Is It Ever “Ok” For Whites To Criticize Blacks?

Last weekend, one of my homegirls invited me to go see “The Dutchman” — a 45 minute long one act play that’s intended to serve as an allegory for Black/White relations in America. Since Saturday was the last day it would be playing at the Bricolage Theater — and since my particular form of bougie Blackness calls for me to witness or partake in at least one “serious” conversation about race per month to offset my affinity for bottomless mimosas — I couldn’t pass it up.

Intense, disturbing, (occasionally) melodramatic, and intentionally provocative, the play itself was pretty much what I expected it to be. The most interesting part of the evening, though, was the “talk back” — the planned, hour-long discussion about race that took place right afterwards; a conversation involving cast members, the theater production people, and the audience. The theater only holds maybe 60 seats, and it’s structured so that the audience surrounds the stage on all sides. A quick jaunt to Goggle shows that this is called “theatre-in-the-round” — the perfect format to have a group discussion.

As you may have guessed, the audience was (mostly) comprised of Black people and the type of ultra-liberal, well-intentioned Whites who wear t-shirts with things like “White Privilege Sucks” written on them — basically, the exact type of audience that’s always present in any “serious” and open discussion about race that most of us have been a part of. And, usually these discussions are nothing but us (Black people) sharing our stories and airing our grievances while the Whites in the crowd nod solemnly and occasionally share their own self-depreciating stories about when they first realized that all White people are evil racists.

There was one person, though, who didn’t stick to the usual script. She was biracial (White and Native American), and she shared some not-so-positive experiences and feelings involving Black people. Her statements went over about as well as a fart in a crowded elevator; you could hear people groaning and sighing while she was talking, and everyone there — myself included — couldn’t wait to respond to and rebut some of the things she was saying.

Now, part of the reaction to her definitely had to do with her delivery. There was a certain tone-deaf antagonism attached to what she was saying. Basically, her body language and tone screamed “I’m fed up with y’all niggas, and you’re about to hear why, dammit!” But, on Sunday, as I reflected on the discussion, I realized that she actually didn’t complain about anything we don’t regularly complain about to each other.

She’s a stage manager, and the story she shared had to do with how Black actors are pretty much never on time. Once, when she asked a group of habitually late actors to be more respectful of her time, they felt disrespected and starting showing up even later just to spite her. (I actually laughed aloud when hearing that)

Again, she had the type of tone and assistant principal-esque demeanor that made it pretty easy to see why someone would respond to her the way the actors did. But, I do wonder if we just have a legitimate problem with getting “called out” by White people.

Actually, that’s a lie. I don’t wonder about this. I know we generally do not take kindly to White people criticizing anything that has to do with Black people and Black culture. As stated earlier, the criticism could even be the exact same thing we criticize about ourselves, but a White voice seems to make that criticism invalid.

For instance, in the last couple of months, there have been at least two high-profile instances of a non-liberal White person publicly criticizing something related to Black people and facing serious repercussions because of it.

John Derbyshire’s “The Talk: Nonblack version” — a “letter” to his son teaching him the best way to avoid violent confrontations with Black people — got him fired from his job at The National Review. While Derbyshire deserved to be fired for using shitty science to back his race-based racist assertions, much of what he said in his piece has come out of our own mouths many times.

In fact, three of his pieces of advice — “(10a) Avoid concentrations of blacks not all known to you personally, (10b) Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods, and (10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with blacks on that date” — are things that can be found in our freakin book.

In one of our chapters, Panama jokes that any guy trying to avoid having to fight anyone while on a date should stay away from places that young Black people congregate, like Applebee’s, night clubs, and Detroit.

You could make the same point about Naomi Schaefer Riley, who was recently fired from The Chronicle of Higher Education for writing a piece criticizing the value of Black Studies courses at universities. Was she wrong for flippantly dismissing an entire field of study? Yes. But, raise your hand if you’ve ever joked among other Black people that a Black Studies degree is about as useless as thumbs on a roach.

Granted, Riley and Derbyshire aren’t the best examples to use when making this point. Both were being intentionally sensationalistic, and they both basically got what they were asking for. But, it’s not only the non-liberal Whites who get this type of push back. I’ve read 1000 word long criticisms of Roger Ebert — a man who’s about as liberal, articulate, reasonable, and well-read as a person can possibly be — just because he gave a Tyler Perry movie a (deservedly) bad review, and I can’t count how many times I’ve heard White sports pundits called racist because they had something bad to say about a Black athlete. In these instances, the tone didn’t even matter. It just came down to “You’re White and he’s Black and that means you can’t say shit”

Anyway, that’s it for me today. I’m curious though: Do you think we have a problem with hearing criticism from Whites? If so, do you think it has more to do with the content of the criticism, or the tone/manner used to criticize?

Lastly, can you think of a time/situation where it was ever “Ok” for a White to call out a Black person/Black people in regards to something race-related?

—Damon Young (aka “The Champ”)

President Obama and The Same-Sex Marriage Stance

So today, Obama said in an interview that he supports same-sex marriage. This is a stark departure from his stance in 2008 when he pretty much opposed same-sex marriage but over time has stated that his thinking on the matter was evolving.

Evolving in this context is such a funny word. Evolution by definition alludes to continued growth. To say that his thinking is evolving almost implies that he had to grow as a person to acknowledge the truth of the situation, which is that marriage is for two people who loved and supported each other. The sex of those people should be secondary, if considered at all.

Let me state up front: I’m all for same-sex marriages. I have no qualms with it whatsoever. I think its a travesty that people are willing to fight SO hard to keep marriage “as it was intended” by the Bible.

I don’t mean to get all heretic or anything, but in my opinion, the Bible is a great book full of a lot of great stories. It’s the greatest quote book ever and the life lessons involved are definitely intended to help one live a fruitful and righteous life. Basically, the Bible is the extended version of the poem entitled “All I Really Need To Know I Learned In Kindergarten” I feel like nearly everything in the Bible is subject to interpretation. I’m also not alone in this thinking since nearly every religion and denomination has seen fit to interpret scriptures to fit their own leanings.

Granted, the Bible is a bit more clear when it comes to homosexuality and marriage. However, it’s a man-made document. And plus, what if I’m an atheist? (I’m not). But if I don’t believe in the Bible or God for that matter, why should I be constrained to the principles therein. A government that purports to separate church and state altogether gets to decide my martial status, effectively based on religious traditionalism? I have big problems with that.

And hell, what if I do believe in the Bible but still can’t help but be who I am? Gay people don’t think that being gay is a choice. So if God made me this way, is God also saying that he created me as an abomination and I’m effectively a reject from God’s kingdom? Hey God, it’s me Panama…inquiring minds would like to know.

It’s very big of Obama to make such a statement. I’m fairly certain that he’s the first sitting president to make such a bold statement about such a contentious issue. Though he did temper it a bit by immediately stating afterwards that it shouldn’t be a federal issue but a state issue. I’m not sure I agree with that. I’m aware that each state has its own set of rules, but marriage seems like such a cut-and-dry thing. Either you can or you can’t. Why fiddle with states rights in an issue as loaded as this; instead, just make a blanket across the board stance. That could be my Big Brother hat on though. I’ll acknowledge this.

I realize that there are significant numbers of people, probably even people who read this blog who think that same-sex marriage is religiously wrong (arguably true), and spiritually amoral. And everybody is entitled to their own opinion. I don’t think that same-sex marriages dilute the institution of marriage anymore than allowing 19-year-olds into the NBA dilutes the quality of play (debateable).

Are there lingering issues that needed to be sorted out? Sure. But it seems like gay people want to get married for the same reason straight people do….love, tax breaks, and benefits. Everybody should have a chance to the game the system, not just straight people. Plus, straight people have been f*cking up this whole marriage thing for a while now….shouldn’t we let somebody else have a chance?

Anyway, what do you all think about Obama making such a bold statement as President? Does it matter? Do you think it could ruin his chances come November for re-election?

Thoughts? Opinions? The floor is yours.

Talk to me.

-VSB P aka THE ARSONIST aka MR. OBAMA SAID WHAT? TURN THE CHANNEL BOO! aka GIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRL HE A 3

A Conversation About Men, Male Behavior, Feminism, Fear, and Bacon (Yes. Bacon)

A couple weekends ago, I went out with a group of a dozen or so people to celebrate my homegirl’s birthday. And, as people in the greater Pittsburgh-area are wont to do after a night of drunken, WorldStarHipHop-worthy ratchetness, we went to Eat & Park afterwards to soak up our alcohol with pancakes and half-assed cheese eggs.

While most others usually opt for the menu food, I always choose to buy the breakfast buffet; a vast decrease in quality, but, when it’s 3:13am, quantity has a way of making you not give a f*ck.

There were so many of us there (I’m guessing 15) that the server put three tables together to accommodate all of us. And, since I was the only one who chose the buffet food, it meant…

A) I would be the only one eating food for the next 15 minutes.

B) I’d have to fight off a clawing pack of drunken and hungry zombies every time I returned to the table from the buffet.

The second part actually became a bit of a running joke. I’d go to the buffet, return with some bacon, and I’d have to smack the hands of my friends away as they tried to grab a slice. Sometimes I was successful in guarding my bacon, and sometimes the bacon zombies would get me. (I know this doesn’t sound like a very fun game to play, but we were all five exits past drunk, and the bacon game happened to be the funniest thing on Earth at the time. Only God can judge me.)

Anyway, although the table was filled with people who all were at the party I was just at, I didn’t know a couple of the people sitting at the other end of the table. I’m bringing this up because all the fun and games stopped when, while returning to the table after one of my bacon runs, one of these unfamiliar hands reached and attempted to grab the food on my plate.

When I made it back to my seat, I called this person out, asking what the f*ck was wrong with them (I think my exact words were “What the f*ck is wrong with you? I don’t know you, n*gga“), and basically put a slight damper on the mood.

(In hindsight, it was funny remembering the reactions of the people sitting around me, their expressions going from “Wait, Champ’s not serious, is he?” to “Um, yeah, he’s serious. This is getting uncomfortable. And entertaining. This is uncomfortably entertaining” and finally landing on “Wait, um, we’re not able to witness a couple dudes in suits fight over some bacon, are we?“)

I eventually forgave this person for their indiscretion. (We actually stood up and shook each other’s hands) The next day, as I was reflecting on the evening and remembering exactly how ridiculous that near fight was, it dawned on me that none of that would have happened if he was a woman.

You see, I was perfectly cool playing the bacon game with the people sitting close to me — all women that I knew. In fact, even if dude had been a woman I didn’t know, I wouldn’t have reacted the same way. I probably would have laughed, flirted, or perhaps even tried to steal some food off her plate when it finally came. But, because he was a guy doing something that guys aren’t supposed to do to other guys, it pissed me off enough to have the following absurd exchange with him

“Where are you from?” 

“Don’t worry about where I’m from. I’m from a place where n*ggas don’t take food off of n*ggas they don’t know plates.” 

(I apparently say n*gga a lot when I’m drunk and/or angry. Perhaps there’s another post in there somewhere)

If you’re still reading, you’re probably wondering what the hell a story about two drunk men having a pissing contest over some soggy bacon has to do with feminism, a concept defined as a collection of movements aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for women.

Actually, that definition is a bit too bulky to work with. I prefer the one coined by Cheris Kramarae

“Feminism is the radical notion that women are human beings.”

Regardless of how you choose to define it, feminism has some roots in the idea that (most) men, even (most) well-intentioned men, don’t regard women with the same respect we do other men.

Thing is, as shitty as men historically have been and currently still are to women, we are pretty much just as shitty (if not shittier) to men.

As history continues to prove, men will regularly intimidate, embarrass, ridicule, mock, taunt, dominate, and even sexually humiliate other men if given the opportunity.

Think about this: Wherever you’re currently reading this, you’re at a place that was “founded” some time ago as a result of a group of men invading the land of a weaker group of men and subsequently murdering and colonizing them.

Even many “educated” and “domesticated” men still regularly do this in their own way. For instance, as ridiculous as that bacon story sounded, most men reading it probably laughed at first and then thought to themselves “You know what? I probably would have reacted the same way The Champ did.” 

Why? Well, although it may have seemed innocent, that guy reaching on my plate was his way of attempting to assert some dominance over me. His fat ass didn’t want any bacon, but he did want everyone to see him taking a slice of bacon off my plate — alpha male-ing me, in a sense.

I (over) reacted the way I did because, frankly, I wanted him to be scared. Not pissing in his pants scared, but “Hmm. This guy’s tone and body language suggests that there’s a possibility that he might actually get up and punch me in the face. It’s a slight chance, but still. Perhaps I should apologize to him.” scared.

Most people would probably consider bacon boy’s act a violation of some “man code” or some other unspoken kinship between men. While this is true, the creation of “man codes” aren’t really about any male kinship or spiritual brotherhoods or anything like that. We have these rules of decorum when dealing with each other because of fear of possible physical danger, and we treat each other with this tenuous respect because there’s always the possibility that we might get our ass kicked if we don’t.

Now, I’m (obviously) no feminist scholar, but it seems like the root cause behind man’s historically unjust treatment of women has something to do with the control and suppression of female sexuality and sexual freedom. It also seems like the only reason why (many) men are “nicer” to women than they are to other men is because they want sexual access to them, and getting women to agree to want to be with you is the socially acceptable way of gaining this access.

I don’t want to believe that the only things motivating us to be kind to each other are fear and sex, but history and any read of any newspaper continues to prove that this may be true. Am I completely off-base here, or are we (men) too f*cked up to evolve to a point where the majority of things the majority of men do are done, not because we can do them or can get away with doing them, but because they’re just the right and just things to do?

—Damon Young (aka “The Champ”)

My Problem With Church

An episode of “the shitty” — the drunk sleep that occurs when you go to bed while inebriated and, for whatever reason, wake up far earlier than you would under normal circumstances — last Saturday night woke me at 8:30am, an ungodly hour for an “I aint got shit to do all day” Sunday morning.

Unable to go back to sleep, I remembered that a group of 20 or so guys play pick-up basketball every Sunday morning at a nearby gym, so I got out of bed and decided to go play.

I made it there by 9:15 or so, played a few games, dunked in a game for the first time in maybe 10 months, slightly sprained my ankle while jumping around and screaming like a banshee after celebrating said dunk, and made it back home by 11.

After showering and glancing at the time after getting out of the shower, I thought a thought I hadn’t thought in (at least) a few months:

“Hmm. I think I should try to make it to church.”

I got dressed, ran out the door, and made it in time for the 11:45 service.

Now, my reasons for not attending church more often range from lazy (I just never get up early enough to go.) and logistical (I occasionally spend Sunday mornings working on various writing projects.) to practical (My favorite brunch spot stops serving food at 1:30. I usually don’t get out of church until 1:15.) and pragmatic, but the main thing limiting my appearances to one per every three months is the fact that I just don’t feel anything when I go.

I understand that everyone isn’t going to catch the Holy Ghost whenever they attend service, and I also get the fact that even in church, your personal relationship with God — not your connection to the parishioners — is what really matters.

But while I do always enjoy myself when I’m there, I never seem to actually be doing what I’m supposed to be doing. While we’re supposed to be praying, I’m thinking about how many calls and texts I’ve missed since I’ve been there. While we’re supposed to be paying attention to the word, I’m scanning the crowd to spot familiar faces (and thinking some, um “unChristian” things about some of them). While we’re supposed to be standing and singing, I’m wondering if the people behind me notice that it’s been a month since I took the suit I’m wearing to the cleaners.

This isn’t a new development, btw. Even as a child, I was never able to immerse myself into church the same way some of my classmates and family members seemed to. And yes, I realize that a good percentage of that was probably an act — many of the kids were likely just going through the motions to appease their parents and teachers — but I didn’t even care/feel enough to fake it.

Despite all of this, I’m not one of those faux intellectuals who think that they’re just too smart and too analytical to be swayed by God, church, and religion in the same way many others are. In fact, my belief in God — and yes, I do believe in God — is from an intellectual perspective.

Basically, I believe in God because the existence of Earth and the universe (and Stacey Dash) — the evidence of His existence — proves that He is real. I also understand and respect the purpose of religion and church. I’ve just never been able to cultivate the type of spiritual and emotional connection that seems to keep churchgoers “filled.”

I’m also not a church cynic. Both the church I attend when I do go to church and the pastor at that church are the embodiment of what’s good about Black churches. I give (most) churchgoers, even the more demonstrative ones, the benefit of the doubt, and I’m definitely not sitting there thinking “Look at these fake-ass motherf*ckers hooting and hollering.” Not only do I believe that they feel the way they act and say they feel, I’m envious of it.

I realize that my issues with church could just be a case of confirmation bias. I know how I’ve felt before while there, so perhaps every time I enter the building now I just assume that things are going to play out the exact same way, and I start to look for things and search for feelings to prove my point.

I discussed this issue with a friend yesterday afternoon, and she thought my inability to connect was a bit deeper than that.

“Your problem is that you expect your relationship with church and God to be easy. It’s not. You have to work at it and want it to be successful. It’s actually like any other relationship with friends or even a romantic partner. Things aren’t just going to magically work. You have to put in the work for it to work, and the basis of this effort is the love you have for your friend. You want things to work because you love them and you know your life is better with them in it. You’re not connecting with church and God the way you think you should be able to because you’re just not trying hard enough to keep a consistent dialogue. As close as I am to my best friend, if I went two years without calling her, we definitely wouldn’t be as close anymore.”

I think she’s right. Perhaps my problem with church is basically just my problem with me, and “going all in” with things. I guess it’s just up to me to decide how important it is to change that.

Anyway, people of VSB.com, can anyone relate to my struggles connecting with church and/or religion? For those who are able to make that connection, how were you able to do it?

—Damon Young (aka “The Champ”)

****ATTENTION WASHINGTON, DC: It’s that time again…THIS Saturday, Cinco De Mayo (May 5th), at Liv Nightclub (2001 11th Street NW) , it’s time for another edition of #REMINISCEDC. VSB x Shine On Me x Just Cause Productions are bringing you the hottest 90s party in the District!! It’s FREE BEFORE 11pm w/RSVP (Doors at 930pm, $10 after), OPEN BAR from 930-1030pm, and there’s NO DRESS CODE. So RSVP at reminiscedc.eventbrite.com to get in free and come party the night away at the dopest house party at the club!!! When they #reminisceDC over you…****

Off-Limits: Are Some Subjects Too Sensitive To Joke About?

 ***As grown-ups who still live within reasonable driving distance of their parents are wont to do, I try to visit my parents on Sundays as often as I can. (Why? Well, my parents are my ace boon coons, and I genuinely enjoy spending time with them. Plus, they always make a ton of food for dinner, it’s always a great way to launch a new week, and, um, did I mention the free food already?) The following is a paraphrased summary of a conversation I had with my mom yesterday evening after dinner.***

Champ’s mom (CM): “Did you see SNL last night?”

Champ: “No maam.”

***Feel free to insert a joke about my parents and I being three of the remaining 17 Black people on the planet who still watch SNL on a regular basis.***

CM: “So you didn’t see the skit about Piers Morgan and George Zimmerman?”

Champ: “Nah. What happened?”

CM: “It had Piers Morgan interviewing a bunch of celebrites for their takes on George Zimmerman’s arrest.”

Champ: “Was it funny?”

CM: “I stopped watching a minute or so into it.”

Champ: “Why?”

CM: “What do you mean “Why?” Of all the things to write a skit about, why choose the Trayvon Martin case? Some subjects are too sensitive to joke about. I was honestly surprised and disappointed that SNL went there.”

***I’ve embedded the skit below. In case you can’t see it, Morgan interviews Ice-T, Kayne, Kim Kardashian, and others, and they each offer their increasingly ridiculous takes on this case and the legal system in general¹***

Champ: “Hmm.”

CM: “What?”

Champ: “I don’t know if I agree with you, Mom. Maybe the skit itself wasn’t executed properly, but I don’t think there are any off-limits subjects. I mean, I agree that the skit may have been in bad taste. But, in order to get the types of laughs comedians depend on, sometimes you have to broach uncomfortable topics. Sometimes the joke works. Sometimes it doesn’t. I just don’t think we should be able to tell people “This subject is too serious to be joked about in any manner.”

CM: ”You’re talking about censorship. I’m talking about common sense. Common sense should tell you that a situation as emotionally and politically charged as the Trayvon Martin case should be off limits. I love that you always try to be so pragmatic and practical, but sometimes being that way gives you some serious blind spots.”

***She’s definitely right about the blind spots. There have been times, both online and off, where my instistence on being “sober” or “irrelevant” or “delibrate” made people upset because they assumed I was being intentionally insensitive. In each situation, I ended up hurting feelings because I just didn’t recognize the possibility that feelings could be hurt. Ironicially, I consider myself to be extremely, almost painstakingly, considerate of others. But, I’ve come to realize that this consideration usually only extends to things that would greatly upset me as well.***

Champ: “I do agree that it’s probably too soon to talk about the Trayvon Martin case in that manner. I still think you can find humor in pretty much every subject, though. Sometimes the humor doesn’t have to be “Haha,” but more just recognizing the absurdity of a situation.”

CM: “Pedophila can be funny?”

Champ: “Every Black person in America has either laughed at or told a joke about R. Kelly — jokes specifically related to the fact that he’s the world’s most famous known pedophile. “Eat the cake, Anna Mae” — a line from “What’s Love Got to Do with It” —  has become one of Black culture’s most popular catchphrases. We use it in a tongue-in-cheek/snarky manner, which makes light of the depiction of prolonged domestic violence and sexual abuse the line comes from.”

CM: “Hmm. Two of your nieces were shot a few months ago. One almost died. Where’s the ”funny” in that?”

Champ: “Um, well…um…”

CM: “Exactly.”

***As you can see, my mom has a way of shutting me up.*** 

¹I watched the skit on Hulu a half hour or so after our conversation. The verdict? I agree that SNL probably should have picked a different subject. But, I thought it was…funny.
—Damon Young (aka “The Champ”)