In the comments section of this post on marriages between whites and Latin@s, there is a newly revived discussion about Latin@s and race. It reminds me of a real conversation I overheard just yesterday. I was sitting in a restaurant, which was almost empty. My waitress was Latina, most likely of Mexican or Central American descent. Since I was sitting in the back, I was near the kitchen area. The young white woman, who appeared to be the manager, sat at the table behind me. The Latina waitress came up to the white woman manager and started discussing her (the Latina’s) children. I suppose this was a continuation of a previous conversation, but here’s what I heard.
The waitress: My children are white. LOL!
The manager: Yes, they are very light.
The waitress: Well, my husband is very light.
The manager: Yes, he’s very white looking.
The waitress: I want my kids to be white.
The manager: Well, they are light, and you are pretty light too. Look you’re just a shade darker than me, and I’m Irish.
The waitress: Well, I want to be white, too.
Oh how I wanted to interject myself in the conversation, and I know that they knew I heard all of this. I sat there and debated about whether or not to keep my mouth shut, and I decided that I wouldn’t say anything. But the tone of the conversation was very interesting and depressing. It was as if the Latina waitress was trying to fit in by asserting the whiteness of her children, and the white manager was trying to give affirmation that she and her children could be white. They both were placing whiteness as something that was superior and something that you strive for. I’m not the least bit surprised that these two women felt that way, but I am a little surprised that they were so open about that conversation. I guess they felt that I was white, so I must approve of it. Of course, since I didn’t say anything, I gave my tacit approval to the whole discussion.
I don’t know about the children, but the woman who was my waitress, much to her chagrin, would have had a difficult time passing for white.
I should have said something like, “Well, there’s nothing special about being white.” What’s even more ironic is that I was deeply concentrating on my African American sociology syllabus and I had several books sitting on the table that reflected this. Their discussion helped me to lose that concentration, and soon after, I left.
This is one of those times when I am reminded of a strange aspect of white privilege–this conversation would have never occurred if these two women did not presume that I was white. This is why I cringe and laugh everytime I hear whites proclaim that they don’t hear people make racist comments. Most of the whites (and those who aspire to whiteness) I know prefer to make their racist comments in front of other whites.
I had my (very obviously not passable for white) aunt tell me how lucky I was for looking like a white woman. I also have an aunt who mourns the fact I can pass for a white woman. It happens in NA circles too.
“I should have said something like, “Well, there’s nothing special about being white.” ”
Why should you have said that? It’s not true.
Whiteness has privileges. The food server (I don’t really like the term waitress) knows about those privileges and wants her children to be able to pass. She’s acknowledging our racist society; she’s not ignoring it or pretending that it doesn’t exist. You can argue that she’s also perpetuating it or being racist herself, but your claim that ‘there’s nothing special about being white’ is wrong.
My nephew is part Filipino but he passes for white. His light skin and blue eyes are regularly discussed among all different groups of people, not just around white people. Everyone understands that it’s an asset in our racist society. No one thinks he’s special because of it, they just all think he’s lucky. Which he is. He is often spared racist comments from people who assume he’s white.
Elaine,
When I say nothing special, I mean nothing that makes whites inherently better than anybody else, which was another thought of mine….”Whites aren’t better than anybody else.” But, on the other hand, your usage of “special” in the last paragraph has the same connotation as mine.
I suppose saying special is distinguishable from privilege…but I surely didn’t have time for a long drawn out academic discussion. In brief everyday interactions you need a good one liner.
Reading this right after having read Sudy’s Maybe post makes me deleriously unhappy. How long until we can learn to take real pride in ourselves, our bodies, hearts, and minds, without internalising the kind of noxious racism that whispers that we cannot ever Be Enough if we are simply ourselves?
I wish you had said something, but honestly, I don’t think I would have either. I would’ve been too shocked, and my Midwestern etiquette would’ve demanded that I butt out simply because the conversation wasn’t designed to include me. And hell, I don’t even really know how to respond to racist remarks that are made “to” me, if not “about” me, so … yeah.
:(
When I say nothing special, I mean nothing that makes whites inherently better than anybody else, which was another thought of mine….”Whites aren’t better than anybody else.”
Why would the employee or the manager care about whether being white is inherently better? They care about whether it’s pragmatically better.
As a sociologist of race, why not ask what they saw as being the advantage(s) of being white?
If one of your friends says something racist like that, you can interject; they will at least listen to you. If it’s a total stranger however, they probably wont listen, and may get hostile.
Perhaps there might have been a way to broach the subject without seeming confrontational? Maybe a positive statement about being latino rather than a negative statement about being racist?
Robert said, “As a sociologist of race, why not ask what they saw as being the advantage(s) of being white?”
LOL! I know what you mean, but I’m not conducting a sociological study, my entire point of interjecting would be to challenge the notion that white is better and should, therefore, be afforded more opportunities.
Quite frankly, if you’re a person of color and you have that much self loathing, a white person saying whiteness isn’t better has more sway than a person of your own race saying that. It’s unfortunate, but true in many cases.
I just don’t think asking why she feels that way undermines racism, which would be my goal.
I just get this feeling that some of the whites in this discussion are so bent on acknowledging the “rationality” of wanting to be white that they are ignoring the tragedy–the social and psychological torment this causes people who feel this way.
Yeah, I think you’re right 327th male, coming with a quick response in a situation like that is difficult, in part because finding the way to get into the discussion that wasn’t intended for you is part of the problem.
huh. although I freely admit that plenty of white people make racist statements when they think their among like-minded folk (and for some reason think that all light-skinned people are “white” or even like-minded) I would not have expected this particular conversation to happen in front of other white people, just because the potential for stupid-but-well-meaning comments like “but they should love themselves as they are/ everyone is just as good/ etc.”
which is not to say that those statements wouldn’t be true and is ABSOLUTELY not to call anyone saying similar things here is stupid. I mean the person who is clueless and blind to white privilege and says these things because they don’t see how it works.
jd said, “I mean the person who is clueless and blind to white privilege and says these things because they don’t see how it works.”
Ok, so let’s say you’re right that only a clueless person would say whites are no better or not special. What should you say?
I can tell you for certain that if my child ever said, “He wanted to be white because white people are treated better,” I would not find that to be an acceptable comment. Saying white people are treated better is fine, but the “I want to be white” part is not acceptable to me. The I want to be treated better part is fine, but I want to be white is not fine.
FWIW–I think it is a white supremacist notion to think that wanting to be white is perfectly rational and reasonable.
Rachel, what do you mean by ‘rational’?
I think what she said was really sad in a number of ways.
But if my name we’re Darius Washington I’d put D. Washington on my rental app. for obvious reasons. There’s “should be” and “Is” and it doesn’t sound like the waitress (or her kids) had the privilege of worrying about should be. I’m making a lot of assumptions here but it sounds like they’re more interested in improving their lives than in social change in general.
Yeah. I had a really depressing conversation with my son’s 1st grade teacher where she congratulated me that he looked so white and went over his features one by one to point out how white they were. She was white and her kids are mixed, so it was extra perturbing. The context was that she wanted me to be sure that he was getting treated as “gifted” not because of being a minority but because he “really deserved” it… and that other people wouldn’t think he was getting into the special class because of affirmative action of some kind. I argued with her for a while, but was afraid to be as hard-assed about it as I normally would be, because she was still his teacher for the rest of the year. I think my message got across though, that he was mixed and that was just fine and it was better to teach him about systematic racism than to tell him he’s white and sigh in relief. The part where I pulled my punches was in pointing out her own scary racism.
It’s only rational and reasonable because we live in a deeply irrational world. How do you think people manage to survive in such a world? By adopting behaviors that in a better world, would be totally irrational and unreasonable.
I’m not white. But of course — I say of course because it seems obvious to me — at some level I wish I was white. My life would have been a lot more pleasant in any number of ways. I wouldn’t have had to deal with any number of painful fucked up things, and I would probably be more happy and well-adjusted in some ways. Maybe less in others, but all things considered I’ll take the “screwed up without painful discrimination and alienation” vs. “screwed up with painful discrimination and alienation.” Being pushed around by racism is an experience of abuse. How could I ever rationally say that I 100% prefer being a person of color?
At the same time, I have another gut feeling, at a totally different level, that racism is wrong. That this world where I end up having the feelings I describe in the paragraph above is wrong. That I value who I’ve ended up becoming because I am, of course, the sum of my experiences and I think I’m still a good and valuable person even if I’m not perfect. And I also value a lot of things about not being white, my non-white heritage, the experience of being a person of mixed race, etc.
But if I:
– didn’t think as much about the structural racism that pervades our society, or believed it was just “isolated individual racists” rather than a huge systemic problem;
– hadn’t come to an understanding that all my experiences, even the painful detrimental ones, at some level have value;
– felt more alienated from people of color, or my parents, or my other cultural heritage, like I didn’t really identify with it or care much about having all that stuff be part of my life;
– was invested in making sure my children had the best life possible with the most opportunities;
… I could totally see myself believing wholeheartedly that I’d want me and my kids to be as white as possible, because it would be a pretty unalloyed positive. I’m not saying the waitress necessarily felt any of the above things, although I’m sure she had at least some of them going on. But you know what? I’ve been at all of those points at one time or another (with the exception of having kids) and I don’t think it’s too hard to understand… even if ideally, nobody would feel many of those things.
I think the response has to be more complex than just “this comment is unacceptable.” If you don’t comprehend all of the above… well it’s probably because you haven’t been through it.
Honestly, not sure I would agree with this either. Even in a self-loathing, alienated-from-my-roots, pragmatically-focused, racism-is-personal mode, I think it’s still pretty clear to most people of color that they know more about racism than your average white person. If some white stranger said “there’s nothing special about being white” or “whites aren’t better than anyone else,” my reaction would be “uh… right, and what do you know? You’re white, of course you don’t think it’s special. You don’t know what it’s like on the other side.” In fact, that was part of my kneejerk reaction after reading the original post, although you did elaborate more about that statement in the comments.
Well Joe my question would be, “Is wanting to be white really going to improve her life?”
Being white might improve her life chances, but that’s not going to happen.
To use a different, but similar example. Let’s say a man says he wants to be tall because tall guys are treated better. He’s right that he probably will get better treatment if he’s taller, but (barring some extreme surgery) he’s never going to be tall, so what good does it do him to want to be something he’s not ever going to be. Wouldn’t he do better to try to challenge height discrimination? Wouldn’t he do better to accept himself and work for change?
So Holly, changing subjects a little; do you think penis envy is rational?
Holly said, “It’s only rational and reasonable because we live in a deeply irrational world. How do you think people manage to survive in such a world? By adopting behaviors that in a better world, would be totally irrational and unreasonable.”
She can try to adopt all of the behaviors she wants, but I don’t think she’s going to become white. I think that’s part of the irrationality of those beliefs. Of course, there is a time and a place to try to fit in and to try to challenge the system.
Furthermore, I think it’s important to make a distinction between wanting to be white, and wanting to be treated how whites are treated.
And one more point– remember there were two women in that conversation.
The waitress, in a diner, quite likely did work for change every time someone only bought a cup of coffee. The easiest way to be treated as whites are treated, from her perspective (I think), is to be fair skinned and assimilate.
Long term I think you’re correct. But I can understand, very well, wanting your children to have every advantage in life.
Also, as you pointed out in another thread, the definition of ‘white’ is somewhat fluid. If I recall correctly, at one point the Irish barely qualified and Italians were completely out. So maybe her kids will be white. John Sununu’s pretty white, except technically he’s not. Same for Bill Richardson.
Even so it’s sad. I look forward to the day that Black is about as important a distinction as Irish or Italian. Not that I think I’ll live to see it.
I never thought I’d be saying this to Rachel, but..
Check your privilege!
What on earth gives you the idea that this conversation was about you?
What makes your interpretation of their “notion” definitive? As several people have pointed out, the words quoted could just as well be interpretted as a desire and hope for the privileges whiteness brings, rather than from having a negative view with respect to race or skin colour per se
Who authorised you to speak about what “has more sway” with people of colour? Does it not occur to you that what “has more sway” might be different for different individual POC?
What makes you think you should say anything?
The waitress is not your child. What business is it of yours that you apply the standard of “acceptable to me” to her utterances?
Daran, Your last comment about the waitress not being her child isn’t really on point. Racheal never wrote or implied that she thought that. She wrote that she found the idea of wanting to be another race irrational and that if her child expressed it than she’d have a problem. To me that doesn’t support the position you’re attacking. I didn’t interpret what she wrote in the rest of the piece to imply authority on the issue. I thought she was explaining her opinion.
Also, you seem really gleeful to be able to criticize racheal in this way. Which is fine. But are you attacking her in good faith? Or are you jabbing an ideological opponent with their own terms because it’s fun? If I’ve misconstrued your motivation, than I’m sorry. I hope you don’t take offense at the question.
So Holly, changing subjects a little; do you think penis envy is rational?
Penises specifically, or wanting male privilege? I have no problem applying the same thoughts to gender, sure. I have had to think about that, quite specifically, as a trans person who’s moved between states of having privilege and not having privilege. I’ve experienced different levels of privilege based on people’s racial perceptions of me in different contexts too. Do you think it’s literally, explicitly unreasonable and irrational for a woman to express a feeling like “I am so fucking sick of being patronized and harassed and belittled, sometimes I wish I was a guy?”
She can try to adopt all of the behaviors she wants, but I don’t think she’s going to become white. I think that’s part of the irrationality of those beliefs. Of course, there is a time and a place to try to fit in and to try to challenge the system.
Yes and no. I don’t think it would be entirely rational if this waitress wanted to subject her children to something extreme like bathing them in skin lightening creams for hours to improve their chances in the world. (Although this is perceived as a pretty rational, pragmatic approach to skin privilege throughout many parts of the world, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-9tcXpW1DE ) Nor do I think it would be rational if someone believed that possession of a penis was (literally, not figuratively) some kind of totem-like key to accessing male power, and they needed to get one by hook or by crook to gain privilege.
However, I think you’re missing (maybe consciously) part of what she was actually talking about: skin privilege. There’s a very long history of people in various cultures, especially in colonized areas of the world, being treated better for having lighter skin. In some places and times, kids with mixed heritage have passed as white completely, even secretly. I have Latin@ friends who pass as white a significant chunk of the time, and who have talked about how they were pushed in certain directions — in terms of behavior, education, everything — in ways that were openly admitted to be connected to how fair & passable they were, about how they received certain kinds of privilege, how alienated they felt, etc. This isn’t a delusional fairytale, it’s an adaptive strategy. It may be a horrifying one that shows us what an awful racist world we live in, but it’s not “irrational” — for the reasons I pointed out.
People of color around the world totally can and do “make their children whiter” in any number of ways. It even plays into who’s considered more desirable for dating and marriage, quite explicitly. There are any number of dating sites for POCs (especially in Asia, in my experience) where part of the information you have to input is to rate your skin tone. (Google “wheatish” for instance.) This is not JUST because POCs have been trained to think light skin is more attractive. It’s also, at some level, a calculated mate selection move. And that has huge structural implications for the population of the world and how people are shaped by racism. Implications we should examine, instead of saying “silly people of color! how could they want to be white, don’t they know being white isn’t special?” … which I have to say is kind of how your original post came across, intentionally or not.
And one more point– remember there were two women in that conversation.
I’m always in favor of white people talking to white people about how to question their racial assumptions and check white supremacist behavior. I think it’s more effective than “angry” POCs trying to do the same. So thumbs up for that angle, sure.
Wow, Rachel, you surprise me. Usually you see things more clearly than this.
It’s a white supremacist notion to think that wanting to be white is a good and positive thing, yes. We’re agreed on the fact that wanting to be other than you are is not a good thing. But good is not the same thing as rational, and I think you shouldn’t try to conflate the two. It is not good, but it is definitely rational, to want to be white in a racist society that values whiteness. It’s just as rational as wanting to be rich in a capitalist society, or wanting to be talented at tracking in a hunter-gatherer society. And yes, it’s just as rational as wanting a penis in a patriarchial society. Human beings are hierarchical creatures; we may not all have what it takes to be at the top of the hierarchy, but that will never stop us from wanting to be there.
At least until integration, I believe most black Americans considered themselves the equal of whites in intelligence, ambition, etc. They learned not to express this belief in public, because it was dangerous to do so — but they passed those messages on to their children, quietly. This culminated in the Civil Rights Movement, which could never have occurred if the PoC who participated in it had believed that white people were inherently better than themselves. (If you really believe that, why fight for equal treatment?) But despite the gains of the movement, our society is still so stratified, and the structure of power within it is so obvious, that even children can see it.
Acknowledging that structure is necessary for survival. It’s a mark of intelligence, IMO, not self-loathing, that the women saw it and were willing to admit to it. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the waitress hates herself, or that the other woman truly considered whites to be superior. It could mean those things, true, but you don’t have enough information to jump to that conclusion. As far as I can tell, this is just an illustration of the fact that working-class women don’t have the luxury of deluding themselves about the realities of the world.
Nora said, “Acknowledging that structure is necessary for survival. It’s a mark of intelligence, IMO, not self-loathing, that the women saw it and were willing to admit to it. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the waitress hates herself, or that the other woman truly considered whites to be superior. It could mean those things, true, but you don’t have enough information to jump to that conclusion.”
I also don’t think there was enough information to assume, like many folks in this conversation have, that the statement about wanting to be white was any sort of acknowledgment or response to social structure. There a good chance it was, but there was not a single mention of anything structural in that conversation.
Holley said, “However, I think you’re missing (maybe consciously) part of what she was actually talking about: skin privilege. There’s a very long history of people in various cultures, especially in colonized areas of the world, being treated better for having lighter skin….. This isn’t a delusional fairytale, it’s an adaptive strategy.”
Obviously, I know these things about colonialism and skin color. Where I disagree with others is that I do not find it to be a morally or psychologically acceptable adaptive strategy. I think the psychological costs of passing or wanting to be white outweigh the social benefits. That doesn’t mean it’s not understandable that people would try to pass or be white, but I don’t think it’s, in the long term, a psychological benefit to that person (or in the case above the children of the person).
I guess a somewhat similar analogy would be closeted LGBT folks or LGBT folks who choose the deny their sexuality in large parts of their lives. Think about how many people deny their sexuality for long periods of time and openly say I wish I were heterosexual because I know I would be treated better.
I personally think it is very important for the individual person in any marginalized group to try to develop an acceptance of their identity that is not predicated on the dominant group’s notion of who they should be. Furthermore, I think there is a general social benefit (less at the individual level and more at the aggregate level) to promoting self and group acceptance within marginalized groups after all we need an alternative to the current social arrangements, reaffirming heterosexism, white supremacy, sexism, ableism, or another other ism. Sure that involves changing the social structure, but are people in those marginalized groups going to work to change the social structure when they buy into it?
(Sorry I forget to say this the first time.)
Nora said, “Acknowledging that structure is necessary for survival. It’s a mark of intelligence, IMO, not self-loathing, that the women saw it and were willing to admit to it.”
Besides the fact that I didn’t here any real acknowledgment of the social structure, I also wanted to say that there is a qualitative difference between saying, “I want to be treated in the way that whites are treated” vs. saying “I want to be white.”
To me the first one is an acknowledgment of structure. I just don’t see the second as a clear acknowledgment of structure, and to the extent that it could be an acknowledgment, I think it isn’t transformative.
Rachel, unless I’m confused I’ve seen you link “whiteness” to non-physical traits (e.g. your old comments that Irish transitioned to white, etc.) Combined with that is the statement that it’s all a social construct anyway, right?
And in that context, you seem to be linking “white” to “privileged” or “powerful.” So wanting to “be white” really, from what you’ve written in the past, seems to be wanting to be “viewed as” white: i.e., wanting to be privileged and/or powerful.
And it is rational to want that, isn’t it?
Daran said, “The waitress is not your child. What business is it of yours that you apply the standard of “acceptable to me” to her utterances?”
I guess I’m not a postmodernist or moral relativist.
That’s my modernist side coming out.
The whole thing about structural issues is that they’re inherent and persistent even when they’re not literally addressed by what someone is saying in words. I mean, that’s what “structural” means in this context.
Where I disagree with others is that I do not find it to be a morally or psychologically acceptable adaptive strategy. I think the psychological costs of passing or wanting to be white outweigh the social benefits.
Since we’re getting to the point of discussing psychological harms that people may inflict upon themselves… is that really something you can dictate or prescribe for others? Even if you’re not a “postmodernist” or whatever?
It’s quite possible for something to be immoral and still rational.
It’s also quite possible to engage in behavior that has a tradeoff — you’re going to suffer in one way, to get benefits in another way — and remain completely rational throughout.
Your prescription for the situation — which I agree with, in the long term — is that we should all invest in social change. But you also see, from your previous comments, that people have to survive in the meantime. You can’t just say “your survival tactics don’t make any sense! you should be putting that energy towards changing the world instead!” because you know what? It might make a difference if you could convince every single person, but you can’t. It’s a privileged position to say “don’t worry about today, think of tomorrow.” It’s also the medieval church position on why peasants should be content — reward in the afterlife. Afterlife, after society is fixed, after the revolution… what’s the difference? I am much more sympathetic to a mom who wants a better life for her kids and hopes they get more privilege due to skin color, educational privilege, height, size, gender, whatevr — even though I will readily acknowledge that on a moral level, it’s simply tail-chasing, succumbing to and reinforcing the current system.
No I was not attacking her. I was criticising her, admittedly in somewhat forthright terms, but I was genuinely surprised to see this level of privilege coming from her.
Yes my post was in good faith.
No she is not an ideological opponent. I find my views on race to be broadly congruent with hers. We part company on gender.
No I am not offended.
“wanting to be “viewed as” white: i.e., wanting to be privileged and/or powerful.
And it is rational to want that, isn’t it?”
It might be understandable, but I just don’t see it as being a mentally healthy adaptation. Given the psychological harm it can cause someone; I’m not so sure that it is the best calculation.
I’m willing to drop the word rational because it has several potential layers of meaning in a discussion like this. As a short term individual strategy, I can see some rational aspects, and I think there are rational reasons that groups would advocate being accepted as white.
Yes, Joe and Sailorman, whiteness is fluid, but I don’t think that’s a good thing. The fluidity of whiteness is in my view a way to maintain white supremacy, which is the point I was making in that earlier thread.
Holly said, “It’s a privileged position to say “don’t worry about today, think of tomorrow.” It’s also the medieval church position on why peasants should be content — reward in the afterlife. Afterlife, after society is fixed, after the revolution… what’s the difference?”
Well if were gonna get all Marxist here :) Then, I would say that wanting to be white is a form of false consciousness that works to suppress social change.
Holly said, “I am much more sympathetic to a mom who wants a better life for her kids and hopes they get more privilege due to skin color, educational privilege, height, size, gender, whatevr — even though I will readily acknowledge that on a moral level, it’s simply tail-chasing, succumbing to and reinforcing the current system.”
While wanting privilege is understandable, the problem is the very concept of privilege. I’m not so sure that I do want my children to have privileges, which are essentially unearned advantages. I want them to have opportunities, but privilege teaches entitlement and other negative things. I know that’s a very moralistic position, and one that I will have a hard time living up to (especially with regard to social class).
Then, I would say that wanting to be white is a form of false consciousness that works to suppress social change.
I have all sorts of problems with the notion of “false consciousness” especially when it’s used by people with more power (for example, white people) to tell people with less power what they actually should be thinking, or what’s actually in their interests. You could be completely right about their interests or what a more productive ideology would be, and I’d still have a problem with the tactic of someone who isn’t oppressed in a particular way telling the oppressed what their real interests are or should be. I also think it’s possible to talk about social change and the need for change without singling out a particular individual (like a waitress) and talking about how she’s wrongheaded or doesn’t understand her own best interests.
I hope I’ve already illustrated how it’s possible to be of two minds about something. You can understand racism quite well — either explicitly, or implicitly in the way that most people of color do just from getting smacked with it over and over — and understand that it would be better to work for a world without it, and still wish quite feverently that you, an individual, were not the one who was being targeted by this problem. It’s not necessarily false consciousness, and as so often with that phrase (coined by the son of a factory owner to label the thought processes of workers) it’s unavoidably patronizing to use.
While wanting privilege is understandable, the problem is the very concept of privilege. I’m not so sure that I do want my children to have privileges, which are essentially unearned advantages. I want them to have opportunities, but privilege teaches entitlement and other negative things. I know that’s a very moralistic position, and one that I will have a hard time living up to (especially with regard to social class).
If they have opportunities, they have privilege. Somewhere in the world — even in the same country — there’s someone who doesn’t have that opportunity because of social injustice. What do you call someone who has no privilege at all? A corpse.
This is the problem with some conceptions of privilege. In a raw atomic way, privilege is not a bad thing, it confers benefits and opportunities that are good for someone’s growth and life and happiness. The problem is that privileges are distributed unequally (if they weren’t, we’d probably use a different word, true). And what we ought to be working for is more privilege for more people, until that word no longer makes sense.
I see a distinction between privilege and entitlement, aka “privileged attitude.” If privilege is allowed to become naturalized and invisible in a privileged person’s mind, if they assume that this is the proper way the world works, they’re getting what’s due them and everything is hunky-dory and unworthy of scrutiny or comment… that’s entitlement. And I think you can hope for your children to have opportunities, while simultaneously trying to educate them so that they’re aware of their privileges and know that the world does not work in a fair or moral way, especially if you lack privilege. It’s not an easy thing to do, but I think there is a distinction.
I disagree that the structural implications of the waitress’ statement weren’t visible. They were, not in what she said, but in who she said it to — a white woman who was apparently her supervisor. She was doing what a bazillion workers do every day — sucking up to her boss. That she chose to do it in this way speaks clearly to the intersection of race with class and (her perception of) authority — again, I see this as an acknowledgement of structure. If she had said these things to another Latina, or possibly even to a white fellow waitress, then I might have concluded as you have that her statement hints at racial self hatred. I find it very telling that she said it to her white boss.
Also,
What does morality have to do with it? Many survival strategies are immoral — prostitution, Stockholm syndrome, betrayal, etc. That still doesn’t make them irrational, or even wrong in the simplest “is it an appropriate way to get things done” sense. It’s a Maslow’s hierarchy of needs issue; people who employ survival strategies aren’t primarily worried about morality or psychosocial fulfillment. Waitresses make shit for wages and almost never receive benefits. I guarantee that waitress you saw is worried about putting food on her kids’ table, and keeping a roof over their heads, keeping them healthy (probably without insurance), and maybe trying to send them to college. Her wish for them to be white, and her efforts to impress her boss, are almost certainly tied in with those things, not racial identity development or the need to transform the American social hierarchy.
And let’s differentiate passing from “wanting to be white”, please. Now you’re conflating an active survival strategy with a passive state of emotional/psychological damage; the two are not the same. Many people who “pass” have no desire to be white. But in the past, the social benefits of passing *did* outweigh the psychological costs by a large degree, and anyone who didn’t take advantage of these benefits would’ve been, IMO, an idiot.
Now, I’ll disclose this: my great-grandfather had straight hair and blue eyes, and looked almost wholly white. This allowed him to get a job as a merchant marine, and later work on the docks in Mobile, Alabama, in a time when black men just didn’t get jobs like that. Because of this he provided well for his family; they became middle-class, owning a house and sending nearly all their children to college. His wife was black; his children were black (a range of shades); he attended a black church, went to black clubs, etc. — basically, in every way except work, he lived and loved as a black man. Did he want to be white? I don’t think so. Did he pass? Hell, yes, and I admire him for doing so, even though it amounted to a kind of betrayal of his racial identity. Whose fault is it that he had to do so? He didn’t make this society; he just had to live in it — and raise a family in it. He did what he had to do. And because he did, his children (who grew up in the Sixties) were able to worry less about survival, and more about the kind of moral and psychosocial and transformative issues that you’re thinking about, Rachel.
So I think you are letting privilege color how you see this incident; you’re applying standards that simply don’t fit the context, and you’re ignoring the context.
What Holly said. And:
While wanting privilege is understandable, the problem is the very concept of privilege.
This seems a bit akin to saying that while wanting to stand upright is understandable, the problem is the very concept of gravity. Privilege is a built-in to social hierarchy; social hierarchy appears to be a built-in to human beings. We can (and should) work towards a society where privilege and hierarchy do not crush and oppress as much as they do; we can mitigate harms. (Privilege that controls who gets to wear pretty clothes is less onerous to the oppressed than privilege that controls who gets to eat nutritious food.) The history of societies and groups who instead work to abolish privilege and hierarchy is not promising; the nuanced and mitigated hierarchy that’s socially evolved over millennia simply gets replaced with the dark and instinctual hierarchy that we always have in the background. I reject the theory of gravity and all it’s works, but I still end up falling on my ass.
I want them to have opportunities, but privilege teaches entitlement and other negative things. I know that’s a very moralistic position, and one that I will have a hard time living up to (especially with regard to social class).
Entitlement is a negative (and powerfully destructive) force, and you’re right, in my view, to want your kids to eschew it. But trying to teach them to avoid entitlement (which is not inevitable, being a psychological reaction to an external reality) by avoiding/denying privilege (which is inevitable, being an external reality) seems like a strategy predoomed to failure, like trying to teach your son to avoid violence against other people by teaching him that physics is a sin. You might reduce the level of violence, but at the cost of crippling your son’s ability to comprehend reality.
That was kind of what I was thinking of as a possiblity. I’ve seen this before, not quite this conversation but others when I worked in food service. Without knowing next to anything about the waitress, her relationship with her boss, I’m not sure I would know what to say or it’s my place to say anything. I’m not sure she was expecting you to interject. Likely, you just witnessed a slice of what her work life is like and it’s not pretty at all. But there’s a lot of things in her life you didn’t see.
Also, I would be leery about putting myself in a discussion between an employer (who’s clearly got racial issues to say the least) and an employee too who may be putting up with a lot of crap that I don’t know about to keep a job she needs. I probably would have left her a good tip and say “thank you” when I left.
If I did say something, maybe I would feel better about myself but I don’t know what it would to help her or hurt her. I know from experience in a very different way that sometimes when customers say anything supportive to you in front of your boss, it can go either way depending.
The theory being that the willow which bends does not break.
Hmmm. I see the boss doing what a bazillion bosses do every day — stroking her worker.
Nora, I definitely agree with your first paragraph, and that’s part of the reason I kept my mouth shut and left a decent tip. I had a lot of things going through my head, and one of the biggest ones was if my child/future children or husband were there this conversation would have never happened in front of us. And honestly, it’s very hard for me to view this incident without thinking about it from the perspective of a mother/partner…I know if I overheard my child kissing up to a white kid and saying I want to be white, and would have to talk with my kid about this. When I heard this, I also thought what would I say to my kids (who would be black and biracial) if they heard this or said this? For me this truly was a white privilege moment because I am fairly sure I would have never heard this conversation if I wasn’t white and wasn’t sitting alone or with other whites. (So Daran this is part of the reason I keep brining up kids–generally speaking the cases I hear of someone directly saying they want to be white involve children.)
Nora said, “What does morality have to do with it?”
If we lived in a just society, people wouldn’t have to do this type of thing.
Nora said, “Did he pass? Hell, yes, and I admire him for doing so, even though it amounted to a kind of betrayal of his racial identity. Whose fault is it that he had to do so? He didn’t make this society; he just had to live in it — and raise a family in it. He did what he had to do. And because he did, his children (who grew up in the Sixties) were able to worry less about survival, and more about the kind of moral and psychosocial and transformative issues that you’re thinking about, Rachel.”
Listen, I definitely think the burden to use these adaptive strategies comes from racism and white supremacy, there’s no doubt in my mind. I definitely think some adaptive strategies are better than others.
But honestly, I don’t think I’ll ever be able to condone certain types of adaptive strategies (FWIW–Beyond the kissing up to the boss part, which was pretty clear. It is completely fair to say that we really don’t know if or how the waitress really feels about this issue in her everyday life outside of work, which is another reason I just listened.). For example, women who “sleep their way to the top.” I know it’s rare and a stereotype, but I think it does nothing for the cause, and I would be ticked off at a woman who used it.
I still maintain that wanting the privileges associated with whiteness or wanting to be treated like whites is qualitatively different from saying “I want to be white.”
Nora said, “So I think you are letting privilege color how you see this incident; you’re applying standards that simply don’t fit the context, and you’re ignoring the context.”
I don’t dispute that my social status influences my views. I certainly feel complicit in racism when I hear a conversation like that and don’t say anything. Because to those two women (the waitress and the manager) it makes it look like I find the whole scenario socially acceptable and I don’t.
Radfem said, “If I did say something, maybe I would feel better about myself but I don’t know what it would to help her or hurt her. I know from experience in a very different way that sometimes when customers say anything supportive to you in front of your boss, it can go either way depending.”
Which is the primary reason I didn’t say anything…I contemplated it, and I still feel bad that it looks like I’m cool with that, but I think in the long run it wouldn’t have been helpful. It may have been harmful.
Daran said, “The theory being that the willow which bends does not break.”
Exactly.
Here’s another 2 cents. Please forgive me for covering some old ground; you guys type faster than I can read.
What are the emotions being expressed here?
Admittedly, I don’t expect that Rachel provides us with a transcript of the waitress/manager discussion, so I concede that I’m guessing at emotion based on limited info. But here’s my read: The waitress expressed surprise, delight and amusement that people would regard her husband and children as white. Basically, the manager sounds like she’s merely nodding along.
Then the interesting line arises: “Well, I want to be white, too.” I have no read on the emotional content of this line, so I have difficulty interpreting it. But assuming the waitress is speaking earnestly, I draw three conclusions. 1) The waitress has an emotional state. 2) The waitress recognizes her own emotional state. 3) The waitress expresses this emotional state in the presence of customers. Each of these conclusions prompts a different reaction in me.
– What conclusions should I draw about the idea that the waitress wants to be white? I regard emotional states – such as wanting – as facts, akin to weight or temperature. I question the merit of the commandment “Thou shalt not covet….” Do such commandments actually discourage people from coveting, or merely promote repression and self-deception? The waitress wants something. Assuming she’s being candid, she is merely expressing a fact.
– What conclusion should I draw about the idea that the waitress recognizes her own emotional state? Seems like a good thing to me.
– What conclusion should I draw about the idea that the waitress would express her emotional state in the presence of customers? While I don’t judge people for having emotions, and I affirm people for recognizing their emotions, I may judge people for expressing them inappropriately. As Rachel demonstrates, discussions of race, politics, religion, etc., often provoke visceral reactions in ways that other discussions don’t. Arguably I could find fault with the waitress for discussing this topic in a forum that would disturb people she is putatively trying to serve.
But there are still more emotions at play here. The waitress/manager discussion clearly vexes Rachel. I still haven’t got a firm grasp on what specifically provokes her so.
I sense that Rachel is disappointed that a Latina would express a desire to be white. I sense this idea causes Rachel to confront anew dynamics of racism that Rachel finds uncomfortable. And that makes sense to me. Yet somehow I don’t think this explains Rachel’s reaction.
Let me take a pure, gut-level guess here: I sense that Rachel expects oppressed people to feel – or at least to express – solidarity against their oppressors. I sense that Rachel does not regard racism as a social dynamic but rather as a war of oppressor vs. oppressed. I sense that Rachel regards the waitress as a soldier in a war, and the waitress’ expression of desire as a kind of betrayal to the cause. Am I close?
I say this in part because Rachel seems uncharacteristically uncharitable to the waitress, a person with whom I had expected Rachel to express sympathy. The strength of Rachel’s own visceral reaction seems to overcome Rachel’s more common pattern of analyzing things from the waitress’s point of view (ok, as Rachel has in the last several comments).
Let me apologize to Rachel if I’m just projecting here. I’ve been sensing this dynamic in atheist circles recently. If praying feels good, why not? Why not engage in “last rites” on your death bed or otherwise profess some faith in the supernatural? Does freedom from religion mean freedom to shun religious practice, or does it mean freedom to adopt religious practice whenever and however it suits you? People who regard themselves as soldiers in a war against oppressive religion seem to derive a sense of identity from their minority status, and strive to vindicate that sense by expressing solidarity to the end – even as they acknowledge that the end is ultimately the end. This attachment strikes me as a curiously religious perspective. Not that there’s anything wrong with that…!
What if that’s the only way that woman can get ahead? What if, otherwise, she wouldn’t earn enough money to feed her kids (maybe because she’d be stuck as a waitress)? You acknowledge that the system (patriarchy) is rigged; it’s intended to make women’s success next to impossible. Any woman who finds a way to endure/survive that system is perpetuating it, yes — but she’s also defying it. So why blame the victim of an unfair system for behaving as that system has set her up to behave, especially if she’s found a way to succeed within it?
Yes, every woman who sleeps her way to the top enables the system further and hurts “the cause”. But until she has enough security, support, or resources to do otherwise, taking the moral high ground is only going to hurt her and the people who depend on her. So what good does it do for you to heap moral scorn on her? What good does it do anyone for you to react this way — except the men who benefit from this system?
Daran, thanks for answering my question and not being offended.
Personally I think the fluidity of white is a good thing. Eventually, everyone will be white, and than no one will be. (to misquote The Invincibles)
Our society, while structurally racist is fluid. Lets bend it to be better, rather than tear it down completely.
I’m not sure about that, Joe… taking history and the extremely low levels of racial intermarriage between black people and other groups in general, whites in particular into account, I can see the possibility of a future in which every non-black American becomes white… a future where white still means something, and people still define themselves as white in contrast with black.
I am ethnically mixed, but self-identify as black. My son also does, even though he is white-skinned, freckled, blue eyed, and has features that could very easily pass for “white”.
My conversation re: race went something a little like this:
You’re gonna be privy to a lot more overt ignorance than me; some people will think you’re white and diss black folks around you. Do the right thing and tell them that your momma and granddaddy’s black and you don’t appreciate it. And when black people tell you you’re not really black because you can pass, tell ’em your momma won’t let you, and you’re not about to forget where you come from. But also remember they’ve got a point because they’re saying the same thing as me, just nastier. Your light skin’ll buy you into places I can’t go, but some of those places aren’t where you want to be.
If race is regarded as a social construct, then isn’t the notion of “passing as white” as something different from “actually being white” incoherent? Aren’t all white people just passing as white, just more successfully than POC?
I doubt that.
Rachel’s theory, with which I agree, is that its flexibity prevents us from tearing it down. That makes it’s flexibility a “bad thing”. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t bend it to be better.
BananaDanna, I agree, it’s unlikely. But, my preferred outcome. I think ‘tearing society down’ is more likely to result in something worse than something better.
rachel,
this post rubs me in the wrong way.
first, i wouldn’t be so quick to assume that the woman’s statement is representative of some sort of “self-loathing.”
second, i think it is very bold and extremely privileged of you to assume that the conversation wouldn’t have taken place without your white body being there.–people of color have conversations about whiteness when whites are around or not–don’t get it twisted. like daran stated above and was so eloquently ignored, what makes you think this conversation was about you???
third, it is also extremely privileged of you to assume that your interjection into the conversation could “save” her from her desired association with whiteness, which is what you imply.
fourth, as i stated on your personal blog, why do you feel the need to try and define the latina woman’s racial background??? i mean, c’mon! what relevance is this to the story?? AND how on earth did you choose “Mexican” or “Central American”……the last time i checked, central america is not phenotypically homogenous and neither is Mexico.
Pingback: Pithy Bitch » Blog Archive » Morality and Rationality
Nora said, “What if that’s the only way that woman can get ahead? What if, otherwise, she wouldn’t earn enough money to feed her kids (maybe because she’d be stuck as a waitress)?”
I just don’t think this is the only way to get ahead. I think some women may think that it is, but I also think that it would be very difficult for this to not come back to be used against a person who did this (as well as other people in this workplace).
And I guess that’s one reason why I am less than generous when people develop adaptive strategies that I think are harmful them themselves and others. It is understandable that people do some of these things, and I don’t think people should forever be marked if they engage in some strategy that I (or others) think hurts the larger cause, that person, or the people around that person.
I think that in this case, a woman does have agency, and that’s where I seem to differ with others–the degree to which I think a person (in a marginalized group) has agency.
I just don’t think “anything goes.” (FWIW–I’m not necessarily applying this to the scenario in the original post, but I think there are scenarios where this does apply.)
krz said, “first, i wouldn’t be so quick to assume that the woman’s statement is representative of some sort of “self-loathing.””
That’s fair enough. I think it is more complicated than that as others have pointed out.
krz said, “second, i think it is very bold and extremely privileged of you to assume that the conversation wouldn’t have taken place without your white body being there.–people of color have conversations about whiteness when whites are around or not–don’t get it twisted. like daran stated above and was so eloquently ignored, what makes you think this conversation was about you???”
First, I never said the conversation was about me. Second, I do believe the odds that this conversation would have taken place in front of me if I was black or Asian would be much lower. I should have specified that more in the post. Third, I never said people of color don’t have conversations about whites when whites are not around or not.
krz said, “third, it is also extremely privileged of you to assume that your interjection into the conversation could “save” her from her desired association with whiteness, which is what you imply.”
I never said anything about saving anyone. What I said in the post was that it bothered me that my silence made it seem like I am supportive of the idea that whiteness is somehow better or more desirable.
It just seems that people are insinuated that my comment (had I actually made one :) ) would only be directed at the waitress and not the white manager.
krz said, “fourth, as i stated on your personal blog, why do you feel the need to try and define the latina woman’s racial background??? i mean, c’mon! what relevance is this to the story?? AND how on earth did you choose “Mexican” or “Central American”……the last time i checked, central america is not phenotypically homogenous and neither is Mexico.”
My guess about her ethnic background was based on more than just phenotype–the neighborhood, the accent, and general knowledge about the ethnic segregation and immigrant settlement patterns of the NYC metro area. I could always be wrong, but my thinking wasn’t that simplistic.
For the record, I as a POC do not think for a moment that a white person who hears something like this and is compelled to have an opinion is “demonstrating privilege”. On the other hand, I think one must have a fat lot of privilege to carry on a long-winded monologue on how the crushing pathologies that lead some POC to believe in this sort of thing are so lovingly rational. (Thank you, Rachel, for being the only one who seems to understand this.) There’s nothing that quite proclaims “I’m as white as Wonder Bread” in coloured polka dot letters as the ability to argue for the quantitative benefits of wanting to be white, as if it were nothing more than feigning an interest in a hobby to join in on a conversation.
I’m reminded of a Sunday school class many years ago. One of the girls in my class was getting blepharoplasty surgery and talk turned to the subject of appearance. The other kids in the class started grading everyone else at church by facial features, on twin scales of “who looks white vs. Asian” and “who’s good-looking vs. not”. Bonus points if you can guess which went with which. Even the teacher joined in. I remember it, because to this day I’ve regretted that I didn’t storm out of there, right after saying something extremely hurtful and prejudicial to the lot of them.
I grew up in S. Arizona in the late 50’s. My mother is 6/8ths Native and 1/8th German and my father was Swedish. Sometimes my mother would get me to go into the restrooms at gas stations to see if ‘anyone was in them’ – before going in herself. Why? Because if she stayed out of the sun she could ‘pass’. Provisions for non-whites were either dirty or non-existent and my mother loved the fact that she could ‘pass’ and use the same facilities as her daughters. There were times when other ‘white’ women would hiss some bigoted remark at her, and she was unable to respond. I know first hand how much she struggled with racism and how often she had to act racist like all her co-workers just to fit in. There was NO place to argue for the rights of the Native people (her people came from N. Carolina and so, banding with the Akimel O’odham was not an option) At 92 years of age, she is undeniably Native, yet remains cautious with her care providers. Is the white world a lot easier? Depends on the trade off. Certainly, it is a lot less humiliating.
This is classic privilege, Rachel. You have assigned agency to this hypothetical woman, and you’re condemning her for not using it, when in fact she may not have it, or feel that she has it. That’s how oppression works — you know this, I’ve seen you argue the same thing in other posts. Agency isn’t something you can bestow on another person just by declaring that it exists. If she doesn’t believe it, it might as well be nonexistent.
I would wager that many women who sleep their way to the top do it because they don’t see a more legitimate or “morally untarnished” way to do it. It’s like the decision to resort to prostitution; how many women really feel like they have a choice about doing it? I also wonder how many women who “sleep their way up” actually perceive it as an act of agency — maybe they’ve seen men do it, or the equivalent (marrying the boss’ daughter, for example).
If race is regarded as a social construct, then isn’t the notion of “passing as white” as something different from “actually being white” incoherent? Aren’t all white people just passing as white, just more successfully than POC?
I thought of this question while reading an article in the New York Times, Famous Black Lives Through DNA’s Prism: