"Obama Black" 12/26/2010
 
 This morning I was listening to Molly Johnson on CBC radio. She was being interviewed by Michael Enright; an old show from last year.
It was lovely to hear her voice as she sang song after song over the airwaves. It was also great to hear her talk about being biracial.
Her parents didn't have it easy as an interracial couple in America in the 1940s. They eventually came to Canada. 

I loved the interview, but what I want to talk about is the term I heard today - "Obama Black". Molly enthusiastically used it when she spoke of being mixed race.
I haven't heard it before. I have no idea if she made it up. But it struck me.
Obama Black.

I’m not sure how I feel about being Obama Black.

It's liberating and confining at the same time: on the one hand, being biracial just kicked it up a notch to presidential status. Woot! On the other, it feels weird to be considered in reference to someone else.  Now I'm not just biracial, I'm "Obama Black".
It suggests, of course, that we (including Obama) are not Black. If we were, we wouldn’t need a qualifier. That’s not a new idea. Being biracial is not Black or White afterall – it’s neither and both. But you can’t pin us down, because we all look so different. So many different shades, and features. It’s confusing, exotic, enticing, cute, frustrating, lonely….

I’m not surprised that we are not considered Black. But it’s almost like, just in case someone does (and that someone would likely be White, because Black people wouldn’t make that mistake) there is something to suggest you should think again.

Not Black – Obama Black.

It’s like making sure you have the right paint chip in the hardware store.

Not red, Napoleon Red.

The shade matters – in paint, and in skin colour.

 

 

Add Comment
 
 
Today President Obama started the process of making Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell a thing of the past. Hurray! The video is moving, and he makes some amazing statements about civil rights and recognizing people for their contributions.  It’s a decision that from this side of the LGBTQ human rights debate, makes perfect sense. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with how men and women serve their country (or any other job). But it’s long been an excuse to exclude some, while supporting homophobia.

I applaud President Obama’s commitment to this issue, but here is my question:

What is the US military going to do to make sure that their men and women are safe? Already today I have read that one of the considerations is how to assign barracks. This suggests that homophobia is alive and well and that possibly, while it may be ok to be gay in the military, it will be a lonely life that will ask certain soldiers to prove their allegiance and be reminded every day that they are “different”.  That is not a place where I think anyone would like to find themselves, and certainly doesn’t engender confidence that we can really be who we are.  

Signing papers is a first step. I hope there is a lot of education, training, discipline, and zero-tolerance to back it up to make sure gay and lesbian soldiers are safe and truly feel welcome.

Add Comment
 
 
I’ve been thinking a lot about “the holidays”. It’s nice to hear more and more people saying “happy holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas” (this may change closer to the actual non-orthodox date). I like “happy holidays”  - it’s inclusive of Jewish people who have just finished celebrating Hanukkah, Black people who might be celebrating Kwanzaa, and Muslims who celebrated New Year earlier this month. Which is great. What it doesn’t do, is recognize those who are not celebrating this month. Diwali, for instance, happened in November this year. I doubt we were hearing “happy holidays” then.

So there are two things. The fact that not everyone is celebrating and that, when we get closer to Christmas, “Happy Holidays” often becomes “Merry Christmas”.

To the latter, I note the following: I don’t hear “Happy Eid” or “Happy Hanukkah” or Happy Diwali” expressed to everyone by Muslim, Jewish or Hindu people respectively while they are celebrating. But “Merry Christmas” seems to be sprinkled around liberally. What gives?  You might say it’s because Christmas is part of “Canadian Culture”. But what does that mean? What is now called Canada used to be populated exclusively by First Nations, Aboriginal and Inuit cultures. But Christmas is not from any of these traditions. What still seems to be accepted as Canadian culture is European culture - and for many years (until the 1960’s) immigration policies tried to keep it that way (and in some ways still do). So maybe Christmas was cultural after colonization and before Canada became so multicultural. But now?

Well, the word multicultural says it all, I think. So I think we need to start examining the assumptions we make about the Christmas celebrations.

Let me be clear – I’m not vetoing Christmas, suggesting it not be celebrated, or that people shouldn’t be merry about it. Not at all. I love Christmas! Plus the commercialism alone is hard to escape. But I think in an increasingly multicultural country (with people celebrating many different traditions) the lovely gesture of wishing everyone a “Merry Christmas” is missing the mark, and not recognizing what diversity actually is about.

Not everyone in Canada is celebrating Christmas. “Happy Holidays” addresses that. But what about the people not celebrating at all this month?

Of course I’m not suggesting you try to figure it out (assumptions are never a great way to go),  take a poll, ask before you offer (how awkward!), or that you quell your holiday joy. Here’s my solution to the conundrum: How about saying “Happy Holidays if you are celebrating”. Wishing someone a happy holiday is a great sentiment, and there is an out if it doesn’t apply. No nosey questions or second guessing required. It’s heartfelt and it’s a recognition of difference. It shows some awareness. If you’re celebrating, you’ll receive it. If you’re not – you’ll receive the acknolwedgment.

Four extra words to help further inclusion. Try it. See what happens. 

Add Comment
 
 
I attended the Pride Community Advisory Panel (CAP) consultation with Racialized communities at the 519 Community Centre last night, and I can’t shake the frustration.

There is so much wrong with this situation.

This CAP was not commissioned by Pride Toronto. They are a group of community members and allies committed to hearing the communities’ voices and helping to create change. This is amazing, and they are doing good work. However, organizational change has to happen from within. The people inside have to be up for it – recognize that it’s needed, want to change. I’m not seeing much evidence of that, and this worries me. The CAP was formed outside of Pride Toronto, and Pride Toronto agreed. I would argue that they agreed because their back was against a wall. The last 8 months have not been pretty. Rightly so, there were many questions raised in the room last night about where this will go, if our input will be heard, and what happens next.  Beyond the report and the recommendations – then what?  It’s a good question – but I have to say that I think it’s a question we should be asking ourselves and our communities, not Pride Toronto.

As I listened to many people speak passionately and thoughtfully about the history of disrespect, lack of engagement, and disregard that Pride Toronto has shown Racialized communities and community organizations, a few things strike me.

First, there is such a long history. This is not a new problem. This concern did not rise up this year. There is a traceable history with Blockorama and Blackness Yes and many community organizations that have seen their place at Pride go from (literally) within the centre to the margins. Obviously Pride Toronto doesn’t “get it”. 

Secondly, Pride Toronto has grown from a grass-roots, community-based organization based on resistance and struggle for rights to a corporate entity. This means that money is the bottom line. Getting it - and getting more next time. This is a red flag; there is no room for community engagement when you have sponsors to worry about. 

When you combine corporate mentality with the history of disrespect and disregard, why are we surprised that no one is listening? That no one cares? That the voices that spoke up in the Spring are still speaking, after more of the same occurred again this past Pride?

Let’s not forget that (although we don’t like to talk about it) systemic racism is woven into the fabric of our country. Add that to the mix and our worries about “will this round of talks make a difference” is an even bigger question mark. 

That’s plenty to make me angry, but here is the thing that has me particularly upset: When will we say “enough”?

We are strong people and a strong community. And we know what we want. I sat in the room, listening to calls for justice, understanding, humility, apology, and to make it right. And something nagged at me. The anger boiled up and I thought, why are we still here? Stamping our feet and talking about all the wrong that has been done and what we would like to see to repair it – when it’s been going on for years!  In April at the meeting with Pride Toronto about Blockorama, the theme was “the fire this time”. That fire is fueling the passion at these talks, but I hope that’s not all.

Marginalized groups are the ones who fight for change. I understand this. We are the ones affected and we fight to make things better for ourselves and others. Part of this is raising awareness about what is wrong, because if it doesn’t affect you, if you don’t feel it, then sometimes you can’t see it and you need some help. So we speak up. Sometimes we have allies. Often it works. But there are many effective ways to create change, and I can’t help but wonder how long we are going to rattle this cage until the people inside “get it”.

We know what we want. We are very clear about what Pride means to us, and that Pride Toronto is not living up to that. We are clear that we – the community - are Pride; that Pride is ours. Why does it feel like we are asking (and waiting) for recognition from an entity that is not representing us, and seems like it could care less about us, instead of breaking out and creating the change we want to see?

Last night's meeting was a good forum (if you missed it, or any of the other 5, check out www.communityadvisorypanel.ca and send in your thoughts)  I have confidence that our voices were heard and that our concerns will be reflected in the recommendations to Pride.
And then what?
What happens if there is no significant change, or hint of movement towards it?
What does "the fire this time" look like then?



 

 

 

 

Add Comment
 
(c) 2011 Building Equitable Environments