After attempting to leave a pithy comment on Jasmine’s blogpost about the politics of respectability, I quickly saw my thoughts on the subject going in circles. My gut reaction to Jasmine’s question - whether or not African Americans should continue to practice the politics of respectability - is one of shock. Of course African Americans do not have to prove the painfully obvious equality of the worthiness and capacity of our races. However, I know that my reaction to Jasmine’s question is not a unanimous one. I also know that my response does not acknowledge the white supremacist atmosphere that weighs heavily upon this country today.
The topic of the politics of respectability reminds me of a book that I am currently reading in one of my religious studies classes. Written by Professor Haynes, the book is entitled The Last Segregated Hour. It is about the Memphis “kneel-ins” at churches during the Civil Rights Movement, where racially mixed groups of students would attempt to integrate Sunday morning worship services. Using Second Presbyterian Church as a case study, Dr. Haynes illustrates the extreme white rejection of these efforts. I am also realizing that this case study illuminates the complexities of the concept and practice of the politics of respectability.
The students who participated in the kneel-ins practiced nonviolent direct action. They were dressed respectably, there was no yelling or marching with signs. The only factor that set these students apart from any other group of college-aged kids attending church was their race. However, the primary argument of the SPC elders and congregants was that the students were acting as protestors, disrupting services with political demonstrations. As the elders of the church refused their entrance, they claimed that their actions were “to protect their church from an invasion of ‘demonstrators’” (Haynes, 111). Even younger members of SPC, who were against segregation, allowed the powerful and otherwise respected leaders of the church to make decisions for the entirety of the church body regarding the issue of segregation.
In this specific moment during the Civil Rights Movement, the fact that the students were acting nonviolently while wearing respectable clothing was insignificant. The long-established supremacist notions among white southerners overpowered any clothes they wore or nonviolent tactic they practiced. I cannot deny that these factors of respectability allowed for a quicker awareness to the racist basis of the segregationist argument, but this did not cause a quick response within churches.
Knowing the intense rejection of Memphis churches to integrate their services, even as African Americans did indeed use the politics of respectability, makes me draw the conclusion that no race, today, needs to continue this practice of politics of respectability. I must admit that the perpetuation of the practice may very well continue to soften the stubborn racist opinions of modern-day white supremacists one by one. However, today, the innate equality of races is painfully obvious. During the Civil Rights Movement, the politics of respectability was meant to help prove the equal capacity and value of a black and white person through similar dress and respectable, nonviolent, actions. Today, an African American’s ability to be respectable and successful in life is not a question. For this reason, to continue to try and prove this through the politics of respectability would be a superfluous action. Today, proving personal respectability is displayed in a myriad of ways - ways that no longer require button down shirts and silent marches.
Haynes, Stephen R.. The Last Segregated Hour: The Memphis Kneel-Ins and the Campaign for Southern Church Desegregation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
No comments:
Post a Comment