The San Bernardino Shooting: Another Wakeup Call for Entitled Men as Another Out-Of-Control Husband Kills Wife, Self and Student Bystander
April 13, 2017
One thing for sure, two things for certain: we cannot discuss last Monday’s San Bernardino shooting without also scrutinizing the downplayed connection between toxic masculinity and the epidemic of deadly shootings in this nation.
</div><div><p>The gunman, Cedrick Anderson, fatally shot his estranged wife, Karen Smith, in a special needs classroom in a murder-suicide that also left an 8-year-old student dead. A second student was wounded and is now in stable condition.</p></div><div><p>As disturbing and heartbreaking as this story is, what’s worse is that the tragic consequences of subverting the demands of a man, as revealed in this horrific incident, is <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mass-shootings-2016-domestic-violence_us_586d39abe4b0d9a5945d8941" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">nothing new</a>. Further, this is an issue that disproportionately impacts <a href="http://www.ebony.com/news-views/black-women-murdered#axzz4e2xULoDG" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">black women</a>: <a href="http://wreg.com/2017/02/13/murder-suicide-leaves-man-and-woman-dead-child-in-hospital-in-horn-lake/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Gale Hall</a>, <a href="http://www.wafb.com/story/34438565/suspect-in-new-roads-murder-suicide-dies" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Latonya Robinson Moore</a>, <a href="http://wtvr.com/2017/03/11/quanta-chandler-dead-standoff-victim-remembered-as-beloved-henrico-jail-nurse/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Quanta Chandler</a>, <a href="http://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/couple-found-dead-inside-catawba-co-apartment-child-unharmed/501912818" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Shanice Williams</a>, <a href="http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Prominent-Methodist-surgeon-is-victim-of-apparent-11015760.php" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Sherilyn Gordon-Burroughs</a>, and <a href="http://www.fox10tv.com/story/35105737/mpd-says-early-morning-kidnapping-ends-with-a-murder-suicide" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Alicia Trotter</a> are among the slain black women who have fallen victim to intimate partner violence since February. </p><div><p>To be sure, white men and their <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-kimmel/americas-angry-white-men_b_4182486.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">aggrieved entitlement</a> are a considerable part of the overall domestic violence problem. However, as a black man, I believe it’s vital I advocate for increased awareness about issues stemming from male entitlement in general while also specifically calling out what is often neglected—the suffering of black women at the hands of black men.</p></div><div><p>What fuels these homicidal attacks repeatedly carried out by men? Consider what we perceive to be “normal” gender roles for men. Society propagates and encourages distorted ideas of what it means to be a man. Men are reared to be aggressive and assert dominance over others. This harmful social feedback loop convinces us—especially men attracted to women—that we deserve access to women’s time and their objectified bodies to satiate our impulses.</p></div><div><div><p>This inflated sense of entitlement leads to trivializing the desires of women and femmes in preference for male gratification, whether emotional, intellectual or sexual.</p></div><div><p>I’ve discussed the problem with male entitlement before in <a href="http://everydayfeminism.com/2017/01/leave-behind-toxic-masculinity-2017/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">great detail</a>. Sadly, there are those who wish to use instances like this as a way to discredit the Movement for Black Lives. This is bizarre, as addressing intraracial violence rooted in sexism and misogyny doesn’t negate the importance of challenging white supremacist ideas and institutions that pathologizes blackness and <a href="https://theestablishment.co/why-white-america-demonizes-the-blacklivesmatter-movement-and-why-that-must-change-4cda83727063#.ni25zmwr0" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">undermine black liberation</a>.</p></div><div><p>Those that do this exploit such horrifying circumstances to silence discussions of anti-black racism while also glossing over (and thus minimizing) the significance of male entitlement and its relation to violence against women and femmes.</p></div><div><p>Let us resist the temptation of misdirection. We (men) are conditioned within a male-centered society that breeds farfetched expectations and assumptions disconnected from reality. Male egos end up being crafted to be more fragile than glass hammers since the idea that the will of women is subordinate to male longing can never be fully realized. This is why it’s common to read about the dire <a href="https://thebodyisnotanapology.com/magazine/we-belong-to-ourselves-on-male-entitlement-and-womens-right-to-say-no/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">consequences</a> of men being told “no.”</p><div><p>This environment also produces self-worth heavily invested in male entitlement. Thus, male entitlement engenders irrational and hostile behavior from men whose wants are defied.</p></div><div><p>Male entitlement leads to men brazenly flouting the boundaries set by women.</p></div><div><p>Male entitlement invents ways to blame women for our contempt, disregard, and disrespect toward their autonomy.</p></div><div><p>Male entitlement imagines vitriol or harassment or coercion or violence as being sensible responses to rejection.</p></div><div><p>Male entitlement transforms professed love into weaponized passion.</p></div><div><p>And because these underlying issues are so well codified into cultural norms many uncritically accept (similar to the way white folks take for granted the pervasive nature of racism), said issues are hard to recognize. This is especially true for those who benefit from this oppressive standard, as it’s more difficult to identify a problem when it’s not a problem for you.</p></div><div><p>The bulk of conversations, reporting, and outrage regarding this and similar heinous crimes where male entitlement is the impetus of lethal violence tends to focus on gun laws and gun control, or on suspicion of mental illness, or on the religion of the perpetrator—all typically to the exclusion of analyzing warped yet idolized ideas of masculinity that continuously delivers similar results.</p></div><div><p>This isn’t a distraction; this is a matter of highlighting a social ill we as a society are reluctant to tackle, or even admit exists.</p><div><p>Can we please start having more candid and “uncomfortable” discussions about the numerous ways male entitlement leads to death and destruction?</p></div><div><p>Black men, this includes you. Lives are literally at stake. Participation in oppressive behavior that threatens or harms black women is inexcusable. The time for “I can spot and call out racism all day but can’t detect sexism or misogyny or male entitlement” is over.</p></div></div></div></div></div>
Keep reading...
Show less
Rachel Dolezal's Book Deal Underscores the Myth of Transracial Identity
April 20, 2016
Ninety years ago, writer Carl Van Vechten published a novel intended to be a celebration of Harlem, which at the time was experiencing a budding literary, artistic and intellectual movement that sparked a new cultural identity for Black America.
<p>Van Vechten’s vivid and nuanced tale granted white America a voyeur pass to “the great Black walled city” of Harlem. There was only one problem: Van Vechten was a white man. Worse, to further inspire exposure over this willful exploit, which he referred to as his “Negro novel,” Van Vechten decided to name his roman à clef after an expression used to describe the balcony seating of Blacks in the era of overt segregation: <em><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigger_Heaven" target="_blank">Nigger Heaven</a></em>.</p><p>Juxtapose this unauthorized thievery of select cultural expressions of an oppressed minority group with a present-day example. Last summer, educator and NAACP chapter president Rachel Dolezal was exposed as a white woman portraying herself as being Black. A torrent of media coverage and interviews ensued. Seemingly for the first time, the United States was obsessed with the plight of a Black woman, except that the attention centered on a white woman who donned blackface and frizzy hairpieces.</p><p>Dolezal—who <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/13/rachel-dolezal-signs-publishing-deal-book-race-black-white" target="_blank">recently signed a publishing deal</a> to write a book about her self-imposed racial identity crisis—<strong><em>is</em></strong> the modern <em>Nigger Heaven</em>. She is a living embodiment of all the conceit, self-indulgence, insensibility and intellectual malpractice that went into Vechten’s bestselling work of fiction, penned after infiltrating the inner circles of Harlem trendsetters, intellectuals and other native, influential Black folks.</p><p>Like Van Vechten, Dolezal shamelessly satiates a fascination with both an existence and way of being that doesn’t belong to her. Both acts are cousins to cultural appropriation in that both involve members of a dominant group exploiting the culture of a less privileged group with no concern for the social context that framed the latter’s history, marginalization and traditions part and parcel to their unique collection of experiences.</p><p>When asked for her take on Dolezal’s narcissistic charade, critical race academic Robin DiAngelo stated,</p><blockquote><p>Being a good person and being complicit with racism are mutually exclusive in the white mind. In keeping with this binary thinking, in some progressive circles wherein it is understood that all whites are indeed complicit with racism, being white becomes bad and being Black becomes good. For her to pass herself as Black rather than face what it means to be white can be seen as a form of <a href="http://libjournal.uncg.edu/index.php/ijcp/article/view/249" target="_blank">white fragility</a>—the inability to take responsibility for her position within a white supremacist culture. Rather than face the discomfort of that position, she has appropriated Black identity and the social capital that it affords within a racially liberal milieu.</p></blockquote><p>Some cry: “But race is only a social construct!” Touché. But those who cite this fact to minimize or excuse Dolezal’s actions often omit a significant part of that equation. While discussing the concept of race, <em>Guardian</em> writer <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2015/dec/07/afrofuturism-black-identity-future-science-technology" target="_blank">Steven Thrasher</a> offers some nuance:</p><blockquote><p>Race is a fiction—which has only existed as we presently conceive it over the past few hundred years, since European colonialism and American chattel slavery began peddling its mythology. But despite being a fiction, its effects are so real in our lives that it can be difficult to imagine ourselves outside our present hell.</p></blockquote><p>Yes, we get that race doesn’t exist, but that doesn’t mitigate the concept’s very real impact on the everyday racism and anti-blackness that saturates our culture. Dolezal’s poor facsimile co-opts a struggle foreign to her own for personal gain. This is the pinnacle of white privilege: being white, pretending to be Black, and profiting from this masquerade while countless actual Black people continue to suffer social, economic and political deprivations by mere virtue of their actual-Black existence.</p><p>Scrutiny that either challenges or highlights inconsistency in her counterfeit identity seems to be received as white noise, as she isn’t actually concerned with reality. This is exactly what we’d expect from a cherry-picked narrative. Dolezal’s warped love affair with blackness is a position of special pleading. If the notion of “transracial” had any crumb of credibility it would necessarily extend to everyone.</p><p>With this rationale, Blacks could simply renounce their blackness. No more racial profiling. No more “DWBs” (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driving_while_black" target="_blank">driving while Black</a>). No more being viewed as a threat when occupying public space. No more getting assassinated for possessing toy guns or <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/jonathan-ferrell-former-football-player-killed-police-after-seeking-help-following-car-w/" target="_blank">seeking help after a car crash</a>. No more <a href="http://www.citylab.com/housing/2015/09/redlining-is-alive-and-welland-evolving/407497/" target="_blank">redlining</a>. No more being victims of a <a href="http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2014/12/11/no-justice-is-not-colorblind" target="_blank">criminal justice system</a> that doles out disproportionate arrest and sentencing rates. No more <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertpearl/2015/03/05/healthcare-black-latino-poor/#507d233d1ca7" target="_blank">defective health care</a>.</p><p>If I chose to self-identify and “dress up” as a white person as <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/eddie-murphy-1984-snl-skit-white-privilege-article-1.2409222" target="_blank">portrayed by Eddie Murphy in a <em>Saturday Night Live</em> skit</a>, would I then be free to benefit from <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/white-privilege-explained/2016/01/16/0173cba6-bbbc-11e5-85cd-5ad59bc19432_video.html" target="_blank">white privilege</a>? If I had a strong inner-hankering that I was really meant to be Caucasian, would our white-oriented society permit me to obtain that excess social and political capital denied to blackness?</p><p>Of course not. We know damn well that’s not how any of this works. Whiteness isn’t merely a reference to skin color. Whiteness describes a socially and politically constructed concept. It’s both a systemic and systematic ideology based on beliefs, attitudes and behaviors that results in unequal distribution of power and privilege that accords a higher regard for the intellectual, behavioral and inherent value of those defined as “white.”</p><p>Blacks can’t magically ingratiate themselves into whitehood given that whiteness is specifically defined in opposition to blackness. Our place within our society’s racial hierarchy is tattooed across our being the moment we exit the womb—with the baggage of anti-Black propaganda and preformed beliefs about our character in tow.</p><p>It isn’t that Dolezal should be criticized just because she tries to be something she isn’t. The problem lies in the implications and splash damage of her foolhardy antics. Regardless of her intentions, she makes a mockery of legitimate concerns along racial lines. Her bizarre story also further solidifies an issue educator and journalist <a href="https://www.facebook.com/stacey.patton.9/posts/10153564473976094?pnref=story" target="_blank">Stacey Patton teased out</a> when news broke of Dolezal’s deal with BenBella Books.</p><p>Patton says, “White America loves to hear about the experiences of Black people but they don’t want to hear about them from the voices and perspectives of Black people. They want blackness interpreted by white people, minstrels, coons, and transracial folk who can then authenticate our truths by deviously passing themselves off as Black while making a buck off the experience.”</p><p>Transracial isn’t a thing and it never was. Those who say otherwise are trying to sell you something. I have no doubt Rachel Dolezal’s book will be a profitable fount of whitesplaining.</p><p><em>This <a href="http://thehumanist.com/commentary/myth-transracial-identity">article</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://thehumanist.com/">The Humanist</a>.</em></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
Noam Chomsky: How the Word 'Liberal' Has Been Totally Distorted in America
October 01, 2015
As the war of words between presidential candidates has only begun to ratchet up, I’ve already grown battle-weary, anxious and disheartened.
<p>While critiquing the existing state of affairs in his essay “State of the Union” (<em>The Nation</em>, 1975), Gore Vidal shared the following observation: “There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat.” Far from a mere witty turn of phrase, what Vidal alluded to was the not so inconspicuous trend of both camps gradually realigning themselves further “right” (conventional, constrained) on issues despite enthralling rhetoric that would suggest otherwise. Forty years later, his <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra_%28metaphor%29" target="_blank">Cassandra dilemma </a>regarding the abandonment of liberalism still rings true though its significance holds no sway over those deafened by partisan favoritism.</p><p>In my piece “<a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/notesfromanapostate/2015/08/under-the-microscope-black-conservatives/" target="_blank">Under the Microscope: Black Conservatives</a>,” I clarify that, though I hold very progressive political views contra conservatism, I do not identify as a Democrat. Part of the reason is due to the fact that many Democrat officials—and thus the political platform they epitomize and endorse—simply don’t push for truly liberal-leaning policies that would catalyze radical change this nation so desperately needs.</p><p>The term liberal comes from the Latin liberalis, which means “pertaining to a free person.” Within the confines of political discourse, liberalism prescriptively refers to one open to new behavior and willing to discard traditional values, the antithesis of “Traditional Values™,” a revered cornerstone of conservative ideation. Why, then, does it appear Democrats have a tendency to disavow programs that would coincide with their adoptive moniker?</p><p>Seeking insight regarding this political malaise, I was able to pick the brain of Professor Noam Chomsky, renowned philosopher and linguist. The world’s leading political theorist had this to say about today’s incarnation of the Democrat and Republican parties:</p><blockquote><p>Both parties have shifted well to the right, the Republicans almost off the spectrum. Respected conservative commentator Norman Ornstein described them, plausible, as a "radical insurgency" that has largely abandoned parliamentary politics. Democrats now are mostly what used to be called "moderate Republicans." There’s ample evidence that most of the population, at the lower end of the income spectrum, is effectively disenfranchised – their representatives pay no attention to their opinions. Moving up the income ladder, influence increases slowly, but it’s only at the very top that it has real impact. Plutocracy masquerading as formal democracy.</p></blockquote><p>The frameworks of this nation’s political system is an <a href="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/princeton-scholar-demise-of-democracy-america-tpm-interview" target="_blank">ostensible democracy as studies reveal</a>, which is only a secret to the apathetic or those living under a rock. In an in-depth interview to be published later this week, Professor Justin Lewis—political analyst and media critic—echoes the sentiment of Chomsky regarding the erasure of left representation, which makes sense given their collaborative work titled <a href="http://www.mediaed.org/assets/products/114/transcript_114.pdf" target="_blank">The Myth of the Liberal Media: The Propaganda Model of News </a>(see <a href="https://youtu.be/E8oHl3ooeZo" target="_blank">video here</a>).</p><p>Much of Lewis’ research focuses on how there’s many issues wherein the U.S. public are to the left of both main parties but that such polling results are rarely referenced due to it conflicting with conventional political agenda. By contrast, what we tend to see is polling data that reinforces views aligned with mainstream party debates: That which is “Part of the Plan.”</p><p>Now, regarding my despondency.</p><p>None of the presidential hopefuls impress me, which is par for the course. That said, Bernie Sanders appears to be an apparition of hope for real social progress that would be absent within the neo-conservative seriously-not-liberal regime of Hilary Clinton and would degenerate midst the clutches of any Republican candidacy. There are significant drawbacks with Sanders (e.g., insinuations that he’d maintain “business as usual” regarding foreign policy is egregious), but in a race advertising 31 flavors of the horrible and grotesque, he’s a somewhat bitter-sweet relief for those desiring a faint taste of liberal representation.</p><p>Chomsky seems to agree. When asked about the more noteworthy contenders in the 2016 presidential race, he said:</p><blockquote><p>Sanders is a decent New Dealer, way to the left in the current U.S. political system. I don’t agree with some of his stands, but he’s a breath of fresh air. Clinton’s a centrist Democrat, Bush a right-wing Republican, sane by today’s weird standards. Trump is a very dangerous demagogue, though one can understand his appeal after decades of stagnation and loss of hope, even though the targets of the fears and angers are misplaced.</p></blockquote><p>The problem is the Wu Tang Clan were right: cash rules everything around me. The Big Two (re: Democrats, Republicans) receive a substantial chunk of financial support from corporate entities that demand politicians reciprocate with supporting policies that favor them. Those who don’t capitulate to these typically conservative forces aren’t likely to be viable contenders, which is one of the reasons why Bernie Sanders is seen as an underdog compared to corporate sycophant Hilary Clinton.</p><p>It’s still difficult for me to take Donald Trump’s run seriously. I get that his sideshow bravado swept up in mainstream media’s captivation is dangerous in a way. I also concede with many points made regarding Trump being <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/08/28/donald-trump-is-the-new-face-of-white-supremacy/" target="_blank">the new face of white supremacy</a>. The thing is, the appeal of this uncouth loudmouth isn’t proof that his explicitly racist, sexist, Islamophobic, and privilege-induced ramblings are in any way valid, but rather a collective sigh of discontent with common political sophistry. We live in a society that craves entertainment and those with whom we can identify—Trump delivers on these attributes though lacking any real substance sheltered away behind that obtuse curtain guarded by blowhard antics. Also, keep in mind this white-oriented culture just endured eight years of having to call a Black man their leader…Trump’s present success—given what he represents—doesn’t surprise me.</p><p>Moreover, people want tangible change that amounts to more than just a catchy slogan. For the right, that means supporting candidates that thrive on victim blaming, yearn to hinder and divest in policies that aid women, LGBTQIA, immigrants, and people of color, and will greenlight stricter theocratic legislation. For the ostensible left, that means (thus far) placing odds on one of two choices: one with considerable clout but a distant stranger to liberal principles though she feigns otherwise, and one who, though far from flawless, actually bears resemblance to a liberal candidate.</p><p>Liberalism is important to me, and likely to anyone else of a similar mindset, because the way progress is effectively enacted across social institutions—the complex of positions, roles, norms and values lodged in particular types of social structures—is by way of evolving and forward-thinking. These standards are prone to stimulate directives targeting the marginalized and support multiculturalism, which literally (seriously, literally) contradicts the motivations and interests of conservative ideology.</p><p>You’d think more would be on board for further development and more inclusionary lawmaking…but then I remember those who benefit from the status quo are more inclined to relish the current horse-and-buggy-pace of societal maturation, or even champion a devolution to “The Good Old Days” (read: Dixiecratic, “Jim Crow wasn’t so bad” resolve) where it’d be more widely acceptable to not consider classism, ableism, toxic masculinity, racism, transantagonism, etc. I understand being a decent person is “hard” for those who adore their <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privilege_%28social_inequality%29" target="_blank">privilege</a>. These are the people who perceive their abject disconnect from those who are <a href="https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/othering" target="_blank">othered </a>as a sign of the outsider’s weakness instead of realizing the frailty is their own.</p><p>And so I sit, battle weary, anxious, and disheartened. Liberalism isn’t dead, but when it comes to a political institution that prefers stagnancy, it sure is hard to come by.</p>
Keep reading...
Show less
