The “allure” of the forbidden fruit:
The media, government, society, and popular culture decree the white woman as being the ultimate in human beauty, femininity, virtue and in moral superiority, ergo, they are forbidden by custom to mingle with “less desireable” elements of society and from the realms of business/politics/professions/academia/entertainment, for these things would sully what virtue upper middle/upper class white women have by virtue of their purity/femininity/moral superiority.
Black men and women are decreed as threats to the “sanctity” of “holy white womanhood”. Black women are competition to white women, i.e. the potential take their men away, while Black men could take away their “virtue”. Therefore, the white man have to protect his women from Blacks of both genders. In order to do so, segregation, formal and informal, media and cultural propaganda, discrimination, lynchings, prisons, etc. are utilized to this end.
Black men weren’t suppose to be familiar with white women on the pain of death. They weren’t suppose to look at posters of white female celebrities during Jim Crow. While thousands of Black women were violated during that period of time.
Abagond, white women, black men and black women didn’t invent the ideology of white womanhood. It’s white men who invented it in order to oppress Blacks, keep them forever subordinate, maintain inequality, and to cover up his guilt.
The pure white woman stereotype was a picture that white Americans had in their heads about white women. It pictured them as being pure in terms of both sex and race. It was the main excuse given for Jim Crow, the laws and customs that kept down black people for a hundred years after they were freed as slaves.
Even today the stereotype lives on in a weakened form, making white Americans uncomfortable when they see a black man with a white woman.
The pure white woman determined how whites looked at blacks. If white women were pure, then black men were the threat. Thus the black brute stereotype, which saw black men as savages. And if white women were pure, then black women were not. Thus the Jezebel stereotype, which saw black women as easy and loose.
View original post 378 more words
Being Black Faculty at a White College
1. Seeing the president of your college around town and having him ask you where you work every single time, in spite of the fact that there are less than a handful of Black faculty members at your school.
2. Having your president ask you at a retreat, “So where did we get you from?” as if you came from a farm, or a zoo, or a plantation …
3. Sitting in disbelief as the college president disrespects the President of the United States, Barack Obama …
4. Feeling sick that the college president represents me in the community
5. Feeling angry that the college president has the temerity to turn our annual state of the college address into a political message directing us how to vote republican, when he’s a state employee
6. Getting a migraine every year, just before the state…
View original post 2,816 more words
Ladies and Gentlemen,
What’s your take on an essay by E. Faye Williams of National Congress of Black Women regarding the Rachel Dolezal controversy?
Here’s the essay by Dr. E. Faye Williams:
Eye of the Beholder
By Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq.
(TriceEdneyWire.com) – Many have given their opinions. Now it’s my turn to weigh in on the subject of race and the right of self-identification. My central question is, “With events occurring in the world that require serious attention, why is there so much interest in a white woman, Rachel Dolezal, wanting to live and identify as a Black woman?”
Are whites so alarmed in disbelief that a White woman would be so enamored by the “Black Experience” that she would be willing to give up her “White privilege”? Does “White guilt” cause them to wonder how a White could join the target of their animus and discrimination? Is her decision comparable to the same self-hatred conditioned into many African Americans? Or, is her decision predicated on living in a manner that reflects the values, goals and aspirations that she holds dear?
Have Blacks been lured into unfair analyses of Rachel’s motives and behaviors that support the suggestion that there is something inherently wrong with being Black? Have Blacks, by engaging in the analysis, endorsed the distorted belief that being Black yields a person of lesser/inferior quality and character? Rather than yielding to the temptation to critique and criticize, Black people should withdraw from this conversation and leave white people to their own frustrations regarding her actions.
Did Rachel do something wrong? Yes, she misrepresented who she was! Was this misrepresentation disingenuous, against the law or did it prevent her from achieving significant or positive outcomes in her community? No, it was not and did not!
I wish that Black critics would step back, listen and not be overly judgmental of Rachel. After all, many African-Americans have been intimidated or demoralized by trying to answer the question, “Am I Black enough for you?” Attempting to manufacture purity of ideal, thought and intent, we sometimes impose a requirement for others to conform to who we think they should be. As a Black woman, I can understand what she did, though I don’t understand why she did it. Those who best know her, even after she defined herself as Black, think the good she’s done outweighs the bad.
I see the Dolezal controversy as a personal and familial dispute between her parents and her. Whatever their motives for outing her will probably never be fully understood, but I have not heard her criticized as incompetent in her work. She’s been lauded by her NAACP branch and supported by the national NAACP.
I’m willing to take her good and praise it. I’m not threatened by her serving as President of the Spokane NAACP. In truth, I’m more concerned about and critical of the Black people who don’t belong to the NAACP. As for the NAACP, white people have been an integral part for 106 years since its founding.
Few may accept my point of view, but I come from a multi-racial family. I love my Blackness, but I welcome any person of any race or culture who shares common interests.
Though many White Americans speak in exclusionary terms of “taking back their country,” we, in the Black community, take pride in our acceptance of others. We’ve prayed for the day when we wouldn’t be judged by the color of our skin. Let’s give Rachel the benefit of the doubt that she meant well–even though she made a few mistakes along the way.
Rachel Dolezal could have used her White privilege to do anything she desired. She chose to define and identify herself as a Black woman. I ask, “Who am I to judge her and tell her she shouldn’t want to be like me?” Some think her desire for Blackness is bizarre, but isn’t it a refreshing change for a White woman to choose to be Black!
To me, what Ms. Dolezal did was cultural appropriation of Blackness, but to Dr. Williams, it’s being inclusive as oppose to the practice of exclusion and narrow mindedness by mainly conservative white folk.
What are your thoughts?