When Harvard Professors Write Back

Giant_Beer_GlassAt least two members of the faculty at Harvard have weighed in publicly on the Skip Gates arrest in articles written for the Chronicle and the Crimson, Harvard’s paper.  Both women Lani Guinier from the Law School and Ruth R. Wisse from Comp Lit,  have taken a critical eye to the incident in question and reached far different conclusions.

Lani Guinier critiqued the instant of the officer’s arrival as a moment stuck in time in which both parties relied on antiquated racial narratives to assess a modern day racial moment. I am always deeply concerned when people say that our perceptions of race are filtered through past egregious acts because it implies linguistically, especially to racial apologists and deniers, that racism is a thing of the past. For many readers, Guinier’s seeming confirmation of this belief in the first few paragraphs will be more than enough to confirm their own disbelief in what happened to Gates and they will not move on to her more substantive argument in the rest of the piece. Her main thesis is that racism is both a thing of the past and a spectre of the present and that policing is a key component of inequality in our nation. She goes on to argue that we must become more competent in discussing the specifics of race and racism in order to challenge these moments in which perception matters more to those who choose not to believe than evidence. (read the piece here.)

The other article, by Wisse, blames Gates, not for flashing back to a “long gone moment in racial history”, but for failing to appropriately code switch. She states that had Gates simply engaged in linguistic passing, he would have negated the ways in which he was criminalized. Could code switching have prevented his arrest? Possibly. Neither I nor Darlene Clark Hine were arrested in similar encounters with the police b/c we handled things differently; tho we are also both black women whose criminality, as Nancy Lopez’s well documented study of engendered policing in NYC points out, is read differently than black and brown men. Others have been shot by police while being equally unobtrusive: Sean Bell and Amadu Diallo come to mind.  Or if, as some black intellectuals have argued, comparisons between working class African Americans and “privileged professors” are not appropriate, perhaps the story of an African American pundit filling in on MSNBC last week (name unconfirmed) who was not only arrested for the same thing as Gates but sued the department for discrimination and won or the story of SFSU Professor Akom who was arrested for picking up books on campus while black, both of whom report having behaved in a reasonable manner at the time of arrest, are more “equal” comparisons. (For me, any unjust arrest or shooting is part of the same narrative of racialized policing that varies according to other intersecting identities and privileges rather than mutually exclusive concepts, see my post “the privileged professor” for more.) If none of these ring particularly salient for readers, there is also the recent case of Omer Edwards, a black police officer shot and killed by white police officers responding to his call for assistance with a burglar and the subsequent revelation that police officers of color are often wrongly mis-identified as criminals when out of uniform. So the idea that demeanor is the overwhelming factor in Gates arrest ignores a history of policing in this country still prevalent today that punished black bodies on the basis of discretionary acts and often exonerates police officers regardless of situation or lethality.

Is it, as Wisse argues, the responsibility of a man being asked to step outside to discuss his attempted burglary of his own home to defer to the feelings of the police (especially feelings that many of us argue are rooted in racialist thinking)? Hardly. Placing the onus on Gates to be subservient in such a situation relies on multiple readings of the situation that negate its historic and present day import and the accountability of any other parties involved. In this scenario where Gates actions are the beginning and end of a situation in which a man is arrested for being angry about being called a burglar, Gates becomes hyper-subject, or object upon which varies forms of societal policing are projected, while the subjecthood, and very presence, of all others is completely erased.

Worse, Wisse, like many others looking at the situation, seems to eschew her own linguistic training to assume that the police report, written by the officer who has already been threatened with a lawsuit for racial profiling prior to writing it up, is a completely unbiased and totally factual piece of evidence. She takes various comments Gates is said to have made as fact while negating any comments or actions that Officer Crowley is said to have made through their erasure from her Op Ed piece. She also cites the “liberal” nature of Cambridge as another reason to believe police have not been and are not guilty of unequal treatment. The fact that Cambridge is a “liberal town” is not a credible indicator of police behavior, as racially motivated shootings and harassment have occurred in both “liberal” and “conservative” towns around this country. Moreover, several black Harvard professors have spoken out about their own treatment by the police, publicly or in closed conversation, and as a Harvard professor Wisse should be well aware of some of the more recent locally publicized incidents. What allows her then to link liberal identity with racial equality is an overarching narrative in the U.S. that assumes, without research or evidence, that liberalism negates racism. We in Identity Studies Departments no better; and I assumed most well-trained linguists did as well since this belief hinges on the manipulation of language and meaning. (read the piece here)

What is most interesting about this turn of events to me, is that Skip has become the villain in a story in which he did nothing but come home, try to get into his own house, and then get angry at being accused of being called a burglar. He is the villain not only to racially antagonistic media pundits who one expects to link him into their vast conspiracy theory of the takeover of America by black men, but also his own neighbors:

racecardsignskipsign outside Skip’s house claiming he is “playing the race card”

groundlessracismsignsign outside Skip’s house claiming he is causing racial division

And now, his colleagues have begun to weigh in as “concerned” citizens who think he undermined the Cambridge police, who by all reports have done this before and will likely, based on the tide turning and their own indignation, do it again. (see my previous post for an example of another black Harvard professor harassed by police while on campus.) In the larger academic community, questions of how this incident will enhance his book sales or get him new contracts have already begun to creep up, even amongst the most liberal of faculty/bloggers.

A colleague and I were talking about the postering of Skip’s house a few days ago, and she said “Well it looks like Cornell will get his way.” She was referring to the public attrition of black faculty from Harvard due to what many believe was a different standard for black faculty’s presence on campus than that of white faculty of similar fame and research commitments. This conflict, which was a lead story in many newspapers and news magazines, one even had an illustration of Skip, Cornell, and Jesse Jackson’s heads pasted on babies bodies outside of Harvard’s gates, was also prompted by perceptions of race and racism and an overarching narrative that included multiple sides behaving badly at one point or another. Instead of addressing larger issues like: how R1s operate with regards to research and publishing  and the cultures they foster with regards to faculty opinion of teaching or how perceptions of race play into the criticisms of similar behavior amongst diverse faculty, or even how certain institutions rely on the public face of their scholars, the issue narrowed solely to the specific behaviors of the faculty in question. Like the narrative about Skip’s attitude at arrest, the discussion revolved around Cornell’s appearance in film and music videos and the larger structural issues fell by the wayside.

update: When my friend said Skip would likely be leaving Harvard soon as a result of all of this, I disagreed. For me, I was much more concerned about the what people attacking Gates’ house might do next, and according to the Daily Beast, so was Harvard who allegedly suggested Skip move. He has already had to change his email and phone number, similar to an African American professor at Emory, the Harvard of the South, who outed a colleague’s use of the N word and then was threatened and harassed via email and phone, and at her home. Naively, I thought that while Harvard’s silence on the arrest issue was telling, Skip was too much of an asset to allow politics to get in the way of retaining him. I hope that I am right, as his loss will be yet another message about how race works to make us “privileged professors” less safe than our colleagues in our own working environments and homes. And as Herbert argues in the NYT, this message has now gone national through Obama’s unwillingness to use the “teachable moment” he so intelligently recognized while thinking he could side step the issue with a quick comment and a beer summit. While some learned from this that Obama is a moderate, others learned that even the President of the United States will be disciplined for breaching acceptable wisdom on policing and race in N. America. If Skip leaves Harvard that message will ring louder than the many tenure denial cases to faculty of color and the people who continue to deny their experiences.

I know some will have already or will soon note that the second author mentioned is white while the former is African American. In an interesting contrast to Wisse’s opinion, the former Chair of the English Department at Duke, who was on Skip’s hiring committee there, has also written an article in which he talks about the societal racism that Skip endured at Duke and in Durham as proof that racism is alive and well on college campuses and in college towns. His story highlights Skip’s larger than life personality (which anyone who has ever encountered him would be hard pressed to deny) without placing onus there. He, a white male, understands that while failing to step and fetch places you closer and more often in the path of danger, danger itself is not your fault nor your responsibility. It’s similar to an argument most feminists recognize: if a woman wears a short skirt to a party, she does not deserve to be raped. If she is sexually-assaulted she has every right to be angry.

A beer, imported or otherwise, will not solve racial tensions in this country.

Open and honest conversation in which people check themselves before they start checking each other is the only way we will move forward. Part of that checking requires a profound cognitive leap toward “disloyalty to whiteness“, the concept of racial privilege as normal and deserved, in this country. Derrick Bell, another former Harvard professor who left over discrimination, once argued that for whiteness to succeed people had to invest in a narrative in which people of color’s criminality went unquestioned and the investment permeates our culture regardless of your actual politics. As long as people are looking for perfect victims – ie people who, as the Crimson author argues, speak in “a white voice” and are “appropriately” deferential and grateful – and negate those who are – like Sean Bel,l going out on to his own porch in his jammies, or Omer Edwards, in pursuit of the real criminal and approaching fellow officers to brief them – we will never be able to have those discussions. Without them, things will never change.

Sci Fi Quickies

I have a lot of serious posts in the works, but my own tone is set on cranky today, so I am going for the sure fire smile with a fluff-tastic post on Science Fiction media instead. Comic-con, no I wasn’t there, has left me with all kinds of excitement about upcoming movies and tv shows. While I am clearly geeking out with this post, I am not as geeky as the ever lovable Natalie who was actually there:

Movies I am looking forward to:

  • James Cameron’s Avatar – A lone warrior tries to help indigenous people survive on their planet. ppl at the con got to see 25 minutes for free but Cameron promises the rest of us will be able to see 15 minutes of the film free at special pre-opening screenings around the country. The film has an amazing cast, exciting graphics, and Cameron is a genius when it comes to sci fi . . . oh and if the images I’ve seen are at all correct, the film stars the actor who played Marcus Wright in T4
  • Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland – I’ve put up character stills of this movie before on the blog, but the trailer is beyond imagining! while it looks like the traditional book, I find myself wondering if it will borrow at all from Frank Beddor’s book The Looking Glass Wars which re-imagines the story in even more creepy detail. The post-structuralist in me, hopes it sticks to the original which is such a fun language game, the reader in me is leaning toward Beddor. Either way, Burton’s imaginary + Depp’s considerable, quirky, talent and graphics to die for, it has to be a hit.
  • Tron the Legacy – saw the trailer for this one and it doesn’t look like the special effects have been updated for modern audience, but for those of us who remember Tron it is  a treat. Looks like Jeff Bridges now controls the board and he is dark. Looks to be fun for those of who remember the original.
  • Terry Gilliam’s The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus – my excitement on this one is a mixed bag. Gilliam’s imagination is magical in a completely different, low budgy in a good way, from Burton’s and yet equally compelling. The elments of realism and the fantastical in his films have always raised important questions about humanity while moving us fully into imagined worlds. Based on that, and the early clips of the film, I am excited to see it. Unfortunately, one of those early clips includes a “pygmy” that looks like a white little person in black face. The plot: a traveling troupe made a deal with the devil to live forever. The buzz: Ledger died before completion and his part is being played by several other actors in the close of the film.
  • Zombie Land – If you are into Zombie movies this one looks good. It stars Woody Harrelson as the Zombie hunter in a part that was made for him. The total tongue in cheek script is reminscent of early Tarantino in a good way, tho the trailer does have some fatphobia. (Harrelson makes a joke about two fat zombies in a convenient story.)

Movies that Might also be good

  • The Surrogates – its based on a graphic novel of same name and stars Bruce Willis as a man who has disconnected from an elaborate surrogate system in which people plug in and live their lives through automated look alikes that cannot be killed, or can they? It’s a little bit Matrix, feels and looks a lot like I am Legend, could be good, could be derivavtive.
  • The Book of Eli – in a post-apocalyptic future Denzel Washington is the keeper of a book that could save the human race. The film looks like your basic futuristic action film with lots of explosions, gun fights, and some Kung Fu. I really haven’t seen enough to weigh in more.
  • Carriers - a zombie creating infection is spreading across the planet and people are desperate to escape before the virus reaches them. As the world’s population succumbs certain key characteristics of how the disease is spread become known. The film follows a group of friends trying to get to Mexico, where the disease is said to be not spreading as well, as they make choices about their own humanity vs. survival. It seems loosely based on this hit book the Z wars with critical changes so as not to pay the author.
  • Jennifer’s Body – on the surface, the film is a total teen-exploitation film with Meghan Fox playing her usually T & A with a new smattering of lesbian window dressing. Underneath, it was written by Diablo Cody and has a tinge of sarcasm and critique of sexualization of teen girls, the glorification of mindless boys trying to get with hot girls in film, etc. I just really am not sure that the writing can work against the amount of pointless semi-naked time that is Meghan Fox’s acting career.

Movies I am avoiding:

  • anything starring Robert Downey Jr. – he has two films coming out soon Sherlock Holmes (in which Sherlock becomes an annoying, womanizing, alcoholic, propped up by Watson and good luck) and Iron Man II (which fired Terrence Howard for daring to ask to be paid a similar salary to co-stars in a script that would have had him donning his own Iron Man suit and involved in a large part of the script. You uppity negro you!)

Television

  • Torchwood has been approved for a 4th season. No word on whether they will resurrect Ianto or if Jack will be given a new love interest and/or return to his flirting ways. Davies did apologize to fans for saying those upset about Ianto’s death needed to go watch Supernatural instead, so that is something. As someone devistated by both the loss of Ianto and the seeming heterosexualization of the plot over the course of the week, I have to say a show without him seems empty. At the same time, it could prove an ideal opportunity to discuss loss and rejoining life after one has lost a long time partner or great love. These are real issues we all struggle with and if Davies does his work up to QAF UK standards (he also spearheaded that show for those who do not know) then it will be tv to watch.
  • BSG Caprica – will start on 1/22/10 and have a gay couple among the main cast. If they do as poor a job as they did representing queerness (yes Ianto I said “queer”) on the original, this is not a good thing. However, the head of SyFy network has said they are trying hard to be more inclusive in their upcoming series. (They are also planning on a lesbian couple for the latest installment of Stargate. Unfortunately, the couple is split up by the Stargate project as Ming Na is with the team and her partner, who will have a recurring role, is still back on Earth.)
  • Doll House promises to take its original conspiracy theory trajectory in the upcoming season. Summer Glau, who is always fun to watch and a long time member of the Whedonverse, and Alexis Denisof (Wesley) are rumored to be joining the cast. Denisof says he is signed on for several episodes. However, I still cannot get past the fact that this show has essentially pimped out unwitting mind-erased women, allowing them to essentially raped as well as actually giving them over for rape fantasies. Tho the series finale included the female “boss” having her own “affair” with a “mind-wiped” male Doll, that does not change the basic plot of the episodes aired, that centered more often than not on female degredation, or the fact that rape is rape whether it is a male victim or a female one. Joss will have to step up his game in explaining why these things are part of a larger critique of human behavior and male privilege run amuck or it just more exploitation.
  • V – I am getting more and more jazzed about the V update even as my little heart says, don’t get excited, don’t get excited, they’ll ruin it, you know they will. It’s not a vegan friendly show but it is a campy good one and the update looks like it is going to take it to the dark intense places that the show warrants.

Shows I knew about before Comic Con and remain on the fence about:

  • Merlin
  • Warehouse 13
  • Being Human

So my geeky lurkers, what films or shows are you looking forward to?

Blog Against Racism Week Ends Saturday

Of course the week the computer goes to the shop and I promise the gf not to use either laptop for blogging, (did I mention pov u monitors computer use without informing employees? I think I did in a post about uni-pre-packaged spyware once . . .) the week is dedicated to blogging against racism. The good news: don’t we blog about that every day here?  The better news: the week is not over, so this is where we bring it international style. :)

Here are the rules for anyone who wants to participate in the next few days:

IBARW will take place between July 27 to August 2, 2009

How to participate:

  1. Announce the week in your blog.
  2. Post about race and/or racism: in media, in life, in the news, personal experiences, writing characters of color, portrayals of race in fiction, review a book on the subject, etc. (Linking back here is highly appreciated!) The optional theme this year is “global.”
  3. Let us know by bookmarking your post on Delicious with “for:ibarw,” or comment with a link to your post in one of the link collecting posts.

Places to look at other people’s posts:

Of course, today is the day Skip, the cop, and the Prez have microbrews on the back lawn, so isn’t racism over? <eye roll>

Chain Camera Documentary Review

chaincamerChain Camera, directed by Kirby Dick, documents a small segment of 16 teen working class, racially diverse, students’ lives as part of a larger project to allow young people to tell their own stories through film. 10 cameras were distributed to students of John Marshall High School, a diverse high school in California and site for popular tv and films that lacked any similar diversity, with instructions to film their lives and then pass the cameras on every 7 days. The cameras were passed for the entire 1999-2000 school year, producing over 700 hours of footage from 200 different teens in attendance.

Dick edited the videos to highlight the stories he found most compelling. He wittles the stories highlighted down to 5 minutes or so each, not nearly enough to tell anyone person’s story but long enough to evoke a bevy of emotions and questions. And while he does a great job of highlighting racial and sexual diversity, and including differently-abled young people, the film is dominated by male voices and is seemingly absent of transgender youth. Of the 15 people included, 9 are young boys. On the positive side, the stories they tell us about manhood are often compellingly insightful and could easily help young men talk about their pressures and concerns. On the negative side, not only are girls voices minimized in a documentary that had 1000s of videos to choose from, but the way the stories are edited, some key information about sexuality, abuse, and self-image appear to have been taken out. What we are left with are stories that hint at sexual assault, forced prostitution, sexual prowess, and the meaning of body image and social interaction for girls. Girls also seldom appear in their own right in this documentary, while 3 of the girls tell their own stories, the other 3, and one featured in another person’s video, are joint videos with their boyfriends or fathers; in one case, their girlfriend. In at least three cases, the boys/men dominate the videos even tho they are credited as girls stories. Finally, there is one video that shows a father masterbating in the background (hand inside his pants), after a torrent of anti-woman cursing, while his young daughter watches tv a few feet away. Like all of the videos, the editing is done behind the scenes, and there are no guiding voice overs or captions during the youth’s stories, so this moment, much like that of a girl who says she wants to be an exotic dancer and talks about suicide and rape, go on examined.

The film is most successful in capturing the way that young people saw their lives, their families, and their social relationships. Almost all of the youth talk about the complex racial relationships in their high school which has over 41 different ethnic and racial groups, including both white chainposterand poc immigrants. Many admit that they have misconceptions or bigotry toward other groups, including between immigrants and native born, Latinos and black people, and people who will only date white people or have “a black thing.” And while most of them seem to only highlight friends in their same racial group, many are dating across race.

Most of the youth also talk openly and honestly about single parent and low income households. They tell stories about their mothers persevering in economic hardship, looking out for them over all else, and being abused or abandoned by male partners. Boy’s discussions of how they see their mothers or how the things that happen to their mothers impact them are particularly interesting b/c they highlight the messages young men get from a sexist society and how they internalize those while still idolizing or idealizing their mothers.

Many of the respondents also discuss drugs and one youth even films his first time smoking pot. They discuss their drug use, their decisions about drugs, and whether or not their friends use. These stories highlight both the mundane and the horrible. And they are far more interesting than the sex jokes that Dick feels compelled to include. All tho, there is one video that runs like a failed sex positive how-to that does highlight a certain disturbing dynamic between young boys and girls.

I was also concerned about the story of a differently-abled young man that clearly showed the typical ableist dynamic between sexually awakening young differently-abled boys and able bodied girls who have no understanding of dis/ability. His story seems particularly disheartening as girls laugh at and mock him, all the while pretending to be his friends. In thinking about it juxtaposed against the differently-abled girl in the film, who says she is “addicted to sex”, I wonder how the dynamic of hormones, sexuality, and gender combine with ability to make differently-abled youth particularly vulnerable to exploitation or abuse (in this case jokes and mocking) and how that in turn impacts their own self-expression. As the young man says “I’m still afraid of girls” and his own parents mock him.

There are a lot of pull out clips in this documentary that could foster discussion with youth about oppressions, survival, and their developmental struggles. The documentary has already been included in courses on autobiography and form and would certainly fit in a soc-anth department. It could also be helpful in the Education Department to encourage education students to think about how “behavioral problems” are actual symptomatic of other issues that may need attention or how to help students who are going through things succeed in school and believe in themselves. When I see 3 of 7 girls express negative self-esteem and boys failing or turning to drugs b/c they fear their home lives or their perceived lack of a future, I worry that we are still not doing enough to provide at least one safe place for youth in this world where they can dare to dream. That is not an indictment of middle and high school teachers, who work under much more extreme conditions than I think we professors do, but rather a statement about where practice needs to catch up with theory or praxis needs to better reflect real life.

Ultimately, if you are interested at all in youth culture this documentary should appeal. If you work with youth, I highly recommend it, but would argue that it needs to be paired with more stories from girls and transgender youth, and might be best used over time as individual stories and discussion. It’s most positive aspect is also the one that will require active participation in discussing the documentary however you view it: highlighting youth’s voices and vision’s of themselves and their worlds unaccompanied by analysis. (However, do not mistake this for free form as this film has been highly edited.)

While the Prof Was Out: Important News Quickies

While my computer was out for debugging, you’d think I would be out walking around on the beach enjoying our vacation. After all, being far away from the office (have laptop and uni laptop bt never blog from the latter) I was virtually internet free accept the phone and the coffeeshop that has 1 wee little lap top for die hards. In truth, I did enjoy being virtually “offline”, this vacation has been critical for us as a stop gap between one set of cancer treatments and the next big cancer test in the family. And yet, I was consistently watching the news and these are the stories that stood out for me:

Positive Stories

  • Houston Mayor Bill White via Council Member Jolanda Jones declared July 25th  Transgender Day in Houston @ the Transgender Center 1 year anniversary. The Day will help raise awareness about both the discrimination against Transgender people and the triumphs of the transgender community and trans center in Houston.
  • Leonard Peltier was granted another parole hearing, citing the admission of the prosecution that there was NO direct evidence that he was involved in the shooting of 2 FBI agents
  • President Obama announced he will sign the the international Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) on Friday which expands the rights of differently-abled people in the U.S. to agreed upon international standards. (More on this on Friday)
  • The Matthew Shepard Act passed. The Act gaurantees extra staffing, investigators, and forensic equipment and databases to investigating potential hate crimes against people based on perceived sexual and gender transgression. read more here
  • Salt Press managed to save their press from going under by asking everyone to buy just one book they published. This story inspired me to come up with a challenge for all of you: please buy a book written by a woc or a woc inclusive press. I’m going to do a whole post on this in a day or two when I’ve coordinated the effort.

Inbetweenies

  • Sotomayor got 13 votes recommending her for full confirmation – 12 democrat and 1 republican. Senator Graham broke with his party to vote for her but diminished his vote by saying,  “I wouldn’t have picked her, but I understand why Obama nominated her.”

Negative Stories

  • Henry Louis Gates homes and yard has been repeatedly postered by unidentified Cambridge residents claiming “reverse discrimination” and blaming Skip for creating racial tension. One of his neighbors, reports there were tons of signs with similar themes on the lawn and the trees lining the sidewalk infront of his home. This serves as a reminder that when the media moves on racism continues. And while the focus on his privilege as someone who can have a mediation at the White House is warranted, so is a discussion about the targeting of him and his home by members of his community for daring to be upset about being accused of breaking into his own home and then arrested b/c he got angry.
  • Health care got back burnered to discuss what kind of beer Gates, Crowley, and Obama drink. I think this is an insult to the N. American people in general, b/c of the massive need in this nation for health care, and to those who have been harassed and/or killed by police brutality who have no similar access to recourse. For me the discussion should have centered around larger issues of inequality and existed alongside health care coverage in popular media. Meanwhile, Republicans took advantage of the distraction to try and remove a public plan from the bill and  to exempt businesses from having to carry some form of health care. Very few outlets bothered to discuss the impact of these issues consistently.
  • The Governor signed the new California budget which will leave some of California’s most vulnerable populations devistated by cutbacks. Among those who will be losing many needed services: the elderly, differently-abled adults and school based children, mothers and children, unemployed and underemployed women, immigrants, and students.  The budget also cuts HIV funding!!!! So who cares if poor folks get the cocktail, didn’t big pharma already say they needed to be “thinned” anyway (this is actually true, a colleague is working on a book about HIV meds, big pharma, and race and class comments they’ve made). Several of my colleagues are not sure their departments will withstand the cuts and at least one has been told her department is done by the end of the upcoming year. On so many levels I am grateful I did not take the two offers to lure me away from my current position to return to Cali, and to think, this time last year I was really regretting it . . . and while I think these thoughts are relevant and important, the myopia of academe while the whole state (and possibly the region) is going to hell feels really privileged to me even if we are facing unemployment or moving to new departments.
  • schizophrenic mom dismembers her own son after family members noticing post-partum and schizoid episode failed to call authorities. Women of color and people with mental health issues both have a long history of being mistreated and/or ignored by the health profession and many, especially those with mental health issues, can find themselves incarcerated for daring to be in public. The fear of discrimination may have been a deciding factor in this Latina’s family’s decision not to call authorities and the result is a dead child. Until we confront the ways systemic oppression, particularly in policing the Other, people will continue to suffer. When a call for help can lead to hurt, how do you choose wisely? and while racism and ableism did not make this woman kill her child, could their absence have helped prevent it? read full story here. (and yes, if this had been a white mom, I still would be talking about ableism, and if it was an able-bodied white mother I would add it to the posts in which I ask if there are larger structural issues turning mothers on their children as this is becoming a much more widely reported phenomena these days. Is it an offshoot of sexism + classism or something else? B/c I’ve done a lot of these posts in the last 3 years and I think it had moved beyond the exceptional “sicko” argument at this point.)

“Hit and Run” Comments and How to be Productive on the Internet

Does this happen to you?

I went on a “blog break” at the beginning of this week and the minute I posted I would be absent until mid to late week the trolls came a runnin’. Multiple people posted comments calling me and other readers/commenters here names ranging from stupid to identity based slurs. Several wrote comments in support of white supremacy and/or the oppression of women socially, physically, and in one case sexually. At least one comment maker spent 2 different 30 minute long stints on the blog denying racism on multiple pop culture posts and then left in a huff claiming “what are you doing, just sitting there deleting every comment I make. It’s been a half an hour, get a life.”  The irony and the ignorance are deeply amusing.

Another person, I’d call a troll instead of a hit and runner, spent 1 hour on the blog sending comment after comment of increasingly insulting racialized verbage about a film review. He then thanked me for “taking the time out to look up images of something you hate so much” to which, I want to say:

you’re welcome. This blog is illustrated, and one thing I have learned is that images help drive home theoretical points in a world where racism denial is a daily occurrence.-P. Susurro

But my favorite was when he came back using a different name and asked where the comments were b/c “I can’t see them anymore and I want to copy and paste them for a friend.” If it really was a different person, they would never have seen or known about them b/c they were stuck in approval queue from the moment he hit send . . .

These “hit and run” comments, where someone comes by to spew hate and then disappears into the interwebs without even waiting to see what happens, waste the energy of everyone involved. They don’t foster conversation, b/c 9 times out of 10 the person isn’t there to talk to, and they deliberately try to upset a community and derail a discussion. Unlike trolls, like those who lurked waiting for their comments to show up and be responded to, hit and runners are spewing rapid fire hate in the hopes of hitting as many people as possible before moving on to the next heavily populated area. Yet both groups discourage people from talking here b/c they create a sense of fear. Fear that conversation will degenerate into hate speech, that people responding will be sanctioned (b/c I don’t allow flame wars here even if one or more sides are right), and/or people less confident in their own grasp of the issues worry that they will be equally sanctioned if they talk. Meaning, when I approve and respond to hit and run comments, I help those people silence my regular readers. I am no longer willing to do that.

So if you are one of our 1,000 or so visitors here are some basic guidelines to participating in the conversation. YOU DO NOT NEED A COLLEGE DEGREE OR A FACULTY POSITION TO PARTICIPATE HERE AND NO ONE WILL JUDGE YOU IF YOU DON’T SPEAK ACADEMESE OR MAKE LITERARY OR HISTORICAL REFERENCES.

  1. consider the community in which you are speaking – if you take time out to learn about the blog you are on (read some posts and comment sections before talking yourself) you will be able to determine whether or not this is a place where you want to participate . While some people thrive on abusing others, participating on a blog that has similar interests to your own or discusses issues you are trying to become more informed about can actually become an important part of your intellectual and social virtual network.
  2. read the post before commenting – this is a longstanding rule here and I repeat it regularly, particularly in controversial posts. If something rubs you the wrong way, and it likely will, if you plan to comment READ THE WHOLE THING FIRST. You might find yourself pleasantly surprised by the time you get to the end, but even if you don’t, it will keep you from making accusations or contributing information that are contradicted by the part of the post you didn’t read. It will also give you a better understanding of the issues covered so that you can be an ongoing participant in the conversation and not just a single issue speaker.
  3. try to add something to the conversation – I like hearing “great post” as much as the next writer/thinker, but what makes a community is bouncing ideas off of each other. Pointing to new info or raising questions or otherwise expanding the issues makes it easier to engage in a conversation where all of us are learning and thinking together. (This doesn’t mean that if all you have to say is “you’re so smart” you should be silent, we all do it, but the more you participate in a way people can bounce off of, the more likely people will engage you on the blog and want to follow to your blog.)
  4. think of yourself as a community member – if someone knocked on your door, insulted you, and then invited you over for dinner at their house, would you go or recommend them to someone else? probably not. On the other hand, if someone comes by your home or business and holds conversations with you occasionally, you are more likely to visit their business or accept their dinner invitation and encourage others to do so. Blogging is the same way. If you really want new readers and hits for your blog, you need to be a part of the blogging community which means talking to people not just saying “hey nice blog. here’s mine [link]” and never coming back. The same goes for “rude comments.” we all have bad days and we all snark once in a while, but if all you are contributing is snark it probably isn’t helpful for you or anyone else. An example that is specific to this blog: I have a particular disability that manifests on this blog as grammatical errors. I invite everyone who participates here to make corrections as a result b/c I don’t always have time to go back thru and edit (I revisit posts over about a week trying to catch everything) but when people say snotty things like “umm learn to spell, it’s P-E-O-P-L-E not ppeole” not only is it rude, in my case it is also ableism. I have several posts and comments addressing the “grammar issues” on this blog and thanking people who catch things, so it something you can and would know if you became familiar with the blog before commenting.
  5. Don’t expect people to caretake for you – if you are new to discussions about oppression, the quickest way to make people think you are disingenuous is to preface your comments with how “scared you are of [fill in id]” or “how hard it is to talk to people who are [fill in id]” or close your comments by saying “please don’t hate on me” or spew stuff you know has been called offensive in the past and say “I know people think I’m offensive but please be gentle with me if you disagree”. Calling people scary, or angry, or any other stereotype of an entire group of people before speaking is like slapping them in the face and then saying “can we talk.” Saying things you know other people have already identified as problematic repeatedly in the past and then asking people to be “kind” when talking to you, is like repeatedly parking underneath a no parking sign and then asking the police officer not to write you a ticket, or taking the fact that he doess it anyway as proof that their out to get you. Everybody gets anxious some times, but part of talking across difference competently, is being willing to make mistakes and take responsibility for them when you do.
  6. don’t cheat or be cheap – if you are advertising an actual business, film, or product, you would never go to someone else’s hard built business and plaster their windows with your advertisements, leaving a comment on someone’s blog that says “interesting post. by the way I was wondering if you would tell people about [product]” is the same thing. When you do that on posts that are completely unrelated to your product, you come across as not only cheap but also offensive.  If your products are related to the blog, most blog owners will be more than happy to review your books, films, activism, organizations, etc. if you just ask. Send them an email or leave a comment on their contact page asking them to review your material. They may say no, but if you just bomb their blog with your advert not only will they delete you, many will ban you for good. (this is for actual human beings who do this; obviously bots are a different story).
  7. Always link back and credit your sources – if you take information off a blog, cite it. Blogs are intellectual property and when you don’t cite you are stealing. People do find out about it and many have now committed to calling people out publicly and by name. I have often encouraged people to invest in e-discovery law b/c it keeps you from having to track others and when legal action has to be taken, you can do it swiftly, openly, and with the best results. Many bloggers with the funds to have legal representation are taking this route as blogs become the go to places for information. For some, who have more complex relationships, these issues are settled behind the scenes. I had a well-read, well-linked blog, prior to this one that I closed b/c of stealing by a particular blogger who, as I predicted, recently closed her blog after slowing down her posts since she no longer had me as a pipeline.  When she closed her blog, my point was made. Behind the scenes shouldn’t make you think you are off the hook just b/c someone doesn’t call you out publicly. And don’t think that it does not change the way people who know what you have done view you as an intellectual, writer, and/or artist as a result. When you steal, whether called on it publicly or privately, it is ultimately yourself you cheat. The only way to become a good writer is to find and trust your voice and then use it. The only way to become a great one is to have people talking back to you, rooting for you, so you can sharpen your ideas and your skills. Neither of these things can happen when you steal.
  8. check your stuff at the door – you can’t agree with everyone on everything. Somethings are worth critiquing and somethings are not. Learn to walk away, it will make your life easier and your participation somewhere more productive. The latter is especially important when you do have a critique that is hard for others to hear, b/c they are more likely to hear it and engage you.
  9. take long comments to your own blog – If you are wordy like me, it is especially important to think about how much you are talking and when you have crossed the line from comment to essay. Look at other people’s comments to assess what the comment threshold is on any blog and try to follow the rule of staying on point and contributing. If it starts to turn into an essay, leave a smaller comment and then write your own blog post. You can always come back and leave a trackback saying that you were inspired to write your own post. Trackbacks are always appreciated, unless you are openly trashing the other blog.
  10. Assume the best of others on the blog – people make mistakes, their learning curves and exposure to issues vary widely, and written communication is often interpreted in multiple differing ways that may or may not accurately reflect the comment makers intent. If you talk to them the way you would want to be talked to in their place, you might get burned or you might actually have an engaging conversation. A lot has been written lately about the differences in communication people engage in on the internet and its impact on various causes and communities. While some people feel any kindness is a sign of “care taking for the oppressor”, I tend to believe talking to people the way you would like to be talked to is quite a bit different than being an apologist. When someone has proven themselves to be untrustworthy (over a period of time or thru the use of slurs) then you can write them off, but doing so on first encounter makes you look just as bad and can help derail an entire discussion. Sometimes, you may even find the way you interpreted something is completely off if you bother to engage rather than shut down. For a really good example of engaging disparate seeming opinions from a place of respect, check out historiann. She snarks back with the best of them, but she also takes a really even handed and engaged tone with people who have misinterpreted her posts or whose comments she disagrees with but who have made compelling points. Ultimately, if you seem like an approachable and open person, more people will talk to you and welcome your presence, and you’ll get more traffic to your own blog.
  11. Know the technology – if you are making a comment pay attention to whether or not the comments are on approval and/or if the blog owner is away. Many times people accuse blog owners of censoring them when they have comments on approval or have gone on vacation and so approval takes longer to happen than normal. Many blog owners don’t approve comments from people who get increasingly belligerent and accusatory while waiting even if they would have initially. Also, using one of the examples from the start of this post, if your comments are not showing up, pretending to be someone else and asking where they are is not going to fool any blog owner with comments on approval b/c if they have not had a chance to approve them, you certainly would not have seen them unless you wrote them. (A caution to blog owners – IPs can be misleading. During the summer months, we have several people staying at our home at any given time who all use the same router for service, that means they have the same IP but are not the same person. When I was staying with Dean GQ, we also had some young ones trying to get back on their feet who were cyberstalking – mostly just logging on a drooling, I hope – colleagues of ours they had found on myspace. we didn’t know anything about it; long time readers no doubt remember I posted a public admonishment of the wee ones on the blog when we figured it out but was too embarassed to say anything to my colleagues’ faces. So an IP is a good start point but may not be enough.)
  12. always leave a link back to your own blog – wordpress has a new feature that let’s you leave comments without leaving your own blog that has basically stopped the link back option, so make sure you log out before leaving comments on a wordpress blog. (I am still remembering this myself.) For most blogs, you have the opportunity to add a link back when you fill out your name. This is the easiest way to encourage others to read your blog and to let people know a little bit about you when you are participating elsewhere.

Other people have written some pretty helpful posts on blog etiquette:

  • Gay Prof has a list of things that are considered troll behavior – I’d just add that some things are blog specific. here you are welcome to process “out loud” and leave longer comments, elsewhere there are twitter like limits on the length of comments tolerated. Some kinds of communication are ok at some places and not at others, but you can solve this by following the “read’ and “know where you are” rules.
  • Historiann deals specifically with activist or “identity based” blogs and people who disagree with them – while I am a lot more lax here, I do think her comments about how your behavior is interpreted is a warning to everyone who is tempted to lash out at other comment makers or blog owners
  • Phil @ Make it Great Guy has a list specific to social networking – ie using blogging and social networks to grow your business or social career – most of his points do not apply to the discussion in this post. However his pts 1-2 and 4 apply to every kind of comment, including the type of blog commenting the rest of us are discussing. And I also like that he makes some reference to blog owner’s responsibility to their community. I would add to those points:
  1. Assume the best of your comment makers or other bloggers until they give actual evidence of being “wrong” – This especially applies to those ppl you intend to contact or encourage to participate on your blog b/c nobody responds well to accusations or derision especially when they are innocent. Assuming the best  is the surest way to avoid misunderstandings and encourage increased social networking. Remember the example of the real life colleague I had who responded to a conversation about an organization whose parent org we both belong to by dismissing the blog, blogging, and me as the blog author? I still view him and ppl associated with that organization with suspicion and have expressed concern about their applications for positions at pov u based on his behavior.
  2. Never assume that you know who you are talking to – People may think they know who they are talking to, but without actual confirmation, you may never really know. Google lies, as I have mentioned before, I know at least 5 people who have been listed as blog authors for blogs they have posted a guest article on as little as once. IPs lie – I use a proxy that says I am in a specific city that I am nowhere near but that I designated as my home city on the program I use b/c I visit the area a lot. You can usually tell someone is using a traditional proxy by looking at the place that says proxy server on most IP look up programs, which for me usually lists as “none or highly encrypted” FYI – mine is “highly encrypted.” Others list as “proxy server in use”  or simply a list of zeros for the IP. Another way to tell you are dealing with a proxy: if the IP changes periodically or often. There are also certain cities that are usually goto places for proxy servers, like Denton TX, since there are real people from these places, they are also hard to tell a part.
  3. Going off on people is generally a bad idea unless the conflict is fully online – no one reading knows you have a prior relationship with the person you are yelling @, even if the person has identified, and will likely be weighing your responses as much as the trolls comments, especially if those comments seem mild in comparison.  I have actually gotten emails from colleagues linking to public conflicts where the information being spewed or the reaction does not line up to the relationship or lack thereof the person appears to have with the speaker. I’ve been astounded by the level of anger, the language used, or simply the dismissiveness. In one case a friend who actually had the power to make funding decisions on another person’s research was being openly ridiculed by the latter b/c she had clearly assumed it was someone else.
  4. Never assume that the current relationship you have with someone will be the same one in the future – Both I and another editor I know have actually been asked to review articles for publication by people who were rude to us online in the past. I’m happy to say we are both professionals and we did not hold that against those authors, but I have been editing journals long enough to know that is not always the case.  As Historiann points out in her post, being rude or dismissive on the internet can also impact your employment prospects in your chosen field. You can safely bet that at least one person on any hiring committee is familiar enough with blogging and social network sites and their archives, to find you and scroll through some of your comments or behaviors.
  5. Don’t out people or otherwise sit back and egg on a flame war or other humiliation – even if you are right and the other person is a super-duper-troll, when you do this it sends two messages: 1. it’s ok to flame people on your blog and 2. it is not safe to speak on your blog without being an “insider.” Flame wars and continuous snark bring in the stats and up your blogs cache but they also have real lasting impact on how your blog is perceived as an open or closed system of communication. When you allow people to be humiliated, you not only drive away trolls, you drive away people who might actually be on the same page with you intellectually or politically but are uninterested in relating in an environment that disciplines and punishes beyond what is necessary. For activist bloggers this can be a huge loss, for academic ones it can mean loss of respect for either you or the targeted person on a scale that is ultimately unwarranted by the conflict. Everybody blogs for different reasons, but if the only people who speak at your spot are friends and known colleagues, or disagreement leads to collective beat downs by the faithful, you might want to think about whether the space you have created is one that challenges you as a thinker, writer, artist, activist, etc. (And no that doesn’t mean you have to wait for the trolls to overrun the place, there are other ways to deal with trolls. When I got my degree in history so long ago, my mentor said “Historians know that if you don’t talk about it, it doesn’t enter public record, nobody remembers it, and then its gone. What power we have.” cue delete button or ignoring as if the troll is not there.) If you add to this rules against flame wars or public calls to treat people with respect that you enforce selectively, you pretty much lose all credibility with people when conflict arises.

In closing, I’d note that I have been guilty of many of these things myself. We all have our off days and we all have those moments when we wish we had stopped and thought something thru before speaking. This is why on this blog we have a first time “no harm no foul” rule that lets most comments through as legitimate contributions to the conversation. I want to believe, despite growing evidence, that people really do want to engage each other on the internet not just re-establish existing hierarchies with them at the top or hit and run.

What about all of you? Are there other rules you have or would add? How do you feel about these?

Hey what happened to the blog Etiquette Post?

sorry everyone. the computer continues to fritz (UGH) so I cannot keep it open for editing nor open any one else’s blog to refer to the list outside of the editor . . . So while my computer is in the shop, I’ll just say this:

  • The etiquette suggestions were from a blog I mis-identified as “gay”, it should have been “guy”
  • Other posts on netiquette I intended to reference come from historiann and Gay Prof @ CoG but I keep losing connectivity trying to find them, so instead, if you are interested, click on the links and run a search on their blogs or just go read them b/c their great fun! (and follow basic netiquette while there of course)
  • My Dr. Who update (remember I promised when I originally saw the latest Dr. Who episode to write a more in depth post) is obviously not going to happen in time while the computer isn’t working. So, I’ll reiterate that it is an amazing episode and that Ryan is one of the best companions I think Tennant has ever had, so don’t miss it.

Quickies: Deaths in the “Virtual” Family

  • Walter Cronkite’s funeral was yesterday. He was a cornerstone of journalism for decades and a regular face in most N. Americans homes. His career was so long and so influential it is nearly impossible to memorialize here; even his own friends got too choked up to discuss him yesterday. You can read more about his career here (and if it inspires you, especially my trad. marginalized readers, consider getting a degree in journalism and taking the media back)
  • E. Lynn Harris died today while on tour for his latest book. I was not a fan of his frothy DL series or they way it, combined with Terry McMillan, ushered in a new era of urban exploitation fiction that drowned out other genres and writers. But he was instrumental in mainstreaming discussions of passing gay men, internalized homophobia, homophobic pressure, complex sexualities, and black gay men (other than the stereotypical black queen in movies). His work sparked widescale discussion across mainstream media and in the households of many questioning black families. And I do believe that his work paved the way for two groundbreaking black gay series on television Here Networks The DL Chronicles and Logo’s Noah’s Arc (my review of which gets more hits than almost any other tv or movie review I’ve done). read more about his passing here.

Everybody Pays – Torchwood S3 E 5 (Spoilers)

tcoeregret2Torchwood 2009/BBC

As the government moves ahead on its plan to round up children, Ianto’s sister, Gwen, and Rhys fight to protect Ianto’s niece and nephew and the working class children they have gathered from the community.tcoeshame3 The men of the area take up makeshift arms to fight off the military and the police as they arrive for the children. Meanwhile, middle class and upper class families start to return their children to school, assuming that the government can be trusted and their children are safe; working class families without child care or misguided loyalty to the system do the same, and soon their children are loaded on buses headed to the aliens.

Frobershire, who has done nothing but his job from the beginning of the series is told he will have to make one more sacrifice: his own children. The PM tells him that the only way to save the rest of the government’s children and pull off the plan to convince the British people that it is the aliens and not the government that double-crossed them, is to show at least one high profile government official tcoehorrorgladly handing over their own children.

Horrified, Frobershire returns home to find the press have already arrived to document his children boarding the bus. What happens next rings extremely inappropriate, at least from a N. American perspective where far too many cases of men making similar decisions as a result of the economic downturn warn against any media making those men out to be sympathetic victims. Frobershire pays for his complicity in the killing of Jack and the others from 1965 and for taking Jack’s family hostage, but so do his wife and two young girls.tcoeshame2 Women and children as “collateral damage” is one of the unspoken themes of this final episode and I think it is one worth thinking quite a bit about.

Jack too is not finished paying for 1965. After the devastating loss of episode 4, Jack gives himself over to despair, allowing himself to be arrested. He then discovers the solution to the 456 problem, but not in enough time to sacrifice another child “who won’t be missed.” (Barrowman’s performance on the final episode is spot on from beginning to end. He infuses the character with pain, regret, internal struggle, and the complex heroism we have all come to expect. It was brilliant!)

Despite being thrown in jail for spying, Louis Habiba continues to be a key player to the end. Torchwood has seemingly abandoned her, Gwen is off saving the children which means she cannot save Louis and Captian Jack gives up after he is told she’s been arrested for espionage marking her down as one more person he has failed. He is so caught up in his own stuff by the time he reaches the jail that he does not even answer her cries through the wall. And still,  Louis comes tcoelouisthrough. When she is asked to hand over the contact lenses for one last recording mission, Louis explains how they work willingly and for all the right reasons. Her actions ensure that the PM, who has put everything off on “the middle men” and the U.S., will pay with his career and possible prosecution.

While this final episode sees two black men taking charge of the handover of the children, one from the U.S. and one from UNIT, the Prime Minister and his aids are all party to the process. And while the visual narrative shows him relegated to the background, something he himself cherishes by episode end, Louis and her supervisor know better. Thus the way he pays is a testament to the women at the “bottom” of the government hierarchy: admin assistants. While much of the commentary about the season with regards to the government has been about the higher ups vs. the “middle men” civil servants, female admin have been a constant background. They make sure the work gets done, both good and bad, and their near invisibility ensures that they are perfectly placed to bring the corrupt down. The multiple ways that womentcoepm are pivotal in these roles is a critical example of engendered marginalization and the power that women take for themselves and exert despite it. (Bravo!)

Another woman also takes power here. The woman who came up with the entire selection plan and justified it through an apalling eugenicist narrative, is the only present at the meetings that does not pay for her complicity. She tries to exert power first with the U.S., then passively by taking unofficial charge of the office and the dismissing of junior staff, and then actively by claiming control over the government. One can only hope that the first video that Louis shot will reach the airwaves and she too will pay for her part. She does however commit to letting Louis out, so that is a good thing.

The good news is that despite being blown up, riding on her stomach on sacks of potatoes for miles, being shot at, falling down, and running on little to no food and adrenaline for days, Gwen is still pregnant at episode end. As a fan, the image of Gwen, with a swelling belly, flanked by Rhys and clearly rebuilding Torchwood while admonishing those who would “run away” is a powerful and satisfying ending for the character. As an academic, the heterosexist narrative surrounding motherhood, parental rights, and overt sexuality running through this season is problematic at best. (My thoughts on tcoefinalgoodbyesexuality from the first exciting exploration of multiple versions of bi-sexuality and/or same sex attraction in the first season to the “family romance narrative” ending of season/series 3 is forthcoming.)

I’ll wait to see the verdict on what people think of Jack’s ultimate decision. While he is initial decline into self-pity will be off putting to most, I think his final decision is fitting with his character going back to the Dr. Who days. However, I do wish he would have ended in his newly built office looking at a photo of Ianto and reiterating his promise to never forget. Perhaps Jack explains it best when he says, “I began to like it [playing the hero] and look what I became.”

I don’t really know how they can come back for a fourth season, but the groundwork is certainly laid if they do. Like most fans, I hope that the ending does not pave the way for predicted Tweenified sexually sanitized Torchwood Tubbies, but it certainly could.