UC's racial turmoil a reminder to us all

The University of California system has had a rough couple weeks. First students at the University of California-San Diego held a "Compton Cookout" party to make fun of Black History Month. Then a satirical campus broadcast program used a racial epithet in its description of the party. On February 22nd, a student at UC Irvine wrote a column in the student paper advocating for the elimination of Black History Month. And last Thursday, the straw that broke the camel's back: A student hung a noose in UCSD's main campus library.

According to Leah Finnegan of The Huffington Post, the student responsible for the noose has since been suspended and faces subsequent punishment.

All of these events were decried by faculty and students alike. The New York Times reports UCSD Chancellor Marye Anne Fox detailed measures to improve the campus atmosphere on a Web site, while students occupied the chancellor's office Friday afternoon, chanting and drumming and participating in a debate about race relations. According to the blog Occupy California, students at the University of California-Los Angeles took part in a sit-in to show their support for UCSD.

These events are awful, to be sure, but they are just as eye-opening as they are racist and insensitive. We claim prejudice and discrimination have lessened through the generations, to the extent that today's college-age adults don't even notice race. We are more open to interracial dating and marriage, and most of us wouldn't even think twice before sitting next to a student of a different race in a lecture hall.

Does that mean we are free of negative stereotypes, racial bias and bigotry? Not even close.

As a University of Wisconsin-Madison senior who hasn't left campus for more than one week in four years, I can attest to the sort of racial prejudice percolating below the surface of my school. Before the legendary "Freakfest" Halloween party my freshman year, all of the dorms had to lecture their residents on appropriate and inappropriate Halloween costumes. They didn't show us Powerpoint slides of slutty nurses or a "Dick in a Box" costumes. No, we were shown pictures of gangster costumes, samurai costumes and ranchero costumes. Sitting in the main lounge of my dorm, we were told these costumes would be offensive and hurtful, yet the room filled with laughter at each passing slide. And sure enough, blackface traipses down State Street every Halloween.

The more subtle forms of racism can be found daily: When a girl's Starbucks cup breaks on the way to class, she yells, "These lids are SO ghetto." When a black man walks into the Nitty Gritty bar on a Friday night, drunk and sober alike immediately start guessing what position he plays on the football team.

These instances aren't as severe or negative as hanging a noose or hosting a "Compton Cookout," complete with gold teeth, nappy hair and cheap clothes, but they prove that our generation is far from "beyond race."

UC San Diego's events may have been extreme, but they don't exist in isolation.

Photo Credit: The Associated Press

One medium pizza, extra white privilege

A St. Louis man got more than he bargained for when he ordered a Pizza Hut pizza last week...

Pizza Hut customer Karl Mayberry was outraged by the name on his Pizza Hut receipt: Instead of Karl, he found "BIGBLACK." As WALB TV of South Georgia reports, Mayberry first thought BIGBLACK was a name of a pizza. But no, this label was used to identify the customer.

Mayberry complained to the company, and Pizza Hut gave him $100 in gift cards and a letter of apology. The company also said they would implement employee training to prevent future errors.

Is this racism? Most of the comments on the popular blog The Consumerist say no. Many commenters took a hard-lined approach, telling Mayberry to "get over it," while a select few cited this as overt racism and said, "it's crap like this that keeps society from moving forward."

While I believe the clerk taking Mayberry's order may have used BIGBLACK merely as an identifier and not as a racist statement against his/her customer, I think we have to look at the broader social context of this event. Sure, the cashier may not have heard or understood Mayberry's name, but if the customer were a white man, would the clerk have put "BIGWHITE?" Probably not.

There are a myriad other physical markers besides race, and I would argue that we tend to use those other identifiers when we refer to white people. We're more likely to mention clothes, hairstyle or color, eyes, iPods or cell phones when the person we're describing is white. But if we're confronted with a minority, our first marker is their "color."

Pizza Hut apologized. They promised corrective and preventative measures. The issue, like so many race issues, is not one of racist individuals. Rather, it's the systemic and unexamined white privilege that allows us to simultaneously normalize and ignore whiteness while emphasizing "otherness" in minorities.

Just imagine the outcry if the news report had identified the Pizza Hut employee as "PUNYWHITEHIGHSCHOOLER."

Photo Credit: WALB TV

Co-opting culture for the glory of gold

While I admit I am not an avid Olympics fan--I cannot say I want to see any more scenes of cold weather than the ones surrounding me every day--I can't help but run into coverage of wins, losses, tragedies and controversies of Vancouver 2010.

One such controversy is that surrounding Russian ice dancers Oksana Domnina and Maksim Shabalin. More specifically, their costumes have been decried as offensive, inaccurate and insensitive to Australia's aboriginal groups. The pair debuted these costumes at the European Championships in January, and amid criticism, the costumes were "toned down" for the Olympics.

The original costumes were dark-skinned body suits with red loin cloths and lots of white markings on their bodies. Leaves and face paint completed the outfits. At last night's Olympic event, in which the pair slipped from first to third place, the bodysuits matched the skaters' skin tones and the face paint was removed.

Despite these edits, many still railed against the skaters for their choice of outfit.

In a Sydney Morning Herald editorial last January, Bev Manton, chairwoman of the NSW Aboriginal Land Council, asked Domnina and Shabalin to reconsider their costumes before the European Championships. They wore the costumes anyway, and won gold at the event.

Reporters were quick to jump on the controversy, and many, like Washington Post sports columnist Tracee Hamilton, agreed with Manton's assertion that the performance was a gross misrepresentation of Aboriginal culture.

While I agree with and applaud Hamilton and others like her for coming out against the costumes, I take issue with the overall mass media coverage of the event. What could have been an important lesson in racial and ethnic sensitivity was quickly overshadowed by the U.S. hockey team's victory over Canada. And for those who argue that the hockey win was more relevant to America, I would fire back, "Oh really? Please name a player on the U.S. Olympic team." I doubt many could recover.

If you did wake up Monday morning and find coverage of the ice dance debacle on your news feed, you can bet it was gone by lunchtime. A Google video search yields results from competitions years ago, but none from Sunday night. Maybe this is the nature of the Olympics--to publicize events at a rapid-fire pace so everyone gets their time to shine. But then again, how many times have we heard about Shawn "Animal" White or Lindsey Vonn?

And worse yet, msnbc.com, which has partnered with NBC Sports to provide exclusive web coverage of the Vancouver Olympics, has not only minimized the costume-event, but they've made a mockery of it as well. If you want to see coverage of the Russian ice dancers, you'll be hard pressed to find a video. (The one video available is listed as a "premium video," and viewers must go through a registration process in order to see it.) The first and most prominent result for a search on "russian ice dance" is a slideshow of "Ice dancing's wild and wacky costumes."

Is it just me, or are blackface and cultural ignorance neither wild nor wacky?

Photo Credit: Yahoo Sports

Race has no roots in nature

In a Newsweek Web Exclusive, Mary Carmichael dissects racial disparities in health care today. Briefly describing data to prove minorities receive lower-quality care, Carmichael spends the bulk of the piece explaining why solving this dilemma is no easy task.

As it turns out, her explanation is not clear either...

Health care disparity is tough to tackle, Carmichael says, because "health and race are both complicated issues to examine academically." How do we classify people into racial groups? What about multi-racial individuals? Do we allow people to self-identify, or do we enact some sort of government policy of racial assignment? Answers to any of these questions have implications for both health care and democracy itself.

Carmichael argues that in order to revamp and reform health care, we must look at both nature and nurture. We must look at genetic predisposition to certain diseases and illnesses (nature), as well as social and medical environment (nurture). Citing race as "a notoriously inaccurate proxy for genetics, since it's such an imprecise way of describing people," Carmichael touches on, but fails to attack a key flaw in health care policy.

Throughout this article, the author never mentions that race is a social construction. Not only is race an imprecise way of describing groups of people, but it has no basis in biology. Historically, racial categories in America--and the hierarchies that accompanied them--provided a way for white society to justify minority oppression and reap the benefits of their exploitation. Race is not natural; it has been nurtured within our social consciousness. Thus, race is not inherent or fixed, and it is not only imprecise but meaningless as a measure of nature.

That being said, there are differences in health outcomes across racial groups. Blacks have higher rates of hypertension and diabetes than whites, for example. I would add, however, that these differences can be at least partly explained by external factors: environment, diet, occupation, access to health care, quality of health care available, etc. While racial differences in health may be a useful frame for examining the health of our society, we should not assume these differences are due to biological or innate characteristics of groups.

The crux of Carmichael's argument--that bridging the health care gap is only possible if we take a step back and examine the larger social structures preventing equality in care--is a strong case for macro-level analysis. However, this analysis will be most successful if we look not at race as a fixed and immutable measure of one's lifelong health projections, but as a product of a history of institutional and social inequality.

Photo Credit: The Institute for Southern Studies

Mayer's not the only one who thinks he has a 'hood pass'

I wanted to steer away from pop culture this week, but this one was too big to miss. The now infamous John Mayer Playboy interview has been a burning hot topic on news sites and blogs since it broke last week.

For anyone who isn't familiar with this story, John Mayer said in a Playboy magazine interview:

"Someone asked me the other day, 'What does it feel like now to have a hood pass?' And by the way, it’s sort of a contradiction in terms, because if you really had a hood pass, you could call it a nigger pass. Why are you pulling a punch and calling it a hood pass if you really have a hood pass? But I said, 'I can’t really have a hood pass. I’ve never walked into a restaurant, asked for a table and been told, ‘We’re full.''"

He later elaborated on his racial preferences when it comes to sexual encounters. When asked if black women throw themselves at him, Mayer replied:

"I don’t think I open myself to it. My dick is sort of like a white supremacist. I’ve got a Benetton heart and a fuckin’ David Duke cock. I’m going to start dating separately from my dick."

From writer and filmmaker Molly Secours to rapper Talib Kweli, everyone had a slightly different take on Mayer's words. As I looked through these comments, ranging from outright fury to lighthearted "he was just kidding," I found The Boston Globe's commentary to be the most thought-provoking.

Author Adam Mansbach laments the two-dimensionality of America's discussion of race issues, which he says lack thorough analysis and critique. Mansbach argues that Mayer's gaffe will soon be a thing of the past, a transgression added to a shelf alongside those of Chris Matthews, Harry Reid and Don Imus.

Mansbach enumerates the ways in which society and the mainstream media will overlook Mayer's faux pas and fail to examine the implications of his words. From Mayer's allusions to white-supremacy to his use of a racial slur, Mansbach says we will sweep it all under the carpet. The dismissal of the "hood pass," he argues, will be the most detrimental.

Mansbach defines a "hood pass" as a widely accepted symbol of white acceptance by the black community. Although Mansbach says the term itself places power in the hands of blacks to decide whether or not to accept a white person, it also makes it easier for whites to deny racism exists, at least in themselves. Whites can buy into an often marketed and exploited black culture and say they have a "hood pass," and therefore understand or appreciate the struggles of the black community.

To add to Mansbach's critique of the term, I argue that "hood pass" perpetuates the individualistic fallacy, which says racism is a product of individual beliefs and prejudices. Crucial to this fallacy is the notion of intention: If we do not intend to keep blacks down, we cannot be racist. This ignores the fact that racism, the culture of whiteness and white privilege all permeate our society's social, economic, political and cultural structures.

The idea that a white man like Mayer can somehow be granted access to "blackness" is an endorsement of white privilege in the worst way. Not only does white privilege grant whites "natural" or "expected" superiority in all social spheres, but it is so ingrained in our society that we often overlook it. According to Peggy McIntosh, associate director of the Wellesley College Center for Research on Women, white privilege grants whites a sort of internalized comfort that they will not be discriminated against in the workplace, that they can have their voices heard (even when in the racial minority), and that they can dress or speak as they choose without attributions to their race. Mayer's "hood pass" comment, a seemingly casual blurb in a men's magazine interview, reveals our subconscious internalization of white privilege, and the "right" bestowed on whites to exercise their advantages in all spheres, including the black community.

A "hood pass" is not a get out of jail free card for whites to say, "See, I'm not racist!" Rather, it is a way to hide, to deny involvement and to run from the problem. And while we may decry Mayer's comments, only to shove them on the shelf by March 1st, his interview is yet another opportunity to start a broader dialogue. Like Matthews' "post-racial" America and Imus' "nappy-headed hoes," we must focus on the larger issue. Mayer is one man. "Hood pass" is two words. But both prove the perpetuation of racism, whether overt or covert, begs investigation.

Photo Credit: GlobalGrind.com

The 'Who' behind "Who Dat"

In a previous post, I lamented the use of the word "Negro" on the United States census. There are countless examples of words like this--words that can be traced back to racial stereotyping and discrimination. But after reading Hollis Robbins' essay on the origins of the New Orleans Saints' slogan, I know "Who Dat" isn't like the rest.

"Who Dat" has its beginnings in black poetry and entertainment. African American poet Paul Laurence Dunbar used the phrase in his 1895 poem "When Malindy Sings." At the time, Robbins writes, "the idea behind writing dialect was that the language evoked the real speech of the folk population."

Dunbar would later team up with African-American composer Will Marion Cook to write lyrics for a Broadway show. The all-black cast, a feat in itself in 1898, was a big hit. Not only did it draw in audiences, but it proved black musicians and writers to be savvy business people.

Opponents to "Who Dat" cite its use in minstrel shows. Others say the use of dialect in song and poetry portrayed African Americans as dumb or inferior. I urge these people to look not at the use of the phrase in its most harmful context but its overall use throughout history.

With its origins in African American poetry and song, "Who Dat" is no more harmful than "Hijo" or "Ese," commonly used in Hispanic households as a term of endearment. To be sure, mass media could manipulate these terms to belittle the groups to which they refer, but these words are not intended for that purpose. Unlike "Negro," which began as a socially constructed marker designed to promote racial hierarchy, "Who Dat" has roots in black empowerment and success.

Sports slogans and mascots are often attacked for their racial undertones, and many teams and groups alter or change their slogans to placate the public. I am not arguing that these changes are a bad idea by any means. The Washington Redskins? Awful. The Cleveland Indians, with their smiley, red-faced mascot? Deplorable. But "Who Dat?" Historically, and even today as the downtrodden city of New Orleans celebrates its Super Bowl win, these words evoke camaraderie and celebration of success.

Click here for more "Who Dat" history.

Photo Credit: TVByTheNumbers.com

Language "Band-Aid" won't solve education problem

Most college application deadlines for the Fall 2010 semester have already passed, but future applications may look a bit different.

The Associated Press reports some colleges and universities have begun offering Spanish-language versions of their admissions Web sites. The translated sites are intended to help parents who don't speak English understand the college admissions and financial aid processes.

Among those offering Spanish-language resources, Bryn Mawr College, Smith College and Wesleyan University have Spanish versions of their Web sites, and the University of Pennsylvania conducts admissions info sessions in Spanish.

The rationale for the translations? Boosting Hispanic enrollment in higher education. According to the American Council on Education, only 25 percent of Hispanics ages 18 to 24 were in college in 2006, compared to 32 percent of blacks, 44 percent of whites and 61 percent of Asians-Americans. Citing Deborah Santiago, vice president for policy and research at Excelencia in Education in Washington, the AP reports, "Parents play a critical role in the aspiration of college," and helping parents understand the process may help Hispanic students close the race gap in college admissions.

What do these well-meaning efforts overlook? For one, a glance at readers' comments reveals a "LEARN ENGLISH" anger common in "to translate, or not to translate" debates. But in addition to this objection, and arguably more importantly, these new Spanish-language resources ignore social and institutional systems that prevent some Hispanics from going to college. Economic barriers may prevent some groups, while lack of access or preparation may prevent others, and still other barriers may exist for other groups. Where to lay the blame for these roadblocks, I don't claim to know. But in order to effectively combat low Hispanic enrollment, we must start from the ground up: In the high schools, the elementary schools, the after school programs and in the home. We must employ an artillery of resources to help Hispanic students, their families and the education system itself.

Furthermore, what happens when Hispanic students are admitted and enrolled? If parents can't proofread their children's first term papers or help them format their cover letters, students may feel lost and alone. Once again, a ground-up strategy is best. We cannot merely provide parents with the tools to help their children get in the door; we must help Hispanic students feel empowered to take on the rigors of college. We may also want to help parents better support their children, whether through academic counseling of their own or orientation programs upon their children's admission.

Spanish language Web sites may do well to introduce parents to the college admissions process, but it will take more thorough and culturally relevant efforts to boost Hispanic enrollment and achievement in higher education.

Photo Credit: OregonLive.com

Buying into a 'Brand of Blackness'

It's no secret that blacks are underrepresented in Hollywood films. As msnbc.com contributor Michael Ventre reports, black actors have made great strides in the entertainment industry, but a closer examination reveals persistent racial inequality in film.

Ventre focuses on three of Hollywood's most bankable celebrities: Denzel Washington, Will Smith and Tyler Perry. Their films consistently bring in millions, Ventre writes, and Will Smith is the only actor in history with eight consecutive films grossing over $100 million each. Surely, we've come a long way since "Birth of a Nation" and Blaxploitation.

But a closer look at blacks in Hollywood reveals there is much work to be done. As Ventre's article points out, the roles these actors play do not require any acknowledgment of race. Much like the "Safe Blacks Era" of the 1950s and 60s, today's films show easy black/white integration. As University of Wisconsin-Madison Journalism professor Hemant Shah says of the Safe Blacks Era, "Black access to white society came at a price: Suppression of self-identity." Blacks in film today are not recognized as such, and thus an important part of their character is ignored.

Some may argue this easy integration speaks highly of our society, as we begin to identify with characters regardless of race. But a lack of racial consciousness in these films also ignores the important ways race informs one's life and opportunity in American society. It allows us to say things like, "Racism doesn't exist. Look at Will Smith/Jamie Foxx/Mos Def and all of their success!" (Just think how often we've heard people use the same logic about President Obama.) It also ignores the years of hard work behind black success in entertainment and in the characters black actors portray.

We do not always ignore black actors' race. USC Ph. D. student Leah Aldridge argues that when a film with black actors is not a smash success, we are quick to say "Black doesn't do well" and label them "high-risk ventures." But when Jennifer Aniston or Matthew McConaughey tank at the box office, no one attributes the failure to their race.

It appears we mention race in entertainment when we can use it as a scapegoat, and we ignore it when it carries any consequence or obligation for society.

While the author deconstructs blackness in Hollywood, Ventre does not weave other oft-stereotyped groups into his analysis. Particularly relevant to his topic, Ventre doesn't touch on issues faced by black female actors, save for a brief mention of Halle Berry. (Berry's only reference notes that she makes less at the box office than the black males mentioned.) Their absence from this article begs the questions: Are black female actors not advancing at the same rate as black male actors? What institutional/social structures prevent such success? How does this perpetuate racism/sexism in film and in society?

Arguably, the inclusion of female black actors in Ventre's analysis would lend depth to a piece on black entertainers in Hollywood. If we don't examine the whole picture, race and gender and class, we cannot completely evaluate the -isms we perpetuate. It is important to confront whiteness, but it is just as important to attack maleness and social status.

Photo Credit: Zade Rosenthal/Columbia Pictures

Inside Islam features: UW Muslims

The story I referenced in my first blog post has been featured on Inside Islam. A joint project between the University of Wisconsin-Madison's Natural Resource Centers and Wisconsin Public Radio's Here on Earth: Radio Without Borders, this blog aims to counter stereotypes and educate people about Muslim life and culture.

I am proud to be featured on this blog. I'd like to especially thank Inside Islam bloggers Lisa Bu and Reem Hilal for their help in my exploration of Islam.

Racism in a 'post-racial' America

It was the shot heard 'round the world: After President Obama's State of the Union address last Thursday, Chris Matthews remarked, "I forgot [Obama] was black tonight for an hour."

As soon as I heard this, I laughed at Matthews' gaff. His comment seems almost silly in today's world. At the same time, Matthews fell right into my stereotype of upper-class, white political commentators--looking down at minorities, the poor, the sick--basically anyone who doesn't play 18 holes at the country club and sip iced tea with lunch.

Then again, maybe we, myself and Matthews included, can learn from this blunder...

Matthews' comment highlights a truth we often overlook: As diversity lawyer Natalie Holder-Winfield reports on The Huffington Post, "There are well-meaning white men who do not associate intellectual greatness and leadership with people of color."

Like Holder-Winfield, I don't think Matthews is a racist. But his comment proves Holder-Winfield's point. That a black man could stand in a room of mostly white men and deliver an eloquent speech as the most powerful man in the world is an anomaly in the minds of many white people. Whether we blame the agenda setting function of the news media or ourselves or both, we feel the need to remark when a black person succeeds.

We saw this when Obama accepted the bid for President. A black man. For President. Did it matter that Obama was black? Are we acknowledging racism by even discussing his race? How much attention, if any, should we pay to Obama's skin color?

I don't think we can recognize the successes of any racial group as "the successes of the ____ race." Rather, these successes need to be those of individuals. As much as Matthews' words are deplorable, I'm glad he made them. In a world he dubs "post-racial," Matthews shows us how much work we have to do to overcome racism. Lynchings and school segregation may be a thing of the past, but they've given way to a more subconscious, some may say more dangerous form of racism. If Matthews forgetting Obama was black helps us recognize, and hopefully combat, this invisible racism, I'd say Matthews has done more good than harm.