i've never done this
allowing foreign thoughts on this
our first guest writer
Rarely do I allow people to post on my blog, because it is, after all, my blog. However, as in the past, I have linked external commentaries and supportive views. This response came to me via MySpace, and I believe that it's important that people realise the reality that minority is more than a color issue that effects certain individuals, but rather minority is an issue that effects us all, and in some instances, allows for a valid claim to cultural identity that some would otherwise deny, based on superficial elements. - Chulo
Begin Guest Post
Yo Pa' I commented on your blog about the 'identity' issue, I wanted to say more, but they were locking up the office where I work so I had to get out of there. If you don't mind, let me endulge you a little bit more on the subject.
I won't go into a lot of details about myself, you can check out my blog(s) and my myspace page if you are so inclined to learn more about me.
It is interesting you commented about this kid named Ross who was more White than you. I thought that was funny because my last name is Ross and people call me that. As a matter of fact, where I went to school my brothers and I were always being ostracized for talking white, or because mi abuela (who is light como tu) would sit in on our classes to make sure were being educated ('till we told her to chill with all of that). I said I wouldn't talk too much about me, so I won't
Anyway I have to say again that I think I really understand where you are coming from with your identity. I think you have the right to claim a minority status and this in no way means that you are trying to appropriate anyone's experience or belittle it or even claim a historical oppression.
It is unfortunate that those who love you do not understand where you are coming from. I read their comments and yours. I do not mean my comment about them to be pejoritive at all. However, it is my experience that those who are Black from the United States tend to establish a line of authenticity (based on White supremacy) as to who can claim a historically or contemporarily opressed experience.
They seem to forget that many people that look exactly like you have been 'othered' for centuries by people in power. It was not so long ago that Italianos were 'nigerized' also. The reason why the 'Black' experience in the United States includes Jennifer Beals, Ralph Bunche & and The Powells (meaning Adam Clayton Powell) and my dad's parents and my mom's mother is because of the idea of White supremacy and purity.
This othering was based on 1/64th as you stated and papi, from what I've seen (of your pix) if it were 100 years ago, you would be with the rest of us people of color.
What people (especially Black) don't seem to understand is that the thing that seems like privilege to them (skin color, hair texture, eye color etc) is only privilege because they do not experience it.
If you are the "White boy" rejected by other Whites or the "Light Skin Black" rejected by both Blacks and Whites, there is nothing privileged about your skin color, y tu sabes bien.
Finally, on the issue of being a man that is sexually attracted to other men it definately give you minority status. Let's be real, gay culture is really White American male culture who happen to be attracted to other men.
I do not think even if you dressed in your most preppy clothes that you fit the Bruce Weber/Abercrombie - Mike Jeffries Arian idealized gay male image. These men do exactly what straight White men do to women. I am sure you'd probably get asked what are you? Or it is possible that you do not get that because you are assumed to be the 'exotic' Latino/His-panic/Mexican (lol you know how the ignorant are everyone that speaks spanish and is a little tan is Mexican). In that regard, you are definitly 'othered' and therefore can be classified as a minority.
If negotiating your life you find it easier and it makes you happier to identify as Latino/Hispanic, I as a queer man de mucho color am not going to hate on you for it. I wish you much happiness and love in your life.
~ Trévoy Zacster
End Guest Post, Feel free to click the title of the entry to visit TréZacster's Blog His words are powerful and his opinions are well thought out...
sábado, mayo 13, 2006
Suscribirse a:
Comentarios de la entrada (Atom)
6 comentarios:
So, I wasn't going to respond to this post because I feel like we at 430 56th Street and those within the Nation have exhausted this conversation. But since, I believe, some of my comments were referenced in this blog and some assumptions were made about my position on race, culture and minority status.
First, my statement that Larry is not a minority was meant specifically in racial and ethnic terms. As a same-gender-loving man, he is of course a member of a the LGBT community and thus a political minority...although I am not always sure that Larry identifies as gay.
"It is unfortunate that those who love you do not understand where you are coming from. I read their comments and yours. I do not mean my comment about them to be pejoritive at all. However, it is my experience that those who are Black from the United States tend to establish a line of authenticity (based on White supremacy) as to who can claim a historically or contemporarily opressed experience."
Sigh...I completely understand where Larry is coming from in terms of his cultural identity. We have had conversations and experiences that go beyond this series of blog posts. I consider myself someone who knows Larry fairly well, as I have actually seen and interacted with him in person. Politically, Larry and I agree on most things.
What is unfortunate - and perhaps a necessary evil of blogging - is that from one blog about the one specific area on which I disagree with Larry, someone would feel that he could understand my entire position on a very complex issue and attribute that to the whole of the Black race.
At any rate, as Larry, I perhaps knows, I have a very broad concept of racial and ethnic identity and am a firm believer in giving a person free reign to define themselves however they like.
I am also a believer in facts. And the fact is that if you are a European-American of Italian and Spanish derivation living in 2006, you are not among the groups legally or politically considered a racial or ethnic minority. This isn't to say that you in your life have not been subject to socio-political oppression or marginalization as race is not the only axis across which people are oppressed. Class, gender, and sexual orientation are a few social constructs that also come into play.
This is also isn't to say that even as someone isn't of a CONTEMPORARY minority group, that one is not a descendant of a people who have historically been oppressed. Although I am Black, I am well aware that our country has in its history subjectied various groups, including Europeans such as Italians and the Irish, to discrimination. But over time and due to a host of factors - usually economic - European ethnic groups were eventually granted a political whiteness and acceptance that was never granted to Native Americans, Asians, Latinos or Africans. Collectively, these groups have been the subject of a sustained effort to define them as other that is significantly different than the the historical oppression of Europeans. I would go so far as to say that white identity was actually created to unify those of European descent against those who were not them.
I believe the essential argument of the blog I am responding to is that it is this white supremacy in reverse that would have Blacks (or others) tell those who aren't "authentic" minorities that they have no right to claim minority status. As, I have said to Larry, I don't believe that "culture" is something fixed and concrete. There is no one way or set of criteria to be Black, Latino, Asian, gay, or whatever. That said, I also don't believe that culture is something so fluid and nebulous that it can be tried on like an outfit and then cast aside. (Not that I am saying this is what Larry is doing). In addition, there are real, valid and not at alll superficial reasons why people of color would be concerned about the appropriation of our varied identities by those who have the luxury and freedom to CHOOSE whether or not they identify as a certain culture or minority.
The bottom line is, no one has the right to disrespect Larry for identifying as he does. He has every right to express his identity in whatever way suits him. But, given how important race and culture are in this country, he should expect questions and understand that many Latinos and Hispanics, including some of those who care a great deal abouth im and know him very well, are not going to include him in their concept of their own culture. And they are free to have that position.
"This othering was based on 1/64th as you stated and papi, from what I've seen (of your pix) if it were 100 years ago, you would be with the rest of us people of color."
What? I know we just had a conversation about your skin tone and you often have a tan. As someone who has seen you in person quite a bit, you aren't so dark that one would question your whiteness based on your skin tone alone. Even 100 years ago (I don't know why 1906 is so key but whatever), I don't think anyone would think you were anything but a white American at all. The only people I know who mistake you for Latino are people who meet you online and that perception isn't based soley on your skin tone.
"What people (especially Black) don't seem to understand is that the thing that seems like privilege to them (skin color, hair texture, eye color etc) is only privilege because they do not experience it.
If you are the "White boy" rejected by other Whites or the "Light Skin Black" rejected by both Blacks and Whites, there is nothing privileged about your skin color, y tu sabes bien."
This speaks to the very complicated issue of intra-racial oppression. But the truth is that the source of one's privilege can, in some instances, be the source of one's "oppression." More about that later. Right now, I have to say that even if you are a white boy rejected by other whites or one who feels uncomfortable around other white people - there are still a host of racial privileges that go along with being a white person in America. Is there any denying the existance of white privelege?
And even if you are a Light Skinned black person rejected by other (dark skinned) Blacks - and let me just say that I know of the social reality of this issue and I think REJECT is a very strong word - there still exists a certain level of privilege based on exoticism that goes along with ligther skin. There is a beauty standard that prefrences lighter skin in almost every person of color community. I don't have enough time to deal with this issue in the manner it merits here, but let me just say that skin tone and race aren't the same thing. What's considered a dark skinned girl with bad her for a Dominican could be lightskinned sista with good hair for an African American...
Shit is complicated.
"If negotiating your life you find it easier and it makes you happier to identify as Latino/Hispanic, I as a queer man de mucho color am not going to hate on you for it."
You certainly should do whatever makes you happy. And I hope you don't interpret my views as hating on you. I am your friend and love you unconditionally. I don't have the luxury of not being honest with you when I don't agree with you. My disagreement isn't based on some ignornant notion of authenticity or minority measuring stick.
I am your friend, not a fan.
Above all things I want you to be truly happy and to love yourself just the way you are.
I do not communicate tone well in my writing (something I am working on) So please understand I write this (and previous comments) with the spirit of learning, understanding and seeking to build comraderie - not alienation.
I was just about to reply that I do not have any major problems with Montez's argument. I am however, open to expand and discuss the nuances of race, class and inter/intra racial issues. But then I read the second to the last sentence.
"I am your friend, not a fan."
I never have commented to Larry or left any messages on his boards that would in any way suggest that I am a fan of his. So where did you come up with this? and why?
Well, I'll now make a few assumptions about you, as you have about me. (smile)
You know well that the reason you assume I am a 'fan' of Larry is because of your experiences with color and phenotype and negotiating your life in a world where there is a European standard of beauty.
When I say that, I mean that ruling class Europeans (or Americans of exclusive European heritage) have defined the standard and mostly all people of the world have bought in to it. The standard then becomes a reality on which one must negotiate relationships.
This standard would define Larry as attractive to a larger or lesser degree depending. You yourself may even agree with that opinion. I do not know.
What I do know is that this is a tired and old tactic used by Black people to weaken the argument or even negate entirely another person's experience.
It is like being in the school yard and the other boys say, "he just agrees with her cause he likes her and thinks she's pretty." Why didn't you just call me an uncle- tom- sell- out for agreeing with him on principle, in the first place?
With all of the historical baggage that you know is associated with intra-racial color politics. You did realize what you were doing.
Montez you have weakened your entire argument with your ad hominem attack on me. By doing this you expose something interesting about yourself, and your standpoint.
Once again, you seek to establish your authenticity. This is completely unecessary. Your original opinion (and response) is sound, albeit arguable on it's merits.
This is a great example of the attitude that colors your previous comments and that I was speaking to when I addressed my original comment to Larry.
As in your original comments to Larry, you here again, attempt to establish yourself as an authentic authority on the subject that of Larry and his minority.
This ostensibly is derived from your contemporary experience(s) (and historically or your family and others of color).
However, in doing this you isolate the ancillary issues of class, (educational and socio-economic) culture, (race and geographical) sexual orientation, that are inextricable.
Most people talking about these issue know about the historical opressions of obviously Black people. Therefore there exists a kind of deference on the part of some people on these issues.
People are afraid to be called names by Blacks and therefore are afraid to challenge us on issues related to race, class and color.
Therefore you are rarely challenged to view another persons or groups standpoint, because you feel your color and race automatically give you the right to speak with authority on the subject(s) unchallenged.
Then when you are challenged by another Black person to actually consider another standpoint, you reflexively react with derision.
You did what I was hoping you would not do, but what Black people often do. You called me a name, a fan.
Montez, let us agree on one thing. There is a difference in agreeing with a person on principle and being their fan. The same as there is a difference in disagreeing with a person and being their enemy.
I am not a fan of Larry.
You are not his enemy.
As with Larry I am not going to hate on you either. You obviously are intellegent and educated man who I wish to regard as an ally, not as an enemy.
(oh and not as a fan either *wink*)
When I made the statement that I am a friend of Larry's and not a fan, I actually wasn't talking about you at all. It was a statement made to Larry that because I am his friend I cannot pretend to agree with him when I do not.
The statement wasn't meant to communicate that your opinion was that of fan an thus wasn't genuine as I wasn't meaning to include you in that statement at all. I don't know you and wouldn't presume to know on what basis your statements were made. Had I meant that about you specifically, I would have said so much more clearly and that one point would have been the basis of my entire blog.
I know that I hate when people assume they know me because of my race, sexual orientation or other social cue so I strive to not do that to others.
I wasn't seeking to undercut your arguments by calling you a fan. That would be quite silly and unnecessary on my part. I cannot control what you presume of me. But, I would never call a person an uncle tom, a sellout an oreo or any of those ridiculously dehumanizing labels because - again - I don't believe that there is one particularly way to be or express any particular identity.
I am wondering if you assumed, based on your experience with other Black people, that I would attack you and then read my blog with the intent of finding an attack. Whatever your experiences have been, I would ask that you not hang those tired tactics on me. I don't like being attacked and wouldn't attack anyone else. I am secure enough in my own beliefs and positions not to resort to that.
And...I can say that as a lawyer for abused and neglected children and kids accussed of crimes (usually poor and of color), I am frequently challenged on issues of race, class, sexual orientation and the impact these things have on notions of justice. Your assumption that I am not is plain wrong.
Perhaps I don't need to respond to the rest of your assumptions as the reason for these assumptions is your mistaken belief that I thought you would only agree with Larry because you are a fan. Again, I don't know you to identify you as anything - fan, ally, or anything else.
PS - I should also point out to Trevoy Zacster - that before your response to my blog I had no idea that you were "another Black person." I had no idea what your racial makeup or identiy was when I responded and I didn't make any assumptions as to that fact. So that consideration didn't impact my statements to you at all.
I think you've made a lot of incorrect presumptions about me.
I think you are right. I did not get an opportunity to read your blog until after I had written my comments. Had I read just a few of your posts, I would have had a better understanding of your position. I have made many incorrect assumptions about you. I do recognize that there is a human being behind the characters that I see on the screen and though none is needed, I sincerely apologize.
That notwithstanding, it was specifically these are your comments that prompted my original reply:
****"i get why you identify as hispanic as the technical meaning is essentially "of spanish origin" - but you are not a minority, Larry. You simply arent. You are of european descent and of the majority in this country. your heart and soul may be with people of color and you may not be comfortable with white people and in addition you may work actively to transcend notions of race, but that doesnt make you not white."****
This is the reason why I mentioned well-known people of obvious majority European ancestry that identify (identified) as people of color. Such as Jennifer Beals, Ralph Bunche, Adam Clayton Powell, Walter White etc.
These people are of majority European heritage, yet for many reasons they identify/identified as minorities and people of color. This does not (did not) change the fact that they are White.
****"it is something entirely to identify as minority when the whole of society doesn't see you as such and you have almost none of the burden that goes along with that title. the simple fact that you get to CHOOSE to call yourself a minority speaks to the power of choice that actual minority individuals don't have."****
****"you don't want to be white. which is a problem because you are white. you want to be a minority...which is a problem because you arent."****
These aforementioned famous people have/had the privilege of choice, (as you say Larry has) to do what Larry does, identify as a person of color. Do you find their claim problematic also?
The point I was trying to make originally is that only Larry can speak to how the "whole of society" views him based on how he experiences it.
Regardless of Larry's add mixture of European heritage if he is contemporarily treated, as a person of color, then his reality is that of a person of color. Therefore, he has the right to claim minority membership.
These historically famous people were treated as “non-White”. That did not mean that their experience was the same as other people of more obvious non-European heritage. Did this mean that somehow they carried no burden or even almost no burden? Do we really want to get into comparing who had it worse and for what reasons? Can we acknowledge that historically and contemporarily if a person is grouped with the minority regardless of his or her ancestral relationship with the dominant society that person has a burden to carry?
****"i want you to respect our various cultures so much that you know that you can't simply choose to be a minority. i want you to know enough about our culture that you realize that there is a legacy and history to being an american person of color that one can't just pick up and put on. it isnt a club you join or get into by taking college credit, minority-friendly AP classes."****
I do not think there is any lack of respect to my culture for a White person such as Larry to choose to be a minority. The legacy and history of being and American person of color is one that includes people like him and Jennifer Beals and Walter White, and my own great and grand parents (and adopted blonde haired cousin).
I do now, and have always experienced life at convergence of race, class, religion and sexual orientation. Therefore, I feel an affinity to and an understanding of the complexities of these issues.
That being said I think we can create a society where we acknowledge and appreciate the nuances of skin color, hair texture, phenotype, and how these historically, and therefore contemporarily, uniquely affect each persons socio-economic status and relationship negotiation in the United States and globally. I think we can do this without denying anyone (including Larry) the right to name his or her own experience.
We instead should challenge Larry to use his perceived ‘white skin privilege’ and self identified minority membership to help make an improved difference for those minorities in a ‘more burdened’ position than he.
I cringe a bit because the people you identified are of a majority european ancestry whereas, Larry is of only european ancestry...
Even with that said, if the following is true "if he is contemporarily treated, as a person of color, then his reality is that of a person of color." I completely agree with you that he should consider himself a person of color. Completely. And I would find that choice less problematic. I, however, don't know and don't believe that to be the case with Larry.
Look, I think Larry is an amazing human being and I love him dearly. I think people like him are essential to overcoming various prejudices and issues of oppression we have in this country. There are moments when I am aware that Larry is truthfully brilliant. I bellieve that with all my heart. He is a man who is romantically and sexually attracted to other men. He feels most at home and accepted among Latinos. He is of progressive and at times, radical politics.
All that said, my position has been and remains, Larry can call himself whatever he wants. He should identify as whatever speaks his greatest and most genuine truth. Not everyone is going to agree, but should disagree respectfully.
Considering him a person of color gives me pause - just from how I experience him and what I know of him. I consider him my family, my friend, my ally. Without nitpicking, there are some statements he has made and opinions he has about Black people that make me very aware that we have differences and also go to me being very uncomfortable about his self-identity as a RACIAL minority, which seems to be more emotional and spiritual to me than anything else. (Which isnt to say, invalid)
But again, these are my opinons. Larry has to decide for himself.
Publicar un comentario