14 responses so far ↓

• 1 John // Jan 29, 2010 at 11:18 am

  The Daily Show did a pointed critique of this lovely incident.

• 2 Paul // Jan 31, 2010 at 7:23 pm

  Pardon my inability to understand what you are insinuating. Are you being critical of this fellow’s opinion (again, sincerely, I’m slow and fail to understand what you are getting at)

• 3 xJane // Feb 1, 2010 at 9:48 pm

  Nope, not his opinion, merely his failure to put into inoffensive words what his opinion happens to be.

• 4 Paul // Feb 1, 2010 at 10:53 pm

  xJane: Thanks for responding. I really don’t understand why you find this offensive. My son-in-law is black and my daughter always refers to him as being “white-washed,” and things like that. He is a terrific fellow and we all love him very much and really enjoy his company (he’s real smart, congenial, cool, calm, works hard, etc). We talk openly about mixed marriages and why the LDS church had this “policy,” and things like that without there being any offenses taken. He knows that many people do not think well about his marriage to a white woman and things like that. It’s what many aspects of our society is like, and we deal with it. So, when I listened to this fellow I don’t see what the big deal is. President Obama *is* black. There *is* horrific racism in the United States AND President Obama knows this as do we all. So, this fellow’s impression was that (at least for him and according to his perceptions, for some others as well) there didn’t appear to be any vestiges of racism during his address. In other words, ‘Isn’t this wonderful!’ Wow, on YouTube during the election I viewed dastardly statements about how (for the people making the statements) that he’s just going to be a “body-bag president” if he gets elected, further inveighing that they can hardly wait for this to happen. But now many people, although probably not for the ones like these ones I viewed and listened to on YouTube, but at least for the ‘soft racists’ (and there are a lot of these in every walk of life, as well as in the LDS church — I know a lot of them!) maybe they are becoming ‘educated’ and are beginning to see the error of their ways.
  What this fellow said is a good thing and I for one was please to hear him say it because many people *don’t* see President Obama like a ‘normal’ president because he is a black man. But they need to change their thinking and get with the times.
  I think President Obama, if for anything else, whether you are a Democrat, Republican, or whatever, whether you think his policies are right or wrong, if anything what he has done is *begin* put to rest in the minds of many ‘soft racist’ that blacks are inferior to whites, a stance, unfortunately, too many still harbor in their minds and hearts.
  Sorry for the long response, but again thanks for your clarifying what I didn’t quite know for sure what the premiss of the blog entry really meant. But this is my opinion on the matter notwithstanding. I hope no offense is taken.

• 5 Paul // Feb 1, 2010 at 10:56 pm

  Oops.. “that blacks are NOT inferior to whites”

  And this is NOT a Freudian slip!

• 6 Paul // Feb 1, 2010 at 10:58 pm

  No, I said it right the first time.

  It’s too late and I’m too old!

  Good night.

• 7 xJane // Feb 2, 2010 at 2:10 pm

  Chris Matthews was speaking from a position of white male privilege when he said that he “forgot” that Obama was black. His statement implied that Obama’s race got in the way of his rhetoric in the past, but in this instance, his rhetoric was presented in such a way that Matthews was able to appreciate it on its merits, rather than on the race of the person speaking (and since white is the norm, this further implies that the rhetoric and opinions expressed by anyone who is not white or male are suspect—and this is often the case). Matthews is a symptom of a society which is far from “post racial” and his statement is an admission that he cannot accept opinions from people who are outside the “norm” (of white and male).

  Race issues should be spoken openly of and, if I believed for one instance that Chris Matthews meant to say, “As a person who lives in a racist society like ours, I am shamed to admit that I was able to listen to our president speaking and, for a moment, focus on something besides his race. It lasted only a moment and it gave me hope that perhaps some day our children will not be judged on the color of their skin but on the content of their arguments (to paraphrase a great man whose skin tone was not similar to my own),” I would be among the first to stand up and applaud him. Instead, he tellingly spoke from his position of privilege while at the same time not being aware of his privilege. That doesn’t help anyone.

• 8 xJane // Feb 2, 2010 at 5:07 pm

  I’d also like to delve a little bit into the assumptions inherent behind your assertion that “[your] son-in-law is black”. From this, I presume that you, yourself (and your daughter and therefore your wife) are white—otherwise your son’s race would not be as important. I also presume that you are in a heterosexual relationship—you have raised your daughter to place value on such relationships and on the institution of marriage. I further presume that you are male, but this assumption is related more to your screenname, even if it is affirmed by your words.

  As a white, heterosexual, male, I would submit that you are likely in the same position as Mr. Matthews: you are a victim of a non-post-racial, white-normative, heterosexist, paternalistic society. You sound as though you have worked hard to overcome this and for that you should be acknowledged.

  Also, as an aside: I don’t find Matthews’ words offensive so much as I find them ignorant.

• 9 Paul // Feb 2, 2010 at 5:20 pm

  After reading your response (again, thank you for responding!) I listened to the video clip again. At the very first I *now* could get the impression that he was coming across as an arrogant *white* man; AND *maybe* even racist, because I think there is a distinction between arrogance and being racist, i.e., you can be one but not the other, as well as both at the same time. Anyway, as he went on and spoke more I must say that I really enjoyed (and agreed with) his commentary.

  About your comment:
  “His statement implied that Obama’s race got in the way of his rhetoric in the past, but in this instance, his rhetoric was presented in such a way that Matthews was able to appreciate it on its merits, rather than on the race of the person speaking”
  Well, I think that President Obama’s race, in the past, and even now for too many errant people has gotten and gets in the way of realizing what an incredible person we have for a President (can you even begin to imagine G.W. Bush speaking with the degree of intelligence and demeanor as did President Obama?). But this speech seemed to have a watershed effect in beginning to put this issue to rest. I think a lot of ‘soft racists’ are getting an ‘education.’
  Proceeding:
  “Matthews is a symptom of a society which is far from “post racial””
  I would tend to agree with this although I don’t know enough about the man to assert that he is a racist.

  Coninuing:
  “and his statement is an admission that he cannot accept opinions from people who are outside the “norm” (of white and male).”
  I really don’t get the impression that he is making such an admission of himself, but rather stating that others have and do.

  Continuing:
  “As a person who lives in a racist society like ours, I am shamed to admit that I was able to listen to our president speaking and, for a moment, focus on something besides his race. It lasted only a moment and it gave me hope…”
  Well, my comment about this is that you should have been his editorial adviser. This is far superior than how he began his comments.

  But then you said, “Instead, he tellingly spoke from his position of privilege while at the same time not being aware of his privilege. That doesn’t help anyone.” Okay, he’s white and *unfortunately* that makes him, and me and most everyone else who is white in America, privileged. This *is* a fact, albeit an very sad one indeed. So if this is something that everyone is aware of, I just fail to see what there is to criticize, except perhaps his demeanor at the very beginning of his commentary, and perhaps he could have advanced his opinion more like the way you suggested he should have.

  I suppose this suggests that a lot of us are still very sensitive to this whole racial issue, especially with this, apparently for some, anomaly of having not just a black man for president of the United States, but an intelligent, amazing one as well. I often thought that the American people don’t deserve a President like Mr. Obama — he’s too good for them to appreciate what they have; it’s like casting pearls before swine.

  Maybe I’ll broach this topic with my daughter and her husband. I appreciate your opinion and recognize it’s validity, but she and him are of your generation (I’m supposing) and it would be interesting to hear what they have to say about this as well. Hey, maybe it’s just a case of the way the younger generation thinks, and finds it difficult to grapple with the memes of people from the older one and the way they in which they express themselves. Heck, I got wrapped on the knuckles by my daughter because I said “Oriental” instead of “Asian.” What?! “What’s wrong with saying ‘Oriental’? That’s not a pejorative term… is it?” “Hmm… you say ‘Asian’ now, dad. Trust me, don’t say ‘Oriental’ just as you wouldn’t say ‘Negro’ anymore.”

  But we both still laugh about the time when my daughter and I were helping my mother (God rest her gentle and caring soul!) by going to the grocery store for her and she said, “Oh, and when you’re there get me a few pounds of those ***Brazil nuts*** — she didn’t say “Brazil nuts!!!” What a generation. Thank goodness it’s passing into the dusty pages of history.

• 10 Paul // Feb 2, 2010 at 6:51 pm

  Our messages must of crossed at the same time!

  Further to your most recent reply, your paragraph one assertions are correct on all accounts. And sincere thanks for the acknowledgement of having “worked hard to overcome,” although I may not agree totally with what you think I have to or have ‘overcome.’

  First of all, I don’t understand what you mean by “non-post-racial” differing from “post-racial.” Perhaps you could explain the difference. As for the “white-normative” comment I would definitely affirm that I have been and perhaps still am a victim because who can really know what the impact of deleterious things bred in the bone from a very early age has on the sub-conscious. Although as for my every day conscious thinking I hope that I have worked my way out of that terrible era. Having a wonderful son-in-law who is black has certainly helped.

  As for the “heterosexist” assertion I am indeed heterosexual and a keen supporter of that ‘life style’ or state of innateness of being or whatever you think it is or however you want to describe it. There are ‘gays’ in my neighborhood (I only know of males). I live right next door to an older, ‘gay’ man. When we speak to each other I do not think of him as being any different than any other person. He’s a neighbor like the person on the other side of me and that’s it. I’d help him out like I would anyone else, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah. The only thing that is *different* is that I don’t think that the relationship he had (now deceased) with his partner could ever have been considered a ‘marriage.’ On that *one* principal *only* I do not and will never concede. ‘Marriage’ is ordained of God and ‘marriage’ is between males and females only. I don’t care if it’s one male to one or twenty dozen women, or for that matter one woman to twenty dozen men (think biology — stamens and a pistol; although I don’t think God would agree with me about this aspect of ‘marriage’) so long as they are sexually conjoining as differing genders . I know that even heterosexual males have anal sex with women just like gay males do with their partners, but I am not in favor that either. HOWEVER, what men and women do heterosexually in the privacy of their own homes doesn’t publicly and legally influence young minds to consummate relationships that are aberrations of nature. No argument, law, or whatever will make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. You cannot procreate our species with male + male or female + female. The human biological system is not set up that way and no amount of modern, scientific or social manipulation of that system justifies a new definition of ‘marriage.’ Even sterile male and female couples are within the paradigm of procreation even though they cannot reproduce. So, having written a lot of words, I don’t consider myself of victim of “heterosexuality” — I am a proponent of it.

  About the assumption of being a victim of a “paternalistic society,” hmm… yeah, I suppose. I was raised by paternalistic parents (father more than mother) and we all know about the paternalism of a lot of mainstream churches (religions). So, I think a lot of us are and have been victimized by this to some degree. I don’t know how you absolutely define “paternalism,” but for me it most definitely has it’s place when raising children, but just as with any organic organism that grows and matures, there is a process of weaning and letting go. Although I think we would both agree that there are a lot of aspects found in some institutions within our society such as most governments and some religions that want to keep us in line, under their thumb, and in the dark ‘for our own good — of course.’

  As far as Matthew’s comments being more ignorant than offensive, I too am guilty of this. Unlike some of the true hallmarks of stupidity, at least I’m smart enough to know I’m not very bright and have a lot to learn from either the very young or very aged — any person, in fact, while attempting to discern with my mind and heart, truth, (with a small letter ‘t’) as we all think we understand it.

• 11 xJane // Feb 2, 2010 at 7:01 pm

  I think “racist” carries with it a set of heavy society cues that makes us demonize the racist and therefore distance ourselves from things that we do that are racist. So, perhaps I should’ve titled this post “I Forgot This White Dude Acted Racist”. I am white. I have lived with that privilege my whole live. I often speak from that privilege (although I try to ensure that when I do, I am doing it to help the underprivileged). I do racist things, just like Mr. Matthews. When I do, I hope that someone calls me out on it and reminds me that I’m speaking from a position of privilege.

  I will also say that I just came out of a class on racism in society, so I’m more sensitive than I might otherwise be to this.

  It is entirely possible that Matthews was being far more meta than I’m giving him credit for; but I see no evidence to support that conclusion. Most television pundits speak from their position of white male privilege with no knowledge that either privilege exists. Exceptions include Jon Stewart, who often acknowledges his privilege so that his audience is aware and knows that he is aware; and Stephen Colbert, who acts from an even greater privilege, to mock that privilege and make his audience aware of it in that fashion.

• 12 Jana // Feb 3, 2010 at 6:35 pm

  Paul:
  I think you spend an awful lot of time thinking about your neighbors’ sexual behaviors. Euw.

• 13 Paul // Feb 3, 2010 at 10:24 pm

  @Jana: I think you may be spending too much time (even one second would be too much) thinking about how you think I think.

  I do think (and I will admit that perhaps too much time is being devoted to this particular form of exercise) , but believe me when I say my thoughts are centered upon far more interesting things than my neighbor’s (or anyone else’s) sexual behaviors.

  There are ‘dirty old men’ and just plain ‘old men.’ The difference between the two is that in the latter ones’ case, the highlight of their day isn’t sex, but rather a good bowel movement.

  Now that’s deserving of a “Euw.”

• 14 Conrad (Ex-Mormon) // Mar 10, 2010 at 1:47 pm

  I am a white and while I know for a fact it will be forever impossible to get over some of my impressions of low class whites, low class blacks, low class latino’s, low class anything and some other racial barriers. I voted for Barrack and I usually lean more on the right side of politics. I voted for him because I believed him. I know he is black. I know he can do the job. I also know I probably shouldn’t walk around lower compton. It is full of black people and I’m pretty sure they will do some pretty bad things to me because I’m white. Does that make me racist?

Leave a Comment