#even if race or racism or racial differences are not at the forefront of the convo or even really involved

[ssaturnsapphic]

swifties kinda up there with the worst fandoms ever

#this post is not abt t swift herself #i already feel like she’s a somewhat meh artist #her stuff doesn’t particularly move me #but mediocrity isn’t a crime #her fans however……. #terrifying braindead racist #not a single good thing #if she was dropping bangers like blank space #then i would get it to an EXTENT #but like #like a black person made a tweet suggesting that tay’s lyric abt the 1830s was just weird #white swifties started being RACIST AS FAWKKKKKK #all in an effort to prove that taylor isn’t racist btw 😭😭😭 #‘taylor isn’t racist but i am‼️’ #this also leads me to a broader point that yt ppl don’t really know how to navigate conversations or discussions involving race #even if race or racism or racial differences are not at the forefront of the convo or even really involved #if it’s mentioned even tangentially they jump to proving anti racism #which okay sure #but also have you understood what is being said 😭😭 #the way yt swifties were like ‘u guys r tryna call her racist but it’s not gonna work!!!’ #and in reality op was talking abt how odd the line was #anyways sha

[the-assignment]

Blog #2 - Race in Get Out & Us

**Spoilers ahead for scenes and plot points in Get Out and Us**

One of the biggest takeaways that I’ve seen in the evolution of Jordan Peele’s films thus far – Get Out and Us – is the intentional Blackness and the subject of race presented throughout both movies – but in entirely different and equally interesting ways.

For example, in Get Out – Race (and racism) are undeniably at the forefront of the movie. It is the catalyst and the vehicle in which the film and plot moves forward, reaches the climax, and ends. From the very beginning, you see a young black man lost and walking down the street of a white, suburban, middle class-esque area. He is then briefly followed by a white car and a full-face helmet clad assailant attacks him, knocks him out, and shoves him in the trunk of his car. Driving off to God knows where while “Run Rabbit Run” plays in the background.

The movie then cuts to Rose and Chris – a young white woman and a young black man in a relationship. At the start, we as the audience can feel tension and hesitance coming from Chris, and the first conversation that we hear, is that Chris is meeting Rose's family for the very first time and he’s worried because she hasn’t told them he’s Black. And right there. Race front in center. Not only prominently in both the characters but the possible consequences of race.

Fast forward through a racially charged interaction with a white police officer – which, no one these days has to only imagine – almost all of us has seen videos – that only gets distinguished because Rose uses her whiteness and her femaleness to thwart the situation. (And almost everyone watching the scene unfold knows that if a Black person tried pulling what she did, they’d be dead or beaten).

I’m not going to rehash every single encounter – either the subtle, “atta boy’s” / “my man’s”, “I’d vote for Obama a third time if I could’s” or the more obvious, like the entire dinner scene conversation – that was race related in some way or another.  

But the awkwardest party in ALL of history… the “BINGO,” the Coagula experiment (the reasons for it!!!), the interactions between Chris and the other Black bodies, the relationship between Chris and Rod, etc. etc., etc.

All of these things directly reflected the idea of race and racism. That, in my opinion, was the point and emphasis on the film. It showed that “well-meaning” and “appreciative” white people are still (and maybe even more) dangerous. That race and racism is not dead – whether people believe it is or not.

Us takes race and Blackness in a completely different approach. Race, racism, white privilege, etc. is not directly the point of the film. Overt racism is not the culprit or antagonist like it was in Get Out.

However, intentional Blackness is still prevalent throughout the film. The main characters consist of a Black family – the Wilsons (shout out to Lupita’s natural hairstyle on the big screen and in a major movie!!) who seem to have reached some levels of success and financial security – enough so that they were able to buy a beach house. And although this is where their terror begins, it is not my main point. Throughout the film the characters being Black is not mentioned / not the point of the film. We simply see Black characters living their lives and a family vacationing during the summer.

However, in some cases it is the microaggressions and the “out of placeness” experienced by the family that highlights their very Blackness.

The family beach scene for example – where they are literally the only Black people on the beach. Additionally, Zora doesn’t get in the water like the other girls her age. The answer to why that is is obvious to any person who also has this consideration – her hair. She wasn’t going to get her unnaturally straight and styled hair wet. (I also thought about the historical significance: the dislike / aversion to swimming / the water is based heavily in slavery and racism – where whites even through acid into pools used by Blacks). The point is, that although race wasn’t said, it was shown.

Just like it was shown when the dad bought a beat-up boat (with no boating experience whatsoever) because he wanted to keep up with their richer (and white) family friends – even though the boat is old and worn.

Just like the dad’s Howard University sweatshirt.

Just like Zora didn’t hesitate to grab the bat – knew exactly where it was and instantly grabbed it when her dad actually asked the son to. (And just like there was no hesitance to use it later when she needed to!)

Just like the dad changes the way he speaks to the unwelcomed newcomers when he’s trying to intimidate them – switching from the polite (white approved) approach he started with, into typical AAVE, complete with a bat when they weren’t listening.

Just like when their white family friends are killed – the first thing the kids ask if whether their car is theirs now.

In Us, it felt like it was showing that while this Black family was inside society, they still weren’t fully a part of society. Their house, car, boat, etc. were smaller than others’ and it was noticeable. They were the only Black people there. They didn’t do the things the others did. Didn’t have the things they did. Etc. And they were still trying to keep up.

But, they were the only ones who had the preparedness and survival mindset and instincts that allowed them to win.

They were the only ones who survived.

So, while Us wasn’t about race, it still was about race.

#blog #assignment #the-assignment #get out #getout #us #jordan peele #ucla #homework

[musical-theatre-encyclopedia]

Watch "The Begat - FINIAN'S RAINBOW on Broadway" on YouTube

Finian's Rainbow made history (and a lot of racists mad) in 1947 as the first Broadway musical to present people of different races as equals. The play's principle villain, a racist U.S. Senator, goes from white to black, and back again—learning a les- son, in the process, about tolerance. He's seen here in the red suit toward the end of his growth and before being changed back so he can rewrite his racist laws.

“Finian’s Rainbow was arguably one of the most controversial and racially provocative shows of its time. It was written in 1947, before Martin Luther King Jr. and the civil rights movement brought the fight for equality to the forefront of social issues. In the show, blacks, whites, and immigrants live happily together. Black and white performers in the chorus shared the stage and even held hands, breaking barriers still in place in the 1940s. In addition to racism, Finian’s Rainbow took on the U.S. economic system, consumerism, and political corruption.”

― Jennifer Packard, A Taste of Broadway: Food in Musical Theater

#black history month 2024 #Youtube

[plannedparenthood]

9 Conversation Tips on Race & Health Equity

Seeing friends or extended family by video? You can have a huge impact by talking to them about issues that are important to you. Take the opportunity to discuss health care access for communities of color. 

Here are 9 tips for leading the conversation. Remember: Talking with your friends and family about the issues you care about can have a real influence that extends even beyond your circle.

Tip #1: Open the dialogue in a way that’s welcoming.

Share how the last couple of years have affected your views on health and health insurance. Say something like, “I’ve been [concerned/angry] about COVID-19’s disproportionate impact on [Black and Brown communities/our community].”

ASK: “Could we talk about how racist our country’s health care system is? I have some ideas about what can be done, and I’d love to hear your take.” 

Tip #2: Get everyone on the same page by defining common terms. 

Racism

Racism in America is the outgrowth of white supremacist policies and ideas that assume white people are superior to other racial groups. 

Racist policies are written and unwritten laws and customs that cause racial inequity, putting racial groups on unequal footing.

Public Health

Public health is built on the principle of protecting and improving the health of people and their communities.

A public health crisis happens when something threatens the lives and health of an entire community or multiple groups of people.

ASK: Have you [seen/experienced] racism in health care?

Tip #3: Define some terms about race that are less common.

Anti-Blackness refers to a worldwide ideology that devalues being Black.

Anti-Black policies and institutions in white supremacist systems dehumanize and marginalize Black people around the world.

Anti-Black racism covertly disregards and overtly attacks anti-racist policies, Black people, and Black institutions.

Structural racism is a system in which policies, practices, and other norms perpetuate racial inequity. It’s the root cause for the health inequities we see today.

Racial inequity in America blocks Black and Brown people from living freely and safely — while putting white people in power, giving them more resources, and chipping away at their humanity.

Racist health care policies cause health inequities for racial groups, fortifying long-standing barriers and creating new barriers to health care access for Black and Brown communities.

Tip #4: Define some terms about health and fairness that are less common.

Equality vs. Equity

Equality gives everyone the same exact things, but ignores differences. Equal access to COVID-19 testing means everyone could theoretically get a test. But for many people, testing is too expensive and far away, or only open at times where they are unable to take off work or get childcare. 

Equity gives everyone what they need, tailored to their individual situation. Equitable access to COVID-19 testing would be affordable, nearby, and have flexible hours for everyone.

Health Inequities vs. Health Equity

Health inequities are systemic, avoidable, and unjust differences in the health of a group of people compared to other groups. 

Health disparities are any kind of differences in health outcomes for a group compared to other groups. Disparities don’t refer to social or structural causes like inequities do. 

Health equity happens when everyone has a fair and just opportunity to be as healthy as possible. This requires removing obstacles to health such as: poverty, discrimination, powerlessness, limited education, unstable housing, unsafe environments, and lack of health insurance.

Tip #5: Provide examples of racial and health inequities. 

Racism is embedded in the structure of the U.S. health care system. The people in charge of that system — including politicians and insurers — have carried out discriminatory practices throughout its history.

Institutionalized discrimination in the U.S. health care system has thrown up roadblocks to insurance, testing, treatment, and care for communities of color. That includes the system’s reliance on employer-sponsored insurance. Because of historic economic barriers, Black and Brown people are less likely to be working in jobs that offer this benefit.

Racial bias among medical researchers and health care providers — such as the erroneous belief that Black people feel less physical pain — have withheld needed care and pain management from Black patients.

Being Black in America takes a toll on the health of Black people. 

Racism, microaggressions, and discrimination cause chronic stress.

Researchers have shown that racism stresses and prematurely ages human cells. 

All that stress causes physical and psychological harm over time.

The result: increased rates of illness and death among Black people.

Tip #6: Share how health care inequities have led to dramatic disparities in health conditions for Black and Brown communities.

Racial and health inequities help explain why — regardless of income or education — Black and Brown patients have disproportionately fared worse compared to their white counterparts across many health outcomes.

Racism’s chronic stress is linked to higher risk of depression, diabetes, and high blood pressure.

Black people disproportionately experience police-inflicted harassment, violence, injuries, and murder. Living in fear of state-sanctioned brutality causes a host of underlying health problems. 

Because of racist policies like redlining, Black and Brown people are more likely to live near toxic sites and amid high pollution, as well as in neighborhoods that lack healthy food options and places to exercise. These environments are linked to higher rates of asthma, respiratory illnesses, and cardiovascular disease.

Long-standing, systemic health and social inequities in the United States and discrimination in doctors’ offices and hospitals all have resulted in a high maternal mortality rate among Black women — three times the rate for white women.

Structural racism, public health failures and economic inequalities — including that the location of Black and Brown workers’ jobs are more likely to put them at risk of catching COVID-19 — have all translated to exponentially higher COVID-19 infection and death rates in Black, Indigenous, and Latino communities.

Tip #7: Discuss why racism is a public health crisis.

The American Medical Association, the American Public Health Association, several states, and other U.S. institutions declared that racism is a public health crisis and called for urgent action from policymakers and institutions.

Discrimination creates barriers to health, both inside and outside the doctor's office. Your health depends on whether you can access health care, employment, good wages, food security, clean air and water, and stable housing — all of which are hurt by racism.

SCROLL UP: Refer to the definition of “public health crisis” and share how you feel about it.

ASK: “How do you feel about racism being declared a public health crisis?”

Tip #8: Share what federal policies you support to address racial inequity. 

For example, you may want them to support policies that:

Aim to eliminate the inequities and biases woven into the fabric of this nation’s institutions, particularly the racial inequities in maternal health. 

Provide additional COVID-19 relief that helps Black, Indigenous, and Latino communities — which have been disproportionately ravaged due to ongoing systemic racism and oppressive policies.

Defund the police. Instead of investing in police forces that brutalize Black people, prioritize a public-health approach that strengthens Black communities, promotes community support, and connects people to services.

Support Black organizations and leaders who are at the forefront of the fight to fix the public health crisis that racism presents and the systems that exploit people of color.

Tip #9: Express gratitude for everyone in the conversation.

Thank your friends and family for connecting with you on this issue, and let them know that you’re open to speaking with them again. 

Show them some warmth — and give them the time and space to sit with the discussion. 

#racism #racism and public health #public health #racial equity #health equity

[teenslib]

IT’S FINALLY DONE! Every year, the Rainbow Book List Committee has more books to review, because literature is slowing getting queerer, and children’s and YA lit are at the forefront of that change. This year, our committee of 13 people had to review nearly 500 eligible titles, and 130 (well, 129) were good enough and queer enough to make the list. There were so many terrific books that we got a special dispensation to create TWO Top Ten lists--the first time the committee has done so! The Top Tens are below, and please visit the link above for the full list.

I’m proud of our committee’s focus on diversity--along lines of race, ethnicity, queer identity, and even genre. At least half of the Top Ten Books for Young Readers and seven of the Top Ten for Teen Readers are about characters of color, and most of those were written by authors of color. We also tried to feature as many different letters of the alphabet soup as possible. I’ve noted the racial and LGBTQIA+ rep for the books that I’ve read.

Here are the Top Ten Books for Young Readers:

Ana on the Edge by Sass, A.J. Ages 8 to 12. Sports Fiction/Figure Skating. MC is nonbinary and Jewish-Chinese-American. Ana is a champion figure-skater. She hates her new princess-themed program, but how can she tell her mother that, when it cost so much money? And why does it bother her so much, anyway? When she finds the word ‘nonbinary,’ she realizes why the program doesn’t fit, but she still has a lot of work to do repairing relationships that have suffered in the meantime.

The Deep & Dark Blue by Smith, Niki. Ages 8 to 12. Fantasy. One of 2 MCs is a trans girl, all characters appear to be Southeast Asian. A pair of twins flee after a political coup that puts their lives at risk. They decide to disguise themselves as Hanna and Grayce, two girls living in the Communion of the Blue, an order of weaving women who spin magic like wool. What one twin doesn’t know is that, for the other, being Grayce isn’t a disguise. This is a beautiful story about self-discovery, acceptance, and affirmation.

Drawing on Walls: A Story of Keith Haring by Burgess, Matthew and Josh Cochran (Illustrator). Ages 6 to 14. Biography. MC is a white gay man. This colorful picture-book biography traces the life and art of Keith Haring.

The Every Body Book: LGBTQ+ Inclusive Guide for Kids about Sex, Gender, Bodies, and Families by Simon, Rachel E. and Noah Grigni (Illustrator). Ages 8 to 12. Nonfiction/Health. Various identities and races included. Filled with self-affirming information, The Every Body Book uses inclusive language, illustrations, and facts to cover a number of important topics for young people including consent, relationships, gender, sex, puberty, and hormones.

King and the Dragonflies by Callender, Kacen. Ages 8 to 12. Realistic Fiction. MC is a gay black boy, his best friend is a gay white boy. King’s family–especially his father–have strong opinions about what it means to be a Black man, and they don’t allow for being gay. But King admires his friend Sandy for escaping an abusive home and living his truth no matter what. If King comes out, too, can his father learn to change?

Magic Fish by Nguyen, Trung Le. Ages 12 and up. Realistic Fiction/Fantasy. MC is a gay Vietnamese-American boy. A young Vietnamese-American boy literally can’t find the words to tell his parents that he’s gay, but cross-cultural fairytales help bridge the language barrier in this beautifully-illustrated graphic novel. 

My Maddy by Pitman, Gayle E. and Violet Tobacco (Illustrator). Ages 4-8. Realistic Fiction. MC’s parent is nonbinary, MC and her parent are white. My Maddy is a heartwarming story about a young girl and her parent. Readers learn that not all parents are boys or girls; some parents are just themselves. In this young girl’s case, that parent is her Maddy, a loving, caring parent who lives outside the gender binary.

My Rainbow by Neal, DeShanna, Trinity Neal, and Art Twink (Illustrator). Ages 4-8. Realistic Fiction. MC is an autistic black trans girl. Autistic trans girl Trinity wants to have long hair, but growing it out is too itchy! None of the wigs in the store are quite right, so Mom makes Trinity a special rainbow wig.

Our Subway Baby by Mercurio, Peter and Leo Espinosa (Illustrator). Ages 4 to 8. Adoption Non-fiction. MCs are white gay men, the baby they adopt is Black. Loving illustrations help tell the story of how an infant abandoned in a NYC subway station was adopted by the man who found him and his partner.

Snapdragon by Leyh, Kat. Snapdragon. Ages 10 to 14. Fantasy. Haven’t read this one yet, so I can’t comment on its representation. Snap gets to know the town witch and discovers that she may in fact have real magic and a secret connection to Snap’s family’s past.

And here are the Top Ten Books for Teen Readers:

All Boys Aren’t Blue: A Memoir-Manifesto by Johnson, George M. Ages 14 to 18. Memoir. Author/MC is a gay Black man. “Memoir-manifesto” is a well-chosen label for this book, which relates stories from the author’s childhood and young adulthood and contextualizes them within a queer Black experience. Although the author’s family is loving and supportive, pervasive heteronormativity, queerphobia, and anti-Black racism threaten his mental, emotional, and physical safety.

Camp by Rosen, L.C. Ages 14 and up. Realistic Fiction. MC and his love interest are gay Jewish boys. For Randy, going away to Camp Outland is a breath of fresh air, a time to be exactly who Randy can’t always be at school. But this year will be different. This year, Randy won’t be the flamboyant theater kid, this year Randy will be exactly the type of bro Hudson would want to date. Changing a thing or too will be necessary for Randy to succeed, even if that means leaving some friends behind.

Cemetery Boys by Thomas, Aiden. Ages 13 and up. Paranormal/Romance. MC is a trans Latino, his love interest is a gay Latino. Yadriel accidentally summons the wrong ghost in an attempt to prove himself a real brujo to his family who struggle to accept his gender identity. Though he thinks he is summoning the ghost of his cousin, he actually summons the ghost of Julian Diaz, and finds himself with not one, but two, mysterious deaths to investigate.

Circus Rose by Cornwell, Betsy. Ages 12 and up. Fantasy. One MC is white and one is mixed-race, one is a lesbian and one is questioning. Ivory and Rosie are twins and half-sisters, born to a bearded woman who refused to choose between her lovers, and raised in their mother’s circus. After a long foreign tour, they come home to find themselves under attack by religious zealots. As tragedy follows tragedy, will Ivory be able to save her circus family?

Elatsoe by Little Badger, Darcie  and Rovina Cai (Illustrator). Ages 12 and up. Mystery. MC is an aro/ace Lipan Apache girl. In this OwnVoices novel, Elatsoe is on a mission to discover who killed her beloved cousin, and why. If not for her cousin, then she is doing this for her people, the Indigenous Lipan Apache tribe. Elatsoe has the ability to raise ghosts from the dead, a tradition that has been passed down through generations. On this journey it will take vulnerability, wit, and the legends of her people for Elatsoe to understand all that is hidden in the small town of Willowbee.

I’ll Be the One by Lee, Lyla. Ages 13 and up. Realistic Fiction. MC is a bi Korean-American girl, her love interest is a bi Korean boy. Skye Shin dreams of becoming the world’s first plus-sized K-pop star, and a reality TV competition may just be her chance. To win, she’ll have to deal with fatphobic beauty standards, fierce competition, and intense media scrutiny–as well as unexpected attraction to one of her competitors.

Miss Meteor by Mejia, Tehlor Kay and Anna-Marie McLemore. Ages 14 and up. Magical Realism. (I haven’t read this one, but I think both MCs are WLW Latinas.) Lita is a star – literally. After falling to earth several years ago, she’s now living life as a teenage girl. When the annual Miss Meteor pageant rolls around, Lita decides to enter – but will her ex-best friend Chicky be willing to help her? Will the pageant help her forget about the past and imagine a new future? Lita learns that winning isn’t about being perfect, it’s about showing your true self to the world – even the parts that no one else understands.

You Should See Me in a Crown by Johnson, Leah. Ages 12 and up. Realistic Fiction. MC is a black WLW (woman-loving-woman). In this affectionate rom-com, Liz Lighty finds herself an unlikely candidate for prom queen at her affluent suburban school. Shy, awkward, Black, and low-income, Liz has never felt like she belonged, and she can’t wait to leave for her dream college. But when her scholarship falls through, it seems her last resort is to win prom queen, and the scholarship money that comes with it. Liz’s plan is complicated when new girl Mack decides to run for prom queen also…and ends up running away with Liz’s heart.

War Girls by Onyebuchi, Tochi.  Ages 12 and up. Science Fiction/Afro-Futurism. Both MCs are Nigerian, one is a WLW. In a not-so-distant future, climate change and nuclear disasters have made much of the earth unlivable. In the midst of war in Nigeria, two sisters, Onyii and Ify, are torn apart and face two very different futures. As their lives progress through years of untold violence and political unrest, battles with deadly mechs and cyborg soldiers outfitted with artificial limbs and organs, they are brought together again and again and must come to terms with how the war has impacted their lives.

When We Were Magic by Gailey, Sarah. Ages 14 and up. Contemporary Fantasy. MC is a white bi/questioning girl with gay dads, her friends are racially, ethnically, and queerily diverse. This firecracker of a novel follows a group of friends who attempt to correct the accidental murder of a classmate. When We Were Magic combines magic, friendship, and awkward moments to create a captivating story. Each character brings their own uniqueness to the strong group of friends, but despite their differences, their loyalty remains. Author Sarah Gailey has written another page turning novel, with the quirky strange content to boot.

#Rainbow Book List #LGBT literature #queer books #queer YA #queer children's books #Book Recommendations #we need diverse books

[swanlake1998]

Article: Dancing While Black: 8 Pros on How Ballet Can Work Toward Racial Equity

Date: January 18, 2021

By: Gabrielle Salvatto

For years, conversations around racism in ballet were typically held behind closed doors. They took place only between company leadership and diversity consultants, and were often met with empty signifiers and performative gestures. Consequently, the dominance of white, Eurocentric ideals and aesthetics have remained as prominent as ever. Tokenism, microaggressions, biased recruitment and prejudicial pedagogy have limited space for Black artists to succeed. But the current momentum to dismantle systemic racial injustice, inspired by the Black Lives Matter movement, has empowered Black dancers to use their voices to demand change.

As a professional dancer myself, formerly with Dance Theatre of Harlem and Ballet West, and currently with the Tanzcompany Innsbruck in Austria, I understand the duality of being a Black face in a white space. I've had the great privilege to interview exquisite Black dancers from several different ballet companies to hear their stories as well as their insights on how ballet can work towards true equity and diversity.

Rachael Parini, BalletMet dancer and creator of the Chocolate and Tulle project

Invest in education: "Educate the board, the artistic and executive directors, and teachers about what is excluding Black artists. Also educate parents of young Black students on all it takes to become a professional. I remember my parents' shock over the high cost of pointe shoes. Equality is not equity. We don't just need the same opportunities—we need support, understanding and a place that is ensured."

Avoid tokenizing: "Being the star of the outreach performances and never used in main-company repertoire becomes internalized by the artist. They learn self-effacing behavior and want to quit."

Don't generalize: "You don't know someone's story until you ask them. Each of our experiences is different—we're not all the same just because we are Black. Everyone has a different struggle."

Lawrence Rines, Boston Ballet soloist

Make sure everyone belongs: "Tokenism begins at the educational level. Having only one or two Black students in the school leaves them feeling unsafe, and it also endorses to their white counterparts, even subconsciously, that 'These people are in our space.' True diversity ensures a sense of belonging, for everyone."

Take time for training: "Diversity and sensitivity training can work—we saw its effectiveness with the #MeToo movement. Accountability has been lacking for so long. The time is up for excuses. The current movements to demand racial justice and equality have been very inspiring. You see how many people actually care, and so many dancers are finding their voices. The human spirit is incredibly strong."

Erica Lall, American Ballet Theatre corps member

Hire Black leaders: "Microaggressions are incredibly discouraging. During my pre-professional training, I once had a teacher walk by me at barre and say, 'I just can't look at that anymore.' We can't address these issues because our voices are constantly silenced, the threat of termination looms or there is just a transfer of blame by the people in charge. We need more Black people in power for true equality to exist."

Promote all your artists: "It feels like there is a mentality in ballet where there cannot be too many Black artists succeeding in one company simultaneously. But promoting and supporting all the dancers of color is literally better for everyone."

Taylor Stanley, New York City Ballet principal

Listen and digest: "During my training I was often the only male and one of few dancers of color. I felt recognized and celebrated for my talent while my biracial identity was being simultaneously suppressed. Your perception of yourself begins to shift. It is important for schools and companies to honestly and authentically bring dancers of different experiences and identities to the forefront. There needs to be intention and purpose behind the daily interactions between administrators and educators and their dancers. Any non–person-of-color needs to understand that, within these conversations, our pain is not a result of their actions. Reconfigure your brain to not be defensive—just show up, listen, have sensitivity and digest the information. Allow time for Black artists to express how they feel about the work being done and make space on the other side to receive those feelings."

Boysie DiKobe, Les Ballets Trockadero de Monte Carlo dancer

Train all body types: "I destroyed my body to adhere to the unrealistic standards of executing technique based on a certain anatomy. You can make great dancers without damaging them. Educators need to learn about the limitations and capabilities of all body types. The body is just a skeleton to build technique, and should be viewed as equal beyond the color of its skin."

Stop pancaking skin: "Pancaking yourself in roles for Giselle and Swan Lake is highly problematic. The characters are nonexistent. I just want to see talent and hard work onstage. Yes, it's possible to have someone in brown tights and pointe shoes onstage be the lead."

Lindsey Donnell, Dance Theatre of Harlem 

Go there: "We need to have more open and honest conversations. Politically correct and coded language hinders real progress."

Recruit those without resources: "We need to broaden our definition of diversity. Race and skin tone isn't the only thing that needs to change—we also need to address financial opportunity. The ballet industry caters to the wealthy, from auditions to training to being a professional."

Alexandra Newkirk, freelance artist​

Hire with integrity: "Honesty would be a great start for changing recruitment. Saying things like 'We just don't have a spot for you,' 'You're not a good fit' or 'Our diversity quota is filled' is less discouraging than making it all the way through an audition and hearing nothing. I feel like I have to fit a mold, or replace another Black girl just to be seen. When I see just one other Black dancer at my audition, I know it's either going to be her or me. She is the only one I am competing with because we will never be compared to the many white dancers in the room. This needs to change."

Kyle Davis, Tanzcompany Innsbruck dancer​

Eliminate typecasting: "Destroy the stereotype of the Black body. Directors need to stop associating body types with roles. Audiences and artistic directors would be surprised by what a 'different body' can bring to the table, and it would simultaneously change their perception of what they think ballet should look like."

Jenelle Figgins, Aspen Santa Fe Ballet dancer and activist

Make ballet for everyone: "Because of ballet's elitism, Black dancers cannot see themselves being part of it. Ballet is still on reserve for the rich, but it should be for everyone."

Honor Black artistry: "There's no appreciation for the contributions and legacy of Black artistry until they're on a white body, and then they are erased. We see this when dancers' choreography is not credited, or it becomes restricted and then placed on a white principal dancer."

Appreciate the challenge: "Acknowledge the dual existence of your Black dancers. We are swallowing to survive and presenting to thrive. When we report micro-aggressions or instances of discrimination, we are gaslit and not heard. The trauma of being in a white space becomes expected."

#article #ballet #gabrielle salvatto #rachael parini #lawrence rines #erica lall #taylor stanley #boysie dikobe #lindsey donnell #alexandra newkirk #kyle davis #jenelle figgins #racism #anti black racism #ballerina #ballerino #dance magazine #abuse mention

[ilovejevsjeans]

WHY HAMILTON, VETTEL AND RICCIARDO HAVE EARNED A CRUCIAL WIN

Lewis Hamilton, Sebastian Vettel and Daniel Ricciardo have 146 Formula 1 victories between them. They can take a share in another at the British Grand Prix, and the race hasn’t even started yet. But that’s kind of the point.

It’ll be around 17 minutes before the formation lap begins at Silverstone when those three drivers, and others like Romain Grosjean, can take satisfaction in a job well done. That’s when, thanks to F1 and the FIA, a prominent display “in recognition of the importance of equality and equal opportunity for all” will be part of the live TV images before the race for around half a minute.

“As long as we are all there together and get a moment which doesn’t feel forced or rushed, I think that’s most important,” Ricciardo had said on Thursday.

“In Budapest, it was a bit of a mess for the timing so they’ve addressed it now and I think we’ll continue to do as we’ve done just with a little bit more ease and not such rush and chaos.”

It would be disingenuous to claim getting F1’s pre-race anti-racism stand back in a prominent position is the greatest victory of the weekend, and in isolation it might not seem like a win at all.

But F1 was heading down a tricky path in a fractured state and this could be a significant milestone in that journey. And as FIA race director Michael Masi wrote at the end of a detailed set of notes: “I hope the above is clear and provides some clarity and reassurance to the drivers.”

Hamilton, Vettel and Ricciardo have spoken – and acted – with passion and respect on the subject of racism. Others have too, including the next generation of drivers like Lando Norris, but this trio in particular has been at the forefront of consistently explaining why it is important and why it must be continued.

“We cannot ignore what’s happening outside of our racing bubble,” says Vettel.

“And I think the fight against racism around the world that has taken off again in the last couple of weeks and months, I think it is completely justified.

“It is an ongoing process and needs all of us – and that’s not just us racing, I think that would be ignorant – all human beings around the planet to stand up and to try and go against racism, inequality, injustice in any form.

“It is right to try and set the right signs to inspire people because in the end I believe that education is probably the only way out of it.

“It is insanity to think that in 2020 with all the knowledge that we have of the past, and all the lessons we’ve learned that there is still something that does exist that should be out of the question.

“But it’s not, so therefore we need to stand up when we have the chance publicly to send a message – or more so even when the camera’s off and we are living our everyday life and setting the right example, and trying to behave in a way that is right.”

That’s what the official anti-racism ‘ceremony’, held at the season-opening Austrian Grand Prix, was all about – a very strong message to a very large audience. But it was made less formal at the next two races and turned into a bit of a rush. It seemed to slip off the agenda and it emerged that other drivers were happy to let that happen.

It’s one thing that all 20 drivers haven’t knelt so far. But as has so often been iterated, that doesn’t matter so long as the 20 are united for the cause.

If some drivers wanted to just drop it and move on, that shatters the illusion of unity. That all 20 seem set to persevere suggests it was more about not understanding the importance of the issue rather than being against it.

To some it will still look odd to see the majority of drivers kneeling and others doing something else. But we’re making baby steps with this issue, which is how Hamilton sees it – progress.

“I spent time speaking to Jean Todt, spent time speaking to Chase Carey and Ross Brawn and had really great conversations with them to understand what they’re planning and what they want to do moving forward, and to make sure they know that we’re on the same team here,” Hamilton says.

“Things like giving us that little bit of extra time at the beginning before the race, so that we can really show how united we are as a sport – because other sports have done a better job at consistently doing that.

“They’ve been really open-minded and I do think that it needs to continue through the year.

“I believe, at the moment, that’s what we’re going to continue to do. I think there’s been some pushback, from some teams maybe.

“But again, it’s a work in progress to get us all together. And I think it’s going in the right direction.”

Different people have different positions on this subject. Not in the sense that anyone morally decent thinks racism isn’t bad, or shouldn’t be ended. But it’s a fact that not everybody is on the same page with how prominent this issue needs to be or what part F1 can play in making a difference.

That’s what has caused division among the drivers and projects an image that the ‘unity’ everybody speaks of might not actually be there.

“After the first race it was then discussed between us drivers, what do we do moving forward,” says Ricciardo.

“Some were in the mindset of ‘OK, well I’ve done it, so why do we need to keep doing it? I showed the support and that’s it’.

“But I think that’s just a bit of education, and I’m not gonna sit here and say I know more than everyone else about the topic because I don’t – but I feel that it was then time to open up the conversation and say well, these are the reasons why doing it once is not really doing enough.”

It’d be great to see all 20 take the knee before the start but that won’t happen and it probably won’t happen all season long. But whatever those drivers choose to do instead, they should be willing to do in front of the cameras for the remainder of 2020.

“It’s not like if someone passes and you wear a black armband, that makes sense, you acknowledge it on that moment and it’s not like you have to do it for the next year or something,” says Ricciardo.

“But this is a cause that is ongoing, and it’s still very fresh for a lot of people, a lot of parts of the world and I think we need to continue honing in on it, and making people aware of it.

“That’s why just doing it once is not enough. If you just do it once, how much do you really mean it?

“I think you have to continue showing your support and your willingness to do something and make a change.”

At this point the knee issue is a distraction from scrutinising whether F1 is really unified on this matter and serious about it. What’s been put in place for the British GP suggests that is the case, as it was in Austria.

The rest is an issue for the drivers to discuss amongst themselves.

Given taking the knee originated as a statement from NFL player Colin Kaepernick against police brutality and racial profiling in the United States, is it a political statement? Or has it transcended its origins and become a gesture of solidarity? Is it really a very sensitive and divisive gesture in some cultures, as has been protested?

And what of the ongoing co-opting of the Black Lives Matter message, originally and ostensibly a simple, powerful statement demanding people recognise the needless killing of black Americans?

As Hamilton has discovered, the association that message now has with controversial political organisations has split supporters of the same cause into factions.

“I’m clearly for more inclusion and ending racism – this whole messaging and movement in my mind is great, and I think it’s only good that we’re putting awareness on this and spreading the word,” says Haas driver Kevin Magnussen. “And I want to participate in that for sure.

“But I don’t want to become political and it’s difficult for me to know how my actions are being perceived by others. I really just don’t want to go into politics and I don’t want to be seen to support groups or organisations that I can’t stand with.”

His team-mate Grosjean says: “Kevin mentioned really a good point that some of the guys have been afraid of being linked to any political movement.

“I don’t think it’s happening but maybe I’m wrong. I’m not linked to any of the political movement.”

This is a delicate issue but if it wasn’t then F1 wouldn’t need to be getting involved. It wouldn’t be a worldwide problem that manifests itself in all sorts of ways – even creating issues that F1 doesn’t go anywhere near, as plenty of people who criticise the anti-racism movement like to point out by asking ‘why isn’t F1 shining a light on X?’.

The solution to inconsistent messaging can’t be that Hamilton abandons wearing a ‘Black Lives Matter’ T-shirt while others wear one that says ‘End Racism’.

For one thing, apparently the other message is on the back of Hamilton’s anyway. But if the drivers are free to make the gesture they choose there is something insidious about forcing the only black driver in F1 to adapt a message important to black culture to avoid causing a problem.

After all, the whole point of this is not to suggest that white hood wearing neo-Nazis are walking around with nooses in every city across the world, assembling lynch mobs.

It’s to raise awareness of the deep-rooted biases that manifest themselves as systemic racism and troubles that are much, much harder to address and fix – which is why something so absurd as racism still exists today.

“I really don’t understand racism,” says Grosjean. “I really don’t understand that it can exist in that way.

“I never experienced it, and talking to Lewis was very interesting and it’s things that you can’t really even imagine.

“I don’t think it should divide us, if anything it should pull us together and help us with our image to stop that because it shouldn’t happen.”

This is at the heart of the importance of what Grosjean (in his role at the GPDA), F1 and the FIA have done, starting with the British GP. The request of arguably the three most powerful driver voices on the topic has been taken on board and acted on.

All 20 drivers will group together for a cause and doing so prominently will help eliminate the underlying feeling that some don’t want to be there.

In the smallest possible way it will be a test of their commitment to this issue and perhaps by exposing them to it more regularly, much like those watching on television, anyone who does have doubts about why it needs to be continued in this fashion will try to understand it instead of trying to end the process.

“The more of an impact we can have as Formula 1, as drivers, the better it is for all of us and the bigger the impact we’re going to have on the future and people growing up,” says Norris.

There’s a bigger part for F1 to play in this fight, with activities of greater substance being set up in the background.

For now, it’s important for all participants to show they are on the same side. And in that sense, what we witness before the British GP should be considered a win. (X)

#lewis hamilton #sebastian vettel #daniel ricciardo #romain grosjean #dan #lewis #seb #romain #blm #i hate the media all stick to the line that they all care cause clearly some dont #they stand there cause they have to not cause they give shit #and saying its a win #cause theyre all there for a few seconds #you can tell a lot of them dont have much of an understading themselves #anyway some good quotes #long post

[srwestvikwrites]

Privilege is the Haven of Thorns

I wrote this post the week George Floyd was murdered. I was angry, and tired, and confused, and increasingly more apprehensive in my capacity as a person and as a writer as I was drawn in to the immense whirlpool of the zeitgeist gripping the internet and society. 

It was such a complicated and emotional time. I was wracked with guilt at not going to the BLM protest in Madrid because we had just opened up into Phase 2 of the desescalada and I was scared of COVID. I was furious at the denial of individuals in my home country of Singapore who refused to believe that just because our race riots were in 1964 and not 2020 that it meant we had no more issues of systemic discrimination or privilege to challenge. I was exasperated and uneasy and inspired at having been drawn into a massive shitshow about race that rocked the Tolkien fandom within the same timeframe.

All of this made me question my place and my purpose as an author writing a story like Haven of Thorns. It doesn’t dwell on these issues, but it draws on them, in the same way that my life doesn’t linger on the colonisation of my home country or the country of my ancestors (India) and yet is irrevocably shaped by this history. 

Haven of Thorns was always going to be a story taking place in the strange rivers of colonial legacy. It is a story of drowned histories and ghosts that reside in the very stones of a city and demons that linger inside people who were happy enough to let them back in. All of it is pushed along by the current of time, where history is not stagnant but forces change. It is about war, and it is about subtle discrimination, and it is about what we choose to do when we’re so hung up on our independence story that we refuse to acknowledge the rot in our roots.

I’m reproducing the post as I wrote it all those weeks ago, even though there are better ways I could have expressed my thoughts, and indeed some of these thoughts have new nuances now as I have drafted pivotal scenes in the story. There are other things I’d rather have focused on. The haven of thorns is more than mere privilege now. And perhaps one day I’ll expand on that.

But for now, this is a historical record of what I was thinking as it was all going down and I was trying to decide what sort of story I wanted to tell in the world I lived in as the person I am.

_________________________________________________

I’m not going to be coy about the metaphor anymore. This book was always going to be highly political. It has just become even more political. I cannot begin to describe how apt and how heartbreaking it is to be drafting my novel right now.

Some context should perhaps be given as to the kinds of politics that are informing this story. I began outlining the earliest iterations of Haven of Thorns at the height of the European migration crisis. While migration itself is not a main theme of the story – and where it does feature, it’s from a rather inverted historical power dynamic – the backlash against it was always present in the telling of the tale. The rise of the European right terrified me. I had never experienced open racism before until one incident when I moved to Norway in late 2015, where I was lucky enough to have an ally at the time, though I never learned her name. I have seen far too many swastikas misappropriated from their holiness to represent hatred, spraypainted on neighbourhood walls in Trondheim, London, and Madrid.

For many years, I likened racism and xenophobia and white supremacy to a contagion, even to possession (which may have been down to the title of this book I read during high school). My view on this has changed, now. For those raised into these ideas, sure, the demon metaphor may still apply. But for many, these corrupted values take root and fester because we allow them to.

The old first draft of Haven of Thorns was begun in the first week of November, 2016. I feel I have no need to elaborate on why this timing is significant. Globally, the sense of the triumph of ignorance and vitriol was palpable. Over the next few years, partially because I became more active on social media and partially because of the degree I was studying for, every day required exposure to injustices very often predicated on culture, ethnicity, language, and/or race.

Then in 2019 Singapore commemorated the bicentennial – our 200 year anniversary of being colonised. And once again I was confronted with the bizarre lack of acknowledgment of how blatantly race relations had been directed and segmented by the British, and how whatever the government line says, we have not bounced back from the wounds that gouged in our society. I interned at an NGO dealing with race relations, and it only illuminated what we’d rather cover up – the value judgements we make of people based off their skin colour, the god(s) the pray to, or the language they speak. When COVID-19 reared its head Singapore was lauded for their response, until it hit the migrant worker dormitories. That was a powder keg waiting to explode. And it is false and unjust to pretend that the conditions they are living in do not have their own origins in the petulant protests of those who unfairly profiled and characterised the workers and robbed them of better conditions, resulting in the tragedy that has taken place now.

Even climate justice and its link to ethnicity began to seep into the story, particularly during the early 2020 fires in Australia and how severely the Aboriginal peoples were affected.

As I write this post Minneapolis is up in arms, and Americans are out in the thousands across the country protesting for justice for George Floyd and the countless other black Americans who have been victims of the system and of police violence.

Growing from childhood to adulthood in the 2000s-2010s has meant growing up in a time when discussions about race, ethnicity, culture, and the legacies of our most backward perceptions and prejudiced notions have come to the forefront, both of activism and of violent action taken against others. How could I not be impacted, for example, by the horror of the massacre in Norway on 22 July? How could I not have felt the shadow of the War on Terror through the rampant Islamophobia in the media and in society?

The extent to which all these disparate ideas of politics and power and race and xenophobia and colonialism actually manifest in Haven of Thorns isn’t perhaps measurable in the amount I’ve discussed them here. But the core of this book is that the haven is privilege, and thorns are both the barrier of our ignorance and the spears upon which we sacrifice those who challenge it.  White privilege in the West. Chinese privilege in Singapore. Yes I fucking said it. To refuse to see that is privilege, in and of itself. One can feel hurt, to be associated with the violent ways these ideas manifest. Or, one can choose to acknowledge that feeling implicated by despicable acts is perhaps the spark to challenge one’s own biases.

This story is about breaking that thorn barrier and letting in the light, in all its unbridled blinding glory, to burn away the festering hatred we’ve allowed to take root in our flesh.

In the end an important theme in Haven of Thorns – perhaps the most important – is the power structures and prejudices that prevail when colonisation has ended, along with its associated forms of exploitation, and a state becomes self-governing. It’s about who remains in power, why they remain there, and what it means for those who do not have an equal share in that power. I’m not just talking about physical force. I’m talking about value judgments that disenfranchise people based on their inherent qualities. Things like language, religion, or skin colour. Having a voice and having the power to exercise and sustain what you advocate for are all very different things, and this is why these stories cannot be apolitical. A person’s life, their right to life, and their rights to liberty and equality should not be a matter of politics – and yet they are. Because politics is about power. And power is far too often exercised unjustly.

Blaming the old oppressor only works up to a point. At some stage, a country has to face what it has done and continues to do to itself, and whether they are going to choose to make collective, powerful, and perhaps jarring value changes for the sake of basic human rights and justice. After all, prejudice is learned. It can be unlearned.

While this tale focuses on the legacy of colonisation, these same principles lie behind the abuse of authority and the untended wounds of what has happened to the black community in America for centuries, itself founded upon ideas of racial superiority. The police brutality coupled with endorsement from the highest offices in the land is a horrific ugliness – but worse, is those who choose not to see it for what it is. Those who tweet #alllivesmatter. Those who say they don’t see colour. Those who question why race has to be dragged into everything. To quote Moses in Dreamworks’s The Prince of Egypt: “I did not see because I did not wish to see.” This is privilege. This is us inviting contagion into our societies and refusing to mask up and letting it kill us from the inside out. But unlike a contagion, this is discriminatory. That is the essence of it. The differential treatment is the point. If you question why people are burning and looting, why they aren’t being “peaceful”, why they don’t comply (they do – it doesn’t work, as anyone who watched the clip of the CNN reporter would know), why they are so angry – then you are in the haven of thorns. You just refuse to acknowledge it, because the only light seeping into your little puddle is filtered, screened, and you’d rather ignore the shadows cast by the thorns.

So many of the choices in Haven of Thorns hinge upon deciding whether to preserve or whether to overturn these vicious cycles of hatred. It’s so painful to see these struggles continue to be mirrored in the real world, happening to real communities at this very moment. Part of me wants to stop writing this, because I cannot begin to capture the true agony of what is happening, no matter how much I empathise. But another part of me knows that I am in a position of great privilege, and perhaps it is time I put my voice to something that truly matters. Add another line to the anthem that advocates for these deep-set value changes that we need to make on a domestic and an international scale.

In the first very first chapter of this story, the royal palace burns. It may just as well have been a police station.

#work:hot #irdiverse #privilege #race #fantasy #social justice #my writing

[keenainthecity]

Recovery is an Evolution: Our COVID 19 Recovery Must Include a Revolution to Demand Change for the Black Community

Red Cross workers during the Influenza Pandemic (”Spanish Flu”) of 1918. Picture from Canva 2020.

April 25, 2020

At some point, we have to learn from mistakes in history in order to evolve as a people. COVID-19 will need to be that revolutionary moment for Black America. 

The most catastrophic pandemic in history was the Influenza Pandemic or “Spanish Flu” of 1918; it was unrelenting in that it killed an estimated fifty million people worldwide and 675,000 people in the US during a two year span. The response was questionable at best-- experts pinpoint the lack of scientific information about influenza, slow efforts to contain the illness, lack of a nationwide mandate to stay indoors, opening up cities before the disease was contained, the lack of data broken down into racial demographics and the layer of overt racism as the Red Cross refused to allow trained Black nurses to participate in recovery efforts at first as the biggest mistakes leaders should learn from to lead a country through a pandemic. Some of this should sound familiar in 2020. Even though significant shifts have been made scientifically, COVID-19 continues to echo many of the shortcomings of the political response to pandemics in regards to ignoring lessons from history and refusing to explore data arising from our most vulnerable populations: minorities, the elderly, those incarcerated and those who are homeless.  

COVID killed my grandmother Rose. Born in March 1919 during the second wave of the 1918 pandemic, she died on April 16, a little over two weeks after she celebrated her 101st birthday in isolation in her apartment in a nursing village in Michigan. In my grief, I am continuously astonished that she was born during one historical health pandemic just to lose her life in the most deadly one since; I am also moved by the audacity of states with large Black populations that have Republican governors (GA, SC, TN, MO, MS, FL and TX) who plan to plow forward with "reopening" their states for business with no significant decreases in new cases or death rates. This irrational push to “re-open” in these states exposes to me the temerity of the privileged to risk the lives of Black populations to make a few dollars while they safely quarantine at home with their families--I halfway believe there are more sinister motives behind these specific states opening, but I will spare you my conspiracy theories against the Black race.

I must admit that I am very angry about my Grammy’s very unexpected and abrupt passing. I am angry that the unprecedented numbers of deaths occurring in nursing homes--on April 17 the NY Times reported the death toll was at 7,000-- has not yielded any specific or swift precautions nursing homes should take at this time. The story of the NJ nursing home where seventeen bodies were discovered brought to the forefront what we have known all along-- that nursing homes have been plagued with lack of protective equipment and shortages of workers. The same can be said about information coming from prisons and within homeless populations--COVID-19 is literally exposing how unfair the care system is in this country for our most vulnerable--those not in position to care for themselves. I am also bothered that even with the calls for data to be improved in cities with Black populations, this data is still sparse.

It is clear that we have not used history to our advantage to fight these systemic ills in our society. It is also clear that the privileged and the rich are still the only voices being heard while our communities deal with trauma spreading rapidly with no word on how it will be dealt with. This is problematic. It is time we used history to navigate the present and force some different outcomes. 

My understanding of racial inequities throughout history was developed by how keen of a woman my grandmother had been-- as a Black woman who lived to remember the Great Depression, participated in the Great Migration, lived in both the South and the North during the fight for civil rights and, lived when voter disenfranchisement, redlining and gerrymandering was the law-- she ensured consistent application of what she learned throughout history to defy the odds of racism for herself and her family. She had the foresight to understand how money works by acquiring equity and using her credit as a means towards wealth. She understood how inheritance clears a path towards wealth in this country and made it a priority to leave this for her family. She remembered the Tuskegee syphilis experiment and refused to receive vaccinations, instead imploring her family to respect how diseases spread and to stay away from her when ill. My grandmother paid for her funeral in 2008-- I remember how upset I was at the eerie foreshadow of her death, but I see now that she was attempting to bar our family from the struggle to bury their loved ones. The last time I saw her on February 23, she talked to me about how proud she was that she could afford to pay professionals to care for her as so many families struggle with the affordability of care for their elderly parents.  She was by far the most proactive person I have ever known--history was not lost upon her, and I am thankful that she was adamant that we never forget the ways this country works so hard to disenfranchise us. 

And, while my family has lost our matriarch, it doesn’t speak to the friends, friends of friends, scores of friends' grandparents, parents and other close family members that have been lost to this epidemic with long lasting hurt being the reality for so many Black families in America especially with “re-opening” businesses in Black areas on the horizon. How are we reopening and many of us cannot even attend funerals of our loved ones? Our communities stand to be ravished by this plague in a more deadly wave of death in coming months and we haven't even healed from the first wave. This begs the question--what is the Black community going to do in light of what we know from history and what outcomes will we fight for?

Beyond getting out the information to our people about doubling down on social distancing in states “re-opening”, who is talking about mental health? The inability to bury loved ones in traditional funerals, losing multiple family members at one time, the absence of proper farewells or even hugs, healthy cries, and goodbyes by the entire family has the potential to explode instances of depression, anxiety, and other disastrous effects within our communities. What are we doing to combat this? What are we demanding from those we elected to represent our interests?

Now is the time that we create an agenda of action to make sure that Black people collectively think through ways to evolve and never repeat the effects of this pandemic again. Examples of what this could look like? 

Black mental health professionals beginning free healing circles virtually or doing more videos on helpful ideas for pushing through the six stages of grief 

Blacks challenging our local governments to track demographic data very thoroughly so we can learn why our communities suffered so heavily and enforce supplies are earmarked for the communities hardest hit

Blacks vocally pressing for task forces (such as what is being developed in Michigan) that specifically collect data and use it to devise recovery efforts lead by diverse health and economics experts

Blacks demanding politicians widen access to mental health professionals locally through grants for free sessions on grief and coping 

Blacks demand equitable support specifically for health facilities, nursing homes and prisons with more humane supports for those who are homeless 

Blacks demanding an extension on the 2020 census in order to collect more information prior to redistricting taking place

And one note on this election: if Joe Biden cannot speak out against the reopening of places with high Black populations who delivered the nomination to him handily, we must broach this topic with him as he cannot be president without Black people voting in large numbers. The reality is that a huge chunk of two generations of Blacks stand to be wiped out in this pandemic which cripples voting in the fall as those two generations were our biggest voting populace; if he plans to win, he’d better be vocal about this in republican states who are strategically risking Black lives. We have to raise our voices now to demand we get something specifically for us in exchange for our votes. It is now or never.

The effects of this pandemic will not only change the shape of our families, but extends far into our economy and political future. Therefore, those of us who know better must demand better. We cannot sit back and accept how the government and the privileged attempt to define this epidemic for us. Instead, we must work to demand an evolution within so many structures of this country to begin needed change, including attention to the unimaginable and heartbreaking grief many, many Black families are experiencing. We must educate our people that recovery is an evolution--for ourselves, for our communities and for this country. There will be no evolution from this pandemic without revolution. It is time that the revolution be televised by raising our voices and demanding action. 

#COVID19 #keenainthecity Blackresistance

[john20ryan]

Conscious Rap & Race (Blog #1)

Rap music as a genre has been stigmatized since it’s origins. Many people frown upon the genre and accuse all the content in the music as vulgar, explicit, and in some cases sexist. These stereotypes have largely discredited the work of rappers throughout their careers. Whether it was Tupac in the 90’s, NWA, Lupe Fiasco, or numerous others, there have been a number of rappers throughout the genres existence who have done their part in trying to make a difference.

           In the recent years, conscious rap has become even more popular, and more importantly, it’s becoming the “cool” thing for rappers to talk about. While in the past, discussing real issues may have been labeled as soft, todays artists widely acknowledge the importance of meaning in their music. Like the aforementioned NWA, conscious rappers today often vocalize their displeasure about racial issues in America. Two artists who have been particularly successful with their music about racial tensions in America have also been the two who have helped popularize the conscious rap movement, J Cole and Kendrick Lamar.

           Possibly the most impactful performance regarding racial tensions in America was given by J Cole live on the Letterman show. Cole was invited on Letterman’s late night show to promote his upcoming album 2014 Forest Hills Drive. Just like any other musician on a press tour, he was expected to perform a song of his upcoming album for promotion. However, Cole saw an opportunity to protest the Michael Brown situation by writing an emotional song pleading for change. “On Friday, just days after the death of Michael Brown and the subsequent civil unrest in Ferguson, Mo., J. Cole’s somber protest song “Be Free” spread around the world in a matter of hours, fueled by social media and the hip-hop world’s intense online discourse about Mr. Brown, an 18-year-old who was fatally shot by a police officer last Saturday” (NY Times). Everyone in the crowd, including Letterman was stunned by the performance and Cole was universally praised for his decision. Between Cole’s emotional verses and chorus pleading for freedom, Cole placed an eye-witness account from Dorian Johnson, the friend who was with Michael Brown at the time of his tragic death. The song was beautifully crafted and did an excellent job at bringing the Brown’s death and racial inequalities to the forefront.

           While Kendrick Lamar does not have one signature performance like Coles “Be Free”, Lamar won a Pulitzer Prize for his album titled “DAMN” and vocalized racial issues to new lengths on his album “To Pimp a Butterfly”. While Cole talks about the issues of racial discrimination head on, Lamar takes a different approach. Throughout the album, Lamar goes on a rollercoaster of highs and lows in life but always emphasizes that no matter how dire the situation, it’s important to remain positive and try and escape. “This is an album about tiny quality of life improvements to be made in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds.” (Pitchfork). In particular, Lamar talks about trying to make it out of Compton as black individuals who grow up in the worst of circumstances. Creating an album that instilled hope in people experiencing situations like this was a first and defines Lamar for his forward-thinking ideas.

Whether it’s “Get Out” or “Sorry to Bother You” the movies and articles we have discussed in class talk about a lot of the same things Lamar does. Institutionalized racism that gives black people a higher chance for failure because of the opportunities at hand. It’s one thing to give in, but whether it’s protesting, fighting back, or Lamar offering a glimmer of hope, It’s important to vocalize these issues. Rap has done a great job at doing just that in recent years.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/16/arts/music/j-coles-be-free-spreads-around-the-world-in-hours.html

https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/20390-to-pimp-a-butterfly/

[foreverlogical]

STATEMENT OF ENDORSEMENT FOR ELIZABETH WARREN

Black Womxn For is an organizing collective of leaders, activists, artists, writers, and political strategists from across the country in the fight for Black Liberation. This statement reflects the views and intentions of the undersigned.  

The last presidential election laid bare what many Black women, gender non-conforming,  and non-binary, and queer folk know deeply; that this nation embraces white supremacy and its evils, even at the expense of itself. It’s no wonder that even among the most committed activists there is a strong skepticism, aversion and even avoidance of participating in political systems.

Despite pervasive attacks from the state on our communities, our identities, and our lives, we -- Black trans and cis women, gender-nonconforming and nonbinary folk -- remain at the forefront of each and every social movement to hold this country accountable for its promise of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is our bold vision, direct action, and strategic organizing that laid the foundation for what we argue is one of the most progressive Democratic presidential primaries in recent history.

Still, the two-party system, elites within the Democratic establishment, and even the primary process itself continue to fall short of what is required to fully engage and honor the power of its most loyal and impactful voters. Just like Fannie Lou Hamer and other Black women political forbearers, we understand that we must create and take our own space in the political process in a way that aligns with our values and builds power for our people.

And though no one presidential contender can rectify the gross atrocities to which we’ve become accustomed, there is one leader who has shown, through action, deed, and word, that a future of economic prosperity, racial justice, gender justice, and social and political equity is possible. She is a leader with a track record of taking on the predatory policies and practices that harm our communities and implementing structural changes that give power back to working people. She is a partner with a deep understanding of how racism and gender discrimination don't just compound income inequality but are actually central to maintaining the status quo.  She is a woman who is willing to learn, open to new ideas, and ready to be held accountable by us and our communities.

We write to endorse, enthusiastically and wholeheartedly, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) for President of the United States.

Our endorsement comes not after lip service or political pandering, but from the hundreds of conversations with Black women GNC/NB folks across the country, substantive discussions about policy and the power of grassroots organizing, and the opportunities and limitations of election politics. After gathering in fourteen cities across the United States and collecting hundreds of survey responses from self-identified progressive Black women and GNC/NB folks, the overwhelming majority of excitement and support is for Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

We endorse Senator Warren with the full weight of accountability. Our endorsement is not a blanket approval of all of her acts, both past, present, and future but rather a firm and calculated understanding that should she fall short of her commitments to us and our communities she will be held to account.

The support for Senator Warren’s candidacy within our community is matched by an awareness that accountability requires commitment in words and actions. To that end, Senator Warren has agreed to the following asks from the Black Womxn For community:

Act With Moral Leadership: Sen. Warren has taken a stance against the White supremacy and misogyny that are woven into the fabric of this country. Policy change is not enough. Sen. Warren has committed to devoting money, staffing resources, and the bully pulpit towards rooting out the culture of white supremacy, exploitation-for-profit, and misogynoir in our schools, legislative language, federal hiring practices, medical institutions, arts and culture, and all areas of our society.

Collaborative Policy-Making Process: Big structural change requires big shifts in the dynamics of power. People most impacted by systems of oppression know the solutions and should be central to crafting policy change. Sen. Warren has agreed to hold a People’s Policy-Making Summit in the first 100 days of her administration that puts Black women, working people of color, disabled people, Indigenous people, and diverse community leaders and experts in the driver's seat of structural reforms in her administration.

Accountability, not Perfection: We do not expect any one candidate to be perfect. We know that all elected leaders can and will fall short of our hopes in different ways. We want a president that is committed to mutual accountability with the people who elected them. Sen. Warren has committed to an accountability process that includes naming the harm, accepting responsibility, outlining steps to make those who are negatively impacted whole, and changes in behavior. This process will be outlined and ratified at the People’s Policy Making Summit in collaboration with community and organizing leaders.

Changing the Face of the Federal Government: There are hundreds of positions in the federal government that the Senator will have the opportunity to appoint. In 2018, 93% of people running our government were white and 80% were white men. Senator Warren has committed to fundamentally changing the internal and external face of the federal government by appointing more Black women, especially trans and immigrant women, Black men, Indigenous people, people of color and disabled people. She has agreed to apply a race and gender equity impact analysis when hiring for her transition team and administration.

We are progressive Black activists who are not beguiled by political theater. We are not ignorant to the violent legacy of politics. Each day, we thread a delicate needle of interacting with systems that have oppressed us while building collective power to shape the terrain so that our Liberation is not but a dream, but an awakening.

We write this letter, not with the belief that Sen. Elizabeth Warren is a savior, but a stalwart who can be challenged when necessary, moved when appropriate, and held accountable to a base led by Black community leaders. We endorse her with the complete recognition that, upon her victory, the work is not over, nor is it just the beginning.

A Warren victory ensures an environment in which Black community leaders can better and more easily usher in those long-overdue societal transformations that move us closer to the Liberation that we know is possible. If you agree, we invite you to sign this statement via the form link at the bottom of this page.

We know our power. We understand the opportunity and the stakes in this election. We hope to encourage others, especially Black women and GNC folks, to be engaged in this important political moment.

BLACK WOMXN FOR STEERING COMMITTEE

CARMEN BERKLEY

JESSICA BYRDNICOLE CARTY

CHARLENE CARRUTHERS

ANOA CHANGA

TRACEY CORDER

RUKIA LUMUMBA

KAYLA REED

LESLIE MAC - DIGITAL ORGANIZER, BLACK WOMXN FOR

ANGELA PEOPLES - DIRECTOR, BLACK WOMXN FOR

[sarahjwessel]

Dear White People - Netflix Original

The 2017 Netflix original, Dear White People, written and created by Justin Simien, tackles the social issues of racial privilege, whiteness, discrimination, segregation, feminism, sexual identity, cultural bias and social injustices. The series starts off when a blackface party occurs on a primary white Ivy League University campus and is disrupted by African American students. The main character, Samantha White, has a university radio show entitled “Dear White People” and exploits the racial tension occurring on campus. This TV Show brings racial issues to the forefront and discusses social and political issues.

When the series premiered, many were appalled at the blunt approach that many considered white genocide, anti-white racism and aggression. In an Article published by The Telegraph discusses many of the complaints that Netflix received along with the talk that occurred on social media when the first trailer premiered for season one.

Having the show come from a primary black perspective, allows for white viewers to view society from a perspective they couldn’t before. When you look the show as a whole it reflects a true society. A society that is unjust and that needs reconstruction. The satire, pokes fun at the social injustices that occur, but in reality, this is a serious conversation that needs to be had.

This media production is today’s version of the invisible Knapsack of whiteness and white privilege that Peggy McIntosh, wrote about in her article of “Unpacking the invisible knapsack”. This show has taken what is invisible to the white population and allows them to see a true reflection of society, It shows the privileges that many have been ignorant about. This show is also heavily reliant on media, because in today’s society we are so reliant on media and are so gullible to what we see in the media. This show emphases how we as a society trusts images and media as proof of ideas and scientific reality. This show even points out the bias’s that can occur in media. This TV show correlates very closely to the material that we have discussed in week two about how images can speak, and Mrizoeff’s “The shadow and the Substance” article.  The parallels that this show makes to the conversation we had about whiteness reinforces what was presented in class.

I have attached a short clip of an interview with the director where he discusses why he created the show and what he hopes will resonate with the audience.  

I want to emphasize the fact that the director had a motive and that has influenced his directorial decisions to have this society be perceived in this way. This is similar to what we discussed in class about images.

The show aims to bring awareness to society and to enlighten the population on the racial injustices still occurring in the twenty first century. I believe that the overall impact on society has been positive. I believe that “Dear White People” have woken people from the left and right as well as minorities and majorities and have addressed social issues that everyone can relate to. I believe that the most important thing to draw from the show is that we are more similar than different. We go through all the same things and all want to find our place in society.

Sources:

“Dear White People | Data Announcement [HD] | Netflix.” YouTube, 08 Feb. 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=6&v=1LzggK5DRBA

“Directing In Color: Justin Simien Tackles Race, Identity In ‘Dear White People’” | NBC  BLK | NBC News” YouTube, 03 May 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25uAwCKHjA4

Graham, Chris. “'Dear White People' Trailer Sparks Backlash as Netflix Faces Claims of Racism.” The Telegraph, 9 Feb. 2017. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/2017/02/09/dear-white-people-trailer-sparks-backlash-netflix-faces-claims/

Seitz, Matt Zoller. “Netflix's Dear White People Is a Feat.” Vulture, New York Vulture, 27 Apr. 2017. https://www.vulture.com/2017/04/netflix-dear-white-people-review.html

Vann R. Newkirk II, Adrienne Green. “How Insightful Is ‘Dear White People’?” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 19 June 2017, https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/05/dear-white-people-season-one-roundtable/526920/.

[badmousestuff-blog]

Caela’s Report

The Reactionary Nightmare of the CPGB-ML

Prelude: A Flawed Declaration

MOTION 8: “Identity politics are anti-Marxian and a harmful diversion from the class struggle”

Motion 8, passed by the CPGB-ML, is thoroughly anti-materialist and profoundly reactionary. In this, the party dogwhistles at “LGBT ideology” being harmful to the working class, who are nebulously defined. This motion says nothing but declares loudly a lack of solidarity with struggles of gender and sexuality, alienating not only those oppressed on those grounds but those who are allied with them. The party seems unconcerned with allying with those masses concerned with the wellbeing of LGBT people, instead using the language of conservatism (“identity politics”) to signal this message:

There Are No Gays In The USSR!

“Why gay rights is not a class issue”

If we are to believe the party, the question of gay rights is not only “not a class question”, but also solvable by the communist revolution in itself. When class antagonism ends, the line goes, then LGBT people will be liberated by proxy. These two statements, however, carry an internal contradiction: if LGBT people are not an oppressed class, as people of colour and women are, then the antagonism towards them will not be resolved by revolution. If they are an oppressed class, then the CPGB-ML is failing in its duty to support all classes oppressed by capitalism, and is thus not only failing tactically but theoretically.

However, this contradiction is not resolved with self-criticism, or improvement of the party line, but through dismissal and ignorance – the worst failure of any communist party. Instead, the party chides LGBT people, and the activists supporting their rights, not merely as reactionaries (as they continue to go on later), but are contrasted against the ultimately nebulous term “ordinary people” - the framing of this implying that abnormality and difference is in itself harmful – consciously or not, the party has taken the conservative line of ignorance and repulsion. This does nothing to improve the lives of LGBT people, many of whom are working class precisely because they are discriminated against by capitalists, many, especially trans people, taking up sex work as the only available option. To stand in solidarity with all oppressed classes means to stand for LGBT rights and liberation, and if one ignores the problem it does not go away. “There are no invalids in the USSR!” means nothing to those disabled people specifically oppressed by bad, exclusionary and anti-materialist policy.

The Root of Left Reaction: The Worker as Biotruth

“The reactionary nightmare of ‘gender fluidity’”

Here we find the largest flaw in CPGB-ML’s ideology, in fact, the one from which myriad other flaws originate – the worker, “ordinary”, is not allowed to be corrupted by the outsider, the abnormal. This takes the class status of the worker and turns it into a crude biopolitics, in which the body of the worker, not their status, is at the forefront. In that sense, though they take some token stand against racism, their assertion that “class is the primary struggle” (said directly to a person of colour asking about racial oppression) makes sense. To the CPGB-ML, all oppression consists of class oppression, and everything else is a corruption, a “harmful distraction.” There is a preference for immediate physicality over psychology – which is why, in part, the party denounces trans people.

In this article, the party demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the material conditons not only of LGBT people, but all those who are not oppressed strictly along economic lines. There is a preference given to immediate physicality – the worker’s arm over the worker’s mind. Ultimately, the line on which the CPGB-ML stand is “the worker”, those who are producing in some capacity. Placing the ability to work at the forefront of one’s politics, especially in an age where so many cannot work, is a privilege only the able-bodied can afford. A Communist revolution, without a plan for those most marginalised by capital and thus the least likely to work, is doomed to fail. A politics that does not take into account the mental health of the masses is a rejection of materialism and thus counter- revolutionary in one of its core ideas. Disregarding the importance of mental health, the article states:

There is even a movement termed ‘ableism’ or ‘trans-ableism’. There exist people who say: “I look as if I’ve got two arms and two legs, but actually in reality, I feel like I was born disabled.”

The writer simply cannot comprehend that there exist invisible disabilities, and things that prevent work that aren’t removed limbs. To the party, the worker is thus conceived as machinery – something whose value lies in working at peak efficiency. This is capitalist logic and should be stamped out of any revolutionary theory, instead valuing people inherently as members of a communist society.

On gender, the writer of this article uses vague truisms to point to what may seem like intuitive answers – however, in simplifying the argument so much, it becomes easy to rebut. Geometry and biology are entirely seperate fields, let alone geometry and psychology – the attempt to say “why can’t a circle self-identify as a square” falls flat, because a circle is not an organism. Thus, the question of “is there a material reality” is a thinly-veiled attempt to get the reader to agree to their conception of reality, and what is material. The hammer does not operate without an arm to drive it, and the arm does not operate without a mind to will it. Creating a staw opponent who argues that “there is no material reality” is a fundamental failure in understanding anything outside of the writer’s experience. In that sense, the writer, and by proxy the party, places the individual conception of reality above the masses – they are not following the research, not conducting their own, and thus relying solely on prejudice. Again, this returns to the hand and the mind – both need each other, and the party disregards one, failing to see an entire side of the process. The article proceeds not dialectically, but via assertion – though the writer brags about being an adherent to the dialectical process, they do not practice it. Similarly, just as the party states their anti-racism, their members cannot avoid white chauvinism and pushing people of colour away from the party. For example, this excerpt:

It’s very useful not to trust muslims or not to trust Pakistanis or not to trust Afro-Americans, or “I don’t really like that Nigerian who lives next door to me, they’re a bit different aren’t they?” Well, if people rub along with each other, they get over that don’t they?

The writer goes on to assert that race itself is a construction of the bourgoisie, and should thus be disregarded in revolutionary movements for a unified class line. However, if one were to conceive of capital itself in the same way, then the logic becomes apparently flawed; constructions of the bourgeoisie need to be acknowledged and worked through, not discarded on the altar of progress. Every time a movement fails to acknowledge this, it fails the masses.

Thus, onto gender, a construction of the modern era. Countless examples of non-binary genders have existed in pre- modern societies, especially outside of Europe and its empire; I need not list them here, but examples include Two- Spirit people of First Nations descent, the Waria of Indonesia, the Hirja of India, etc. - all of these conceptions arose independently of one another, long before capital established itself. If we are searching for material reality, the gender binary seems to fly in the face of it – it arises as the Other of the dominant class (men). Gender is a historically contingent category, and is a process of becoming (as Simone de Beauvoir describes) a gender, rather than being born it. Even the sex binary is fundamentally flawed and ideological, as intersex people are routinely violated at birth to enforce it. This binary is purely in the realm of ideas, and as such is anti-materialist. To embrace gender divergence, even gender fluidity, as the title of the article states but does not elaborate on, aligns perfectly with a historically materialist conception of history. The writer accuses trans people of being purely idealist – I have demonstrated that it is in fact the opposite – enforcing the gender and sex binaries are firmly anti-materialist. The division of the working class is not in the removal of these binaries, they are those binaries.

So, I ask, when you routinely ask why women and people of colour do not come to your side, and when you’re constantly accused of queerphobia, do you not perform the self-criticism necessary to grow, and realise that your policies are alienating the masses? Why do you meet the idea of the number of trans people being ten percent, not with engagement, but with rejection and incredulity, inventing some narrative that trans people are telling gay people that they are trans?

There are two answers to this question: one, that your party is ignorant of the facts, and has not done the research necessary to engage with this issue, and has regardless written an article and held a party congress on the issue. The other option is that your party holds a resentment to queer people (thinly veiled over with empty statements of acceptance) many of whom are working-class specifically by modes of capitalist oppression. Both of these solutions render the CPGB-ML unable to represent the masses, and thus unfit to call itself a party of the proletariat.

[seluandthecrow-blog]

The entertainment industry in America is imbued with racist ideology, and gaps in representation and wages between actors of color and white actors are reigning free. Black actors are sometimes more successful than their white counterparts, but even then they’re not being recognized or compensated in the same way. I observe this from a privileged lens as a white person, and though I have struggled economically and still do, I have the privilege that comes with whiteness. Here I will attempt to communicate some of what I see as disparities and racist ideologies in the American entertainment industry today.

  I saw the most recent Star Wars movie “Solo” when it came out on Netflix. Alden Ehrenreich plays Han Solo, our lovable, orphaned, thief-but-for-the-right-reasons protagonist. He’s moving up through the ranks, stealing for the noble cause of one day being reunited with his adolescent crush Qi’ra (Emilia Clarke).  Donald Glover plays Lando Calrissian, the owner of the Millennium Falcon. His methods for acquisition of the Falcon are under constant scrutiny, and he is portrayed as the crook, with little back story. When white writers Jonathan and Lawrence Kasdan created this story, did they intend to cast Lando as a black man, or was it perhaps the casting agency who thought Glover would be good for this supporting role?

When Donald Glover was offered the job, he faced a choice. Did he want to be in the new Star Wars movie if he played a thief? There is a sacrifice made when an activist musician and comedian takes a high caliber role that potentially stereotypes him based on race. Certainly the circumstances are unique for each actor, but when a black entertainer is given an opportunity to succeed, but there is a wage gap between black and white entertainers, as well as male and female actors, and intersections of these different categories work like a confusing math problem that becomes easy to distill: there is disparity.

Sure, films like Black Panther are working against subjugation by taking black characters into the forefront of the picture, but what goes on behind the scenes is still inequity. It is generally stated that Chad Boseman who plays Black Panther earned $500,000 for his appearance in the film, and around 2-3 Million for Avengers, Infinity War. Robert Downey Jr. however, earned $500,000 for the first Iron Man, and earned a sickening $40-$50 Million for Infinity War. (QUORA.COM, 2019) (MENXP.COM, 2019) 

Entertainers with more weight in the industry based on previous successes gain more creative independence and move up in the income ranks based on that success. But roles and incomes are limited for black actors in the mainstream, and when you see a black actor or hear a black musician, what parts of their blackness are being commodified and to what end can they be undervalued as artists when their bodies and voices are being harnessed to entertain?

According to Forbes, Black Panther grossed over 1.3 Billion Dollars, more than Titanic, one of the highest grossing films to date (Forbes, 2018), Whereas the first Iron Man grossed less than half that, close to 318 Million. (Box Office Mojo, 2019). There are some lurking variables affecting the difference in Boseman and Downy Jr.’s salaries in Infinity War, like that fact that Downey Jr. has appeared in more films than Boseman (IMBD, 2019), but the key factor in the wage gap here is clearly white privilege. This phenomenon is hard to name because acknowledging it opens up hundreds of years of dialogue on oppression and dispossession which is painful to talk about, but it is impossible to ignore if you want it to change.  

Coincidentally, Donald Glover’s hit song This is America was co-written by Swedish computer Ludwig Göransson , who also wrote the score for Black Panther. Göransson  speaks to that experience in an interview with Complex.com last year:

“What I’ve been working with, and really trying to be aware of, is how you take traditional music from these different countries and put electronics and big orchestra on top of that while keeping the same sounds,” he said. “It’s been really challenging. I went to west Africa and South Africa for a month to do research and record a bunch of different musicians for the score. I brought that back to my studio and, for the past year, I’ve been figuring out ways to preserve the essence of that music and try to make it cinematic to fit this superhero universe.” (COMPLEX.COM, 2018)

So where are these nameless musicians from Africa credited in information on this blockbuster’s soundtrack? Nowhere that I could find. Were they paid anywhere close to what Göransson received as the Composer for the film?Do they receive royalties from their performances?

Michelle Alexander speaks to new manifestations of racism in her book The New Jim Crow, a book which according to a 2018 article in The New York Times is banned in prisons in North Carolina and Florida. (Bromwich, 2018)

“In the era of colorblindness, it is no longer socially permissible to use race, explicitly, as a justification for discrimination, exclusion, and social contempt. So, we don’t. Rather than reply on race, we use our criminal justice system to label people of color “criminals” and then engage in all the practices we supposedly left behind. Today is it perfectly legal to discriminate against criminals in nearly all the ways that it was once legal to discriminate against African Americans…we have not ended the racial caste in America; we have merely redesigned it.“ (Alexander, 2012)

  And that’s exactly what is going on in the entertainment industry today. We are redesigning racism with wage gaps, divisions of screen time and biased survival in apocalyptic pictures (Infinity Wars,) and portraying black actors as thieves and sidekicks (Solo,) while black rappers in the mainstream sing about prison time, womanizing, gold chains, and street drugs, perpetuating these images to the public. In Lil Baby’s song Pure Cocaine, which is #24 on the Billboard rap charts as of April 5th, 2019, he says:

“When your wrist like this, you don't check the forecast/Every day it's gon' rain (every day it's gon' rain), yeah/Made a brick through a brick, I ain't whip up shit/This pure cocaine (this pure cocaine), yeah/From the streets, but I got a little sense/But I had to go coupe, no brain, coupe no brain/I ain't worried 'bout you, I'ma do what I do/And I do my thing, do my thing”

  Chris Holmlund makes observations of the entertainment industry’s racist ideology flattening the Whoopi Goldberg into a tool for the white protagonists to connect in the movie Ghost in his book Impossible Bodies:

“Garishly dressed and made up, Oda Mae [the crook turned accessory to the white protagonist’s happiness, played by Goldberg] looks ridiculous when she visits Molly at Sam’s urging. “I don’t see what’s wrong with what I’m wearing,” she complains, voice off over a bird’s eye shot of Manhattan. 

The next shot shows her striding along, resplendent in a badly fitting rose-colored jacket, black flounced skirt, black stockings, white net gloves, bouffant black wig, and rakish hat. Her legs splay apart awkwardly above spike heels. In African leggings she later seems more at ease, but she never looks as deliciously fragile as Molly [Demi Moore] does in her pixie haircut, baggy sweaters, and spaghetti strap T-shirts.

            No wonder, then, that Oda Mae lends her body to the dead Sam when he wants to hold and kiss his wife one last time. “O.K., O.K., you can use me,” she says, “You can use my body. Just do it quick before I change my mind.” Orlando at least submersed himself in her, before reemerging in ghostly superimposition to hear his wife’s response. Sam simply replaces her, obviating the lesbianism implicit in a first, teaser, closeup of Molly’s white hands held by Oda Mae’s black ones, by suddenly appearing in medium shot to wrap his strong arms protectively around his tremblingly eager widow’s torso.” (Holmlund, 2002)

This example from the 1990 film may show that movies have come some way in representation of black characters, but Lando’s role in connecting Han Solo with his love Qi’ra seems to follow a similar trajectory. Epigenesis is painful, and there are many steps back accompanying each step forward in how ideologies can be reshaped. In 2010 there was one such instance of painful steps backward which instigate change in the 15th annual broadcast of the Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show, which aired on CBS. A summation of the event from The Color Complex by Kathy Russell-Cole, and Drs. Midge Wilson and Ronald Hall follows:

“Over 9 million viewers, the largest audience yet, tuned in to watch thirty-four female models, six of whom were women of color, parade around in lingerie and little else. The display of wares was organized around six differently themes sets, and in each, even the country-themes one featuring a barn and blond wigs, the subset of “girls” participating was racially integrated-with one notable exception. The single themed presentation in which the producers saw fit to showcase only the six models of color was the segment entitled “Wild Thing.” The setting was a jungle and the models entered wearing nothing more than African wraps on bodies covered in tribal body paint. From the African-American community could be heard a collective moan: “Seriously? Again, you put us back in the jungle?”

Since before the Civil War, the dominant White culture has abused and manipulated images of African Americans, usually for the purposes of fear, humor (i.e. what Whites thought was amusing,) and marketing.” (Russel-Cole/Wilson/Hall, 2013)

Awareness of these disparities is the key to unwinding what large entertainment corporations are continuously feeding to the public. I encourage you to question the lyrics on the radio, and ask yourself who is writing them, who is singing them, and for what reason. Watch the behaviors of actors. What are they promoting? Mainstream media is engineered by corporations to succeed with awareness of what consumers will buy into. It’s your responsibility as the consumer to shape the reality of the entertainment industry, and equality on and off-screen. 

#white privelage #blacklivesmatter #disparity #entertainment #robert downey jr #solo #chadwick boseman #whoopi goldberg #demi moore #wage gap #wearethe99% #universal #hollywood #activism

[nationaldvam]

5 Takeaways & Lessons Learned at Facing Race 2018 a National Conference by Race Forward & Center for Social Inclusion

by Justine Robillard, Creative Media Specialist for the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence

National Resource Center on Domestic Violence (NRCDV) is devoted to continual learning and education around racial justice as a core element of our gender and social justice work. We refer to this collective journey as our Racial Justice Initiative. For our organization, this means that our staff and board at all levels are dedicated to investing in racial equity and bringing it to the front and center of our work. This November, it also meant that several of my colleagues and I were able to attend the #FacingRace 2018 Conference.

As a first time attendee I was overwhelmed with the sense that we (our organization & our movement) are part of something much larger. You see, as anti-violence advocates, we speak of “intersectionality” and “bridging gaps” and working with “sister” movements. At this conference we had the privilege of seeing first-hand the intersectional approach Race Forward takes when addressing social justice inequities. We were able to experience the coming together of sister movements, embracing their unique values and perspectives in a way that enhanced and moved conversations forward.

Tarana Burke stated that sexual violence intersects with all justice work: prison abolishment, police reform, economic justice, community health, housing, and homelessness. “Sexual violence is a racial justice issue, economic justice issue, community health issue, police brutality issue, LGBTQ issue, human rights issue.”

In the closing plenary Is America Possible? Building a Multiracial Democracy in an Era of Division, panelists explored steps for moving forward and taking the energy, bold truths and raw facts from this conference to empower our lives and our movements in a realistic change-making way.

“Alignment; let’s be smart. Let’s have a strategy and work together across differences.” - Ash-Lee Woodard Henderson

What does this mean for advocates working in their respective movements? We’ve highlighted just a few of the many take-aways from Facing Race that resonated with NRCDV team members who attended the conference.

1. Honor your ancestors & the space you are in. 2. Reimagine a World 3. The Power of Stories 4. Unjust, Not Unfortunate 5. Be Rigorous!  

1. Honor your ancestors & the space you are in.

“We are the children of the ones who did not die; We are the children of the people who can fly; We are the children of the ones who persevered; We are fearless, we are strong, and we’re ready to carry on.”        - Song led by Wendy Moore-O’Neal, Conference Weaver

Honoring the story of the space you are walking into, as well as the history and culture that you, yourself and your ancestors bring is exceedingly important. This serves not only to ground you in the culture and communities you are working with and for, but also to break down walls that you or others in the room may put up when entering a workspace. This is also an opportunity to acknowledge the history and voices of those who have come before you.

“Recognizing the power of Truth telling. We won't get to justice until we can actually tell the truth about our history” - Ash-Lee Woodard Henderson

So, what does this look like?

Race Forward was intentional about honoring the land we were on, those who walked it before us, and those who walk it today. They did so through community agreements, and showcasing the rich history of Detroit, especially its indigenous populations. They brought leaders such as Grace and Jimmy Boggs, the water warriors of Michigan’s water crisis, and labor rights activists to the forefront and made space for Detroit's leaders in arts and music.

2. Reimagine a World

Throughout the conference many speakers challenged us to not only reimagine the world around us, but how you are going to be present. They challenged us to reimagine new systems, such as public goods and services; reimagine how we utilize our land and natural resources; reimagine how we value labor, and where we put our financial resources. Reimagine democracy. Reimagine your own body. What would your body be shaped like without oppression or exploitation? How would you look and how would you move? What would it look like if you shared this vision of yourself with the world? It was extremely challenging to envision ourselves and our systems in ways that are different from what we currently have, but it is this radical reimagining that has the ability to create major impactful change.

“Creating the condition for people to feel free to imagine a world with new possibilities.” - Bree Newsome

3. The Power of Stories

At Facing Race a few of us were able to attend FRED Talks (Facing Race, Elevating Democracy) featuring stories, strategies, and lived experiences of advocates and leaders from communities most impacted by societal oppressions. These stories remind us not only that our work is not yet done, but the importance of engaging with our sister movements, continual open dialoge, and the power of sharing our stories. Every story holds a different perspective or lens. It is through these perspectives that new lessons, barriers, and learning moments are revealed, and from which more comprehensive and innovative solutions can be found.

Let me put it another way. Say we’re playing “Escape the [social inequity] Room.” Every story holds a different perspective and each perspective holds a different key. If we do not share, listen, learn and respect the stories of our siblings fighting for justice, we are aimlessly trying to “escape the room” without access to all the keys to open the locks.

4. Unjust, Not Unfortunate

“When we leave people at unfortunate, not at unjust, we aren't addressing the systems of oppression. We aren't holding institutions accountable or pushing them to do better. We aren't pushing for real change.” – Adrienne Maree Brown

As advocates, we fight injustice daily. The injustices we face have become so normalized by society that systemic oppression is often labeled as merely ”unfortunate.”

Adrienne Maree Brown reminded us that when we label struggles caused by poverty, racism, and homophobia as unfortunate, and not unjust, we are removing ourselves from the humanity of these situations. If a situation is unfortunate, like a scrape or cut, we address it with Band-Aid solutions, because unfortunate problems may heal or resolve themselves in time. We need to be bold and acknowledge when things are more than just unfortunate. It’s unjust to listen to lived experiences and not offer a path to healing and change.

Justice requires movement; it requires systemic change; it requires acknowledgement; and it requires more than a Band-Aid. An unjust situation may require stitches, surgery, the setting of bones, or even the re-breaking of bones to then be set right. Justice is messy and hard it requires real change.

5. Be Rigorous!

Ash-Lee Woodard Henderson reminds us to "Study. Be disciplined and rigorous in what's happening now and what has happened in history. Do work. And evaluate and grow as you continue to work.”

Advocacy is hard and sometimes draining, and self-care is important, but we cannot stop! We must be rigorous in our study and learning and rigorous in the inclusion of others and their unique perspectives, because they are valuable not because they are a statistic. We must be rigorous in uncovering and acknowledging the hidden histories of our nation and oppressed peoples, and rigorous in developing our own work and growth. We must be rigorous in evaluating our progress, learning from our failures and continuing to get back up, and rigorous in helping one another get back up and into the race.

“Let’s roll together. Solidarity is a practice. You have to do it… There are opportunities to build solidarity in our shared fate. If you come for one of us, you come for all of us… We need revolutionary strategies. Let’s use our visionary muscles.” - Ash-Lee Woodard Henderson

These takeaways by no means reflect all the wisdom we gathered in this space. With well over 100 workshops, not including plenaries, planned Race Flicks, Racial Justice Reads, and social events, this conference was packed full of learning for everyone at every level of racial justice work. Check out our December TAQ (Technical Assistance Question of the Month) on VAWnet, where Ivonne Ortiz speaks to her experience attending the Race Forward conference as a woman of color and addresses the question “As a woman of color; how can I find my place in the domestic violence movement?”

Learn more about how you can put these awesome ideas into practice! Some ideas to get you started: • PreventIPV, Tools for Social Change: https://preventipv.org/ • MEV’s Resource Library: https://www.movetoendviolence.org/resources/ • Race Forward’s research https://www.raceforward.org/research • Race Forward’s news outlet, Colorlines: https://www.colorlines.com/ • December TAQ: We exist! As a woman of color; how can I find my place in the domestic violence movement?

#Awareness Highlights #blog #DVAM #DVAP #NRCDV #raceforward #facingrace #racism

[theliberaltony]

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

The basic theory of the presidential candidacy of Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and the potential candidacy of former Vice President Joe Biden is that Democrats win when they are able to get the electorate, particularly Midwestern white voters without college degrees, thinking about economic issues and not cultural or racial ones. Lots of left-leaning commentators favor something like this strategy — “It’s the populism, stupid,” New York Times columnist David Leonhardt wrote a few months ago. Other Democratic 2020 candidates, such as Bernie Sanders, are also hinting at this approach.

The case for Democrats both running on populism and centering their electoral strategy around appealing to Midwestern white voters without college degrees is fairly strong. After all, polls show that voters are more aligned with the Democrats on some high-profile economic issues than on some hot-button cultural ones. Recent electoral history also seems to make this case. Then-President Barack Obama leaned heavily into economic populism during his successful 2012 re-election bid, when he won states including Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Hillary Clinton lost those three states and the election in 2016 after a campaign in which both she and President Trump spoke bluntly about issues around race and identity. In turn, Democratic congressional leaders emphasized a pocketbook message for the 2018 midterms, and the party’s candidates executed it, highlighting health care, particularly the GOP push to repeal Obamacare, more than perhaps any other issue. And the Democrats made huge gains in November.

Looking ahead to 2020, the easiest, clearest path for the Democrats to get 270 electoral votes is for them to win Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and all three states’ electorates have a higher percentage of whites without college degrees and a lower percentage of people of color than the nation overall. And those three states have already shown signs of bouncing back toward Democrats — the party won the governor’s race in all three in November.

But there’s also a fairly strong case — backed by plenty of data and political science research — for Democrats to talk a lot about equality and identity issues, and to focus on turning out nonwhite voters and white people with college degrees as much as white people without degrees. Think populism and identity instead of populism alone. In other words, a Democrat can probably win in 2020 with something like the Clinton strategy of 2016. Here’s why:

Discussing race probably isn’t why Clinton lost

Many Democratic politicians and strategists view the party’s 2016 collapse with Midwestern white voters without degrees as largely the fault of Clinton, arguing that she talked about issues other than economics too much. But some research shows that that’s not quite right. In their book “Identity Crisis,” political scientists John Sides, Michael Tesler and Lynn Vavreck described how non-college-educated white voters who had more conservative views on racial issues had been leaving the Democratic Party throughout Obama’s presidency. Clinton didn’t create the Democrats’ problem with non-college-educated white voters. She inherited it and failed to reverse it.

The way Clinton ran in 2016 — invoking terms like the “privilege” of white Americans and embracing the Black Lives Matter movement — might have exacerbated the shift of racially conservative white voters away from the Democratic Party. But Trump was likely the bigger cause, according to Ashley Jardina, a political science professor at Duke University and author of the new book “White Identity Politics.” According to Jardina’s research, Trump, with his anti-immigration and anti-Muslim stands, tapped into white Americans’ identity as white people in a way previous Republican presidential candidates did not. In other words, the key difference between 2012 and 2016, per Jardina’s findings, was not really that Clinton ran a campaign with less economic populism and more talk about race.

Rather, “Trump drew in certain white voters who were especially concerned about protecting their racial group and its interests,” Jardina said.

Looking forward to 2020, the Democratic presidential candidate probably can’t avoid an election where issues like immigration are at the forefront, since Trump is running and he loves talking about them.

It’s not all about Obama-Trump voters

You’ve heard a lot about Obama-Trump voters. But there is an alternative bloc of 2012 Obama voters who didn’t back Clinton in 2016 — and they may easier for Democrats to woo back in 2020. Using data from the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Study, political data experts Bernard L. Fraga, Sean McElwee, Jesse H. Rhodes and Brian F. Schaffner, estimated that about 9 percent of 2012 Obama voters backed Trump in 2016. But an equally large bloc of Obama 2012 voters either didn’t vote in 2016 (7 percent) or voted for a third-party candidate (3 percent.)

According to these experts, the Obama-Trump voters were about 84 percent white, as you might have expected. But those who stayed home were about equally divided between white and nonwhite, and the third-party voter group was about 70 percent white. And those who didn’t vote at all in 2016 had more liberal views on policy issues than the Obama-Trump bloc.

Similarly, a post-election analysis by the left-leaning Center for American Progress argued that Clinton would have won Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Florida if she had not suffered from two different problems with black voters: First, the percentage of African Americans who voted went down in 2016 compared to 2012, and second, Clinton did not win as high a percentage of those who did vote as Obama did.1

And even outside of one-time Obama voters, there’s a case that Democrats can win more nonwhite voters and racially-liberal whites without really sacrificing any white votes that might be available to the party. Christopher Stout, a political science professor at Oregon State University, argues, using survey research, that black and Latino voters have both become more aware of racism and more consciousness of being part of minority groups since around 2014, in part because of movements like Black Lives Matter. During that same period, according to Stout, white voters have become more sorted according to their racial views — so white Democrats are liberal on racial issues and white conservatives are conservative on racial issues too.

In Stout’s view, there is little downside for Democrats in talking about fighting racial inequality because people bothered by that kind of talk are already Republicans. But there is a potential plus in this strategy. According to Stout’s research, a candidate advocating for criminal justice reform, granting legal status to undocumented immigrants and making it easier to vote (he tested these three policy stances specifically) would increase voter turnout among people of color.

“Current political contexts make positive racial appeals a necessary component of any successful strategy for left-leaning candidates,” Stout told me.

The Democratic candidates for 2020 are already headed in this direction. Sen. Cory Booker and former Rep. Beto O’Rourke are emphasizing that they favor not only legalizing marijuana but also removing pot-related convictions from criminal records. Several Democratic candidates, including Booker and O’Rourke, are opposed to the death penalty and cash bail. I would expect whoever the Democratic nominee is to emphasize and making it easier for Americans to vote and for undocumented immigrants to become citizens, because those are core positions of the party. And many of the Democrats’ 2020 candidates are either people of color (Booker, former Cabinet secretary Julian Castro, Sen. Kamala Harris) or taking decidedly liberal stands on racial issues (O’Rourke and Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand and Elizabeth Warren, among others.)

And electorally, this kind of approach, with a focus on whites with college degrees (who tend to be more liberal) and nonwhite people of all kinds, might align better with where the U.S. electorate is headed. Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin are probably the most important swing states for both parties in 2020, since they were so close in 2016 (Trump won all three by less than 1 percentage point).

But after those three, the 2016 and 2018 results suggest Democrats have as good a chance of winning in Arizona, Georgia and Texas (places with fairly high nonwhite populations) as in Iowa or Ohio. The latter two are traditionally considered battleground states, but the Democrats are really struggling in both as of late.

Populism alone didn’t win the midterms

Congressional Democratic leaders decided fairly early in the 2018 election cycle in 2017 that the party should run on health care and other pocketbook issues in the 2018 midterms. So unsurprisingly, Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill are now arguing that their health care strategy was central to the party’s victory in 2018.

I’m skeptical. Trump’s approval numbers did drop a bit in early 2017, amid his party’s push to repeal Obamacare. But the Obamacare repeal push ended in September 2017. What was Trump doing for the next 14 months before the election? I would argue that the issue he was most focused on, particularly in 2018, was immigration — making headlines both for his policies (separating immigrant children from their families at the border) and rhetoric (“shithole countries”). The year leading up to the midterms was full of Trump doing and saying controversial things on a number of issues, but not really on health care.

The biggest reason Democrats won the House in 2018 was huge turnout among anti-Trump voters. Some of the Democrats’ strongest candidates, in terms of doing better than the state’s partisanship suggest they should, including Georgia’s Stacey Abrams and Texas’s O’Rourke, cast themselves as liberal on cultural issues as well as on economic ones. The data suggests that in 2018, Democrats didn’t just make gains in the Midwest with one specific strategy, like economic populism and appealing to white voters without degrees, but rather that Democratic candidates with all kinds of different messages did pretty well across the country and with almost all voting demographics (compared to 2016) because they were running against Trump and the Republicans.

Looking forward to 2020, Democrats may not want to assume that the general dynamics of the 2016 election — the Electoral College is closely divided and the candidate who wins Obama-Trump voters in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin will be elected president — will remain in place.

“After every election, the losing party is told that it needs to rectify the alleged mistakes of that election in order to win the next election,” said Sides, one of the co-authors of “Identity Crisis.” “Usually this means winning over some supposedly crucial group of voters.

“Does the losing party usually do this? No. Do they often win the next election anyway? Yes,” he added. “After 2004, Democrats were told that they needed to win over ‘values voters.’ Obama didn’t do that, and he won. After 2012, Republicans were told to woo Latinos, women, young people, and so on. Did they do that? No, and Trump actually went farther in the opposite direction than anyone could have imagined. He won anyway.”

“So why do we assume that 2020 is different?” said Sides. “You don’t always have to fight the last battle to win the next one.”

How exactly might 2020’s electorate be divided differently than 2016’s? Well, the data experts who researched Obama-Trump voters say that 2020 could see an increase in the number of people who voted for Mitt Romney in 2012 who then defect to Democrats, as well as an increase in Republicans under 40 who backed both Romney and Trump but are now leaving the party. They argue these blocs in particular don’t align with Trump on immigration and trade.

I’m making a case here, and it’s purposefully a bit provocative. The clearest way for Democrats to win in 2020 is for the party to carry Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — three states that have lots of white voters without college degrees and where Trump’s tax and health care plans are very unpopular. Perhaps Democrats aren’t disciplined enough to talk about race and identity without also talking about related issues (reparations, for example) that may turn off swing voters. Maybe voters will actually hate legalizing pot or ending the death penalty once they think more carefully about it. Maybe white voters in the Midwest will keep getting more Republican, and 2018 will prove to be an aberration. Maybe some of them were turned off by Obama and Clinton’s identities, and the real issue is not that Democrats are culturally liberal in policy but in persona, and that presidential candidates like Booker, Gillibrand, Harris and Warren are doomed in the Midwest.

So I’m not sure that this kind of non-economic liberalism is the best strategy for Democrats. But I’m not sure it isn’t either.

#IFTTT #Politics – FiveThirtyEight #politics #538 #Perry Bacon Jr.