Academia is so much like church sometimes it sickens me. The final straw would be a collection plate going around with the professor/preacher justifying why your money should continue to go in. Then again, that comes in the form of tuition and fees, so there's no need. What there continues to be a need for, is the kind of preaching, certain churches are notorious for; where in order to make a point--and usually a weak one--some entity needs to be berated as an example of why the teaching makes sense. Sure we could all be a little kinder to each other, but did you have to bash the shit out of so-and-so's point of view just now? Where is the kindness in that? Oh you mean we should enact a kind of social justice that is connective and compassionate but will judge the crap out of anyone who uses commercial means like the only store in town in order to make such connectiveness a reality? Real classy. And just what are people supposed to do to share resources, make them out of whatever is around the house? Am I going to turn my nose up at somebody's contribution just because I came from a huge corporation? Hell to tha naw! I will instead be grateful as all get out that we were able to pool our resources enough to help each other out at all. Growing food and sharing it is one thing, but is a potluck really that bad if someone made an apple pie from the apples they can only afford to buy at Wally's World? Has the spirit of community been undermined by such a heinously evil act? Hard not to get that messaging from a person who will turn around and try not to be classist about the fact that sometimes our choices are that limited when it comes to shopping.
Judgement is often cast the harshest within the walls of academia with the don't do this or this, and then turn around and do just that because that's how they keep their jobs. Not cool dude, not cool. How am I supposed to model this ideal behavior when I keep receiving the exact kind of modeling I've been receiving for years, only this time it's packaged as somehow radical or liberatory? Can't help but see right through that one. Not to say that there is no hope. I mean at least the professor/preacher is mindful enough to know what is happening is f--ed up, just not enough to know when they are participating in the perpetuation of it. We are complex creatures, we human beings, but those who find themselves in positions of power and privilege either flaunt it shamelessly or pretend like they aren't doing it or that they even have such things! And this is not a pipe (that I wish I were using to bash my brains out for having once more subjected myself to such nonsense)! But I digress, just like the other beloved preacher/professors who love to go off on the kind of tangents reminiscent of the kind found in "Don't be a Menace" when that reformed prisoner is preaching away. And is it really the so-called leaders in academia that should really be sought out as potential enactors of social justice? This is not what I intend to be about. I try to live it, but who am I kidding?
Of course I am guilty of judging and would try to justify it with some reasoning like, isn't the point of judgment to know what not to do in the quest to reclaim oneself, to adhere to a higher ideal even? How does one respond compassionately to such happenings? To listen without judgment is perhaps my greatest challenge. To pull from what is heard and unheard gems that help get us or maybe it's just me closer to actualizing the underlying messages of community and education that undermine and perhaps undo the status quo that were intended to be preached about. In the meantime, I need a break and a place to find my own way for a while. Modeling the kinds of behaviors that lend to compassionate and loving community and education are what I thrive off of. I honestly can't expect to do it without perpetuating the very modeling I've come across to date. Where to find that kind of modeling is a mystery. To think I could solve it myself is a rather lofty mistake to make.
A space for introspection. An attempt at improved articulation & understanding of self & environment. A deeply internal sense of traveling as I voice thoughts, ideas & other things quite trivial in essence. A scatterbrain with a lot to learn & share. Welcome.
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
Sunday, September 14, 2014
Victimization and the “Strong Black Woman’s” response: A dry run at expression
When someone asks “is she really the victim here?” and
follows up with “As a black woman she likely has some power in the situation,”
it is a challenge on two fronts. On the one hand, the listener is challenged
with considering this as a possibility which means further pondering what kind
of power a woman could have in this situation and to what extent the power one
has is also racialized. On the other hand the listener is challenged with the
assumption that once more, she is likely to be blamed as the cause of her own
demise. It’s even worse when a black man posits this question and dichotomizes
responses among women especially black women i.e. the strong black woman’s
response versus the black feminist response; where both groups place their
blackness and womanhood on the stereotypical dominantly derived hierarchy and
are thus mandated to view them as a negative juxtaposition.
Should I be considered black first and a woman second? This
seems to suggest that I put my womanity on the back burner in favor of highlighting
my blackness. Black people have long
been subordinated as a group and made to feel as though our lives are hardly
meaningful and worth snuffing out on a moment’s notice. So, is this to say that
in situations where black men are being called into account for treating black
women in this very way that my blackness should be at the forefront of any
response made? If so what response should that be? According to the strong
black woman mythos, the suggested response is to “stand by your man” because we
are both black and our spirits and lives have been similarly disheveled. But
look what ends up escaping the attention of both groups; a battered black
woman. But hey she’s strong, she’s black and she certainly is not a victim
right? Her blackness is what gives her her power, her strength. What ends up
happening is a familiar sort of abandonment, especially when it appears the
black male counterpart was provoked into doing such dastardly deeds. It’s
almost as if to say, she WANTED to be attacked or else she wouldn’t have done
what she did. –How this does not seem familiar when it comes to black men having been attacked and murdered by white
men in positions of power who would
claim the victim was being aggressive
and thus illicit such an uneven response on the part of black men is
beyond me—The result is abandonment by black men, black women, and anybody else
with a similarly dominant mindset that would rather believe they deserve what
they got than be considered people worthy of living without fear of being
minimized off the face of the earth. He
is upholding a status quo which is amplified by a blackness that demands his
dominance over any woman. Questioning this means undermining the black man and
by his logic the black community.
Why does there seem to be this insistence of this kind of
“strong black woman’s” response? That she massage and soothe the black man’s
wounded pride in favor of her own internal and external wounds which he insists
she deserves and/ or should considered insignificant to his pain? Who is there
to comfort and help her heal? Based on the black man’s response of the sort
where he demands the black woman consider her blackness above all else, it
appears as if he should not be expected to do such a thing blackness
considered. A strong black woman could be a viable option, however if a similar mindset is at play, then proceed with caution. What s/he can be counted on to do is reiterate how the black woman
being treated this way is not the victim and is powerful. A damning eulogy for
those who undergo soul and actual murder by the hands of their supposed savior—and
this goes for all supposed saviors.
A powerfully painful reminder that no one is coming to our rescue; which is not to suggest a commitment to the kind of strong black woman mythos that has the iron skin and soul that equips us for our continued subordination. Rather it is a painful reminder that no one is going to neither hold him responsible nor make him change his mind about us as beings who deserve the unconditional care and support as he does. When his love and support is given on the condition of your unyielding subordination it is hard to imagine him as any different from the people he claims to be protecting us from. (near tears when considering this possible truth)
A powerfully painful reminder that no one is coming to our rescue; which is not to suggest a commitment to the kind of strong black woman mythos that has the iron skin and soul that equips us for our continued subordination. Rather it is a painful reminder that no one is going to neither hold him responsible nor make him change his mind about us as beings who deserve the unconditional care and support as he does. When his love and support is given on the condition of your unyielding subordination it is hard to imagine him as any different from the people he claims to be protecting us from. (near tears when considering this possible truth)
She needs a community that looks out for her unconditionally and without judgment. A community that can model for her what that looks, feels, sounds, and acts like. A space where her blackness and womanity are acknowledged as parts of her whole self not to be minimized or negatively juxtaposed as competing entities.What kinds of space exist like this beyond family and friends (which can also be problematic depending on what dynamics exist within these settings)? How can we get to a place where, when taken as a whole, we are valued and value others--strength, weakness, and power included? I am continually searching for this space, albeit cautiously.
Note: This response meant to challenge an often dominant
response to black female victims of battering and/or murder--especially by those black men who inherently look down on black women who value both their blackness and womanity. By no means should this be considered a general rejection of black men, more-so a response to black men with a dominant masculine ethos. Instead it could be read as challenge to what it means to be a member of the black community in
terms of love and support. When blackness has been accounted for, how are women
regarded? How is this community different from a status quo that operates
similarly on the grounds of gender, let alone sexuality when it comes to
expressions of power? What would it mean to truly liberate ourselves from such
continued nonsense? Why do we continue to find such responses acceptable?
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Problems with being me
Ho hum, here I go again!
I was just at a going away gathering
and came away feeling rather embarrassed. In trying to go with the
flow with trying to start conversations and introduce myself—like I
normally don't—I ended up making a fool out of myself several
times. This is me however. I don't always say the right things at
the right time, I was never that cool to begin with, so attempts seem
quite futile at times. I knew it would be rude to be the odd
wallflower on the margins, so I figured I would just be me, and ended
up being weird. What causes that extra sting is that I was around
other black people like myself for once. Except when I speak or be
myself, I am reminded that I am not like other black people, and that
they more than likely have a strong desire to disown me.
The dream
goggles of marginal acceptance came off when a certain so-and-so
showed up acting like he didn't know me and only bothered to speak to
me—to say bye—when I was saying my goodbyes. I honestly have
given this person no real tangible reason to dislike me as much as he
clearly does—I mean the nonverbal cues speak volumes. Tonight
however, a scenario popped into my head that involved me actually
confronting this attitude ridden stranger, punching him in the face
several times and saying “Now you have a tangible reason not to
like me...chump!” and then walking off with only shocked stares
following ("Steppin' Razor" is playing in the background).
The fact that I am so bothered by such continual
occurrences means I have a long way to go before gaining a true sense
of self acceptance. What makes this challenging is knowing that
around anybody, but especially other black people, I feel like I am
in permanent high school. I can't escape from the constant judgment
that comes with me being myself! It's not that I'm a total slob or
anything, I just “talk funny” and have a rather awkward demeanor
at times. I'm not sure what else has me being elected for an even
more marginalized status than usual but it kills the shit out of my
self-confidence, and I'm fricken 29! Time and time again I ask
myself, WHAT DID I DO? What did I do to offend these people so? What
am I to these people?
I know I sound like a whiny victim; I just cant
help it when stuff like this keeps coming up. I honestly do nothing
but try to be polite and strike up some semblance of a conversation.
Yet, all I get is brick walls of attitude like I am unworthy of being
taken seriously as a human being for some reason! What would these
people say about me if I were to die tomorrow I wonder? These people
who could give two farts about me on any given day? It is soul
crushing to feel so alone because I'm not this, that or black enough.
Ugh, how scummy must I appear to these people, my so-called fellow
human beings? If any of those people needed help tomorrow, I would
give my all to do what I could, while those same people—especially
mr. so-and-so—would probably set me on fire if they thought they
could get away with it (and in this town they probably could).
Here I am trying to find a path toward
healing, understanding, and love, and I keep coming back to stuff
like this. I am certainly not thrilled by such inner turmoil and am
troubled by not knowing when or how to get to a place where stuff
like this doesn't bother me because I am okay with who I am enough to
know that no real harm is meant by these people (or maybe I'm
dreaming again). Days like this make me want to close up permanently.
However I cannot help but revert to that childhood self that loves
reaching for the stars and the heavens. Maybe my people (real
non-shady, awesome people) are up there too. How to strengthen myself
to the point where I can withstand the dangers of reaching is a
mystery that is yet to be solved.
Saturday, February 23, 2013
Institutional Turmoil
“It is the mind in us that yields to
the laws made by us, but never the spirit in us.”
--Kahlil Gibran
There is so much going on in my head
lately. Much of it has to do with being a living contradiction within
a living contradiction of a graduate program. Why is it that no one
wants to discuss the reproduction taking place simultaneously with
the critique and resistance of the status quo within which we reside?
How can ideals of change, justice and betterment be professed and
aspired to, when at the drop of a hat, the maintenance of oppressive
structures are upheld and enforced on Others perceived to be a
threat? What happened to conflict resolution; to understanding; to
putting in the work that goes toward defying the status quo which
means dealing with discomforting things, people, ideas? We talk of
disruption as a powerful tool that leads to a multitude of
possibilities in ways of being that are possible, yet treat those
people, things, and ideas that disrupt as a problematics in need of
reprimanding if not removal.
I am constantly struggling with finding
my voice and expressing it with confidence. When I experience the
turmoil of these contradictions taking place, I am bewildered. I
thought the point of the academic endeavor was to become a
self-actualized scholar, which meant journeying through the landscape
of ideas and issues and emerging with the formulation of one's own
voice and way of knowing and doing things. Yet I am a witness to the
shaping power of our figure heads, and the reality that these people
hold our lives and livelihoods in their hands. It is they who must
sign the paper of approval. How can I think that I have the power to
become when it has to meet the approval of the powers that be? Yet
the powers that be behave as if they have no power; as though we are
their colleagues; that is until we are either met with bureaucratic
realities of things like coursework, exams, and other tests of
measurement, or in need of usually negative sanctioning.
Must I always conform to what is
inherently contradictory? I am clearly not okay with this yet feel
as though, when attempting to articulate this inner turmoil, that it
is the institution that is defended by way of the issue being made
personal, rather than effectively examined with alternatives to be
considered. The people with power are suddenly powerless to the
workings of the institution and those that have a problem can either
shape up and conform or just go away. Those that have been treated
well by the institution have a hard time seeing things as troubling,
reducing responses to critiques of it as a personal problem to be met
with individualized solutions. And so the ways of
institutionalization continue.
But I don't want it to be this way! I want meaningful work and relationships to emerge from my journey. For the powerful to be transparent in their power yet open to alternatives to institutional ways of being. For those around me and myself to be willing to work with and through the troubling for the sake of being all the better for it instead of silencing it. I want a mentor, friend, and collaborator, not just someone to defer to because of their position. I want to be okay with expressing what's in my soul without fear of being shut down. Challenge me, but not for the purpose of belittling. I am in need of much nurturing and realize that institutions don't hug back, but refuse to believe that those that have been institutionalized have no humanity, no soul, no desire to make things different. It doesn't have to be this way. When will we let our spirits, knowing and feeling what is right, lead us?
Labels:
academia,
betterment,
desires,
environment,
hope
Friday, February 22, 2013
Occupied by someone else's Love: a critical review
Here's my scrappy perception of the film Occupy Love
Firstly the film as a documentary is overtly academic. A question is being asked in a way that assumes that everyone knows what is being asked and why. That question is something along the lines of 'how is what you're doing--as a social activist--or what is going on--with fill-in-the-blank social movement--part of or a reflection of a love story?' or something along these lines. When the film maker mentioned that most people looked at him like he was crazy, no one wondered why. Silly people! Can't you see what this man is trying to say?! That seems to be an exaggerated response but a noteworthy one nonetheless. No one bothered to consider that the idea of love or the romanticizing of a particular aspect of social movements--that they are happening--should be examined or discussed before acting on it in such a universalized manner. No one else felt troubled by the combination of Occupy and Love besides me? The idea of Occupation as a historically problematic phenomenon that is in direct opposition to Love is in need of consideration as I see it.
And that's when it hit me.
This film is part of a trilogy that documents one man's understanding of people's engagement in social movements. Three films that show a progression of one person's understanding of a thing that feature individuals and groups that serve as a conduit through which this understanding is reached and expressed. When approached in this way, my understanding of the film remains that it is one that is academic, because it is a documentary, but one with a deeply personal, borderlining on selfish purpose.
It would be great if these films were the start of a conversation rather than a giant assumption of the perception of various social movements. In a multitude of ways, he was on to something. Our connection to one another, the love that spurs one to act or react to various crises, the messiness of love. Yet this messiness is not something that is examined. Only the happening of this lovely thing was celebrated.
Again I must remind myself that this is a documentation of one person's perceptions of a social phenomenon. The documentarian is the star of the story, the people featured are the supporting cast. The truth of this is well masked by way of film in a way similar to academics and their use of jargon. The picture painted is one that says this is what is happening. Not often does the document express, this is my understanding of what is happening. Such a monologue should be open to conversation, especially when it comes to love and the occupation of it. I mean, what are we talking about here? What should we be talking about? Should love be thought of in this way? What do you mean by love? No one was privy to this conversation, only the assumption that love has to be what is going on here.
That along with unacknowledged white privilege--as in at times the film seemed like this guy's safari experience with social movements, which included some pretty dangerous moments that privilege likely allowed him to escape, in other words, his investment was in the storytelling not in the people with their complex humanity being used to tell the story; indeed he always had a way in and out and no meaningful connections to any place or people in particular, not to mention his anybody can do it attitude about telling these stories with no sense of the politics involved in getting such stories made or heard--were my points of discomfort with this film. My moments of hopefulness were found in the connections made with the hope that emerges from critical moments in time, our ability to come together and act, and a sense of love and spirit that is the essence of such actions.
It would be cool if a multitude of folks made responses to this film that become a multidimensional discussion about love and social movements--especially those that highlight the messiness, contradictions, and counternarratives that exist as part of these things. There is constellation of truths to be found within a topic that veers dangerously close to overt romanticism.
Firstly the film as a documentary is overtly academic. A question is being asked in a way that assumes that everyone knows what is being asked and why. That question is something along the lines of 'how is what you're doing--as a social activist--or what is going on--with fill-in-the-blank social movement--part of or a reflection of a love story?' or something along these lines. When the film maker mentioned that most people looked at him like he was crazy, no one wondered why. Silly people! Can't you see what this man is trying to say?! That seems to be an exaggerated response but a noteworthy one nonetheless. No one bothered to consider that the idea of love or the romanticizing of a particular aspect of social movements--that they are happening--should be examined or discussed before acting on it in such a universalized manner. No one else felt troubled by the combination of Occupy and Love besides me? The idea of Occupation as a historically problematic phenomenon that is in direct opposition to Love is in need of consideration as I see it.
And that's when it hit me.
This film is part of a trilogy that documents one man's understanding of people's engagement in social movements. Three films that show a progression of one person's understanding of a thing that feature individuals and groups that serve as a conduit through which this understanding is reached and expressed. When approached in this way, my understanding of the film remains that it is one that is academic, because it is a documentary, but one with a deeply personal, borderlining on selfish purpose.
It would be great if these films were the start of a conversation rather than a giant assumption of the perception of various social movements. In a multitude of ways, he was on to something. Our connection to one another, the love that spurs one to act or react to various crises, the messiness of love. Yet this messiness is not something that is examined. Only the happening of this lovely thing was celebrated.
Again I must remind myself that this is a documentation of one person's perceptions of a social phenomenon. The documentarian is the star of the story, the people featured are the supporting cast. The truth of this is well masked by way of film in a way similar to academics and their use of jargon. The picture painted is one that says this is what is happening. Not often does the document express, this is my understanding of what is happening. Such a monologue should be open to conversation, especially when it comes to love and the occupation of it. I mean, what are we talking about here? What should we be talking about? Should love be thought of in this way? What do you mean by love? No one was privy to this conversation, only the assumption that love has to be what is going on here.
That along with unacknowledged white privilege--as in at times the film seemed like this guy's safari experience with social movements, which included some pretty dangerous moments that privilege likely allowed him to escape, in other words, his investment was in the storytelling not in the people with their complex humanity being used to tell the story; indeed he always had a way in and out and no meaningful connections to any place or people in particular, not to mention his anybody can do it attitude about telling these stories with no sense of the politics involved in getting such stories made or heard--were my points of discomfort with this film. My moments of hopefulness were found in the connections made with the hope that emerges from critical moments in time, our ability to come together and act, and a sense of love and spirit that is the essence of such actions.
It would be cool if a multitude of folks made responses to this film that become a multidimensional discussion about love and social movements--especially those that highlight the messiness, contradictions, and counternarratives that exist as part of these things. There is constellation of truths to be found within a topic that veers dangerously close to overt romanticism.
Thursday, October 25, 2012
A Love Poem
here is something i just wrote. will refine later. tentative title: love movement
what would it mean
if we could become
part of a greater constellation?
our souls connected
part of a greater treasure
love bringing us together
and what if it didn't matter
who we are?
as stars we are members of the same universe
and part of each other already
let us recognize this
about ourselves
and leave nothing to chance
let us continue our journey
of re connection
manifest love as an artform
become our own kind of cosmic stuff
have no doubt
it is worth the struggle
our souls have been crying out for us to become
to begin undoing the damage
of separation practices
forgetting that we shine brightest when we're together
so when we struggle,
let us do so in love
and be strong in our resolve
for the restoration of our cosmic souls
part of our greater whole
is always worth the effort
and i yearn to begin
----------------------------------------
until next time...
what would it mean
if we could become
part of a greater constellation?
our souls connected
part of a greater treasure
love bringing us together
and what if it didn't matter
who we are?
as stars we are members of the same universe
and part of each other already
let us recognize this
about ourselves
and leave nothing to chance
let us continue our journey
of re connection
manifest love as an artform
become our own kind of cosmic stuff
have no doubt
it is worth the struggle
our souls have been crying out for us to become
to begin undoing the damage
of separation practices
forgetting that we shine brightest when we're together
so when we struggle,
let us do so in love
and be strong in our resolve
for the restoration of our cosmic souls
part of our greater whole
is always worth the effort
and i yearn to begin
----------------------------------------
until next time...
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Who knew music could be so divisive part two: Coffee Shop (Mis)Adventures
The following is as close a recounting of true events, and an excuse as to why I couldn't get my work done this afternoon and will now be forced into a possible all-nighter.
So I’m trying really, really, hard to do my reading for the
week . However, there is this table of young (probably sorority) women studying
and one has their laptop practically blasting music of her—and the
groups—persuasion. After gnashing my teeth about it for forty-five minutes or
so, I finally—after repeatedly going over the variety nicest possible ways to
ask without coming off as upset—ask the young woman if she could either pop in
her headphones or turn down or off her music altogether, mentioning that it was
really distracting to my studies (and a gentleman behind the studytable in
question quietly chimed his agreement) . Her response: “If you say please”. So I did in an oozing manner, all the while smiling. She
shut off her music, I said my thanks and went back to my table to continue
reading. But my focus drifted off to the fact that once again I am too slow on
the snappy comebacks.
“If you say please?”
Did you ask any of us if we wanted to listen to your music in the first place?
“If you say please?” Were we even a consideration before you
started blasting your tunes for everyone to hear?
“If you say please?” Excuse me, but do not imply that I am
the one without the manners here. You were the one that didn’t even ask anyone
if you could play your music loud in the first place.
“If you say please?” Yeah, I realize how uncivil I was for
not saying please, but do you realize how uncivil you were for not even asking?
But I’m the one in the wrong for not saying please? If
equivalent exchange is the issue, then the correct reaction would have been to
go right up to her laptop and shut her music off, since that is the same level
of respect she accorded the others and myself.
Politics of politeness is interesting in a given context. I couldn’t
help but feel like the typical minority, the person who has to go out of her
way to be polite when it is my space that is being forcibly infringed upon.
Reads a lot like much of the history of most colonized folks. Being regarded as a child who must oblige the unjust adult is just humiliating. Dignity continually torn to shreds at the thought of similar scenarios.
Being the passive one
doesn’t help, yet I knew that being confrontational with comebacks would have
blown up the situation and all I wanted to do was study. Instead I look like a
fool and am stuck wondering about that fact and this muffed up scenario for the
rest of the day. Study time was officially ruined, and I had tons of shizz to
do.
When pondering the ways in which I could ask this woman to
shut off the tunes, I was also pondering the dissertation titles, “The Politics
of playing Music in Public Spaces: Music as a form of post-colonization” and “Would
you please turn that down/off?: Politics and Post-Colonization of Space”. I was also fantasizing about being uncivil for
reals. Forget my fantasy pal Louie Ville, the slugger and him chomping on some
knee caps. Nah, I was ready to introduce AK-47, whom would initially be pointed
at “Miss Please” before totally decimating her precious Mac, after I said “No”
in response to her mandate “If you say please”.
How’s that for civility? The idea of
bustin caps was in need of an upgrade anyway. Now I just need to make these
little misadventures and violent-yet-comical fantasy responses into a comic.
Only a
passive-aggressive person would think of such a thing as a release. Of course
there’s the matter of not being considered a danger to society, unlike the
folks who get away with making all sorts of violent films and shows that
desensitize us to erroneous acts of violence on a daily basis.
Note: Racial and gendered undertones of this response are
implied. Most of you will know what I’m getting at.
Until next time…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)