Jackson Free Press

I never understood the significance of Jackie Robinson breaking the color line in baseball, and baseball is the favorite sport in my household. Robinson's accomplishments in the integrated major leagues means no more to me than his accomplishments in the Negro League because I do not need whites to validate the genius of African people.

Robinson was not great because he was able to earn a MVP and win a World Series ring in the integrated majors; Robinson was great long before he stole home against the Yankees, and so were Josh Gibson, Satchel Paige, Roy Campanella, Cool Papa Bell, and many others.

My parents taught me that African people were the first people to write, the first to calculate numeric values, the first to master architecture, the first to master medicine, and the first people to have a complex and organized civilization along with their Sumerian brethren. So Robinson's accomplishments do not teach me about or validate African genius but are simply affirmation of the long history of African accomplishment.

Robinson's "crossing over" to white acclaim seems more like a poor strategic step in the journey toward African first-class citizenship and sovereignty. As poorly organized as some of the Negro teams were and even though some of the teams were fronts for illegal activities, the league still allowed ownership to African people.

Rather than celebrating Robinson, we should teach about people like Octavius Catto. Before becoming co-owner of a Negro League team, Catto worked with Frederick Douglass to raise 11 regiments of U.S. Colored Troops in Philadelphia, Pa. He was a main figure in the fight to desegregate Philadelphia's trolley-car system in 1865. Catto was shot on Election Day by Irish mobs who commonly used violence to keep African people from voting.

In the final analysis, what did Robinson's accomplishments in the integrated major leagues gain African people other than the right to be highly paid laborers? They have not led to African people being able to control the sports in which they participate, which also means to earn the lion's share of the profits. It has only allowed African people to continue to be patted on the head and loved for being well-paid and well-trained chattel as long as they shut up and perform on demand for the people holding the $200 seats.

So now Tiger Woods has fallen from the fantasy of white folks. I understand he is no longer that mythical "special Negro" who is somehow better than the rest of his race. Several of my African friends have recounted how a white person on a college campus or in some corporate office has said to them, "You are not like the others."

While enrolled in a doctoral program, a fellow student asked, "And you attended Jackson State?" And while in basic training, a fellow "maggot" (which is what we are all called in basic training) said to me, "I've never met a black person like you before." This Boston native clearly suffered from what James Baldwin called "selective naivete."

Tiger Woods seems to have fallen prey to this illusion of acceptance, as did Michael Jackson, whose $40 million in sales did not affirm his African genius but caused him to reject more of his African self to remain in the good graces of his white patrons.

Let's be clear; Woods is an adulterer -- no more, no less. But this is not a crime but a moral failing. Unfortunately for Woods, the bulk of his money is not earned on the golf course but is made through endorsements, and those endorsements are gained by creating an illusion of being the perfect (safe) eunuch with the blond-haired, blue-eyed bombshell. Woods is not the first major athlete to be an adulterer, and none of those others lost major endorsement deals. However, Woods has not only had the nerve to master one of the last great havens for white masculinity-- golf -- he also had the nerve to "cheat on this pure and innocent white woman," as poet and social critic Charlie Braxton puts it.

If Woods' wife was African, would there be this much outrage? Most news reports concentrate on Woods' indiscretions and not on the violent actions of his wife, who allegedly struck Woods with a golf club while he was sleeping. Her actions are no different than the female who shot Steve McNair while sleeping.

While I cheer for Woods, he is not a validation of African genius. While I cheer for Venus and Serena Williams, I knew of Althea Gibson and Arthur Ashe long before the arrival of the Williams sisters, and none of them were validations of African genius for me.

To be a "special Negro" means to be an illusion or a plaything. Illusions eventually fade, and playthings are eventually tossed into the trash for the next thing of pleasure.

C. Liegh McInnis is the author of seven books, and is editor and publisher of Black Magnolias Literary Journal. Visit his site at http://www.psychedelicliterature.com.

Previous Comments

ID

154568

Comment

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa????????????

Author

Queen601

Date

2009-12-30T13:25:54-06:00

ID

154572

Comment

Oh Good, I wasn't the only one confused as to the point.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2009-12-30T13:43:13-06:00

ID

154577

Comment

You have GOT to be kidding me! We are damned if we DO and damned if we DON'T. People like you keep us away from progress.

Author

littledivot

Date

2009-12-30T15:19:11-06:00

ID

154584

Comment

Another fine job, C. Leigh. Only Jason Whitlock has written a column on Tiger Woods' situtaion that surpasses yours in my opinion. I didn't know Elin hit the player with a 9 iron while he was sleeping. I'd give her a couple million dollars and send her to stepping for that ploy no matter my indiscretions. Then I give about 100 millions for my children. She can always go back to her half-naked modeling career in Sweden, can't she? Except for hitting the player while he was sleep I don't have anything negative to say about Elin. I have seen some of her modeling pictures and feel justified in my comment about that! I hear you loud and clear though, C. Leigh, and people should note that not everyone shares the same opinions on the subject of Tiger and Elin. I don't even agree with you entirely but I understand your points. Having views that few or not all share don't set race relations back in this instance, in my opinion. Maybe Hitler meant the white woman was faster than the black man when he said Jessie Owens couldn't outrun his runners in the Olympics. He, he, he. Now that I know Tiger was hit in the head before he ran, I now know why the player couldn't escape. Hell, I thought it was because he was cabliasian. Of course we all know, no one is superior to another strictly or solely due to race. I do agree that Robinson and others were great before they were accepted into Major League Baseball. And I'm not surprised at all that Tiger is loosing all these sponsors because I knew it was likely to occur for some of the reasons you stated. The sponsors are capitalists who respond to dollar bills, no matter the reason the dollar bills came and/or went. Now, I'm hearing something like 12 plus billions have been lost in investments since Tiger did Elin wrong. I can't wait to see what happens in the divorce. Richard Pryor said when he divorced his first white wife, the judge told him "we want everything, and if you got any dreams, we want them too." Hopefully, Tiger would get a neutral magistrate and not Nancy Grace to hear his case. Smile. Certainly people should be free to love, date and divorce whomever they want to regardless of race, creed, color, age, et al.

Author

Walt

Date

2009-12-30T17:57:52-06:00

ID

154586

Comment

Walt, I take it you're perfectly fine with him having 14 mistresses?

Author

Ironghost

Date

2009-12-30T19:08:51-06:00

ID

154589

Comment

There seems to be so much anger here and in C.Leigh's other writings that it gives pause to the thought that perhaps the only way to satisfy him would be a rigid separate-but-equal society -- at least we wouldn't have to go around worrying that somebody might want to "validate" us. Either that or get rid of white people altogether. And that's the part I can't reconcile -- how you can be so vehemently anti-racist that you go full-circle and seemingly end up being more racist than those whose behavior you despise.

Author

chaffeur

Date

2009-12-31T01:11:45-06:00

ID

154600

Comment

I'm not sure what to make of this. I agree with some of it, but it also seems to me that being a successful black person who happens to be loved by white people is somehow wrong.

Author

golden eagle

Date

2009-12-31T09:59:43-06:00

ID

154603

Comment

Ah, nothing like the ramblings of a Black supremacist to start the day off. Where on earth do ya'll find such people?

Author

bill_jackson

Date

2009-12-31T10:52:59-06:00

ID

154628

Comment

In high school, I was the 'Token/Special Negro.' In college, I became the 'black experience' for whites who to see a real, live black person, just like the black people they saw on the tv show Good Times. That's why I agree with C. Leigh regarding selective naivete. Despite my 'token/special negro' status, my purpose was to get a quality education, graduate from college and contribute to society.

Author

Stiggers

Date

2010-01-01T16:13:21-06:00

ID

154644

Comment

I'm with Golden Eagle on this one. I am just confused. I read this over and over again and I can't help but be offended by some of these statements. I just don't get it. Guess I'm not elevated on that level and honestly I hope not to ever be. It's quite strange to me.

Author

Queen601

Date

2010-01-04T09:41:45-06:00

ID

154646

Comment

He's a professor, Rex. I wouldn't call him a black supremacist, though; although I wouldn't exactly call him an integrationist, either. He clearly believes that black people don't need white people. (Me, I think we all need each other, so I'm in major disagreement.) It's kneejerk to assume that because someone believes that Africans (or African Americans) do not need to be validated against whites that that means they are black supremacist. I don't know that to be the case about C. Liegh. We didn't run the column because we agreed with it; we ran it because it raises issues that some people are thinking to get others talking: for example, whether or not people would be as outraged by Tiger's cheating if his wife was black. Personally, I think they would, but I'm interested in what others think. If you think back to the O.J. incident, white America was astounded to find out that black America didn't think just like us on that case. The same in some other high-profile situations. So might as well talk about it. For the record, we've also run interviews and such with Klansmen and white supremacists so that our readers can be challenged and better see where they're coming from, agree with them or not. I'm not by any stretch saying that C. Liegh is the opposite of Giles; he's not. But don't start getting bent out of shape that we run a column by him and even try to say that we wouldn't allow the views of anti-blacks in our paper. Because you would be wrong.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T10:02:41-06:00

ID

154648

Comment

I used the term 'supremacist" because he references "African genius". Anytime I hear a white person talk about "Anglo genius" you can pretty much assume where they are coming from, so thats a 2 way street. And he equates Elin Woods giving Tiger a fat lip with McNairs' mistress killing him, just can't see that one.

Author

bill_jackson

Date

2010-01-04T10:24:28-06:00

ID

154649

Comment

Dam is that the point of this. WOW. But to answer your question Donna, since you have put it plainly, I wouldn't care if Tiger was black, white, rich, poor, preacher, sinner, teacher, athlete...none of that matters. The dude cheated on his wife, alledgedly, with at LEAST eleven DIFFERENT women. Not one woman eleven times. But EVELEN DIFFERENT WOMEN. That is ridiculous. He should have left if he need that much variety, unless his wife was in full disclosure and agreement and I just don't know of a wife who would agree to that. However, I am sure there are some women out there who would have been more inclined to stay for the money and just kept up the front. I don't see this as a black/white issue and I am embarassed that it has even come to this. If anything it's a male/female issue and there is no way a man can justify to me Tiger's being chastised over this by making it out to be racial or by saying the dude has a sex problem. His problem is that he was weak and he was a not at MAN. He was not satisfied with his wife and he was not man enough to own up to that and give her the opporunity to leave his trifling ass. Bottom Line. Now let me also add that the majority of Tiger's fan base is WHITE. That has got to be clear to the masses. So of course white people are more affected by his appearance of perfection than black people are.

Author

Queen601

Date

2010-01-04T10:24:34-06:00

ID

154650

Comment

I used the term 'supremacist" because he references "African genius". Anytime I hear a white person talk about "Anglo genius" you can pretty much assume where they are coming from, so thats a 2 way street. That's a stretch, Rex. It's not a two-way street because we don't have a history of violently enforced black supremacy in the country. You simply can't imply that from his statements without that context. I think he's talking about Elin's alleged attack on Tiger while he was sleeping as similar to McNair while he was sleeping. That part is similar, although it would probably offend the McNair family to have that comparison drawn, considering he is dead. I agree with you, Queen. I don't see it as a black-white issue, either. Some do, though, due to the reaction to it. My argument *might* be that the mixed-race component could make it more interesting to the media. But, Woods is so big and angelic-seeming that it likely wouldn't have mattered. And, frankly, had the media covered it the same way if both were black, some folks would likely be complaining that it was overblown because she was black. For me, it's easy: Woods has now joined the ranks of Bill Clinton, John Edwards, Steve McNair and others who are so un-self-aware that they look for "love" in all the wrong places, no matter who it hurts. It's tragic that so many men (and some women) stay in that place long past their young years of sowing their oats. At some point, you should grow the hell up and know that happiness is found within and stop looking for cheap thrills in stupid places. Sermon over. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T10:47:03-06:00

ID

154651

Comment

BTW, I like the part of the column where C. Liegh's parents taught him truths about the people he descends from so that he can be proud of his heritage. We all need to be taught full history; I certainly wasn't when it came to people of color. My education was very Euro-centric and "western," which hurts us all. Very sad.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T10:49:44-06:00

ID

154652

Comment

I don't agree with most of the author's opinions, but I have heard many of these same arguments or views expressed within the black community.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2010-01-04T10:55:38-06:00

ID

154658

Comment

I was wondering when Donna would show up to defend publishing the column. :) If we limit it to Tiger's philandering, then I think it's wrong no matter how you mix/match the races. C. Leigh there needs to come out and visit the real world, not the ideal he lives in.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2010-01-04T11:36:56-06:00

ID

154659

Comment

I think many miss the point of the article. C. Leigh is commenting on the intersection of Black achievement and acceptance in terms of White America. Tiger Woods and Jackie Robinson didn't just have to be great at what they did to gain respect in the White community, they had to be presented in a “non-threatening way”. This non-threatening way can cause resentment in many circles in the black community. The Woods scandal speaks to the absurdity of Black success in mainstream (white) America. The notion of "meritocracy" in America is a metered through the lens of white acceptance. From Michael Jackson, Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, and even Lebron James; for a Black person to be lauded for your accomplishments in the mainstream comes with a political and social disclaimer that you be apolitical, non-racial (no race consciousness), and subtly ashamed of or apologetically dispositioned concerning being black. It wasn't enough for Tiger Woods to be the best golfer ever to have the respect and admiration form adoring white fans, he had to say he was "Cablinasian", have the blond haired, blue eyed wife, and distance himself from anything politically or socially critical. This is the "magical negro" concept that academics discuss when they comment on the acceptance (or lack there of) of black people in the American mainstream. So, C Leigh is not commenting on separatism or integration, and he's definitely not a "supremacist" as Donna pointed out. He is commenting on the absurdity of Tiger Woods' fall from white American grace that had nothing to do with a lack of accomplishment, but everything to do with a fall from being the "Magical Negro"

Author

Renaldo Bryant

Date

2010-01-04T12:13:59-06:00

ID

154660

Comment

Iron, there is nothing to defend. I posted because people were asking questions. I'm always happy to answer my readers' questions when I can. I knew there would be kneejerk responses to this column by the usual suspects. You and some others being predictable is never a reason not to publish a column or anything else. Otherwise, Blackwatch's post just now addresses this very well. There is an intellectual discussion this teases out should anyone care to join in. Just because it hasn't crossed your mind before doesn't make it irrelevant or "black supremacist." Think a bit harder. He's trying to talk about the perceptions of the dominant culture here, which can be very hard for members of our culture to even see, much less grok. That is: Not everyone thinks like we tend to, and that doesn't make their thoughts any less relevant. And I think the point about Jackie Robinson is an excellent one and one that gives me pause; I am guilty of measuring African Americans against white standards, too, even though I'm aware of and work hard to reverse that socialization in myself. That knowledge of this habit is what makes me uncomfortable with most popular movies (and books) that deal with race: They are considered "great" or to have bestseller/big movie rewrite potential when they are done in such a way as to make white people more comfortable. The recent Michael Oher film comes to mind: As much as I enjoyed it in many ways, and loved Sandra Bullock's performance, I knew I was also watching something offensive to many African Americans: yet another white-people-saving-black-people film. I'm very grateful that many African Americans have forced me to at least see that I have these tendencies as a white person. Columns such as C. Liegh's can do that if you just take time to think about it and not kneejerk lunacy such as that it's "black supremacist." That is patently absurd. Like Jeff above, I don't agree with many (most?) of C. Liegh's views, but I sure am glad he's out there to challenge my own.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T12:23:11-06:00

ID

154664

Comment

Interesting. In re. to your comment about the Oher film, The Blind Side, Donna, that it was "yet another white-people-saving-black-people film.": Wasn't the film based on a true story? It is a definite that people and art, in this case, a movie, can really hit us so differently. I saw the young black man in the film "saving" the white Sandra Bullock character, who moved, during the film, to the point that she risked her "friendships" with her friends to live her friendship with him and laid down her ingrained preferences to support his personal choices. I saw the young man opening eyes in the family and the school and the community. He was the shape shifter, not Sandra Bullock. I saw love that was color blind, from both, so despite the title The Blind Side referring to the left tackle position that protects the QB from which side the QB is "blind," I think, for me, at least, there was a play on words with the title. I know this blog digresses a bit from the essence of the original blog, but in a way it is on point because of how very differently we all view each other and groups of each others. It hink that some of that we can control and some of that is a part of who we are and we have to work to reshape ourselves to see differently. Which the characters in the movie did, from all different directions, which, to me, was what the movie was about.

Author

J.T.

Date

2010-01-04T13:00:13-06:00

ID

154665

Comment

This is all speculation anyway, since we will never know how the media would have presented it since they aren't both black. I tend to think it got the coverage it got simply because he is "Tiger Woods",the great, good fella. Not because he's has some black in him OR because his wife is white. OJ got the coverage he got because he seemed guity the entire time; not because he was black and Nicole was white. Just my thoughts. But, I reserve the right to refuse to make everything about race. My goodness, the news is that the dude cheated. I wish we'd stop trying to make news that isn't relevant. Who cares what color he is. He is an individual who doesn't keep vows or respect his home. That's all that matters in this situation to me. Why did Chris Brown and Rhianna's situation get so much media coverage when this type of thing happens all the time and they are both black? It got so much coverage because Chris Brown pounced on the wrong chick. IF Rhianna was just some female that no one knew, had no affiliation with one of the richest most powerful hip hop artists, and wasn't deemed as America's Princess...Chris Brown would not have been made out to be such a monster. A dude who messed up, yes, but not the monster the media has made him out to be. And I doubt very seriously that he would have had his records pulled from any radio play. IT's easy to blame it on black/white issues, but sometimes it's not that (or not just that).

Author

Queen601

Date

2010-01-04T13:03:44-06:00

ID

154666

Comment

Yes, J.T.,it was based on a book about Oher, written by a (good) white journalist. It's not the story I'm questioning, per se, J.T.; it clearly was uplifting. It's the choice of that kind of story as a bestseller and a book and a blockbuster film, over and over again. ("The Help" is another that comes to mind over, say, a book like Valerie Martin's "Property.") And in "The Blind Side," note that there are no significant or particularly strong black characters (except for the acerbic NCAA official), and there is no attempt at context of *why* his family was so helpless. And you can't argue they couldn't have done that: they "dramatized" (made up) characters and scenes throughout it. The problem is not one film, per se. It's the constant repetition of the "good" white person saving helpless black people over and over again that takes over our psyche. And when someone—usually a smart African American like C. Liegh; I am just telegraphing what black friends and professors have taught me—tries to talk about it, they are branded as "black supremacist," or some other non-thinking label. I find that "The Help" falls short for many of the same reasons, and I'm sure I'll feel that way about the Oscar-winning movie when it comes out. It was a good read, though, just as I enjoyed "Blind Side," and it clearly got to some sheltered people who seem to have had no clue about how North Jackson got its damn sheets washed and dinner on the table just a few decades back. But I also realized that my enjoyment was in part to the fact that it was designed to make "progressive" white people feel good about ourselves. And I don't take away from the intentions of Kathryn Stockett when I say that; I believe she was sincere. But being able to see these dichotomies will help us all grow up on race issues and really mend the fences rather than just ignore the holes in them. Thus, I can enjoy "Blind Side" (and cry during it) even as I realize that the film is being marketed directly to me as a white woman in a way that has become acceptable in 2010, but that will go no further. And I can understand why that would bother many African Americans. It bothers me.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T13:08:02-06:00

ID

154668

Comment

I agree with you, too, Queen: I think the media would have pounced regardless in this case. But I don't blame C. Liegh for trying to force the conversation because it's certainly true in many cases. I agree that not everything is about race. But: a local guy one time whined to me: "Why is it always about race?" My response: "It's not. But why can it never be about race to you?" The bigger point on this one, I think, is that it allows us to have a multiracial conversation about something that white people don't tend to think about, as Blackwatch explained well. That can range from historic facts about culture and science in Africa -- which I promise you most white people do not know; I didn't until I left Mississippi and started filling in my educational holes -- to the "magical Negro" concept some have brought up. That one is not mine to argue; however, I will provide a forum for others to have that conversation in an intelligent way should they wish to. The JFP has never been a forum for just things that make white people the most comfortable.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T13:14:53-06:00

ID

154672

Comment

Donna, I think that every little positive that comes from art and movies and words is just that, a positive, like the constant drippping of water on a huge bolder, Truth, constant, over time, erodes our personal prejudices. That is why, I think, your paper is so important. I personally didn't think The Help fell short, except for the apologetic tone in the postscript, as I mentioned in my review. In fact, I thought it opened the door on all the "North Jackson's" in America. Though you and so many people who read this paper and who blog here are wide eyed and realistic and open to all humankind, the truth is that years of living differently has left at least some people in our environment otherwise. When Kathryn Stockett or Donna Ladd open a door so the inside can see out and the outside can see in, those in the "otherwise" category feel a drop of water. Would be interested in your assessment of the movie Invictus from the standpoint of who helps who.

Author

J.T.

Date

2010-01-04T13:43:52-06:00

ID

154673

Comment

I'm beginning to think that Queen has the most common sense of anyone here. The media didn't jump all over this because Tiger is black/multi culti and his wife is white. It's because for the last 10 years they (media) have been beating us over the head w/ their claim that Tiger wasn't just the best golfer in the world, but the best ATHLETE in the world, and, as such, his downfall was all the more spectacular. And when all the sordid details started to come out, it went full scale feeding frenzy. And please elaborate, Ladd. Should The Blind Sides' screen writers have fabricated "positve black characters" just to achieve some sort of "balance"

Author

bill_jackson

Date

2010-01-04T13:45:11-06:00

ID

154674

Comment

The Micheal Oher Movie is a true story to my knowledge. Slightly embellished for entertainment value I'm sure. But it IS a true story. Not one IMO shot to make white people feel comfortable. Oher was a kid in trouble and he was saved by a family who happened to be white. Would we rather no one had helped him? Or should he have passed up the help to wait on a black family to save him? The family's color in this case is a nonfactor especially when there is a person in need. I'm sure oher didn't care if they were polka dot. I'm sure there are some white kids who have been raised/saved by black folks. In fact I'm sure of it. Likewise there are some great stories of black families/teachers/coaches helping black kids. Great Debaters. The movie about the Swim Team, Remember the Titans etc. For the black athlete/artist/rapper/actor wider acceptance usually means wider exposure and a bigger bank account. Which incidentally is what most folks who enter those professions are looking for. At the same time you're given a shorter leash to mess up. With great power/money comes great responsibility its all about what cost you're willing to pay. IceCube, Will Smith, Ice-T, The Rock etc. I'm not mad at em at all. Being accepted across racial lines shouldn't be frowned upon. Success shouldn't be frowned upon just acknowledge where you cme from when you get there. Would Tiger have lost any endorsements/fans had he said he was "black" instead of Cablicasian or whatever? Don't think so. Whatever color he's the greatest golfer ever. Would he have lost fans if he had married a black woman? I say no to that as well. Still the greatest golfer ever. It was HIS choice and now he has to deal with the consequences of his actions either way. My wordy point is This LOL. I don't give a rat's patooty WHO recognizes my talents first as long as SOMEONE does.

Author

Kamikaze

Date

2010-01-04T13:46:44-06:00

ID

154675

Comment

Thanks, J.T. I don't agree entirely, although my feelings on this are complex. Sometimes "apparent" positives aren't so positive from someone else's perspective. There were people who thought Mississippi Burning was a good film for race issues, for instance, but it does little to celebrate the heroism of black people themselves. You should hear Dave Dennis, who helped Bob Moses lead Freedom Summer, go off on the film. And still, it probably created "little positives" -- many people will credit that film for everything they know about the Movement (and Mississippi), which is tragic. And not for the reason that it makes us "look bad." It probably didn't make us look bad enough, quite frankly. Nor does "The Help." But as I said, I have mixed feelings, but that is the very thing I'm encouraging: Let's back up a step and allow that bad can come with the good with these films. "Blind Side," for instance, really does paint a white good-v.-black bad dichotomy that a good, reformed, rich white woman helps a black boy escape from. It's a great story, but it can quickly become a defining narrative. That's the really sad part: That these kinds of films are allowed to define the "truth." And it always ends up being the truth that more white people are comfortable with. I urge everyone to mix in some contemplation of dominant culture's desire to be paternalistic when the right time comes. That doesn't mean we have to run from criticism of our paternalism and take our toys (and efforts) with us. I wouldn't still be doing what I do if I allowed criticism (by whites or blacks) to scare me off. But contemplation and attempts at understanding a different perspective is very important, as some very smart people pounded into my head. (Thanks, for instance, Dr. Marable.)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T13:51:57-06:00

ID

154676

Comment

Would we rather no one had helped him? Or should he have passed up the help to wait on a black family to save him? That's a long leap in logic, Kaze, from what I and others have said. Of course I don't think that is true. I think it's a great story; I loved it; I cried; I hoped it would inspire others. That said, I understand why it would make some African Americans flinch (not all, of course; not all y'all think a like, either! smile). And, yes, they easily could have done more to alleviate some of that, but probably didn't feel the need. (I read up a lot on the film and the money behind it, so I was even less surprised that it came across as Good Whites v. Evil Ghetto.) In other words, I'm of two minds on it, and I think that's a good thing.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T13:55:58-06:00

ID

154677

Comment

A quick search turns up this B.E.T. review. It starts and ends: For many African-Americas, a story like The Blind Side is all too familiar in the history of cinema. First, there is the element of the “Great White Hope” — a white character who saves the life of the poor, uneducated Negro, showing him how to be “civilized” and “sophisticated.” Without the “Great White Hope” the Black characters can’t accomplish success on their own. Second, there is the “Magical Negro,” the Black character teaches Whites compassion, folklore-like lessons and other doses of emotionality (think Hattie McDaniel in Gone With The Wind, Sidney Poitier in The Defiant Ones, or, a recent example, Morgan Freeman in Bruce Almighty). With all of that said… this is a true story. You can’t hate a story for being true, even if it channels legendary Hollywood stereotypes. There is so much thought-provoking material to explore in The Blind Side but it’s as if the director, John Lee Hancock, was afraid to tackle the edgy (and obvious) subject matters like race, poverty and drug addiction. Therefore, every potentially good moment is washed over with some Southern twang and a toss of Sandra Bullock’s hair. For example, Leigh Anne Tuohy, who picks Michael off the street in the rain, was allegedly raised in an extremely racist environment and her father pulled her out of the Tennessee public school system when it was integrated. [...] In his first film, Bronx native Quinton Aaron plays Michael. Aaron definitely has potential but in The Blind Side he gives a one-note performance and you can nearly see his nerves rattling on camera. Maybe it was the writing, but the character was underdeveloped with little depth; you couldn’t tell if Michael was portrayed as socially awkward or developmentally disabled. This movie is based on Michael Lewis’ book, The Blind Side: Evolution of a Game, but this film is not Michael’s story. In the end, it’s more about Leigh Anne Touchy and Sandra Bullock being the star. Regardless of the racial implications, The Blind Side is a true story that is told fairly well. It’s a story that seems almost too good, therefore, you have to let go of Hollywood’s betrayal of African-American story lines to thoroughly enjoy it.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T13:59:44-06:00

ID

154678

Comment

Kaz, Is Tiger's appeal strictly his golf game or his image? What image is constructed? When black actors, rappers, athletes reach this iconic status in the mainstream, is it about their talent, or their image? That is the issue I am addressing in my post. Do you think that Lil' Wayne is being lauded in the mainstream because of his talent alone? Would you consider Lil' Wayne the greatest rapper alive? I think not, but his image is non-threatening to mainstream society. For all of his bravado and "swag", he does not threaten the socio-political power structure in this country. In fact, he bears out very stereotypical notions of black creativity and identity. And he sells millions of records... mostly to white suburban teens. Many people in the mainstream praise Michael Jordan as the greatest basketball player ever, yet is he the all time leading scorer? No. Has he won the most titles? No. Did he win the most games? No. So why does the mainstream accept him so much? His apolitical "colorblind" image crafted for him by marketing executives. Tyler Perry is lauded as the premiere black filmmaker of our times, yet his movies are very simplistic morality tales that have stock and static characters that are poor written and directed. Yet, his movies are very apolitical and not to mention the stereotypical "Madea" character. So, when we start talking about mainstream acceptance of black people's talents, we have to take pause and consider what is really being accepted, talent or image. Do white people have to do the same? And what does that say about our society?

Author

Renaldo Bryant

Date

2010-01-04T14:01:16-06:00

ID

154679

Comment

Yep. It WAS a leap indeed but one to make MY point. Black folks getting mad at a film where a young black man came from nothing...Could have been left to become a product of the prison system or worse death and was helped by a family who happened to be white. Does the movie industry remain lopsided. YES. Are there similar stories out there where a Black protagonist stood as the hero? YES. Will THEY get a movie as well. I Dont know. Again...thats for someone with the MONEY to make a film and ability to dictate subject matter to decide. Will Smith has that power now, Tyler Perry has that power now. Spike Lee even. So lets DO IT! This story happens thousands of times daily somewhere in the US and all of them arent as lucky as Micheal unfortunately. I want THOSE kids, the ones who WONT have a movie made about them or the ones who WONT make the NFL to get the same chance Micheal got and it doesnt matter to me WHAT color the person(s) is who does it.

Author

Kamikaze

Date

2010-01-04T14:07:02-06:00

ID

154680

Comment

Truth, Donna, I use in my blog to mean the core Truth of the Universe of the sacredness of all humankind. I do not mean any one person's handle on a perception or belief. To focus on the positive in a situation doesn't mean that the focus is not coming from some understanding of the negative. E.g., in Invictus, Mandela, much to the dismay of many, focuses on some of the positives in Rugby that were ignored because of the line in the sand in South Africa. I know that I, as a white woman, cannot understand my black brothers and sisters. There is no way. That doesn't mean I can't try. And, if my trying falls very short of my making an appropriate connection, that doesn't mean I have failed. It means I have tried. In all those efforts from all of us, trying to understand each other and portray--in writing and art and movies--our differences and our problems and our pasts, full of contradictions and pain and misunderstandings and hate and harm and deliberate oppression, those little drops of water fall. It doesn't make any one drop good or bad, in my eyes. It makes it a drop of water. I am glad for all the drops of water. Not only do the drops erode the boulders that separate us, they feed the roots of this thing I call Truth with a capital T. Sounds high and mighty. Is.

Author

J.T.

Date

2010-01-04T14:13:51-06:00

ID

154681

Comment

"Many people in the mainstream praise Michael Jordan as the greatest basketball player ever, yet is he the all time leading scorer? No. Has he won the most titles? No. Did he win the most games? No. So why does the mainstream accept him so much? His apolitical "colorblind" image crafted for him by marketing executives." WRONG- the reason Jordan is the regarded as the greatest is because his game was complete. He was a consumate defender and clutch scorer. Jabbar may have more career points, but what would you rather watch- a 7 footer throwing up sky hooks from 5 feet out, or MJ taking off from the free throw line?

Author

bill_jackson

Date

2010-01-04T14:15:41-06:00

ID

154682

Comment

Donna, I hope that BET reviewer realized later that Morgan Freeman played GOD in Bruce AND Evan Almighty. A role that has traditionally been played by White Men and in comedic roles made famous by George Burns..just an aside. Blackwatch, I think Lil Wayne is definitely threatening to White suburbia. Not from talent per se'. But..A Young Black man with money who can go and do what he wishes and may be attractive to their white daughters or influencing thier white sons. I think Dave Chappelle and Kanye are good examples (at least for me) on how you can inject msg into your craft and still be popular and relevant. Because ultimately your msg whatever it is, doesnt matter unless youre "relevant" would you not agree. I watched Perry this morning on an interview. The man said. He has no "contracts" with anyone. He doesnt owe anyone. He OWNS all of his product and no one TELLS him when and where he can release product. He OWNS his own studio lot and hires black actors. He has the power the Spike Lee was fighting for years ago and STILL has not really achieved himself. And yet, he gets maligned. Yes his premise is silly, plotlines are straight out of romance novels, and he does a great deal of male bashing, BUT dude is a mogul who owns his own brand. Not may can say that. Not even Tiger.

Author

Kamikaze

Date

2010-01-04T14:20:51-06:00

ID

154683

Comment

I agree with you, Kaze. I don't like it either when people start yelling at whites who are trying to do the right thing that they are trying to be black, speak for blacks, save blacks, etc. That tends to be mindless hysteria, even as I can understand the anger that creates it. And in this case, I don't criticize the family at all for what they did, at least not based on what I know about it. As I said, it's a great story and bless their hearts for saving the young man's life. (The BET reviewer said that, too.) But we're talking about the use of art to frame stories and narratives and heroes certain ways that make white folks more comfortable. That's a different conversation. And J.T., you know I believe in the heart of what you're saying there, and try to live it every day. My point is that it cannot possibly hurt us well-meaning white folks to try to understand a perspective that we might not have considered, and even recognize the potential for unintended consequences. We can hold all these thoughts at once and, I believe, must. There will always be folks like the one who accused C. Liegh of being a black supremacist for daring to try to have such a conversation, but who cares? The rest of us can seek to hold several thoughts at once, if it's for the right reasons. I'll let the rest of y'all argue about Michael Jordan. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T14:22:19-06:00

ID

154684

Comment

Well Donna that was my point. I agree totally that art and popular, money making art, is framed and skewed. Absolutely. Im just sick of the "hysteria" as you called it from Black folks who go up in arms when good people, who happen to be white, try to help folks in need, who happen to be black. How youre a "magic negro" if youve achieved popularity across racial lines. My answer to that is...where were YOU when Oher was hurting. And what do YOU do when you see similar scenarios played out in front of your face daily in Jxn and other places. Are you REALLY prepared to do what that family did for OHer? if not I suggest you simmer down. I dunno....Discussions like this NEED to happen but is frustrating because it seems at times folks arent Listening. Theyre just talking

Author

Kamikaze

Date

2010-01-04T14:30:21-06:00

ID

154685

Comment

Kaz, For all that Perry "owns", it can be taken away from him in a second if he offends the wrong sensibilities. For every actor or writer he hires, he won't ever do a movie about Steve Biko or do the Muhammed Ali story justice (that movie staring Will Smith was a big disappointment, because it tried to tell a story of a very political black American and yet appeal to white or mainstream sensibilities). Lil' Wayne isn't a threat, or he wouldn't appeal to the white teens. Ever heard of minstrelsy? Urban coons, black bucks, etc. have always had a menacing yet appealing place in mainstream America simply because they are not a threat to the social structure. Now, a black person challenging power relationships and stereotypes is challenging. Just because Lil' Wayne or Tyler Perry make money doesn't mean they challenge the socio-economic racial order, especially if their art will never provoke anyone to challenge it. This sentiment you express is part of market fundamentalist thinking. In other words, money making ability justifies the creative process and artifact. That thinking cuts at the very heart of what we value in art and eventually in life. Jordan, Wayne, Perry all make millions, but does that mean there is equal opportunity for all people? Does that mean that what they do 'works' in the sense of affirming humanity? I think not.

Author

Renaldo Bryant

Date

2010-01-04T14:35:36-06:00

ID

154686

Comment

Yes, I agree with that, too, Kaze. I can't stand folks who tear things down while doing nothing themselves, regardless of their race. And we got a few of those around! But then there are the situations where white people get deaf, dumb and stupid over the fact that much of the world is molded in a way to make us comfortable. Gross. And it's often harmful. To bring it back to C. Liegh, I don't agree with everything he says, but the column above isn't hysterical, in my view. I mean, it's hard to argue with the point that it is tragic that so many people (of all races) know so little about figures like Catto, Douglass, even Marcus Garvey. I might piss C. Liegh off by saying it, but I believe they all are historic figures we should all claim and get to know. And if we did, the arguments of the closet white supremacists among us (the most dangerous ones) would fall apart before they left their lips.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T14:39:10-06:00

ID

154687

Comment

Reximus I disagree, Jordan was a very good player, but he was no more a complete player than many of his contemporaries (Bernard King, Dominique Wilkins, Clyde Drexler). His appeal was his marketability, seized upon and crafted by corporate America. Basketball wise, He benefitted more than anyone from the early reirement of Magic Johnson and the downfall of the Laker dynasty of the 80's (those Laker teams would have destroyed the Bulls for about 2 more years). The game changed as a result of the rise in his popularity to a style that suited him better, one -on -one ball and athleticism over team ball and skill. Jordan was a great player, Hall of Famer no doubt. But his mainstream appeal was not so much about his basketball skill as it was about corporate marketing.

Author

Renaldo Bryant

Date

2010-01-04T14:44:48-06:00

ID

154688

Comment

I'll ignore the "hate", as some might put it. I don't think Tiger would be as big a story if he hadn't been inflated to be the new Jesus by the media. You can't argue against it: go read Sports Illustrated if you don't believe me. They've put him up there past God. We as a society are always ready to tear someone down, or help someone destroy themselves for the sheer spectacle of it all. The fact that he proved human was just icing on the cake for the media. It's a sad fact that we have to inject race into a situation which isn't racial at all.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2010-01-04T14:48:13-06:00

ID

154689

Comment

Ironghost has spoken! Iron, clearly some people disagree with you. Do you mind if others just keep talking even if we don't parrot your beliefs? Or mine? ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T14:53:14-06:00

ID

154690

Comment

Blackwatch- MJ made the all defensive team 9 times while still having mad scoring skills. As much as I liked 'Nique, he was nowhere the complete package that #23 was. And if you look at the collection of slugs he played with and still won all those titles it's even more impressive.

Author

bill_jackson

Date

2010-01-04T14:54:34-06:00

ID

154691

Comment

Donna, in response to your: "My point is that it cannot possibly hurt us well-meaning white folks to try to understand a perspective that we might not have considered, and even recognize the potential for unintended consequences." I totally agree, Donna. However, I perceive inherent in the phrase "well-meaning white folks" at least an openness to try to understand others. When, however, it comes to making art, writing words, making movies, I think in terms of those exercises--though ripe for theft by people with an ax to grind--as being matters of great risk any way I look at it, but great risk worth taking. In fact, no one can ever predict the consequences of a creation. That is what gives it life. If a creation has an unintended consequence that I, e.g., deem to be bad, the creation has served its purpose, in a strange way, because it has illuminated something for me to see, to learn, to understand differently. Art, writing, movies don't protect. They provoke. But, here I am preaching to the choir, which sings so beautifully.

Author

J.T.

Date

2010-01-04T15:00:00-06:00

ID

154692

Comment

Blackwatch, who do you think would be invited quicker into a white suburban home? Lil Wayne or Tiger? Who would a quaint family in the burbs accept quicker as his daughter's boyfriend or son's buddy? Lil wayne or Tiger? That is where I say he's a threat. Nothing more. I dont think he's the greatest rapper at all, but a young black male who has made a great deal of money in the music industry and I never begrudge those who are successful whether I agree with them or not. The world is made up of different people. And black folks are not monolithic in thinking and neither are white folks. For evey Jordan or Tiger, you have a Bill Russell or Jabbar or Ali. For every Wayne you have a Chuck D or Dead Prez. it takes us all. You cant expect every successful or rich black person to do what YOU wish them to do with their influence. As I said on another thread you dont tell millionares what to do. You ask. Hope is that one day we can find an entity in the Black community that posesses both. money and influence and a Philanthropic heart and drive to help Black folks become moguls. AND use it to better the cause of racial healing and uplifting of the downtrodden. Im not scared of making money, lots of it. and wouldnt ask anyone else to be either. But to act aa if its wrong to want wealth AND to act as if its shameful to be liked by Black AND white America is off-putting to me. It seems at times that folks are trying to quantify thier "blackness" to me and "out-black" the next guy.

Author

Kamikaze

Date

2010-01-04T15:02:21-06:00

ID

154693

Comment

I can't see why Tyler Perry gets all the run that he does. It's like he's made the same 2 movies over & over again. IMO, Spike Lee is WAY more talented. And speaking of Lil Wayne, did anyone see this story a few weeks ago? http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2009/12/marijuana_smell_makes_lil_wany.php

Author

bill_jackson

Date

2010-01-04T15:08:23-06:00

ID

154694

Comment

Some of the unintended consequences we can anticipate, J.T. Or, at least be open to learning about them when it comes up. Not you, but some others immediately try to shut down any narrative that isn't in their comfort zone. And unfortunately, people like that dominate the mainstream media. Put it another way: The JFP could be another well-meaning progressive newspaper with no people of color on our staff and that doesn't try to find columnists and such with different, non-dominant viewpoints. We could justify that by saying that we are well-meaning (as many papers do while they do little to change their diversity in content or staffing). If we chose that well-meaning route, we could still sprinkle around some good ideas, but it would not be the same thing. For one, we would not inspire as many people different people to find and share their own voices—and say things that might make our well-meaning readers uncomfortable. That would be a tragic unintended consequence and limit our usefulness in the community. It's the same thing in the larger world of media -- whether film, big books, etc. Sadly, what makes it to the top of the heap and gets promoted are books and films about race designed to make white people comfortable. That doesn't mean they have no value, but it does mean that they have limited value.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T15:09:56-06:00

ID

154695

Comment

When Spike hits, he hits. When he don't, he don't. (smile)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T15:10:46-06:00

ID

154696

Comment

In response to your comment, Donna, about people who try to shut down any narrative that isn't in their comfort zone. That's their problem. For me, that is an invitation to drop a little water on the boulder and keep dropping it. Drip! Drip! Dri1. Since I cannot control anybody but myself--and I do not do a very good job of that most days--the best I can do is--to borrow from someone else's idea: Show up. Pay attention. Tell the truth. Drip! Drip! Drip! Don't buy into the end result. Drip! Drip! Drip! Okay, gotta leave this blogging and go do some work. Peace to all. Thanks for this venue.

Author

J.T.

Date

2010-01-04T15:29:42-06:00

ID

154698

Comment

Kaze, Is the point of art simply to make money? Is all art that makes money good? What about aesthetics or rules governing what make art "good"? Being accepted into someone's home and challenging power structures are two vastly different things. In reality, it doesn't matter who is accepted into whoever's home, it is about the ability to self define and chart your own destiny at your own terms individually, and what these issue do to characterize opportunity and autonomy for others, collectively. For every Dead Prez and Chuck D who struggles, they struggle because Lil' Wayne and his ilk help set the standards or, in your terms "success", for what types of art will be rewarded with financial gain. This is not about a drive to be wealthy, this is about what determines the art we receive. This isn't being critical of black people making money, it is being critical of the notion that the only black arts aesthetic we should respect is the aesthetic that values the profitability of the art. Isn't art supposed to engage, inspire, agitate, and reform? When do Lil' Wayne or Tyler Perry actually do that?

Author

Renaldo Bryant

Date

2010-01-04T16:18:59-06:00

ID

154700

Comment

Okay so much has been covered since I started working. First off...LIL WAYNE NON THREATENING>>>>HA! The dude has tear drops on his face. In the hood that indicates someone being shot or murdered either by his hands or someone close to him. He is tatted up from his eye brows to his toes. The name of his label is Young Money, throw back off Cash Money. His teeth are platnuim and diamond. He raps about money, guns, and chicks. He is right now about to serve time for being caught with guns in NY. Then he has to go back to trial in Arizona to face drug and gun charges. Non-threatening. Puhleezz. The reason why he sales to white hip hop lovers is because they are convinced that that's what hip hop is all about. Listening to Little Wayne adds credibility to their Hip Hop culture. Whether that's the truth or not is based on ones opinion. However, I know that true hip hop isn't "just" what we get from Lil Wayne and is especially NOT what we've gotten from him lately. Can't comment on any of the movies yall are talking about, because I haven't seen them. Donna, I know that you are well versed in the struggle of black people. You consider yourself well informed and you can sympathize with what our people has gone through. You've written about it and you've even been discriminated against for not agreeing with racism, etc. But for you to say, "I don't like it either when people start yelling at whites who are trying to do the right thing that they are trying to be black, speak for blacks, save blacks, etc.", prooves that you still have a ways to go and I'll try to be simple and understand that I am not trying to be offensive here. But if after all that you have experience, that which I've listed, plus that which I couldn't possibly know, if you STILL can't understand that there is a fine line that white people should not EVER cross, means that you have simply not grabbed the entire idea of what this struggle is for us. Not that you ever will. But to even find a way to be angry at that....that's concerning for me. We understand when a white person is "doing the right thing" and when they are "speaking for us". At least I do. But when I think you are trying to speak for me, you may not think you are. But who's right? Are you right or am I right? All I know is that if feels like you've overstepped yourself whether you were trying to or not. Does that mean that I'm wrong? Point is, either you understand that this is now and will forever be touchy for us, you will have that attitude and thus will be shut out by most of the people you are trying to help by doing "the right thing". Just saying...

Author

Queen601

Date

2010-01-04T17:18:03-06:00

ID

154701

Comment

By the way, I have met many white people who get this so not all white people are trying to "speak for us" or "save us". Some white people understand that they will not ever be able to do that and that it is offensive to try. Some, on the other hand are doing it and denying it to themselves just because they refuse to admit they are not as far in the game as they'd like to think. The reason why Tyler Perry gets the run he gets is because he has hypnotized the religious African Americans into believe that his films/plays are about God. When actually the main focus is on drug addictio (every movie) and male bashing. The dude hates men (or loves them - remains to be seen). Either way, he has monopolized on a community who needs to see itself and laugh. That's what we do. We laugh at our imperfections and Perry has figured out a way to keep that popping for the black community. Not a new idea since the first Madea play. Still though he manages to keep getting paid and finding new ways to do it. By the way....I'm guilty of watching ALL the plays and loving them for the SANGING. And I do get in a little House of Payne when I can. Although I realize it's a terrible show. Just horrible.

Author

Queen601

Date

2010-01-04T17:23:42-06:00

ID

154702

Comment

Of course not Blackwatch. I'm more in line w/ your mode of thinking than you think. I'm just making the argument that we spend an enormous amount of time chastising artists who have been financially viable instead of helping to give a bigger voice to those that WE feel need to be heard. I've always strived to be the embodiment of the 2. I don't feel the 2 are mutually exclusive.

Author

Kamikaze

Date

2010-01-04T17:23:54-06:00

ID

154704

Comment

I'm an interested bystander on the Lil Wayne argument. ;-) Queen, I'm not really interested in who's "right" and who's "wrong." It's not a paradigm I try to spend much time in because it's so limiting. But for you to say, "I don't like it either when people start yelling at whites who are trying to do the right thing that they are trying to be black, speak for blacks, save blacks, etc.", prooves that you still have a ways to go and I'll try to be simple and understand that I am not trying to be offensive here. I'm not offended at all; you're entitled to your personal viewpoint, but that doesn't mean I agree with it. That statement is rather false on its face merely from a logic standpoint. I said that "I don't like it" when people yell that, just as Kamikaze said a very similar thing. You don't like it when *I* say it: with due respect, so what? You're not in a position to tell me what I like or what I don't, and I assume you respect my viewpoints as I do yours. Thus, it does not follow that my not liking that reaction "proves" anything about me. I will give you that I have a ways to go, though; so do we all. Some more than others. Stipulated. The rest of your post is saying stuff that I know and is rather obvious. I am fairly educated (especially for a white woman) on what could be called black history, and I also talk to many different African Americans in the course of my job and my ongoing education efforts. As a newspaper editor, that enables me to share different viewpoints and help make the point that not all black people think alike, no more than all white people do. So anyone who pretends to to speak for all black people or white people or any people are not credible from the outset. That's why I would never do that. When people have accused me of doing so, they tend to be reacting emotionally, and I can understand that. It doesn't change things, though. Beyond that, I have *never* said I completely understand black people's struggles or some other things you have accused me of now and then in your more passionate moments -- smile. My goal is to provide a forum where people can talk to and hear each other across racial boundaries and try to further that conversation with probing questions in a poor-girl's Socratic way. As far as you feeling like I've overstepped your line, I'm sorry to hear that. But with due respect, different people have different lines, and yours is not the same as that of some other black people I converse with. As I was expressing in the comments to Kaze that set you off here, I've long stopped worrying about those kinds of accusations, Queen, even coming from you, and I never, ever apologize about any benefits of my education. I can respect someone telling me something was specifically offensive, and explaining their reasoning, and apologize if it's merited, but the idea that I've crossed some vague imaginary line just by talking about race doesn't interest me so much, especially when I was essentially restating what Kamikaze was saying to agree with him on the point he made. I'm sorry if that offends you coming from a white woman but not from an African American man. That is not my problem. Most importantly, had I recoiled (as many would have) at your similar retorts (such as in past discussions of misogynistic lyrics), you and I would not have come nearly as far as we have in our conversations or respected each other so much. Thus, I am more than willing to take the risk because what I say is based on love and compassion and more than a little dose of education, much of which came directly from African American professors and students who don't offend quite as easily as you can sometimes in these conversations. All that said, I'm not offended at all by your remarks (I expected them, in fact). And I will say it for the hundredth time: I would never try to speak "for" black people. But I will share what they tell me and have taught me when it is appropriate to further dialogue, and I'm not the type to be scared out of doing that because it's hard for some people hear a white woman talk about these things.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T17:57:58-06:00

ID

154706

Comment

I'm just making the argument that we spend an enormous amount of time chastising artists who have been financially viable instead of helping to give a bigger voice to those that WE feel need to be heard. I've always strived to be the embodiment of the 2. I don't feel the 2 are mutually exclusive. You sum up a lot that has been said there, Kaze. I don't think most of the thoughts many of us have expressed on this thread today are mutually exclusive; we can hold conflicting thoughts at once and learn from them all. That has been my thought throughout. Let's engage the brain on all of this rather than shut down the parts that make some people a bit uncomfortable. This has turned into a very thought-provoking thread; think what you will about C. Liegh's column, but it has led to excellent dialogue. Thank you all for taking part. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T18:07:29-06:00

ID

154708

Comment

I don't know where to start on replying to the comments made since I first jumped in this conversation. One thing is for sure, anyone who gleaned C. Leigh is a racist, black supremacist or separatist from this column doesn't know what the terms mean. As I read the column over again, I see very little I disagree with. C. Leigh is obviously a smart man who knows his history, not merely the history of Black Americans which Black Americans barely know themselves and don't have a clue why they need to know it. This history will never be learned or discerned just by going to high school or college generally. To learn the truth of Black history, including African history, you have to hunt it down in bookstores, select colleges, libraries, museums and rare places, because the American system certainly doesn't have any real interest in us learning it. To know this kind of history is to know your past and have pride, self esteem and belief in Black genius that isn't connected to, caused by, or validated by anyone beyond Black people. I understand well what C. Leigh is talking about here. To have this doesn't make you anti-white or anti-any other race. I haven't seen the movie, Blind Side, and don't know that I ever will or could watch it. It took me forever to see the Color Purple. I knew the story and just couldn't watch it for many years. I know the story in Blind Side, too, and I know why lots of Black folks have the same reticence I have about seeing it. I agree with Donna comments about the manner in which the movie was presented and why, although I haven't seen anything but the reviews and the trailer. I seem to always understand and agree with Blackwatch's comments or arguments. Someone said here, more or less, that Black folks have probably done some or many things to help Whites too. To know your history is to know that Black folks have done countless millions of things to help Whites. In fact, we've spent a large part of our existence helping Whites more than we helped ourselves due to force, inhumanity and voluntary good will or benevolence too. And due to hatred of ourselves too. If we have arrived a this race-neutral plateau or level, I'm disappointed no one has informed me yet, and I'm a very open-minded and rare southerner. I've just witnessed the election of the first black president and paid very close attention to how he was viewed, discussed and labeled. I'm unconvinced that the race of Tiger Woods or his wife doesn't have anything to do with Tiger's present down fall. Sure, he's a cheating bastard and a slow running cablinasians, but he was the safe and acceptable Negro to many Whites until he did that White woman wrong, just like Orenthal James Simpson was. I realize that not every one will agree with me.

Author

Walt

Date

2010-01-04T18:50:55-06:00

ID

154709

Comment

To know your history is to know that Black folks have done countless millions of things to help Whites. In fact, we've spent a large part of our existence helping Whites more than we helped ourselves due to force, inhumanity and voluntary good will or benevolence too. Powerful statement, Walt. This is why I argue so vehemently, at the risk of offending those of whatever race who don't think a white woman should, that we should all do everything we can to learn our whole history. And you're right: You do have to seek it out deliberately because it's not just waiting there for us all to see. I do believe the media firestorm would have been the same toward Tiger if his wife had been black. It's nother question whether it would have been the same had he not been.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T18:57:05-06:00

ID

154710

Comment

This favorite quotes seems apropos for this thread: "If you ask me what I came into this world to do, I will tell you I came to live out loud." - Emile Zola

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T19:10:03-06:00

ID

154711

Comment

I don't think the media firestorm or public outrage would have been the same if Tiger Woods' wife had been black; black men have routinely and historically been given a pass by the white media for cheating on black women, and anything else short of domestic violence tends to be seen by white media folks as other people's business, but add a white partner to the mix and it's fair game. I don't think the culprit here is overt racism as much as it is overt race anxiety; white journalists are afraid of how they might come across if they stick their noses into black relationships. But there's definitely a disparity in the way relationships tend to be covered if all of the participants are black. Expectations are lower, descriptions of the relationship tend to be cutesier and "sassy"...we saw some of that in the way Fox News described Michelle Obama as Barack's "baby mama," which kinda indicates that they'd never really given substantial coverage to a black family before. So yeah, I think it matters that Tiger's wife is white, and I think it matters that his mistresses are white. I think if they'd all been women of color, he probably would still have the endorsements he had before this blew because the entertainment media wouldn't have given the story the same level of breathless coverage. This is assuming he'd have been able to get those endorsements to begin with. We're all reading tea leaves here, but that's my opinion. Media reflects culture and we still live in a white supremacist culture. For a good example of that, look at how the national media systematically ignores missing-person stories when the person who has gone missing isn't skinny, white, and female (and the younger and richer, the better). The same dynamic applies to Tiger Woods.

Author

Tom Head

Date

2010-01-04T19:27:56-06:00

ID

154712

Comment

Sadly, I can see your point, Tom.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-04T19:31:24-06:00

ID

154717

Comment

Donna, we have had a round or two about this very thing and you have been one of the main reasons why I have come some far in my thinking. Yet, I do think that there is a level of unwillingness sometimes to understand that that imaginary line is REAL for black people. Its not like we asked for it's presence, but we are a hurt and frustrated people. Our views and ideas all come from pain and mistreatment. I think that needs to be recognized by white people and some sort of appreciation has to be given to it before any level of real communication can take place. So while I understand (and expect) your reaction to my comments, I stand firm on the fact that at times you do tend to come off way too advised when trying to "understand" or discuss the black race. It's a turn off for me so I'd be willing to bet that there are many who don't know you as well as I do who would certainly be offended. I'm not asking you to not offer your opinion, or share what you've learned from the black people who have taught you. I'm just saying that there is still yet to more to learn and possibly more black folk than the ones you've chatted with. I'd even venture to say that having those conversations doesn't make you a scholar on the black experience....which, although contrary to what one may think, is very different the white experience in Mississippi, in Jackson, in America and in the entire world. No doubt I have the upmost respect for you because of your stregnth. I've made that known and would challenge anyone who dismissed your connection to the struggle of black Mississippians. It's amazing how this discussion keeps coming up on this site in some way. Whether discussion Tiger Woods or the Ole Miss fight song, we always end up back to this topic. I'm glad to be able to contribute to it. I'm glad that people aren't afraid to state their opinions here. I'm glad we are all here willing to grow and to learn. That says alot for the site, the paper and for us as Jacksonians. Peace Folks.

Author

Queen601

Date

2010-01-05T08:23:42-06:00

ID

154718

Comment

Tom, I can see your point, but I am still not in agreement. Okay....maybe he wouldn't have gotten scrutinized the way he did has his wife and lovers been black, I can't make that judgement because he didn't. So I really don't know what type of vision or supernatural ability any of you have to be able to make a statement such as that. Maybe, Tiger is the great golfer he is because he is multi-racial!? Maybe, Tiger got all the endorsements he got because he married a pretty little white girl?! Commo now, how ridiculous does that sound???? I believe that had he been such an angelic-seeming black dude who did eleven different women, he would have received the same amount of media attention, but of course, I haven't a clue because it didn't happen. Look at Kobe Bryant- a very popular athlete - rich and famous, he cheated on his non-black wife and was even thought to have raped the lady he slept with outside of his marriage. So why then, in your opinion, wasn't it as "serious" as Tiger's transgressions? She was a white chick that he cheated with....Lily White and from Iowa I believe - do white people get any whiter than that? What do you presume that was? I keep reading about Michael Jordan and OJ Simpson and neither of them offered as much gossip and news as this Tiger Woods story. I mean OJ did eventually after the televised chase and the trial and all that hooplah. But initially the biggest thing about his was the suspense of whether he did it or not because he said he didn't and no one believed that crap. Then it turned into a black/white thing. And then hell, it was murder not sex...so one may make an arguement on the OJ thing. Murder seems to me to be more news than a sexual affair. But for the Jordan/Kobe argument, I think they didn't get the response Tiger got because it wasn't ELEVEN DIFFERENT WOMEN they carryied on with. The man had outside relationships with these women - not just a sexual encounter (here and there). Tiger had month-long relationships, dirty text messages, etc going on with more than one woman. THEN, the idiot had an affair before his child was even born, what's that like a couple of months into marriage. I think Tiger's trip down FOOL ROAD is the reason he has sent the media into frenzy. NOt because of his race or his wife's race. He was just an idiot who threw away his life and he just so happened to be non-black and so was his wife. Does that just not make any sense at all to you?

Author

Queen601

Date

2010-01-05T08:34:40-06:00

ID

154720

Comment

I've come away from blogging on this site yesterday and reading the entries and pondering it with a new level to an understanding that has nothing whatsoever to do with race and everything in the world to do with it: We each heal and change and open up as we tell our individual stories and the stories of our ancestors. Telling our stories is healing for the teller and for the people who read the stories. I spent 3 years writing a part of my story for my children. It was the hardest and most difficult time, in a way. It exhausted me. I mined the depths of my feelngs and my self. Came up often with very dirty hands and tears in my eyes. But, once I did it, I felt free in a way that I cannot explain. I am white. I am not black. But that exercise of telling my story changed everything about me. McInnis's emphasis on teaching about ancestry goes to this idea of story telling. Once we tell our story, it is ours, we own it. And, we, in a way, shape who we are by how we tell the story. I cannot tell Donna's or Queen's or Tom's or Kaze's story. I can only tell mine. I might be able to convey what one of them has told me. But the point is that in the soul searching that happens as we "tell our own story" transformation happens. I am off put when others finish sentences for me, though I do that sometimes for others and know I shouldn't have. I am off put when people think they know exactly who I am without knowing anything about me. I cannot begin to imagine the frustration of my black brothers and sisters when I or another white person presumes to "know" who they are as individuals when we only know about them. Knowing others is different from knowing about them. Our struggle today, seems to me, to be to get to know each other, one on one, up close where we see the color of the eyes. It is a huge task. We are all up to it.

Author

J.T.

Date

2010-01-05T09:13:55-06:00

ID

154721

Comment

[quote]But for the Jordan/Kobe argument, I think they didn't get the response Tiger got because it wasn't ELEVEN DIFFERENT WOMEN they carried on with. The man had outside relationships with these women - not just a sexual encounter (here and there).[/quote]That is key...even as a man of color, if Tiger had cheated with 1 or 2 women regardless of their race, in all likelihood depending on how he handled the revelation, he would be forgiven for the most part and probably wouldn't be bleeding sponsors the way he has now. We live in a society with a 50% divorce rate and a long list of celebrity breakups, and we are almost at a point where it is no longer a big deal for a celebrity or a politician to be caught having an affair...its almost a rite of passage! Its the dozen or so (known) jumpoffs that he has had in the last 5 years that is so offensive. Several of these women are reporting to have slept with him without using protection. Think about that, in this day and time with HIV/AIDS and other life-altering STDs out there, it's mind boggling that this man would risk his life and the life of his at one point pregnant wife to get his rocks off condom-free with a different slut every couple of months. I wouldn't blame Elin for going upside his head with a 9-iron! I don't give a crap about whether his wife is white or black, that is disgusting and reprehensible, and THAT is the main reason he is losing sponsors. And even that I believe can still be reversed or slowed.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2010-01-05T09:34:21-06:00

ID

154722

Comment

Since we are speculating on hypothetical situations, I'll throw in my two cents. Personally, I think it is the celebrity of Tiger Woods driving the media feeding frenzy. He is the most famous Golfer there is and a sex scandal involving multiple women and violence and car crashes is gonna get splashed all over because of the sheer spectacle of it all, I don't believe it would matter what race his partner is because it isn't about her, she doesn't sell magazines or newspapers or get big ratings, he does. Now, looking at the matter of the endorsements, there may be something to the race of his wife driving the sentiment that he isn't the proper person to be a company's spokesman anymore. But how could you ever know? Simple answer is you can't. Very few corporations seem to have any sort of ethos when it comes to decision making aside from the axiom "if it's profitable then it's good." They obviously see Tiger as more of a liability at present. Maybe the negative image is because he cheated on his white wife. Maybe it's just because he cheated on his wife. I think it's probably some of both of those and a lot of "here is a guy who can't handle his business." The scale is a big thing too, like Queen said. Eleven different women? I don't think you can really compare this to many other scandals for the scale and the scope and the spectacle being played out. Plus, we just really love to tear down our icons. I really like C. Leigh's column. While I rest easy that he doesn't need me to affirm his genius. It's made me think about things in a way I hadn't really thought of before. It's such a different perspective for me. For instance, he started off talking about how he didn't see the significance of Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier in major league baseball because he didn't need white people to affirm "African Genius" as he put it. Well, my first thought was that it really doesn't take a genius to be able to play baseball. Sarcastic, I know, but it's how my brain works. Anyway, it got me to thinking why would he use the word genius, he is purportedly a smart guy. So I looked closer at the word. This is, in part, how Wikipedia describes it. More than just originality, creativity, or intelligence, genius is associated with achievement of insight which has transformational power. A work of genius fundamentally alters the expectations of its audience. And it occurs to me that the significance of Jackie Robinson breaking that barrier was the transformational power his genius had on the wider audience that the larger stage of Major League Baseball provided. While an individual may not need the affirmation of whites or any other race of "African Genius." Genius needs an audience to transform with it's insight and creativity. Otherwise, it is simply potential lost, wasted, or hidden away. And that was just the first paragraph. Great column, keep it up.

Author

WMartin

Date

2010-01-05T10:08:56-06:00

ID

154723

Comment

Queen, thanks for your comments. Don't get me wrong: I think about what you're saying. Regularly. I have held back intentionally on certain issues from time to time for the very reasons that you talk about, even though I had some interesting points to add to certain discussions (which I learned from people like black professors who urged me to join in the discussion whenever possible). However, I know from repeated experience that this "line" falls different places for different people, and I am not going to obsess over where it is at every possible juncture, thus keeping me from participating in and helping lead needed conversations. I grew up amid black and white people who did not talk to each other pretty much at all, and white people either so bigoted or so scared to open their mouths that they would not dare try to participate in such a conversation. As an adult, I've been told by some black and white people that I should keep my mouth shut on these issues, that I don't have the right to talk about it, that I am a traitor to my race, that I am trying to be black, whatever. None of those things are true. I am willing, no determined, to make people uncomfortable on the race question, which sadly was not resolved in its 20th century. I will do everything I can do to be respectful of other people's views and open to listening and caring. But I will still continue to have the conversation, and I apologize if that sometimes makes you uncomfortable. As we've both said, it's part of the reason we have been able to get to the other side of many issues. Put another way, I will stay at this table even as people try to push me and others away in order to contribute to dialogue and understanding. For whatever reason, and not to get too spiritual on you, participating in that conversation is my calling, and it is not up to me to say no. But I think as usual, we've ended up at the exact same place, and bless your heart, Queen, you help us show those who lurk and read on this site that people can come from different places, disagree and still meet in the middle, without trying to shut down people they disagree with. I love you so much for that. Your comments are lovely, J.T. I have nothing to add. WMartin, I love that you appreciate C. Liegh's column. You're one of my favorites here, even when you confound me. OK, all, I've got to focus on getting the paper out today, so carry on without me. And don't a single one of you try to bait me back in here! No can do. Cheers, y'all. I just love the JFP Nation. I hope y'all know how special and unique this kind of conversation is on a media site (or any site). We provide the forum and keep the jerks from shutting y'all down; you do the magic. I'm grateful to all of you.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-05T11:02:45-06:00

ID

154726

Comment

I've been in lurker mode for a while, but I had to come in to say that I totally agree with everything that Blackwatch has written. Great Points!

Author

News Junkie

Date

2010-01-05T13:16:37-06:00

ID

154728

Comment

Thank you, Donna. Love and Peace in 2010 to all of you whose words and ideas feed me and grow me.

Author

J.T.

Date

2010-01-05T13:30:11-06:00

ID

154749

Comment

I've enjoyed following this blog since my first comment days ago. I've learned a lot from the bloggers and certainly have a new insight into a lot of things. Thumbs up to the bloggers. You've turned as somewhat negative blog into an inspirational quest into the cause and effect of many people's situations. Thanks for opening my eyes.......however, still thumbs down to the article. I still feel it very closed minded and negative.

Author

littledivot

Date

2010-01-05T16:37:49-06:00

ID

154764

Comment

Thanks, littledivot. I hope you'll comment some more! I agree: great thread.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-05T22:29:48-06:00

ID

154771

Comment

It's all about the white woman. The white woman is held up on a pedestal in this society. That negro best not touch that white woman. It happens over and over again. The most recent and best example I can remember is Kanye West and Taylor Swift. That was the third time Mr. West had pulled a similar stunt, the second time he had actually gone on stage and stolen a mic out of someone's hand and told them they didn't deserve it (justice, 2007 awards), but because this time he had corrupted a helpless little blonde white girl and ruined her dreams, it became a big deal. and C. Leigh, thank you.

Author

that guy

Date

2010-01-06T00:50:49-06:00

ID

154773

Comment

I heard yesterday that Elin might walk away with between 350 to 500 million of Tiger's money. While I do not condone his actions in any way, I have to ask myself "how many putts did she sink to deserve such"?

Author

bill_jackson

Date

2010-01-06T08:10:03-06:00

ID

154774

Comment

I don't think it was putts she sank so much as the 18 hoes.. err holes Tiger played.

Author

WMartin

Date

2010-01-06T08:36:38-06:00

ID

154776

Comment

Considering Tiger's extramarital activities and his reported behavior, I would call it hazard pay.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2010-01-06T09:30:54-06:00

ID

154778

Comment

Ladd and littledivot Why is it when Black folk express their point of view, usually firmly based in historical fact, White folks DISMISS it as negative? But when White folks express the same idea, it is suddenly great, courageous and progressive? Dr. Kings work, BB King and the Blues in general, come to mind immediately. On a more local note, when I was the Chairman of the Smith Robertson Museum Association (not its legal name), the organization founded by Dr. Jessie Mosley, Dr Alfreteen Harrison and many others, I approached the Jackson Business community, through my contacts in the Jackson Chamber of Commerce, with the idea for the formation of an institute at Smith Robertson that would highlight and honor the successful Black and White patnerships that resulted in racial progress in Mississippi. Examples Fred Banks and Dr. Robert Fortenberry during the JPS Consent Degree days; a very interesting story. Mayor Russell Davis and President Walter Washington of Alcorn State University in the formation of Jackson 2000. The women's auxillaries of the Jewish Temple and Black women's groups connected to Dr Jessie Mosley during the Civil Rights revolution in Jackson. William Winter was prominantly paired with more than one Black individual and/or efforts. Well it appears that the powers that be at the JCC appointed the current president of South Central Bell/BellSouth/ATT to give me the bad news. "Such an effort would bring up so many bad memories and history. We can't support it" More distressing was the message I received from a most prominent Black legal icon in the state. "William Winter! I wouldn't give him any credit for the successes fo the Civil Rights movement in MS or anywhere else. Winter was a prominent proponent, an an active member and apologist for all the Jim Crow efforts within the state. In fact, support of de facto segregation was a prominent part of Winters early and successful campaigns for political office" Fast or slow forward to today and here comes The Wm Winter racial reconciliation institute at 'Ole Miss'. I ask again, Why is that and doesn't anyone other than me see this? PS: Surpise (oe not) I really do have my opinions explaining why...just intereted in more perspectives..that's how I learn and progress.

Author

FrankMickens

Date

2010-01-06T09:50:37-06:00

ID

154781

Comment

WMartin and Blackwatch, Keep up the good work. Your thoughtful and respectful comments finally broke thru the sensationalist, lewd and talk show entainment comments of others who in their short sightedness/blindness/beningness, missed the points so brillently and clearly cited by Cleigh.

Author

FrankMickens

Date

2010-01-06T10:11:04-06:00

ID

154783

Comment

Well, Frank, I (a white folk) did not dismiss C. Liegh's comments as "negative," so I guess that disproves the vast generalization you just posted about, presumably, all white people. But, of course, you're right that many white people dismiss columns such as these out of hand as negative, or worse and less informed, "racist." Just be careful about falling into the same stereotyping trap you accuse others of being snared in. (Your comments are now in moderation due to earlier personal attacks. That just means we don't open them until we check the moderation line-up. Anyone who posts personal attacks more than once or twice, regardless of viewpoint, gets moved there. That way we can only let the comments through that do not violate the user agreement, or that do not waste space here complaining about it. It helps keep the conversation on track. For the record, you're bumping up to the line in the comment just above about everyone else's flaws; be careful to stay on topic and avoid attacks or no more of your comments will get through. Same for everyone.)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-06T10:38:53-06:00

ID

154784

Comment

Thanks Frankmickens, The sentiment expressed by the AT&T;folks is similar to what I have encountered in the educational arena concerning the civil rights education law enacted in 2006. People tend to want to explore these issues in depth simply because there was conflict and "bad feelings" and people are just not comfortable with it. That shouldn't preclude us as a community going forward with what we know to be fair, just, and academically necessary concerning the education of our children in this state. That sentiment also characterizes a social and political environment in this state where too many poor and minority people are simply disfranchised. For all of the lauding that Marty Wiseman notes for Barbour on the national scene, Barbour and his ilk has never even tried to court the Black vote in MS. The only Black people who even care about what the State Republican party tries to do here are either staunchly conservative socially or are very politically unaware, and yet so well versed in conservative church dogma that they act politically against their own self interests. This is not the empowering notion of democracy that the founders of this country envisioned, nor the civil rights movement was predicated upon. This is political apathy born out of fear and ignorance. This could be combated with a more progressive push in education and in the public discourse here. Kaze and Queen601, Your understanding of the "threat" that Lil' Wayne poses and my understanding are different. Lil' Wayne may be threatening to many white people's sensibilities concerning interpersonal relationships, but he (with his image, art, and actions) affirms the status quo politically, economically, and socially. This is what I mean by not being a threat. I am taking a systemically critical approach to this issue; you seem to be taking an interpersonal approach. That approach lends too much to individual personality and preference to be very useful in a discussion about the collective representation of black people's talents in the mainstream. So, at some point we seem to be talking past one another. Donna, I respect the perspective you bring, and I encourage more courageous conversations like we are having about this issue. It's the only way to move forward collectively.

Author

Renaldo Bryant

Date

2010-01-06T11:05:14-06:00

ID

154785

Comment

Frank, I agree with your 10:11 AM comment. The lewd TMZ-type stuff shouldn't be part of my/our conversation as it relates to the original column.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2010-01-06T11:08:34-06:00

ID

154789

Comment

I've enjoyed following this blog since my first comment days ago. I've learned a lot from the bloggers and certainly have a new insight into a lot of things. Thumbs up to the bloggers. You've turned as somewhat negative blog into an inspirational quest into the cause and effect of many people's situations. Thanks for opening my eyes.......however, still thumbs down to the article. I still feel it very closed minded and negative. posted by littledivot on 01/05/10 at 04:37 PM Thanks, littledivot. I hope you'll comment some more! I agree: great thread. posted by ladd on 01/05/10 at 10:29 PMi Donna, are you saying you now disagree with your statement above?

Author

FrankMickens

Date

2010-01-06T12:19:16-06:00

ID

154790

Comment

Yes, Frank. Please read it again. I said: I agree: great thread. Funny how you only bolded part of the sentence. It was/is indeed a great thread, and I had already talked about my thoughts on the column, and said nothing about it being negative. Frank, why do you spend so much time trying to pick fights? You have too much to offer to waste my/your time like this. I won't open any more petty comments like this from you, but I'm happy to allow you to post the big-thought ones that you're so good at that are actually on topic.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-06T12:23:32-06:00

ID

154792

Comment

DL is about to drop teh [BAN HAMMER]

Author

bill_jackson

Date

2010-01-06T12:26:58-06:00

ID

154794

Comment

Nah, Rex. With the moderation feature, we have to ban very few people these days, unless they are utter trolls through and through (usually from out of state). Now we can just delete any offending comments without them ever seeing the light of day. Love this feature. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-06T12:30:53-06:00

ID

154796

Comment

Great discourse indeed. Blackwatch, you are correct it is an interpersonal relationship. And I guess I'm saying that at the core of this for me IS better interpersonal relations between folks of different races as a basis for larger reconcilliation. They're not worried about Lil Wayne taking any "power" from them or even leveling the playing field but they are indeed afraid of him moving into their neighborhood or dating their daughter. And THAT is a fear I feel that needs to be addressed as well. Again you and I want or seek, or fight for the same things. Methodology may be vastly different but I feel you. As I stated I dnt think these things are mutually exclusive. The answer as with most things lies in the middle. I strive to be the embodiment of both. I feel that CAN be achieved. Social Conciousness/raising awareness and being financially successful. I dnt feel a choice has to be made. At the same time If Tiger or Jordan or anyone else DON'T want to use their platform that's THEM. I can only control what I do when I have that same platform

Author

Kamikaze

Date

2010-01-06T12:47:18-06:00

ID

154801

Comment

Blackwatch, I would be willing to put money on the fact that NONE of the white youngsters buying Lil Wayne's albums would follow him to his hood. Why wouldn't they? AFRAID, I'd suggest. Having said that, I do see the point your making. However, just because the man is now a popular artist doesn't mean these folk are ready to invite him to dinner or to meet the parents. They are not. It's the fantasy that intrigues them. The fantasy of being in the hood and being of the hood. Still though, their mommies and daddies consider him a thug and a criminal, and a black guy with his pants hanging down his back who does drugs and has guns, not to mention the long dread locks he rocks in his hair which typically are associated with hoodlum-ish activities....thus, a threat = THREATENING.

Author

Queen601

Date

2010-01-06T13:10:27-06:00

ID

154805

Comment

Res, yes, Rhianna did get smacked around a little last year. She's the one who is suddenly, now that Chris Brown's career has been thrown into the toilet, admitting to having a "ROUGH/BAD" side. Although she was considered during this whole thing to be such an angel. (but that's off topic....just had to throw that in).

Author

Queen601

Date

2010-01-06T13:21:01-06:00

ID

154817

Comment

Kaze, I am not saying that challenging the status quo and making money are mutually exclusive (check the bank accounts of Farrakhan, Smiley, Jessie, etc. they seem to do prety well). I am commenting on why people like Lil' Wayne and Perry are making millions, is it their talent or their image? I am saying that making money doesn't justify the minstrelsy and apolitical art that we see out of many popular black "artists" these days. There is no "middle ground" in my perspective. It speaks to what mainstream America will accept. If you are a black person trying to "make it" in this scociety, there are instances where you'd have to swallow your pride and muzzle your thoughts if you are in certain fields (corporate America, politics, etc.). That's part of the absurdity of being Black in America. Artists (of whom I would characterize all manner of "truth speakers" and truth "see-ers")are supposed to be the consciousness of the society, producing art that inspires, critiques, challenges, and provokes. When supposed "artists" admittedly don't do those things, and then get rewarded by the mainstream, it makes you wonder why they are being rewarded. In the instance of black artists, the question of the function and history of minstrelsy always characterizes any notion of black artistic acceptance in the mainstream. The question is not what Lil' Wayne or Perry decide to do with their fame, it is why are they famous in the first place?

Author

Renaldo Bryant

Date

2010-01-06T13:46:04-06:00

ID

154820

Comment

Baquan, The issue with me isn't interpersonal so much as it is systemic. While these concepts are not mutually exclusive, adderssing one (individual relationships) will not necessarily improve the other (systemic injustice). Better interracial- interpersonal relationships may help with individual understanding, which is necessary for a cohesive ethnically and racially diverse community. Yet, systemically, racist practices and policies can be enacted in institutions without there being individually racist people in said institutions. And it is the instiutionalized racism that characterizes inequality in the 21st century moreso than interpersonal prejudices. How you combat insitutionalized injustice is by advocating for freedom, justice, and equality for all people in a democratic scoiety. To the extent that inter-personal relationships can help achieve this goal, I'll support and work towards them. But better individual interracial relationships may or may not be necessary, but they definitely aren't sufficient, in achieving full freedom for more people in our society. Just policies, practices, and freedom of thought and discourse are some of the ways we can truly combat injustice. So, to me , the goal or the issue isn't whether or not Lil' Wayne can date white women (doesn't indicate much for me either way). It is the access to equal opportunity and self-autonomy for minorities in a society that has, at its core, racist, classist, sexist, homophobic, and xenophobic institutions, values, norms, and practices.

Author

Renaldo Bryant

Date

2010-01-06T14:18:55-06:00

ID

154829

Comment

banquan2000 said, in part, "I for one still say we have a caste system in this country and it's real, getting people to admit it will change things." The caste system, banquan2000, has included, over the years, treating women as second class citizens and as sex objects. It could be argued that when all men of every race evolve enough to recognize the humanity of women, and all men of every race honor women the way they, men, also want to be honored from the standpoint of their race, AND when women, regardless of their race, demand that they themselves be honored, then the very nature of humankind would be elevated. And, along with that elevation, honoring others might rub off on the racism issue and help eliminate it. Anyone who demands that someone honor me for my race while I refuse to honor the female gender of my own race may have a premature expectation.

Author

J.T.

Date

2010-01-06T15:04:15-06:00

ID

154845

Comment

I'm glad to see the interchange between Kamikaze and Blackwatch because I agree with a lot of what Kamikaze and Queen were saying, but I didn't know how to reconcile or compare it to what I and others were saying also. Blackwatch must be one of those Black genius which America has a hard time recognizing except that he be a pet Negro or safe Negro or the White system makes him. I don't know, maybe he's not even Black or Negro. I agree wit J.T. on the sexism thing. How in the hell can you claim you are against racism and yet have a problem with treating women with respect as as equals, or even be against interracial mixing, as far as I'm concerned? I realize some will disagree with me on the interracial mixing matter. However, I choose to not limit myself from learning and sharing with other people. Don't get me wrong though, I know who I am, where I (and us) come from, and will never forget it under any circumstances. I down for the cause and the truth, with the truth always being my greatest guide. The bloggers here are some smart people. We have all these different races, sexes and ages who bring so many perspectives.

Author

Walt

Date

2010-01-06T17:49:06-06:00

ID

154846

Comment

It is the access to equal opportunity and self-autonomy for minorities in a society that has, at its core, racist, classist, sexist, homophobic, and xenophobic institutions, values, norms, and practices. Hear, hear, Blackwatch.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-06T17:56:57-06:00

ID

154850

Comment

Fellows, we all knew the line was crossed when Elin's picture was put up. We ought to thank J. T. for not starting her complaint with you sonsa.......

Author

Walt

Date

2010-01-06T18:08:28-06:00

ID

154857

Comment

Walt, it crossed my mind to begin my blog that way, but I resisted. And, Walt, you need to know that the more I blog with you the more I love you. Peace.

Author

J.T.

Date

2010-01-06T18:53:28-06:00

ID

154864

Comment

Baquan2000, I'm not going to curse you out. I'm not sure how to respond to your last statement, but I agree with your statement about Mrs. Woods. Completely as a matter of fact. I tried to actually post that but in all the deleting, mine was deleted as well. Long time followers of this site know that I am not the typical feminist, if at all. I don't consider myself to be at least. I have to say that because MOST of the time, I disagree with feminist ideas. I didn't necessarily find your comments as insulting and offensive as J.T. and Donna must have. Not to say that I don't appreciate and understand where they are coming from. I can easily see where had the conversation continued I WOULD HAVE become offended by it though and I think that's why it was cut short. To me you didn't disgrace that woman by commenting on your opinion of how she looks and I can't see how making a statement about a woman who has taken a photo half naked drapped over the side of the mountain makes you the monster. So no, you'll get no challenge from me to that regard. I think she expected and probably wants men to look at her and make a judgement of that nature since she did it. Why else would she? Now if you stole that picture from the confines of her husband's phone (a long with the freaky/nasty text messages) then that would be a problem for me. Trust me, I know this is not a popular statement made by the women on this particular site, but there are others of us out there who would agree with me.

Author

Queen601

Date

2010-01-07T08:16:01-06:00

ID

154867

Comment

Have not seen it.....yet! But I certainly will!!!

Author

Queen601

Date

2010-01-07T08:53:05-06:00

ID

154868

Comment

Queen and Baquan, I thought I just deleted the macho stuff about whether or not Mrs. Woods is "hot" and the complaints about it. Sorry if I deleted something more substantive and applicable to the column.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-07T09:15:35-06:00

ID

154873

Comment

Thanks Walt, though I am by no means a "genius", but I am an aware black man, trying to make sense of it all, and work toward a better future for all children. Baquan, Studies on the life chances of black men have been done. Look here http://www.morehouse.edu/centers/leadershipcenter/index.html for some resources. Though I caution against delving into futile arguments about which minority group is more oppressed, there are plenty of lessons to be learned by exploring the types of opportunities available for black men. There is an interesting book entitled "The Minds of Marginalized Black Men: Making Sense of Mobility, Opportunity, and Life Chances" by Alford A. Young Jr. that explores how some black men in Chicago tackle life and it's challenges as presented to them. I did a thesis on how Black men conceptualize masculinity and that conceptualization’s effects on romantic relationships and single parenthood in the black community and I can tell you that access to opportunity (or the lack thereof, perceived or real) has powerful implications for community development, psychic health, and family structure and function. That is why I take a structural and functional analysis approach to these issues, because environment constrains and characterizes so many of our choices in these matters. Our choices are not made in a vacuum and have broad effects on our future generations and community. That is why a discussion on the acceptance of black people in the mainstream is an important discussion to have. When only certain “types” of black people are lauded and exemplified in the collective consciousness, it affects the life chances of black men. For example, one of the main reasons why black boys do poorly (relatively speaking) compared to other groups of students in school is the perception in the minds of their teachers about their cognitive ability and personal behaviors. Studies have been done concerning issues like self-fulfilling prophesy and lowered expectations and how teacher and student perception effect those issues. If a teacher (who more than not is a middle class white woman), takes her cues on how Tyrone will behave and perform academically from a stereotypical image lauded by media, "art", cultural artifacts and other outlets, it effects how she will teach him, which in turn will effect his academic performance, which has crucial impact on his life chances. The popular image of black men does play a role in how institutions mete out justice, opportunity, and safety. So, while a discussion about Lil’ Wayne’s or tiger Woods' image may seem trivial, the issues that it raises are vital to the issues of justice and democracy in this country.

Author

Renaldo Bryant

Date

2010-01-07T10:19:59-06:00

ID

154874

Comment

Careful, Blackwatch, I'll beg you to be a columnist. GREAT stuff. Thank you. If a teacher (who more than not is a middle class white woman), takes her cues on how Tyrone will behave and perform academically from a stereotypical image lauded by media and other outlets, it effects how she will teach him, which in turn will effect his academic performance, which has crucial impact on his life chances. This gets into the research I did for my fellowship through the Casey Foundation folks about the discriminatory application of school discipline. Research shows that teachers, especially white ones, react different to young black men due to their own stereotypes gained from media and through socialization by dominant culture. Thus, even though expulsions and suspensions are up for kids of all races -- a travesty in itself -- kids of color are kicked out more often for subjective offenses such as the teacher through he looked threatening or such, whereas white kids are kicked out for specific things that are in violation of policy. Especially since I started teaching at Tougaloo, I've been reading all sorts of academic stuff about the interaction of white teachers with students of color, especially young men. I'm still a student myself of all this, but it is so important. Of course, the research on the particular problems of young black women is compelling as well.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-07T10:27:52-06:00

ID

154876

Comment

It is also, of course, why our prisons are packed with many more black men in for, over all, lesser crimes than white people serving less time. (And who then come out and often can't vote in order to help change the deck that's stacked against them.) In order to support white supremacy in our country, and the inhumanity of slavery and then Jim Crow/ghettoization, white people were taught to fear the black man as an animal and a monster. I was taught these things, although not as much by my mother, thankfully. And, yes, we were told over and over again that black men would hurt white women. I will admit that even if others won't. That message was everywhere in white Mississippi in the 1970s when I was in school. When we moved back to Jackson, there were popular radio shows that constantly pounded about crime in Jackson with one host saying we should build a gallows in front of the Capitol and hang the criminals there. I even still have an e-mail from a radio host that was sent around looking for horrible crime stories to talk about on the radio show. Whether done intentionally or not from a race standpoint, this kind of rhetoric just serves to set those stereotypes in our heads. Same with how the media throw Lanier High School or Metrocenter on the screen every time a crime happens in the vicinity. (I didn't see them show the front of Jackson Academy when Karen Irby killed those two doctors or George Bell beat Heather Spencer to death with his mama in the house.) We all have to face these stereotypes head-on, and work to change them. Young people tend to grow into expectations for them and if our society can't figure out why that is a major cause of crime among young black men, then they have their ears stuffed closed.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-07T10:34:39-06:00

ID

154878

Comment

I have a million thoughts rolling around about the last few posts, but I will say this for now - Children's Defense Fund is presenting their information on the Cradle to Prison Pipeline on Wednesday at the Parents for Public Schools' monthly Lunch Bunch. The Pipeline info specifically addresses potential solutions for closing the pipeline and encourages dialogue about stopping prejudices practiced in the classroom, which we find bleeds over from white teacher-black students to black teacher-black students, etc. (I promise I'm not just promoting the PPSJ event because of my affiliation. It's because this is GOOD information that the greater public should engage in.)

Author

nyoung

Date

2010-01-07T10:59:27-06:00

ID

154881

Comment

It's OK, darlin'. Promote away. It's important.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-07T11:20:25-06:00

ID

154882

Comment

I would like to add that Jackson 2000 is co-sponsoring this Lunch Bunch. Positive partnership! I encourage folks to read the info on the CDF website about the Pipeline. While there are horrifying truths about a system that perpetuates the passage of black boys in schools to black men in prison, there are also eye-opening truths about how to work together and create support. The report is here.

Author

nyoung

Date

2010-01-07T11:28:10-06:00

ID

154883

Comment

I think Blackwatch would make an excellent columnist.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2010-01-07T11:37:24-06:00

ID

154888

Comment

I see why you brought it up, but it quickly went into the beer-gutter. It also sounds like you're projecting a lot of things you can't know onto the Woods couple, and that's not very useful. So let's curtail any further discussion of whether or not you or any other he-man thinks Ms. Woods is hot. Adds nothing and takes a lot away from a great discussion.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2010-01-07T12:45:01-06:00

ID

154889

Comment

I want to say that I appreciate all the discussion here- there is a lot to think about. It's very interesting how different people think about this one. It's good to create a discussion where folks can articulate what they think & agree or disagree respectfully. I guess my first take on the column was the general idea that blacks don't need to become successful in the white world in order to prove validation to themselves. I thought that this was an interesting idea. I think too often people get sucked in to systems of validation and success to make themselves seem strong and in the end this can be fruitless.

Author

Izzy

Date

2010-01-07T13:14:51-06:00

ID

154907

Comment

Note, Looks like Charlie Sheen's Hanes endorsement deal is in jeopardy, I assume due to the allegations of domestic abuse. But for the "other", kinder and gentler side of the story: http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/media/what-tiger-woods-can-learn-from-charlie-sheen/19295792/?sem=1&ncid=searchnew00000005&otim=1262963295&spid=35473866

Author

FrankMickens

Date

2010-01-08T09:13:51-06:00

ID

154936

Comment

First of all, sorry about the picture of Elin Woods, I am just in the habit of backing up my arguments with proof. But it was a silly argument to begin with and I shouldn't have participated. Baquan, True, Tiger's wife is not the famous one or the super talented one. She didn't go to Stanford or achieve any of the other things you describe. And she may even be "Plain Jane" in your eyes. None of that justifies the way she has been treated by her husband. You can try all you want to talk about how she looks and what she hasn't done. But none of that stopped Tiger from making the vows that he did and then from breaking them. I haven't seen anyone attributing Tiger's success to his wife. So, you want to somehow say he is getting the King Kong treatment? The big difference is Tiger made all the choices himself to wind up in the spot he is in. King Kong got hauled off to his demise unwillingly.

Author

WMartin

Date

2010-01-11T13:35:09-06:00

ID

154937

Comment

HERE, HERE, WMartin!!!!!

Author

Queen601

Date

2010-01-11T13:50:59-06:00