It's Easy to Call John Derbyshire a Racist

Guest Post from Renee of Womanist Musings

John Derbyshire, a former writer for the conservative magazine The National Review was fired after he published a piece in Taki's Magazine entitled: The Talk: NonBlack Version.  Derbyshire was inspired to write this article because of the conversations that Black parents are having with their sons in the wake of the murder of Trayvon Martin. I am going to share with a small portion of Derbyshire's advice to his children:

(10a) Avoid concentrations of blacks not all known to you personally.
(10b) Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods.
(10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with blacks on that date (neglect of that one got me the closest I have ever gotten to death by gunshot).
(10d) Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of blacks.
(10e) If you are at some public event at which the number of blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.
(10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by black politicians.
(10g) Before voting for a black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a white.
(10h) Do not act the Good Samaritan to blacks in apparent distress, e.g., on the highway.
(10i) If accosted by a strange black in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving.
(11) The mean intelligence of blacks is much lower than for whites. The least intelligent ten percent of whites have IQs below 81; forty percent of blacks have IQs that low. Only one black in six is more intelligent than the average white; five whites out of six are more intelligent than the average black. These differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. They are reflected in countless everyday situations. “Life is an IQ test.”
(12) There is a magnifying effect here, too, caused by affirmative action. In a pure meritocracy there would be very low proportions of blacks in cognitively demanding jobs. Because of affirmative action, the proportions are higher. In government work, they are very high. Thus, in those encounters with strangers that involve cognitive engagement, ceteris paribus the black stranger will be less intelligent than the white. In such encounters, therefore—for example, at a government office—you will, on average, be dealt with more competently by a white than by a black. If that hostility-based magnifying effect (paragraph 8) is also in play, you will be dealt with more politely, too. “The DMV lady“ is a statistical truth, not a myth.
(13) In that pool of forty million, there are nonetheless many intelligent and well-socialized blacks. (I’ll use IWSB as an ad hoc abbreviation.) You should consciously seek opportunities to make friends with IWSBs. In addition to the ordinary pleasures of friendship, you will gain an amulet against potentially career-destroying accusations of prejudice.

At first The National Review simply tried to separate itself from Derbyshire's article, but decided to fire him after public outrage was evident. There have been several articles in major news outlets like The Guardian and Huffpo, as well as commentary at CNN, declaring Derbyshire's piece to be racist. Anger at this piece is the quintessential White liberal response, and comes with the added bonus of being able to separate oneself from Derbyshire and declare that since you would never dare to express these kinds of idea publicly that you are not a racist.


It is absolutely impossible to read even a small section of The Talk: NonBlack Version, without declaring it racist. Socially there is very rarely difficulty calling out the extreme overt examples of racism, in large part because racism has come to mean to many: A noose, a burning cross, brilliant White sheets and in some cases the N word [note: I say some cases, as there are plenty of White people who actively believe that they are oppressed, because of an inability to use that word without facing some form of social censure].  What gets ignored is the systemic ways in which racism works and the everyday acts of covert racism that negatively impact the lives of people of colour.

Challenging racism as an institution is beyond the understanding and desire of many, because it would mean the eradication of White privilege. They would rather live in a world in which they can co-opt pre 1963 Dr. King, and wax poetically about a colour blind society, while our children are being undereducated in broken down schools, and shot for daring to wear a hoodie at night. This is the world as it really is, and why I simply cannot take comfort in any kind of discipline that Derbyshire is facing.

Reading his article, what I felt was not outrage, because this is exactly the kind of thought pattern and behaviour that Whiteness has normalized.  People are simply upset that Derbyshire had the nerve to air his dirty laundry in public, rather than internalizing his racist ideas.  The world is still very much segregated, with Sunday being the most segregated day in North America.  If you doubt that, walk into a Black church and then a White church.  Blacks and Whites who supposedly worship the same God don't even pray together, and yet we are told that racism is a thing of the past and that we are all equal now, with exception of course, of a few isolated incidents.  White on Black violence, even when it is continually perpetrated by the police, is always constructed as isolated, [Oscar Grant and Sean Bell] because White people are individuals, but the moment a Black person behaves in a manner which we have deemed socially unacceptable, ze is suddenly a representative of their race.

To bring up the systemic ways in which racism effects the lives of people of colour is deemed racist because interjects the much taboo subject of race into a conversation.  We cannot even talk about racism, except to view it as a thing of the past, and yet we have White liberal after White liberal decrying the language Derbyshire used, while not holding themselves accountable for the multitude of ways in which they uphold and maintain White supremacy.  Today, racism is seen as a card that Blacks employ to achieve an unfair advantage over decent God fearing White folks. The conversation has been so twisted that we now have White people claiming that they are victims of racism, when people of colour react with righteous rage to the ongoing assault against their persons.

It's easy to call Derbyshire a racist, and that is why it is happening.  If it meant a true assault on White supremacy, what you would be hearing right now is crickets and not outrage.  Nothing this man wrote in his column is in the least bit surprising.  I found that I could not even drum up outrage, because I am so accustomed to living with this sort of racism day after day.  Whether it is the White person who seeks to turn me into their very own Black BFF [yes we're collectors items], or commentary on how "articulate" I am -- racism is a part of my lived experience -- and has been since I was a very young girl. No amount of liberal hand wringing is going to change that and so I will just nod at the commentary and accept that there will be no substantive change in my lifetime. Today it's not the Derbyshire's of the world that we have to fear, but those who declare themselves to be decidedly not racist, even as they do everything in their power to ensure that yet another generation of Black children grows up with the stigma of being "othered" in a White supremacist world.

UT SucKKKs...

More like the Daily Texan and its 'cartoonist'  Stephanie Eisner who drew this full of racist fail cartoon with their vanillacentric take on the ongoing Trayvon Martin case.

Yes TransGriot readers, they are nominated for this week's TransGriot Shut Up Fool award. 

Yo Stephanie, don't you have a UT College Republicans meeting you should be attending with Lauren Pierce and the rest of those burnt orange pointed hood wearing Longhorns?

Oh yeah, if you're going to conservasmear somebody, spell their name correctly. It's T-R-A-Y-V-O-N.

And check out the vanillacentric privilege permeating the comment threads of this Houston Press story on the offensive cartoon.

Why #teamambernicole Matters And The Silence Of White Women

Another insightful post from Renee, my fave mommy blogger and the editrix of Womanist Musings.    
Last week, I wrote about a 14 year old girl named Amber Cole, who became an internet sensation, after a video of her performing oral sex on a boy went viral.There can be no doubt that Cole's life will never be the same and we know that once something goes online, there is no way to stop it from circulating.  Every time someone views this video, Cole will be re-victimized. Thankfully, the boys involved in this incident have been arrested.

Amber only consented to performing oral sex to attempt to win back the affections of her ex-boyfriend, she most certainly did not consent to have the act filmed and released on the internet.  The boys used Cole. This tells me that Amber has a self esteem problem, and the last thing that you do when someone already has a negative self view, is to shame them into oblivion.

It would be one thing if Amber had consented within the framework of a reciprocal loving relationship, but that is not the case.  I don't really find her behaviour all that surprising, when society invests so much time teaching young Black girls that they are without value and not deserving of love.  When many heard about this incident or viewed the video, though it constituted child pornography, all they saw was a fast ass little girl and not a reflection of the way in which Black womanhood has been devalued.  Since the arrest of the boys involved, some have even gone as far as to claim that Amber should be charged with something herself, as though public shaming has not been more than enough punishment.  Amber even had to change her school, and that is only the first example of how this video will follow her through life.    

When I wrote about this last week, a commenter brought up the issue of lack of coverage of the incident in the feminist sphere. I know that as bloggers, we have limited resources and we have to make careful consideration over what we bring attention to, but the glaring silence about Amber Cole is painful.  Black women have spoken up in droves to claim #teamambercole, as a method of rejecting the slut shaming and the cyber bullying involved in this incident. The silence of our supposed White female activist allies speaks loudly.

Black women have spoken out repeatedly about the various ways in which our stories differ from that of White women and this often reduced to us just being angry.  When incidents like this happen and the response from White women is silence, it simply stands as further evidence that when they advocate for women's issues, what they really mean anything that effects them and not us.  If women truly mattered, the defense of Amber Cole, would not be left solely for Black women to undertake.

Amber Cole matters because all Black women have at some point been subject to such vile exploitation.
It may not manifest in the same fashion that it did with Cole, but it is an inevitability.  To be Black and female is to be constantly under attack.  Despite the fact that Black men must negotiate racism, when it comes to gender, there is no doubt that they exist with privilege.  Despite the fact that White women must negotiate sexism in our patriarchal world, their racial privilege means that they will never experience it the way that we do, and that in and of itself is privilege - a privilege born of White supremacy.  There is not one group that completely understands the plight of the Black female and this is borne out by their lack of confrontation or defense of us when we are in need. 

It doesn't matter whether the issue is Amber Cole or Michelle Obama, no one has a vested interest in truly being an ally to us, because that requires confronting privilege.  White women's organizing groups make a point of arguing against sexism, even in cases where the woman they are defending is absolutely vile.  There is never any shortage of defense for people like Sarah Palin, who is clearly anti-woman because attacking sexism aimed at her is considered necessary to fight patriarchy.  This same concept however, is not applicable to Black women, even when they are the victims of clear exploitation.

I am firmly #teamambercole because if Black women don't stand beside her and declare that cyber bullying is absolutely wrong, and that slut shaming a young girl for failing to make a wise decision is indefensible, then no one will. The only people we can reliably count on is each other. I have been told many times since I started Womanist Musings that my approach is divisive, and that I cause harm to the delicate fabric of female solidarity. If being angry at being neglected, when we are so clearly being attacked is considered divisive, then you don't really have a vested interest in women.  If you can ignore what happened to Amber Cole, and think it is okay to go about your day without defending a 14 year old girl who was used, but then defend someone like Palin, who has done nothing but harm women, then what are you doing isn't really about advocating on behalf women, but advocating on behalf of White female empowerment.

It seems to that White women want equality with White men, and far too many have decided that the best way to make that happen is to either stand directly on our shoulders, or to hand us over lock stock and barrel to patriarchy as a replacement. You're silence offers Black women up to be abused, exploited and actively oppressed in your staid.  We shall not suffer so that you can walk with freedom and we shall not be silent so that your voices and your lives constitute the entirety of the female experience. #teamambercole matters and until you can see why, we have very little to talk about.