A Cognitively Promiscuous Week

There were several happenings last week that stuck.  Imma see if I can wrap ’em up neatly for y’all.

1.  According to a Study by an asshole, Black Women are “Rated Less Attractive” than Other Women 

I often say it’s amazing what people think they can say to you.  In an article for Psychology Today, Satoshi Kanazawa waxes scientific with tables and graphs and “mean physical attractiveness” indices, attempting to obscure the inherent bullshit in his study.  I thought we’d already done and summarily dismissed this kind of racism — using pseudo-science to support the absurd notion that Blacks are inferior in every way not just to whites anymore, but to everybody.  Black women, even the “best” of us, can’t land a man to save our lives.  And we’re perceived as uglier than everyone else to boot.  I won’t dignify the Psychology Today post with a superfluous defense of Black women’s beauty.  I will, however, note how insidious this kind of shit is.  Although Psychology Today hasn’t the reach or credibility of, say, the American Medical Association or the like, the deep-seated othering embedded in Kanazawa’s article was researched, edited, and published.  Folks will read this article, and some will believe it, and the cycle of “black is wack” will continue.

In a bitchass, but also wise move, psychologytoday.com has since removed the original post.  It was bad for business, I suppose.  That it was ever there in the first place though is telling.  This questioning of Black legitimacy is part of the fabric of our great Nation.  It is the part we tend to gloss over in our understanding of who Americans are, what America is, how the America we know came to be.  Initially, we questioned the very person-hood of Blacks.  And when we decided reluctantly that Blacks were in fact “persons,” and indeed deserving of all the rights and privileges the quality of being human accords, we then questioned their ability to intellectually conceive of, well, anything intellectual.  They weren’t smart enough to govern themselves, or anyone else for that matter.  And “science” supported those faulty claims too.

It’s easy for Psychology Today to remove the post from its site, perhaps as a way of punishing the author or as a self-correction for publishing inflammatory garbage in the first place.  What’s more difficult to remove, however, is the hubris –the entitlement– that affords this work the light of day in the 21st century.  What grand sense of enlightenment is bestowed upon the masses when we resolve to research the attractiveness of Black American women?  Who benefits when we learn that, scientifically, Black women are less desirable than all other women?  No one does.  The study is yet another advancement of the narrative we’ve heard and witnessed and attempted for centuries to abate:  that we are less than our worth.  There have been victories in this fight, but the work continues.  The President of the United States may be Black, but even he had to prove, in long form no less, that one could be Black and American and President of America at the same fucking time.

2.  Professor West vs. President Obama

The debate on Black leadership wages on, as does the face of Black leadership apparently.  Last week, Professor West said some pretty fool-hardy shit about President Obama.  In my view, his characterization of the President was incendiary and counter-productive to his cause.  All of this nonsense about Obama not returning West’s calls and failing to get him tickets to the inauguration was petty, and beneath the Professor’s dignified intellectual position.  You’ll get no argument from me there.  West’s point, on the other hand, was spot on.

One of the questions I asked my students on their final exam was: Do you think a minority agenda (racial/cultural/ethnic etc) is helped or hindered by capitalism (or capitalist ideology)? Their answers speak to the legitimacy of West’s policy and ideological criticism of Obama.  Personal affronts aside, I don’t think old school Black leaders (and I don’t mean that disparagingly) were necessarily wrong or myopic to expect a certain pointed focus from Barack Obama to minority communities. We assumed, perhaps immaturely and without regard to realpolitik, that because of his background and his own progressive positions and rhetoric, Obama would be a different type of politician. We assumed that he could in some meaningful way dismantle the power structure that keeps Blacks disproportionately poor and disadvantaged — because it’s about personal accountability and all, but it’s also systemic and institutional.

Obviously, West loses the credibility of his argument in calling the President “a black mascot of Wall Street oligarchs and a black puppet of corporate plutocrats.”  But President Obama is now part of the American Institution.  He can chip away as best he can at its unsavory aspects. But his job is to see that the Institution perseveres. And given that capitalism is sustained on the backs of most folks, Obama’s pragmatism — his seeming aloofness with regard to the issues of the poor — unfortunately is par for the course. It is unfair and unrealistic to expect that President Obama might be able to fix the deeply, deeply embedded problems Black Americans face in America. However, the President has the biggest bully pulpit we’ve ever seen, giving him the ability to address more directly the issues of the poor and the disenfranchised — of which Blacks make up a solid majority.  I can appreciate Obama’s professorial and diplomatic pragmatism, but West and these old school Black leaders are right in a sense — Obama ought to stiffen his spine.  But he can’t.  To do so is to take a big, black ass bite of the hand that feeds him.  I know our Black bourgeoisie is comprised of post-Civil Rights Movement Blacks, and we think our era is “different.”  But let’s not be so hasty in assailing our rightful disappointment with the powers that be, which now includes black faces.  In short, the system is the system, and Obama is President of the system.  For cats like West who’ve railed against overt and institutionalized racism for years when it wasn’t personally or socially expedient, seeing a Black man at the helm of this same system that still crushes poor, voiceless folks, hurts.  Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade — you don’t gotta call it dirty names.  But you gotta call it like you see it.

3. Beyonce and 21st Century Feminism

Bey’s new single, “Girls Run the World,” doesn’t inspire me to shake a tail feather as much as “Single Ladies” did.  I’m pretty sure I won’t rush the dance-floor for “Girls” like I did for “Upgrade U” and “Get Me Bodied.”  But I also have no problem dissociating myself from the hoes and the bitches and the groupies that most cats rap and sing about on contemporary radio.

Beyonce Knowles is no bell hooks.  Likewise, these little girls aren’t great scholars with any meaningful interest in Audre Lorde’s or Patricia Hill Collins’ powerful feminist musings.  Bey meets girls where they are, and provides them with the armor they need in the 21st century:  Femininity, power, self-respect, and self-determination.  In other words:  if you got a man, great!  Don’t sacrifice your dignity for that cat though.  And if you don’t have a man, great!  You are enough all by yourself.   So don’t sacrifice your dignity to get one.

Bey isn’t going around unshaven and shit to lend credence to her particular brand of girl power.  She asserts in her own way that little girls can be ladies and all that entails, and still be bawse, runnin shit too.

As academics, we see the world normatively — operating from “should be” and “ought to be” perspectives.  Sometimes it is what it is though.  We’d love it if 9 year olds girls would look to Patricia Hill Collins to explain feminist thought and sexuality, but they aint though.  I’m glad Beyonce speaks to them in a language they understand, and I suspect they are stronger with her than they are without her.

4.  The Rapture

A guy — the rapture guy —  in California thought it was laughable that folks were predicting the world would end in 2012.  On his biblical authority, the end of days was slated for May 21st, 2011.  Yes, last Saturday.  I’m assuming I didn’t get in cause I failed to RSVP.  I’m terrible with those things.  I, like you, was “left behind”.

I don’t do religion.  I understand why people do, and I respect those people.  I’ll just practice the golden rule and respond to the spirit that thrives within me, instead of the guy — the rapture guy or any other — who claims to know what the Creator has in store.  On Saturday night, I didn’t fret about the hereafter.  Instead, I toasted a dry martini to the only Rapture I respect — Ms. Anita’s.

And if Saturday night had turned out to be the end of days, I was ok with where me and the good lord stood.  I didn’t need the rapture guy — or any other — to scare me to my knees.


About moniquealicia

M.A.G. is a doctoral student at Howard University. She resides in the Washington, DC metro area, and is passionate about her love of family and friends, politics and conversation, and the exceptional meal. View all posts by moniquealicia

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: