Showing posts with label Racism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Racism. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
I've Been Spending Time...
...reading this blog this summer: http://www.antiracistparent.com/. I recommend it!
Friday, April 24, 2009
Race and Adoption
I've been thinking a lot about race and racism recently. A LOT. Now that Obama is president, whites seem to think we are post-race, which they think also gives them permission to be more overt about their subtle racism. In some ways I'm glad it is no longer *quite* as subtle and insidious because it is easier to deal with overt racism. But I can't believe the things that are coming out of folks' mouths right now. [sound of me throwing up as I think about it]
Anyway, so I've been thinking about race and racism a lot.
And ta-da, one of my friends online produced one more interesting related read this morning:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/194886
Anyway, so I've been thinking about race and racism a lot.
And ta-da, one of my friends online produced one more interesting related read this morning:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/194886
Friday, April 3, 2009
Today Was "Speak Your Mind" Day
Well, at least that's the side of the bed I rolled out of today.
I may have been too whiny to be deserving of a gift, but that is a different story.
Anyway, I learned a few other things about myself during "speak your mind day":
1. According to my value system, speaking out against insidious racism is highly important. When such racism is occurring publicly, I may find it worthy of a public response if that seems most effective in the moment.
2. Over time, I work up courage to speak up about things that bother me. The first or second time I witness a similar type of event, I may not say anything at all, but by the third time (even if I am with different people in a different situation) all bets just may be off.
3. The more someone's previous behavior seemed wrong, the more their current behavior will seem wrong to me when they are doing something offensive (vs. someone else doing the same thing without the same history). This is especially true for some reason or another in my view of certain famous people.
4. I expect that if someone sends me one of those forwarded emails, the subject is open for discussion. If such an email has been sent to a large list of folks, I tend to think that reasoning people will assume it is open for discussion and won't be confused by a public reply.
5. Since forwarded emails bother many folks, I rarely send them. If someone sends one to me, I figure a response couldn't be more bothersome to anyone who has already received the forward. I tend to think such responses are delightful because they are always much more thoughtful than the forward.
6. I occassionally get cranky and run out of patience when people think we are somehow "past racism" or that they couldn't possibly harbor unexamined prejudices-- big or small-- or that they couldn't possibly be oppressive of others in any way because they are good people. Being good doesn't take you out of a system of institutional racism.
7. There are some things I just don't find funny. If it is something racist, not only will I not laugh, but I won't perpetuate the problem by refusing to speak up. I also may fail to see the humor in any follow-up jokes meant to mend fences.
8. There are some hills I am willing to "die on."
Sorry. This isn't meant to be a cryptic message. Just some self-observations upon reflection at the end of the day. Nothing major happened. I just got a forwarded email that really bothered me (one of the most offensive things I've heard in a long time), responded that it was disturbing, heard back from the sender that it was rude for me to bother all her friends and family by replying all, and replied back to apologize for the misunderstanding and to explain that my error occurred because I thought that the subject had been opened for discussion. Don't worry. We all kissed and made up and everything. But I can't say I feel what I did was wrong. That email wasn't fit for public consumption in the first place, in my humble opinion.
I may have been too whiny to be deserving of a gift, but that is a different story.
Anyway, I learned a few other things about myself during "speak your mind day":
1. According to my value system, speaking out against insidious racism is highly important. When such racism is occurring publicly, I may find it worthy of a public response if that seems most effective in the moment.
2. Over time, I work up courage to speak up about things that bother me. The first or second time I witness a similar type of event, I may not say anything at all, but by the third time (even if I am with different people in a different situation) all bets just may be off.
3. The more someone's previous behavior seemed wrong, the more their current behavior will seem wrong to me when they are doing something offensive (vs. someone else doing the same thing without the same history). This is especially true for some reason or another in my view of certain famous people.
4. I expect that if someone sends me one of those forwarded emails, the subject is open for discussion. If such an email has been sent to a large list of folks, I tend to think that reasoning people will assume it is open for discussion and won't be confused by a public reply.
5. Since forwarded emails bother many folks, I rarely send them. If someone sends one to me, I figure a response couldn't be more bothersome to anyone who has already received the forward. I tend to think such responses are delightful because they are always much more thoughtful than the forward.
6. I occassionally get cranky and run out of patience when people think we are somehow "past racism" or that they couldn't possibly harbor unexamined prejudices-- big or small-- or that they couldn't possibly be oppressive of others in any way because they are good people. Being good doesn't take you out of a system of institutional racism.
7. There are some things I just don't find funny. If it is something racist, not only will I not laugh, but I won't perpetuate the problem by refusing to speak up. I also may fail to see the humor in any follow-up jokes meant to mend fences.
8. There are some hills I am willing to "die on."
Sorry. This isn't meant to be a cryptic message. Just some self-observations upon reflection at the end of the day. Nothing major happened. I just got a forwarded email that really bothered me (one of the most offensive things I've heard in a long time), responded that it was disturbing, heard back from the sender that it was rude for me to bother all her friends and family by replying all, and replied back to apologize for the misunderstanding and to explain that my error occurred because I thought that the subject had been opened for discussion. Don't worry. We all kissed and made up and everything. But I can't say I feel what I did was wrong. That email wasn't fit for public consumption in the first place, in my humble opinion.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
In Relation to the Rev. Wright, A Memo
Here is what I wrote to my congregation this week in our weekly newsletter. My apologies for any formatting issues. I took this from a copy clip that was unformatted, and the computer jumbled some words together, etc. I felt we would be remiss if we did not start speaking explicitly about liberation theology again in this ripe moment, while it is in the national conversation. I do believe that living religion can not distance itself from the world in which it is living.
R E L I G I O U S E D U C A T O R’ S M E M O
“Power As a Source of Power”
“All people have a major task, from cradle to grave, of defining who theyare” -- Na'im Akbar
My son M. woke up wanting to wrestle this morning. He walked over to me, not with blinking half-awake eyes as he sometimes does, but instead with wide open eyes, and a giddy grin on his face. “Arh!” he growled as he jumped onto me, indicating his playful initiation of our “mama lion-lion cub” game.
My wife G. commented the other day that M. has been something of a“class clown” lately. “Remember when he was just six months old and we werewriting down his personal strengths for that developmental assessment?” I asked her. “We did write that his number one strength was his sense of humor. It’s part of his identity.”
In 1982, B. Harro created a “cycle of socialization diagram” that I find useful. It is printed in the book Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice: A Sourcebook by Maurianne Adams. If you have internet access, plug "‘Cycleof Socialization Diagram’ +Harro” into Google, and it will bring you to Google Books (last link) where you can see the diagram in the book.
In this diagram, Harro postulated that we are “born into a world with mechanics in place. We have no blame...no guilt...no choice...limited information.” Through our lives, we are socialized, that is, taught on a personal level by parents, relatives, teachers, people we love and trust. We are shaped by their expectations, norms, values, roles, and models of how we should be. This is our lens of identity.
However, Harro went further to illustrate that we also have a lens of socialization and teaching, in which we are bombarded on conscious and unconscious levels with messages from institutions such as churches, schools, television, the legal system, medical and mental health systems, and businesses, as well as from the practices, lyrics, language, media, and patterns of thought of our culture.
Through this, our lens of identity is enforced, sanctioned, or stigmatized. We receive positive and negative feedback about ourselves. We receive privilege and persecution, discrimination and empowerment. This is our lens of experience.
Before G. and I were foster licensed in [state], we were required to take a thirty-hour foster parent training called “Parent’s Resource forInformation, Development, and Education (PRIDE).” During this course, we were asked to name the sources of our socialization: the people and institutions in our lives that have served to either shape us, or reinforceus. Participants in the class called out names: “Uncle Juan,” “my mother,Glory,” “Mrs. Smith, my third grade teacher,” “Dr. Narayan.” They named schools they’d attended, jobs held, employers, clubs, sports, and faith communities. They even named foods and drinks and the social settings for these, sources of media, and hardships or privileges they could count on.
As we did this, our facilitators wrote our responses on a dry erase board. We indicated the power of each source, and accordingly, our facilitators wrote the items we named closer to or further away from the center of a circle. Current sources were indicated by a solid line to the center. Sources from the past were indicated with a dotted line. Then we were asked to identify, in sequential order starting with parents and siblings, the losses that takeplace when a child comes into foster care. Soon, the whole board was altered beyond recognition.
Our lens of experience results in a variety of internal experiences that may include among other things dissonance, silence, anger, dehumanization, guilt, collusion, ignorance, self-hatred, stress, and internalization of patterns of power. From here, we have a pathway out of the cycle which involves consciousness raising, interrupting, educating, taking a stand, questioning, or reframing. Or, we do nothing. We don’t make waves. We promote the status quo. And in this case, the cycle begins again at the lens of identity, only now, this lens is shaped by “misinformation...history...habit...tradition...prejudices...stereotypes...biases.”
This cycle is in constant relationship with our fear, ignorance, confusion, and insecurity. Renowned scholar, educator, and author (among his other books he wrote Is God a White Racist?), Dr. William R. Jones says that when we talk about “oppression,” it brings up negative connotations. In part because our own identity is in a constant relationship with fear, insecurity, and dissonance, we are unconsciously defensive and can’t associate ourselves with the notion of “oppression.” The work becomes especially intense when we begin to unpack our own bags of privilege: the way we oppress others on a daily basis (and we all do) in order to preserve our privilege. Whew! That’s tough work.
It helps to know this: power is being able to say “what the norm is.” It threatens something as precious and fragile as our identity to step out of the cycle and empower others. The power of setting the norm gives us the power of being the norm. And yet, I believe we have something even more powerful to gain by engaging in empowerment of others as we practice being gentle and loving with ourselves. That is, a move from that fear, ignorance, confusion, and insecurity, into the strength of an identity that is more fully integrated, more fully whole.
As uncomfortable as recent political tensions have been, and as much as I may not agree with some particular things that the Rev. Jeremiah Wright has said, I find myself thankful that “liberation theology” has received some attention in the national dialogue recently. Whether or not this is a part of your own theology, and absolutely regardless of what you think of the Rev. Wright, the act of studying liberation theology can be a part of a journey toward wholeness.
Warmly in Faith,
S.
R E L I G I O U S E D U C A T O R’ S M E M O
“Power As a Source of Power”
“All people have a major task, from cradle to grave, of defining who theyare” -- Na'im Akbar
My son M. woke up wanting to wrestle this morning. He walked over to me, not with blinking half-awake eyes as he sometimes does, but instead with wide open eyes, and a giddy grin on his face. “Arh!” he growled as he jumped onto me, indicating his playful initiation of our “mama lion-lion cub” game.
My wife G. commented the other day that M. has been something of a“class clown” lately. “Remember when he was just six months old and we werewriting down his personal strengths for that developmental assessment?” I asked her. “We did write that his number one strength was his sense of humor. It’s part of his identity.”
In 1982, B. Harro created a “cycle of socialization diagram” that I find useful. It is printed in the book Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice: A Sourcebook by Maurianne Adams. If you have internet access, plug "‘Cycleof Socialization Diagram’ +Harro” into Google, and it will bring you to Google Books (last link) where you can see the diagram in the book.
In this diagram, Harro postulated that we are “born into a world with mechanics in place. We have no blame...no guilt...no choice...limited information.” Through our lives, we are socialized, that is, taught on a personal level by parents, relatives, teachers, people we love and trust. We are shaped by their expectations, norms, values, roles, and models of how we should be. This is our lens of identity.
However, Harro went further to illustrate that we also have a lens of socialization and teaching, in which we are bombarded on conscious and unconscious levels with messages from institutions such as churches, schools, television, the legal system, medical and mental health systems, and businesses, as well as from the practices, lyrics, language, media, and patterns of thought of our culture.
Through this, our lens of identity is enforced, sanctioned, or stigmatized. We receive positive and negative feedback about ourselves. We receive privilege and persecution, discrimination and empowerment. This is our lens of experience.
Before G. and I were foster licensed in [state], we were required to take a thirty-hour foster parent training called “Parent’s Resource forInformation, Development, and Education (PRIDE).” During this course, we were asked to name the sources of our socialization: the people and institutions in our lives that have served to either shape us, or reinforceus. Participants in the class called out names: “Uncle Juan,” “my mother,Glory,” “Mrs. Smith, my third grade teacher,” “Dr. Narayan.” They named schools they’d attended, jobs held, employers, clubs, sports, and faith communities. They even named foods and drinks and the social settings for these, sources of media, and hardships or privileges they could count on.
As we did this, our facilitators wrote our responses on a dry erase board. We indicated the power of each source, and accordingly, our facilitators wrote the items we named closer to or further away from the center of a circle. Current sources were indicated by a solid line to the center. Sources from the past were indicated with a dotted line. Then we were asked to identify, in sequential order starting with parents and siblings, the losses that takeplace when a child comes into foster care. Soon, the whole board was altered beyond recognition.
Our lens of experience results in a variety of internal experiences that may include among other things dissonance, silence, anger, dehumanization, guilt, collusion, ignorance, self-hatred, stress, and internalization of patterns of power. From here, we have a pathway out of the cycle which involves consciousness raising, interrupting, educating, taking a stand, questioning, or reframing. Or, we do nothing. We don’t make waves. We promote the status quo. And in this case, the cycle begins again at the lens of identity, only now, this lens is shaped by “misinformation...history...habit...tradition...prejudices...stereotypes...biases.”
This cycle is in constant relationship with our fear, ignorance, confusion, and insecurity. Renowned scholar, educator, and author (among his other books he wrote Is God a White Racist?), Dr. William R. Jones says that when we talk about “oppression,” it brings up negative connotations. In part because our own identity is in a constant relationship with fear, insecurity, and dissonance, we are unconsciously defensive and can’t associate ourselves with the notion of “oppression.” The work becomes especially intense when we begin to unpack our own bags of privilege: the way we oppress others on a daily basis (and we all do) in order to preserve our privilege. Whew! That’s tough work.
It helps to know this: power is being able to say “what the norm is.” It threatens something as precious and fragile as our identity to step out of the cycle and empower others. The power of setting the norm gives us the power of being the norm. And yet, I believe we have something even more powerful to gain by engaging in empowerment of others as we practice being gentle and loving with ourselves. That is, a move from that fear, ignorance, confusion, and insecurity, into the strength of an identity that is more fully integrated, more fully whole.
As uncomfortable as recent political tensions have been, and as much as I may not agree with some particular things that the Rev. Jeremiah Wright has said, I find myself thankful that “liberation theology” has received some attention in the national dialogue recently. Whether or not this is a part of your own theology, and absolutely regardless of what you think of the Rev. Wright, the act of studying liberation theology can be a part of a journey toward wholeness.
Warmly in Faith,
S.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
The Rev. Wright
Did you catch the Bill Moyers interview? I did not. While it may be ancient history for some, I just finished the full text online. Much better than a singular clip. I am glad I went back a few times until I could finish it.
Here it is. The video is in two parts. Look up at the top of the page to click on "part II" when the first ends. However, there is the transcript at the bottom of the same screen, with the whole interview in its entirety. The interview was completed in an hour-long segment:
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/watch.html
Some random thoughts on first reflection:
1. I wish Bill Moyers had not limited his conversation in the interview to the term "black liberation theology." Unfortunately, due perhaps to "miseducation," white folks-- and maybe even other folks of color-- who are unfamiliar with liberation theology may be inclined to put this off as something that has nothing to do with them. Ahem. "Liberation theology." I am so glad this term is coming, if slowly, into the national conversation. I come from a religious tradition with a history closely intertwined with liberation theology. Whether or not this is your own theology, developing an understanding of liberation theology is of value. We are all developing, learning human beings, and if we are people of faith seeking to develop ourselves spiritually and religiously, we will be interested in developing into the wholeness of our humanity. Liberation theology can help inform us along the journey.
2. There is a powerfully beautiful (slightly off topic) sermon here from the Rev. James Ford: http://monkeymindonline.blogspot.com/2008/05/saying-yes-to-life-even-hard-parts.html. There is a piece in that sermon, that reminds me of one of my favorite sermons from one of my all-time favorite preachers, the Rev. Thomas Anastasi from Shoreline Unitarian Universalist Church in Shoreline, WA. His sermon was titled something like "What You Think You Heard Me Say Was Not What I Thought I Said." There are few more painful and fragile lessons for those of us new in our ministries, and perhaps those long-timers as well-- and really for all people-- than what that title sums up. This whole "Rev. Wright controversy" has been so interesting for me to just stand back and observe. I feel such tenderness, such empathy for the Rev. Wright, even as I do not agree with everything I think I hear him saying.
3. Many folks are questioning Wright's judgement in terms of the timing of his very public commentary on the media-frenzy over statements he has made. I do fear this will be detrimental to Obama's campaign, and at the same time, I am thankful this is coming out now. I want all the mud-slinging to begin at this time, rather than when the general election is upon us. If there is "dirt" to be dug up on Obama, let it not take us by surprise.
4. I think it is worthy of pause to think of the many preachers of one type or another who have been involved with our various presidents and other politicians. Some heinous things have been said by a-many of them. What makes the Rev. Wright's comments (whether or not you consider them heinous) particularly controversial seems to me to be (1) that the Rev. Wright is black, and unapologetic. Yes, though Obama has since "divorced" himself from the Reverend, as he originally said, it does come back to the old phrase that Sunday is the most segregated day of the week...the Reverend has made himself clear that he is not going to speak in ways more palatable to whites if it changes his message to do so. And that to me seems to be the clincher in this conversation. I do have a feeling that many of the doubts that this raises for folks about Obama have as much to do with the "miseducation" that you can't be patriotic and question your own country. And being black just seems to feed into that sense of suspicion. But what is more patriotic than questioning one's own country in an effort to call it into its better self? And anybody who has ever been to therapy knows that honest dialogue about the self-destructive things we do and the way to get out of those patterns does not automatically mean self-hatred. Finally, as many ministers have commented since "Jeremiah Wright" became a household name across America, let no one ever hold a congregant accountable to every belief and statement of that congregant's minister. As a religious professional myself, I'd like to acknowledge that I am also a living, growing, changing, learning, fallible human being.
5. Unitarian Universalists have been attempting to engage in honest racial conversation and anti-racist work (starting from within our own hearts) for a long time. When I heard the Rev. Wright frame his "next step" recommendation for the work of the United Church of Christ as needing to have such a conversation, I got hung up for a moment. It is easy to feel discouraged right now as a Unitarian Universalist in the midst of such a conversation, with so many fits and starts. Then I heard the Rev. Wright say this in his next breath about that conversation: "To start using Bill Jones' paradigm, about how one sees God...your theology determines one's anthropology. And how you see humans determines your sociology." We are on an interesting course right now in Unitarian Universalism, engaging theological language and having an honest conversation about our theological diversity too. Perhaps these two conversations, our conversation on race and our conversation on theology, for the first time should begin to find places to be in ongoing relationship with one another. I wonder how this would change the depth to which we can take both these conversations.
That's it, for now. I'm sure I'll periodically have more to say on this.
Here it is. The video is in two parts. Look up at the top of the page to click on "part II" when the first ends. However, there is the transcript at the bottom of the same screen, with the whole interview in its entirety. The interview was completed in an hour-long segment:
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/watch.html
Some random thoughts on first reflection:
1. I wish Bill Moyers had not limited his conversation in the interview to the term "black liberation theology." Unfortunately, due perhaps to "miseducation," white folks-- and maybe even other folks of color-- who are unfamiliar with liberation theology may be inclined to put this off as something that has nothing to do with them. Ahem. "Liberation theology." I am so glad this term is coming, if slowly, into the national conversation. I come from a religious tradition with a history closely intertwined with liberation theology. Whether or not this is your own theology, developing an understanding of liberation theology is of value. We are all developing, learning human beings, and if we are people of faith seeking to develop ourselves spiritually and religiously, we will be interested in developing into the wholeness of our humanity. Liberation theology can help inform us along the journey.
2. There is a powerfully beautiful (slightly off topic) sermon here from the Rev. James Ford: http://monkeymindonline.blogspot.com/2008/05/saying-yes-to-life-even-hard-parts.html. There is a piece in that sermon, that reminds me of one of my favorite sermons from one of my all-time favorite preachers, the Rev. Thomas Anastasi from Shoreline Unitarian Universalist Church in Shoreline, WA. His sermon was titled something like "What You Think You Heard Me Say Was Not What I Thought I Said." There are few more painful and fragile lessons for those of us new in our ministries, and perhaps those long-timers as well-- and really for all people-- than what that title sums up. This whole "Rev. Wright controversy" has been so interesting for me to just stand back and observe. I feel such tenderness, such empathy for the Rev. Wright, even as I do not agree with everything I think I hear him saying.
3. Many folks are questioning Wright's judgement in terms of the timing of his very public commentary on the media-frenzy over statements he has made. I do fear this will be detrimental to Obama's campaign, and at the same time, I am thankful this is coming out now. I want all the mud-slinging to begin at this time, rather than when the general election is upon us. If there is "dirt" to be dug up on Obama, let it not take us by surprise.
4. I think it is worthy of pause to think of the many preachers of one type or another who have been involved with our various presidents and other politicians. Some heinous things have been said by a-many of them. What makes the Rev. Wright's comments (whether or not you consider them heinous) particularly controversial seems to me to be (1) that the Rev. Wright is black, and unapologetic. Yes, though Obama has since "divorced" himself from the Reverend, as he originally said, it does come back to the old phrase that Sunday is the most segregated day of the week...the Reverend has made himself clear that he is not going to speak in ways more palatable to whites if it changes his message to do so. And that to me seems to be the clincher in this conversation. I do have a feeling that many of the doubts that this raises for folks about Obama have as much to do with the "miseducation" that you can't be patriotic and question your own country. And being black just seems to feed into that sense of suspicion. But what is more patriotic than questioning one's own country in an effort to call it into its better self? And anybody who has ever been to therapy knows that honest dialogue about the self-destructive things we do and the way to get out of those patterns does not automatically mean self-hatred. Finally, as many ministers have commented since "Jeremiah Wright" became a household name across America, let no one ever hold a congregant accountable to every belief and statement of that congregant's minister. As a religious professional myself, I'd like to acknowledge that I am also a living, growing, changing, learning, fallible human being.
5. Unitarian Universalists have been attempting to engage in honest racial conversation and anti-racist work (starting from within our own hearts) for a long time. When I heard the Rev. Wright frame his "next step" recommendation for the work of the United Church of Christ as needing to have such a conversation, I got hung up for a moment. It is easy to feel discouraged right now as a Unitarian Universalist in the midst of such a conversation, with so many fits and starts. Then I heard the Rev. Wright say this in his next breath about that conversation: "To start using Bill Jones' paradigm, about how one sees God...your theology determines one's anthropology. And how you see humans determines your sociology." We are on an interesting course right now in Unitarian Universalism, engaging theological language and having an honest conversation about our theological diversity too. Perhaps these two conversations, our conversation on race and our conversation on theology, for the first time should begin to find places to be in ongoing relationship with one another. I wonder how this would change the depth to which we can take both these conversations.
That's it, for now. I'm sure I'll periodically have more to say on this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)