So there’s this post on Feministe about “shorter, cuter, more honest people”. I have a lot of issues with this post. A lot. Starting with the fact that the author wants to make this a childfree vs. parent issue. Then there’s a little jab at American cultural values, and we round it out with this idea that it’s a good thing to have your toddler in a bar all night. So, where to start? Heck, I’ll just cover the spread. First up, let me just speak up as someone who was that kid in the bar in the middle of the night. The child isn’t having fun. No, not even if they get up and start spinning in circles. They’re not spinning in circles, whining, breaking things, or screaming because they enjoy being dragged from pillar to post while you ignore even the most basic concept of respecting their needs. They’re (at best) overstimulated. More likely they’re tired, cranky, scared (especially by the drunk people), and really in need of someone to step in and put their needs first. That person should be their parent. Be considerate of your child. They are indeed a person and as the one responsible for their well being you should treat them as one.

Now, in the interests of full disclosure let me just say that I am a parent. I have been a single mom in the past. I am a married mother of two now. I know all about the sacrifices of parenting. And yes, I think little kids are awesome. They’re sweet funny people that make me want to kiss their cheeks all the time. They’re at their cutest when they are well fed, well rested, and engaging in age appropriate activities. This is not a “Kids should be seen and not heard” post. I think it’s great to take kids on trips abroad, to museums, to the park, to nice restaurants, to festivals, and even concerts that don’t involve a single Disney character. I think that all of those trips should be made when they can be comfortable and enjoy the experience. Kids that are enjoying an experience generally aren’t crying, yelling, or pouting. They’re happy to be there, they may well want to dress in special clothes, and they are at their best when they have time to process what is going on around them and feel safe doing it. Protip: They don’t tend to feel safe when every adult around them is out of control. *hint hint* Drunk people are not in control. They often say things that small people do not need to hear, and frequently do things that small people do not need to see.

Parenting is work. Like any job it can swing the gamut from rewarding to frustrating, but it is a job in which you need to put forth your very best effort. It’s the hard parts of parenting that often matter the most precisely because you’re the ultimate authority in that child’s life. This argument that adult specific places are about isolating women or not treating kids as human might work better if we didn’t go out of our way to make kids comfortable in most situations. Granted, not all. But enough that I can’t buy any claims that they are being oppressed by not being welcome in a bar at 4 am. Children have very different biological and social needs than adults. They need more sleep, and aren’t as capable of processing input in social situations without a competent guide. Yes, that means giving up some experiences once you have a child. Does that mean you can’t still have a social life? No. It’s fine for you to go out. Have a blast. I’ll even buy you a drink. But, only if you get a sitter so your kid can have a good night too. Can’t get a sitter? Might be time for a night in. This isn’t about American values vs. the world. This is about basic child development and loving this sweet funny person enough to do right by them even if it means you miss out on watching the sunrise with an alcoholic beverage in hand. Sometimes sacrificing your fun is the biggest part of being a good parent.

As for the idea that other people can’t say something is bad parenting? Yes, yes we can. You know why? Because kids are vulnerable people. They need someone to step up for them at all times, but especially when their parent is failing to do right by them. This is not about a harmless parenting choice. This is about neglect, possibly abuse, and acting in the best interests of the child. That’s the criteria that counts here. Do I love it when a kid flips out in the grocery store? No. But I get that sometimes such things happen. However, there’s a huge difference between a grocery store where you need to be in order to get food and a bar where you want to hang out and get inebriated. Social services agencies geared toward protecting the welfare of children exist for a reason. That reason isn’t that becoming automatically makes you a good decision maker. If it did? Legions of folks wouldn’t be bearing the internal and external scars of no one putting their needs first.

On Being A Considerate Parent -- Originally posted at The Angry Black Woman

So I got into a conversation with someone on LJ who was determined to pretend that they knew how to be a real American. For a whole host of reasons that schtick gets on my nerves. When it comes from someone who is willfully ignoring social and historical context it really annoys me. But, this post isn’t about that person. I know, not what you expected right? No, this post is about their friend who ran to not only defend their bigotry, but to tell me all the ways I was getting being black wrong.

Not just in the actual post (which was stupid enough for three lifetimes), he also decided to private message me and went on for some time despite me saying repeatedly that I wasn’t interested in his BS. Cited credentials for telling me to change my approach to life included knowing POC and having sex with at least one at some point in the past. The exchange (which is long and kind of creepy) can be found in my Livejournal if you want to hurt yourself. But really, it doesn’t include anything new. It’s more of the same old patriarchal imperialistic BS encased in concern trolling (no, the perpetrator is not who you just thought of) and only upsetting in that way that happens when there’s someone creepy talking to you and they won’t go away, but you’re not in the mood to make a scene.

In other words, not scary enough for screaming, but annoying enough to make you hostile. Pro tip: If you say something like “That’s not really (insert ‘ism here), this is really (’ism) and people like you are just taking things too seriously/being professional victims/part of the problem because you’re living in the past” chances are excellent that the conversation isn’t going to go anywhere good. Now I know someone’s going to say “But I’m just trying to help. If we could all just look at these things logically and not get so emotional then we could solve the problem. There’s no reason for you to get so angry.” That’s just concern trolling 102. The mindset that lets you tell someone they should turn off their emotions in order to discuss an emotional issue is so privileged that it boggles my mind. Granted, I’ve noticed that such comments come most often from people who don’t have a dog in that particular hunt, and so they think they know everything about how to handle it. But as someone with a (metaphorical) dog? None of my hunts have room for bystanders. Whether I’m discussing, race, class, misogyny, or even the parenting issues that come hand in hand with having a special needs child I don’t have the time or the inclination to give up the emotions that have me so invested in fighting the good fight. I need that fuel to keep going, because otherwise wading through whatever hot mess is in front of me would wipe me out. When you’re a bystander it’s easy to turn away from the issue and rest, because it doesn’t affect your day to day life. But for the people it does affect? There is no rest from it (other than perhaps death) because it is a integral part of their life and they must deal with it every day in order to navigate the world. So you can either shut up and listen, or just shut up.

You’re certainly free to run your own experiments (elsewhere!), but don’t be surprised if you find yourself getting the rough side of someone’s tongue for saying stupid shit and not listening. I know if you try this on me, I’ll mock you, I’ll talk about you, heck I might even talk to you…but I’m not changing a thing. Not just because I’m stubborn (though I am) or even to prove a point (though it will) but simply because I already know that the source is a bad one and should be ignored. I learned a long time ago to distrust anyone who wanted me to ignore the reality of my life because it made them uncomfortable, or because they wanted me to join them in their fantasy world. I think we need a concern troll Bingo card in the worst way. Possibly one for each ‘ism though I suspect that we could just play find and replace with key words in these conversations and it would be the same basic set of invalidating lines. Someone commented elsewhere that my latest troll sounded like an abuser, and I had to laugh because I’d already drawn the comparison in my head, and then debated whether or not it was hyperbolic before pointing it out in one of the messages. Granted no one’s come to blows (yet), but it sure felt like that stage where the abuser tries to make you doubt yourself enough for them to weasel their way in and hurt you in the name of ending racism love.

Shut Up Creep or Why I Don’t Care What You Think I Should Do -- Originally posted at The Angry Black Woman

So, there’s this thing happening in the black American community (and outside it) where women who look like me are supposed to be grateful for any crumbs that happen to fall into our bleak little lives. Apparently, our lot in life is to be miserable unless some rich educated black man wants us. We’re struggling to survive on our own in a world where we might have to actually be self supporting and self loving, and we don’t even have the good sense to realize that it’s impossible to be happy with ourselves as long as we’re not reflecting the picture society expects. After all, such stellar catches as Kobe Bryant, Tiger Woods, and Michael Jordan have opted to seek out women of a…lighter persuasion rather than black women.

It’s questionable enough that anyone believes that three dudes who wouldn’t understand fidelity if it walked up to them and sat in their laps being unavailable to black women is supposed to be a clear indicator that black women aren’t valuable. Erm, how to put this politely? Oh right, I’m not in a mood to be polite so I’ll just say flat out I wouldn’t touch any of those cats with my worst enemy’s vagina mmkay? I have standards for the men in my life that include things like trust, respect, and at least a vague grasp of human decency. For the record? I’ve been married twice. The first time was a hot mess in that way that can happen when you’re 21 and too dumb to read the big flashing neon signs that say “Leave this dumb bastard alone” but my current marriage? Loving it. He’s black, educated, and has a good relationship with his mother. It wasn’t hard to find him (I wasn’t even done with my divorce when I met him as a matter of fact) and he has never expected me to be someone else. He loves me for me. I love him for him. That’s our big secret. We’re not unique in this respect either. There are plenty of happy black couples (married or not) out here leading their lives without feeling the need to resort to a Stepford process for either partner. That’s before we get into what it means to be LGBT and unable to legally get married in a lot of places. Newsflash: Not every black woman wants a man. And even for the ones that do? Marriage isn’t necessarily their first priority.

Now, let’s take a second to be real on the topic of marriage. The institution grants certain legal protections and rights, but it doesn’t guarantee a happy couple or even a long lasting relationship. For further proof on that topic feel free to check out the relationship history of the three celebs I’ve already mentioned along with Swizz Beatz, everyone on Basketball Wives, and most of the rest of the modern world. That 50% divorce rate has nothing to do with the flaws of black women and everything to do with the reality that people get married for the wrong reasons to the wrong people everyday. As societal panaceas go, marriage has never really been all that effective despite the hype about the good old days. In the good old days, women got stuck in horrible relationships, men brought home social diseases, and everyone wished they had way out that was socially acceptable and didn’t result in life long poverty. So, let’s drop this idea that marriage has ever been the institution to grant us a stable society. It can’t even grant a stable relationship. And really, if we’re going to harp on the value of marriage? Let’s make it available to everyone instead of offering up expensive substitutes and insisting marriage only has one meaning. If some pop star can get married for 56 hours and the institution still have meaning in the aftermath of that quickie divorce? It’ll be just fine.

This phenomenon doesn’t just rear its ugly head around our love lives though, we’re also supposed to hate our hair, our skin, even the shape of our bodies, and we’re supposed to strive to achieve behavior patterns that are in direct contradiction to our personalities as soon as someone hints that they find us too strong/abrasive/angry/loud or whatever other bullshit excuse they can trot out as part of the effort to denigrate and demean every facet of our existence. After all, we do insist on wearing our hair the way it grows out of our heads, and choosing colors and styles that highlight our skin tones as well as displaying our bodies in ways that we find flattering. I mean, whoever heard of someone wearing a sleeveless top indoors in the winter? Oh wait, I lift weights (and kids) on a regular basis and I also wear short sleeved or sleeveless tops most of the year too. Because they’re comfortable and I like them. And really, what gives anyone the right to police our bodies as though they don’t belong to us? Whoops, I forgot I’m supposed to be begging everyone else for their approval as part and parcel of my experience right? Right.

Except that’s not ever going to happen and the fact that a lot of people are assholes isn’t a reason for black women to turn themselves inside out. It is a good reason to ignore the assholes and keep going about the business of life. Yes, even with “nappy” hair, my natural eye color, and an ass that makes skinny jeans self-destruct I am happy to be a black woman. I love myself, and I love my life even if someone says I’m living it wrong. Instead of finding new ways to insist that to be a black woman is to be miserable, how about celebrating all those unique qualities that are inherent in our shared existence? Oh right, that would require putting down all those ‘ism’s people love to cling to wouldn’t it? I guess if you can’t give up the sexism, racism, and classism then we’ll just have to learn to live with the hate and keep doing our own thing.

On Being A Black Woman and Happy With It -- Originally posted at The Angry Black Woman

The recent incident with the Arizona elementary school mural and the city councilman who hated it with his racist, racist ways got me to thinking about how it always feels to me that no matter how many minds I change via this blog or through personal interactions, it still may not be enough. There are too many people who are mired in their mindset and never have it challenged because of where they live, or who they associate with, or whatever. It might be possible to write those people off except they have children, and they teach those children either directly or by example. And the cycle continues.

So how do you combat this? One of my thoughts was that if we could teach young people about the concepts we discuss here — privilege, unpacking the knapsack, the different levels and manifestations of prejudice, bias, and bigotry — could we give them the tools to combat them or, at least, change on an individual level?

I know such efforts occur on a college level. I have a piece in a book about key debates around race (though I’m not sure when that book is coming out). Though I wonder if this is too late? Or even enough?

Kids in elementary school deal with or perpetuate bias, so shouldn’t we start with them? Of course, kids that young might not be able to fully grasp concepts of privilege (adults seem to have a hard time). What I envision is a multi-step, multi-grade curriculum designed to teach different aspects of anti-prejudice thinking and behavior appropriate to the age level. Elementary, middle school, high school, then college. You’d have two tracks — one for kids who progress from one level to the next, starting in elementary, one for kids in middle and high school who get these lessons for the first time. As far as college goes, I think every school needs to have a mandatory freshman class on Understanding the Other.

This learning scheme will not only be about race but also gender as well. And higher level materials will also include sexual orientation, class, religion, and more. And there should be discussions and lessons for kids who are likely to be the target of prejudice on how to deal with it effectively. I would also love to see materials for kids of color that specifically deals with intra-POC relations. because it’s not as if there aren’t issues there, too.

There are three aspects to this curriculum that I see as key.

1. Books. We need different ones for each learning level as well as teacher materials and activities. While my choice would be for each child to have a book they can keep, it might be more effective to aim for each school getting books they can re-use.
2. An online component. Since there are always new essays, blog posts, and amazing discussions online, there should be a repository for links or full text that teachers and students can also access. This way the books won’t have to be updated as often, but the curriculum can remain fresh. I feel a wiki would be the most useful in this regard, as that would make it easy to categorize posts, articles, and essays and make interconnections between them.
3. Independent teachers. As much as I would wish that existing teacher could implement this curriculum, I know this would not always be the case. For many schools, it might be more useful if outside teachers came in and taught during one class period — perhaps for the one devoted to social studies? — for one week twice a year. Obviously the optimal situation would be throughout the year and all the time. But you have to start somewhere. The teachers wouldn’t have to be full-time in this case. Professionals who get the training necessary and could take a week off from their job or part of the day for a week to teach. I expect this would work best in any area where the program is just getting started.

To get started on something like this one would, of course, need money. We’ll need folks to come in and help design the curriculum for each age level, we’ll need folks to write, design, and print the books and materials, we’ll need teachers. And since all the news I hear about public schools is how people keep taking their money away, I assume that the best strategy for getting this into schools is to offer it at no cost. So, privately funded.

The whole time I was thinking about this, I was sure that I can’t have ever been the only one with this idea. And someone must have implemented it somewhere. i’d love to know, if anyone out there is aware of such things. I’d also like to know how they pulled it off, what the results have been for the kids.

This idea and the structure I’ve envisioned may not be perfect or exactly right. But it’s an open source idea. Build on it, improve it, whatever. What I want the most is for people to get together and make it happen. How? I am not even sure. I’m willing to have someone tell me. Or even just to go out and do it. I don’t need to spearhead.

Thoughts?

Get Them While They’re Young: An Idea Toward Creating An Anti-Prejudice Future -- Originally posted at The Angry Black Woman

So apparently this month is LGBT Pride Month. I therefore snagged this from ontd political which gives the info that it was first put together by students of Earlham College and then link-enhanced by the current poster. Do I need to mention the part where ‘phobic assholes of any kind will be summarily deleted and banned? Oh who am I kidding? Homophobic, transphobic, any ‘phobic assholes of any kind will have their comments summarily deleted and be considered for banning depending on the severity of the offense. That having been said…on with the show.

I can be pretty sure that my roomate, hallmates and classmates will be comfortable with my sexual orientation. (Example: “Gay bulling in schools ‘common’” – BBC | Campus Climate for LGs – The Task Force).

If I pick up a magazine, watch TV, or play music, I can be certain my sexual orientation will be represented. (Example: More gay characters on TV now than before – Variety | LGBT Character Shows May Lose Tax Credit – SD G&L News).

03. When I talk about my heterosexuality (such as in a joke or talking about my relationships), I will not be accused of pushing my sexual orientation onto others.

04. I do not have to fear that if my family or friends find out about my sexual orientation there will be economic, emotional, physical or psychological consequences. (Example: PFLAG Rejection Statistics – PFLAG)

05. I did not grow up with games that attack my sexual orientation (IE fag tag or smear the queer). (Example: From Bullies to Heroes: Homophobia in Video Games – Student Pulse.)

06. I am not accused of being abused, warped or psychologically confused because of my sexual orientation. (Example: “Camp that ‘cures’ homosexuality” – Times Online.)

07. I can go home from most meetings, classes, and conversations without feeling excluded, fearful, attacked, isolated, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance, stereotyped or feared because of my sexual orientation. (Constance McMillen Wanted to Take Her Girlfriend to the Prom, So the School Board Canceled it – CBS News.) It’s also worth noting that CBS probably chose the worst picture of her to pair with that article. It’s hard to say if that was motivated or not.

08. I am never asked to speak for everyone who is heterosexual.

09. I can be sure that my classes will require curricular materials that testify to the existence of people with my sexual orientation. (Example: Banning Gay Books – Alternet).

10. People don’t ask why I made my choice of sexual orientation.

11. People don’t ask why I made my choice to be public about my sexual orientation.

12. I do not have to fear revealing my sexual orientation to friends or family. It’s assumed.

13. My sexual orientation was never associated with a closet.

14. People of my gender do not try to convince me to change my sexual orientation.

15. I don’t have to defend my heterosexuality.

16. I can easily find a religious community that will not exclude me for being heterosexual. (Example: Homosexuality and Religion – Religion Facts).

17. I can count on finding a therapist or doctor willing and able to talk about my sexuality. (Example: Rekers and the Barbarism of Anti-Gay Therapy.)

18. I am guaranteed to find sex education literature for couples with my sexual orientation.

19. Because of my sexual orientation, I do not need to worry that people will harass me. (Largest Ever Study on Anti-LGBT Harassement – GLSEN).

20. I have no need to qualify my straight identity.

21. My masculinity/femininity is not challenged because of my sexual orientation. (Examples: Are Gay Stereotypes true? – ABC).

22. I am not identified by my sexual orientation.

23. I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help my sexual orientation will not work against me. (Example: ‘Doctor Shock’ – Huffington Post.)

24. If my day, week, or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it has sexual orientation overtones.

25. Whether I rent or I go to a theater, Blockbuster, an EFS or TOFS movie, I can be sure I will not have trouble finding my sexual orientation represented. (Example: Before ‘Bruno’: A brief history of gay characters in movies and TV – NY Daily News).

26. I am guaranteed to find people of my sexual orientation represented in the Earlham curriculum, faculty, and administration.

27. I can walk in public with my significant other and not have people double-take or stare. (Example: Kiss Off: A gay couple cited for holding hands on Main Street Plaza – Salt Lake City Weekly).

28. I can choose to not think politically about my sexual orientation.

29. I do not have to worry about telling my roommate about my sexuality. It is assumed I am a heterosexual.

31. I can remain oblivious of the language and culture of LGBTQ folk without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.

32. I can go for months without being called straight. (I suppose this depends on where you are and who your friends are.)

33. I’m not grouped because of my sexual orientation.

34. My individual behavior does not reflect on people who identity as heterosexual.

35. In everyday conversation, the language my friends and I use generally assumes my sexual orientation. For example, sex inappropriately referring to only heterosexual sex or family meaning heterosexual relationships with kids.

35. People do not assume I am experienced in sex (or that I even have it!) merely because of my sexual orientation. (Example: GLBT Stereotypes – GLBT Social Sciences).

36. I can kiss a person of the opposite gender on the heart or in the cafeteria without being watched and stared at. (Example: Is Main Street USA Ready For Gay PDA – ABC News).

37. Nobody calls me straight with maliciousness. (Example: John Mayer’s Apology Wanted for Use of Gay Slur – Aceshowbiz).

38. People can use terms that describe my sexual orientation and mean positive things (IE “straight as an arrow”, “standing up straight” or “straightened out”) instead of demeaning terms (IE “ewww, that’s gay” or being “queer”).

39. I am not asked to think about why I am straight.

40. I can be open about my sexual orientation without worrying about my job. (Example: Bias in the Workplace: Consistant Evidence of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Discrimination [.doc download] – UCLA).”

Can you add more?

Linkspam: Unpacking the invisible knapsack Straight privilege edition -- Originally posted at The Angry Black Woman

At WisCon this year I participated in a panel called Writing the Other: Shout-Outs wherein the panelists named fictional properties they liked where the writers(s) wrote characters that were “other” to them. Not just white people writing POC, but also able-bodied people writing disabled characters, men writing women, etc. We had a great time on the panel giving each other recs and getting them from the audience. And I thought this would make a good regular post here on the ABW.

Each month we’ll have an open thread where people can list and discuss books, short stories, TV, movies, and comics where the writer(s) successfully wrote the Other. List as many as you like (just watch out for adding too many links, else the spam catcher grab thee!) and tell us why you think that media is a great example of writing the other.

To get started, here are some of the books and shows mentioned at the panel. Big thanks to coraa for posting this list on her journal.

• Richard Morgan’s Black Man, published in the US as Thirteen
• Peter Straub, The Hellfire Club
• Gwyneth Jones, Life
• Tananarive Du, The Good House
• Tobias Buckell, “In The Heart of Kalikuata”
• Tamora Pierce, Circle of Magic and The Circle Opens, Daja and Briar
• Alexander McCall Smith, Ladies’ #1 Detective Agency (and the TV show)
• Nnedi Okorafor, She Who Fears Death
• “The Pirates of Dark Water” (TV)
• “The Closer” (TV)
• “Dexter” (TV) (there was some lively discussion on this one)
• “Leverage” (TV)
• Catherynne M. Valente, The Orphan’s Tales
• “Gargoyles” (TV)
• Adrian Drake, Null Void
• Okasha Skat’si and Susanne M. Beck, The Growing
• Karin Lowachee, Gaslight Dogs
• China Mieville, Un Lun Dun
• Robert V. S. Redick, Rats and the Ruling Sea, published in the US as The Ruling Sea
• Justina Robson, “Silver Screen”
• Jon Muller and Krista Brennan, Virtuoso
• Maureen McHugh, China Mountain Zhang
• Kathryn Erskine, Mockingbird
• Ursula LeGuin, Powers series
• Elizabeth Moon, Remnant Population and Speed of Dark
• “Avatar: The Last Airbender” (TV) (not, as many people emphatically pointed out, the movie)
• “She-Ra” (TV)
• “Lincoln Heights” (TV)
• Samuel Delany, Babel-17
• Mike Shepherd, Kris Longknife
• Shannon and Dean Hale, Rapunzel’s Revenge

Leave your shout-outs in the comments or co-sign any of these.

Writing The Other Shouts-Outs – June 2010 -- Originally posted at The Angry Black Woman

Adviser for Americans arrested in Haiti suspected of Child Trafficking in El Salvador. So am I supposed to believe they just happened to find someone connected to human trafficking and hired him? Don’t answer that. In other “I hate the world” news this shit right here? Prime example of what happens when groups get so focused on their pet interest that they throw all logic and common sense out the window. The reality is that abortions are not happening because Planned Parenthood exists. Long before Margaret Sanger was a notion in her mother’s eye women had ways to end a pregnancy. And they did so (and still do so) for a lot of reasons having nothing to do with race, though as with everything else racism does play a part in the underpinnings of some of those reasons.

First up, there’s the purely financial aspect of things. We live in a country that begrudges people a living wage and health insurance. For some reason these are viewed as things you have to earn, and if you don’t manage to secure them then it’s all your fault for not using those magical boostraps. Never mind pesky details like limited educational opportunities, a sagging job market, and the overall lack of boots or straps that plague much of our population. Attitudes toward public assistance are ugly and filled with all sort of ridiculous myths about recipients. Especially recipients of color. That Welfare Queen schtick is alive and well along with an idea that more money = better parents. Not true.

Then there’s the reality that not every relationship that produces a child is a safe healthy long term one. That’s not exclusive to any race, but the reality is that a WOC in an abusive situation is going to have an even harder time getting help. And more kids can make it harder to leave. And of course there’s the simply reality that not every pregnancy is a wanted pregnancy for a whole other host of reasons. But hey, why let facts get in the way when you can fin all new ways to pretend that WOC don’t love their children. After all, if they breed them but can’t feed them then the answer is to steal save them right? Right. Oh wait, I was supposed to be outraged at the idea of abortion wasn’t I? Sorry, I reserve that emotion for stupid manipulative ad campaigns that ignore reality.

Evaluating the Outrageous -- Originally posted at The Angry Black Woman

So this whole thing with Chris Matthews “forgetting that Obama is black” falls into that same range of racism as “Pretty for a black girl” and the “You’re not like those other black people” claptrap often espoused by the “I’m not racist, but…” crowd. They’re coded as compliments, but the subtext is still an ugly one that frames racism as being the fault of the oppressed. After all, if we’d all just be a credit to our race then our problems would go away right? Right. Oh wait, no that’s completely wrong.

Let me give you a quick history lesson on American race relations and what can happen when black people in this country are just going about their business. We can start with Rosewood, Florida. Now let’s move on to Tulsa, Oklahoma, and of course the riots that broke out right here in Chicago. What’s that? Oh, you think the early 20th century is ancient history? Okay. Let’s talk about a Baptist church in Selma, Alabama. Still too far in the past? Okay. Let’s come forward to cases like Lenard Clark’s or Abner Louima’s. Or this one on New Year’s Day 2010.

This incidents are as much a part of America’s racial history as the “I have a Dream” speech, traffic lights (invented by Garret A. Morgan, peanut butter, open heart surgery (successfully pioneered by Dr. Daniel Hale Williams), and all the other positive moments like the election of President Obama. I’ve heard people that claim to be colorblind (or post-racial) insist that the future hinges on seeing people without including race. Of course their future seems very…pale with some of the same people complaining about the continuing existence of institutions like the NAACP, HBCU’s, and other organizations that predate the Civil Right’s Movement.

I’ll buy that part of the problem is the failure of our educational system to teach history comprehensively, but that’s not the only reason for these attitudes. America’s efforts to “transcend” race are still about America’s efforts to forget the past entirely and of course to ignore anything happening right now that might require confronting reality. Racism isn’t going to go away as long as we try to pretend that ignoring race is a solution. The idea that race is something for POC to overcome is the equivalent of buying racism a new costume to replace the old hood.

Transcending Race…A History Lesson -- Originally posted at The Angry Black Woman

So, you want to help? Great. Here’s a list of charities. However if you feel the need to sound anything like Pat Robertson I’m going to need you to go sit down somewhere and be silent. The last thing anyone needs after a crisis is the bigots swooping in with lies to bolster their racism. And after all the things that have been done to Haiti over the years in the name of U.S. Foreign Policy the last thing they need is white American missionaries handing out condemnation and vilification in the guise of help. Aside from the major logical flaws in these arguments; what makes anyone think offering a helping hand in a crisis is dependent on approving of someone’s religious or social status? Oh wait, if you think that way then you’re a bigoted asshole. Stroking your ego by paying lip service to the idea of assisting victims while bashing them for some imagined sin isn’t true charity or particularly Christ-like. If you’re going to claim to be a Christian you might want to act like one.

On Haiti, Helping and Hurting -- Originally posted at The Angry Black Woman

To start, I’m sure many of you have seen or heard about the YouTube video of the black dude who shows that the webcam on the HP MediaCenter does not track his face but does track the face of his white co-worker. The vid is here, in case you haven’t seen. It’s pretty funny, too, because the dude (Desi) seems like a fun guy. When he says “I’m going to go on record and say HP computers are racist” you know he’s mostly joking, though it is really messed up that the camera doesn’t recognize his face as a face.

Now, this vid was uploaded to YouTube (ironically using the HP MediaCenter) on December 10th but it took a few days to really blow up around the ‘net. HP caught wind of it a couple of days ago and put up something on their blog mentioning lighting conditions and they were working to solve the problem and whatever. But that hasn’t stopped tons of commenters on blogs and Twitter and Facebook from declaring that HP is racist or, at least, its webcams are.

I find myself in a strange position here, because I’m about to say something I don’t normally say: people, there’s not racism here.

That’s not to say there isn’t a problem and a serious one. But it’s more along the lines of the stuff I pointed out yesterday with the digital frames. One of not thinking or considering, one of privilege and blindness, but I am failing to see how racism is involved.

Let’s back up a bit. In case you’re not sure what’s going on here technologically, there is a feature in some webcam software that is designed to zoom in on the face of a person looking into the camera. I don’t know why this feature is necessary, but obviously someone likes it. Anyway, Face Tracking is supposed to keep your face in close up no matter where you move within the webcam’s field of vision. It identifies what is a “face” by an algorithm I won’t even try to explain because I don’t know how it works. HP said something about measuring the distance between the eyes and cheekbones but, again, I have no clue. That is what Desi was trying to get to work in the video but could not.

The software behind all this is part of HP’s MediaCenter suite which looks like one big program all created by HP. However, that’s not exactly true. When I was playing around with the program I noticed that it was really similar to CyberLink’s YouCam software, from the way the buttons and settings menus were designed to the kinds of effects and avatars available.

It’s no secret that vendors often bring in third-party software then put their own branding on it. Why develop webcam software in house when perfectly good software already exists? You can find YouCam software on a ton of computers, not just HP, and you can also download it yourself. I put it on a computer of mine and tried the Face Tracking thing and it works the same. So, if anything, the software is “racist”, not the webcam and not the computer manufacturer.

Though HP probably did some testing to ensure that the software interacted well with their system, I doubt anyone at the company tested all of the features. That’s not their job, actually, that’s the job of the software developers. So if we’re going to look for culprits here, we need to turn our attention to CyberLink. I don’t know for sure, but I’m going to guess that the folks at CyberLink tested the Face Tracking with a few people, but either not with any dark-skinned employees (assuming they have some) or not in enough varying lighting conditions with said employees.

The webcams included with most notebooks and all-in-one PCs are not of the highest quality. They’re for Skype chatting and mking silly YouTube reaction videos or lip dubs. The brightness, contrast, and backlighting correction are rarely the best (I know, as I’ve tested dozens). And that’s where the software runs into problems.

Go look at this video, then this one. It shows that a simple change in the software’s settings makes the difference between the webcam being able to track the face of a dark-skinned person and not being able to. (Also note that different shades of dark skin make a difference, too.) So what’s the real problem here? It’s two fold: one, that the software developers didn’t properly take dark-skinned owners into consideration when creating the product. Two, that crappy webcams make everything worse in life.

Given all this, I don’t see racism here. I think this is a fine wake-up call for CyberLink or whoever actually made that software to expand their testing parameters. I am willing to bet that they probably didn’t take dark-skinned people into consideration, but I’m willing to be told I’m wrong. If they didn’t, it’s probably because all of the developers on the team were fairer-skinned (which doesn’t mean white. The webcam works fine for East Asian and light-skinned Black faces, for example). It’s looking more like a case of blindness due to privilege. Like I said, problematic, but not malicious or even unfixable.

For my part, I’m going to continue to enjoy the video that started it all. Because it’s damn funny. And though I hope people will stop just parroting the HP Is Racist line and start asking “Who made the software?” and “How can we get them to fix this problem?” I can’t force people to. Instead, I will just pop popcorn and watch the drama unfold.

On HP’s Racist Webcams (Or Lack Thereof) -- Originally posted at The Angry Black Woman