Recently in Racism Category

Danah Boyd gave a thoroughly thought-provoking presentation at the Personal Democracy Forum this week about how the politics of class play out online -- and thoroughly debunked the idea that the Internet is a Utopian paradise in which we are "all equal."

To get specific, Boyd looks at the divide between Facebook and MySpace users. She quotes Kat, a 14-year-old from Massachusetts:

"I'm not really into racism, but I think that MySpace now is more like ghetto or whatever, and Facebook is all... not all the people that have Facebook are mature, but its supposed to be like oh we're more mature."

That's right, a "ghetto." Boyd goes on to note that teenagers from wealthier backgrounds are more comfortable engaging in "adult" environments than teenagers from poorer backgrounds -- hence wealthier teens are probably more likely to favor the "mature" social networking site, Facebook. And here's the part where I am just going to quote from Boyd's analysis extensively, because she is so freakin' smart:

The fact [is] that MySpace is still quite popular among a certain segment of the population. Only a month ago, I was doing fieldwork in Atlanta where I found heavy usage of MySpace among certain groups of youth. They knew of Facebook but had no interest in leaving MySpace to join Facebook.

Herein lies the reality that makes all of this quite messy to deal with. It wasn't just anyone who left MySpace to go to Facebook. In fact, if we want to get to the crux of what unfolded, we might as well face an uncomfortable reality... What happened was modern day "white flight." Whites were more likely to leave or choose Facebook. The educated were more likely to leave or choose Facebook. Those from wealthier backgrounds were more likely to leave or choose Facebook. Those from the suburbs were more likely to leave or choose Facebook. Those who deserted MySpace did so by "choice" but their decision to do so was wrapped up in their connections to others, in their belief that a more peaceful, quiet, less-public space would be more idyllic.

This dynamic was furthered by the press, an institution that stems from privilege and tends to reflect the lives of a more privileged class of people. They narrated MySpace as the dangerous underbelly of the Internet while Facebook was the utopian savior. And here we get back to Kat's point: MySpace has become the "ghetto" of the digital landscape. The people there are more likely to be brown or black and to have a set of values that terrifies white society. And many of us have habitually crossed the street to avoid what is seen as the riff-raff.

The fact that digital migration is revealing the same social patterns as urban white flight should send warning signals to everyone out there. And if we think back to the language used by teens who use Facebook when talking about MySpace, we should be truly alarmed. Those who are from privileged backgrounds tend to be far more condescending towards those who are not than vice versa. Many of us in this room come from privileged worlds where we want to "help" those who are not well-off. Here is where a privilege-check is necessary. How often do our language and mannerisms reflect a problematic level of condescension? Perhaps we should look at our teens. They are certainly speaking in a manner that reveals distrust and condescension.

The case of Ricci v. DeStefano involved 17 firefighters who had taken the qualifications exam to become firefighters. All passed, all were white, but one Latino, and the city invalidated the test because they feared a racial discrimination lawsuit. The court found that this was essentially "reverse" racism and violated Title XII.

The ruling yesterday to overturn Ricci v. DeStefano was another bad decision in a series of bad decisions by the SCOTUS that will have implications for communities of color, women and poor people. Legal Momentum tells us why,

The Court created a new, more stringent standard for employment discrimination claims in striking down the New Haven Fire Department's attempt to ensure that its promotional exam did not discriminate against Black and Latino candidates. We believe that the standard articulated by the Court reflects a flawed interpretation of Title VII and is contrary to congressional intent.

Irasema Garza, President of Legal Momentum, stated: "Employment discrimination continues to be a major problem. To this day, women and minorities remain egregiously under-represented in many employment sectors. Astoundingly, the Court's decision acknowledges this fact and yet requires employers to avoid policies and practices that would help to remedy this discrimination. This decision will make it far more difficult for women and minorities to get good jobs in fields that continue to exclude them, such as firefighting, and for employers to eliminate barriers that have proved discriminatory in their effect."

Further, as a supporter of Judge Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court, Legal Momentum strongly disagrees with those who might use the Court's decision to imply that Judge Sotomayor and her colleagues in the Second Circuit erred in their ruling below. The Second Circuit panel of which Judge Sotomayor was a part acted with appropriate restraint in applying the precedent as it existed at that time. The matter before the Supreme Court involved issues of first impression and the Second Circuit's opinion was consistent with the views of four Justices on the Supreme Court as well as with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Justice.

Also, what about the possibility that Alito was also racially biased in making this decision? As Adam aptly asks at Tapped, why is racial discrimination only considered an offense when it is women or people of color being biased against whites?

After the news tha the remaining five defendants of the Jena 6 case were getting a plea deal today, we find that they pleaded no contest to misdemeanor simple battery, sentenced to seven days probation and fined $500 plus court costs. Color of Change's Executive Director James Rucker said:

"The story of the Jena 6 was an extreme example of what can happen when a justice system biased against black boys operates unchecked. But it's also an example of what can happen when hundreds of thousands of people across the country stand up to challenge unequal justice. Together, we drew the country's attention to this case and raised the money necessary to fund a strong legal defense."

This is great news.

Via AP, we find that the the Lousiana courts are anticipating reaching a plea deal today with five of the six black students from Jena High School in Lousiana who were being outrageously being charged with attempted murder, the outcome of a series of racist events which in turn led to a huge civil rights movement against the charges. Here's a good sum-up of what happened:

The only thing that's outdated in the video is that the sixth defendant, Mychal Bell, ended up pleading guilty in December 2007 to a misdemeanor second-degree battery charge and was sentenced to 18 months in jail.

There's no doubt that the movement that arose out of this injustice led to the plea deal expected to be made today, but we're not sure yet what that lesser charge will be. We'll keep you posted.

Related:

The Jena 6.
Jena 6: Mychal Bell Conviction Vacated
Jena 6 Information and Day of Action
Um, wow.
Jena 6 Revisited
Still awaiting justice in Jena.

I saw an amazing panel yesterday about some different local struggles and their connections to global climate change. Two of the most affecting:

Elisa Young, a 7th generation Appalacian, is part of Meigs Citizens Action Now. She talks about the coal-fired power plants in her area and how they are affecting so many people's health. She's had cancer herself and has lost friends and neighbors to a range of other cancers thought to be caused by close proximity to so much CO2 emissions. Some tests estimate that folks in the area are being exposed to 341 million pounds of sulfur dioxide a year--unprecedented and highly dangerous levels. Young's own family has deep roots in the coal industry, but she says it's time to get real. New plants are planned, which would bring nine power plants in a ten mile radius.Young says: "There's a lot of denial involved. How do you admit that your job is going to kill you? That your job is going to give your kids learning disabilities? You have to put on those blinders so you don't go insane."

Then Lee Sprague talks about how the Little River Band of the Ottowa Indians are also being affected by coal-fired power plants. He introduces himself: "I am a member of the former majority. I am from the territories, currently occupied by Michigan and parts of Canada." He's part of Clean Energy Now. He says that the levels of mercury in women in his area are more than twice that of women in other parts of the country. He shows a picture of his little son, who was in the hospital for quite awhile because of breathing problems, thought to be connected to the power plants in the area. If you live in Michigan, definitely check out their work. They have lots of easy ways to get involved immediately. Check out this inspiring video of a young activist, Lee's daughter!, speaking at a rally:

I'm at a summit today in Detroit, Michigan on environmental justice--specifically looking at climate change. It's an issue that I'm learning more and more about thanks to one of the amazing subjects for my book, Nia Robinson, who is the Executive Director of the Environmental Justice and Climate Change Initiative.

In short, the environmental justice movement (formally born in the 80s, traced back to indigenous Americans by some people), is aimed at calling attention to the ways in which low income people and people of color have been disproportionately affected by environmental issues (toxic power plants are often built in low income areas, those most vulnerable to the effects of global warming are in the Gulf South etc.). Hurricane Katrina was the most obvious recent example. Like feminism, environmental justice is based on looking at intersections--race, class, gender, environment, economics etc.

The whole community is really excited. A new report out by the Obama administration takes climate change seriously and a climate change bill is in the works. All of this is in anticipation of Climate Conference in Copenhagen in December.

One of the sponsoring organizations of this summit is WEDO--Women's Environment & Development Organization. An excerpt from their mission statement:

Today, WEDO recognizes that policy commitments alone are not enough to improve women's daily lives. That is why WEDO is collaborating more deeply with Southern partners on implementing global policy gains at the national level and holding governments accountable to their commitments on women's rights.

Climate change is the talk of the town today in Washington as the American Clean Energy and Security Act is up for a final vote in the House of Representatives.

President Nicolas Sarkozy says that burqas are "not welcome" in France, and supports a ban on women wearing the burqa in public.

[He] said the Muslim burqa would not be welcome in France, calling the full-body religious gown a sign of the "debasement" of women.

In the first presidential address to parliament in 136 years, Sarkozy faced critics who fear the burqa issue could stigmatize France's Muslims and said he supported banning the garment from being worn in public.

"In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity," Sarkozy said to extended applause at the Chateau of Versailles, southwest of Paris.

"The burqa is not a religious sign, it's a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement -- I want to say it solemnly," he said. "It will not be welcome on the territory of the French Republic."

Banning the burqa doesn't further women's rights - it limits them. Now, obviously there's a difference in Islamic women's dress from the hijab to the burqa - but legally banning any of them erases all agency from Muslim women. (I'm especially wary of Sarkozy's comments and this potential ban given that France banned headscarves from public schools in 2004.)

If you're interested in hearing Muslim women talking about the hijab, here are a couple of interesting vids.

UPDATE: Jill has more.

Related posts: Only citizenship for some: France denies citizenship to Muslim woman
Malaysian women speak out on hijab

Samhita mentioned this in her What We Missed post yesterday, but I want to address it more fully.

From Talking Points Memo:

According to local law enforcement, three people posing as police officers forced their way into the home of Raul Flores in Arivaca, Arizona, about 10 miles from the Mexican border, on May 30. They shot and killed Flores and his nine-year-old daughter, and wounded Flores' wife. The three, Shawna Forde, Jason Bush, and Albert Gaxiola, were arrested and charged last Thursday and Friday.

This happened this past weekend.

After Dr. Tiller was murdered, and the guard at the Holocaust Museum was shot and killed, discussions have been afloat about how during more liberal administrations, right wing violence (of the white supremacist and anti-choice variety) tends to go up. The Department of Homeland Security even issued a report about it. For those of us in my age bracket (I'm 25), this is a really new phenomenon. It's been a long time since I could remember a liberal administration--I was pretty young when Clinton was president. This type of violence, often linked to white supremacist and anti-government organizations tends to increase when individuals believe the government is being run by the left. I can only imagine what Obama's presidency is doing to fuel their fire.

The issue of immigration reform has allowed for a new crop of anti-immigrant groups to enter the mainstream dialogue, even though many have ties to hate groups with violent records. One of the perpetrators in this crime in Arizona, Shawna Forde, has been liked to the anti-immigration group FAIR. Here is a video where she is listed as a representative of the group:

We can't let white supremacy and hate mascarade as legitimate politics through the guise of immigration "reform" just like we can't let it slip into mainstream dialogue about women's rights or the right to choose.

For more links to responses from the blogosphere, see the FIRM blog.

I wish I was shocked by this.

A prominent South Carolina Republican killed his Facebook page Sunday after being caught likening the First Lady to an escaped gorilla.

Commenting on a report posted to Facebook about a gorilla escape at a zoo in Columbia, S.C., Friday, longtime GOP activist Rusty DePass wrote, "I'm sure it's just one of Michelle's ancestors - probably harmless."

When taken to task for the racist comment - and after killing his Facebook page - DePass said, "I am as sorry as I can be if I offended anyone. The comment was clearly in jest."

Yeah - ha fucking ha.

Via Michelle Obama Watch.

Serious props to NPR's Nina Totenberg today. Rather than simply reporting about "concerns over Sotomayor's temperament" or allegations that she's a "bully," Totenberg actually compared audio clips of questions asked by Sotomayor and those asked by her male colleagues -- or those who would be her colleagues if she is confirmed for the Supreme Court. And -- SURPRISE! -- Sotomayor is no "meaner" than your average justice. She is just femaler.

Judge Guido Calabresi, former Yale Law School dean and Sotomayor's mentor, now says that when Sotomayor first joined the Court of Appeals, he began hearing rumors that she was overly aggressive, and he started keeping track, comparing the substance and tone of her questions with those of his male colleagues and his own questions.

"And I must say I found no difference at all. So I concluded that all that was going on was that there were some male lawyers who couldn't stand being questioned toughly by a woman," Calabresi says. "It was sexism in its most obvious form."

And what if such criticism came from a woman lawyer? Well, says Calabresi, women can be just as sexist as men in their expectations of how a woman judge should act.

This echoes so many familiar themes. Women in positions of power in the workplace are often considered meaner than their male colleagues who act the same way. And how many times have we seen a woman of color who exhibits strength and power described as threatening, "fiery," or too angry? (This is why so much effort has gone into reclaiming the term "bitch" -- if society is going to use it to describe a woman who is bold and direct, shouldn't we consider that a compliment?)

Listening to the clips, Sotomayor sounds an awful lot like John Roberts -- who did not face any concerns about his "fiery temperament" during his confirmation hearings. Totenberg exposes this talking-point for what it is: straight-up sexism, with some racism mixed in for good measure.

(For a great take on reclaiming "bitch," see Shark-Fu's post on taking back words. She also talked about this subject on NPR!)