Resolution #2 for the Week

I was talking to my girl about a number of things the other day. And, I asked her to join my simple resolution: not to laugh at shit that aint funny.

If there was one word to summarize the past 2-3 years of youth culture it would be "awkward." Calling oneself awkward, trying to avoid awkward people, situations and places, secretly visiting blogs about awkward circumstances - fucking everything is awkward to people. And, in avoiding this dreaded "awkward situation" people will do dumb shit like laugh at racist/misogynist/classist/etc. or just plain unfunny jokes just because they want to not make the situation uncomfortable.

My question is, why not? Because, when you uncomfortable chuckle to a person's inappropriate joke you signal a couple of things to them and others. One, and probably most primary, you become complicit in the joke. Now, at this point, it doesn't really matter if you didn't tell the joke, you are just as guilty. Secondly, you tell the joke-teller that their joke was both appropriate and/or funny. So, that means they probably think that it was a great success and will continue to inappropriate and/or not funny. If this person is your friend, why are you gonna let them make a fool out of themselves? If this person is not your friend, why do you care if you make them feel uncomfortable? They should feel uncomfortable.

Now, as a small caveat. I tell bad jokes a lot, all the time really. Sometimes, I'm the only one laughing because they are really just that bad. But, if my jokes just don't seem funny - that's okay - usually they amuse the fuck out of me. I don't expect people to laugh all the time, but I still tell my jokes because I know they'll brighten up my day. Rarely, I even tell some inappropriate jokes, which makes me feel guilty after and when no one laughs it only shows me how bad I am at making decisions sometimes. Good, thank you for checking me. 

So, please, make some awkward situations people. Stop laughing at bad jokes. Ask pointed questions after inappropriate jokes (ie. So, I'm confused, did you mean [insert explicit but detached summary]?). Stop letting people get away with thinking they're funny when they're not and even worse that making light of others differences or some other form of inappropriate joke is okay, because it's not. Thank you.

I thought culture was supposed to be around some backlash or political something or other

And, there, in one fell swoop went my promise to myself to write once a day, but my promise has evolved into a resolution. Which, in my head, means that I will try my damnedest to write each weekday but if I don't I will not feel that Catholic guilt but will just carry forward with the plan. That being said, I have an excellent excuse.

Oh, haha, excuses and whining. Well, anyways, I came down with a short, intense case of the flu. Not yet being on health insurance (but, thanks Obama for making sure I can stay under moms for a little while longer) I was sorta pissed that I would have zero access to anti-virals. But, after 2 intense days of fevers, chills, sore throat, body aches that made me cry from pain, etc. etc. it subsided to mild versions of the sore throat, body aches, lack of energy, etc. etc. Speaking of Obama, I spent the weekend getting intimately acquainted with my bedroom - for the first time since I've moved here unfortunately - and finally got around to listening to Dreams from my Father. A great listen, and something to mull over though I am disappointed that my President bears less resemblance to his younger self than I would like.

One of my critiques of my generation and of myself is the lack of politics. Instead we all feel girdled with the enormous pressure of political correctness and status quo. Instead of coming together around shared politics and beliefs, we come together around... what? It's like hipster culture - okay, yes, I live in Williamsburg, Brooklyn - but I can point out people and laugh about how they are a charactature of the a hipster. But, do hipsters have any unified beliefs or values? What is the commonality except for posturing? It seems odd how we construct these identities based on a sense of irony that often comes off as immature, music tastes that are somehow above others and a style of dress that's not really that original, but nothing of substance. Now, our parents generation - the hippie generation - maybe they didn't seem much better but in addition to the free love, free drug attitude, they protesting the war, they rebelled against the 50s white picket craziness. Our generation, if we assume the hipster culture is a culture not only is not protesting but they are also definitely not rebelling. It just wouldn't be in their best interest to rebel against their sponsors.

Anyways, to bring this full circle, the young Obama was political. He was critical of the structural racism that the country was built on and his white family's complicity in it. He was a thoughtful brother, ya know? He was angry and tried to organize people for change. Now, it seems like all that anger has been beaten out of him instead of being channeled into productive decisions. By choosing to be bi-partisan  ("why all the democrats acting like fuckin republicans?") he essentially chooses to not do anything. When we take the smart, middle ground instead of being radical, the results are always limited. So, it's a shame that unlike the rightful critique of my generation as not political enough, he was but has turned into a people pleaser.

Though as a final thought: I still love me some Obama and really he can do nothing wrong in my eyes. No matter what, he will always be 100000003484534339834 billion times better than Bush.

Public Defenders and Race: Something to Think About

My brother sent me over this article entitled "Public Defenders as Effective as Private Attorneys," which basically finds just that. Yay! Public defenders! Disparaties between the outcomes of those who have a private attorney as a public defender do matter in regards to race though. Surprise, surprise. The article states:

...they noted some interestingly varied outcomes when looking at a defendant’s race. “White defendants are the only defendants who benefit from having a private attorney at the release decision,” they write. Specifically, they found whites with private attorneys are 2.7 times more likely than whites with public defenders to have bail granted. For people of color, private attorneys may not help in getting bail, but they do facilitate plea bargains. “Black defendants who retain a private attorney are almost two times more likely to have the primary charge reduced than black defendants who are represented by a public defender,” the researchers write.

Now, the first point seems like the court favors wealthy white men over poor white men. And, wealthier black men over poor black men. Now, I wonder what causes the difference between white defendents whose attorney choice affects the release decision and black defendents whose attorney choice affects their possibility of a charge reduction? Is the court more likely to be "fair" or on their toes with attorneys that are perceived to have a higher stake  and interest in the case? Even within this seeming divisision between those who can afford an attorney and ones that can not, one realizes that the disparaties over sentencing whites and blacks remain strong.

Citizenship and Erasure

Tonight, I had dinner with girl from Korea. And, when I say from Korea, I mean straight from Korea - first time in the States ever. So, basically I be trying to school her on American history and try to learn a thing or two about my? her our Korean culture. So, anyways we were discussing Asians in America:

Her: So, how long have Asians been in America?
Me: ah, since the 19th century, a lot of Chinese immigrated here in the late 1800s
Her: whaaa? I never knew that
Me: yo, I know!!

And, it made me think of the politics of erasure practiced in the asian american community - that it seems everyone else took and ran with. Almost no one is aware of the long historical and political struggle that Asians had in America. Primarily, because it's a history that has been erased in our collective memory.

What I find so interesting about the erasure is that it seems to be both a product of Asians disavowing a radical, political history in an attempt to align themselves with whites and a product of whites choosing what history to teach - essentially saying whose history is important and whose is not. But these dual efforts (along with other historical and social policies and structures) have so rooted the narrative of asians as :forever foreigners that everyone - white, black, latino and ASIAN - has bought into the myth.

Takawa Ozawa, a Japanese immigrant, brought a challenge to the court in 1922. He said that he and his children deserved to be American citizens. He argued two points before the court: the first that he acted culturally like any white American and, second more importantly, that citizenship should be based not on nation your ancestors but on what's in your heart. "In name Benedict Arnold was an American, but at heart he was a traitor. In name I am not an American, but at heart I am a true American."

The court denied him, saying whiteness (and thus citizenship) was based on biology and while his skin color was indeed lighter than many white people, he was clearly from the mongloid race. Case closed. Following the case, land and property was stolen from the Japanese-Americans resulting in immobility of the people, which was furthered by their physical immobility during the period of Japanese internment in America. They - sometimes 3rd and 4th generation Americans - were still foreigners. Their long history in America was erased because of the "threat" they posed - a threat that German-Americans and Italian-Americans did not pose.

And now, decades later, asians still are seen as non-citizens. It's the same old lines - "you're english is really good" "no where are you from? where are you really from?" For a people that have been part of the States in big numbers since the 1800s, when will we be just from "New York" or "California" or "Oklahoma." How can we reclaim our historical identity? And, in what ways can people of color generally begin to push our history into the mainstream, instead of being relegated to just a chapter?

why my whining is okay (or helping the helpers parte deux)

so, here's the deal. i'm supposed to be helping these people think through the ways in which structural racism manifests itself in education and the specific ways in which we might begin to remediate its affects. now, these fools* wanna put on a skit ala hot tub time machine (or ghosts of christmas past) where a child is brought by the guidance counseler through time.

now, there were two women there. whining. really complaining. "just tell me what to do and i'll do it but i wanna go. get a drink. ::smirk::" Now, being the helpful person that I am I suggest that she come up with a written narrative of sorts to begin the process of moving the skit from rough idea to more finalized product. she looks incredulous. "that's not my thing." now, i'm confused - what's not your thing? this conference? working? moving projects forward?

so I reply, "well if you don't want to participate in this way" before I'm cut off with her angry words, "when did I say that? I would never say that. I want to participate, I'm here aren't I?" Well no, participation requires a bit more than just showing up. It requires... uh, participation.  but, I try to remember I'm on company time, so I reply "I didn't say you didn't want to participate at all, I was going to suggest that if you don't want to participate in this way then there are other things you can do." not surprisingly, i got completely ignored. I think she might have looked at me and then picked up her phone. hah. makes me wanna tackle her.

anyways, the two points i want to make with this narrative are these: 1) my whining is okay and her's is not and 2) showing up is not enough and 3) I wanna tackle her.

why you so obsessed with me?

It seems like every time I navigate to the NYT, there is some article on how "20-somethings" have no direction or live at home or are in some sort of limbo because they are too irresponsible and self-indulgent to be an adult. But, the narrative leaves out a specific subset: the sort of people who aren't married with children and a 9-5 but who aren't living with their parents and working at the local video store. What about all the 20-somethings who are independent, responsible, and pursuing things they actually enjoy? What about me, and all most of my friends?

The latest article is entitled "What Is It About 20-Somethings?"  written by Robin Marantz Henig, which explores the "emerging" stage of life called "emerging adulthood" -- a term coined because it was cooler and catchier than "youth." ... (blank stare) ...

As mentioned, the article creates a dichotomy between the "traditional cycle" of "orderly progression" - "finish school, grow up, start careers, make a family and on and on" - and the cycle gone awry - "remain(ing) untethered to romantic partners or to permanent homes, going back to school for lack of better options, traveling, avoiding commitments, competing ferociously for unpaid internships or temporary (and often grueling) Teach for America jobs, forestalling the beginning of adult life." And, while, I do not profess to co-sign to those who live an extended childhood by living off their parents, I think that my generation is being demonized for not following the trajectory of the previous generation - a trajectory that many do not wish to follow. This either/or dichotomy ignores a huge subset of people in their 20s: those living independently but non-traditionally.

much, much more after the jump...

Tempus II

Tempus II from Philip Heron on Vimeo.

reminds me of the beauty inherent in letting things fall apart around you. being the catalyst for those actions can either be an act of self-preservation or a desire to break free.

helping the helpers

Since Saturday, I've been in Virginia assisting in giving workshops on Structural Racism to a national organization that works on individual relationships with low-income minority students. Although the organization is something like 20 years old, this is the first time they have included a structural racism frame within their organization. And, while some of the participants "get it" - most do not. 

To me, it can be analogized to this basic standardized test question:

Fill in the missing number:

2, 4, 6, 8, 10, _, 14

a) 2     b) 12     c) 34394343.394

And, you know what most people choose? answer c. 

....

instead I'm surrounded by people spouting the "official" language, blaming the children for their racialized "deficiencies" or being upset because we're not applauding them (read white people) for saving our poor, dirty, backward children of color from themselves and their fucked up families.

now, what i find most discouraging is the fact that these are the very people who are dedicated, or at least working 35 hours a week, to children and to closing the achievement gap. now if these are the people who are helping our youth, how can any real change be affected? it only makes the problems seem bigger. the outlook bleaker. 

I addressed some of the issues of the white liberal savior and their pursuit to save the poor black kids in my thesis. what's going to help? and in what position can I position myself to be the most effective?