Lose Your Mother

To many, it would seem unthinkable that one of our nation’s Founding Fathers was in fact a racist. Not only was Thomas Jefferson racist, but he wrote the document Notes on the State of Virginia promoting pseudoscience that claimed blacks were in fact lesser than whites. In his own words Jefferson claimed that these differences were ‘fixed in nature’. Jefferson not only created a distinction between blacks and whites, but he used these ‘differences’ to define race. Race, for Jefferson, was not only the color of one’s skin, but a hierarchical system of those who deserved rights and those who did not.

Jefferson penned this excerpt from Notes on the State of Virginia as an observational piece, similar to how a researcher may reflect on a naturalistic observation. Jefferson stated “It would be unfair to follow them to Africa… We will consider them here” (paragraph 3). In his book, Jefferson stripped away individuality by stereotyping black slaves as a group, while simultaneously dehumanizing black slaves by describing slaves in animalistic terms. Being black in America created the separation between lesser humans versus greater humans (whites). This excerpt from Jefferson’s book is important first, because it demonstrates how he justified slavery through stereotypes derived from pseudoscience. Secondly, because the hierarchical, social construction of race defined in books such as Jefferson’s (1783) can still be viewed today in current stereotypes of minority groups.

Being that it is Black History Month, companies and businesses alike find some way to celebrate the history of Black Americans and those who have influenced movements from the past. Ranging from Nike’s Black History Month collection of apparel and shoes, celebrations and festivities all around the country, and even our own College of Wooster’s month-long celebrations. These events do well to celebrate the history of African-Americans in the United States and recognize what figures such as Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, and Malcolm X have fought for. Although, these celebrations do not always hit the target.

A controversial topic was the German-based sports goods company Adidas. Like many other companies, a popular silhouette of a shoe(s) was released.  The particular Adidas shoe ended up being all white and cream with a black sole, getting away from the extravagant treatment that BHM (Black History Month) shoes usually receive. Being the only part of the Adidas BHM Collection that received backlash, the shoe was removed from retailers and discarded from the “Harlem Renaissance” Collection. Adidas also released a statement expressing its regrets about the Adidas “Celebrating Black Culture” Ultra Boost Uncaged shoe. The “Celebrating Black Culture” shoe “did not reflect the spirit or philosophy of how adidas believes we should recognize and honor Black History Month” (Adidas inc).

(https://www.complex.com/sneakers/2019/02/adidas-removes-black-history-month-shoe-following-backlash)

(https://sneakernews.com/2019/02/01/adidas-harlem-renaissance-bhm-shoes-2019/)

After seeing the white BHM Adidas shoe released to the public, it was obvious to me that Adidas did not do their proper research before releasing the shoe. Over the years that the trend of themed-based shoe collections (Christmas, Black History Month, LGBTQ Pride, etc.) has occurred, I can not remember anything controversial such as this happening. Adidas was right to rollback the shoes and keep the three appropriate shoes on the market. When it comes to race and/or identity, it is important to get things as this right so that those in the communities targeted are not offended.

Dr. Shakes talk spoke mainly about the dynamics and parallels between Black Panther and Luke Cage. She spoke on the representation of African culture within Wakanda and the intra conflict between Black Americans and Africans and how this conflict is used to define how blackness is defined through national and ethnic identities. A piece that really stood out to me and what I did not pick up on per se is the difference between Kilmongers view of trans-nationalism and Nakia. While on the surface level his version may result in violence which should not be the option, the deeper connection to his vengeance has to do with colonialism and the suffering/ genocide of his people and ancestors. When we touch on the Trans-Atlantic slave trade in class we go into detail about the commodification of black bodies and how the industry plays an integral role in how the past was shaped. But it is still playing a role in who we are as a people today. This is often overlooked in the discussion. The discussion needs to be rerouted to the root issue at hand and it starts with American imperialism and the institution of slavery, which is a point Dr. Shakes reiterated throughout the lecture.

Dr. Shakes also provided dialogue about Bush Masters’ being American by birth and how Jamaican culture deemed him “alien”. He is essentially an outcast even though he has ties to both cultures and has every right to belong. The main takeaway from the discussion that resonated with me was how we discuss and accept black identity without making one the main hegemony as Dr. Shakes said. The institution of slavery has hindered us, and the way we go about interacting needs improving. Many identities can co-exist at once and no one deserves to feel inferior, but because of slavery, these problems have been forced upon us

In the past few months, incidents of blackface have become a hot topic in the media. Just last week, former Florida Secretary of State Michael Ertel resigned after photos of him in blackface dressed as a Hurricane Katrina victim from Halloween 2005 began circulating. Ertel was appointed by Governor Ron DeSantis, who, when running for the gubernatorial position, stated that voters shouldn’t “monkey this up” by supporting his black opponent, Andrew Gillum. Another example of this kind of overt racism is Virginia’s governor, Ralph Northam, who is being pushed by his constituents to resign for his section in the 1984 yearbook of Eastern Virginia Medical School. It contains a picture of a man in blackface standing next to a man dressed as a Ku Klux Klan member. In another instance, NBC television host Megyn Kelly drew controversy last Fall after defending blackface Halloween costumes. She justifies the practice by comparing it to the people who place axes in their heads, suggesting that they are equally jarring.

In addition to their appalling behavior, the public figures in question attempted to defend themselves. Just one day after publicly apologizing for his actions, Northam reported that he was not in fact the man standing in the picture next to the Ku Klux Klan individual. Kelly sought to reform her initial statement, maintaining that if someone were to dress as Diana Ross and present blackface, she would view that act as a way of “honoring and respecting” Ross’s beauty. Even more disconcerting is the fact that the only times we have heard these public figures apologize for their decisions of the past were to save their reputations or careers. Ertel— who, despite his resignation, still faces a large mass of offended and enraged citizens— claims he is “a better man than [he] was 14 years ago.” Governor Northam asserts that his poor ethical conduct is not reflective of who he is today or what he stands for.

Notice the trend. Not only were the apologies meant to save face, they also attempted to affirm that the person at fault has since grown from the situation. Individuals on national platforms must recognize the weight of their actions. We can no longer readily accept any and every meek apology that is recited to us day after day. These figures who have gained massive followings must be held accountable for their actions, and we should not be so quick to forgive them.

The lecture by Dr. Shakes entitled African Future, American Legacies was very enlightening. She started the lecture by discussing what is missing about blackness in popular culture. She discussed how it originated with the Transatlantic Slave Trade and  how these racist ideas are continued throughout history by the mainstream media. Black Panther and Luke Cage are not important because they are the first black superhero, but they are the first black casts. When looking at Black Panther, she explains that there is an ideal African society that has been untouched, a space for African Americans and the African diaspora can call “home.” This society takes a diplomatic approach to international aid, but falls short in expressing black unity in their effort. A contrasting character arises as a villain. This character’s problem is that he wants total power and demonstrates this image that he became americanized; he has a colonialist desire for domination. A similar character was put in Luke Cage. However, Luke Cage did not address many of the issues African Americans face within the United States, such as gentrification. She also brought up the fact that many of the characters in Luke Cage fill specific stereotypes. Dr. Shakes concludes by bring up there simply needs to be more discussion of white interaction within the African and African American communities.

I knew and recognized there was bias in the media, especially in regards to the idea of Blackness. However, looking at specific examples that target African Americans and seeing the importance of these examples allowed me to gain a better understanding of the effect white supremacy, as well as how far we still have to go in order to fully recognize the African American struggle within our society. As I have thought about the lecture, I have come across a question. Is discussion the only way in which we can change? And how else can we change the images that mainstream media presents? What is the new social media?

By: Adebola Bamidele

Recently, the international brand Gucci went under fire for their release of a wool Balaclava Jumper sweater featuring a Caucasian model wearing the sweater slightly up to her nose with bright, red lips surrounding a slit where her mouth pokes through. It was quite obvious to many individuals that the piece of clothing was offensive because the sweater gave off the impression of blackface (makeup and materials used to make a nonblack performer play a black role). The clothing brand has recently apologized on its social media platform, but the picture has gone viral since its release date and has many individuals upset. While in the midst of trying to rectify their brand, Gucci posted a picture of a Black woman holding one of their purses above her head. Other brands in the past such as H&M and Prada have also undergone scrutiny due to their racial products.

It’s unsettling to know that there are individuals on the design team that sat around and decided to create a sweater with previous racial ties. Many African American celebrities have stepped forward and have stated that they will be boycotting designers that have incorporated racist elements in their brands. The same celebrities also are asking their fans and supports to buy from underrepresented designers that they believe are not offensive.

In the future, it would be good to see more diversity in the design planning room, that way more brands avoid having to deal with racial issues. It would also be nice to see more celebrities or individuals of influence who are courageous enough to call out brands they believe are discriminatory to their fans.

By Tanisha Ford

“For the past year or so, I’ve been tinkering with a short essay on my earliest encounters with the Ku Klux Klan and the ways in which Klan violence is intimately linked to my childhood and my earliest understandings of myself as black x girl. You see, I grew up just a 2-hour car ride from southern Indiana Klan country.

I didn’t have any plans to publish this essay. . . . it was more of a writing exercise, #wannaBauthor and all.

But the photograph of Virginia governor Ralph Northam dressed in blackface (he’s now claiming it’s not him) alongside a person wearing a Klan hood + robe pierced my spirit. The image symbolizes a long history of racial terror in the United States. So much so that I cannot ever see impersonating the Klan or dressing in blackface as  simply youthful self-expression. It’s racist. full stop.”

In the two appeals for secession from William Harris and Stephen Hale there was clearly a concerted effort to put forward two separate arguments, one that appealed to upper-class slave owners and one that appealed to lower-class southern whites.

The first appeal, the one targeted towards the upper-class, was focused mainly upon the political and economic benefits that slaves provided. The essence of this appeal is as follows: not only were slaves a source of free-labor that the southern economy relied upon but slaves had also become a source of political power with the advent of laws such as the Three-Fifths Compromise.

The second appeal is the concern of this blog post. It was an appeal that relied upon inaccurate characterizations of Republican policy and Northern views on slavery. These came on page 85 and 98 respectively, when both authors  inaccurately portrayed Republicans (and Northerners) as proponents of racial equality. The purpose of this was to play upon the fears of poor southern whites and make them believe that social, political, and economic equality would soon occur and threaten their way of life. Arguments made to convince poor southern whites reflect the importance of racial attitudes to the continuation of slavery as an institution in the South. As a result, the racial anxiety fueled support of the institution of slavery among those who would have benefited from its non-existence.

In summary, the two primary documents found in Apostles of Disunion showed that often racially charged arguments were used to increase support for the institution of slavery among poor southern whites. In a sense elites, who likely ascribed to ideas of scientific racism themselves, appealed to the racially tinged  ‘common sense’ of poor southern whites with the intent to stoke racially fueled fears that led to their support for the institution of slavery.  These two primary documents helped to make this clear.

Throughout high school I had always seen Abe Lincoln as a hero because of his fight in freeing slaves. But after reading this letter my idea of this president has completely changed. Although we talked about this in class on 2/4/19, I was still shocked to read that his main focus was just saving the Union. His words, “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that” (A. Lincoln). This clearly shows that it did not matter to him what happened to the slaves, his main focus was saving the Union and preserving its ideas. There was no focus on the thoughts, feelings, or morality of the slaves. They were still indeed seen as property, not human. After reading this I will no longer see him as a hero although he had a major role in freeing the slaves within the United States. I will simply see him as another individual that made their decision based on what would be best for themselves and the people who held the same beliefs as them.

3 Ways to Improve Education about Slavery in the U.S.

When it comes to teaching students about slavery in the United States, teachers often stumble through the topic. In the worst cases, they use poorly conceived lessons that end up inflaming students, parents and communities about a subject that is already difficult to deal with because of the inhumanity involved.

For instance, in 2018 a Bronx middle school teacher “shocked and traumatized” her social studies class when she had black students lie on the floor, then “stepped on their backs to show them what slavery felt like.”

In 2012 in Georgia, a third-grade teacher resigned after an investigation found the teacher and three others had assigned math homework with word problems about slavery, such as, “If Frederick got two beatings each day, how many beatings did he get in one week?”