An observation about why the Harris-Perry piece may have touched such a sore spot [View All]

[Empowerer]

In my view, based on experience and much study, one of the considerable advantages of being white in America is being taught and conditioned to believe that one is not a member of any particular group, but is, in fact, just an American. On the other hand, women, minorities and other groups have always, to varying degrees, been marginalized as subsets of the larger American family and are consistently reminded of this fact, regardless how hard we try to be just "people."

This advantage does not mean that all or most whites are racist or bigots or insensitive. But it is an entitlement that many whites have grown accustomed to and, in fact, often don't even see as an entitlement since it's just a reality of their day-to-day living. Often it is not until it is pointed out in various ways - sometimes passively, sometimes in more confrontational, less pleasant ways - that it becomes apparent. And depending upon the circumstances in which it is made apparent, that realization can be frustrating, painful and sometimes very difficult to embrace.

I think that may be one of the reasons that Melissa Harris-Perry's article has set off so much anger among some people. Much of the anger and pushback that I've seen involves a reaction to and resentment about Professor Harris-Perry's analysis of the motives and behavior of some white people, as if speaking about whites as a group is inherently offensive and racist, especially when done so by a person who is presumed not to be a member of that group. However, other groups are frequently identified, singled out and analyzed without much of a kerfuffle. For example, black voters are regularly analyzed with broad judgments pronounced about our tendencies, motivations and political behavior. For the most part, except in the most egregious circumstances, we don't loudly object - perhaps because we're so used to being seen as a group, it's just not that jarring to us.

A while back on the first day of a law seminar that I taught, I conducted an experiment. I asked all of the black students to raise their hands. The 7 black students in the room raised their hands. I then asked the white students to raise their hands. The 15 white students in the class looked around in shock and it took quite a bit of coaxing on my part to get them to raise their hands. But they wanted to know why I was asking, why it mattered, what was I trying to do, what difference did it make, etc. I asked the black students how they felt about being asked to raise their hands and most of them just shrugged, with one saying, "Everybody in here knows I'm black. The whole world knows I'm black. That's the first thing most people figure out about me. So what's the big deal?"

But when I asked the white students how they felt about the question, several students said things along the lines of: "Because I don't define myself by my race, I really resented you singling me out because I'm white. I'm a person." The fact that I had also singled out the black students didn't seem to bother them - they just resented being identified by their race.

Another example - I once overheard a real estate agent tell a client, "You might not like that town so much because it's very ethnic. I'd rather show you this town because it doesn't have a high concentration of any group. It's all white."

I think this may be one of the reasons that it's been so difficult for some here to understand that when a black person (or anyone else) refers to the behavior and attitudes of some whites, we are not saying this applies to ALL white people. It has been extremely frustrating and extraordinarily perplexing to see over and over and over again how very clear language is consistently misinterpreted, to the point of absurdity. Whenever someone here says, "I have seen that some white liberals, etc.," invariably, the response from some is, "You are saying that all white people do so-and-so."

I really believe that some of this disconnect and inability to really hear and see what is being said is based upon an unfamiliarity with or discomfort with being identified as part of a racial group after a lifetime of being seen and treated as just one of the "people."

I don't present this observation as a value judgment or criticism of white folk. But I do think that it is relevant to this discussion. If one is not used to seeing themselves identified and analyzed as part of a racial group, it is probably very off-putting to have someone do it. But I urge people to step past that and listen to what people are actually saying.