- Awareness of the color of oneself and perception of the color of others;
- Color-aroused ideation about oneself and others (previously known as prejudice) ;
- Color and ideation-aroused emotion resulting from the color-aroused ideation (which most people think of as "hate and fear," but which is really considerably more complex, just like your relationship with your neighbors is more complex than "hate and fear," including such emotions as "envy" and jealousy;
- Color-aroused behavior based on the above perceptions, ideation and emotions.
It is not perception of color that causes problems, and we will never render all Americans "color-blind" anymore than we would want one of our children to be born congenitally color-blind. As anyone who is literally color-blind knows, literal color-blindness is an a debility, not an asset.
However, the passing policeman may havealso learned anti-Black ideation that is aroused automatically by his perception of my skin color. S/he thinks, for example,
That Black man must be doing something wrong, because he is Black and Black people are ALWAYS engaged in illegal behavior. What's more, he's driving a new car, and Lord knows that Black people can't afford new cars. Why does he have a better car than I do? That fucking bastard Black man would like to sex my daughter (or my son). He wants my job. If Blacks keep improving their socio-political and economic status, they will soon eclipse the white "race" and leave us behind. I've got to keep that Black man in his place. (And so on and so forth.) I'm going to stop his car and see what I can find on him."Prejudice" is literally "judging people beforehand". But as any knows who has tried a capital murder trial, it is not sufficient to know that there was a preudgment. The specific content of the prejudgment may determines whether the defendant lives or dies. This is why the term "prejudice" alone is insufficient. Believe it or not, the specific content of the prejudgment is important, whereas the term "prejudice" has been used as a catch-all. A doctor who believes that all lumps are cancerous has a prejudice far more dangerous than a doctor who believes that all coughs are colds. The CONTENT of the prejudice is important, just as the CONTENT of the "racism" is important in any specific context.
This is where most of us fall down. We wing the words "prejudiced" and "racist" at people without bothering to study the content of their ideation to discover how dangerous or relatively benign it may be. But let me tell readers right now. Not all prejudice and "racism" is equally dangerous or benign, any more than all cancers are equally malignant or benign. It depends when they started, where they are, how much they have progressed, and how what studies of that particular cancer tell us about the prospects for recovery. Have you EVER heard ANYONE speak of "racism" or prejudice with that level of specificity?
Color-aroused ideation alone will not complicate my life, except when it leads to color-aroused behavior. When the policeman stops me and my car based entirely on the perception of my skin color in conjunction with the policeman's color-aroused ideation and emotion (prejudice), then the perception, ideation and emotion have ripened into color-aroused BEHAVIOR. Without this behavior, I might never know or care about what is going on in the policeman's head. And yet, some color-aroused ideation and emotion is so potent and malignant that it has a high likelihod of erupting in color-aroused behavior.
People who engage in extreme color-aroused behavior based on color-aroused ideation and emotion are people with extreme color-aroused disorder. And this is what distinguishes this analysis from "racism". Those who believe in the "racism" analysis often believe that the thoughts and emotions of the "racists" are the essence of the illness in and of themselves. This is analogous to believing that the desire to drink makes someone an alcoholic even if he has never actually imbibed alcohol. The PROBLEM of alcoholism ripens with the actual drinking, just as the problem of color-aroused disorder ripens for the public with the actual color-aroused behavior.
It is not inherently a problem for the public that a person is a "racist". It is a problem when the person engages in color-aroused behavior, which is like the difference between a bening and localized cancer versus a malignant and metasticized cancer. "It's all the same", you say? Oncologists would certainly disagree, as would psychiatrists, if they bothered to study the differeence between benign color-arousal and malignant and dangerous color-arousal. A man who would like to kill Black people and one who actually does so may be different in significant ways, but we don't know the differences with specificity because we have never bothered to study the question. "It doesn't matter. It's all racism."
Having travelled through seventeen countries and lived for long periods of time in three, I can say based on my experience that while color-aroused ideation and emotion exist in many places, still malignant color-aroused behavior is more pronounced, consistent and dangerous in the United States than it is anywhere else where I have lived. The likelihood of being stopped, profiled, shot and killed by police in the United States simply for being Black exceeds the likelihood present in any other country that I have visited or lived in. Meanwhile, the likelihood of experiencing a color-aroused imprisonment is higher in the United States than in any other country I have visited.
And that's why I hate the United States. I simply hate being perceived, thought about, felt about and then reacted to principally on the basis of my skin color. You don't know how terribly burdensome it is until you get away from it for a while.
16 comments:
tight
this is as well put as it can be,i feel i know it, i am it still to this day on this land.they respect the fez cause they stole it to wear it but not the skin cause they must always compare it.we were human before we raised those,who come from us from their head to their toes.if the insides was white they wouldnt come out they motherswomb right,, hell she wouldnt even have one,skin cannot live with out flesh an thats inside the dark melanin you have inside your body that does make it to the skin cause you are not from the space you claim are the heavens, from what the bloghost has stated we hate why he hates the united states an why he feels that way an whatever hate made him feel this way.color ideation is ok to hate cause so many make ritualistic rape to it every day.we are the ones raped mentally ritualistically daily by others creating and making it a burden to be negro colored black hispanic latinoafrican american brands meaning it must be a natural burden to be albion to act human from man kind that they have to create burden to win the race like cheaters.it is what race is an why we lose cause we are not really a race but the original human race that cannot be named by those coming on the planet after us 6000 years ago and be our reality selves
I understand where you're coming from, but I don't agree with you. It will take a LONG time for Americans to perfect their unions. Some prejudices and stereotypes may never disappear, especially in older Americans; however, it's only in the U.S. that Barack Obama's story is possible. Can you imagine France, Britain, Italy with a non-white president or prime minister? In your example, the policeman is an ignorant whose stereotypes get in the way of his ethics. The more someone is ignorant, the more likely he/she will hold on to a paradigme of the world that is obsolete. Int he countries where you have lived, you might have been treated "better" because you are an American. I am a black from the Caribbean, I've lived in 3 countries and visited a lot of countries, I just get treated as another black. All americans(regardless of their skin color) get the red carpet treatment because they are Americans.
This is a likely example of severe color-aroused ideation, emotion and behavior. Why do I suspect the mayor's condition is "severe" rather than "moderate" or "mild" or "benign"? The Social Security Administration says that in order for a mental condition to be sufficiently serious to consider the person disabled,
"Your condition must interfere with basic work-related activities for your claim to be considered."
Can there be any doubt that the color-aroused behavior of this mayor interfered with his "basic work-related activities"?
When a mental condition and the outward symptoms and behaviors cause a person to lose his job AND become the object of international public ridicule, that mental condition may well be "extreme" using the definition provided by the US Social Security Administration.
We would also need to know whether this was a one-time incident or whether it lasted for six months or more, causing repeated difficulties in one or more major areas of life. But, just the fact that this man lost his job over a color-aroused incident is enough to indicate that he should be evaluated for a color-aroused condition. Otherwise, he might lose his next job as well.
This is an example of how color-aroused disorder's victims include both the perpetrator and the target. The perpetrator is out of a job.
www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2197363/posts
Frances read this article.
Pascale, I don't think I was treated better just because I am an America. I had a lot of friends who were from Africa and the Middle East and, although a few of them hated all white people for their own reasons, yet none of them was stop and searched on the streets of France simply for being Black or being from the Middle East.
The color-aroused antagonism in France is both more subtle and more blatant (when it comes to people making color-aroused remarks), but my friends weren't harrassed constantly by police in France simply for their Middle Eastern or African ethnicity.
I suspect they were often discriminated against in job advancement and at university, but that's different from having your very life in danger at every turn.
The graphic color-aroused demeaning jokes that are circulating in the United States about Barack Obama are illegal in Brazil. ILLEGAL. I'm sick and tired of arguing with people over whether the have an inherent Constitutional right to insult others based on their skin color.
Can I imagine an Obama arising in another country? Yes, I can. Let's all remember that virtually no one expected him to arise in the US just three years ago, so the fact that it seems improbable anywhere doesn't mean that it is impossible there.
Color-aroused disorder is not "ignorance" any more than schizophrenia is mere "ignorance". Schizophrenia and manic depression can be treated with medication and therapy IF they are recognized as a mental illness. If not, then there is virtually no hope for those who suffer from these illnesses.
For so long as we minimize color-aroused disorder by calling it "ignorance", we can be sure that very little intervention based on the real nature of the problem will be undertaken.
When I was in France, in a Master's Degree program, there was a very intelligent young man who constantly made very hurtful jokes about me and about a Chinese friend. How did this white Frenchman get into a very competitive Masters Degree program if he was "ignorant".
The fact is, my white friend had a psychiatric disorder that caused him to offend others verbally, analogous to Tourette's syndrome in some ways. Tourette's syndrome is not "ignorance". It's a disorder.
I'm not saying that color-aroused disorder is genetic, because I don't think it is. I don't know of any color of person that is not susceptible to color and ethnicity aroused disorder.
Anyway, Pascale, thanks for visiting my blog, sharing your thoughts, and gracing these pages with your very pretty picture. If those are braids you have, they're right on time!
Mr. Holland,
Thanks for your response. Again, I agree with part of it. Tourette's syndrom is a disorder, it has nothing to do with ignorance. However, tagging every racist or every person who hasn't been exposed to other type of people/culture, or every person who lacks knowledge/culture of other ethnicities/races/sub-cultures within his/her own country/culture of Tourette's syndrome and/or of any type of disorder is , a priori, not a way to solve the problem. It is over-generalizing .
Black people in France may not experience policemen stopping them all the time because not many blacks in France drive. But they do get stopped all the time at the train station, and the ones that are illegal get sent back to their countries within a week or so. Also, I haven't seen many black people in the French parliement, Sarkozy's cabinet, or power position. It's hard to imagine a black person ruling France in 3 years. Whereas in the U.S., we've seen Collin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, black governors and black senators/congressmen...
I understand that in Brazil color-aroused jokes are illegal in Brazil, but in these countries there is a big gap between the law and its implementation. Check this out http://www.miamiherald.com/multimedia/news/afrolatin/part1/
http://www.miamiherald.com/multimedia/news/afrolatin/part3/index.html
you can copy the links into your brwoser. It's a very interesting report on race/ethicity relations in latin America.
Anyway, thanks for the discussion. It's fun. FYI, I don't have braids on in this picture. This is my natural, God-granted, nappy hair.
Until next time,
Pascale
@Pascale-
Interesting articles. By the way, the address tag works here, so here are clicky versions of the links:
part1
part3
part5
My main comment on the series is that they simplify things greatly. As one example, they mention that very few people (around 1%) identify themselves as indigenous, but elsewhere mention that they are a major component of the modern Brazilian gene pool (according to this study, around 33% of the mtDNA of "white" people - as opposed to 28% African) - but they never connect the two. With that sort of large disparity, it's obvious that there are perceived advantages to not being labeled as indigenous - yet that's wholly unexplored.
Zimbel, you might say that being Black in Brazil, which most Indians are to some extent at this point, has more caché than being indigenous. I actually heard some teenagers laughing at a friend and saying that he was an Indian, protected by the Brazilian native protection agency, "IBAMA".
It's cool to be Black in Brazil, with even white people enjoying and participating in and envying many aspects of Black culture, particularly music, dance, Carnaval . . . With the young generations in the United States, that's become true to some extent as well, although whites in the US never (can) completely relinquish white privilege, even as they relish Black culture.
Pascale, police in major cities deal with Blacks daily. So, how can they be said to be "ignorant" of Blacks, unless ignorance is given an entirely different meaning than the standard one. If ignorant means "misbehaved", then I agree with you, but I do not agree that it comes from lack of information. They have far more information about Blacks than do white people in Chile, who are far less antagonistic.
When people have a complex set of symptoms that make it impossible for them to function effectively, we say that they have a "syndrome". Instead of calling police officers who deal with Blacks every day "ignorant", let's acknowledge that those officers who display the array of symptoms are people with a "syndrome". Now, let's define that syndrome the way we define all other diseases: in terms of its symptoms, signs, cause, treatment and prognosis.
Until we do that instead of merely causing a complex array of thoughts, emotions and behaviors "ignorance", we will be too ignorant of what the problem is to have any hope of solving it.
What I'm saying is that the term "ignorant" is not a scientific term and may be a global description, but it's really more of an epithet. Let's apply science to syndromes, just as we would in any other circumstances.
If Blacks are plagued by a syndrome that affects the ideation, emotion and behavior of others, and yet we are unwilling to study that syndrome scientifically, as we would any other, then we are discriminating against ourselves. We are saying that the what exists in third parties and plagues us is not as worthy of study as what plagues others. We may be more willing to scientifically study the fleas on our dogs than we are to scientifically study the ideation, emotion and behavior of the policemen who shoot us down like dogs in the street.
We are generally afraid to look at "racism" scientifically, perhaps because we are afraid that acknolwedging the disease of rabies would absolve dogs morally of their rabid behavior. Perhaps we're just afraid of what we would discover if we looked at the behavior of those who plague us more clinically.
@Zimbel
It's interesting to see how a word/term/expression can mean different things for different people. For example, in the Dominican Republic, "indigenous" has nothing to do with "aborigenous". Former president Trujillo decided that the black Dominicans will be called "indigenous" because black is too dirty. The Haitians as perceived by the Dominicans are black/dirty/ugly enough!
Therefore, every black person in the DR is an "indigenous".
Mr. Holland,
I didn't mean that policemen in major cities were all ignorant of black people. I hate stereotypes! There are a lot of policemen who actually do their job of protecting the citizens of their country. But there are some whose egos and ignorance get in the way of their jobs.
What do I mean by ignorance? You remember in ancient times when "knowledge" used to be so limited that the "philosophe" used to know everything! Ces temps sont revolus! These times are gone! So "knowledge" is ever-expanding. Our ability to learn new things is the only way to survive in the 21st century.
Imagine a policeman in Muscatine, Iowa. Muscatine is a tiny town in rural Iowa with a population of 20000. Some people in Muscatine were born, raised, lived all their lives there. Some of them have never been anywhere else: not even to Chicago which is 2 hours away. can you imagine these Muscatine dwellers' reactions the first times they saw me: a black (they rarely see black people) from another country with an accent? I'm sure that most of them are good people; they are just not used to other people. It took them a while to warm up to me. And at the end, I had made a few friends.
This is one example of "ignorance".
In big cities, policemen see black/Asian/African/Arab people all the time. They know that those people exist. They are not ignorant of them. Just like Hitler knew that other races existed. But their perception of these (differnt) people is outdated because they are still stuck in the days when blacks used to be their servants. They have yet to realize that we are the same in different colors. And this "ignorance" influences how they behave on a daily basis.
I agree that for some of them(policemen), exposure to other people/culture will not change anything. They will need some sort of therapy to accept that REALITY.
But if we were to tag every person whose perception of others is biased of a disorder, there would not be enough therapists in the world. We've been conditionned by the euro-centric standards that regulate our lives for over 2000 years , it will take a long time to set new standards.
check this out:
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2009/02/24/bia.two.brothers.cnn?iref=videosearch
Pascale, that video's deep and it shows how close many Black people are to prison, even when their relatives are nationally known professionals.
I feel very angry in the United States. Angry people do angry things. Angry behavior puts Black people squarely within the gun sights of the prison industrial complex, which is four times more expensive than it was 20 years ago, even though crime has decreased 25%.
Because we are unwilling to recognize color-aroused anger in others it is also virtually impossible for Black people to get treated for our own color-aroused anger, hopelessness, depression, PTSD, fear, loathing, self-loathing. The "treatment" offered is prison, while the Black people most likely to go to prison are also those who would most benefit from treatment for color-aroused/associated rage, fear, loathing, envy, post-traumatic stress disorder, and etc.
Pascale:
When you say that there are some police whose "ignorance gets in the way", I really need for you to define "ignorance." What is it that they don't know? If they knew it, would they treat Black people differently?
So husbands beat their wives because they don't know enough about their wives, in which case reading their wives autobiographies would lessen spouse abuse? Or do husbands beat their wives because those husbands have emotional and behavioral problems that need to be treated, and because they need legal and psychosocial interventions?
If police are "ignorant" about Black people, there must be at least one specific thing that they don't know about us, right? What is ONE example of such a specific lack of knowledge?
They spend so much of their time focused almost exclusively on us that they have had every opportunity to learn immensely about us, unless there is something ELSE getting in the way. What is that something else?
As for "indigenous", we humans seem to be able to turn any word into an epithet. I've always liked the word "indigenous" because it means "people who are from here." Of course, Black Haitians aren't indigenous to Haiti, because the were brought as slaves, typically, from Africa. Indians are indigenous to Haiti, just as Indians are indigenous to the Dominican Republic.
Mr. Holland,
What do you mean by "So husbands beat their wives because they don't know enough about their wives, in which case reading their wives autobiographies would lessen spouse abuse?"
I don't understand. Does reading someone's biography/autobiography translate into you KNOWING that person? So, I go to the bookstore and purchase a Mr. Holland's autobigraphy, all of the sudden I become an expert in Francis L. Holland, or I can consdider myself a personal friend of yours? That would be extremely simplistic, don't you think?
When I say that there are policemen whose "ignorance" get in the way of their ethics, I'm not talking about these policemen not KNOWING personally/culturally these black people. Indeed, the fact that these policemen are accustomed to a biased understanding of these black people make them more likely to shoot them down.
Same goes for the husband who beats up his wife or children. He (husband) is still in this patriarchal/machist time when wifes used to be a thing that a husband owns.
In order to tackle this ignorance that makes both the policeman and the abusive husband use force/weapons/physical violence to express themselves, we need EDUCATION. By education, I don't mean INSTRUCTION (degrees). We need years/decades of education so that they understand that time has changed: we are not in colonial time anymore; blacks, whites, asians, women, children are all human beings "nes libres et egaux en droit" as they say in French...We need this type of education just like we need education about the consequences of drunk driving, environmental awareness, climate change... This education should be given at school, but most importantly it should be given at home, by the parents. Then it should be talked about at church.
Until then, people's actions and behaviors will still be guided by obsolete stereotypes that don't do any good to the American society.
Again, there should be help/therapy/counseling available for those who need them. Those for whom education alone can't help.
As for "indigenous", black Haitians and black Dominicans are not indigenous to the the island of Haiti (which comprises both Haiti and the DR). The "Indians" were all decimated a few decades after Colombus had "discovered" and started the exploitation of the island. That means if any black from any country moves to the DR and get the Dominican citizenship, then that black becomes an "indian/indigenous" automatically:-)
Mr. Hoallnd,
when you say "Because we are unwilling to recognize color-aroused anger in others it is also virtually impossible for Black people to get treated for our own color-aroused anger, hopelessness, depression, PTSD, fear, loathing, self-loathing...", is it possible that you are angry because of color-aroused anger and depression?
In the case of the 2 brothers in the video, what do you make of personal responsibility? They both grew up in the same household.
Post a Comment