California State University, Dominguez Hills
University of Wisconsin, Parkside
Latest update: December 30, 1998
Faculty on the Site.
Site Index

Jeanne at jcurran@csudh.edu
Subject line: jjex2: racism
First message line: Your name and class.

Source materials for the following questions will be found at Color as a Barrier to Forum Access, Forum Control, based on readings of Mann and Zatz, Images of Color, Images of Crime, Roxbury Publishing, 1998, Introduction and Chapter 1: "The Power of Images." Be sure to include your name!
Try to answer in 25 words or so. Make each answer integral, so that I can read it without reference to the exercise or the question itself.

1. Why does Derrick Bell say "they would have invented us" if we hadn't existed, of Blacks? (Images of Color, p.vii and lecture notes)

   So that they could make our behavior the model that they could agree they would never engage in. That's easier than trying to agree on the parameters of behavior you would engage in. They make it easy for themselves to have someone to be better than.

2. How does this concept of someone to" be better than" fit "the stubborn child" orientation? (lecture)

   Labelling the child as a "stubborn child" allows the same kind of dehumanization that occurs in the labelling of any Outsider, not accepted into the privileged group.

3. In Keith's project, The Violent Minority, he seeks data on our perception of the validity of this labelling as "violent." William Oliver published The Violent Social World of Black Men. How do you perceive this "violent" stereotype as affecting the social construction of the identity of the "stubborn child" of 1999?

   The "violent minority" becomes a special group for "black male" children, and to some extent for "black female" children in which the popular culture demonizes them. The issue then becomes one of intersectionality. "Appropriate" behavior will be defined by middle class privileged standards that involve superficial politeness and and relatively passive behavior towards authorities. Violence will be seen as that term is understood by the general populace. That means that a 3rd grader hitting another 3rd grader with his/her lunch bag could, and in some cases has been, construed as "violent" when members of this "violent minority" are involved.

   The crux of the matter lies in how we measure what we claim to find. If we define one 3rd grader slugging another with a lunchbag as violent, then we will find much more violence than if we had a more stringent definition. And if we tend to expect children of color, especially males, to be more violent, then we will probably note such actions more readily when they engage in them, as predicted. Did you ever notice how once you look up "egregious" enough times to learn its meaning you start to see it used in many places you'd never noticed before. We tend to see what we are looking for.

   That's not so hard to grasp in terms of measuring variables and doing research. Trouble is the privileging of subjectivity means that the unstated assumption behind most of what we observe is that our perception is normal, and we tend to see behavior around us from our own perspective. If we wouldn't do it, it's not normal. So the one who did it must be "violent." Another variation on "They ain't us.

   The interpretation of acts of violence was particularly harmful in the "stubborn child" instance because women were primarily in charge of children, and women were taught to be passive, avoid any display of violence. So the standard applied to the children was a "gendered" standard. In the real world, boys were expected to "fight it out," not run to mother or teacher.

4. How does the problem of "voice" enter this issue of the "stubborn child?"

   Because the child was often of a minority group or impoverished no one listened to the child. Age operated against good faith listening. He was "too young" to know. Race operated against good faith listening. "People of color" were not generally amongst those making the decisions, exercising the authority. Thus, others decided what was good for the child, without granting any voice to the child. Today courts try to avoid this by appointing counsel for the children.

5. Give examples of institutional discrimination that might affect the "stubborn child." (Images of Color, p. 4)

   The child would have been expected to be "on time" to school and to classes. And he/she would have been expected to remain alert throughout instruction. The child's failure to be "on time" and alert could well be due to hunger and irregular patterns of sleep. Yet privileging of the perspective of authorities can lead us to view this behavior as willful and indicative of future refusals to respect duly legitimate authority. The rigid rules do the harm. No alternatives that might permit the child to fit in were explored or offered. But the rules were violated. If the child is under investigation by the "authority," whoever it might be, these facts might be interpreted to portend violence.