Mixed Race Studies

Fade To Black: Racelessness In The Age of Obama

A. Little Bit of Enlightenment
2009-10-09

Anita Little

The new 21st century epithet of racelessness, which most associate with the positive qualities of a post-race society, can actually be a guise for a much more sinister motivation. The tendency of society to assign the quality of racelessness to only successful African-Americans and other minorities, denotes an underlying belief that a minority who doesn’t let go of his racial identity gives up a chance at success. Racelessness becomes code for “whiteness,” making it the norm that members must abide by to climb the social ladder. Raceless non-identity becomes the normative benchmark by which our society’s hegemonic structure judges racial outsiders. If Barack Obama had marketed himself as the African-American candidate, he would have alienated white voters and potentially lost like so many other black politicians before him who were seen as the “black candidates” such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. In the new era of race and ethnicity precipitated by President Obama’s election, the designation of racelessness to successful African-Americans reflects how America’s hegemonic structure still strives to perpetuate negative stereotypes.

Racelessness is a quickly rising form of cultureless non-identity that allows one to “rise above” the labels of race and be seen as simply human, devoid of the epithets that subject many to stereotypes. President Obama has often been praised for his ability to transcend race and become “raceless,” garnering a broad appeal to diverse demographics. Fordham suggests that academically or professionally successful African-Americans must adopt a “raceless” persona and reject their cultural links in order to achieve social mobility. Success and intellectualism are qualities that are stereotypically not assigned to the black community, so in a form of internalized and structuralized oppression, successful African-American have the title of racelessness forced upon them. These transcendent individuals are allowed to break through barriers and be accepted by the hegemonic society as equals.

The title of racelessness is often a double-edge sword however. The goal of being racially transcendent implies that race is a bog that must be overcome. One would only want to “transcend” their ethnicity if they find the label oppressive. Giving an African-American the title of racelessness can actually be a way to disassociate that person’s accomplishment from their race. Racelessness becomes code for normal and in America, the normative standard is often seen as white. Racelessness becomes the 21st century name for whiteness, a wolf dressed in sheep’s clothing. The very fact that being raceless or racially transcendent is a quality only assigned to minorities, but never whites, shows that whites are perceived as already having this quality. The other races are abnormal and need to conform to the white standard Americanness. Calling President Obama raceless may seem an innocuous claim at first, but it is dissociating him from his accomplishments as a black man. In a hegemonic structure where European Americans have dominated for centuries, achievement and success is a designation reserved for whiteness only. High-achieving minorities defy social expectations. This threatens the white hegemony and in order to maintain the status quo the individual’s race is simply erased. In order words, the black basketball player who also becomes a Rhodes Scholar is suddenly no longer seen as “black-black.” He has crossed over into the realm of racelessness, lest his success defy stereotypes and introduce the dangerous idea that all minorities are capable of such multi-platform success…

Read the entire article here.

Brazilians of African descent demand equality

Al Jazeera English
2013-07-02

Rachel Levin

“Brazil is one of the most socially unequal countries in the world, we’re selling the image that everything is good and we’ll host the World Cup but it’s a country that denies opportunity to its own people.” —Lais Nascimento, student

Eighty percent of Brazilians are originally from Africa and they say they suffer discrimination

Tens of thousands of Brazilians are renewing the decades-old struggle for racial equality, and are staging protests to draw attention to their grievances.

Eighty percent of Brazilians are of African descent and they say they suffer discrimination.

Al Jazeera’s Rachel Levin has this report from Salvador.

Let’s face it: We need a new way to talk about race

U.S. Catholic
July 2013

Anthony Walton

Our conversation about race in America is still stuck in black and white. In order to move forward, we all need to learn a new vocabulary.

By any measure, we are living in the best period of racial experience in American history, exemplified not only by the obvious fact that the president, Barack Obama, is a twice-elected African American, but also that all around us there is evidence of the astonishing social progress that has been made in the last 50 years.

A half century after Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech, African Americans have progressed into positions of visibility and authority in virtually every field of employment. There is growing acceptance of African Americans by other groups socially and intimately. There is also evidence of significant numbers of African Americans gaining economic purchase and power, including a few joining the ranks of the absolute wealthiest, while millions more enjoy middle-class prosperity. And then there is what can loosely be called the “Obama Coalition,” the disparate group of Americans from across the national demographic that banded together in 2008 and 2012 and which was most powerfully observed during crowd shots including Americans from all walks of life during the two election night celebrations.

But this undeniable progress must be paralleled with a reality that illustrates that this is a less than optimum time in American racial experience. While great numbers of African Americans have progressed into what we can loosely call the mainstream of the wider society, equal numbers have been essentially running in place in poverty or losing ground during the post-civil rights era, the disparities of family wealth by group remaining immense and growing. A most distressingly enormous number has become trapped in a hard-to-transcend culture of dispiriting poverty, where segregation, unequal education, economic exploitation (payday loans, food deserts, etc.), gang violence, and an unending cycle of incarceration combine to make everyday life crushingly difficult. They are seemingly unseen unless they gain head-
lines for violently criminal activity…

Read the entire article here.

Racial Discrimination in Medicine versus Race-Based Medicine: The Ethical, Legal and Policy Implications on Health Disparities

Georgetown Journal of Law & Modern Critical Race Perspectives
Volume 3, Issue 1 (Spring 2011)
pages 59-86

Christopher Ogolla, LL.M., J.D., M.A., M.P.H., B.A., Academic Support Instructor
Thurgood Marshall School of Law
Texas Southern University

This paper explores the history of racial discrimination in medicine and evaluates the ethical and policy issues raised by race-based medicine. It notes that proponents of race-based medicine have failed to frame the debate in such a way that distinguishes it from racial discrimination in medicine and suggests that race-based medicine is more likely to pass muster if it is framed in terms of elimination of health disparities among different segments of the population. The paper attempts to answer questions such as whether race was and is still a dominant factor in medicine, and whether it is ethical to tie one’s advice (as a medical professional) to a patient’s race. More importantly, the paper explores the issue of whether race-based medicine can ever be justified.

The paper argues that traditional medicine sometimes supported by the government, fostered bias and discrimination against minorities and suggests that this history has injected a level of suspicion and cynicism in public discussions of race-based medicine. The paper evaluates benefits and pitfalls of race-based medicine and analyzes the ethical, legal and policy implications of such a practice. It recommends that there is some value in understanding the variable response to drugs and the ethics of producing drugs for those who need it most, even if they happen to be members of one ethnic group. The paper concludes by noting that race-based medicine promises to achieve optimal medical outcomes by helping physicians and patients choose patient-specific disease management approaches based on a patient’s genetic profile.

Read the entire article here or here.

The Nature of Race: How Scientists Think and Teach About Being Different

James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy
Rice University
2011-09-15, 18:00-19:30 CDT

Jenifer L. Bratter, Host & Associate Professor of Sociology
Rice University

New York University sociology professor Ann Morning, Ph.D., analyzes how scientists influence ideas about race through teachings and textbooks.

Ann Morning, Ph.D., is an associate professor of sociology at New York University. She studies race and ethnicity, especially racial classification; multiracial populations; demography; and the sociology of knowledge and science. In her book “The Nature of Race: How Scientists Think and Teach about Human Difference,” Morning explores the ways scientists are influencing ideas about race through teaching and textbooks — even as the scientific community debates the issue. She also examines how corporations and the government use scientific research in ways that often reinforce the idea that race is biologically determined. Morning holds her Ph.D. in sociology from Princeton University.
 
This event is co-sponsored by the Baker Institute Science and Technology Policy Program, the Race Scholars at the Kinder Institute for Urban Research and the Department of Sociology at Rice University.

Video Duration: 01:25:44

Professor Dorothy Roberts — Challenging Concepts of Race

Mixed Race Radio
Blog Talk Radio
2013-06-26, 16:00Z (12:00 EDT)

Tiffany Rae Reid, Host

Dorothy E. Roberts, George A. Weiss University Professor of Law and Sociology; Raymond Pace and Sadie Tanner Mossell Alexander Professor of Civil Rights
University of Pennsylvania

Dorothy Roberts is the fourteenth Penn Integrates Knowledge Professor, George A. Weiss University Professor, and the inaugural Raymond Pace and Sadie Tanner Mossell Alexander Professor of Civil Rights at University of Pennsylvania, where she holds appointments in the Law School and Departments of Africana Studies and Sociology. An internationally recognized scholar, public intellectual, and social justice advocate, she has written and lectured extensively on the interplay of gender, race, and class in legal issues and has been a leader in transforming public thinking and policy on reproductive health, child welfare, and bioethics.

Professor Roberts is the author of the award-winning books Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction, and the Meaning of Liberty (Random House/Pantheon, 1997) and Shattered Bonds: The Color of Child Welfare (Basic Books/Civitas, 2002), as well as co-editor of six books on constitutional law and gender. She has also published more than eighty articles and essays in books and scholarly journals, including Harvard Law Review, Yale Law Journal, and Stanford Law Review.  Her latest book, Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-create Race in the Twenty-First Century, was published by the New Press in July 2011.

For more information, click here.

Facing up to the Failure of “Racial Democracy” in Brazil

Planète Afrique: Articles on Africa and the African Diaspora Written by Hishaam Aidi for Various Magazines
First published: 2001-11-28

Hishaam Aidi, Lecturer in Discipline of International and Public Affairs
Columbia University

What do the Brazilians who call themselves “prieto,” “pardo” and “mestico” have in common? Despite a dizzying array of options when it comes to racial classification, all would be considered “black” by US standards.

A DNA study by Brazilian scientists found that 80 percent of the population has at least some African ancestry, and fully half of the nation’s 165 million inhabitants consider themselves to be of African descent. Brazil, the largest country in South America, is home to the largest black population outside of the African continent.

But despite the widely held and consciously promoted view of Brazil as a “racial democracy,” vast inequalities exist between the country’s white minority and the mixed and black majority. Afro-Brazilians live in appalling conditions often concentrated in impoverished, crime-ridden favaelas (slums) of Brazil’s large urban centers; very few Afro-Brazilians are in government, whether in the legislature, state bureaucracy or the military. Afro-Brazilians have also long been excluded from the civil service and other professions, with newspapers advertising private sector jobs stipulating “good appearance,” code words for “white.” And only two percent of Brazil’s 1.6 million college students are black…

Read the entire article here.

Santita Jackson Show (WVON AM, Chicago) with Rainier Spencer

The Santita Jackson Show
WVON 1690 AM
Chicago, Illinois
2011-02-16, 15:05Z (09:05 CST, 10:05 EST, 07:05 PST)

Santita Jackson, Host

Rainier Spencer, Director and Professor of Afro-American Studies; Professor of Interdisciplinary Studies
University of Nevada, Las Vegas

The topic of discussion will be the so-called “one-drop rule.”  Listen to the interview here (39.6MB, 00:43:21).

Dr. Spencer is the author of the new book, Reproducing Race: The Paradox of Generation Mix (2011) in where he argues cogently, and forcefully, that the deconstruction of race promised by the American Multiracial Identity Movement will remain an illusion of wishful thinking unless we truly address the racist baggage that serves tenaciously to conserve the present racial order.

Selected bibliography:

• “Racism and the Multiracial Label,” commentary in the “Room for Debate: The ‘Two or More Races’ Dilemma” section, The New York Times, February 12, 2011.
• “Mixed-Race Chic,” The Chronicle Review, May 19, 2009.
• Challenging Multiracial ldentity. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2006.
• Spurious Issues: Race and Multiracial Identity Politics in the United States, Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999.

Listen to the interview here (39.6MB, 00:43:21).

How the ‘Loving’ Case Changed the US

The Root
2013-06-12

Kelli Goff, Special Correspondent

The legacy of the interracial-marriage case looms large on the 46th anniversary of the landmark decision.

Forty-six years ago, on June 12, 1967, the Supreme Court ruled that a Virginia law prohibiting Mildred Jeter Loving, who was black, and Richard Loving, who was white, from marrying because of their race was unconstitutional. Their family name, “Loving,” was so perfect for a case about love that it probably would have been dubbed unbelievable if the story were being pitched as fiction.

The case transformed the landscape of America. In a statement to The Root, Kim Keenan, general counsel for the NAACP, said of Loving v. Virginia’s impact, “Along with other key cases, it brought an end to a separate-and-unequal legally sanctioned way of life in America.”

Below is a list of the top ways that Loving v. Virginia has directly and indirectly changed America.

It gave the United States its first black president. Barack Obama was born in 1961, and the Loving case was decided in 1967, but the Lovings were married in 1958 in Washington, D.C. They were arrested upon returning to their native Virginia for defying the state’s anti-miscegenation statute. Their sentence of one year in prison or the option of leaving their home state set the groundwork for their landmark Supreme Court case. In doing so they made it possible for families like that of President Obama, which consisted of his black African father and white American mother, to legally exist in the state nearest to the city that the president and his family now call home…

Read the entire article here.

Photo of the Week: An Interracial Family in 1962

The Brooklyn Historical Society Blog
The Brooklyn Historical Society
2013-06-05

Sady Sullivan, Director of Oral History

The Bibuld Family, ca. 1962, V1989.22.14; Bob Adelman photographs of Brooklyn Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) demonstrations collection, V1989.002; Brooklyn Historical Society.

This photograph from the Brooklyn Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) collection shows the Bibuld family: parents Elaine and Jerome, and their three children Melanie, Carrington, and Douglass (L to R).

The Bibulds, an interracial family, lived in Crown Heights in the early 1960s and the children attended a neighborhood school that had a Gifted and Talented program and enrichments like art, music, and field trips.  After their home caught fire in the fall of 1962, the Bibulds moved to Park Slope, and the children’s new neighborhood school had substandard academics and few enrichments — and the student body was more than 70% African American and Puerto Rican.

Elaine and Jerry Bibuld, both members of the Brooklyn chapter of CORE, were angered by this educational inequity and concerned for their children who were very bored at their new school. So, they pulled their children out of this racially segregated public school and sat them in an all-white school in the Bath Beach section of Brooklyn. Technically, the children were not enrolled in school and the City considered them truants, which opened the parents up to imprisonment for parental neglect. For roughly three months, the Bibuld protest was the most important desegregation case in the city…

Read the entire article here.