in ourselves as a community? What happened to our sense of linked fate?

Chauncey Devega says: Priceless!

When the sisters speak their own language:

Plus victomology:

Equals priceless!!!

Just being provocative....any takers?

Zora Says: Who Be We in the Galaxy?

I agree with Gordon. Sun Ra and his Arkestra should be an obvious choice for our galactic calling card. His music has been reaching other worlds for quite a while now ... Space__Is___The___Place. Close seconds, for me, would be Rahsaan Roland Kirk and Fela Kuti. Dim lights, deep merlot (some need reefer) and any of these guys on the CD player has the potential of elevating even the most mundane of us to another world.

Sun Ra

Rahsaan Roland Kirk

Fela Kuti

There is absolutely no place for anything Hip Hop on our mix tape. This isn’t a slam against the genre, but more a comment on the nature of the music. Overall, it addresses the business of the street, the here-and-now. Where once it provided an alternative voice, a “bite back,” it increasingly just promotes a faux vision of gangster life, of urban life, of negro life … What’s more, it is ahistorical – for most hip hop artists, our life began in the 1980s (maybe the 70s, but only as a source of samples). Transcendence Hip Hop does not offer.

Communing with alternative life forms requires something existential, a deep probing of who we be – as negro Americans, as decedents of Africans, as Black people, as men and women, as human beings, as earthlings … Who be we? I still don’t know, but Sun Ra, Kirk and Kuti are examples of black artists who require serious introspection.

Post note:
Anyone who appreciates the music of Sun Ra, should not be so quick to dismiss science fiction, speculative fiction, zombie flicks, etc. These art forms require the same level of thought -- an ability to imagine alternative ways of being, to reason outside of what has been given to us as rational. Octavia Butler, for example, was one who understood well the potential for science/speculative fiction to explore and explain the madness and irrationality of race. Chauncey and I will have to school you on this later …

Gordon Gartrelle says: Speak For Yourself!

"As renaissance negroes we are also black geeks"

You know damn well that I'm not into comic books, videogames, "Star Wars," sci fi books, zombie flicks, slasher flicks, "Lord of The Rings," Monty Python, computer programming, or any other element of geek culture. I was a huge "Simpsons" fan before it started sucking, though.

And "There be life" is not a valid construction in AAVE . Stop disrespecting our heritage, Brother.

To answer the question, I say we send samples of our greatest alien musical representatives:

Sun Ra, Funkadelic, and Outkast.

I think we should also send the complete works of James Baldwin. Not only was his intelligence otherworldly, just look at his face and tell me the aliens wouldn't recognize him as their brother.

For anybody doubting this project, I leave you with visual evidence of the potential fruitfulness of the 1st contact between human and alien species:

Behold:

Gordon Gartrelle says: Why we (dis)like it: Lightskinnededgirl

The likes and dislikes links to the right aren’t consensus picks. In fact, each of us can add to the likes and dislikes independently of the others. Last week, I proposed an idea for a regular feature: Why we (dis)like it. This feature will consist of one of the respectable negroes objecting to the like or dislike selection of another, and this second negro then defending the selection. The third might chime in as well. Why we (dis)like it will serve not only to highlight more of our disagreements, but also to spark broader argument about the value of the people, things, and sites on our lists.

I was going to wait until next week to write the first Why we (dis)like it entry, and lightskinnededgirl was one of the two subjects I was considering. But when I saw that she made a blog post yesterday bemoaning her addition to our dislikes list, she made the choice for me.

---------------

It might seem strange that I’m defending lightskinnededgirl, given that:

1.) I’m an admitted hater.

2.) I share my colleagues’ distaste for tragic mulatta narratives--they’re tired, they are often based on the desire to be distinguished from “regular blacks,” and they perpetuate essentialist racial and cultural binaries.

and 3.) I wouldn’t say that I’m a fan of her blog.

I do, however, respect her right to define herself without being castigated. The type of “mixed up” identity that can come as a result of having a black and a white parent seems more justified than, for instance, the pathetic “I got Indian in my family” bullshit that internalized hatred has kept alive among black folks.

Race screws up everybody; lightskinnededgirl is just screwed up in a different way than are those who identify as white or black.

There are bigger fish to fry, negroes. I say we toss this one back.

Gordon Gartrelle says: You disappoint me, Brother Chauncey

You’re getting old. You do realize that you sound like the nostalgia pimps who start every sentence, “back in my day” or “these kids today,” right? You’re one step away from shaking your fist at “whipper snappers” for walking on your lawn.

Kids of all generations dress like clowns. Don’t make me post an old picture of you rockin a hi top fade and Hammer pants.

[You have to admit kids everywhere wanted to wear Hammer's outfit from the Turn this mutha out video. Actually, I was rockin the Ellesse sneakers (or multicolored boat shoes), with some Cavarichi pants and a Cross Colors jean jacket--I was so beautiful, sort of like a cross between Prince and Carlton. When I had a date I would wear my high cut Italian dress boots, with my cardigan sweater or a turtleneck under my Colin Powell desert camo jacket. I really wanted an S curl or a high top fade but my mom wouldn't let me, she said I would look to 'hood--Chauncey]

This whole thing reminds me of a Jimi Izrael piece on Black Enterprise’s Earl Graves, a negro with some fucked up porkchop sideburns, forcing an intern to cut his dreadlocks because they convey the wrong corporate image.

Why is it that folks who look busted always feel the need to judge other people’s appearance?

[Granted the White T/Saggin pants ign't kids don't necessarily look any better than the people judging them, but the consequences for their mutual lack of fashion sense are quite different, don't you think?--Chauncey]

And how is saggin’ holding anyone back? You act as if brothers are rolling into Fortune 500 job interviews with their pants around their knees. Let’s address real problems, please. Focusing on superficial shit is the job of the media.

And I'm glad that you mentioned the Cos'. Now there's a brother who knew how to dress for success!

Zora says: The Politics of Respectability? or, the Politics of Responsibility?

Gordon, I consider both you and Chauncey to be friends. As such, I presume that you are intelligent and deliberative, that you think about the impact of your words and that you are capable of giving context to phenomena in our community. Above all else, I presume that in fact you love black people (I hope so, at least). I do not presume that you are both progressives -- that remains to be seen.

I will never waste my time defending "black degenerates," or any other kind of degenerate. They simply are not worth it. But neither will I waste my time highlighting and publicizing degenerate black behavior. Why? Again, they are not worth it. I only wish that the American media, white conservatives and black "progressives(?)conservatives" like Chauncey and Bill Cosby would share my perspective. Oprah Winfrey, for example, disappointed me greatly when she defended her choice to build a school in South Africa by saying that inner-city children in the U.S. wouldn't value a free education. Apparently, she asked a couple of kids in Chicago what they would want from her and they answered gym shoes. She took those few responses to represent the values of an entire class of children in our community. In spite of her own self and her own history, she bought into what the media consistently sells regarding our people. (I do wonder if Oprah now will be as quick to make generalizations about South Africans given that her new school is at the center of controversy). Please let us not forget that from the very time we arrived in the U.S., we have been putting our lives at risk in pursuit of education. Those values are still kicking in our community.

Why not use our voices and resources to discuss the black working poor who are struggling to get ahead? to discuss cutbacks in American public schools? to discuss the lack of police protection in urban neighborhoods? ... Let's address the root causes of disfunction where it exists rather than just mocking those who are disfunctional. This is not about making excuses, it is about taking responsibility.

Gordon and Chauncey, here's to performing the politics of responsibility! My brothers, are you with me?

Gordon Gartrelle says: Respectable to Ourselves!

Sister Zora,

Buffoons of all stripes are made to be clowned. Don’t you laugh at tacky rednecks or homoerotic white frat boys? Why does it become a matter of racial elitism when the buffoons are poor and black?

Shouldn’t we, progressive thinkers concerned about black well-being, be given the benefit of the doubt? We don’t hate black people. We aren’t ashamed of our blackness. We don’t believe that racism has been eradicated from our society. We don’t believe that all poor black people are hopeless degenerates. We do, however, believe that some poor black people are degenerates, and that those of us who should know better continue to enable and make excuses for them. Clearly, the black underclass doesn’t have a monopoly on dysfunction, but we delude ourselves by pretending that the problems aren’t acute among this population.

What’s more discouraging is that “respectable” black people jump to publicly defend black degenerates—I emphasize “publicly.” I’ve spent a lot of time with brothers and sisters like yourself: educated defenders of the black underclass, performing all manners of excuse-making and victimology to anyone who will listen in public, but who behind closed doors spew the most callous vitriol about the very people they defend. The harshest comments I’ve heard about the black underclass have come from educated black progressives (as well as the respectable members of the underclass itself). As Brother Chauncey often jokes, Michael Eric Dyson—brilliant, pandering flimflam artist that he is—probably looks at the loud, vulgar, disrespectful horde of black kids in ghetto neighborhoods and says to himself, “What a bunch of ign’ant ass niggas.”

The politics of respectability used to be performed primarily for white people. Since courting white approval is pathological, it’s time for the politics of respectability to be performed for black people, especially the worse off among us.

Zora says: Respectable to Whom?

What does it mean to be a "respectable negro?" Does it mean that you take all of the opportunities that you've been blessed with just to throw stones at those of your brethren who have not been as blessed? Does it mean that you can use the antics of a few to represent the behavior of an entire class?

I really don't understand the obvious joy you take in highlighting buffoons -- people who do not represent our brothers, our cousins, our mothers, our friends... You seem to be endorsing the white, mainstream practice of only giving black folks attention when they do something to support a stereotype.

Does the black underclass only serve to make you respectable, Mr. DeVega? "See, boss! I ain't like dem der negroes. I be respectabul!"