BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: GUEST,Richard Bridge waiting to lecture...
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 04:55 AM

Hope you are better soon Azizi.

IMHO it is better to reclaim your past and to be proud of it than to turn your back on it - in the same way the "new queer" movement has reclaimed past experience of homophobia.

But the situation of the black historical sailor was not significantly different from the white. Both were rigidly oppressed by their captains and by the economic and class structures of the time, and AFAIK the black sailor would not usually have been a slave.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Grab
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 09:01 AM

Re playing "older" music (like 40s and 50s), you don't hear too much white-created music from then either, unless you're really into that kind of stuff. Black or white, the 40s was the era of the big band, and that's not a style most folks today like.

Some older stuff survives the test of time - Jerry Lee Lewis, for example. Similarly Chuck Berry from black music of the time - plenty of folks play "Johnny B Goode", even if you might not hear the original. (You might ask how many black musicians would play "Johnny B Goode", though, and that's a valid question which I couldn't answer.) Mostly though, these are songs which are recognisably the precursors of modern pop and rock, and can still be appreciated with modern "ears".

And FWIW, white music isn't taught in schools either. You'll maybe get lessons in classical, but that pretty much stops at Beethoven and Mozart. You certainly wouldn't learn about Turlough o'Carolan, Glenn Miller, Buddy Holly, the Beatles or Bob Dylan. Nor would you be taught dances like the Charleston, waltz or foxtrot - I go to barn-dances fairly often, and hardly anyone under 70 knows a waltz step. Nor would you get instrument lessons unless your parents paid for them. So this isn't a uniquely black issue - white-originated culture also tends to forget its roots.

Maybe things are changing though? Certainly pop on the radio today is much more likely to feature people actually playing instruments, and older musical forms like the original "soul" style are being revived. This is a change from the last ten years that saw white people picking up the black styles of turntablism, mixing and rap. This to the extent that Tim Westwood, an upper-middle-class rich English kid, adopts a fake inner-city black American accent. Incidentally, Sasha Baron Cohen's "Ali G" character and his "is it cos I iz black?" approach were lampooning that "wigga" fakeness, not black culture itself.

For the further past though, it's not too surprising that black Americans wouldn't know about sailing traditions. Black sailors would be more likely to integrate into poor-white society or back into their African roots - their experiences wouldn't get back to black Americans.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: SINSULL
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 10:04 AM

A thought:
There are black chantey singers. Here is one group:
http://www.coresound.com/fa-menhaden.htm


I wonder if the proportion of Caucasian Americans who know anything about chanteys/shanties is any higher than the proportion of blacks. I remember a review of Johnny Dep's CD after the Pirate craze began. The reviewer suggested that someone ought to look into the history of shanties as if Dep had discovered something new.

This type of music holds limited appeal to a limited number of people. Struggling Maritime festivals prove that out.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Azizi
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 01:38 PM

s&r, thanks for posting the meaning of "forebitters".

For anybody else reading this who may not have known that, here's a link to an archived thread that includes information about forebitters:

thread.cfm?threadid=37548#524756

What is a Shanty

-snip-
There's a looong list of related Mudcat threads under that title.

**

Sinsull, here's the hyperlink to the URL that you posted:
http://www.coresound.com/fa-menhaden.htm

-snip-

In the interest of helping to make sure that the summary statement found on that website is preserved, I'm going to post it here and on the archived Mudcat thread about shanties whose link I just posted.

Menhaden Chanteymen Worksong Singers Beaufort [North Carolina]
updated Jan. 9, 2006

"For more than a century, folklorists and ballad hunters have mined the North Carolina mountains for folksongs and traditional crafts, virtually unaware that such treasures could be found in abundance along the watery byways of the coast. Many of the richest folk traditions in the state are associated with maritime occupations, or "working the water," as people say.

In the town of Beaufort, in Carteret County, commercial fishing enterprises have long operated fleets to net huge catches of menhaden, or shad fish, as they're more commonly called by the local fishermen. In processing facilities along the water, the fish are converted to a remarkable variety of uses, from feeds and fertilizers to paints and perfumes.

The ship-board crews employed by the fisheries have been predominantly black over the years, and the work assigned to them has been physically demanding. Menhaden are caught by quickly encircling large schools of fish in two small "purse" boats, which surround the fish with their nets. This purse seine must be pulled tight or "hardened," drawing it in from the bottom in order to capture the fish and lift them to the surface of the water. A special "scoop" net then brings the catch to the hold of the main fishing vessel. Since the mid-1950s, this work has been performed with the aid of hydraulic winches and lifters; prior to this time it was done by hand. As it was not uncommon for a catch to exceed 100,000 fish, hardening the net required great strength and coordination on the part of the crew.

To help ease and pace this extraordinary labor, the men sang "chanteys" or worksongs. Generally a leader would sing out the first line of the song by himself, to be answered with another line sung in harmony by the rest of the crew. The songs or lines were drawn from many sources, including hymns and gospel songs, blues, and barbershop quartet songs, and were often improvised.

Folklorists Michael and Debbie Luster, hired by the North Carolina Arts Council in 1988 to survey the folk culture of Carteret County, were fascinated by what they'd heard of the chantey-singing tradition. They arranged a gathering of about a dozen retired fishermen, hoping that a few might be able to recall verses or even perform some of the old songs. Though they had not sung together in more than thirty years, the singers found their parts with ease. The lines were recollected almost effortlessly when they began to pantomime the action of working the net.

The great success of the venture persuaded the men to accept an invitation to perform in public at an event sponsored by the North Carolina Maritime Museum, in Beaufort. This reunion concert brought misty eyes to the audience and singers alike, and renewed the pride of the community in these beautiful sounds that once rolled across the water.

Since that memorable occasion, the Menhaden Chanteymen, as they like to be called now, have been constantly in the public eye. They have performed for the North Carolina General Assembly and the National Council on the Arts, appeared at Carnegie Hall, and have been featured on national television and radio. And every Friday night they gather at the parish house of St. Stephen's Congregational Church in Beaufort to sing for themselves and to share the fellowship wrought by decades of rugged camaraderie at sea."
-snip-
updated Jan. 9, 2006

{visit that website for additional pages and a photo]

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 01:39 PM

Bobert commented,

White is made from combining all of the basic colors: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet... You mix them colors allo together and you get white...

Black, howver, is an absence of color..

Irrelevant. NOBODY here is really white, in the sense of what you said, and NOBODY here is really black in that sense. Take me, for instance: I'm a sort of a mottled pinkish color. I've never seen Zeez, but I'd bet she's some shade approximating the color brown. And so what?

My biological forebears were all from Germany, but I don't think of myself as "German-American". I'm not culturally particularly German. I'm an American (United-Statesian?), who shares a lineal background going back to Germany at a certain period, but even that doesn't say much, because Germany contains (and did then) a lot of mixed streams of peoples going back to ancient, ancient times.

If "African-American" means that one's United States biological ancestors came at some point from Africa, then all of us in the US are "African-American", just because we're homo sapiens.

But of course none of that really relates too much to Azizi's thought, problem, whatever you want to call it. I think she's said pretty much that what she's talking about is more rooted in the culture she has a great historical stake in than race as such. If I'm wrong, I stand to be corrected.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Azizi
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 02:22 PM

It occurs to me from reading this thread and reflecting on some of its posts, that much if not all of my "problem" is that which others probably {most assuredly?} have had in different contexts at Mudcat-
when, how, how often, and how much does a person who cares deeply about a subject respectfully share information that differs from an opinion that another person has given. I think that these questions are even more pertinent when the person who differs or wants to share information sees herself or him self or considers herself or himself {and perhaps also is seen by others to be} an "insider"-meaning she or he is the only one or one of few people who has a certain kind of direct experience or inside information about that which she or he wants to talk about.

In other words [gee Gulliver, you've made me aware that I really can be longwinded; that's because of my Sagittarius Sun, Mercury, and Jupiter placements :o)] I'm not the only person on Mudcat who feels strongly about a particular opinion, or position, or culture. But unfortunately, most times I've been the only African American person and the only person of color {which is a catch-all category which includes African Americans} to post on threads about race. Given my temperment and my interest, I do feel a considerable degree of "protectiveness" about African American cultures. There have been comments that I've disregarded, and some that I chose to respond to. The reason why I respond on the record-within that thread-is because as I've mentioned previously, I'm mindful of the fact that people can access Mudcat threads in months and years to come, and I don't want information that I conside to be erroneous or incomplete to be out there and not contested.

Also, I admit, that I feel a certain degree {perhaps too much} responsiblity to add to the record in situations when I am posting to a thread and a comment comes up that I feel needs to be addressed. I admit that I don't want future readers to think "How could that Black woman continue posting to that thread and say anything about what has been said?.

However {And}, I'm also very mindful of the fact that what should always be most important is the message and not me. What I mean by this is that I should be very careful not to add information to a thread or differ with a person because of self-promotion.

Well, every now and then I feel I can promote my website, http://www.cocojams.com/. But that's a different kind of self-promotion since that website is about sharing and preserving cultural artifacts, and isn't really about promoting me.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Bill D
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 02:25 PM

I saw the Menhaden shanty group in Mystic, Conn. a few years ago. They were quite a hit, and did several demos of play-party games, as well as the songs they sing on the job.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Azizi
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 02:34 PM

Correction:

I meant to write:

Also, I admit, that I feel a certain degree {perhaps too much} responsiblity to add to the record in situations when I am posting to a thread and a comment comes up that I feel needs to be addressed. I admit that I don't want future readers to think "How could that Black woman continue posting to that thread and not say anything about what has been said?.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Peace
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 02:40 PM

The question is not why you have to (and should, imo) reply to those types of posts, Azizi. The question is why those types of posts appear here at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Azizi
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 03:04 PM

Well, Bruce, it depends on the meaning of "those types of posts".

When I and others consider the posts to be racist, sometimes I feel the need to respond to them, sometimes I wish others would-and you and others have-and sometimes I and others report those kind of posts to the moderators who delete them.

But my post which questions when, how etc to respond refers to the times when other people post a comment about Black people and Black culture that I disagree with or which I feel can be misconstrued.

I also need to say that I feel that the fact that I'm usually the only publicly acknowledged Black person or person of color} posting on a Mudcat thread-or one of a few Black people and other people of color- is further complicated because I am learning so much about that aspects of Black cultures from other folks here {such as the discussion about chantey singers and discussions about blues}.

I don't want it to seem as though I think that I am {or other people think that I think that I am} Mudcat's expert on Black cultures.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Azizi
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 03:26 PM

It also occurs to me that I started another Mudcat thread which is pertinent to this thread. Here's the link to that thread:

thread.cfm?threadid=88950
BS: Responses To Racism

Here's an excerpt of my first post to that thread:

BS: Responses To Racism
From: Azizi - PM
Date: 19 Feb 06 - 01:34 PM

I'm back!
...

First, I would like to thank all those who wrote public and/or private messages to me about my decision to leave Mudcat.
I very much appreciate all of those messages.

I had decided to leave Mudcat because I felt that I was blindsided by what was -in my opinion- a particularly offensive post by a Mudcat member. The thread's title appeared to be one that had nothing to do with race or racism. The offensive post was the thread's first comment. After that first comment, most posters on that thread ignored the offensive comment and talked about issues related to that thread's subject. However, at least one member commented about the racist comment before I posted my comment.
After I wrote my comment, several other persons posted comments that also spoke out about that first comment.

In hindsight, I believe that if I had not had a particularly traumatic day at work, I may not have reacted as I did to that post. But my work is often traumatic, so perhaps that is not the reason.
I just think that I had one of those moments when it all became too much. As I said in my post that was deleted along with the rest of that thread, what bothered me more than the racist comment was the fact that most people ignored it. [btw, there was absolutely no allusions-that post was openly racist]

Ignoring racist and otherwise offensive posts may be the perferred strategy for Mudcat forum's members. I admit that this is the tactic that I usually use. Most of the times, I don't even open a BNP thread, or other such threads. But I'm wondering now if the practice [policy?] of ignoring such post might not send a message that Mudcat doesn't mind racism.

Furthermore, deleting the responses to that racist posts may mean that teaching & sharing moments were lost. But since the offensive post was the first one in the thread, would my comment and others speaking out against it make sense if only the first comment and not the entire thread been deleted? Should the first post been deleted and the thread declared closed? That is not my call to make.

But I wonder what folks here think should be the appropriate response when I and others are confronted with racist and offensive remarks.

If we email Joe and ask that the thread be deleted or closed, then if we feel the need or the desire to share our feelings about this experience in the public forum, where should we do that? Maybe some people might think that sharing a personal response to racism shouldn't be done at all on this public forum. However, I disagree.

That's the main reason why I'm back. I feel the need to talk to 'Catters about my response {reaction?}to that offensive post and the lack of comments in the thread about that post. I should say that a number of members have PMed me to say that had they seen that post, they would have responded on that thread. I thanked them privately and I want to thank them publicly.

And perhaps I should say what should go without saying-I have talked to people in the real world outside of Mudcat, about this experience. But I feel the need to know what 'Catters think about this. Should people ignore offensive posts? If so, what about the feelings those posts cause? I think that ignoring them would be unhealthy. And what about sharing feelings and insight about these types of experiences with the community at large? Isn't there some value to that?

I guess I could have stayed gone. But I like it here. And as some of you have said in your PMs to me, the racist poster would win if I decided to leave because of him.

So here I am...

Thanks, again. You all know who you are.


Azizi

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Peace
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 03:47 PM

'Well, Bruce, it depends on the meaning of "those types of posts".'

I mean racist posts. Those people should go get stiffed.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 04:03 PM

The posts by Gargoyle are still here or have been returned. Azizi, they are complimentary (in gargoyle's peculiar style).

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 04:41 PM

I think this thread could use some relevant musical content. So here is a YouTube clip of the Carolina Chocolate Drops, who are currently on a short tour in Ireland, England and France. (There is a thread about it up in the music section of the Mudcat.)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 04:45 PM

Also including gigs in Scotland Holland an d Belgium. (I don't want to start one of our arguments about that kind of stuff...)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 04:50 PM

Certainly there is great interest in Afro-American shanties..and people who are in the shanty community so to speak are probably pretty aware of contributions...I remember a Seattle Public Library record that had a wonderful group of African American men doing at least one shanty I listened to over and over..maybe Don's sister in law Ph. could resurrect it..it was so great...a roll song...not rolling home..not ...well, I might think of it. I was unaware of the "cunjine???sp??" songs that required a special step for muscling bags of sugar up or down the gangplank. Lots of the rivershanties.

Then we get into the railroad songs...but if we have several generations now of people who think "it is not black enough" and ridicule each other if they sing "I've been working on the railroad"...we have a problem. Let people like what they like. I love lots of music from the African heritage..sppirituals, the South African group singing..the Jamacain..oh I guess not African...but lots and lots..even I don't mind non-nasty rap music..I will say I can not listen to jazz without getting into a nervous feeling like I am about to have an epileptic fit..it jangles my nerves something awful...but to each his/her own. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: robomatic
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 04:56 PM

Bobert writted:
"
White is made from combining all of the basic colors: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet... You mix them colors allo together and you get white...

Black, howver, is an absence of color...

So to all my white friends here: you is da' colored people!!!

If I recall some old recordings of George Bernard Shaw, he was fond of referring to his fellow islanders as 'pink' and of course for a musical angle there used to be a group in the US Northwest called: "The Amazing Pink Things"

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 04:58 PM

"Pale" and "dark" are much more accurate terms.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 05:01 PM

Pink is not accurate for most. In my family, we have a range of colours from fair to tan, almost all of us freckled which leads to a kind of mottled mix of skin tones. My arms are covered with freckles so much they are a myriad of shades.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 05:14 PM

Hells bells what relevance does the actual colour have? Focussing on that is to trivialise the whole thing.

There are a set of people who have been systematically marginalised by a society.

A person of that descent has the willpower to say that this society, the 'cat, repeatedly appears to reflect (albeit in I hope a less strident form) that marginalisation, and to diminish reflections on it.

For shame.

We do not have to imagine racism where it does not exist, if it does not so exist, but let us think before utterances that may rankle.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: M.Ted
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 05:15 PM

Azizi realizes something that very few of the others here seem to understand. Posting to Mudcat is makes it part of "The Permanent Record". It isn't just that Mudcat discussions are are a record preserved for the indefinite future--Mudcat threads are always in the first few Google results when the keywords match.

This came up first, for instance, when the search terms were "people of color, difficult":

BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color From: Mrrzy Date: 25 Feb 08 - 09:45 AM One question, Azizi - are you an American? ...
www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=108931&messages=6 - 33k - Cached - Similar pages


Though that excercise seems a bit like stacking the deck, the fact is that, if you take keywords from any current thread and google it, the thread will come up, not only for you but for any one of the Millions of daily googlers who happen to type them in.

So logic dictates that, if the subject of a Mudcat thread is important to you, that you want to make sure that all the important points are made, and that inaccuracies, distortions, and false statements were properly refuted.

That's what it's about.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Rowan
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 05:24 PM

For the further past though, it's not too surprising that black Americans wouldn't know about sailing traditions.

This reminded me of a conversation I had with some local folk musicians I met while living in South Carolina around 15 years ago. I had been singing some Oz songs and some shanties and they commented that they didn't know of any shanties 'from the South'. Without missing a beat I launched into Roll Alabama Roll. I might be wrong about its specific provenance (being from Oz and all, but they didn't correct me) and I didn't get into others that deal more directly with the cotton trade from the South but I was surprised this one wasn't right near the tops of their heads.

Perhaps the things that are intimately familiar to us (but not very problematic), when growing up, are not 'top of the pops' in our thinking much later on. This would be epecially true if those things were ones we were trying to change into something else that was 'better'.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: curmudgeon
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 05:59 PM

The CSS Alabama was a Confederate warship know for it's proclivity for sinking New England ships. It, n turn was sunk by the USS Kearsarge. The song commemorates this final action and would not have been looked kindly upon in the South, had they a clue about the history.

This reminds me of a friend who served with the USAF Pipe Band back in the 60s. While somewher below the Mason-Dixon line, they were asked, "Can y'all play a Southern tune?"
Whereapon the band struck up "Marching Through Georgia." No one got it.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 06:28 PM

"would not have been looked kindly upon in the South." Not if your sympathies were with the secessionists. But I'd imagine that wouldn't be likely to include too many of those people in the South whose ancestors at the time were slaves.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Rowan
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 07:04 PM

"Can y'all play a Southern tune?"
Whereupon the band struck up "Marching Through Georgia."

Well, ignorant as I was (being from Oz and all), I knew better than to play that one in South Carolina. But it reminded me of the little old lady who lived next door to us when we were in Columbia. At 83 she was the epitome of southern graciousness associated with the "white" part of antebellum society and, being keen to meet these Australians living next door, she invited us to (what we'd call) afternoon tea.

I thought I knew all the terms, factual and euphemistic for the American Civil War (you know, "Agressions from the North", "War between the States" etc) but she floored me with a new one; "The late unpleasantness". In 1993!

The people who were providing us with accommodation there also thought of themselves as untainted with 'racially-derived' attitudes and were kindness itself. To show us the route from home to USC (the original, not the Californian pretenders) they drove us in their car for a few trips and then I used a bicycle we'd been loaned. It seemed a rather roundabout route but it wasn't until I acquired a map (a story in itself) that I discovered a much more direct route. The direct route went through suburbs dominated by African Americans, while the one they showed us went through suburbs where more money was in evidence.

Perhaps they were trying to protect us but I often walked the direct route with my 15 month-old daughter in a pusher (what's called a stroller in the US) and I never had anything other than a pleasant conversation with those I met; I rarely met anyone, let alone someone with whom a conversation was possible, in the other suburbs.

Which I found interesting. And relevant to this thread.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: meself
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 08:35 PM

Richard - Your post of 27 Feb 08 - 05:14 PM is admirable.

"what relevance does the actual colour have? Focussing on that is to trivialise the whole thing."

And that of course is the point of the posts in question ...

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 09:10 PM

But Azizi has a point that ought not to be trivialised.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 09:14 PM

The merit of "Dark" and "Pale" rather than to "Black" and "White" is to remind us that most people are at the same time darker than some other people and paler than others. And of course some people who are counted as "Black" are paler than others are counted as "White", and the other way round as well.

Because, of course, it isn't about colour of skin as such, at least in theory. That's why Hispanics in the USA can be any colour. It's about ethnicity, or what is perceived as ethnicity, and about the treatment some ethnic groups have had imposed on them over the years and the centuries.
.................

What Azizi said, about the way that the history of slavery and what came after can perhaps predispose African Americans against seeing the past as something they want to value, makes lot of sense.

I was reminded of what I have heard about how, at one time anyway, aspects of Jewish culture associated with Eastern Europe, including the Yiddish language and Klezmer music, were by some seen as things to be rejected, as too painfully linked with the Holocaust. And I think there are other examples of a similar process.

That would suggest that in time there could be a reawakening of interest in the African American musical heritage, as appears to have happened in other groups with painful histories. (And that's one reason I put in that link to the Carolina Chocolate Drops, who seem to represent that kind of process - though my main reason was because they make great music, and deserve to be brought to wider attention.)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 09:53 PM

Someone else was going on about pink. I don't like being called pink or white same as some don't like being called black, as in my former son-in-law who calls himself mahogany. One can check any of my many posts throughout my time on Mudcat to find I am no racist.

Re' down South. I have a friend from Pennsylvania who has also lived in Rhode Island for much of her life. She and her husband moved to a smallish town in N. Carolina a few years ago. She told me the other day she can't count the number of times she's been called a "damn Yankee" with a followed reference to the "war." Amazing how much people will hang on to such hatred.

I wonder if we will ever get away from labels. I asked my daughter about this recently since she has twin boys who are of mixed race. I asked her if they identify with the father's ethnic background more then hers or vice versa. They live in an area with what the officials term a majority of minorities...African Americans, Puerto Ricans, and all kinds of mixes. She told me by and large, she and her friends who are parents, grandparents, etc. just identify their kids as all being part of the human race. They are not being raised to identify with any one ethnic identity. It's difficult to describe it the way she did, but it seems to be a pretty healthy way with less discrimination, while still enjoying the cultural diversities that come with it. I guess one would call it a multi-cultural upbringing which is reflected throughout the community, including the schools, businesses, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 09:57 PM

One other note, I am uncomfortable using the term "mixed race." It doesn't seem accurate. My grandsons are half Antiguan of African descent and half American of English/Irish/Scottish/Native American descent.

I also want to reword the following: They live in an area with what the officials term a majority of minorities...African Americans, Puerto Ricans, and all kinds of mixes.

They live in an area in which minorities are in the majority.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: meself
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 11:52 PM

"But Azizi has a point that ought not to be trivialised."

Exactly.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Janie
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 12:15 AM

From Richard's 5:14 post of today:

We do not have to imagine racism where it does not exist, if it does not so exist, but let us think before utterances that may rankle.

No, we do not have to imagine racism where it does not exist, but the fact is that sometimes happens. It is called projection.   Although I am not responsible for some one else's projection, I can understand the hows and whys that it happens. When that some one else "speaks their truth", which I perceive to be projection, says 'end of conversation', and walks out, slamming the door behind them, they have just left me holding their bag of garbage. All I can do at that point is drop it in the can to be pushed out to the curb on Thursday morning.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: meself
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 12:23 AM

'When that some one else "speaks their truth", which I perceive to be projection, says 'end of conversation', and walks out, slamming the door behind them ...'

I can't think of anything that would be further from what Azizi has done in this thread ... Did I miss the post where she said 'end of conversation' and walked out, slamming the door?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Ebbie
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 01:10 AM

Not really relevant here but I found it interesting:

Today I turned the television on just in time to hear a researcher inform a Black man that according to US freedmen records, his forebears had been enslaved by the Chickasaw nation, not by Whites. The Black man sat there stunned; after a moment he said that he doesn't even know what to think about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Megan L
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 03:38 AM

Count your blessings

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 04:12 AM

I didn't know the Chickasaw nation ever operated any slave ships from Africa.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Azizi
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 06:38 AM

I believe that there often is a cumulative, straw that broke the camel's back effect that occurs when I {and/or any other individual} respond to comments or actions that "bother" me {him/her}.

I started this thread in reaction to certain comments made by two posters in another thread whose link I provided upthread. In retrospect, it probably wasn't fair to those posters for me to provide that link in the first place. Also, my then not referring specifically to the comments that they raised or linking to those comments may have compounded that mistake. My not doing so may have caused some people to suspect that these posters' comments were something horrendous and deeply offensive. However, while I was and I am very troubled by those comments, I don't think that they were "horrendous and deeply offensive". Actually, it was difficult for me to pinpoint and to put into words what troubled me about those comments and why I was so troubled. It's taken me some time and several tries to realize and to articulate this.

In hindsight, I believe that it would have been better for me to have started this thread and not referred specifically to any posts or any thread that was the impetus for me starting this thread. Because of this belated realization, I apologize to both of those posters.

I have exchanged pms with both posters who wrote the comments that I took exception to. In both cases, the posters pmed me first, and I responded to them. I did not think that the pms that I received or sent were argumentative or hostile. As I said, or at least meant to say on this thread, I absolutely do not believe either one of these posters are racist. I also don't believe that I am racist. Yet we are all products of our cultural upbringings and experiences. Given all sorts of reasons, I may be misunderstanding the points that those two posters made, and either one of them or both of them may be misunderstanding me.

I believe that it would compound the problem if I posted excerpts of or links to the comments from those threads which bothered me. Needless to say, I will respect confidentiality and not post the content of pms. People who might be interested in reading those comments in the context of the rest of that thread are free to visit the thread in question.

However, for the matter of the record, although it may seem to be out of context, I feel the need to say this:

I believe that Black people in American societies have been and to a large degree still are measured by idealized White standards of speech and conduct. According to those Eurocentric standards, Black people are acceptable and good to the degree that they {we}approach the most idealized White standard.

I believe that Eurocentric standards are racist and I believe that they are deeply rooted in American society. Part of this once overtly pervasive and still deepseated viewpoint is the belief that light skinned Black people are more acceptable than Black people. According to this racist viewpoint, lighter skinned Black people are more acceptable to White people than darker skinned Black people not only because their skin color and, perhaps, their hair texture, and facial bone structure is closer to that of the pale skinned, Nordic White person {who is held as the ideal White person in physical characteristics}, but also because light skinned Black people are assumed {by virtue of their skin color} to have a better chance of "talking and acting White". In other words, those who hold this erroneous, simplistic, racist viewpint believe that Black people who are light skinned and Black people who are dark skinned act {and talk} differently. According to this deep rooted belief system, the darker a Black person is the more ghetto he or she will act {with "ghetto" here not only meaning the worse that a person could be and could act, but the worse that a Black person-or any other person-could be and act and still be considered a human being}. Indeed, some people still do not believe that Black people are people.

Furthermore, another-or perhaps the same-deeply rooted racist belief in the United States that one rarely hears now in our politically correct communication, is when Black people of mixed Black/White biological ancestry excell, it is because of "the White part" of their biological ancestry.

I want all races/ethnicities to be valued and to receive the same consideration, respect, and treatment under the law, and in all other aspects of life by all people.

Given the viewpoint, Barack Obama is acceptable to White people because, these people think, he's not that dark skinned, he "talks and acts White" and his birth mother was White.

Note: the quotation marks are not quotes from the posts that I referred to. Instead, I've put these comments in quotation marks to designate that these comments are not what I believe, but are commonly given sayings.

My concluding statement is this:

I want race to be a non-issue. I do not want Black people or any other people of color to be acceptable to White people only to the degree that they are preceived by White people to talk and act in a manner that has generally been called "talking White" and "acting
White".

I believe that the "talking Black" and "acting Black" and "talking White" and "acting White" memes are stereotypical in their essence as Black individuals talk and act a myriad number of ways at different times and in different contexts, and so do White individuals. In my opinion, given the deeply woven European ethnocentrism of the United States*, embedded in those commonly used phrases is the belief and implication that "Black is bad" and "White is good".

*I've limited my comment to the USA, but suspect that this is true elsewhere.

Again, I am writing this because I feel the need to do so. I accept that this may be seen by some to be muddying the water more than clearing the air, and if so, I'm sorry about that.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Azizi
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 06:49 AM

Correction to my cut and pasting:

The sentence "I want all races/ethnicities to be valued and to receive the same consideration, respect, and treatment under the law, and in all other aspects of life by all people." was supposed to be the first sentence of my concluding statement.

However, that sentence bares repeating.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: MaineDog
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 07:40 AM

there you go!

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Big Mick
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 10:04 AM

I believe this thread, in the long view, will be one of the more valuable Mudcat threads. It is a virtual smorgasbord of modern day responses to racism. It demonstrates clearer than any song, or single essay, that racism, and racial/cultural misunderstanding, is alive, well, and completely misunderstood by most folks. We see in one place the code words, the class guilt, the trivializers, the do gooders wanting to save folks, we see those folks who are trying their best, with varying degrees of success, to understand and grow ........ and one brave, and well spoken, woman who cares enough to try, with great grace, to explain a very difficult subject. I applaud her.

I once made the observation to her that she brings a unique perspective to this place. In addition to expressing some frustration with that (in a very gentle way), she also indicated that she tries to focus less on what things are, and more on the how and why of it. I would suggest to all that that is such a valuable perspective that we need to appreciate it. It really isn't much different than when we hear the folks that lived in the North of Ireland under those conditions, or the folks who lost loved ones in IRA bombings. These things are so valuable because they allow us to dump our perceptual biases and generalizations, and see through the eyes of friends who have walked the path. It brings enlightenment, and ultimately can lead to a more balanced look at the world.

I appreciate your stepping out front on this, Azizi. I appreciate your motive, and I recognize the difficulty of it. I admire the strength you show in defending your right to express and value yourself based on the traditions, values, and the culture of those who came before you. I am grateful to you for taking your time to try and explain and educate those of us whose backgrounds are different.

Great thread,

All the best,

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Peace
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 10:12 AM

I find Azizi's posts to be quite considered and reserved. I have seen (read) some instances of racism--usually prompted by ignorance, but on occasion malice--that have been thrown Azizi'a way. I guess until ya walk a mile in her shoes it is difficult to understand the feelings that must engender. The instances, a dozen or so, remain in my memory. Mostly those folks have gone away or now they post as guests.

Reality is a perception, but perceptions generate their own reality, too. To deny what Azizi feels is to deny her reality on a few occasions here on Mudcat. And having read the posts myself, I agree with her. This place IS difficult for 'People of Colour'. But, it's getting better.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 10:17 AM

McGrath, not slave ships, slave owning. Many of the American Indian nations had wealthy members, landowners who owned slaves. Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Natchez, etc. I won't try to characterize the conditions, same or different from white slave ownership, but there are accounts if you wish to find them. This was generally prior to when the U.S. stomped down on the Southeastern tribes and "removed" or relocated them to tribal lands in Oklahoma and elsewhere.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 10:19 AM

I believe that Black people in American societies have been and to a large degree still are measured by idealized White standards of speech

English as a language is subject to standards of spelling and grammar that are not white or black, but originate in an agreed set of rules as expressed in the Oxford English Dictionary and elsewhere. The ability to communicate in English in an articulate fashion is subject to these same standards, and is the product of education, awareness, and intelligence. Those who consistently display an inability to communicate clearly and articulately are considered, in my opinion, ignorant and uneducated, and sometimes stupid, whether black, white, rich, poor, and regardless of their background. For any one in an English-speaking culture who wishes to be clearly understood and who wishes to succeed in any endeavor, a mastery of the language has always been a strong tool to that end. Obama understands this, I believe.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: artbrooks
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 10:20 AM

Hummm...this may launch another entirely different set of discussions..

Azizi says: I believe that Black people in American societies have been and to a large degree still are measured by idealized White standards of speech and conduct. According to those Eurocentric standards, Black people are acceptable and good to the degree that they {we}approach the most idealized White standard.

Very true, but perhaps a bit limited in scope. IMHO, all people in the US are measured by standards based upon those held by the minority group that we hate to refer to as WASPs - that is, White Anglo-Saxon Protestants. Not to trivialize the oppression experienced by the citizens of this nation who are of African descent, just about every other group who has come here over the centuries has experienced discrimination to one degree or another, and the extent of that discrimination increases in direct proportion to their deviation from that WASP norm. It decreases as they move toward that norm (i.e., become "Americanized") and, I think, actually increases if a group tries to maintain their socio-ethnic distinction and separation. Where Black Americans are more disadvantaged in this process than most other groups is in their physical distinctiveness; that is, even if he or she conforms in dress, speech and manner (and please understand that I'm not saying they should), a very dark skinned person with short "kinky" hair is going to stand out more than a fully assimilated, third generation Bulgarian. In most cases, unfortunately or not, those who stand out are shut out.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 10:22 AM

As Stilly said, many slaveholders were native americans. In Oklahoma, for this reason, most tribes fought on the side of the Confederacy in the Civil War.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Peace
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 10:23 AM

Sorry, Mick. I hadn't read your post when I pressed submit. You said it much better.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: M.Ted
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 11:12 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 11:15 AM

My point was that the essential element in allowing slave-owning to have a place in North America was the existence of the Atlantic slave trade. The fact that slave owners included Native Americans, and indeed some people of African descent, as well those with European roots, is interesting, and it is right to bring it to the attention of people - but it's a secondary matter.

None of us have any part whatsoever in the actions of our ancestors, bad or good. The kind of shame (or pride) which seems to claim that we do is misplaced. And it can be a distraction from the responsibility which every generation has in relation to the crimes of the past, which is to try to undo the evil effects which may carry on into the present, and to learn lessons from the past and apply them for the future.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Azizi
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 12:45 PM

There are so many Mudcatters and people outside of Mudcat who have done so much more than I have to fight for an advance the cause of equality for all. If starting this thread, and posting my thoughts to it have helped advance that cause, good. However, I didn't start this conversation because I had that lofty goal.

Also, I feel the need to say that the points that I've been trying to make in this thread are different than those points that I tried to make in the Response To Racism thread. {Btw. isn't it interesting that those threads were starting a week and two years apart from each other? That certainly wasn't planned}

In that Response to Racism thread, the question I raised was how members of a community should respond to overtly racist commentary. The comments which that the impetus for this thread were more about how people perceive persons of different races, and the misunderstandings that may occur via the written word between people of different races.

That said, since this thread focuses on racism, in the next two posts that I submit to this thread, I'm going to take the liberty to add the words of Hilda Fish-another Mudcatter who is a person of color.

I haven't seen any posts from Hilda for a while. And I didn't ask her prior permission to repost her comments on this thread. However Hilda Fish had given me permission to repost her comments on a page on my website about race & racism. {I've since retired that page to focus that website on rhymes, chants, cheers, and "non-traditional" personal names}. Given her previous permission, I don't think that Hilda Fish would mind me reposting her comments on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Is Difficult For People Of Color
From: Azizi
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 12:47 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Responses To Racism
From: hilda fish - PM
Date: 19 Feb 06 - 08:05 PM

Azizi I'm back too but just for a min. I've already posted you about my anger re racism at another time and I just need to say a little more on this. It hurts it hurts it hurts. Sometimes I just have to grab my throat to stop the sob. Ultimately that's what it's about whether its print, internet, face to face, whatever. It breaks the heart. I find that there is a point where I have to withdraw I am so enraged. It's no good ignoring stuff in the hope it will go away. It doesn't as history shows. Confronting and challenging it wherever it pokes up, like ripping out a bad weed before it kills the garden when it's too late, is my answer. And by the way black is what we have all become who are not 'white' - many Indigenous people are neither 'black' nor 'white' in looks but are black in psychology and the impact historically and in the day to day of racist comments, attitudes etc. ultimately kill the hope of our children from the instant they are born. It's a bit of a platitude to say to develop a thick skin - my people have done that in order to survive and still it hurts. The 'thick skin' response is also a form of denial of racism and how it impacts on many people in this worl. Its not just that we get a bit sulky you know. It puts most of us on the bread line, homeless, uneducated, unemployed, dispossessed in more ways than can be said, dying horrible deaths. It's not afternoon tea. Racism is racism - it is not anything else. Anti-racism is not feminism - it is not communism, it is not left thought. It is something I demand or my fellow human beings make a stand on in order that we are not so continually demeaned as a group. See, here I go again!!! It rips my heart out and it makes me wild! I can never ignore it and I am embarrassing and obnoxious often enough in my attempts to grab it's head and rip it off. I stutter and stammer for words but I will not let anyone get away with it if I can help it. Thick skins I think we have a plenty wouldn't you agree Azizi? It's the heart that is always human. It breaks and breaks. Racism!! If I could just grab hold of it, take it to the river and drown it I would be a happy person. As a famous Oz once said, I luv yoos all, but not some.xx