So Ted Rall, who I quite like (he included me in an anthology he edits, and when I met him at Stumptown I thought he was smart and funny), drew a cartoon I really didn’t like (scroll down to the cartoon for September 27). The theme of the cartoon is, “why are people marching to support the Jena Six, when there are so many much more worthy victims of racism to march for?”
If you agree with Ted’s cartoon, let me recommend as a rebuttal this excellent post by Elle PhD:
Do you ever wonder why sit-in participants had to be so well-dressed, so calm, so “respectable?”
Well, of course you know. The people who would be the face of the Civil Rights Movement had to be virtually blameless. They couldn’t give white bigots fodder to dismiss them or the movement. They had to tread a line between being the human face of the movement while upholding super-human reputations and faithfully remaining non-violent.
It was a lot to expect, this demand for perfection, this unspoken implication that African Americans had to be more than human, had to prove themselves worthy of fair treatment, of justice. […]
For people who didn’t know much about the Jena Six, suddenly you were awfully concerned about offenses for which Mychal Bell had been convicted.
And you focused on the MAJOR point of “was the slogan really effective/correct/what I would’ve chosen?” […]
We’re still going to see and fight the injustice in the treatment of this child:
Whether you think he’s a hero or worthy of the effort or not.
And for the other five of our children that you’ve thrown under the bus–you know, the ones you’ve convicted even though at least two of them say they did not participate in the fight? The ones who you just know are guilty and that’s the other reason you “can’t get behind this?”
We’re going to press for justice for them, too. They deserve it. They are worth it.
There’s lots more, so please click through and read the whole thing.
And then go read “We Protest” at Afro-Netizen:
We protest because the boys of Jena 6 and their families need to know they are not alone.
We protest because the Jena travesty is not about a nooses that were hung on a now-felled tree, but the noose of injustice that remains around the neck of Black America.
We protest because few people know “state-sponsored terrorism” like Blackfolk.
We protest because Jena is not a rural Southern town, it is a state of mind — not from the 1950s, but of the here and now in every American town, suburb and city from South to North and sea to shining sea.
That’s just a teaser; the whole thing is worth reading.
What strikes me as I read this is the history of this need for blacks to be super-human in order to prove their worth. It’s much older than lunch counters — slave narratives, those autobiographical writings we have from the people who were enslaved in the American south, are considered a unique form of memoir because the writers were forced to carve virtually all of their personalities and flaws out of the text, in order to leave only paragons.
Frederick Douglas must present himself as logical, asexual, unemotional. Harriet Jacobs, who had children by a white man, must show herself going through a symbollic death — an outrageous penance in which she spends years living in a tiny, coffinlike space — in order to come across in the text as having atoned for the sin of being raped.
Didn’t like the cartoon either. For one thing, strawman tossed out on the Jena Six panel. Has anyone justified what was done to the kid who was beat up? No, they haven’t. Many have condemned actions taken. Many have said the people who did it should be punished within what’s reasonable and fair. And those are the words used most often, reasonable, just and fair treatment of all the individuals involved in the incidents regardless of race. But that’s not what is happening in Jena hence the protests and blogging on what’s been going on there.
What’s being protested is the inequities in the judicial system involving White and Black defendants, a problem which mirrors that of the criminal justice system in this country. It’s a part of a larger picture.
Another thing, I would bet for each of those other so-called more “righteous” protests against racism, that individuals involved in fighting those injustices were told the same thing. Why are you defending the guy who was killed by the officers? Yeah, he was unarmed but he was stoned/had a criminal record/reached in his pants/fled the officers/did not immediately comply with their commands and so forth. Or in the voting situations, why are you bothering yourself with that example of racism? Sure it’s wrong, but what if a felon wants to vote, they should not become a felon in the first place. Felons should never be able to vote again.
And so forth. At the end of the day, it doesn’t seem as if there’s an example of fighting racism that appears to pass these litmus tests as to whether they are valid because after all who’s giving them, and why? Why?
In addition, you have to remember one thing. Racism is like so, 1960s; it’s a part of this country’s history, swept away with time, not its present. And besides, it was only in those southern states anyway, not elsewhere. America is much different now. If anything, racism has gone the other way, and it’s Whites who are facing all the racism now. Blacks, Latinos, Asian-Americans and American Indians are just too darn sensitive and hostile after all the rights we have given to them and so forth.
Elle’s blog posting is so great. It reminds me so much of a meeting I attended of a board meeting which addresses the city employment issues and grievances. I asked for stats on filings of grievances for hostile work environment(racism and/or sexism, homophobia) and the outcomes including how many resignations or terminations of complainants vs discipline of the accused parties. How many people tried to use the complaint system were retaliated with firings for example? Well, the board members said all these things which left me with the strong impression that like amp and Elle have said, you have to be so damned perfect, done everything right and be blameless to be believed.
The trouble is, if you’re facing discrimination and harassment, there’s no such thing especially when dealing with people with feelings, not machines. A woman or man who is racially harassed might take days off, call in sick, be late or their productivity level might drop because of stress or not wanting to face or wanting to avoid the harasser. A person who is sexually harassed might have the same thing. Then those things are used to justify their firings, with this board which is supposed to be independent of city politics tsk tsking saying, if only they had better employment records, were essentially “perfect” or “blameless”. This attitude causes their doubt that racial and sexual harassment is a big problem.
I guess I’ve heard similar criticism which was intended to be the theme of the cartoon I guess, similar from people who have loved ones incarcerated or being overcharged by the judicial system here in that, why are their crowds protesting in the streets in Jena and not for my son/daughter/father/mother/brother/sister/friend and so forth? Because the fact is, there are “Jenas” across the country, both in the adult and juvenile systems and in the overlap of the two(as is the case in California for example). That’s been the source and focus of most of the criticism I have heard.
I’m not sure I buy the conflation of expecting someone to be “perfect and super-human” with expecting someone to “not gang-beat an unarmed man bloody and unconscious.”
If the real issue is unequal treatment of white and black criminals, or “inequities in the judicial system involving White and Black defendants,” then one could just as easily argue for harsher treatment of comparable white defendants.
Pingback: Hungry Blues › History of the Obvious
I just need to point out this is simplified to the point of obscuring the story.
Ted Rall’s title for the cartoon is interesting…my first reaction was, “I have to pick ONE?”
This is an interesting perspective especially considering all the recent comments even on this very blog about the Duke rape case. About how “those privileged white boys aren’t angels either.” What were they doing at a party with strippers? Someone shouted racial obscenities (when there is no evidence that it was the three defendants).
If for some people attending a college party with strippers and beer is enough disqualify someone as worthy, certainly a group of kids ganging up on and kicking the crap out of another kid would certainly disqualify them as being worthy for other people also.
Maybe the lesson is not that whites expect blacks to be perfect, but rather some people expect others to be perfect before fighting for them.
Hey, Larry.
Did I say — EVER — that the fact that some of the Duke Lacrosse team acted like racist, sexist assholes meant that team members were not “worthy” of equal treatment in a courtroom?
If I said that, then your argument that my post is hypocritical would hold water. But I know I never said anything like that.
If that’s not your argument, then what the heck is your argument? Spell it out for me, step by step.
Because it appears you quoted my post (or its title, anyhow), and then faux-rebutted not with a reasoned argument, but with knee-jerk, brainless point-scoring.
I simply cannot condone the use of violence against hate. If supporting the Jena 6 is what the anti-racism movement has devolved into, then I cannot support it.
The conviction was being overturned long before the march. Plus, it turns out Mychal Bell was already on probation for beating up his girlfriend. I will not support a woman beater.
If supporting the Jena 6 is what the anti-racism movement has devolved into, then I cannot support it.
Heh.
Plus, it turns out Mychal Bell was already on probation for beating up his girlfriend.
Do you have a source for this? I don’t keep up with all the news, of course, but I’ve not read of this factor in any news reports.
“Sources told ESPN that one of those cases was a battery in which Bell punched a 17-year-old girl in the face.”
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=3030458
How convenient is it that everyone wants to ignore this? Though convenient “facts” are nothing new to this case. Even NPR backtracked:
Are we to doubt NPR now as well?
“Sources told ESPN that one of those cases was a battery in which Bell punched a 17-year-old girl in the face.”
Okay, thanks. They don’t appear to have confirmed this (difficult to do, no doubt, as juvenile records are still sealed in most states, far as I know). It would be interesting to know who their “sources” were, or what sort they were, at least.
Are we to doubt NPR now as well?
Oh, gosh, no! Doubt NPR? As if.
I’ll just mention, however, that NPR was reposting content from an AP article (as if we’d ever doubt them either!) – which sort of sets out a series of facts and opinions all together – in the interest of providing a wider pool of information and sources for their (NPR’s) readers.
But don’t worry, I was just curious about the woman beater accusation… I have no intention of trying to convince you of anything or anything… if you can read through Amp’s post, Dr. Elle’s post, the ESPN article, the AP article and NPR and come away from them with what you seem to have done then, well… there you are.
Sorry, no I didn’t mean to say that. As I recall you were not one of those “Ya well those Dukies are not angels either” people. I wasn’t poking at your personal position on the Duke case, but rather the Jena 6 implication that white racism must play an obvious role in the notion that one must be worthy before much of the public will fight for you or care about your case. Especially with the Duke case so recent where three white guys faced the very same attitude in the media and on the blogosphere (including here (Again. No, Not you)).
Rall’s stuck his foot in it a few times before – a lot of conservative bloggers wanted his head on a stick when he made fun of Pat Tillman for getting enlisted and then getting killed.
My fave political cartoons all came from D.C. Simpson. Too bad he draws so rarely these days.
Larry said, “Especially with the Duke case so recent where three white guys faced the very same attitude in the media and on the blogosphere .”
Nonsense Larry. I had people from day one posting over at my site in support of these guys. They felt there was no possible way that white men would gang rape a black woman. In fact, they said I should be raped by a black man for supporting the accuser.
If you ever faced actual hate, you would. Or you’d get the shit beat out of you for no good reason.
Sorry, but this world-innocence of people who seem to deal with reality on a strictly semantic level is starting to annoy me.
I just need to point out this is simplified to the point of obscuring the story.
I’m not sure what you mean by “simplified” in this case. I got the words “perfect” and “super-human” from the headline and blog post underneath it, and the incident in question involved a gang of people beating an unarmed man bloody, and unconscious…
Rosa Parks may have been selected as a symbol of the civil rights movement over similar women who had a harmless skeleton in the closet, and that’s a shame. But Mychal Bell is a bad person, regardless of his race, and that’s why he’s a poor symbol to rally around, even though his punishment was overly severe.
That’s the part that’s simplified to the point of obscuring the story…though your defense pushes it all the way to error.
No I will not try to educate you. If you’ve held that opinion for this long I think you actively want to have it.
Maybe a leeeeetle bit of education.
We rallied around the Jena 6 situation, and the lack of equal justice under the law in the town. NOT “Mychal Bell” per se. We saw it as a reflection of problems ALL Black folks encounter.
How did it come to turn on a single individual?
We were not the ones that made it about one individual.
NOT “Mychal Bell” per se. We saw it as a reflection of problems ALL Black folks encounter.
So we’re both agreed that Mychal Bell is kind of a punk, and if we were auditioning people to serve as symbols for a movement, he wouldn’t get a callback?
I think there’s an insult contained in that statement, though– not all black folks would put themselves in the situation that he did.
I asked first…who made it about one individual, and why? As an alternate, you can say why YOU ignore the principle we are concerned with and focus on an individual instead.
You’re allowed to duck the questions. It will just be noted, and the offer to educate will be recinded.
You have greatly misunderstood the meaning of
I asked first…who made it about one individual, and why? As an alternate, you can say why YOU ignore the principle we are concerned with and focus on an individual instead.
I’m not really ignoring the principle that you/we are concerned with. I just think that we both agree that it’s important: people deserve fair and equal treatment, regardless of race. It would be silly to “debate” that since it seems we’re both on the same side on that issue.
But the original blog post that we’re responding to dealt with a particular Ted Rall cartoon, and the rebuttal that Ampersand quoted in the original post up above states:
For people who didn’t know much about the Jena Six, suddenly you were awfully concerned about offenses for which Mychal Bell had been convicted.
and
We’re still going to see and fight the injustice in the treatment of this child:
Whether you think he’s a hero or worthy of the effort or not.
as well as, it should be noted–
And for the other five of our children that you’ve thrown under the bus–
…so I’m responding to that. I just don’t think that the sentiment that Ted Rall expressed is over the top: people who gang up and beat the snot out of an unarmed kid–no matter how much of a prick that kid is/was–aren’t a very inspiring symbol.
As long as you focus on one individual instead of the principles we NEED to have established, I think you are.
But to answer your question, Mychal Bell is an ideal “poster boy” for this, because equal protection under the law is not to be optional. You don’t (or shouldn’t) get to decide who gets it.
SO MANY PEOPLE openly ignore the vital issue of equal protection under the law, actually search out reasons to ignore him, he has exposed the extent of the problem…i.e., every person that has a problem speaking up in defense of his getting that equal protection, is part of the problem. Thene there’s the Thomas/Hill effect. Clarence Thomas’ S.C. nomination was going down the tubes until the accusations by Anita Hill were made public. The topic was diverted, and instead of focusing on his credentials and experience (the very reason the nomination was sinking) the discussion became “Is Thomas Guilty.”
The foul use of prosecutorial discretion is lost beneath all the noise about Bell’s suitability for canonization…as was the intent when the issue was first raised.
And the bullshit of it all is indicated by this: if Bell what a choir boy and the D.A., judge and mayor DID the EXACT SAME THINGS (which you must admit is probable) would you oppose those actions?
P6–Amen. I guess I am an angry harridan, but when people constantly disparage and harm me and mine, I get ANGRY. Not saying it’s right. But I am human, and I get pissed and if I had suffered months of racial discrimination in a rural deep south high school, and some white kid came up to me saying n this and n that etc etc. he just might get one in the face. And groin. And wherever else. So yeah, I may have never made it through the lunch counter situation, or the Little Rock 9 situation, cuz the first time some angry white punk spit on me, it would’ve been over. I am glad so many more folks like tred can be abused and not fight back.
Next.
tred, I don’t give two diddly squats what Mychal Bell was on probation for. I am protesting about THIS PARTICULAR CONVICTION. I hate woman beaters too, if I had seen him do that, I’d prolly beat him about the head and neck with my shoe for hitting a woman–you know, like we did back in the old days–communities raising our kids, taking care of each other. But this whole thing came about because of UNEQUAL PUNISHMENT UNDER THE LAW. I don’t care if Mychal Bell was a freaking serial killer before, out on bail– the DA was out of control charging them with attempting murder for THIS incident. Shoot, manslaughter with a series of tennis shoes would’ve been hard to swallow, much less attempted murder! So feel free to go ahead and pull up any dirt you can find to make this fight not worth your while. When I hear about those folks in Florida getting off for that boot camp murder, where the majority of the defendants were white, I get pissed. Or when that Black girl in Texas pushed a hall monitor and got sent to Juvie for over a year, while her white counterpart burns down her parents house and gets a pat on the back and some counseling–I get pissed.
Oh, and Larry from Exile–Hey, if I thought this country would get tough on white criminals, I’d be all for it. Heck yeah, put those white counselors from Florida UNDER the jail for killing Michael Anderson. Send that little white teenager to the Texas version of CYA until she’s 21 for property damage-burning down the family homestead. But let’s be real…it ain’t gonna happen, dude. But if you want me to, I’ll argue for it.
Okay, now I’m just mad. See, I love this blog, but obviously have to stay away from the comments. I am too emotional.
I don’t care if Mychal Bell was a freaking serial killer before
Well, that’s an illuminating statement. Call me a knee-jerk reactionary, but I don’t have a lot of sympathy for serial killers, either.
Look, I’m not saying that Mychal Bell’s punishment was appropriate, or that he doesn’t deserve to get off. But civil rights rhetoric has front-stage and back-stage messages. If a person becomes a symbol for a cause, there’s an opportunity cost: all of the people who were not chosen to be a symbol, whose situation does not garner national attention. That’s not the result of laziness; it’s just math–there are thousands of criminal convictions every day, tens of thousands every week, hundreds of thousands every year in this country.
So, if I’m an average, nerdy white guy who doesn’t witness the effects of unequal treatment firsthand, I might hear about the Jena 6 from impassioned activists. The front-stage message might be: “This group of kids in Jena got really harsh treatment for beating the snot out of another kid.” But the backstage message, if we’re talking about kids who beat the snot out of another kid, rendering him unconscious and bloody, is, “At least this doesn’t happen on a regular basis to people who aren’t violent and sociopathic.”
That might not be accurate, but then, communication is seldom 100% accurate. The act of devoting energy and time to a particular person (or group of people) necessarily takes one’s energy and time away from other persons or groups. It’s pretty normal, and ought to at least be anticipated, that the audience will read into that.
And the bullshit of it all is indicated by this: if Bell what a choir boy and the D.A., judge and mayor DID the EXACT SAME THINGS (which you must admit is probable) would you oppose those actions?
I think what you’re asking is, if Bell were a choir boy and the D.A. and judge threw the book at him, would I oppose the actions of the D.A./judge/etc?
First, I don’t support the actions of the D.A. and judge in the case of Mychal Bell. I’m just pointing out that he isn’t a very sympathetic symbol.
But secondly, if your question is: if Mychal Bell were a choirboy who, along with a group, beat the sh** out of another kid and left him bloody and unconscious, would I feel exactly the same way? And the answer is yes.
“The act of devoting energy and time to a particular person (or group of people) necessarily takes one’s energy and time away from other persons or groups. ”
So Phil, what civil rights causes do you personally deem worthy of fighting for/supporting, generally?
The Jena 6 weren’t good “posterboys” and what they did was wrong, I think we can all agree on that, but the problem with this issue is it’s an inequity that generally depends on its victims’ history of bad behavior, sullied reputations, and low regard in the eyes of our society. There aren’t really any “good posterboys” for this issue. Even many people who were outright falsely convicted — the innocent — have a history of priors that make them “perfect scapegoats” for crimes that they didn’t commit, and for many people, those priors make them wastes of humanity for whom no one should bother seeking justice for. When people talk about inequities in the justice system, they’re generally adressing the issues of people who society sees as “throwaway people” because of what they’ve done and/or who they are, and there’s pretty much no getting away from that stigma and the accompanying categorical unpopularity of the issue of unequal punishment. I however, have no idea why people say “Free this dude who actually did what he was accused of!” … it may be easier to say than “Jail that other guy who did the exact same thing last week!”, but it’s definitely not a “selling point” for the noninitiated.
Phil, you’ve proved my point. As I said, you actively want to hold that opinion.
This is NOT about symbolism. It’s about six lives being destroyed…SIX LIVES, not one. If you can’t see them that way, you’re part of the problem.
I asked you the question I intended to. You see, even the folks in town say some of the kids have no record and just got caught up in the moment.
Now, we Black folks have been saying “Jena 6, Jena 6” and suddenly white folks focused on Mychal Bell. Why not one of the innocent ones?
It’s about the District Attorney’s actions, the judge’s actions, not the Jena 6’s. They are the responsible adults that fucked it all up. And if you want to know the truth, you cause ongoing and increasing damage by ignoring the real rot at the roots. Why CHOOSE to define the case incorrectly?
Why does the D.A. not want all Black people to receive equal protection under the law? Why do YOU not want all Black people to receive equal protection under the law? Because you don’t…not if you can’t support the rights of the imperfect.
I wonder how YOU would fare if YOU had to be perfect for any of your complaints to be heard at all. How many white people meet the standard you hold Black people to?
Speaking of not focusing on one thing over another, why doesn’t anyone seem to acknowledge that the DA already agreed to four probations for Bell following four separate felony convictions? Shouldn’t his probation have been changed to his original sentence with the second concivtion? Certainly, his third? No? His fourth? Didn’t Bell’s girlfriend deserve her own justice after he beat her up?
What kind of judge and prosecutor would keep letting such a violent serial offender go free? They must be racists!
@ferg
Only extremists say that Bell shouldn’t have been punished. The argument is NOT that Bell should have gotten away with it, but that law enforcement and local officials should’ve gotten involved long before he participated in jumping that boy, and should’ve taken interest in what the white students were doing to provoke this violence. The extreme nature of his sentence highlighted this racial imbalance.
ferg:
You want to get to the root of it? The responsible adults fucked up and you’re blaming the adolescents. Why?
Bell was clearly mistreated. But this
doesn’t really happen much, for whites OR blacks.
Which is to say, that the racism usually comes from a decision not to charge, or a decision to give more credibility to certain witnesses, or stuff like that–prosecutors and cops don’t generally go digging for provocations because it’s debatably not their job.
Yeah, to this and your other posts and also that by banana dana. I kind of skimmed through some of the others b/c I get that every day. There are Jena 6s taking place all over the country. It’s not about one individual, except by those who don’t want to look at what’s going on all over the country including in their backyards. That’s not what brought thousands of people there.
But also what banana dana said, many people (thought not all)who get shot and killed by police or die in police custody might have had records. I one case, the D.A.’s office compiled a 1,200 dossiar on one woman’s “record” including every note she ever received to go to the principal’s office(since she had a very minor record) and insinuations even about her sexual orientation as if that were criminal behavior. And actually, the more egregious the incident, the more fervantly LE agencies engage in this “fact” gathering.
Many of the women who are raped under the color of authority by police officers have priors and that’s used against them in the media for example.
In these cases, the same thing happens. Individuals get pulled out and their records become what’s happening. A woman who is sexually assaulted by an officer in his squad car under force or coercion to not be arrested may have a prior history and be branded a liar for that reason, but often police officers who engage in this criminal conduct seek out female victims who won’t be believed. They know if they victimize a woman who hasn’t any prior record, they’re probably going to be busted and often are, including in cases involving two police departments in upstate New York and one in Orange County involving a woman who called 9-11 and was raped by an officer and didn’t tell anyone until a representative from another department called her to interview her for a customer satisfaction survey and she told that person what happened.
But for women who have records and it happens to them, they don’t report it. I’ve had women talk to me about it including sex workers, but there’s no point in reporting it because there won’t be any justice until the system changes and it’s not going to happen.
Radfem,
It’s unfortunate when irrelevant material becomes a part of a criminal trial or a perception of guilt. Just to clarify, I’m not saying the kids who beat up Justin Barker are poor role models or poor symbols of a movement because of their histories: I’m saying that they’re poor role models and symbols because they beat up Justin Barker. Really, badly. In a group. So it becomes a matter not of “Gosh, those kids don’t deserve to go to jail!” but instead, one of, “Gosh, those kids deserve to go to jail, just not for as long as the original charges would have sent them.”
Mychal Bell has been singled out, in particular, by supporters and skeptics, because he’s the member of the Jena 6 who got the harshest sentence.
I one case, the D.A.’s office compiled a 1,200 dossiar on one woman’s “record” including every note she ever received to go to the principal’s office(since she had a very minor record)
The District Attorney compiled a 1200-page dossier that included notes that sent a woman to the principal’s office? That sounds excessive, indeed. I’d be very curious to read about it. Is there a source you can direct us to?
@Sailorman
My point was that the beating was the end of a very long cycle of racial violence that was spiraling out of control, which should have been handled by school authorities (or handed off to the police) long before it happened. Nobody cared until the black kids beat up the white kid. That’s my point. Selective prosecution, and complete mismanagement by community/school leaders, both of which likely for racist reasons.
Phil:
You don’t need to clarify what you’ve said up until now. You’ve been using standard English
Rather than assume, let me ask you directly: are you and the other skeptics saying you can only support symbols and role models? Isn’t that the central claim Amp made, isn’t that what you’re trying to deny here?
I’m saying they are not symbols. They are not role models.
I’m saying they are humans with lives that are getting totally screwed over.
Do not try to blame the supporters for distracting the nation from the issues at hand. Mychal Bell was singled out by skeptics. Period. Who were skeptical, and THEN singled him out. And he is NOT the one who received the harshest treatment.
The ones with no record that were charged with attempted murder got the harshest treatment. Didn’t know about them until recently, did you? Why aren’t you talking about THEM?
The problem here is adults responsible for the town, the youths and their education screwed up from the start. Why aren’t THEY your symbol and concern instead of an event six repercussions down the chain of events? I understand why they aren’t your role model…
Sorry Phil, the only one who were allowed to read it were media outlets so it’s not online. It caused quite a stir. I knew some reporters and publishers who saw it and it was at least three binders of material, but the woman only had a battery misdemeanor turned disturbing the peace conviction in the criminal record.
I don’t recall whether or not it included anything about the fact that she was attending adult education classes and was about to earn her GED.
One of the officers involved in the shooting must have had access to it because he used the information in his self-published book on it and cited the D.A.’s report in his footnotes.
It was an unusual amount of information generated even on someone who was shot by police officers. Interestingly enough, the sexual orientation material never made it in the press and actually wasn’t known by many people, because when I wrote online on the shooting not too long after it was happened, I received in response anonymous postings calling the woman a lesbian. Or more literally, a gang banging drugged out lesbian whore.
Phil: “It’s unfortunate when irrelevant material becomes a part of a criminal trial or a perception of guilt. Just to clarify, I’m not saying the kids who beat up Justin Barker are poor role models or poor symbols of a movement because of their histories: I’m saying that they’re poor role models and symbols because they beat up Justin Barker. Really, badly. In a group. So it becomes a matter not of “Gosh, those kids don’t deserve to go to jail!” but instead, one of, “Gosh, those kids deserve to go to jail, just not for as long as the original charges would have sent them.”
I reiterate… a lot of people who are subject to unequal sentencing actually committed the crimes that they’re being convicted of. For instance, one of my mother’s cousins is doing 20 to life to drug possession. Sadly, most rapists don’t get that much. He probably did it — I don’t know the specifics, so I can’t definitively confirm or deny. However, I know that the sentence was obscenely out of proportion, seeing as he wasn’t Pablo Escobar. Does society usually care when people who did it get shafted? Not really. While the framing of the Jena 6 as poor, innocent schoolboys may have been disengenuous, it was probably done with that fact of life in mind. If you’re looking for “role models” and blameless innocents, unequal sentencing is not the issue for you.
That’s why I don’t back away from supporting Mychal Bell while pointing out the error of flipping the focus of the discussion.
Phil this is going to sound a bit harsh and I don’t mean it to be so.
You are a part of the problem. At this point there isn’t much you can do to defend your decision to be part of the problem. I would like you to understand WHY you are part of the problem, but I think that Earl is right.
Even if priors mattered in this case–and I’m glad that for the progressives they do not–given that the priors were decided by courts in Jena I don’t see why we should take them seriously. And I would have to think very hard to imagine a modern day circumstance in which I would not want my children to act as those children did in defending themselves against white supremacy.
I happen to think that Gunnar Myrdal was wrong when he argued that the central problem with “American race relations” was that whites held two sets of standards regarding democracy–one they applied to whites, and one they applied to non-whites. But in this particular case it IS part of the problem.
Oh, it was “20 to life for drug possession” and “disingenuous”… I hate typos. What happened to the lovable edit feature, mods?
are you and the other skeptics saying you can only support symbols and role models?
No, I’m just saying that it’s a stretch to say that that these particular people are being dissed because they’re not “perfect” or “superhuman.”
The ones with no record that were charged with attempted murder got the harshest treatment. Didn’t know about them until recently, did you? Why aren’t you talking about THEM?
I’m not sure who you’re referring to here. People other than the Jena 6?
Banana Danna: I guess I’d consider someone who was found “guilty” of drug possession to be a blameless innocent, since it’s a victimless crime. Perhaps that’s my libertarian bent, but I think 20 years (or one year) is excessive for a possession charge, no matter what your race, even if you did possess the drugs.
And I would have to think very hard to imagine a modern day circumstance in which I would not want my children to act as those children did in defending themselves against white supremacy.
Perhaps I’m misunderstanding part of the case, Lester. What was the white supremacist act that Justin Barker was guilty of?
Hey Radfem,
I was just curious about a source that wrote _about_ the dossier that included trips to the principal, not necessarily the dossier itself. Did any of the media members who saw it write about it? Is there a newspaper article that mentioned it? Or, if one of the officers involved wrote about the principal’s office trips in his self-published book, do you know the name of the book?
The local press wrote several. The D.A. had a press conference on his decision not to file charges in the shooting and then handed out the dossier. It was clearly meant to explain the officers’ actions but it was meaningless, because the woman shot was probably having a seizure at the time and not conscious of what was going on around her and the officers had no idea who she was until afterwards. The call for assistance was originally for medical aid.
The book is “Justice for None” written by Gregory Preece and Bill Burnett. The interesting thing about this duo is that Preece was supervising the officers in the shooting and Burnett was the chair of the grand jury that oversaw an investigation into the police department that was launched because of the shooting. It seemed like a bit of a conflict of interest to me, but oh well.
Phil:
They are not being dissed. (The editorial) Your underplaying the severity of the problem is another ingredient in the problem, just as your continual insistence on focusing on the WRONG PEOPLE.
Their right to equal protection under the law, one of their central constitutional rights, is being denied.
If you were a teenager, had no record, got caught up in the moment and were charged with attempted murder (weapon: a sneaker) would you call that just being dissed?
It’s THAT unimportant to you that these young men get the rights they are entitled to as citizens?
No. I am talking about the Jena 6. I explained this several comments up. I shall do so again.
This
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1024/p09s01-coop.html?page=3
is by Craig Franklin of the Jena Times, who (along with Jason Whitlock) is the source of the stories that support the irresponsible adults in the town. I quote…again…
Scroll up…you’ll see this quote in a previous comment, address to you.
Now you’re sure who I am referring to here. Is this a great enough injustice to glean your support? Are they clean and shiny enough for you? Can you differentiate between the individuals you insist on focusing on…or does Mychal Bell = Jena 6 to you?
When are you EVER going to discuss the lessons the responsible adults had to learn?
P6:
I get the impression that you really like to argue, and as such, really like to oppose whoever has a different opinion than you, even when it doesn’t quite make sense to do so.
I’ve never said that the punishment given to the Jena 6 was appropriate, nor did I say that being tried for attempted murder constituted “dissing.” The “dissing” came from people like Ted Rall, who questioned why people are marching for them. The initial post in this blog said that people were expecting them to be perfect, and subsequent posts used the word “superhuman.”
You know as well as I that there’s nothing “perfect” or “superhuman” about not beating the f*** out of some poor kid. To use such language is an insult to the millions of high school kids who don’t resort to bloody violence when they’re angry.
As far as, “The ones with no record that were charged with attempted murder got the harshest treatment,” that’s simply inaccurate. I think waht you mean to say was that they got the most inappropriate treatment. But Bell was tried as an adult, held on $90,000 bond, and faced 22 years in prison. Who got a harsher treatment than him?
Fortunately, it makes eminent good sense here.
I actually hate arguing. I’m just very good at keeping track of facts and am offended when people insist on approaches that are damaging and threatening to me and mine. Your attitude, widely spread (which it is…) is a threat to me and mine.
And your argument is sooooo busted now, I don’t understand why you don’t drop it. The options I see are, you WANT to hold the opinion (which I have said I believe to be the case) or YOU’RE the one who just likes to argue.
I don’t care which is the case, by the way.
That’s the second time you tried to tell me what I mean to say. Wrong again.
You know as well as I if the little bastards hadn’t started shit, and if the responsible adults had acted appropriately we would not be having this discussion.
All they had to do was charge the kids as juveniles and we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
You’ve been comfortable reinterpreting what I say, and ignoring it. Yet you focus on the hyperbolic vocabulary instead of working with the statement as intended…the meaning of which is obvious.
Sad.
Your argument is busted. Do you like to argue or hate to lose?
That’s the second time you tried to tell me what I mean to say. Wrong again.
If his interpretation of your statement is wrong, perhaps you could clarify what you meant. You made a statement that the most innocent got the harshest treatment; this is factually incorrect. A reasonable gloss on what you might have meant was presented by Phil; you’re saying that’s not right either.
So are you just wrong? Or what?
Okay Phil…if they’re not being “dissed” because they aren’t “superhuman” or “perfect”, would you say they are being “dissed” because they are not symbols and role models?
Oh, that’s right. You said that already. Damn near those very words.
Can you explain how that is any different than the point made in the original post?
Oh. I asked that before.
Who made Mychel Bell the symbol, Phil? And why?
Robert:
I use small words. I don’t believe clarification is necessary. You may feel I am wrong, and that’s fine. To pretend you don’t understand me is nonsense.
Just a random note that the “deadly weapon” brouhaha isn’t as nuts as it sounds.
Sure: go ahead and whack me with a pair of sneakers and I won’t die. But if you’re kicking me with sneakers or shoes (rather than bare feet) the legal theory is
Similarly, “attempted murder” can have an unusual legal definition. You don’t actually have to kill or maim someone, you just have to attempt it (which is why the fact that the victim was OK is actually fairly irrelevant.) Kicking someone when they’re down, while you are wearing shoes, can leave the victim A-OK (much as the dude here) or it can leave them seriously injured, or handicapped, or dead. Depending on the circumstances, it could certainly be attempt with a deadly weapon in a variety of states.
Of course as i said above who gets charged with it is an obvious issue.
Sailorman, when one has to struggle so hard to justify something, I tend to feel that something isn’t the real issue.
P6, are you making a random comment about the thread in general, but merely directing it to me? Or are you simply using the word “one” when you meant to say “you, Sailorman?”
I’d say “Sailorman” if that’s what I meant. It’s a general comment about ALL debates, particularly online ones. It’s directed to you because you made the comment that inspired it.
Taken from here:
Now I actually wasn’t referring to a “white supremacist act” but to white supremacy. There is an important difference here.
But Barker made a decision as to what side he stood on by his speech act.
Under the circumstances, Barker could easily be seen as inciting a riot.
Lester, are you saying that you would encourage your own children to beat the tar out of someone who is a white supremacist but doesn’t act on those beliefs? Surely that’s not what you mean?
I thought the initial post was made by “Ampersand.” Is that another pseudonym for you? If so, I’m sorry for reinterpreting what you said.
We’re both agreed that the vocabulary was hyperbolic, and we both agree that the Jena 6 deserved some kind of punishment, but not nearly the excessive prison sentences that were initially on the table. There isn’t really a lot of ground between us, so it doesn’t seem necessary to continue to argue.
White supremacy is a structural feature of societal institutions in the US.
You might want to check out what The Angry Black Woman calls required reading:
http://theangryblackwoman.wordpress.com/2007/07/27/how-prejudice-and-bias-works/
http://web.archive.org/web/20070108084300/http://coffeeandink.livejournal.com/607897.html
http://www.amptoons.com/blog/archives/2005/12/02/how-not-to-be-insane-when-accused-of-racism/
http://theangryblackwoman.wordpress.com/2006/09/14/things-you-need-to-understand-4/
http://theangryblackwoman.wordpress.com/2006/05/07/some-things-you-need-to-understand-1/
http://theangryblackwoman.wordpress.com/2006/09/18/monday-debate-what-is-racism/
http://theangryblackwoman.wordpress.com/2006/07/02/some-things-you-need-to-understand-3/
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=10157
http://pics.livejournal.com/ktempest/pic/0001p0ht
Phil, now I’m curious. I felt my statement about Barker was clear. What about it was unclear? Do you know what a “speech act” is?
I noted the difference between “white supremacy” and “a white supremacist”. Do you understand the difference here? Do you understand why I would say that Jena is a bastion of white supremacy, as opposed to simply a place where some people might harbor white supremacist attitudes but not act on them?
Oh, I’ve said nothing to you…you’ve ONLY been responding to the post.
Pathetic.
Wrong. There’s HUGE space between us. You still think focusing on one person is the way to address a social failure. You still think denying people their constitutional rights is a “diss”.
But you’re right about (only!) one thing. There’s no point in discussing it with you. You’ve made it clear you’re going to cling desperately to your position and require Black people to be role models and symbols before you recognize their rights. So I’m done.
Loading comment…
From brownfemipower comes this brochure from Incite! Women of Color Against Violence. It’s about the policing of women of color and transpeople and their communities.
Reading it made me think of what’s on this thread, because I’ve been following cases with women of color who’ve reported being sexually assaulted by police officers including several facing criminal charges. How it’s all about rape only happening if the women are “perfect” and the brochure states how police officers target these women and trans people because they know that they won’t be believed if they report it because they are not “perfect”. How not only do you have to be the “perfect” victim but that the rapist has to *fit* perfectly into a category too, meaning that police officers can’t rape, because they’re considered a class of people who don’t do such things because they’re in charge of arresting people for those things.
And I’m not sure if these individuals who create such informative brochures and do amazing and often dangerous work call themselves feminist by name but personally, I think people who do this kind of work are what feminists look like too.
No, you were clear. I asked what the “act” was and you provided an example of an act.
My question was a response to the statement that you weren’t referring to an act but to supremacy itself.
You appear to be taking this very personally. Perhaps you would enjoy political discussions more if your contributions to them were less acerbic. For example, it’s poor form to tell people what they think (seen above.) It distracts focus from the subject of discussion to the participant(s) in the discussion, and can lead to fallacious conclusions because it mirrors an ad hominem attack.
In this discussion, your personal comments lead me to defend myself even when we’re agreeing on key points. This creates a perception that I’m somehow holistically opposed to you and everything you’ve said, when in fact, I don’t hold any of the opinions you attribute to me in Post #61. (For example, that black people must be role models before their rights are recognized.)
Curious, this.
Of COURSE I am. Haven’t you noticed? Every Black person who is concerned about it at all takes it personally because it IS personal. We have experienced the same on less drastic scales. We have seen the exact same thing in the community.
And we have heard the exact same response over and over. Discussions of overt racist actions by white people always gets converted into “Teh BLACK ONE made us do it.”
But you don’t have to take my attitude to heart…just think of yourself as a symbol, or role model.
I’m a happy person when the topic is happy. I’m a serious person when the topic is serious. The topic is serious.
How fucking ridiculous is this question? Honestly dude, when history and your own personal experience tells you that you and all the kids who like you can die at the hands of people who are supposed to “protect and serve” and the vast majority of your fellow citizens won’t bat an eye, then, yes I’m going to take it personally.
Amp and mods, feel free to moderate me, but I’m done giving the fucking benefit of the doubt.
Gah! Didn’t see P6’s comment. Same shit different commenter.
Well, Phil it’s personal for many people even if it’s academic to you and your post is more than a bit patronizing.
But then it’s not like women don’t often have rules laid out for our participation in discussions of issues that impact us personally and see these discussions as more than mere academic exercises. We even do it to each other on issues that make some of us uncomfortable or push us to examine our privilege.
Jena 6 is something that happens nationwide every day. I don’t think many people have any idea because they don’t have to think about it. Those folks make it all about the one person with the worst background they can find or come up with because then they can absolve themselves from having to think about it.
The only complaints I heard about it was that the focus was on Jena and not elsewhere by people who are involved in Jena 6s or whose family members were. It’s not that they didn’t get what it was about, but it’s frustrating because many of the people in the countless Jena 6s that happen every day often feel isolated and alone. And since not having access to anyone but an over-worked, over-stressed, over-taxed and under-paid public defender(or even “pretender” as some are called) and facing “two prosecutor”(the assigned one and the judge) courtrooms, many feel helpless as well and that frustrates people.
Do you think there’s a difference between taking an issue personally and taking a discussion of that issue personally?
The problem with such conflation is that if you fly off the handle at someone who talks about something that you don’t like, it cheapens your views, in that person’s perception, of your stance on the actual actions that you’re both addressing.
Radfem, do you think that a patronizing post was out of line as a response to post 61? If so, I’m curious why.