Rap Music vs. Movies

 Today in class, we listed out key characteristics of the Rap music we hear today. All of these features seemed to me to be accurate. When listening to Rap music, we hear about violence, police encounters, alcohol and drug use, hard knock lives, hustlin', etc. Then, as were discussing, these features, we came to the realization that a lot of these are the exact same things we hear about and learn about in movies and other forms of entertainment. So, why does Rap music get a bad rap for doing this? The question especially applies when we look deeper into the lyrics of a lot of Rap music and realize that the lyricists are actually criticizing these features.

I have two theories in mind. The first deals with the idea that perhaps, Rap music get blamed for negatively influencing our youth to a greater extent than other like forms of entertainment because of the concentration of the negativity in these works. With a lot of Rap music, it's not just a line here or a line there that has a some kind of negative connotation (especially for those just listening for the words, not the deeper meaning). Typically, every line or at least every other line has either bad language or a seeming bad message. This is different in movies or books where there may be scenes of negativity but there are usually other scenes depicting quite different messages. So, in a way, after listening to a particular Rap song (not all), there is no way of leaving without a sense of negativity just because of the concentration of certain words that may be present. I'm not sure how much I necessarily agree with this, but perhaps it can provide some kind of reasoning.

 Kind of going off of my first theory, or more specifically the fact that we often just pick up the words and not the deeper meaning behind the words, I would be certain to say that the beat has some influence on the fact that Rap music can be so influential. The beats of a lot of Rap songs are captivating and I'll listen to most Rap because of the beats. So, potentially people get locked into the song by the beat and then really only care to pick up on the words and not the deeper meaning because they're focused on the beat. Often times movies have quite captivating scenes but not in the same way that a beat can get you, pull you in and bring you back multiple times later. This could potentially play an effect on the bad name that Rap music gets because people are brought back to the music because they are hung on the beat and then they are  not picking up on the deeper meaning behind these words that they are hearing.

Next, it could be due to the amount of time we spend listening to music versus watching movies. I know I listen to a lot more music throughout the day and consequently it has more of an effect on my everyday actions than movies do (whatever effects may occur as a result, if any). If we spend a longer amount of time on any given thing, we become more attached or influenced by that thing, so maybe that is some of the reasoning behind it all.

So maybe these are a few reasons for why Rap music often gets a bad name (although some songs inarguably are just crude and uncalled for). Do you agree or do you think that maybe Rap music is just easy to blame because it, without further attention, seems to be quite crude? Doe you think there are other factors at play here?

Gentrification with Justice

Throughout this semester, I've been connecting discussions to my Urban Geography class because in that class we often talk about concentration of poverty and race. I'm writing my final paper on a topic we discussed a while ago about the idea of re-neighboring. Re-neighboring is the idea of people who have access to certain resources such as those who contain jobs and have an education relocating to inner-city neighborhoods that lack these resources. The neighborhoods formed in the first place for a few resources but namely, joblessness. This joblessness caused a concentration of impoverished people in certain inner-city areas. In these areas, we see the same cycle occur over and over simply because the people do not have access to outside resources to make any kind of change. This is where re-neighboring comes into play. People move in to these neighborhoods with the intent of connecting, as a neighbor, with these people to both provide and receive resources that the other doesn't have but could benefit from. In other words, it's not a bunch white, affluent people taking over these neighborhoods or the individual lives of these people. It's a mutual decision to become closer to our neighbors and provide each other with what we have to help end a period of social isolation and poverty.

I personally believe that this could be the forefront to social change. However, critics have presented opposing views. You can probably imagine the most heavily cited critique. Most people take this idea of re-neighboring to mean that white people (because yes, it is generally white faith based volunteers) need to move in to help impoverished black people and immigrants. This is absolutely not the case at all. From personal accounts of people who have chosen to move into these communities to support their neighbors, I've read stories where the new residents actually have gained more since they've been there than they felt they've contributed. Both groups has something to offer and they are mutually benefitting each other by strengthening their neighborly bonds, because that's what they are, that's what we all are, neighbors.

I see more benefit coming out of implementing this outreach, but clearly it has it opposition as well. Where do you think you would stand on the issue? A prominent group in this social change is FCS Urban Ministries, and you can go here to learn more about them like where they do their work and the successes they've had (http://fcsministries.org/). I think it's a highly interesting concept and is worth much, much more further investigating. Do you have any qualms about it? Do you think that it potentially instills this idea of racial separation in inequality even though it's bringing these communities together? Maybe I'm just being hopeful in thinking that all communities will see it this way when really some will see it as an infringement upon their rights and as subjecting the impoverished people.

"Why aren't we happy?"

In regard to the significant gains that have been made among the African American community over the past 200 years, Professor McKinney asked the question, “Why aren't we happy with the progress?” Listening to the comments in class and reading the blog posts, I have noticed that it is not that we are unhappy with the progress that has been made, but we are dissatisfied with the ever present immeasurable amounts of inequality in relation to race, socioeconomic class, gender and more. Professor McKinney mentioned that currently there are more African American males enrolled in colleges and universities than incarcerated. This is a positive for which we are happy. However, when analyzing the campuses of predominantly private white institutions, we see that the amount of racial diversity is sub-par, which further depicts the reasons for which we are dissatisfied. However, on these campuses the issue of racial diversity is only one aspect. In conjunction with this topic, we must also examine the issues centered on socioeconomic class.

Recently, an article titled, “The Challenge of Being Poor at America’s Richest Colleges” was published in Forbes magazine. Below you will find the link. This article discussed the challenges students from low-income backgrounds encountered at the nation’s richest colleges. Again, we see the dichotomy of positives and negatives in relation to the progress that has been made. A positive is that more students from varying socioeconomic classes are being enrolled into these wealthy institutions. A negative, as noted in the article, are the sentiments of inferiority felt by these students at these institutions. The question arises, why aren't we happy? This is an example, of why we are dissatisfied.

Within the political spectrum, we as a nation have made momentous strides in that currently, we have a President who identifies as African American. However, as many students’ posted and commented, President Obama has had to balance his identity, to avoid scrutiny from the public. In doing this, limitations have been imposed on his speech and appearance. And, he has been subjected to an immense amount of critique in regards to his perspectives on various areas of politics as opposed to past Presidents. The election of President Obama can be viewed as a positive attribute in relation to America’s transition toward cultural understanding and acceptance. However, the notion that he has to seemingly “wear the mask” is indicative of the progress that still needs to be made. And, further highlights, why we are dissatisfied.  

             As we observe the moments of equality and inequality in relation to the progress that has been made, the original question of “Why aren’t we happy?” begins to morph into the question “When will we be satisfied?”

Source

http://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2013/11/27/the-challenge-of-being-poor-at-americas-richest-colleges/

Effect of Hip Hop music on Black Culture

Alas, we have reached the end of a very interesting and rewarding African American History class. We have all, whether we admit it or not, altered our way looking at certain things in life. Our last discussion was about hip hop music (which most of us listen to). This post is addressing the affect of hip hop music on black culture. As we stated in class, most artists rap about what they have encountered in their lives. The reason I say "most", is because we just found out that Ice Cube was in art school when he started in write gansta rap. However, in modern times, many students have taken the music to heart and have been participating in violence. Therefore, many critics say that hip hop has a negative affect on black youth. Although approximately 75% of the rap and hip hop audience is nonblacks, blacks are the focus because of the high crime rights in the black community. Although this is true that there are high rates of crime in the black community, I don't think that hip hop music is the reason for the violence. The picture is much bigger than that which is another blog post. Hip Hop music has plenty of positive impacts which includes raising political awareness and exploiting the social injustices that exist in society. Hip Hop is one of the most influential music genres around the globe because of the audiences that it reaches.

Racial Identity in Transracial Adoptions

Transracial Adoption

I’ve noticed a few posts on racial identity and wanted to pose a similar topic from a different perspective. The little that I know about the adoption process is that it is long, complicated, and costly. It appears that many adoption agencies have been using the transracial term to refer to couples that are opting to adopt children of a different race, who in some cases are biracial kids.

After reading “Interracial adoption: One couple’s Story” and seeing the process that one couple experienced in trying to adopt, I realized that different reactions that many coupes in a similar situation may encounter. I hope that for families looking to adopt a child of another race have a conversation with adult adoptees, as described by Lloyd and Pellissier. I think that having a conversation with David, Andrea, and Julia (adoptees from the article) cuts through all the stuff, for lack of a better word, and truly lays out the very real consequences of being raised in a household with parents of different races. Julia is able to cut through the white privilege goggles and is able to not only voice her concerns about interracial adoption but does so in a manner that is interesting and captures the audience.

In the Lloyd and Pellissier article, a white couple would rather adopt a black toddler and set him/her up with a college fund, rater than spending their life savings on a white infant. First, the idea that the kids waiting to be adopted are not only ranked according to how likely they are to be adopted (which is based on race and gender, among other things) but are also given a price is just ridiculous to me. Second, the idea that Hank believes that adopting a child of color won’t be a big deal because he and Carol are knowledgeable in black culture paints which creates this image of a parent trying to teach a kid ‘how to be black.’ Not only are the parents using a huge brush to cover the complexities of the adoptees experiences and creations of identities, but it makes me think that as long as Hank thinks he knows about African-American hist/lit, music, etc. and Carol knows about hip-hop and other music and activities that they are as well equipped to raise a black child.

I would like to believe that at one point or another I have thought about adopted children’s process of creating an identity for himself; unfortunately, I don’t believe I have done so. After reading Julia’s discussion with Carol and Hank I hope that more families are able to go through similar conversations. I am more interested, however, about how these now-adults handle themselves in society. I can’t tell a parent what they need to do to make their future child’s life better but if we all had the opportunity to hear from more multiracial kids raised in interracial household, we would be able to understand better. Hearing these individuals’ testimonies would be a deciding factor for many, I’m sure. But I’m more concerned about the now-adults that I have had this conversation and their stories about their experience.



Carol Lloyd and Hank Pellissier, “Interracial Adoption: One Couple’s Story” http://www.salon.com/1997/08/04/adoption970804/ l

YouTube video “#$%@ People Say To Transracial Families” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFp61HAj-nk

The Light of Memphis

Towards the end of my senior year in high school, I competed for a scholarship here at Rhodes, and on an application I was asked a question that has stuck with me as an avid lover of Memphis, my hometown. I thought it’d be interesting to duel my responses between when I had only a surface level high school education and then having a concentrated study of civil rights. Here was the question:

Some have stated that the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King has stunted the progress of our city, but Mayor AC Wharton refers to Memphis as a "city on the move." What do you believe is the future of Memphis in light of its difficult past?

Pre-History 242: “I wholeheartedly agree with Mayor Wharton and disagree with the conjecture that we are held back by the death of Dr. Martin Luther King.  Dr. King left us with these words: “…I've seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land.” Dr. King left us with optimism and hope for the United States, including Memphis. The only cause of  Memphis’s stagnation is our own selves. We haven’t, as a community, grasped the hope of Dr. King and fully accepted his call to action. Memphis has a bright future with ethical leaders and a supportive population with a common goal of Memphis being a city of model stability. The key to actually achieving that goal, however, is being aware of Memphis’s past and not living in it.”

Post History 242: I have a couple of criticisms for this question. 1) We have discussed the obsession and commitment to the larger narrative of African American history, Dr. Martin Luther King’s death being the assumed peak of African American History. It is not an accurate or fair to condense this nation’s history to one event, making Memphis a stunted city. 2) We don’t discuss how Memphis still resides in that history. A good example is the apparent favoritism and discrimination in this city’s school systems. Per the Tennessee Department of Education report card of the 2011- 2012 school year (http://edu.reportcard.state.tn.us/pls/apex/f?p=200:1:3598217713481567),  Memphis City Schools(MCS) , the more urban school system had 94,629 student promotions versus Shelby County Schools (SCS) , the suburban school system, promoting only 44,312 students. The problem is that in MCS there were 4,361 expulsions beating SCS’s 64 expulsions. Now, we can attribute some of MCS’s student promotions versus SCS’s to the majority in population but when we consider 4297 student expulsion lead Memphis has on Shelby County, it is apparent that Memphis City Schools System does not take as much pride in educating their students as Shelby County does. The top tier officers of education in Memphis have, at some point, lost hope in the urban students of color and not made educating students a priority verses the anterior goal of simply letting students pass. So, simply, Memphis’s light is re-calibrating our education system’s priorities and goals. Though this statement has been used a lot, these kids are the future and if we don’t align them on a path towards knowledge, that light will implode like a dying star. 

Yeezus the Revolutionary

Hip hop artists critique popular culture through their must, but artists also critique stereotypes of the African American community through their behavior. Artists tend to band together in what at first glance could be considered a gang. In some ways, this action alone defies a common systematic stereotype. It is believed that the black community is still impoverished because members do not form helping relationships among each other like those of the white and Asian communities do. I would argue that in forming conglomerates like Death Row Records, Murder Inc., Shady/Aftermath, Kanye's G.O.O.D. Music and Young Money that hip hop artists are mirroring themselves after what they view predominately white conglomerates to appear as. Instead of struggling alone, the choice is made to market themselves as a package to gain support. 

Kanye West has always been controversial. One of his first releases was a hip hop song titled “Jesus Walks” where he proclaimed his religious faith. During the Hurricane Katrina tragedy, West claimed that President Bush did not care about black people due to the delayed national response time. Interrupting VMA winner Taylor Swift during her acceptance by assuring that Beyoncé had the best video made him appear even stranger. Between paparazzi confrontations, illuminati membership rumors, and the adaptation of the moniker “Yeezy,” (short for "Yeezus" a play on the name of Christianity’s martyr and on Jay-Z's "HOVA"), Ye can come off as abrasively ignorant, but I believe that he actually has intellectual ideas to express.

In the face of critics of his newest project, "Yeezus,” West recently made an appearance on “The Breakfast Club,” a syndicated hip hop talk show on New York’s Power 105.1 fm. Although “Kanye Kardashian” is a controversial individual, when given the chance to speak outside of his music, he raises important points about African Americans and hip hop culture. Kanye's central argument in the Breakfast Club interview is that in order to be free from label and material slavery, African Americans need to be billionaires so that they own companies. He states that "when you have money, can't nobody fire you." One interviewer known as Charlemagne tha God, openly called West a "walking contradiction" because on one hand the artist openly loathes corporations, yet he understands that he needs their support to be successful/popular. Of course Kanye has money to power a few of his artistic pursuits, but West expresses that it is not about the money; it is about the relationships that billionaires have with one another. They are speaking an exclusive language.

He supports these views with a few anecdotes. A few years ago, West designed and released "Air Yeezys" through Nike. It was said that the company refused to give him royalties for the shoe that he designed and are also unsure as to when the next shoe is to be released despite societal demand. When asked about a $120 shirt that he designed for the A.P.C. fashion line, West says that he did not determine the merchandise's price. It is that lack of control that Ye feels suppressed by society. He believes that his name and his accomplishments have earned enough merit to make those types of executive decisions. Why is it that he cannot? What institutions are put in place to stop even the most affluent people of color? Is he simply playing up his rebellious image, or is he actually facing some form of adversity because he is black?

As an aside, Kanye West claims that hip hop artist do not make much money from radio spins and album sells, despite popularity. West views himself as popular as British royalty, yet claims that he and Kim do not have royal money. Why do he believe this? In America, is popularity favored over funds?

[Recent] Police Harassment and Community Police Relations Project (CPR)

It is not my intent to demonize police officers—it is not fair. They are but small parts of the larger issue. Humanizing them is one of the things that the Community Police Relations Project has helped me to do. Working and hearing of cases of racial profiling can easily lead one to think that all cops are bad but the reality is that their actions are a result of the way in which they’ve been socialized. I find policies and laws that perpetuate these stereotypes and prejudices that facilitate racial profiling to be infuriating.

Recently, police harassment cases have been shown some light, as presented in a previous post. The Cypher that was part of last month’s Trolley night led to a chain of events that has reawakened the Memphis United group. Started in January, as a response to the planned rally by the KKK, organizations, groups, and individuals collaborated and committed to create an event “to engage in self-reflection, dialogue, education, training, and non-violent action to collectively re-envision and recreate our region as a fully welcoming and nurturing community” (Memphis United Facebook description). The Cypher incident happened on Trolley night, yet a few days prior a group of H.O.P.E. (Homeless Organizing for Power and Equality) members were harassed and arrested outside a weekly meeting at the Manna House on Jefferson. The previous evening, another H.O.P.E. member was banned from a public building downtown for attempting to use a public restroom. These events in addition to the various attempts by the police to prevent The Bridge vendors to sell copies of The Bridge (even though a permit was filed to allow the sale of the paper), resulted in a letter and series of upcoming actions led by members of Memphis United (scheduled for Dec. 17th if anyone is still in town).

These cases are few of the many that happen everyday due to the relationship of community and police relations which is why I have been attending and helping to facilitate CPR forums these past few months. Through the forums I have seen and had the privilege to listen to community members and the police express their interactions on the streets of Memphis. There are plans to create a ‘Plan of Action’ that will be presented to the City of Memphis, but my question to you all is, what would it take to improve community-police relations in Memphis (in addition to these forums)? Have you seen any other attempts similar to the CPR Project? What of the community members that aren’t able to attend the forums but have rich experiences and information that would be valuable to the project?



Ronald Weitzer, "Racialized Policing: Residents' Perceptions in Three Neighborhoods"
https://www.facebook.com/MemphisUnited?ref=br_tf
http://wreg.com/2013/10/24/neighbors-say-they-witnessed-police-brutality/
http://www.wmctv.com/story/23811561/rappers-claim-police-overacted-to
http://wreg.com/2013/11/16/memphis-group-works-to-end-police-harassment-and-profiling/

Do You Know Why The Caged Bird Sings?

One school in Maryland has assigned students 3 books to help them learn about the Civil Rights Movement and the attitudes and relationships between whites and blacks. These 3 books are I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings, The Help, and The Secret Life of Bees. 2 of these books are written by white women, and can not accurately portray the opinions and emotions that were felt by black women during this time period. Only one, I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings, is a narrative written by a black women, and thus is the only that can be appropriate to be used to teach about the civil rights movement. I know, from my own personal experience, that my high school uses The Secret Life of Bees, to teach about the period, and I remember at the time thoroughly enjoying the book. But also, I thought that it was an accurate depiction of race relations and that is exactly why this is a problem. We already know that children in our school system fall prey to the ‘master narrative’ that is presented to them in our textbooks, so why would we exacerbate that problem even further by giving them novels to read that are also inaccurate?

Some argue that these books, while not the most accurate, are spurring an interest in history, and the period, among students that otherwise would not have cared. These novels are engaging and endearing-they draw the reader in with their happy endings. While they may encourage children in school to actually read them instead of turning to sparknotes, how likely is it really that they will then look elsewhere for more information? These stories, with their positive endings are not in anyway representative of what actually happened, so if we present them as the truth it is likely that is what will stick with these kids for the rest of their lives.

It is not as if other viable alternative do not exist. Why not restrict the reading to just Maya Angelou, or include Alice Walker in the list of options? Why is American history afraid of listening to black women’s voices?

What do you think? Is it ever okay to give these books to our children, and present them as accurate, if it may spur further interest in the period-or is it too much of an injustice?

Class Struggle on Campus

I stumbled across this article and it is very interesting: http://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2013/11/27/the-challenge-of-being-poor-at-americas-richest-colleges/

The articles goes into detail about low-income kids on campuses with wealthier students.  It reminded me of a talk I went to where our very own Anita Davis was talking about her campus climate surveys. She was saying that in the surveys, they don't get nearly as many race difference complaints as her office does class issues.  Low income students feel very uncomfortable when the people surrounding them come from more economically advantageous backgrounds.

This is a very touchy topic, so I'll pick my words carefully. But has the race difference evolved into more of a class difference.  What is a student to do when everyone around them wears designer things and goes on expensive outings?  Is it even the responsibility of a college to dictate the climate around socioeconomic status of students.  Is it the responsibility of the school to accept a more financially diverse student body?

I don't know. I just found it interesting to think about.

An Emotional Rant on Truth

In class, we have discussed some of the negative stigmas and ideas that have wrongly and unfairly characterized people of color. This is an issue that I have grown to be passionate about the more I’ve witnessed this theme that seems to overarch our society, thus Rhodes College. It was not until recently that I found these ideas to be much of an issue to try to critically analyze. There is a single instance that perplexed and then infuriated me: I was having a conversation with a friend about her descent, and she let a group of us know that she came from a white, Louisianan mother and father from Egypt. Needless to say, My interest was piqued, and in that moment I felt this indescribable, abstract connection to her because she seemed so proud to say that she was half Egyptian. She told me all about how her father makes an effort to visit Egypt often. Based on what she was telling me, I asked her, “Does your family stick to any African traditi-, “she interjected, “wait. I’m not African.” This threw me through the tightest and most uncomfortable loop. She admitted she knew that Egypt was an African country, but she didn’t consider herself an African. I finally broke down and asked her if she was ashamed of the African label. Also needless to say, I did not get a straight answer to that question.

            I can understand that this may not have been the most crucial occurrence but, I cannot ignore the gaping hole of the delusion (this all in love) that causes her to deliberately reject her African descent. Consequently, I can only attribute her indignity to the internalized criticism of people of color in general, not just those of America. The color of my skin holds so much weight. The issue is greater than white privilege, overt racism, or institutionalized discrimination. I believe that now the real underlying matter is untruth. Frankly, I have lost patience with, what I believe is now, conscious disregard for the truth. This is the truth: the only thing that separates me from my white counterparts may be our diverging lifestyles, ideas, and internal and physical characteristics- which also sets me apart from my African-American, Indian, Mexican, or Asian neighbor. When America or humanity makes itself available to the truth, an apparent change will take place. The barrier that we have to break, however, is that we have to not be afraid of our comfortable surfaces falling through. The more surfaces we break and fall through, the closer to truth we get. This is not a scholarly writing, but in that regard, I hope that my sincerity is taken to heart.

City of Memphis vs. Greene

          This summer, I learned the reasoning behind why West Drive in the Hein Park Neighborhood just east of Rhodes did not connect to Jackson Avenue like most other streets—a 1981 lawsuit that went all the way to the US Supreme Court. In the City of Memphis vs. Greene, the residents of Hein Park, one hundred percent white, stated their reasons for wanting West Drive blocked at Jackson were to reduce traffic flow through the small subdivision, increase safety to children and students walking to school, and reduce litter, noise, and pollution in their community as a result of the traffic. The plaintiffs’ argument said that the blocking was a violation of property rights and had a racially discriminatory intent, as the overwhelmingly majority of residents north of Hein Park were black. The Supreme Court held the closing valid, saying that it did not support the Court of Appeals decision of invalidity due to “adversely affecting respondents’ ability to hold and enjoy their property.” There was no injury under Section 1982 of the Civil Rights Act.

            A few years ago, again in Memphis, history did not repeat itself. Residents near Goodwyn Street proposed to have a barrier placed between the entrance of their affluent neighborhood and the poorer, black neighborhoods south near Southern Avenue. The Land Use Control Board denied the request. Of course, there were plenty of obvious reasons from a traffic and city planning standpoint as to the denial, but the race question was still brought up. Over twenty-five years after the highest courts ruled a Memphis neighborhood street closing legal, a similar situation had the opposite outcome. In Memphis’s largely segregated neighborhoods, does a street closing allegedly restricting access to property violate civil rights? Do you think the Supreme Court’s decision in 1981 was correct?

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0451_0100_ZO.html

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2007/nov/12/editorials-street-decision-turns-on-traffic/?print=1

Why hasn't Black Demography Changed?

Before reading the article, "Living Apart: How the Government Betrayed a Landmark Civil Rights Law," I first looked an an interactive map at the top of the page. It was a map of the US and highlighted, by percentage, the black population living in areas of the US. As you scrolled across, the map changed, showing movement of this population across the years (1890-2010). At first the results were as expected, in the 1820 map the black population was solid 80+% in the south and east of the US. However, as I moved across the map, a interesting change, or better, lack of changed, startled me. Throughout he 1900's and even into 2010, the black population was still overwhelmingly concentrated in the south and east. While it was not a solid 80+%, it still had very concentrated pockets in these areas. We have discussed a number of limits to the mobility of back people from moving out of the south--such as money, family, home-pride, bonded labor, etc--but to see that the majority of the population has not more evenly dispersed across the country is baffling. This puzzle led me to the remainder of the article.

One of the main historically influenced discussed that possibly caused this lack of migration was the failure of the Federal government. Presidential tenures repeatedly denied, avoided, or delayed numerous movements to end segregation. A large example was President Nixon's administration declining to fight segregation and enforce Federal law and programs. President Obama is quoted saying that this could have cut segregation in half had the original effects/intents been successful. Additionally, the Obama administration has held a higher accountability for enforcing anti-segregation practices and has even denied federal funding to cities for their failure to meet desegregation efforts.

This brings me to a pondering thought, because of this failure of previous administrations, what will it take to be effective in overcoming lingering segregation? I found an interesting project done which colored certain cities by ethnicity and Memphis was one of the selected cities. It is evident in Memphis and in the other cities in the project that racial segregation, whether influenced by institutions, culture, economics, etc, still readily exist even in some of the biggest cities in the country.

Living Apart Article: http://www.propublica.org/article/living-apart-how-the-government-betrayed-a-landmark-civil-rights-law

Images of Cities colored by race (2010 census): http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5560473024/

Thoughts in a Theater: Owning "Our" History

          Reading through blog posts over the past month or so, I was happy to see how many of us have seen 12 Years a Slave. So must of us understand the movie’s subject material and have felt moved by it, described it, and recommended it as honest, necessary, tough, thought-provoking, etc. However, I am curious to know if others had a similar viewing experience as I did. About a month ago, a friend and I decided to see it on a Friday night. Naturally, it was packed early on, and we found two seats in the very front section. As it has been all semester, this class came into mind as I looked around the dimming theater and saw mostly African American faces. There seemed to be a group of ladies sitting directly behind us as well.

            As much as I would have liked it to been, the theater did not stay quiet for long. At certain points in the movie, the audience would collectively gasp, clap, yell, and holler at the screen at the extremely emotional scenes…even at some points, I believe, that were inappropriate to encourage. For example, when Northup is building a wooden structure and comments that if it was done wrong, there was something wrong with the instructor, the overseer attempts to physically punish him. And, rightfully so, Northup defends himself. However, as the fine line between self-defense and violence may have been crossed (as Northup continues to violently beat and kick the supervisor), most of the audience cheered him on. This fact stuck with me more than the scene had to offer, as did the ladies behind me.

            One lady decided to voice her opinions throughout the entire film, and naturally, a few surrounding her were not happy. As another woman directly on my left turned and politely asked her if she could quiet down, that she was disturbing others trying to watch, the lady responded with, “I can say whatever the hell I want—I ain’t a slave no more.” She was black, and the woman in front was white.

            This was one of the major points of discussion with my friend as we exited the theater. How much of the past can today’s African Americans take ownership? Can I own that history just as much, as it is a part of my history as well? How many years go by if this “ownership” varies with time…i.e., Civil War vs. Civil Rights? Just a few thoughts…

Foreclosure Rates by Race

Currently, I am an intern at United Housing Inc., an organization that helps new homeowners in Memphis make smart decisions when purchasing so that they are less likely to face foreclosure in the future. Additionally, they help those who are facing foreclosure by providing counsel about the options available to those who are in foreclosure about regaining their homes. Unsurprisingly, a large percentage of the clients who come into UHI are African American, but this could in part be because of the demographic breakdown of Memphis. However, nationally, the statistics for those affected by foreclosure are skewed racially. An estimated 11% of African American homeowners entered foreclosure during the 2006-2009 period, as compared to a 7% of White homeowners. While there are more foreclosures filled by non-hispanic whites than blacks (this makes sense simply because of population breakdowns), the African American community is affected at a much greater rate than the White population. This is the result of both a long history of exclusionary practices in the homeownership business and new predatory tactics employed by banks and mortgage brokers. Historically, African Americans have been victims of redlining and loan denial. Today, African Americans are more likely than any other racial group to be targeted for subprime loans. Subprime loans or second-choice lending, is when mortgage lenders give loans to people who have a documented issue affecting repayment such as child support/alimony, high debt, unemployment, etc. These loans always have high interest rates-the lender justifies this by stating they are taking a risk on the borrower because of their history of repayment issues or because of their current financial situation. This justification might be more valid if it were not for the fact that African American’s are chosen for these types of loans at a disproportionately higher rate than any other ethnic group. 49% of all mortgage loans granted to African Americans are considered subprime.

Another issue with this type of loan is the criteria that banks use to to determine if borrowers qualify. While the most common qualification is a history of loan repayment issues, there are several other factors that banks can use to justify their decisions. These include those who have limited debt experience (African American’s are denied loans more often and thus it is difficult for them to build up loan experience) and a lack of possession of other assets.  

Data found at: http://www.urban.org/events/upload/Panel-1-1-Bocian.pdf

Nonviolence and Self-Defense: Complementary or Antagonistic?

Two of the most prominent individuals in the Civil Rights Movement were Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X.  As Professor McKinney discussed in class, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a proponent of order theory as advocated by nonviolence strategies such as peaceful sit-ins and marches. Malcolm X was a supporter of conflict theory as evidenced through self-defense approaches such as protecting one’s own by any means necessary. Both Dr. King and Malcolm X were radical in their ideologies, in that each wanted to evoke monumental change toward racial equality.  Examples of this can be seen in Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I have a Dream Speech” and Malcolm X’s “Ballot or the Bullet” speech. However in the master narrative taught to us in our secondary education, we primarily learn about the efforts of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. whereas Malcolm X and his ideologies are framed as undermining the goals of Dr. King. Scholars of this movement argue that in some cases, such as in rural areas of Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana nonviolent approaches were ineffective in relation to the severe acts of racist’s violence enacted upon African Americans. For example, in Civil Rights from the Ground Up, Emilye Crosby mentions that in Lowndes County, Alabama, “where the movement was built around voter registration and political organizing, tactical violence was nonexistent and self defense was commonplace”.  Professor McKinney suggested that Dr. King and Malcolm X resembled a “good cop” and “bad cop” relationship in which Dr. King wanted effectual change in a peaceful manner, and Malcolm X was unopposed to using violence to enact change. He suggested that each fueled the goals of one another and ultimately the progress of the Civil Rights Movement? In your opinion, were the nonviolent and self-defense strategies of the Civil Rights Movement complementary or antagonistic in evoking change in the morals and ideals of the nation? 

Civil Rights Confrontation: An Issue of Citizenship NOT Simply Racism

“Africans who are in America… Nothing but Africans. In fact, you'd get farther calling yourself African instead of Negro. Africans don't catch hell. You're the only one catching hell. They don't have to pass civil-rights bills for Africans. An African can go anywhere he wants right now.”

—Malcolm X, “Ballot or the Bullet”

The goal of the African American Civil Rights Movement was to end racial segregation and discrimination against black Americans and to enforce their voting rights. When analyzing the reasoning behind the constitutional confrontation, one usually finds the problem to be racism. After all, the ideology that blacks were inferior supported the notion that they were not suitable enough to be labeled American citizens and receive equal treatment. However during the era of segregation, Africans visiting America were allowed to dine in segregated restaurants. Anthony Eromosele Oigbokie recalls how "[a] lot of African-Americans were upset that white people would serve me but not them. They felt the system gave us better treatment than it gave them." I agree that the American system treated Africans differently than African Americans. But why would America treat two groups of people of the same color differently?

            Unlike African Americans, Africans were not necessarily trying to receive equal rights as citizens. They were not trying to integrate the nation’s schools or receive the American vote. African Americans were. Because some people still felt that black citizens would taint the nation, they resisted giving African Americans equal treatment. In sum, segregation was not just a tool to practice racism:  It was a way to deny African Americans their rights as citizens.

 

"I'm black but I would like to be whiter."

          In the world today, we are each defined and categorized based off different aspects of our lives whether it be our occupation, gender, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, personality characteristics, or things related to our overall physical appearance.  While society may decide on many aspects of these "categories", we adjust individually in forming our personal identities.  One of the more dominant "categories" that is sometimes more difficult to pinpoint is racial identity.  These controversies are seen mostly in the struggles for biracial children to form their perspectives of themselves.
          I found an article from The Washington Times which touches on this idea.  The author specifically references Halle Berry and her daughter.  Halle Berry is biracial, being 1/2 black and 1/2 white, and the father of her daughter is a "white French-Canadian", thus making their daughter 1/4 black and 3/4 white.  The author includes several statements from Berry regarding her daughter's racial identity.  Berry notes that her daughter will have to make the decision for herself on which side, white or black, she personally identifies with, just as Berry had to do herself.  While Berry mentions that she sees her daughter as black, the way her daughter forms her identity will be mostly shaped by the way she is encompassed by society and how others seem to identify her.
          The author also discusses the racial identities of 2 biracial sisters, in which the one whose physical appearance leans more towards their white genetics identifies herself with her black side, being actively involved in black organizations throughout her schooling.  I thought it was interesting and yet disappointing that she was "accused of overcompensating for being biracial."  Her sister, whose appearance resembled closest to their black genetics, identifies herself with their white side and did not pay much attention to the organizations her sister was involved in.
          I remember I came across an episode on the Tyra show that was focused on "Preconceived Notions About Race" in terms of biracial individuals that hated one sides of themselves and having them discuss how they personally defined themselves.  There were people on all sides of the spectrum, one of which was a woman who appearance-wise would definitely be considered to be black, but she proclaimed herself as an active member of the KKK.  She explained how she did not like black people and made a lot of generalized statements about "the way they talk and act" and how "they are unpredictable."  Having found the video again and rewatching it, I had the same feelings of just complete shock at what this woman was saying.  It's difficult for me to process how this woman came to feel and think the way that she does and that she has developed such an intense hatred for a very prominent aspect of herself, at least genetically.  Obviously I cannot even begin to imagine what it would be like to have to basically choose between 2 sides, or not (as one woman claimed that she was mixed, she did not claim either side exclusively) and how difficult and conflicted it would be to have to decide or what to decide about yourself.  What is said in this video goes hand in hand with the article however in referencing the Jim Crow "One Drop" concept, that simply because these woman appear black they are automatically considered to be black while they may not necessarily identity themselves this way.  There were two women who were very light-skinned but 100% African American, completely contradicting and pointing out the inaccuracy in the idea that we can assume an individual's race by the color of their skin.  For these women, it is an every day frustration of having to correct people and having to go through the same conversations all the time.

article:
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/politics-raising-children/2011/feb/10/jim-crows-one-drop-rule-may-still-apply-biracial-c/

video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xM2_w-m_UFs&feature=related

The Gospel and Race

Tonight I attended a worship service/Christmas party with other Rhodes students and students from the University of Memphis. The event was put on by each of our separate bodies of Campus Outreach, a national Christian ministry that is aimed at equipping college students with the resources to follow Christ on their campuses. As I looked around the party tonight, I was pleasantly reminded that the Gospel of Jesus Christ knows no barriers. Students of all different race and socio-economic background were gathered with the shared purpose of worshipping God and celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ that comes with the Christmas season. This event embodied a kind of racial harmony that I don’t often see at Rhodes, and I think that that comes from an understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I want to preface this discussion by acknowledging that the ministry that I described above is not perfect and neither is the church that I attend. This blog isn't a plea for conversion but rather a discussion of the Gospel as a potential solution to racism and racial injustice. I also think it is important to acknowledge that the Bible and Christian "morals" have been perverted to justify slavery and racism in the past. Slave owners during the time of chattel slavery often pulled verses from the Bible in order to justify their unrighteous acts. Verses such as 1 Peter 2:18 which states, "Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh." and Ephesians 6:5 that says, "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear". The use of the Bible in this way is a clear deviation from the message of the Gospel and the teachings of Jesus. Often times, the Bible is pulled out of its historical context and its message is misconstrued to fit different situations. I can understand that this might lead some to question the Bible and it's teachings as a method for solving racial issues, but I firmly believe that a clear understanding of the Gospel and it's message leads not only to racial tolerance, but a love for all of God's people.

The Gospel teaches that Christ was crucified on the cross for everyone: for blacks, whites, Latinos, Asians, etc. It also demands that followers of Christ are to replicate the love that Christ showed to the world by dying on the cross. This takes the form of unconditionally loving others, even our enemies. Galatians 3:28 says that there is neither "Greek nor Jew" in the family of God. Ephesians 2:11-22 also explains how Jesus destroyed the racial divide and allowed for all people to be one in Him. If this calling for Christ exalting diversity were lived out in our society today, I think that racism would cease to exist.  

Last year over Christmas break, I had the opportunity to listen to Pastor Bryan Loritts speak at a conference in Nashville. Loritts is the lead pastor of Fellowship Memphis, a racially diverse church with three locations in Memphis. In one of his talks at this conference, Loritts begged for the understanding that Jesus was not a white American; that Jesus was a man who didn't see color of skin or social status, rather he saw people as God's creation. Now, as an attendant of Fellowship Memphis, I have been able to see how the message of the Gospel can transform people's mindsets and put love and understanding where racial divide once existed. I have witnessed the power of Christ like love in the Memphis community and ultimately I believe in its capability to change people's hearts in ways that no legislation, activism, or other teachings can.