#the causal racism continues to be excused by some of you

[muncedes]

alonso continuing to find a way to disrespect lewis in every single interview at his life alert age is why i have never and will never be one of the “they still have respect for each other” person bc the truth is lewis will continue to advocate for himself while continuing to respect everyone else while drivers and ppl like alonso are still bitter about the career and success he’s had continue to target and belittle him in the name of “friendly competition” when it’s very clearly rooted in racism and jealousy yet some of you eat it up

[clandestine-j]

okay, still can't access my interview tumblr so I'mma say it here, due to some things I've seen in the tag.

Lets go!

Now, one post I saw, talked about how fans (mainly Louis fans) wanted to pretend like the show runners and etc, didn't say they would revisit ep 5. And while that might be true, I'm not one of them. I'll be honest on my feelings about it.

If they change it, I think it's a bull-shit cop out and I've be heavily disappointed with interview if they went that route. Why? Because I'm tired of black people and poc being made liars and etc! Oh, it's not about race you say? YES IT IS. IT'S ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT RACE IN THE AMC. THEY MENTION IT, THEY MAKE A POINT TO MENTION.

I have consumed enough media about black people and black men being made lairs. I have consumed enough media of black women being maligned.

SICK OF IT.

That's one half of it. The only half, is the main reason why I stopped reading the book series. I wasn't a Lestat fan. In fact, the Lestat I cared about seeing grow and etc, was dropped in favor of making him this perfect godly man at the expense of dropping Louis.

And that brings me to Lestat fans. I want the drop to be real because I'm sick of Lestat discounting everything that Louis says, by calling him a liar. That is why I did not continue the book series. Because anything bad Lestat does, can be excused with, well, Louis is lying. It's lazy story telling to me. But mainly.

The drop was the only time I saw Lestat fans (and more so speaking of the show) have to accept and talk about what Lestat did. I'll be honest, I didn't need the drop to feel some type of way about Lestat. I felt that every single time, he dismissed what his partner, A BLACK MAN FELT. Lestat violence was clear to me and made me feel a way, when he was completely READY to make his BLACK husband, be his VALET, so he could see an opera.

Do you know how fucked up that is? Do you not understand that I'd would've left the relationship in a heartbeat? Like why would you put your partner through that? Like fucking hell. That's what was hurtful.

And while Lestat will do long discourse about how Claudia or Louis is the issue, there, weren't, long detailed post about how that was fucked of Lestat to do. The causal racism that Lestat is willing to benefit from and be apart of, no deep thoughts on that.

There should've been essay's on essay's on how telling your black partner that you want him to be your fucking valet to a racist opera house to make YOU happy. When Louis expressed his feelings for Lestat and Lestat laughs? Oh, he's so cute and funny. But this is a character people call emotional closed off (Louis), opening himself up and GETTING LAUGHED AT. But then Louis will get picked at by fans for never saying I love you.

He opened himself to asking his partner if he's good enough and he gets laughed at. Everyone will talk about the 'of course' Lestat says when he's lying to himself but not the minute before, when he laughed in his husbands face. And do ya'll know how hard is for a black man to open himself up like that? Only to be laughed at. Or the non-discriminating scene, no long post about how it's been years but Lestat still doesn't CARE to understand the racism and nastiness that Louis is going through. He just doesn't care. And that is violence to me.

So, I always knew that they would revisit ep 5 but I still think it's a bullshit cop out to change it.

I'm the biggest bo bo the fool bc I still ship it. But I don't need to make excuses to do so. I still love the fucking toxic mess but the fans...it's always the fans.

[slingsendarrows]

I have coloreds in my family😒😒

Let me preface by saying Duncan, British Columbia is a predominantly white city. So much so when a person of color, especially a black person, moves into town the attention and active noticing is palpable. This is not necessarily an issue because headphones exist, my playlist is fire and my ignore game is always on 💯. I stare right ahead and go about my business as if my blackness does not matter (it does) and make no obeisance with regards to comforting the Whites with my presence.

My race experiences in western Canada have been more about willful ignorance than stupid hate. I’ve moved in majority white spaces most of my life and on most days, we good. I don't feel anxiety or tension with regards to the space I occupy and how I move in it. However, some experiences leave you questioning your senses and the limitations of logic and reason.

I recently took a part-time job at the local liquor store. Needless to say, I am the only black employee and in addition to the First Nations lady, the only other person of color. Today a customer dropped by to make his selection of alcoholic purchases, and as I was ringing him up, he decided to strike up a conversation. Most of these interactions involve asking, "Is that all for you? Did you find what you needed today?" Followed by bland responses such as "Yes, I did. Thank you!" and "What dreary weather we're having."

But today was different. This disheveled gentleman started off by saying, “So, how long have you been in Duncan?” Subtext: “You’re a Black I haven’t seen before. I make it a point of knowing all the Blacks because you know, I’m a White who is down with Blacks and I need all Blacks to know I am racially/culturally aware. At first my dumbass was unaware of what was happening and figured this was going to be regular cashier/customer banter, so I responded, "The first time or this time around? I just moved back to the island." Which of course he ignored, barrelling onward to his main point, "There are not a lot of colored people in town, and I usually know when there are new dark people." That's when I clued into the fact I was dealing with a particular level of white ignorance and casual racism.

"I grew up in Texas," I responded. His face changed slightly, disappointed I hadn’t provided a more exotic point of origin. A probability I instinctively gleaned from his "dark" choice of words. Normally, I am happy to share my heritage, but I was not going to give this White the satisfaction of other-ing me. Because let's face it, he does not give a shit about where I am from really. He just wants to make sure I fit in his ready-made box: black, dark, Africa, got it, I know things. This was not my first rodeo.

Like most of his kind in these situations, he would be damned if he couldn't relate and show he understood this Black. He is always, after all, for the Blacks. So he found another path to connect. "My son is married to a black woman from Texas. She's the same color, dark as you." Why does it always boil down to color? Because that is the whole-ass point of these Whites doing this shit. They want you to know, to really see, that they don't care about color by pointing out your color and assuming all it represents, meaning they care about color. Like I said, racial biases, like racism, are inherently stupid. "Which part of Texas?" he forged ahead.

"Dallas." At this point, all smiles were gone, and I just needed him to get the fuck out of my face. But it was a slow morning, and the universe often conspires to test my patience. "That's where she's from!" his face brightening up excitedly. Dammit, dammit, fuck! I should have said White Settlement. I saw his next statement coming like we all saw the Drake-secret-baby-blow-up coming. "Do you know (her name)?" he continued. "Dallas is a large city. Many people live in Dallas," I tried, offering him a logical life raft in my most Marvin voice (R.I.P. Alan Rickman). He laughed it off like it was a minor inconvenience. As if that would not impede my ability to know of this particular Black. Forget the geographical size of Dallas and the population therein. Let's consider age group, peer circles, or time period. When was she in Dallas? For how long? Common sense would not deter this White. He acted, as most Whites of his kind are prone to, as if there is a newsletter distributed to all Blacks announcing a weekly prayer circle, led by Oprah with Beyoncé directing the choir (if only). 

Luckily another customer appeared and he departed with, "You should look her up on Facebook," laughing merrily as he exited the store. And hopefully from the rest of my life. I frustratingly mused over all the petty and trolling retorts I could have used. "Do you know Mr. Rogers, he's a white man that filled up my gas this morning? He lives in Duncan. You should look him up!" NOT ALL BLACK PEOPLE KNOW EACH OTHER, WHITES!!!.

The fact that this has happened to me more times than I can count is fucking frustrating. And yet, the Whites keep doing this shit and expecting me to skip along to this false play of racial-wokeness as if I am not aware it is bullshit, disingenuous, and lazy. But I have to be polite and understanding. Take their hand and let them know, I understand they did not mean to be so racially stupid and inept, and accept this level of daftness because they mean well, or their old, and oh, did I mention this town is so white. I’m done with all that. Now I am trolling the Whites as a public service. The only way I figure they will see how ridiculous this ultimately is if I am just as ridiculous. You're welcome, Whites!

After such experiences, I often conduct a social experiment by sharing it with the black and white people in my life. The moment I start this story, black people already know where I am going and how it plays out. We empathize for the moment, chagrined by the prevalence of such idiocy, and shrug, knowing it is unlikely to change and tomorrow will be more of the same. 

White allies, however, will go out of the way to justify the behavior of their compadres. Whether it's assuming all black people know each other, touching our hair, or using, albeit poorly, the latest black vernacular.  Suddenly I need to consider the possibility of dementia, limited interactions with black people, and such an overwhelming fascination with my latest hairstyle they can't resist putting their measly hands on it. The onus is on me to give racially ignorant Whites the benefit of the doubt. Fuck my feelings. Fuck my experiences.

I understand the desire to explain away these behaviors. They don't want to believe this is indeed problematic. They don't want to consider their past actions and similar faux pas could be construed as casual racism. They are not racist. You need to believe them. And if you think this White's specific act is racist, then oh gosh, have I been racist all this time? Yes. The answer is yes.

The fact that you feel I should cater to and understand where you and/or they are coming from more than they need to respect my personal boundaries and not treat my personhood as an extension of their racial awareness/curiosity exposes the arrogance of racial power structures. And that is the problem. That will always be the problem.

I should make it easy for you. I shouldn't complain too much. It’s not a big deal. You wouldn't mind if a stranger put their hands on your hair. As if you can equate our experiences in this larger white supremacist world.

But you have to take responsibility for your part in the system. You may not wear white hoods, march in the streets, hate black people, or burn down churches, but you are perpetuating this dearth of racial understanding when you expect me to justify why strangers shouldn't feel warranted to touch my FUCKING HAIR!!! Why isn't my discomfort and annoyance enough? Why do I have to further rationalize my frustration all while comforting you and parroting back your desire not to be seen as racist? 

I honestly wish more people cared about not actually being racist than being perceived as racist. You expect me to educate you on blackness while ignoring my individuality, not to mention Google has been around for over 20 years now. Google it!

You want me to decode why Midler's racist statement was largely well-meant because females have historically struggled similarly to black people? How? Where? When? Were white women stolen, raped, separated from husbands, children, mothers, and fathers enmasse and forced to raise their oppressor's children? Were black women complicit in slavery's stronghold as they condoned the violation of their vagina sisters believing themselves the epitome of beauty and pure womanhood? Was white history erased like black history to the point where a disturbing number of people believe black history begins with slavery, as if Africa is not the birthplace of humanity and we are all descendants thereof? Was it black women’s tears that sent many black men to the lynching tree? Are OBGYNs institutionally disinclined to believe the pain for white expectant mothers as they do black mothers? (Ask Serena Williams). Is there a pernicious angry white woman trope that seeks to dismiss white women's voices? Does the failure of white communities rest solely on the shoulders of white women as does the failure of black communities on black women? Has the feminist movement historically diminished and ignored the unique experiences of white women as it has black women? My color- and vagina-based experiences are not one and the same. And no, your age does not excuse your ignorance and racism, Bette! It really doesn’t.

Stop requiring I make you feel comfortable with my existence and kindly cease and desist this need to justify the causal racism I have had to navigate all my life. Just say, I don't know what that's like (because you don't) and/or I am sorry you had to deal with that. Your desire to explain away these behaviors by fellow Whites just shows how little you actually care about my individual experiences and how much more you would like to comfort and delude yourself into believing faced with the same set of facts we are all enduring the same experiences. No, the fuck we are not!

It's okay to say you don't know or understand. Diminishing my experiences because in your heart of hearts you want to believe that this racist experience was well-intentioned adds an unnecessary burden to an already burdensome life.

White privilege isn't about freedom from hardship. We all have difficulties and challenges in our lives. But we also all share certain levels of privilege (i.e. being able to read and write, having a job, access to health care, ability to travel and explore, eating regularly, clean water, etc.). White privilege is about exemption from specific experiences by virtue of skin color. Nobody questions your nationality even if you are a first-generation whatever; nobody assumes your behaviors and attitudes the minute they see you; nobody is worried about you being a terrorist based on your religious beliefs (can we talk about The Crusades or more recently, colonial evangelism?). You are you. I just want to be me. 

Actual knowledge is achieved when we become comfortable in the disquieting discomfort of our limited understanding. I don't know everything. As such, I have learned to simply say, “I don't know enough about this to have an opinion.” And that is okay. Let’s all do the same.

[ecologicalbodies]

What We Are Reading: a conversation with Hannah and Emily

The term “ecological” has been defined as “relating to or concerned with the relation of living organisms to one another and to their physical surroundings.” In the spirit of being in relation to all that we’re swirling in right now, we (Emily and Hannah) are sharing some of the conversations and ideas we’ve had leading up to Ecological Bodies about articles that we’ve been reading and thinking about. Everything is in relation to everything…

“The body is not a thing, an anatomical substrate; it is a performance, a function, a behavior. Soul does not have a body, it is body; body does not have a soul, it is soul...Even your skeleton and brain (organs that for example are nearly structuralized to death and physical substance) are ‘on the move’, are processes. I learnt from the embryo: Motion is primary, form is secondary. Forms comes out of motion (and not the reverse as reductionistic thinkers always propagate) and in that motion a behavior is performed.”

Jaap van der Wal, MD, PhD. in  “The Embryo in Us – A phenomenological Search for Soul and Consciousness in the prenatal Body”  

EJ: [Jumping right in] For me, this article brings to mind how we are indoctrinated in this capitalist society with the concept of a top down approach--the common perception that our brain is responsible and guiding the rest of our body. This brings up the parallel idea that political leaders and those with the most capital are responsible and dictating the rest of society.

Jaap Van Der Wal proposes a reorganization in the way we understand leadership in our body. Instead of the brain guiding the other parts, he proposes autonomy in each region, and each region being in conversation. He proposes that the brain exists in tangent with all other organs, not superior to them. I love this because it makes me think of our socio-political structure as well. If we didn’t think of our bodies as hierarchical structures that are predisposed by genes, could we think of our place in the world less vertically organized? I know that is a lofty statement. How can power be redistributed to better empower individuals? This can extend beyond physiology.

All the readings that have directly informed Ecological Bodies and this week of inquiry we’re facilitating seem to deal heavily with the concept of noticing what the fuck is happening around you. We (you and I) are all part of these systems and play into them in many ways. How do we actually observe what is going on? This is the question that keeps coming to my head. So often we go through participating with the status quo, oblivious to how we are contributing to the hierarchies around us. What is the space that allows questioning and reconsidering, and how is this cultivated?

HK: This article that you shared by Aurora Westfelt we discussed, “From oppressive structures on the dance floor to a world of dance,” is reaching for it. Like Westfelt, we have a lot of reservations about the dominate culture of the Contact Improvisation, and many other somatic practices. I appreciate her deconstruction of CI as a glorified “safer space, in which we can be physically close.” She’s speaking from her lived experience and identity, while doing her best to name the fact that we cannot step out of our positioning on the “capitalist, sexist, racist, hierarchical systems we are immersed in” when we step into these dance spaces. (FYI: For a deeper dive into this subject, I also recommend this article from an issue of Contact Quarterly. It features a conversation between mayfield brooks and Karen Nelson about IWB, improvising while black.)

However, I also have questions about the theory Westfeld brings in at the end of her article, as she seeks a way forward, so to speak. While the theorists she references--Nina Björk and Judith Butler--are wonderful, accessibility to this type of theoretical rhetoric is still an issue. We have to question socially predetermined realities of “what this is about and for whom,” as Westfeld writes. This includes the types of knowledge and theory we intake, given our identities--even the articles we’re talking about now!

I also find this article by Anna Kegler instructive, particularly as it gestures to the notion of the “spectrum” of oppression. She’s specifically talking about racism in this article.

So, if I believe there’s a binary of oppressiveness, and if I believe I’m on the “not-oppressive” side of the binary, then I can just opt out of doing that work. Yay me! But, if I see myself as sitting on as spectrum of oppressiveness, I have no choice but to acknowledge this positioning, my implicit participation in hierarchies of oppression, and I must keep listening, keep noticing repercussions, keep questioning, keep adjusting, keep decentering myself and my experience, keep modifying thought patterns, and keep modifying behavior, etc.

This idea of a spectrum also brings me back around to the import of practice and process. I cannot shake the thought that “products” and “outcomes” are so often dictated or mandated by the constraints of our capitalist society, and perhaps every outcome we create for ourselves, every commodity we create (even our dances!), and every idea we share is actually just a forced moment in time. In talking with my collaborator Zena Bibler about this phenomenon, she aptly described it as “artificial freeze-frames within more continuous time.” Every moment is a point on a lifelong spectrum of learning, and learning from that learning.

And, maybe “learning” is actually the REAL WORK, not creating products and outcomes. Maybe this, in turn, becomes an invitation to change how we weigh everything in our lives: to “redistribute” (as you’ve mentioned above), to loosen our desperate grasp on some things, especially on our narrow definitions for the world around us, and to hold more tightly to other things--which we might be overlooking. In my lived experience right now, and what I’m working with, these ideas also feel resonant.  

EJ: I also really appreciate the way Anna Kegler describes the danger of binary thinking. Thinking in binary dismisses and disregards all the space in between [and assumes that the two poles have value as foundational categories]. That space of uncertainty that requires self-reflection and consideration of multiple experiences colliding. Why is it that we are so uncomfortable with uncertainty?

Near the end of Jaap van der Wal’s interview he talks about addiction to causality. As humans we easily attach to a reason or an excuse for the way something is, whether this be in our own bodies, or in society at large. I’ve so often heard and read sentiments like, “I have this condition, because it runs in my family” or “discrimination happens because of the history in our country.” Those overly simplified causes and outcomes make us less individually accountable. Sure, those reasons might contribute to the current situation, but other factors, including those we are personally responsible for and participate in, also need to be considered.

Jaap van der Wal primarily discusses the fascination with genes, and how we point to our inherited DNA--structures as causes for anatomical, physiological, and psychological attributes. In the scientific community, my understanding is, embryology and genetics were, at one point, part of the same field. When genome mapping took off, the field split and genetics was given precedence and more funding because of the measurable  answers that were coming out of that research.

Now, these fields are merging again. How genes are expressed has much to do with environment, and embryological development, and life post-embryo. Phenomena are a result of various causes and conditions intersecting.

HK: I love it! I’m thinking about your question: “Why is it that we are so uncomfortable with uncertainty?” I wonder if it's because we’ve all internalized a twisted definition of comfort as something imperative to our lives. Uncertainty seems to be the thing that sustains life! Your question also brings me back to some of the conversations we’ve been having around naming--specifically in relationship to Luciana Achugar’s dance research through the Pleasure Project--and what it means to revel in the uncertainty about what surrounds us.

Achugar says that “naming” (e.g. that is a tomato!) without “understanding” (e.g. what is a tomato?) is a “colonial act” that halts our experiencing. Perhaps the act of “naming” something as a discrete and comprehensive phenomenon is a way to hold onto expertise, power, influence, and capital--not to mention, a way to create chasms of distance between human lived experience and everything surrounding it. Kegler is really getting at this in her aforementioned article, where she discusses the way specific terminology persists in coddling white experience.

Someone, though I can't remember who (maybe Chrysa Parkinson), said: “If I am over comprehended and over identified I can only be one thing.” Jaap van der Wal would say that we’ve been over comprehended and over identified as beings that exist in and “own” their bodies--bodies are a means to an end. In light of this, he argues that we--our very souls--are our bodies. Everything that happens to our bodies, happens to our souls, and if this is true, then life is not a means to an end!

In this way, I suppose we are working to redefine a sort of value system for ourselves, less predicated in fixity, more in fluidity, less comfortable with stability, more interested in learning from uncertainty. I’m excited where these ideas will take us, and how they will be informed and transformed as we continue researching and sharing and listening and adjusting to everything (in relation to everything!).

REFERENCES:

http://www.portlandanthroposophy.org/the-embryo-in-us-article

https://www.movementactivism.com/single-post/2017/06/01/From-oppressive-structures-on-the-dance-floor-to-a-world-of-dance

https://contactquarterly.com/cq/article-gallery/view/IWBcompressed.pdf

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anna-kegler/the-sugarcoated-language-of-white-fragility_b_10909350.html

https://www.liberatedbody.com/podcast/?category=Embryology

http://www.lachugar.org/the-pleasure-project/

http://audiostage.guerrillasemiotics.com/chrysa-parkinson-the-value-of-dance-as-practice/