Affirmative Action

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=288313#288313

Here, LW, Merry Andrew and I had a mini-symposium of a racial issue. I remember when the event (Bill Cosby's rather pointed disagreement with Donahue about his blackness) caused a minor racial hullabaloo.

This would be neat for related discussion, as well, I thought.

I'm with you Sofia. Why? In part because (like many) I've had this issue front and center since the mid-'50's and watched the changes in vocabulary (often very good changes, some frivolous) used, themselves, as a tools of prejudice and rejection. One should avoid using words as weapons, I think, and avoid assuming that not knowing the correct label connotes inherent prejudice...

On the other hand, I'm always puzzled about (though used to) the insistence on acknowledging differences, AND GETTING THE LABELS RIGHT!, I don't like it, particularly these differences among fellow citizens don't seem particularly relevant to the situation at hand. So I'd want to start this exploration by asking, When is it important to acknowledge differences, and when it is irrelevant? When is it important to get the label right, and why? Does it follow, when an elderly person or a foreigner unfamiliar with the latest acceptable labels uses a passe or newly-deemed politically-incorrect label, that s/he is inherently prejudiced? Or simply out-of-date? And again I ask -- isn't the habit of labelling self and others a little excessive and asking for trouble? Am I always primarily "white" and then (gulp!) having gotten that over with, allowed to move on to other, more interesting things?

I'm gonna go back and reread the entire Antwone Fisher thread when I have time, but I just checked it to see what Bill Cosby said to Donahue and I'll tell you, Cosby has it right. He and I are about the same age -- parallel experiences -- maybe that's why I usually agree with him. Age indeed may play a huge role in this -- more on that later!!

I only hope that racial issues have become a minor part of our lives to the extent that we must always be on guard concerning discrimination and bigotry. I truly believe that we are making progress, but the ugly head of discrimination still rears its head now and then. It was rather disconcerting to learn that we still had housing discrimination in the San Jose area. According to the San Jose Mercury News, some managers of rental housing still treat minorities in negative ways; quoting higher rents or telling the applicant there are no vancacies. What surprised me the most was the fact that Asians suffered the greatest discrimination in our area at 22 percent. We must all be aware that prejudice is alive and well, and that each of us has a duty to challenge them. Ignorance in labels are not acceptable, but they are minor in relation to the realities that minorities must still live with discriminatory practices in this country. c.i.

Sofia- Very interesting. Cosby wanted nothing to do with the blackness issue.............but he thinks it is OK to to define himself by gender. How about "I'm the greatest "entertainer"![/b]

I'm thinking all of your questions are a great kick-off to a interesting discussion, Tartarin.

I think, when describing a criminal or victim of a crime, reference to their race isn't important, and shouldn't be used. There was an outcry from the black community years ago, centering around the media's reference to the race of perpetrators. I questioned this privately--wondering If the criminal was black--why not print it? Well, the bigger question is Why print it? What purpose does it serve?

Phoenix--
OH NO! One problem at a time!!! :wink:
I must admit, I strongly identify with my gender. I don't strongly identify with my race. I have never felt the urge to proclaim, "I AM WHITE!" But, I have proudly proclaimed my WOMANNESS. I wonder if thats in some way hypocritical...

Phoenix-- I may have misrepresented Cosby somewhat in my lazy shorthand on the Antwone Fisher thread. I want to clarify. Cosby indeed feels his blackness. He funds many black colleges, and is involved in programs that center on black issues and Civil Rights.

He just balked at being referred to as the best black entertainer. The way Donahue introduced him was limiting, and Cosby and I disagreed with it.

I think saying someone is the best black or Asian or Hispanic something is an unintentional--or intentional--insult, as if they can't or don't compete at the ultimate level with everyone else.

Sofia- No, I don't think that it is hypocritical. But think about it. In the US white is the primary race. Therefore, white people don't really have to think about it. But, as has been written, women are "The Second Sex". There are really many similarities about being black, and being women in America.......

I could not disagree more, Phoenix.

Women have far more power than blacks do in this country.

maxsdadeo- I think that I am coming from a place where I have seen the evolution of women over many decades. I don't want to hijack this thread, so maybe I will start another one on just this issue.

I dislike categories -- purely from my own experience. Having had suffragettes in the family a couple or three generations back, it seemed more liberated and liberating to throw myself into experiencing the world as both men and women experience it -- probably because I was brought up to "think like a man." It's certainly true of most women I know that their gender has taken on different meanings at different stages of life and many of them never experienced a hard time competing with men. A friend of mine (woman) who became an Episcopal priest had, on the other hand, one helluva time with the (male) church hierarchy. So there are glass ceilings throughout the world of work BUT (uh-oh, here's trouble) I think there are cases (albeit not the church hierarchy) where they are self-imposed. Note I say "some cases"!

In other words, there's are as many variations among women and their experiences as there are between women and men. It's interesting Cosby said "man," rather than "entertainer," but I can hear a woman, in the same circumstances responding in the same way. Context is everything -- the speaker's context no less that your (the observer's) social context. Yet another reason we have to be very careful about jumping on words and phrases. Because someone says "man," it doesn't always mean "not woman." I don't know about you, but when we talk about mankind, I include myself. I don't need any special wordings or specially constructed walker to move around the world. (Well, the walker is in my future, but not yet!)

It's possible that we are living in a society which, contrary to its self image, actively needs differentiation for some (possibly sicko) reason. I sense that may be the case, but would be interested in other views...

An interesting article:
Traffic tickets affected by drivers' race, gender and age
Bill Dedman and Francie Latour of The Boston Globe conducted a study of ticketing patterns in Massachusetts, using newly released data from the state. "On city boulevards and rural lanes, whites are far more likely than minorities to receive written warnings instead of tickets when stopped for identical traffic offenses ... And women, especially young women, get breaks that aren't afforded to men. The price tag for this unequal treatment amounts to an estimated $25 million a year in traffic fines and higher insurance premiums." An accompanying PDF file explains how they did the reporting and analysis.
link to: Race, sex, and age drive ticketing - Minorities and men least likely to receive warnings

In Michigan, they have rusty cars, bad chinese food, but good drivers.

In California, we have shiny new imports, good chinese food, and lousy drivers.

Coincidence?

I had mentioned this on another thread as a good possibilty. One of the first things we do with out children is teach them to make differentions between things. We teach them to respond to shapes, colors, etc.. Our entire concepts of numbers and letters (and as a result, words) is based on each having a different meaning/value. Everything we do is based on "What is the same?" and "What is different?".

It doesn't seem to be much of a leap to apply the same principles to ourselves. We seem to do it every day. Look at the personal ads in any newspaper. They list the desired gender, height, weight, eye and hair color, ethnicity, etc.. of potential suitors.

The seperation of doing that when it is necessary and when it isn't is the hard part.

I do remember, as a child, the elements being "taught prejudice," at home, at school, in the playground. Don't want to make myself out as some goody-goody pollyanna, and I certainly didn't backtalk when given those "rules" 'cause I knew about going along to get along, but I always thought they were weird and another strike against society (which I was against from the get-go -- genetic, I guess). I also remember the first time in my life when I was among people who let me out of that cage. Never looked back.

Keep talking, Fishin'! Particularly about the process of getting away from discrimination... I think there's a key in there somewhere. We might all want to remember our first encounter with people and/or situations which demanded we rethink classifications and separations...

The process of coming to perceive differences clearly has a developmental component. When my daughter was a wee one, she discovered the physical sensation of mildly biting her own tongue, and she said "Daddy, feel this" as she bit down again.

It seems to me this is undoubtedly an ongoing process involving increasingly sophisticated recognitions of differences AND SIMILARITIES, and, as in all human developmental characteristics, there is a great range evidenced in any population. A Klan member is not likely to found at the higher end of that potential range.

I remember that interaction between Donahue and Cosby, and it is a great example of the sort of sophistication I'm referring to.

I don't know about Canada, but in Britain (in my day) color wasn't noticed in a TV interview unless it was in connection with story about a race riot, or something like that. When I came back to the US after 20 years overseas, I had to "relearn" certain "noticings" -- it still drives me nuts.

Tartarin

I understand, I think. Imagine how nuts it must drive Cosby. He was the first person to be cast on American tv in the role of someone who was black only in terms of skin color - no other component of 'blackness' was written into that role. And that was more than thirty years ago. Of course, he's gone on now to achieve his doctorate in education. Very smart and cool fellow and if you and I find ourselves impatient with the rate of change on race issues in the US, god knows how he remains so level-headed.

Cosby took a lot of flack from the black vector for not featuring a 'traditional black family' on his show. He took great exception to that as well. It seemed attempts to smash him into a 'black' peg came more from blacks, than it did from whites.

He is quite a respectable figure, to me. He could have bowed to the pressure on either side. But, he said what he thought, damn the consequences. He said what he thought--and it never fell neatly into any particular political agenda. I have a great respect for anyone who does that.

Me too, Sofia. Reject categorizing, that's my shout! I trust people like Bill Cosby, just because they're thinking (and doing) for themselves.

And because he wrote "The Chicken Heart That Ate New York" !!Which, by the way, is about kids -- all kids, any kids, about the scary stories kids tell each other, and not about any particular ethnic or social or other group of kids. It's still one of the funniest things in the world.

BTW, his wife strikes me as a fully-fledged person, partner, and beyond-categorizing citizen of the intelligent world...