Category: Opinion Articles

Drag Performance and Black Lives Matter

January 2nd, 2022

Black drag queens have been at the forefront of social justice movements since Stonewall, and this past decade has only seen this trend continue. Popular reality competition show RuPaul’s Drag Race has given several drag queens, both Black and not, a platform to use their voice and their drag to advocate for change. One being Symone, RuPaul’s Drag Race’s Season 13 winner. Symone, a Black queen from Arkansas, used the show’s runway to demonstrate her support for Black Lives Matter, wearing a “Say Their Names” dress with bullet wounds on the back. The look sparked conversation among the judges’ panel, fellow drag queens, and on social media platforms such as Twitter. While known for its glamorous and entertaining nature, it is clear that the impact of drag extends far beyond lip syncing.

The term drag is believed to have Shakespearean roots. During the 17th century, only male actors participated in Shakespeare theater productions and would dress as female actors when necessary. It is rumored that 17th century actors coined the term drag when discussing how their dress costumes would “drag” across the floor. Drag did not become a part of American culture until it was introduced as a part of the vaudeville entertainment genre of the early 20th century.

Vaudeville combined music, comedy, dance and often female impersonation for a live entertainment experience. It is from vaudeville that the first famous drag queen emerged: Julian Eltinge. Eltinge placed drag in the spotlight of American entertainment, aiding in its increasing popularity. Following Eltinge, gay men began to perform as drag queens in underground clubs in the 1930’s. Drag has been intertwined with gay American culture ever since, and has evolved consistently with time. Drag queens have found themselves both underground and in the mainstream media, fighting for gay liberation and more recently Black lives.

In June of 2020, drag queen Jo Mama organized “Drag March For Change”, an event meant to raise awareness of police brutality against Black Americans and violence against Black trans women. Thousands of drag queens in full drag attire marched in Chicago calling for a defunding of the police, reallocation of police funding, and for violence against trans people to be considered a hate crime. Jo Mama and other participants aimed to emphasize intersectionality in their march, wanting to serve as a reminder that LGBTQ+ Black lives are included in the fight for all Black lives.

Famous Drag Race alumni Bob the Drag Queen immediately responded to the killing of George Floyd with a call to action. Bob encouraged her Twitter followers to use their voices and advocate for Black lives. Unable to participate in protests due to health concerns surrounding the pandemic, Bob traveled to local jails and bailed out protesters, proving that there are multiple avenues for supporting Black lives. In an hour long conversation on the drag queen’s YouTube channel, Bob discussed how white silence is both unacceptable and extremely harmful to the Black Lives Matter movement. Through both conversation and action, Bob the Drag Queen has served as an example to her fellow drag queens and the world at large what it means to be a true activist.

Bob’s Drag Race community followed a similar course of action, with over 40 former Drag Race competitors appearing in a five minute YouTube video challenging non-Black identifying people to speak out against white supremacy and police brutality. The drag queens featured in the video advocate for the signing of petitions and challenging of belief systems that have allowed racism to persist in America for centuries. Although the creator of Drag Race, RuPaul, has said little on the human rights issue of the mistreatment of Black Americans, the queens who have competed on his show have used their newfound popularity for good.

At its core, drag has always had a spirit of revolution and change. In drag’s history are queens such as Marsha P. Johnson, who fought for the liberation of minority groups even when pushed to the outskirts of the movements they helped to create. Now, with new drag queens facing similar social challenges as their predecessors, drag is serving as a force for shaking up long-standing systems and promoting cultural change once again.

✰

✰

✰

Featured image from DAZED Magazine
The Colonisation of Black Beauty

October 9th, 2021

Society has a love-hate relationship with Black beauty, our features are ridiculed and heavily disrespected, but they are loved and alluring on other races; just as long as that race is not ours. Since birth, we are told that our noses, our lips, our melanated skin and our hair texture is less than and that we should aspire to have straightened hair, snatched and sleek noses and swirls of indigo in our eyes. Society is yet to reach a point where our beauty is wholly recognised and respected.

Colonialism brought upon and introduced the idea of a social hierarchy, and whiteness soon became an ideal at large. Western beauty standards were now the pinnacle point of beauty, it is at this point where beauty was in the hands of the coloniser. The ideology of whiteness being right is a construct just like race. It was made to assert control, dominance, and power over colonial subjects. Therefore, as a society, we need to think in terms of seeing ourselves in a way that does not take away our humanity, because that is what imperialism and colonialism did. And just because colonialism is in the past, does not mean its legacy — that is ingrained in our minds — ceases to exist.

We have been trained to believe that Western features are on top, and forced to believe they outshine non-white features. My flat buttoned nose, enlarged lips, sepia skin and jet black tresses are no match to current beauty standards according to society.

For many young Black girls, our hair is manipulated to conform to Western standards. We know the tickling feeling and pungent smell of hair relaxers. Our curls are slathered in chemicals that will help us fit into the narrowed hair standards. Straight hair should not be the apex of beauty, because quite frankly our minds have been tampered into believing that looser textures of hair are the epitome of beauty. Curls, coils and kinks are unique in their own way and should be valued as such.

There has definitely been a shift in how Black hair is viewed today. Nowadays we see that there is a culture that boasts and embraces the array of Black hair textures. That widely being in the community itself, which is progressive as it encourages our people to unlearn the construct of whiteness being what we should aspire to. However, as a society collectively we are yet to see that at the same level. In our society, Black hair is still only held to a higher regard than it was before if the texture is looser, has a bouncy curl and perfectly coils when in contact with water. The love towards Black hair is unconditional. This is because Black women with tighter curls are still not widely represented when it comes to the face of Black hair. This goes to show that there is everlasting contempt towards Type four hair for instance. Black hair is still colonised because the Black hair that is accepted has close proximity to Eurocentric hair standards.

Black lips. See, society loves the prospect and allure of our features; just as long as it is not on us. I grew up believing the notion that my lips were “too big”, “enlarged” and “too dark” so much so that I would purposefully smile in a way that didn’t show the true size of my lips; in pursuit of aspiring to have smaller lips that resembled my white counterparts.

Although, nowadays society finds fuller lips as appealing as soon as fuller lips became a trend on non-Black people. But, Black lips have always been here, but their beauty is masked by disdain, unfortunately.

Over the past few years, I have noticed that the features that black women have always had are being treated as a new aesthetic. When a celebrity adopts that facial feature. When I was younger, having bigger lips was unattractive and unsightly.

In 2015, I noticed a monumental shift in the way larger lips were viewed, when Kylie Jenner got and acknowledged that she had lip fillers. In the wake of Kylie’s surgeries, society revised its attitudes towards bigger lips. Getting lip fillers and injections became normalised, and for the first time accepted by society as a recent wave of beauty. It wasn’t until someone who was not black got their lips done cosmetically to appear fuller that white people praised it as if it was new. Meanwhile, Black women have had full lips all along. For many of us Black women, we have grown up hearing that our features are overly large and masculine. Now with the emergence of cosmetic alterations, they are suddenly seen as alluring.

Black lips should be embraced on Black women for starters, society cannot continue to take away from our beauty. Black lips are not a trend.

“Darkie”, “shadow”,“pitch-black night sky” are some names that have been thrown at us Black people because of the colour of our skin. In essence, what is wrong with the colour of our skin? Think about it, who has taught society to believe that having a darker skin tone makes you less competent, less worthy and less worthy? It is a manufactured ideology because the idea of “race” is a construct.

I love my sepia hue and I have learned to embrace it after liberating my mind of the damaging notion that I have to be “lighter” to love myself. Society is yet to do that for itself. Our minds have been trained to label and judge darker-skinned people as unworthy and judge them upon first look.

In order to decolonise Black beauty, we have to aim to remove the standards that have been perpetuated by white society since birth. To make that happen, we have to educate ourselves on the construct of race. By this, I mean that we have to educate ourselves on how standards are conditional and that there is no right way to look– and whiteness is not the best option. We need to see value, beauty and worthiness in the alluring abundance of other cultures, races and ethnicities. As a society, we must stop subconsciously preferring and treating whiteness with such glory.

✰

✰

✰

Art credits: Asia R, @rey.illustration on Instagram
Abolishing the Model Minority Myth

September 17th, 2021

The model minority myth is an idea that encourages racism and drives a wedge between minority groups, forcing them to focus on being against each other rather than against their oppressors. White supremacists have often used this idea to place minorities into two categories: “The obedient, token minority” and “The threatening disobedient minority.” Those who believe in the model minority myth often place minorities into those categories based on stereotypes. The model minority myth is extremely destructive, and it is a way of thinking that must be put to death if we wish to grow and mature as a society.

Considering the recent hate crimes that have been committed against Asian Americans, many people have been forced to re-evaluate the way they view minorities. I have found that many Americans did not even believe that Asian Americans could experience racially motivated hate crimes. This is false and stems from the model minority myth. No matter how much a minority group is praised, they will never be treated with the utmost respect that they deserve. Asian Americans are often placed in the first category that I mentioned: “The obedient, token minority.” People often compare them to other minorities, claiming that Asian Americans are more obedient and intelligent– Not threatening or disobedient like other groups. Yet, the same people who perpetuate this idea were quick to claim the exact opposite when Asian Americans were fighting back against the racism that they had experienced. This just goes to show that in the mind of a closed-minded racist there is no “Perfect minority;” just a minority who is quiet and compliant. To them, a model minority does not display the very stereotypes that they placed upon marginalized groups.

This false narrative takes experiences from the groups that are seen as the model minorities and weaponizes them to use against groups that are not seen as the model minorities. This does a great amount of harm because the experiences of those model minorities are not truly being understood, they are just misused. This is why many people who believe in the model minority myth were surprised when Asian Americans spoke out. The Asian American community has always voiced their concerns, but instead of listening to them, people ignored those concerns and mistreated more people.

Another reason the model minority myth is harmful is that it further instills the idea that the “threatening, disobedient” minority cannot be anything but threatening and disobedient. This myth also makes it significantly harder for those unfavored minorities to be successful. It makes those people in marginalized groups feel as though they must do the impossible in order to be respected. After completing the impossible, they must rid themselves of everything that makes them unique to be accepted. There is no winning for any minority in the model minority myth, whether in the first or second category.

This way of thinking allows society to blame the culture and values of different groups instead of taking responsibility for the system that allows marginalized groups to continue being marginalized. In the mind of one that believes in the model minority, there is no systematic racism because the success of minorities can be based on what they look like. Certain minority groups will always triumph over others and some of them will never be successful no matter how much they try because they will never be more than the stereotypes that define them.

https://mobile.twitter.com/mikajain/status/1397660695181725697

The model minority myth ignores the fact that within a minority group, different experiences may pertain to different ethnic groups within that minority.

This myth also often strips certain minorities of their minority status, while keeping them at arm’s length. It says, “You are not oppressed enough to be a minority, yet you will never receive the privilege that white people have.” It allows certain minorities to feel as though they are stuck in the middle, not wanting to be as low as the minorities in the second category, but never being able to reach that perfect status. The truth is there is no model minority. There is no minority better than or less than any other. This idea that has been pushed for so long negatively affects all that are involved, even those that seem to be benefiting from this false narrative. This idea disguises a long history of racism as a form of appreciation to keep certain minorities from being able to comfortably speak out on the racism that they experience. It makes things like the “American Dream” seem unreachable to many minorities solely because of their race.

I encourage everyone to do away with the model minority. I encourage minorities to avoid the temptation to be allied with those who only aim to oppress. This idea has never been used to uplift; it has only been weaponized to create unrealistic expectations for those in a system that has never benefited them. Eradicating this myth will make those who believe in it unable to blame racial inequalities on anything but the system that has given room for the inequalities. It will also force them to always see minorities as humans, not just when beneficial or when they can make inaccurate comparisons between groups of people that have different individual experiences. Ridding ourselves of this idea as a society will allow us to focus on the voices of those that have often been silenced. There is no winner in an unjust system.

✰

✰

✰

Featured artwork by Asia R., @rey.illustration on Instagram
It Hasn’t Been 101 Years

August 27th, 2021

In August 2021, the United States celebrated 101 years since the ratification of the 19th Amendment and how far American women had come since receiving voting rights. However, that centennial didn’t mark a century since every woman in America could vote, but every white woman. By 1920, women of every other ethnic groups, including indigenous, African-American, Asian-American, and Latina, weren’t privy to such a right. Despite the emphasis placed on the twentieth century suffrage movement and the path it supposedly paved for women’s rights, what exactly did feminism then, and in its all succeeding waves, mean for women of color?

First-wave feminism, from the late nineteenth century to early twentieth, was directly linked to the suffrage of white women. Though many attach all sorts of labels like able-bodied, cisgendered, and middle-to-upper class, it was only white women who benefitted from the 19th Amendment. Sacrificing the rights of their fellow women was a compromise with white male leaders that this group was willing to make, considering that their gender was the one factor hindering them from total privilege. The famous Seneca Falls Convention didn’t even have African-American women present, who were expected to “wait their turn”; this further strengthens how they were viewed as the other and that their needs were deemed as entirely separate from that of white women’s. When it came time for protest, they made the active choice of relying on Cherokee, Haudenosaunee, and Chinese-American women, who they regarded as “less threatening” than the Black women they were sidelining.

However, once the right to vote was received, there was radio silence on the issues concerning women of color, including racism and voter suppression. The repeated usage of the phrase “women’s rights” must have confounded WOC, as they saw themselves belonging to the gender just as equally as their white contemporaries, but didn’t benefit from the strides supposedly made. Sojourner Truth questioned what gender and race meant to her in her famous “Ain’t I a Woman” speech when she addressed all the rights she never received as a black person, a woman, and a black woman. Truth points out that because of misogynoir, her blackness takes away from her womanhood. The activism of WOC was inherently intersectional; unlike white women, they had to defend all aspects of their identity at once because one aspect could further diminish another. While “women” received voting rights on paper, indigenous and Asian-American women weren’t even given citizenship and the same policies preventing Black men from voting now applied to Black and Latinx women. There was no choice in being either a race activist or a gender activist; first-wave feminism refused to take this into account.

From the 1960s-1980s, second-wave feminism was better able to include WOC. The agenda of middle-class white women had once again been at the forefront and their concerns with being allowed in the workplace and abortion rights didn’t always coincide with the concerns of WOC, who were always required to play subservient roles and were trying to prevent forced sterilizations. These differences in interests stemmed from historical differences in power; white women had the ability to demand entrance into the workforce when service hadn’t been made their entire identity as it had for WOC.

Minority women accepted that they would have to branch off on their own, which led to the founding of the Chicana movement and the National Black Feminist Organization. Both worked toward convincing WOC that they could benefit from feminism that hadn’t been portrayed in white mainstream media. To map out how their compounded oppression, WOC discussed not only how their race and gender affected their role in society, but also their sexualities, whether they’re able-bodied, their class, and their skin color. They were bolder in targeting intersectionality, which was coined by Black professor/critical race theorist Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw during this wave. From an engagement standpoint, WOC were broadening the accessibility of feminism and evolving the color of equality. Americans saw the fragmentation of this “monolith with a single unified agenda” that many had seen feminism as.

Third-wave feminism, from the ‘90s to the 2000s, saw women reclaiming femininity, which first and second-wavers had shied away from in order to be taken more seriously by male establishment. However, ferocity, being rebellious, and other stereotypically masculine behaviors were equally important during this time as a test of gender identity. Both these aspects of the third-wave were critical for WOC, who previously had their femininity stripped from them due to their race and were viewed in a more masculine light due to their service roles. They were finally accessing the femininity naturally associated with white women while also fleshing out a form of masculinity that was self-validating rather than societally enforced. The media was extremely important during this period as feminist accomplishments pertained to the social/the cultural rather than the political. This way, third-wave feminism was integrating intersectionality more directly into the movement by working slightly harder to include WOC, while still keeping them at arm’s length.

Though many believe them opposites, exclusionary feminism is inherently misogynistic. When fighting for equality without desiring it in a format that is accessible to all women, you are prejudiced against WOC in order to obtain what men have. It forces feminism to prioritize the power already held by men rather than the power that can be garnered by complete female unity. Feminism then becomes about acquiring privilege, not restructuring society to incorporate justice into its institutions.

As WOC pushed themselves closer to the forefront of each successive wave, less and less definitive legislation can be assigned to those eras. This introduces the assumption that as the undervalued made themselves known, there was suddenly less legislative fervor to rectify their issues. It reinforces that feminism is the empowerment of white women rather than all women. Though the landmarks they have made are highly commendable, achievements supposedly in the name of feminism shouldn’t be spread out for other ethnic groups as if they are meant to wait their turns. We shouldn’t have to wait until 2052, 2062, and 2065 to celebrate a century since Asian-American, indigenous, Black, and Latina women received voting rights. The goal of feminism must mean that when you utter the word “women”, you’re including all of them.

✰

✰

✰

Photo credits: Charlotte Mecklenburg Library, “Vote Baby Vote.” Courtesy of Gabriel Hackett, Getty Images.
What It Means to Navigate Two Different Worlds as a First-Gen American

August 10th, 2021

A people hold among them culture, tradition and a particular way of life. Different countries hold different national values. When your parents originated and discovered themselves in a world quite different from the one you are discovering yourself in, disagreements about how to navigate the world are bound to arise. I cannot retell a story about not fitting fully into two different worlds, because that is not my experience. I’d say I’ve had the privilege of knowing two countries so well I can call them both home. This knowledge allows me to criticize and accept parts of each I’ve experienced, and form my own unique cultural identity.

Within cultures themselves, different generations break and curate new traditions to change what was previously deemed unchangeable. My parents, and many of yours, have probably broken traditions and gained new aspects to their cultural identity that the previous generation didn’t have. In that sense, they understand the changes that come with time- although to a somewhat limited extent.

There is only so much influence the ideals, traditions, and way of life of parents will be received by their children. As people come to age, their thoughts are not restricted solely to what their parents teach; everywhere they exist and everyone they meet will influence who they are. Since the people and places you meet in a new country are not directly going to spread the same ideals you are taught at home, it poses a different standard for parenthood that immigrant parents are unfamiliar with.

Challenging and criticizing parts of my culture and its beliefs is sometimes taken as an attack on the character of its people, including my parents. And very well, your beliefs do reflect your character. But most times criticizing tradition takes into account the fact that our parents are members of a system that has long not been challenged. Their character, just like ours, is a product of their environment. I’ve come to understand that even if I disagree with some parts of their way of life, some ideals become too intertwined with our being to change. It can be frustrating to see them live out with beliefs that fundamentally contradict your understanding of the world. But disagreements on how to live your life forces one to see with more sympathy and understanding.

There is an embrace of sensuality and sexuality with my generation and in New York that isn’t quite the same in Mali. And while I was frustrated with that for some time, I’ve come to understand that I wasn’t looking at a full picture. As it turns out, femininity and sensuality are embraced in Mali. Within my parents’ generation, there was a spread of women’s empowerment that had never been seen before. Women were more expressive through their clothing choices. My parents broke traditions and created a new culture for their ideals to exist in, one that their parents didn’t quite understand or agree with. I’ve believed and accepted my generation’s notions of sex-positivity and sexuality in a way that is quite detached from the beliefs of previous generations, too. And that’s in some part because of the cultural difference we were exposed to, but also just as a nature of changing times before changing minds. Change happens within regions at different speeds.

Yet, when it comes to conversations about self-love, boundaries, and healthy relationships, it’s beyond frustrating to see the types of actions that are deemed acceptable within my culture. The mental abuse that is endured, especially by married women, is sometimes astounding. I think a lot of women aren’t given the chance to fully explore and love themselves despite being expected to pour all their energy into their husbands or children. Especially when it comes to societal pressures of marriage, there can be a huge stigma around divorce for older generations. A lot of women refuse to choose their peace for the sake of their children, or even because of fear of what others might say. As someone who is trying to love themselves and establish healthy relationships and boundaries, this is a frustrating reality to witness.

A criticism of my, or any, culture is not a rejection or diminishment of its value. It is simply a questioning of ideals, of why things are the way they are. I am especially hesitant about how I receive some parts of my culture given a Western educational background. I reflect on points that may stem from a type of superiority. But there are some fundamental aspects like homophobia or sexism prevalent in the functions of my culture society that I will never accept. I have set as my truth, and fundamental truth, that it is inhumane to treat anyone less than because of their sex or sexuality. These hateful beliefs are invasions that have settled some of the ways of my culture that I gladly choose to reject. And they make me grateful for being a part of another world that has challenged only looking at people for an aspect of their identity.

I’ve also come to better understand that beyond some trivial differences about how to navigate the world, the pressure of success as a first-generation child and student stems from the lack of opportunities my parents had. In many cases, it stems from a position of good intention, just faulty execution. Parents fail to fully understand their pressure added to the personal pressure on school and life. And even when they do attempt to understand it, their attempts sometimes aren’t enough.

A change in environment can sometimes completely change someone’s cultural identity as a young child, though it is less likely to occur in adulthood. So for kids who move from one country to settle in a new one, they will adopt and be influenced by the culture to a greater degree than their parents.

That’s not to say that parents aren’t also influenced by new environments. As previously acknowledged, a lot of immigrant parents do have to bend the traditional roles of parenthood. My parents are keener on apologizing and listening. They are more open to honest conversation and to being vulnerable. They are open to learn and change and become better parents.

Yet, it is to say that I look at the world through a different lens than anyone, but also a significantly different one to my parents. And that doesn’t make one of us right, or better navigators of the world. Rather, we are just navigating two different worlds differently. My exposure to more ideals and standards is because of my exposure to a new world. As I am finding myself, I take the agency to question. I must question before I fully embrace.

For me, being a first-generation child has not been about shame or disappointment in some ways my parents or other family members have chosen to live their life. It’s just allowed me to to explore and challenge what’s always been in front of me. Being introduced to a new culture on top of my own has given me a chance to pick and choose what I hold as my truths.

I sincerely believe that you criticize places and people you love the most. You learn from them. Just as my parents aren’t identical reflections of their parents, I won’t be identical reflections of them. And that’s a truth I’m no longer guilty feeling.

✰

✰

✰

Featured artwork: Reyna Noriega (@reynanoriega_ on Instagram)
The Crack Epidemic: How the US Government Failed Black Americans

August 2nd, 2021

Ricochet was born into an unstable home with a verbally abusive mother in 196`1. She quickly became involved with drugs, alcohol and both abusive and drug-addicted men. Ricochet eventually moved out of her childhood home, and into a low income Harlem housing project with her two children. She soon developed an addiction to crack, which led to the neglect of her children.

To support her addiction, she often spent money on obtaining crack cocaine instead of necessary items such as food and clothing for her children, and prostituted herself for drugs when money became unavailable.

Ricochet fell into a cycle of entering relationships with viciously abusive men and being unable to maintain housing for both herself and her children, while simultaneously feeding her addiction to crack. By 1998, Ricochet had lost custody of both her children and was once again in a relationship of domestic violence.

Ricochet’s story does not have a resolution or a happy ending, nor is it a unique experience. It is the result of America’s treatment of addiction as a social plague rather than a public health crisis.

Crack cocaine’s production in America began in the 1980s. The drug was quickly popularized as a result of its cheap pricing and highly addictive nature. With the introduction of crack came an emergence of inner city drug markets that supported frequent users. Prior to and during the 80s, “white flight” occurred. White Americans moved into the suburbs in large groups, while Black Americans were often denied access to these suburbs, resulting in high numbers of Black Americans residing in poorly resourced inner city communities.

These communities provided very little economic opportunity, leading several young Black men to become small time drug dealers during the crack era. Crack dealers made large profits, and the desire to protect this cash flow led to an increase in inner city violence. The homicide rate for Black males between the ages of 14 and 17 more than doubled during the crack era, between 1984 and 1994.

Rather than promoting rehabilitation, the US government responded to the crack epidemic with an attitude of deterrence. Former president Ronald Reagan famously characterized his government’s response to the crack epidemic as the “War on Drugs.” However, the Reagan administration’s legislation and course of action during the War on Drugs era made it clear that this was not a declaration of war on drugs, but rather a war on inner city Black communities.

The 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act targeted Black inner city crack users and dealers, as it required a mandatory minimum sentence of five years without parole for 5 grams of crack cocaine, while requiring the same mandatory minimum sentence for 500 grams of powder cocaine. Powder cocaine was much more expensive than crack cocaine, and more importantly, almost exclusively used by white Americans.

The act also led to the mass incarceration of hundreds of thousands young Black Americans, specifically young Black males. By 1989, 1 in every 4 black men aged 20 to 29 was either incarcerated or on probation. These statistics gave the United States the highest incarceration rate in the world in 1989, and this rate continued to increase between 1989 and 1995.

The implementation of these racist policies had consequences for the Black family dynamic. During the 1990s, the majority of black households were single mother households, as Black men were being lost to the prison system, addiction, or drug related violence. Several of these single mothers found it difficult to support their children alone, and often turned to selling or using crack themselves.

Addiction is a disease, and an addiction to crack is no different. The desire to continue, support and fulfill this addiction often superseded familial responsibilities, creating the Crack Generation.

The Crack Generation encompasses children born during the crack era or children directly affected by a parent’s crack addiction. This generation of children inherited structural disadvantages, counterproductive behaviors and a lack of preparation for a structured and adult lifestyle from their parents. They were forced to find ways to survive in unstable homes, like Ricochet’s two children. The crack epidemic also resulted in an increase of low birth weights and fetal deaths for black pregnant women. But the Reagan administration was not concerned with these devastating realities. The US government saw the spread of a drug mostly used by Black Americans, and the spread of fear of this drug by white Americans, and these two factors dictated an all too familiar response: a disregard of Black fears to soothe white fears.

The response to a crack epidemic was a failure. It failed to address the root cause of the spread of crack addiction within Black communities: economic and social inequality rooted in America’s longstanding history of systemic racism. Instead, America did one of the things it does best, criminalize its Black citizens. If crack users had been presented with an opportunity for rehabilitation, instead of jail time, it is possible the history of the crack epidemic would not be as devastatingly tragic and racist as it is.

✰

✰

✰

Image credits: Vox, via the New York Daily News/Getty Images
The Effects of Racial Burnout As a Black Woman

July 12th, 2021

Growing up I’ve always been highly aware of my race. The culmination of racism, colourism and texturism made me aware that I was Black from a young age. Due to racism, I was constantly fed the idea that Blackness was undesirable, unworthy and unwanted by those around me. By age five I already started being told that I needed to have thick skin and to be strong simply because I exist as a Black person.

Countless experiences with racism in predominantly white spaces and glaring stares in public places were the main reminders of my Blackness growing up and even up until now. As a Black woman, I can say that these racist encounters occur almost every day, not a day passes without the reminder of my melanated skin.

Imagine this, being reminded of your race so frequently, in a demeaning and dehumanising way, it eventually gets tiring. It is incredibly exhausting, to say the least. In one of my classes where I was the only Black person, I felt like my body was in constant flight or fight mode as I braced myself for the racist comments I knew I would walk into and have to endure.

This is known as Racial Battle Fatigue, which is described as the cumulative result of a natural race-related stress response to distressing mental and emotional conditions. These conditions emerged from constantly facing racially dismissive, demeaning, insensitive and/or hostile racial environments and individuals.

Microaggressions

Microaggressions are like mosquitos, they can pop up anywhere, at any given time; so much so that their pestering nature is exasperating. Some people get bitten by mosquitos more than others just because of their ethnicity, religion or gender. The mosquitos can strike in the workplace, at the grocery store and at school, at any given moment.

Given my experiences attending predominantly white schools, microaggressions have been a frequent form of racism for me. I’ve heard a fair share of racist and ignorant questions and statements countless times. Microaggressions may seem minor and minuscule on paper, but their effects are much larger.

Microaggressions are perceived as more subtle and implicit ways of expressing outright prejudice, colourism and discrimination. But their consistent and offensive nature shows how harmful they are to one’s mental wellbeing.

”Can I touch your hair?”

”You aren’t like other Black people.”

”You’re pretty for a Black girl.”

These statements build up, become heavy on the mind, and can lead an individual to feel tired to answer them because they’d have to explain their race and cultural identity over and over again. It’s not as simple as brushing them off as annoying remarks– it eventually becomes a burden to carry that you’re forced to encounter ever so frequently.

The debate over the existence of racism

Up until now people still debate over whether something is racist or not. They continue to question whether it was rooted in race and look for something else to blame the incident on. The issue with this is that it prevents us from sharing our experiences with racism and as a result silences our voices that are longing to be heard.

It’s draining to hear that people still don’t believe that hate crimes and denial of opportunities can be due to the colour of my skin. Because it stops us from recognising that racism is prevalent today, some people are still under the impression that racism was an issue of yesterday. For me as a Black woman, I do not feel that– I am black 24/7.

It takes a toll on me since it feels like we are going backwards. It feels like people who aren’t BIPOC think I am being ”too sensitive” or that I am ”overreacting” when they are only able to say this because they are white. It’s disheartening to hear these defensive rebuttals as they truly emphasize some of the racial bubbles some of my white counterparts are living in.

In summary

Racial burnout is real and having to recount trauma’s and sitting down having to explain that something was racist is painful and mentally draining for the ones who actually experience the racism.

As a Black woman, racism is everywhere for me no matter where I am, that’s how deeply rooted it is. As a result, having to encounter it and learning how to deal with it from a young age has taken a toll on my mind, in the way I present myself and navigate life as a person with melanated skin.

We deserve to rest and peace, and white supremacy is stopping us from getting to that. We deserve to be heard, seen and amplified.

✰

✰

✰

Photo by ArtByPrincella on Instagram
The Push Against Anti-Racist Education

May 16th, 2021

The Black Lives Matter Movement of this past summer forced several educational institutions to push for changes in both their curricula and culture that should have occurred long ago. Several primarily white institutions, or PWIS, have released statements committing to diversity, equity, inclusion and anti-racism. Among these institutions is Dalton, an elite New York City K-12 private school located on Manhattan’s Upper East Side. Recently, Dalton’s faculty released a list of demands regarding anti-racism and the promotion of structural equity, separate from that of Dalton’s anti-racism and diversity, equity and inclusion statements.

The demands are extensive, with faculty citing a need for full time diversity officers, the requirement of courses that challenge white supremacy, required faculty anti-bias training, the establishment of a clear system for reporting instances of racism and many other necessary changes to Dalton’s culture. Simply put, the demands are a call to advocate for the needs of Black students and faculty, as well as the fostering of an environment in which both students and faculty are equipped to handle and engage in conversations about race. They are a reasonable request to support and enable the safe existence of Dalton’s Black community members, and unsurprisingly, this request was met with opposition.

The opposition took the form of an open letter, authored by anonymous Dalton parents titled Language of Loving Concern @ Dalton. The parents describe Dalton’s new commitment to anti-racist education as an end to Dalton’s previously “joyful, progressive” mode of learning; one of the many reasons for their claimed necessity that Dalton place a hold on any and all lessons relating to anti-racist education. The letter’s authors referred to social justice as “at most, one part of the educational world”, and it is in this aspect of their overwhelmingly racist argument that their privilege could not be clearer. Social justice is not merely “one part of the educational world” for Black people, it has been ingrained into us since our birth into an inherently racist country. It extends past an educational experience, and to a means of protecting our selfhood. It is not a ridiculous notion to suggest that white children be expected to learn about what Black children have no choice in enduring.

When Black students inhabit educational institutions that were not created with us in mind, students bravely tend to push for structural changes, as Black Dalton students have. However, the idea that Black students should be grateful for their presence in white spaces, and that this gratitude prevents them from critiquing these spaces, has led to anger in some readers of the faculty demands. The demands were posted (and critiqued) by the Naked Dollar, a blog which often finds reasons to discredit efforts towards equity and inclusion. Under the demands, Naked Dollar reader Caleo commented:

““You people are a joke, blowing millions of dollars so you can pat each other on the back about how sophisticated and progressive you are, while getting screamed at by spoiled Black brats about how oppressed they are by being gifted the opportunity to teach at or attend this upscale ‘school’.”

Spoiled Black brats. To the Dalton parents wondering why anti-racism is crucial, this is it. Black students have to deal with comments such as these, and far worse, regularly. It is not a choice nor a lesson plan that we have the power to put on hold, it is our reality. Your worst fear is being “branded a racist”, while Black people have lived through incomparable instances of trauma. Most Black children have firsthand experience with instances of bias, racism, bigotry, and you find yourselves threatened by the requirement to learn about it. An anti-racist education is not a personal attack, it is an effort to better both the community and the individual.

A diverse, race-focused curriculum has numerous benefits, for both Black and white students. A study performed by Claremont McKenna University concluded that diverse curricula has overwhelmingly positive social and emotional effects for students of color, and causes a recognizable appreciation for cultural difference in all students. These types of curriculums grant students the opportunity to engage in cultures different from that of their own, different from the “Dalton curriculum” that parents wish to revert to.

A survey conducted in the Cambridge public school district, one of the most diverse districts in both student population and curriculum, found that students felt a high degree of comfort working with individuals of different backgrounds, and were able to recognize the existence of racial disparities within their school and potential solutions for change. Diverse curricula creates forward-thinkers, it promotes the joyful learning environment that the authors of Language of Loving Concern @ Dalton claim to be losing.

Black students have already begun the work of challenging racism once again, with the New York organization Black Students Demanding Change, which has partnered with independent schools across the US to promote inclusive education, writing a powerful response to the anonymous Dalton letter and creating a google form for signatures of support. It should not be the work of Black students to make our high schools more equipped to support us, but it is the work several of us choose to take on. Anti-racist education should not be a debated request, it should be implemented into every school’s curriculum, private or public, primarily white or diverse.

It is ignorant for Dalton’s anonymous parent community, for anyone, to expect to be exempt from engaging in conversations about race in a racist country. Language of Loving Concern @ Dalton reads, “We have forgotten that before being an “anti-racist” institution, we must be an educational institution.” However, it is the authors of the letter who have forgotten that an educational institution is an anti-racist institution.

✰

✰

✰

Image credits: ABC news illustration, published on GoodMorningAmerica.com
How Reality Court Shows Exploit Black Communities

May 9th, 2021

As I got ready for school, dramatic TV-court shows like Paternity Court and Divorce Court, or “chat” shows like Maury served as background noise. Yet, these shows display and, quite frankly, exploit problems that are anything but in the background of Black communities. As I watch the shows for the dramatism that makes them entertaining, I can’t help but notice stereotypical and damaging portrayals of Black women, Black love, and Black family structures.

Divorce Court, a 36 season TV-series dating back to 1975, claims to deliver “powerful human drama, suspense and a resolution – making for a compelling 30 minutes of television.” Yet, it accomplishes this mission while profiting off the damaged relationships and dangerous dependence (financial and/or romantic) between couples, especially among young Black ones.

In the episode Coleman vs. Wyatt, Laquia and Joseph had been together for 14 years and married for 7. Laquia opens with, “I’m here today because my husband is a cheater and a pathological liar. I kicked him out of the house because of all the lying, all the cheating. I see myself spending all the rest of my life with him, if he changes. But, I don’t think that that’s gonna happen.” She continues to explain how he often leaves home for prolonged segments of time, even when she desperately needs him. When she called him in need of comfort and aid during a miscarriage, he stayed at the bar and didnt help her, because “he was not a doctor, he can’t stop it” and told her to handle it. Joseph blames his actions on her jealousy and suspicious relations. He also claims that her assumptions about him cheating due to his past actions are making their relationship weak.

Though the couple is separated to divorce, Laquia still says that love is keeping her from fully leaving. And evidently, they’ve come on Divorce Court in hopes to redeem this relationship. Judge Lynn Toler ultimately told them she has faith in the restoration of this relationship. Yet, how with these obvious signs of infidelity, insecurity, toxic dependence and physical assault? Joseph gaslights Laquia for her distrust and anger even though he gave her reason not to trust him. While he is the root of her insecurity, he bashes her for being the very person he caused her to be. This is unsurprising though, as gaslighting is a common manipulative force in most damaged relationships. Conversely, this insecurity led to both physical and verbal violence from Laquia toward Joseph, heightening the danger of this union. Nevertheless, there is a dependence and hope from both parties in the relationship, speaking to lack of self worth and incapability to leave abusive relations. There is a clear lack of respect and anger that is confused for passion. The normalization of abusive relationships in the media especially, can make it hard to even recognize that a relationship is so. The longevity of this relationship, also perpetuates the “ride-or-die” belief.”

Still, none of this was discussed on Divorce Court. Judge Lynn Toler encouraged this behavior, in a household of children who will have to grow in this toxic environment. I suppose she doesn’t always have to think about the children, which is why there is a Paternity Court.

Lauren Lake’s Paternity Court, a court-show currently in it’s 7th season, states that “these emotional cases can have life-changing consequences for participants and sometimes new beginnings for individuals. While most suits relate to a child’s paternity — including deadbeat dads and DNA-test determinations — others involve things like grandparents fighting for visitation rights.” Sure, this court does deliver paternity truths that change configurations and doubts within families. However, it exploits the instability of Black households (majority of the features on the show), an issue that stems from slavery. The show often features single mothers who also grew up with absent fathers.

In the episode “Jones v. Fowler,” Iesha Jones grew up without her father, and wanted to end the cycle by making sure the supposed father Jonathan Fowler was in her son, Adonis’s, life. She says that Jonathan is not present in Adonis or their other child’s life, and that he is only around for sex when he is drunk. She proceeds to say that she loves him and wants to be a family, to which he responds “I don’t love her. I don’t wanna be in a relationship with her.” They had been sexually active for the window of conception, yet he doubts paternity because he thinks she slept and conceived a child with her ex-boyfriend. Iesha says that Jonathan disrespects her in front of the boys, which is not surprising if he could do it on national television. At the end of the episode, Jonathan was not Adonis’s father. Iesha claims that this will be what she needs to detach herself from Jonathan, but that seems unlikely with their past history. And now, just as she grew up not knowing her father, her son will have to go through the same experience.

Throughout the episode, Iesha refers back to Jonathan’s statement that he doesn’t love her, and asks “why would you sleep with me if you don’t love me.” Judge Toler redirects the bickering to how it surrounds two innocent children in a toxic household. The judge emphasizes that the two are not good for each other, which triggers Iesha into an emotional cry. Despite her anger and hurt, Jonathan failed to blink an eye. He has managed to use Iesha at his disposal, given that she is clearly emotionally attached and suffering from low self-esteem issues. She doesn’t have the self-love it takes to create boundaries. This dependences on men are psychologically common amongst children who grow up with absent fathers, along with self-esteem issues, depression, becoming sexually active earlier, heighten susceptibility to addiction, and difficulty navigating relationships.

According to Our Everyday Life, boys specifically, like Adonis, who grow up with absent fathers tend to have negative behavior, difficulties bonding, emotional distress and anger. This common trope of absent fathers is not a complete and accurate reality of all Black families. Yet, for those it is, it often finds route in the separation of families during slavery and the fact that Black men weren’t given the chance to be fathers. As Judge Lauren Lake attempts to resolve holes in families due to systems issues bigger than themselves, it does also unfortunately exploit their vulnerability and problems. Yet, we may assess the intent of her and Judge Lynn Toler as Black women, differently than Maury, a white man, profiting off the same issues.

Maury is a 23 season chat show that features hour long episodes who aim to “tackle volatile issues with his guests and studio audience.” Majority of the guests on Maury are young, troubled Black teenagers. Maury exploits damaged Black family structures through dramatized scenes of stereotypically loud overreactions that ensure high TV-ratings.

A Complex article writes, “Maury’s eponymous talk show has faced plenty of criticism since it transitioned from serious news topics to tawdry, mean segments that perpetuate racist stereotypes…. The dramatic reading of the DNA results is followed by even more dramatic reactions, which range from tears to screams to breakdancing.” On Maury, a young woman is often defending a case as to why she thinks the defendant is the father. Maury is either sympathetic or laughing at the situation. Then, the alleged father comes out shouting and denying the claim. The crowd makes a prediction through boos and nays, before Maury reads the DNA results. Depending on the results, the people either yell “I told you so,” or run away from embarrassment.

This show is clearly exploiting the damaging systemic family structures within the Black community. Daily Easter News states, “This show seems to change people. Couples who said they once loved each other end up yelling and cursing at one another to prove a point on TV that they were right…. [It promotes] chaotic behavior. Instead of simply telling these people the truth, Maury and the audience basically pit the couples, or friends or family or whomever, against each other so the final verdict is more entertaining. On top of the sensationalism, the show targets minorities and those of the lower rungs of society for its entertainment.” And why exactly is it that the majority of the features on Maury are Black? And why are we ok with a white man profiting off the pains and trauma within Black families?

Certainly, all the three mentioned shows profit off the televising of problems from majority Black guests. It is important to recognize that these shows are contributing to the commercialization of Black trauma found within Black love and Black family structures. They often present Black women in a demeaning light that doesn’t allow them sexual liberty, emotional independence or the ability to seek self-love, and that needs to change.

✰

✰

✰

Art credits: Stormy Mae Nesbit, @_stormae on IG
How Colorism Changed The Perception of Black Beauty

April 6th, 2021

Growing up in a predominantly white school, I heard “yeah you’re pretty, pretty for a Black girl” quite often. As a Black woman, that phrase left a mark- one that took a long time to heal. To put it blatantly, it’s dehumanizing and exhausting to hear.. The statement “you’re pretty for a Black girl” is often used to “compliment” Black girls, but in reality, it’s extremely backhanded. This phrase implies that in comparison to the rest of the women in your demographic you are the only exception of beauty.

Oftentimes the media portrays most Black women as having fair skin and loose wavy hair. Picture Zendaya for example, a biracial woman who is often deemed the most attractive in the media’s eyes. Headline upon headline depicts Zendaya as an icon, one representing Black women around the world. Agreed, Zendaya is extremely beautiful; but she doesn’t represent girls like me. Although it’s great to have a biracial actor, we should stray away from only representing Black women as one type: fair-skinned & loose curled. The fact is, portraying Black women as one phenotype has allowed colorist ideas to foster.

This is problematic for many reasons. For starters, the portrayal of Black women as one type has led many to only find beauty in fairer tones, as well as only push lighter skin Black women in the media. By only deeming light skin women “worthy of being portrayed”, the entertainment industry fails to acknowledge the beauty in dark-skin women. If the onscreen representation of Black women isn’t diversified, the appreciation for other skin tones depletes. In addition, the lack of representation causes an increase in self-deprecation: this can be seen in those struggling with internalized racism. When dark-skin women are on television, they’re often given side roles.

i don’t think people who consistently have representation should speak about representation unless it’s for the underrepresented.
— nay (@chaoticblkgirl) March 16, 2021

Take for instance Coco Jones, a Disney star whose career skyrocketed after her role in the hit TV movie “Let It Shine.” Jones mentions in one of her YouTube videos that part of the reason she didn’t receive many acting roles after Let It Shine was because of colorism. Jones said, “if somebody else looks a little more marketable, it doesn’t matter how much talent you have.” Jones claims that casting directors displayed bias when it came to providing her with roles. They would often select actors based on skin tone, rather than talent. This is very common in the industry and can often lead to situations where only one type of Black woman is cast…the one with lighter skin.

The sad thing is, the fact that this is so common means that dark-skin women are constantly being denied roles because of the biases in the entertainment industry. This devastating fact just proves that darker skin women- like Coco Jones- are disproportionately excluded from opportunities due to the large part that these biases have to play.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Coco Jones (@cocojones)

Casting girls that are not based on talent is extremely detrimental for dark-skin girls who are trying to “make it” in the industry. Thousands of dark-skin women are being denied roles simply because of their appearance. But, what can put an end to these discriminatory biases? If anything, casting directors need to take accountability for the part they play, and continue to play, in colorism. Representation matters and will ultimately help end internalized colorism, which fosters due to the lack of dark-skin representation in popular media.

✰

✰

✰

Art credits: Reyna Noriega, @reynanoriega_ on Instagram

Category: Opinion Articles

Microaggressions

The debate over the existence of racism

In summary