School For Activists

Further Action on Whitewashing for Booksellers

2010-02-09T23:51:00.004-06:00

So I'm swamped with my second job starting up again FYI -- you'll be getting more fully thought out posts later, but I wanted to talk about more things booksellers & buyers can do about whitewashing.

First of all, talk to all your publishers reps (or get your buyers to talk to them) about whitewashing generally and the examples we've seen lately specifically. Don't assume that your reps know what's going on in any detail at all, or that they're even aware that there's a controversy. Show them specific examples in their catalogues of excellent books and less excellent ones. Don't just talk about whitewashing of covers, but also of the need for more genre fiction with main characters of color. Talk to them about J. Woodson's covers being all blurred out or not having people on the cover at all. Tell them about great examples put out by other publishers.

But it's not enough to just talk to your reps. This seems counter-intuitive to me, but from everything all of my reps have told me, their word counts for pretty much nothing with the marketing folk. (You'd think publishers would want to listen to the folk in the field, but no). So you must also write letters to the publishers yourselves, identifying yourself as a bookseller/buyer/manager/etc. Target the sales departments and the senior executives of the company. Be nice. You catch more flies with honey. They're just following the money so show them how their racism is going to bite them in the butt. I'll post my letter soonish as an example.

But if you want to have the most impact, get your act together a little bit and get your customers to sign a petition that you will later send to publishers stating "We will buy books with people of color on the cover no matter what race we ourselves are." Go in to more detail, tell them all the things you want to see (not what you don't), use positive phrasing, tell them you appreciate the good books they've already published. Send the petition to every major publisher you order from whether they've been part of the recent controversies or not. Put the petition at the desk, certainly, but set up an online petition that your facebook & twitter fans can sign and you'll get way more response. Don't just direct them to a petition that's already been set up. Get them to sign yours and then print that sucker out and send that big fat envelope to the publisher with a note that say "LOOK. ALLLLL of these customers of ours are saying that THEY will buy books with kids of color on the cover. Get to it."

But it's still not enough. If you want to really change things it's not enough to just get customers to sign the petition. After all, very few people who you explain it to are going to refuse to sign it. It's not the signing that matters. Their opinion doesn't really matter, their actions matter. It's changing their buying habits that you really want to do. You have to get them to really understand that publishers are putting racist covers on books because they think that that they won't sell otherwise. You must get your customers to actually consciously commit to buying more books with people of color on the cover. And not just for today. Your goal has to be to get them to change their habits long term. You're going to need a Really Serious Life Changing Display-A-Mundo of Power, my friend. I'll post pictures of ours later (when I have access to a camera), but think about making a window display. Hell, it's black history month, lets do something useful for once. Make that display really, really clear. Put lots of example books in the window with notes to explain them. Post copies of articles about whitewashing. Use big clear text. Tell people to sign the petition inside. Don't forget that customers have attention spans the size of a pea. Make a smaller display inside to remind them about the problem. Put a sign at the desk reminding them to sign the petition. Remember that customers don't read signs, remind them verbally when they check out. Don't be afraid to put that pressure on. You're an independent bookstore, after all, taking a stand is what you're supposed to be all about.

When you're done with all this, send each publisher a fat envelope of the petition, pictures of your windows and display(s) (don't forget to claim that co-op either!), copies of articles about white washing, and your own letter explaining that you are so not down with whitewashing, and giving specific examples of what you'd like to see from publishers in the future in regards to race. And keep the pressure on, don't let your customers, reps, or publishers forget about it. This isn't over when covers have been changed and it won't be done when black history month is over. Keep calling publishers out on their crap.

Reevaluating

2010-01-25T23:25:00.003-06:00

So I started this blog a year ago and you can see what a spectacular job I've done of updating it, so I've been thinking about narrowing my focus a bit so that I'll be more likely to post. I'm thinking about focusing in more on youth issues and specifically media (emphasis on books) created for youth and how much it reinforces kyriarchy. I'd be defining both "media" and "for youth" very widely -- more like media created for, or consumed by, or created about, or affecting youth -- whether it's intended for them or not. And not just recent media either. So maybe in the same way that Packaging Girlhood looked at what girls read, watch, listen to, wear, and its effects on them, maybe I can look at those things (with an emphasis on books) and their effect on all oppressed youth. I think I'd like to also have a Theory Corner for discussing ethnic/gender/sexuality/disability/women's studies. I'd also like to develop a list of criteria to be used when evaluating where a book/show/etc lies on the spectrum between having empowering messaging and downright alarming messaging. So look out for updates & reformulation ahead!

Whitewashing in the Publishing Industry: A Response to the BloomsburyFAIL

2010-01-19T20:12:00.010-06:00

This post began as a response to a comment on the Jezabel thread about the whitewashing of Magic Under Glass, a new young adult book about a girl of color that has a white girl on the cover. GalNovelty, Bookshop, and Reading in Color as well as many others also have blogged about this. The book is put out by Bloomsbury (part of Macmillan) who last season did the same thing to another book, Liar. The blogosphere freaked out and the cover was changed (to a picture of a very light-skinned girl whose hair is mostly covered up). A commenter on Jezabel questioned whether there was really a specific thought that "black covers don't sell" instead of just not much thought being put into what goes on the cover of a book. This is my response.

I work as a children's book buyer at an independent bookstore and interact with publisher reps regularly. I have frequent conversations with my reps about how books are packaged (novels as well as picture books) in which I point out the problematic racism, sexism, heterosexism, & general kyriarchy in them. I would actually say that quite a lot of thought goes into how books are packaged and marketed -- just not a whole lot of socially conscious though. Just look at how many different covers a single title will have in it's publishing history. Publishers are well aware that the way a cover looks affects that title's sales and they will put a cover on a book that they think will help it sell. Clearly they think that books with black kids on the covers don't sell. Whitewashing is not something that happens by accident. One of my reps frankly asked me whether our books with black children on the cover sold. She also told me that she's been told by some of her other buyers that their customers are reluctant to buy books recommended to them if there's a black kid on the cover. Penguin just released a whole new set of covers for Jacqueline Woodson's books that either have no child at all on the cover or have racially-vague depictions of children. The washing out of books with children of color protagonists is not an accident.

However, it is not the only problem at play here. I don't think we should write off the role of the buying public with sarcastic jokey comments about "But White People Won't Buy Teh Books About People of Color!" Many people who buy YA & kids books buy them as gifts. Just as there is an (apparently a-okay) perception that boys won't read books about girls, I'm quite certain that there is a (mostly unstated) assumption that The White Child I'm Buying This Book For Won't Be Interested in A Book About a Black Kid. We live in a racist society. People make racial-charged decisions about the books they're buying. We can't only call publishers out on the covers they put on books. We also have to do activist work around what books people buy for their children.

Similarly, it seems like a whole helluvalot of the books that do have black kids on the cover are historical fiction about slavery, the civil war, jim crow, and the civil rights era. There absolutely should be many YA and kids books about these topics. Absolutely. However, where are the books about black and of-color children who are having adventures, going on quests, battling vampires, falling in love, dealing with school issues, solving mysteries, telling stories about their families, finding out they're magicians? -- all those things that white characters get to do without having to think about their race. There need to be more books for kids of color to read that aren't constantly reminding them (and the white readers) that Kids of Color Are Oppressed.

Just to be clear, I'm not knocking books that deal with serious issues of oppression -- that is a very important issue needing to be covered in YA & kiddie lit. But it's also important that kids of color get to have fun in their books. It's important for them, and it's also important for white kids (and their parents) to see that not every story about kids of color is going to be historical fiction. That hey, if they like fantasy/mystery/contemporary realistic fiction, they don't have to be surrounded by white characters. Perhaps part of the reason that some white people don't buy books with black kids on the cover is that their main experience of books with kids of color on the cover is historical fiction about oppression. Maybe the think: "black kid on the cover --> historical fiction --> slavery --> educational book --> not fun --> i want a fun book for my kid --> they won't want to read that --> i'm buying something else." I'm not condoning this line of thinking, but it's not really being countered by a publishing industry that doesn't seem to be publishing a whole lot of books where the black characters get to have some fun. To be fair, there are some out there -- many small and independent publishers like Lee and Low do a great job -- however the mainstream large publishing houses are not at all doing a spectacular job (The True Meaning of Smekday & Ziggy and the Black Dinosaurs are a few awesome exception to this).

It's not enough to call for black kids to be on the covers of kids books. We need to call for more books about kids of color that are not just about oppression. We need to call for fantasy/mystery/scifi/romance/genre fiction about kids of color who get to have some fun. We need to call for major mainstream publishing houses to start publishing such books. And we can't let them get away with sticking the lightest-skinned "ethnic-looking" person they can find on the cover when we make a fuss. I mean, come on, the girl on the new cover of Liar? She could be black, sure. But it's not super immediately clear is it? You're not wrong if you think that this was done on purpose.

It is RARE that I see dark-skinned unambiguously Not White kids of color portrayed anywhere in kids books (Kadir Nelson is an awesome exception to this) -- from the covers of YA books to the illustrations in picture books, most kids of color are depicted as extremely light skinned. Most black kids (especially the girls) are also depicted with straight hair. Not that light-skinned straight haired people of color shouldn't be depicted anywhere, but the huge preponderance of them in kiddie/YA literature about kids of color is motivated by racism. Publishers MUST be called out on this, and not just by a few kids buyers sitting down with their rep and saying so. Buyers need to refuse to buy any frontlist titles from Bloomsbury at all this season. Those of us who see a problem must unambiguously say so.

Absolutely, boycott. The publishing industry is on it's last tottering knees -- they are extremely focused on money and that is the way to reach them. Write them angry letters -- tell them you want to read books about kids of color that have unambiguously Not White kids of color on the cover. Tell them you want to see more genre fiction about kids of color that aren't historical fiction. Tell them you want picture books with darker-skinned kids who haven't had their hair straightened. Tell them how awesome books, authors, and illustrators like True Meaning of Smekday, Kadir Nelson, Sharon Draper, etc are. Tell them that you're a POC and you want all this. Tell them you're white and you want all this. Buy books with kids of color, read books by authors of color. Support your independent booksellers who take pains to carry books that don't promote oppression and who deliberately carry books from independent presses and by unestablished authors doing new things. Buy books from independent bookstores staffed and owned by people who care about social justice.

Just for a point of reference, here are the big big big publishing houses (who for the most part need to get with the program). Contact them!

Random House (includes Knopf, Yearling, etc)
Harpercollins (includes Hyperion, Disney)
Scholastic (bills through Harpercollins)
Penguin Putnum (includes Puffin, Dorling Kindersly, Dial, Speak, Dutton, Viking)
Simon and Schuster
Hachette Book Group (includes Little Brown)
Macmillan (includes Bloomsbury, Tor Forge, etc)
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt

And just think, this post only addresses racial problems with kiddie lit. There are just as many problems with the depiction of gender, sexuality, sex, class, (dis)ability, you name it.

Quick Hit

2009-12-05T00:10:00.006-06:00

Another thing to add to the straight white privilege checklist...

Number 857,639: I will never have to choose between living in a region where the professional, financial, political and friend things in my life are going well and living in a region where i can be a part of my cultural community.

Spoken Word Saturdays: Yellow Rage

2009-11-15T19:46:00.004-06:00

Yellow Rage performs "A Little Too Much" with intros from "Listen Asshole" and "I'm a Woman Not A Flava" at the Asian Arts Initiative Grand Opening Celebration.

They are SO. Fucking. AWESOME.

Books Are Not For Hurting: A New Series!

2009-11-09T22:08:00.012-06:00

So as you probably noticed, I haven't written squat since May. However I'm back with a new series of posts about bigotry and unintentional bias in children & teen's literature. And lo, it shall be, and I shall call it "Books Are Not For Hurting!"

"Why?" you might be saying to yourself, "Why oh why should I care about Curious George and The Bernstein Bears when over 400 women have been murdered along the US/Mexico border?" Heads up, the messages we send kids when they're young -- be it through picture books, movies, tv, etc -- impact how our society changes (or doesn't) to address issues of social injustice like the inattention to what's going on in Juarez. Society starts early with messages that non-white bodies don't count when it fails to provide a noticeable body of literature featuring kids of color. Obviously, this also affects women, queer people, differently-abled folks, and so on. So as a background to why kids books aren't a utoptian playground of egality and justice, let's review! (Major h/t to Packaging Girlhood)

I'm a children's book buyer, so I see pretty much all the books that are published by major publishing houses each year. Most publishers send a box of samples of the picture books they are putting out for the season, along with a selection of uncorrected proofs of the novels, and of course a catalogue. I haven't had time to do any intensive counting and statistical-ness, but I'd estimate that 90% of the books that are published feature white children as the main protagonists. A growing number of picture books are featuring children of color as well as white protags, but most of these have kids of color in the background -- they are rarely the main protag of the book. Those books that feature children of color rarely have a child of color on the cover, and are frequently about serious subjects such as racism, slavery, the civil rights movement, etc. It is very rarely that I see a book with a main protag of color in which that child's race is not somehow related to the main problem of the novel/picture book. I'm often left thinking, Gosh, wouldn't it be nice if Fancy Nancy was black? or Wouldn't it be great if I'll Love You Forever featured latino kids? or Goddamnit I wish I could find a happy story about a black kid that isn't about racism!" Additionally, lots of books that have a main character of color end up with a white kid on the cover, à la the to-do about Justine Larbalestier's Liar which, despite being about a black girl, originally featured a white girl on the cover until there was major outcry.

And that's just the tip of the problem in regards to race. Think about how many picture books designate the "girl" animals with a hair bow, pink, skirts, or heavy eyelashes, whereas the normal animal is left to be read as the boy -- the boy as the default, the girl as altered, inauthentic & performative, if we're going to get academic about it (h/t Julia Serano). If a parent is featured, it is almost always a mother, particularly in any books featuring daily activities like washing, eating, cooking, hugging, etc -- you know, because dads don't care about their kids, that's the mom's job.

Which moves us on into relationships (what up Twilight?) Ah yes, the ever-popular fetishization of violence, most notably in the soon to be published Stolen by Lucy Christopher which apparently (according to the packaging, I haven't read it yet) describes a young woman's quest not to fall in love with her abductor and potential rapist. Admittedly it could be that Stolen is actually a well written book, and that it's just packaged badly, but it's indicative of what the publishing industry thinks is appropriate romance lit for teen girls: power imbalance, threats of violence, stalking, etc. (FYI, I'll actually be reading Stolen and posting a review later, so stay tuned). Then there's also all the heteronormativity (the always awesome Renee touches on this), not to mention the internalized homophobia in the coming-out books.

Oh I could go on forever (and do, on my goodreads feed). Trust me, the kiddie lit scene is fucked up. But the point is, we need to be talking about this more. The messages that kids get when they're young from picture books and novels are not neutral. Pictures are not neutral. We tend to think about books as being so much better for children than TV, magazines, the internet, and so on, but picture books and kids novels are subject to the same bias and bigotry that's present in the rest of our society. In fact kids books are probably a stronger hold out for conservative "values" since we have to Protect The Children and The Quality Of The Written Word and all. So! Welcome to my new series on kid's lit! I'll be getting together a list of questions to use as a tool when thinking about kid's literature, and I'll be using them to review stuff. And it won't all be negative either -- I'll also be posting profiles of authors, illustrators, books and publishers that are doing an awesome job. Hooray!

(Note Martha, dressed in a pink skirt with a flower on her head, while George isn't even wearing pants).

Spoken Word Saturdays: Suheir Hammad

2009-05-30T14:05:00.002-05:00

I woke up with this poem in my head today, so here is Suheir Hammad performing "Not Your Exotic, Not Your Erotic" at the Def Poetry Jam.

Spoken Word Saturdays: Self Watering Containers!!!

2009-05-25T21:35:00.003-05:00

I have been absent for an unforgivable length of time. BUT! I'm nicely settled in my new apartment with (almost) no unpacked boxes AND a baby tomato plant that is about to become the Happiest Tomato Ever. Why? Because it will get just the amount of water it wants, and I will only have to water it once a week. Thus is the magic of Self Watering Containers. And in honor of such, instead of our regular Spoken Word Saturdays (which I'm super late on anyway), here is a video of how to make your very own SWC.

PSA

2009-05-13T18:56:00.003-05:00

So I just moved into a new apartment and I don't have the internet at all right now, so sorry for the delayed posting. In fact, I think it's just going to have to be on hiatus until the situation can be remedied. But rest assured, soon I will be back with full wireless in my apartment and things can go back to normal.

Spoken Word Saturdays: Mayda Del Valle

2009-04-26T12:46:00.003-05:00

Sorry I'm late this week. I'm in the midst of getting ready to move. Here's Mayda Del Valle performing "I'm Going Back" at the Def Poetry Jam

Spoken Word Saturdays: Yellow Rage

2009-04-12T10:29:00.002-05:00

Oh no! I forgot yesterday! But here we are, a day late: Yellow Rage performs "Chinky Eyes."

Spoken Word Saturdays: Sunni Patterson

2009-04-04T13:11:00.002-05:00

Another Sunni Patterson poem because she is SO FLIPPIN' AWESOME. Here she is performing "We Made It" at the Def Poetry Jam.

Book Reviews: In The Time of the Butterflies

2009-03-29T20:53:00.005-05:00

A few weeks ago I spent the evening (and a lot of the night!) rereading Julia Alvarez's In the Time of the Butterflies. I had forgotten how devastating and amazing this book is.

In the Time of the Butterflies tells a fictionalized version of the lives of the Mirabal sisters -- Patria, Minerva and María Teresa -- who were assassinated for their resistance to Dominican dictator Rafael Trujillo on November 25th 1960, when they were killed on a lonely mountain pass on the way home from visiting their incarcerated husbands. Alvarez's retelling begins in the 1930s when the sisters are very young and switches the point of view of each chapter to a different Mirabal sister, including Dedé Mirabal, the only sister still alive. Alvarez emphasizes the humanity of these women who have become larger-than-life figures -- María Teresa is only 10 when her first chapter begins. She tells her Little Book:

"I don't know if you realize how advanced I am for my age? ... I knew how to read before I even started school! ... My penmanship is also very pretty as you will have noticed. I've won the writing prize twice, and I would have this week, too, but I decided to leave some i's undotted. It doesn't help with the other girls if you are best all the time."

From childhood scribblings to the retellings of their imprisonment, gun-smuggling, near misses with Trujillo, and eventual deaths, Alvarez's book is beautiful and absolutely devastating. It reminds me of Kelly Tsai's poem, "Little Red Books:"

"my friend signs off all his emails / siempre luchando / paz y revolucion / as if the two were possible / peace and revolution / as if bloodless wars didn't still tear psyches apart / change hurts / living it is hard / we've got to be ready / if we decide to / zhan qi lai / stand up / zhan qi lai / zhan qi lai."

It's easy to deify activists like the Mirabals. It's easy to glorify their actions and call for a revolution, but we do them a disservice by forgetting their humanity and the horror of what they went through in the backlash to their actions. In her postscript, Alvarez says:

"What you will find here are the Mirabals of my creation, made up but, I hope, true to the spirit of the real Mirabals... For I wanted to immerse my readers in an epoch in the life of the Dominican Republic that I believe can only finally be understood by fiction, only finally be redeemed by the imagination. A novel is not, after all, a historical document, but a way to travel through the human heart."

I feel like this is the moral calling of great fiction and poetry -- to demonstrate the passion, terror, devastation, humanity and beauty in historical events that have been trammeled into bloodless factoids of banal, dispassionate textbooks.

A few months ago while looking for a book for my students to read that month I was struck by the inability of kids biographies to make their subjects passionate, interesting and human to their readers. My students and I had just finished reading Twelve Rounds to Glory, which is an illustrated biography of Muhammad Ali written in poetry. It fucking rocked because it was passionate and creative and talked seriously about racism and my students were friggin INTO IT. So I was looking for something similarly awesome and passionate about a woman of color for the next month, but nooOOOooo. Everything was stale non-fiction bore-the-pants off you crap. And about awesome people like Sojourner Truth and Harriet Tubman and Daisy Bates. I want fantastic kids biographiess about the Mirabals and Audre Lorde and Gloria Anzaldua. Imagine if, after talking to my boys about their sexist behavior and trying to convince them that girls are strong, we could all read a biography of the Mirabal sisters.

Boys Will Be Boys: Everyday Misogyny in the Classroom

2009-03-29T20:34:00.002-05:00

So I tutor groups of exchange students at a school grades 5 through 9. As soon as I started working there, I noticed that it was 90% boys; however, most of my classes have (obviously) had only boys in them, so gender relations hasn't come up much. My class this semester, however, has 7 students, only 2 of whom are girls. (Two of the five in the entire school, mind you). The boys in this class will regularly refuse to sit next to the girls or to be on teams with them. They make faces and groan when I make them work together. At first I wasn't sure what to do exactly because of course the same thing happened to me when I was in school. I was just like "oh well, that's what kids do, they pretend that boys and girls have cooties."

But really, it's sexist and hurtful and I'm not having it. Maybe it's different in schools where the gender ratio is more balanced -- maybe it's not sexist then -- I'm not sure, I still have to think about it. But what has been going on in my classroom has certainly been a product of a misogynistic mindset. My students and I have talked extensively about race and racism this semester and the conversations we've had have been very productive and strongly felt. When responding to homophobic remarks I have explained to them that hating someone because they're gay is the same mindset as hating someone because of their race. I have to say that I haven't heard a single homophobic slur since. When I talked to them about the misogyny that's been going on I drew a similar parallel. I'm not sure that the main ringleader was much fazed, but the four other boys looked pretty abashed. And, as a teacher, if you can the followers on your side, you've already gone a long way towards controlling your troublemaker.

What would happen if teachers across the country started refusing to let boys ostracize girls simply for being female? What would happen if teachers started calling boys on being sexist and proactively taught their young students about the effects of sexism, racism and other prejudices? Not just as a history lesson mind you, but to say: "Here, we've learned about racism in the past. We've learned about Muhammad Ali and the Civil Rights Movement. Here are the ways that you are perpetuating the same hateful thinking in your own life. This is the way that fear of difference goes down in our classroom. How do you feel about it? What are you going to do about it?"

Spoken Word Saturdays: Otep

2009-03-28T14:53:00.003-05:00

Otep Shamaya performs "Dedicated to My Enemy" at the Def Poetry Jam

Spoken Word Saturdays: Sunni Patterson

2009-03-21T18:18:00.001-05:00

Sunni Patterson performs "We Know This Place" on Hip Hop Speaks

Our Deplorable Immigration System

2009-03-15T17:42:00.005-05:00

Today the Associated Press released a report conducted January 25th analysing the detention system for undocumented immigrants. The report shows that most immigrants who are currently detained have "no criminal conviction, not even for illegal entry or low-level crimes like trespassing." They also report that "More than 400 of those with no criminal record had been incarcerated for at least a year. A dozen had been held for three years or more; one man from China had been locked up for more than five years." This is despite a 2001 ruling by the Supreme Court that the ICE has six months to either deport or release people they've detained. You should really read the whole article though because it just gets more shocking.

Ask Obama to end the detention of immigrants, whether they are undocumented or not. Ask the rest of your elected officials to do the same. You may use my letter (below), if you like, or write your own.

Dear President Obama,

I campaigned for you in Missouri and it still makes me crazy happy to hear people on the radio say "President Obama." I'm glad to see that you've put a stop to the Global Gag Rule, created an office for Women's and Girls' Issues, and ordered the closure of Guantanamo Bay. I'm writing to you today to ask you to do something about the immigration system and particularly the detention system for immigrants.

The Associated Press reports that most immigrants who are currently detained have "no criminal conviction, not even for illegal entry or low-level crimes like trespassing." They also report that "More than 400 of those with no criminal record had been incarcerated for at least a year. A dozen had been held for three years or more; one man from China had been locked up for more than five years." This is outrageous! The article further reports that despite a 2001 ruling that ICE has only 6 months to either deport or release people they've detained, the ICE has flouted this deadline and held more than 900 people for longer than six months.

Our prison system is already bloated, abusive, and of questionable efficacy; it is shameful and condemnable that we are engorging the prison system by locking up folks who have committed no crime, just for being from out of town. When we lose our compassion and start locking up people just because they're different from us we have also lost our humanity.

Please do something to end this crisis in the immigration system. Please release those people who have been detained and never charged. Please release those people who have committed no crimes. Please allow those people who have committed low-level, non-violent crimes or misdemeanors access to bail. Please help those folks who are here undocumented to become documented and to learn English if necessary. Please stop the incarceration and deportation of undocumented people and children who have committed no crimes.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to your steps to end this deplorable situation. Here is the link to the article I'm referring to: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090315/ap_on_re_us/detained_immigrants

Sincerely,
DontBoxSarah

Spoken Word Saturdays: Suheir Hammad

2009-03-14T11:47:00.001-05:00

Suheir Hammad performs "First Writing Since" and the Def Poetry Jam.

Spoken Word Saturdays: Gina Loring

2009-03-07T20:25:00.001-06:00

Gina Loring performs "Somewhere There is a Poem" at the Def Poetry Jam

Spoken Word Saturdays: Sweet Honey In the Rock

2009-02-15T10:48:00.002-06:00

Sweet Honey in the Rock performs "Peace." Check out their Live in Carnegie Hall album. It has a bunch of awesome pieces on it like "Letter to Dr. Martin Luther King," "Emergency" (about apartheid) "Ode to the International Debt," and "Are My Hands Clean" (corporate greed & sweatshops).

To grow up hypnotized / and then try to shake yourself awake / because you can sense what has been lost / you can sense what is at stake

2009-02-14T23:41:00.007-06:00

"Unless one lives and loves in the trenches, it is difficult to remember that the war against dehumanization is ceaseless."
-- Audre Lorde

So, I've written about this before, but I want to say it again because I think it's really important. I've been thinking tonight about how easy it is to forget the truth if you don't hear it being consistently repeated to you. Even if it's something you know is true. Even if it's something that you discovered yourself. Even if it's something you've written about extensively. If it's not something that's reinforced by society, if it's not something you hear about all the time, if it's not something you make a conscious effort to remember, you'll forget about it. You'll have a vague feeling that something is wrong, something is not right, but you won't be able to remember why.

I remembered this today because I was trying to explain to my friend C that a person could be "unwilling to come out" even if they have supportive friends and family. And I knew that it was possible, I knew that "unwilling to come out" wasn't really the right words, I knew that I had experienced it for christsake, but I couldn't remember what was wrong with it. Fortunately I happened to be rereading my journal tonight and I figured out why. It's not because they don't want to come out, it's because sometimes they don't realize they're Queer. Because it's not been presented to them as an option, because they're still trying to reconcile themselves with what society is telling them

It's the same thing with not having your truth repeated to you on a daily basis. Our society can prattle on as much as it wants about tolerance and acceptance and live-and-let-live, but being Queer is still not presented as a viable option for children's future selves. If the social models you're presented with don't fit with your own identity, you're left walking around with this weird vertigo -- wasting your time trying to fit your identity into the models you've been given.

For example, I can't believe how much time I wasted feeling insecure and outsiderish because the idea of being attracted to women was never presented to me as a personal option. I knew people were gay. I knew gay people, but certainly that was never something that I would ever be. It's great to say that we're accepting of difference and that we support people in loving whoever they want -- but society gives zero models for how to live your life as a Queer person. So if you are Queer, you spend the first 20 or so years of your life wasting time trying to fit your understanding of society and your personal experiences together -- trying to squeeze yourself into a mold that you don't fit.

It doesn't mesh, so even if you don't have a big dramatic angsty personal crisis of feeling unfit to live, you still have this weird vertigo of being unable to understand and name the things you're going through and the way you feel. It's not like I was ever like "Oh my god, I'm attracted to a girl! I don't understand!" Nothing so overt or dramatic. Because for the longest time I didn't even realize that I was Queer. I just spent years berating myself for not being proactive about flirting with boys and not putting myself out there for dating them. I certainly wanted to date a boy, in the theoretical at least, because society presents it as the ultimate experience for women, and it seemed exciting and it was SO LAME not to. But at the same time I was terrified around boys that they would think I was attracted to them. But I didn't even realize that that was why I was so awkward and apprehensive and terrified -- thinking it was because I was stupid and too wrapped up in not wanting to do the stereotypical dating thing. Feeling CRAZY insecure for YEARS because I had never kissed anyone, even though there was never anyone I wanted to kiss.

What a waste of my time. I could have been having (or at least pursuing) relationships with people I was actually interested in. I feel quite certain that if I hadn't spent 4 years at a women's college where there were plenty of women who were repeating truths similar to my own, that I would still be wandering around trying to date men, wondering why I was so unhappy, and blaming myself for it. That's why it is SO important for Queer people and their friends to be visible and publicly Queer and present that as an option for other people. Not because of some stupid HRC-ish reason about trying to gain "tolerance" by showing that "we're just like you." We're not just like you. That's the point. We have to speak up about our own truths so that others can find their own way into their selves and stop trying to cram themselves into what society tells them.

It's scary to think that our selves are so mutable, so influenced by the messages we get from society, so easily erased by the company we keep and the things our friends say to us. I guess in some ways it's powerful because it means that one or two people can easily have a profoundly positive impact on another person, but it also means that a person's convictions, identity and self can be essentially erased simply by not having a community of similar people who will repeat their selves and their identities and truths to each other.

So SPEAK UP! Whether you're Queer or not. Tell the truth to children. Acknowledge in casual conversation that people have different identities and different experiences. Make sure that your words and actions don't unintentionally oppress others. Surround yourself with people who will embrace your identity instead of trying to ignore it or assimilate it or trample it down. Repeat the truth of your identity to everyone -- they need to hear it.

"As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others."
-- Nelson Mandela.

"The power of resistance is to set an example: not necessarily to change the person with whom you disagree, but to empower the one who is watching and whose growth is not yet completed, whose path is not at all clear, whose direction is still very much up in the proverbial air."
--Tim Wise

**Title Lyrics from Reprieve by Ani DiFranco

Spoken Word Saturdays: Damali Ayo

2009-02-07T11:46:00.003-06:00

Damali Ayo panhandles for reparations. She collects money from white people and gives it to black people as a way to start conversations about race, privilege, and oppression. Since she first did this, people have been joining her nationally on October 10th of every year. You can read more about all her performances, read an interview with her about reparations, join the National Day of Panhandling for Reparations, and see pictures and stories from people who participated last year.

Spoken Word Saturdays: Sista Queen

2009-01-25T18:44:00.003-06:00

Whoops, I'm a day late. But here's Sista Queen performing "Try Being A Lady" at the Def Poetry Jam.

Spoken Word Saturdays: Staceyann Chin

2009-01-17T13:04:00.004-06:00

I've been resisting the urge to post this poem every week because I don't want to make Spoken Word Saturdays just a constant stream of Staceyann Chin. But I couldn't resist anymore. Plus I've been reading the Essential Dykes to Watch Out for and I was struck, throughout the entire 20 years of the strip, by the social commentary and the searing indictment of an increasingly corporate and conservative LGBTQ movement. I ranted about this to a reporter at Pride last summer but of course none of it was published.

So in honor of the nauseating slogans we have seen coming out of the mainstream LGBT movement, in honor of "Gay is the New Black," in honor of everyone pushing for marriage before basic human dignity, in honor of blaming people-of-color for Prop 8, in honor of McDonalds being present at Pride, in honor of LOGO and the L Word, in honor of the HRC and The Advocate, Staceyann Chin reads "Poem for the Gay Games."

However, I do have to say that I don't agree with everything she says. This poem constantly challenges me to think more deeply about where I stand politically in the Queer community. Because I think it's okay to say "I just date people." I don't buy into the idea that this constitutes "neoconservatism breeding among us." I think there definitely IS neoconservatism in the Queer community. I just don't think that saying you date people is an example of such. I think sexuality is much more complicated than identifying either as gay/lesbian or straight (or even bisexual). Because it all gets mixed up with how you identify, not just who you're attracted to. I identify most strongly as Queer because it is a politicized sexuality and it's also a pretty broad, encompassing term. I don't identify as lesbian even though I don't realistically see myself dating a guy anytime in the forseeable future. I don't want to imply that that couldn't change. Sexuality is fluid and, personally, I don't see the term "lesbian" as embracing fluidity. I don't think it makes me a neoconservative for not wanting to box myself into a certain term.

Study Finds Race Was Not Deciding Factor in Prop 8

2009-01-15T10:46:00.003-06:00

Despite disgusting rumors to the contrary, "a new study released this week finds that neither African Americans nor any other ethnicity were disproportionately in support of Proposition 8, which amended California’s constitution to ban same-sex marriage." In fact, the study found that voter's proability to vote in favor of Prop 8 was much more influenced by religion, age and party affiliation than by race. Read more. I'd like to see this as widely known as the rumors of black homophobia. Particularly, I'd like to beam this into the heads of the white lesbians I heard ranting about "black homophobia" at the Prop 8 rally I went to in November.

H/T Racewire/Colorlines Blog

BART Transit Police Spokespeople Vague & Deliberately Misleading About Grant Shooting

2009-01-10T16:40:00.004-06:00

BART board president, Thomas Blalock, said in an interview with ABC7 News, that he could not "pull anything factual" from the cell phone videos that show a two-year BART cop pulling his gun out and shooting an unarmed Grant in the back while another officer had his knee on Grant's neck. How anyone can watch that video and then say he "can't pull anything factual" from it is beyond me.

Additionally, despite the videos clearly showing Grant on the ground face-first with a police officer kneeling on his neck, BART spokesman Jim Allison stated that Grant was "not restrained" when shot. In other words, the BART spokesperson is lying.

Furthermore, Alex Jones reports that Spokesperson Allison claimed that BART had no videos of the shooting, even though BART had confiscated the cellphones of many witnesses who were recording. I can't find a clip or other citation of Allison saying this, but it seems crazy that BART would be claiming not to have videos, given that it says on the BART website that "the District also utilizes video-surveillance systems in trains, stations, and parking lots." So in addition to lying about not having video (according to Jones) even though they confiscated the cell-phones, it's like BART doesn't even care since they are flat-out contradicting the information right on their website!

Upon further perusal of the BART website, it seems that BART police are not a part of the local police departments and are "an autonomous law enforcement agency," according to their website. It's not at all clear what this means and what kind of oversight they have to report to, but it's clear that there needs to be more oversight. The Courage Campaign has a petition you can sign, asking the government to create a civilian oversight board for BART. I should also point out that the BART website says that "Qualifications and training for BART police officers exceed the mandates of the state's Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, which certifies all California peace officers." Given that, one wonders about the speculation that Johannes Mehserle, the police officer who shot Grant, accidentally reached for his gun instead of his taser. Shouldn't their fancypants training be covering not reaching for a deadly weapon when your partner is kneeling on a victim's neck? For that matter, why did he even need to get out his taser for chrissakes?

H/T Alex Jones < /snirk >

Spoken Word Saturdays: Zora Howard

2009-01-10T15:32:00.002-06:00

Okay I found out that I CAN embed the video of Zora Howard performing "Bi-Racial Hair" at the 2006 Urban Word NYC Annual Teen Poetry Slam! I know I posted it before with a link, but it so awesome that I wanted to make sure everyone's seen it. So here it is, in all of its embedded glory:

Oscar Grant, Young Unarmed Black Man Shot By Oakland BART Police

2009-01-10T00:37:00.003-06:00

I'm a little late to this, but on the morning after New Year's Eve, Oakland Bart police shot and killed Oscar Grant, a 22 year old black father, who was unarmed and lying face-down on the ground with his arms behind him. There were MANY bystanders and witnesses present who recorded the incident on their cell phones and cameras. You can see footage of their videos here, here, here, and here, although apparently the police immediately tried to confiscate all recording-devices as soon as Grant was shot. There have been protests in Oakland the past few days, which have resulted in rioting and the destruction of property completely unconnected to the incident. The (few) (kind of) major news outlets that I've found covering this story (e.g. San Jose Mercury News, Yahoo News) have focused mainly on the destruction resulting from the riots or on excuses proffered by the police department, and have barely addressed the police-brutality and race issues that this incident brings up. What is it going to take before people take this issue seriously?

Racewire has a list of Five Things You Can Do Right Now About the Oscar Grant Shooting, and Holly and Davey D make good points about why this is more alarming than just an unarmed black man being shot. As if you needed more than that. Holly discusses the police mindset that questioning their actions makes you the enemy, which results in you getting shot (Grant), arrested (Amy Goodman), pepper-sprayed (Holly & Jack), or otherwise harassed. Davey D interviews Dereca Blackman, who asks why police can confiscate cell phones and other recording devices after such an incident, why do police have the privilege to not be interviewed for days after the incident, thus allowing them time to "get their story together," as it were.

We're now being told that it was an accident, that the officer's gun discharged, that he thought he was reaching for his taser, etc. I don't think it really matters, honestly. You can clearly see from the video that there were at least 2 or three officers in physical contact with him. He was on the ground, unarmed, arms behind him -- as Grant's family lawyer asks "WHY did he take his gun out???" (emphasis mine). There was clearly, CLEARLY, no need for him to take his gun out. Christ, Grant wouldn't have even been able to see that he was being threatened with a gun since he was face-down on the ground. This illustrates, oh-so-clearly, the effects of a society that vilifies black and brown bodies and gives deadly weapons to (mainly) white police officers. Renee discusses the racial implications and what she will tell her two young sons about Oscar Grant.

Amid all of this awfulness, I do want to say how awesome it is that the bystanders and witnesses to the shooting were NOT passive bystanders. That they recorded the incident, that they made it clear to the police that they were watching, that they thought what the police were doing was out of line, that they yelled "let him go!" Way to be citizen journalists! Way to do the work. Why do we never hear THEIR stories when people talk about apathetic youth and bystanders who do nothing? Holly has an interesting discussion of what kind of effect this sort of citizen involvement has on the police.

This HAS to be talked about. It's really alarming to me that I found out about Grant's death and the rioting from my friend who lives in Oakland, rather than from the friggin' news. Man, this is the TIME to be talking about police brutality and racial profiling now that we finally have someone sympathetic (and not batshit crazy) in the White House. There need to be nation-wide protests in solidarity to highlight these problems across the country, not just in Oakland, and we need to be talking to our local elected officials about what they plan to do to address police brutality and racial profiling in our own communities. Go organize a protest.

Spoken Word Satrudays: Good Sista/Bad Sista

2009-01-03T19:26:00.002-06:00

Turiya Autry and Walidah Imarisha of Good Sista/Bad Sista perform "Supa Soul Sistas" at the 2008 Wordstock Poetry Slam

Travel Tips: San Francsico Bookstores

2008-12-27T23:01:00.007-06:00

So I had the great joy of visiting some awesome independent bookstores while I was in San Francisco this weekend. If you happen to be in the Bay Area you should check these bookstores out. Then spend lots of money there to support them! I, myself, had a difficult time not buying more books than I could take home on the plane with me. As it is, some of them might have to be shipped. But am I going to find an out-of-print signed copy of This Bridge Called My Back in St Louis? No way man. So it was money well spent!

Modern Times Bookstore, located in the Mission District, is a collectively run bookstore with a huge selection of latino/a literature and studies books both in English and Spanish, an awesome children's section featuring multicultural and anti-racist books, and a diverse selection of used and new women, gender & LGBTQ studies books. I heart them big time. I am super impressed that they can stay in business.

Dog Eared Books, also located in the Mission, is a pleasantly grubby used bookstore just down from Modern Times. Crammed full of books with surprising little nooks and even more surprising little sections (e.g. beekeeping), Dog Eared Books has a small but decent section of LGBTQ and women's studies books, as well as a classy series of sections on African American, Chicano, Latino, and Asian History and Studies.

Green Apple Books, located in the Richmond District, is HUGE. So huge that "I Married a Green Apple" Maps are distributed throughout the store. Mainly stocking used books, Green Apple also has a selection of discounted new books bought as remainders. This bookstore is so big that I sort of want to refer to it more as a library. This store has STACKS, my friend. I got dragged out before I could thoroughly explore it, however I very much enjoyed getting lost and witnessing the extensive shelf space dedicated to all manner of sections. Cooking was probably 40 feet long. Art was even longer. I didn't even see fiction, but their bookmark says they have a mile of it. I found the previously mentioned out-of-print, singed copy of This Bridge Called My Back in their women studies section.

The Booksmith, located in the Haight, was nice enough, I guess. I don't go in for slick bookstores; I prefer a certain amount of dishevelment that you can poke around in and feel the history, so I'm already a bit predisposed to be hard on the Booksmith. Carrying only new books, The Booksmith is very new looking: very clean, well-lit, well-marked — no mystery at all. I have no doubt at all that the owners of the Booksmith are good folk, probably fairly liberal, and are doing their best to survive as a general-interest, non-niche-based, independent bookstore; however their store shows the stresses of compromising in order to make ends meet. I was alarmed to see staff picks for Twilight (see why this is alarming) and Sweet Valley High, and their identity-studies sections were underdeveloped. The Booksmith is not a bad bookstore, it's perfectly fine as a general-interest store and their displays were very well done; however with so many bookstores to choose from in the Bay Area, there are others I would recommend.

Spoken Word Saturdays: Jay Smooth

2008-12-27T20:57:00.009-06:00

Okay I know I've been way behind with the rest of the features and stuff I want to do with this blog, but you know, it's the holidays... I work in retail so this has been a really crazy fall. New Years Resolution: Stay On Top of Blog.

Anyway here's Jay Smooth of Ill Doctrine on "How to Tell People They Sound Racist."

Spoken Word Saturdays: Zora Howard & Kelly Tsai

2008-12-20T23:27:00.004-06:00

Okay, I wanted to feature Zora Howard today performing her poem, "Biracial Hair" at the 2006 Urban Word NYC Annual Teen Poetry Slam. It's on You-Tube, but you can't embed it, so click here to see it. It's awesome. Check it out. In the meantime, here's Kelly Tsai performing "Mao" at the Def Poetry Jam:

Spoken Word Saturdays: Yellow Rage

2008-12-14T12:57:00.004-06:00

Okay, I'm a bit late with this, but Yellow Rage will more than make up for the delay. I'm channeling their what-the-fuck-do-you-know-about-me-just-because-you-read-a-novel-about-my-identity today. Why is it always the responsibility of the oppressed to answer the nosy questions the privileged class? If you want to know so badly about my identity go to the library. And no, one book does not make you an expert. Instead of tokenizing me with your nosyass questions do some friggin research. THEN we'll talk.

Book Review: Speaking Treason Fluently

2008-12-06T19:34:00.026-06:00

I really wanted to like Tim Wise's new book, Speaking Treason Fluently. And at first I did. The articles at the beginning about Obama's campaign were very interesting and relevant to the election at hand (I started reading it sometime at the end of summer). And upon a recent conversation with some acquaintances who spend less time thinking about social injustice, I can see how this book could be very useful. Wise does a good job of incorporating statistical evidence to back up his argument that racism is still a very relevant problem (although he doesn't do the best job of citing his sources). However Wise's newest book is hampered by his denigrating and insulting tone, a lack of intersectional analysis, and the erasure of experiences of non-African-American people of color.

Despite perhaps being more useful to those who have not yet thought deeply about race-relations, this book is clearly not aimed at them. Wise constantly denigrates and insults the intelligence of racist people. I understand that Wise is angry; I'm angry too, and it's easy to just call racists idiots and dismiss them as not worthy of notice. However, ultimately, this is not a constructive way to deal with the problem of racism. Yeah, it's true, they ARE racist, it's totally condemnable. But let's address the difference between ignorance and stupidity. Most racists are not by definition unintelligent as Wise repeatedly implies, but are uninformed and perhaps have not thought deeply about systematic oppression. Perhaps they have been deceived into believing in meritocracy. Perhaps they are themselves struggling with the horror of working hard and not being able to succeed in a society that tells them that anyone who works hard can make it. Perhaps they are unhappy people who have been poorly treated and deceived by their society/government and are clawing to get ahead by tearing down those who are perceived as being socially less worthy than themselves.

I am not excusing their actions and words; it is ignorant and racist. But also I think probably even you, Tim Wise, were once racist yourself, given that we grow up in a culture that practically insures that white people are inculcated with a belief in their own moral superiority. So perhaps instead of insulting people who are racist, giving up on them, and talking to them as if they're idiots with no chance of ever growing, perhaps you should consider that they ARE YOU. You as you were in your past, before you became Oh-So-Enlightened. No, perhaps you never became as extreme and consciously racist as some of these people, but surely you, who have so well explained the structural basis of racism in our society, can understand how they got to that point? Why not try to talk them through a calm, non-insulting, non-alienating transformation of thought instead of giving up on them? After all, we are all harmed by oppression and ideas of superiority (of course not to the same degree, but it is harmful to all of society), so everyone stands to gain from it's destruction. This insulting tone severely wounds the potential of Wise's book. I would have been much more excited to see an analysis that tried to educate instead of denigrate.

I was also alarmed by the lack of intersectionality and power-analysis in Wise's book. There were occasional off-the-cuff remarks and statistics about non-race-based oppression, however there was no incorporation of the way racism interacts with classism, sexism, xenophobia, heterosexism, etc to affect people of color in very different ways. Nor was their much discussion of an intersectional approach that would attempt to reach out to racist people who — though they may not be racial oppressed — might be oppressed in a different way by the same system that harms people of color. For example, it's easy to rag on low-income whites for being racist when they bring down black people. I mean it's TRUE. It IS racist. However the conversation cannot stop there. Classism is all mixed up in racism, and instead of endlessly raging against the moral corruption of low-income whites who don't stand up for black people, how about some interesting conversation about uniting people who are oppressed by the same system, albeit in different ways? Not to excuse low-income whites from personal responsibility, but to try to actually think of a solution, instead of alienating potential allies by condemning them for wanting to get ahead in a system that has taught them they must oppress others in order to be successful. We need some Dorothy Allison up in here. As she says, "The horror of class stratification, racism, and prejudice is that some people begin to believe that the security of their families and communities depends on the oppression of others, that for some to have good lives there must be others whose lives are truncated and brutal." We need to speak to those who have been thus deceived — people who are, in reality, good people (or at least want to be), but who have become used to thinking and acting in a way that oppresses others, whether intentionally or unintentionally.*

Speaking of intersectional oppression, Wise's book concentrated almost exclusively on the way that racism affects African-Americans (not Black people, not people of African descent globally: African Americans only). There were occasional mention of Latinos, and a few spare references to how America treats Arab-Americans post-9/11, but these remarks were usually thrown in as an aside or as additional statistics to back up Wise's arguments about African-Americans. There was no discussion of the way racism affects Asian-Americans in a very different way from the way that it affects Black people. No discussion of the experiences of mixed-race people. Little conversation regarding the treatment of native and indigenous peoples. There would be nothing wrong with that, except that the book made the claim of addressing racism generally; Wise did not say that he was going to focus only on the way that racism affects African-American people, instead he says he hopes that Speaking Treason Fluently (along with his previous book, White Like Me) will "form... an effective one-two punch at the edifice of racism and white supremacy" (Wise 2008: 7). Thus, by claiming to address the effects of racism generally and then by talking almost entirely about the experiences of African-American people, Wise effectively (if perhaps inadvertently) erases the experiences of a wide range of people of color who are NOT African-American. Mixed-race women living abroad, low-income Vietnamese immigrants, Caribbean-American queer people of color, people of Arab descent, native and indigenous populations around the world — the list of people erased by Wise's analysis is long, and the omission of their stories implies that the racism they face is less severe or perhaps even non-existent. I do not think that this is Tim Wise's perspective, but the lack of a broader perspective on racism could imply to a non-alert reader that non-African-American people of color do not face "real" racism.

Wise does an excellent job of incorporating relevant statistics and news events, and his step by step logical breaking down of racist myths had real potential to be useful in the education of those new to the ideas of racial oppression. Reluctant as I am to knock the well-intentioned attempts of allies trying to combat racism, I have to say that Tim Wise could have done a much better job. His extensive collection of anti-racist writings would have benefited from a less-judgemental tone, an intersectional approach to anti-racism work, and a more inclusive selection of evidence that included the experience of many different people of color.

* One of the parts of Wise's book that stuck with me the most acknowledges, in fact that racists are people too and that they have potential to change. While talking about white-denial he says "Acknowledging unfairness then calls decent people forth to correct those injustices. And since most persons are at their core, decent folks, the need to ignore evidence of injustice is powerful: To do otherwise would force whites to either push for change (which they would perceive as against their interests) or live consciously as hypocrites who speak of freedom and opportunity but perpetuate a system of inequality" (Wise 2008: 61). Okay, Wise doesn't seem to be too optimistic about the ability of white racists to overcome white-denial, but he acknowledges that most folks want to be decent people. And it doesn't seem to me that insulting these folks who want to be good people is the best way to get them to cease their racists-ways.

Spoken Word Saturdays: Introduction & Staceyann Chin

2008-12-06T18:54:00.006-06:00

Another regular feature I'd like to introduce is Spoken Word Saturdays which will (duh) provide you with a regular stream of awesome clips from spoken word artists, poets, activists, musicians, and speechifiers. Education and communication are one of the most important parts of activism, and spoken word allows artists and activists to communicate and educate in a more immediate, personal and creative way than more academic forms of expression.

Today's feature is one of my favorites ever: Staceyann Chin performs If Only Out of Vanity at the Def Poetry Jam.

Letters to a Young Woman: An Introduction

2008-12-06T17:57:00.007-06:00

One of the regular features I'd like to include is a series of open letters written to women from conservative and/or conservative-religious backgrounds.

I think it's pretty important to be able to have respectful open-minded conversations with people who disagree with you and/or who come from a very different ideological standpoint. There are too many liberals who stay within their ideological bubbles and think of conservatives and people who are religious as 'the enemy.' In Give Me Liberty: A Handbook for American Revolutionaries, Naomi Wolf says, "like most pro-choice activists, I had lived a whole lifetime formulating my ideas about abortion rights without ever having coming in contact with a pro-lifer" (Wolf 2008: 183).

I have a lot of respect for Naomi Wolf and the work she's done, but it seems irresponsible to me to be an activist who never engages with the people she disagrees with. After all, those people could potentially be your allies, right? As she says, "I was sitting at a table with 'the enemy' — and yet the men and women I had been taught to disdain were decent, compassionate people. To my amazement, all of us... had more in common with one another than we did with most people outside that room — whatever their political backgrounds. Overwhelmingly, the people gathered were there because they cared more than most people did about the suffering of women and children" (Wolf 2008: 185). So if we can communicate with people "on the other side" we can keep social change from becoming a battle, and instead let it become a collaborative effort by people who seriously care about making the world a better place. (awww....)

So! Letters to a Young Woman will be a feature dedicated to communicating with people from a totally different ideological background. These letters will consist of the following (and more!):
- respectful introductions to progressive ideas regarding social justice and change
- questions, explorations, and speculations meant to promote dialogue between the left and the right
- non-condescending, non-insulting, constructive responses and rebuttals to ideas coming from the political right
- and more!

A Short Disclaimer Before We Begin

2008-12-04T01:50:00.009-06:00

So I should say right off the bat that I'm not in school. Neither am I currently active enough to be considered a real activist. However I am deeply interested in social change, feminism, activism, and social justice generally. I've been thinking about going to graduate school for women & gender studies, LGBT studies, social work -- a whole variety of options. If there was a field called "Studies in Ending Oppression and Privilege" I would be in line for that degree. The really big problem for me is that it is really privileged to go to graduate school, and honestly I don't feel like it's necessary in order to have a positive impact on the world. However I sincerely want to learn as much as I can about social injustice, as well as participate in a community that questions the system, challenges me to think more deeply, and encourages me to take direct action. So really I pretty much want to be in school. School for Activists. BUT! I have some ethical problems with attaining a degree that will allow me to get choice jobs over the heads of people who didn't have the money to go to school, but who are probably much more intimately familiar with oppression than I am. Not that we should really quantify oppression, but you get the idea.

Thusly! Follow me as I embark on a quest to read as much social justice literature as I can get my hands on! I shall update you with the new things I've learned, reviews of books I've read, and the status of my quest to effect radical social change. I'm also on the search for practical "how-to" info for wannabe activists, so stick with me and I'll update you on any helpful hints. Not "how to write a press release" hints, although I'm sure those are helpful. More like: how to meet other activists, how to raise hell, how to not starve, how to network with the activists you have a crush on, recommended reading lists, recommended educational programs, activist-y places to locate when you move to a new city, etc.

EDIT:

Also, a few more notes upon poking around a bit more in the feminist/womanist/WOC blogosphere.

1. Yeah, I don't know what I'm doing. Clearly. That's why it's called School For Activists. So — not that anyone's reading this yet — but let's all just stay calm and I'll try really hard NOT to step on anyone's toes, be condescending, erase anyone's experiences, silence anyone with calls for niceness, unwittingly flaunt my privilege, exclude anyone by not talking about them, or generally be an asshat. Because that's some shit. But at the same time I'd like to emphasize again that this is a blog for me to document my progress in trying to become an all-round better informed, more active, and more effective intersectional radical feminist activist. Obviously I'm not there yet.

2. I'm increasingly annoyed whenever I come across statements whose sources are not cited, so (at least in terms of citation, if not style) I'm going to operate as if I were writing an academic paper and cite everything in APA (or by simply linking). Posts will have tags with all the works they cite (author's last name and year, with the exception of statements that are cited through links) and I'm going to keep a running list of works cited under the Reading List if you need more information about specific works.

3. The Blog Roll, Reading List, and Magazine List comprises material that I have either read, read regularly, or really want to read. I'm not going to put anything on there that I haven't looked at least a little bit — enough to know if it's something I want to spend time pursuing or not.