Can we talk?

In a 1962 Gallup poll, 85% of European-Americans responded that African-Americans had the same opportunity for a good education as their children did.  In 1963, 66% of European-Americans felt that Afican-Americans in their communities were treated the same or better.  In 1968, only 17% of European-Americans would agree with the generality that "African-Americans have been treated poorly in their communities".  (Statistics drawn from Anti-racist Activist Tiim Wise's book "Speaking Treason Fluently")

In a time in which racism and discrimination was blatant, there was a resiliency for many people to express this observation.  It seems like there is a cultural pressure to minimize the truth of racism, even when it is recorded and demonstrated on your TV's,  as it was done during the civil rights era.

Over 40 years later, I find that there is still incredible resistance to see and express the results of racialization and racism.  Some of that stems from the desire to believe in the national myth of the innocent nation (our nation always acts on the best behalf, even its evil had a honorable purpose).  This myth is why Americans could not speak out against the war and still be considered patriotic.  It became difficult to question that motives of leaders because it violated the innocent nation mythology.  Yet, even beyond this, there is a national guilt that is too painful to realize. We dare not touch it because then our identity and our mythology must succumb to the unflattering portrait of realism. So insidious is this blindness that we have even labeled our current era (after the election of President Obama) as "post-racial era.

Why can't we talk about what's plainly there?  Why can't we dialogue about the entrenched discrepancies of education, healthcare, distribution of wealth, opportunities for enterprise that are apparent between European-Americans and Americans of color?  Why can't we share our observations of the predilection of capitalistic systems to have cheap labor in order to have increasng profits, and that cheap labor is predominantly brown, black, olive, and tan in America?

When can we have the courage to make observations and take ownership of that reality, so that we can simply move forward to solutions.  Yet, I find, even in the halls of academia, we can't even have the discussion.  Its too powerful, too frightening, and too overwhelming.

I want to have the discussions so that my children will inherit a nation with the conviction to own its past, and wrestle with its present, so that its future is one of true democracy and justice.

Can we talk....


Pastor M Traylor

Martin Luther King Jr. and Optimism

For the past week, I have had the privilege of reading through many of the speeches and writings of the great Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  I have been reading a compilation of his work that was edited by the late historian James Washington. "I Have a Dream" , James Washington editor.

As I read his speeches and writings, I became aware of a battle that was raging in my mind.  It was a small tension at first, but the more I read, the louder the dissenting voice in my mind became.  Soon, I was journaling and praying because I found that His writings revealed a huge "ego-dystonic" gap in my attitudes and his.

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., had an amazing faith in two ideals that I approach with increasing cynicism.

He first had faith in America.  He loved the American creed (We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal") and was confident that America can and would live up to the ideals in which it was created.  His works, particularly the poignant and powerful, "Letter from the Birmingham Jail", gives an unfailing optimism in the spirit and purpose of the American creed.

Secondly, Dr. King had the significant faith in the moral consciousness of all people.  He would argue with African students that non-violence works against all regimes, no matter how cruel, because all people have a moral consciousness that can be challenged.  In his 1959 article in Ebony magazine, he states "non-violent resistance, when planned and positive in action, can work effectively, even under totalitarian regimes". 

Although I love America, I do not have faith in it.  I although I thank God for the privileges found in America, I mourn the exploitation and the devastations of entire peoples in order to make that possible.  I spoke to a leader in the impoversihed nation of Malawi in 2004.  I asked him why there were not more American products around.  He replied "There nothing here to exploit".  He went on to explain his thoughts which were echoed in Kenya that America is the land of opportunitist.  The American creed was declared at a time inwhich the rights spoken of, were reserved for Whites only.  It was never meant as Dr.  King defines it.  I love his confidence, but unfortunately do not share it.

Dr. King is heavily influenced by the social gospel movement of the late 19th and early 20th century.  This movement believed that the people of God will usher in the Kingdom of God through our own direct actions.  He believed that people will rise to the nature of their calling.  In his 1964 Nobel Prize acceptance speech he states "I Refuse to believe the "isness" of humanity can not reach up to the "oughtness" that forever confronts him".  I believe that humanity has incredible capacity for good and evil.  I believe that without God, we will never reach our "oughtness" and that Jesus Christ came to lead us back to our "oughtness". 

Now, obviously Dr. King lead a movement that changed the world, and I, on the other hand, have not.  Therefore, I am challenged on my cynicism and my theology.  Have I focused on humanity and America's capacity for evil, to the neglect of the possibility for it to be a tremendous force for good. 

My thought is that I choose to be hopeful, even if I am not optimistic.  Optimism is a favorable outlook based upon the past or present conditions.  Hope on the other hand, is God-centered and focuses on the work of God to bring about the things that matter to him, such as justice, love, and peace, acknowledging that the vehicle of his kingdom is flawed peoples, nations, and communities.

How would you describe your approach to social change?  Are you hopeful, cynical, pessimistic, or joyful.

It is my desire that the hope of God would inspire and empower you this day!

Pastor M Traylor

Questions for single women.

John Hopkins research Sociologist Dr. Andrew Cherlin writes a provocative book looking at the marriage patterns in American contemporary society (Marriage-go-round, 2009). Statistically, we know that single African-American women are more likely to remain single, live with multiple unmarried partners, and undergo divorce than their European American counterparts. The reasons are manifold. Some are societal (higher likelihood of poverty, earlier sexual initiation, etc), and some are interpersonal (culture of disappearing and irresponsibile men). However, it is heartbreaking to know that statistically, African-American women will experience more relational disruption and conflict than most women in America.

 

Recently, a good friend and blogger, Anjanette Potter began to write a series of provocative questions to single women who were considering marriage in the future. Her questions dealt with the qualities that prospective spouse should have. You can read more of her writing at:

 

http://happyspinster66.wordpress.com/2010/07/12/welcome-to-the-happy-spinster/

 

I wanted to write a follow-up that is more basic to those women who are desiring marriage. These questions are not focusing on the character of your prospective spouse, but are questions that focus inwardly. God causes us to wait for several reasons. Sometimes it is to change the things outside of ourselves, such as situations, finances, other’s character development, but many times it is to change us. God uses time to help us find wholeness, healing, and completeness.

 

Here are my five questions that I believe single women, particularly African American Christian women who desire to marry should ask.

 

1. Am I experiencing the profound love of Jesus?

•  When you are hungry for affection and affirmation, everything looks good. It is like going to the grocery store when you are hungry; everything looks good.
•  The love of Jesus is unconditional and unrelenting. You need to experience true love in order to           share it and receive it.

2. Am I depending on this relationship to restore my security, significance, or acceptability?

•  In other words, am I looking for someone else to make me complete. You need to feel complete    prior to entering into a relationship.

3. Do I have a clear calling to marry?

•  Not everyone is called into marriage. Entering into marriage without a clear calling is like becoming a   musician without musical skill. God equips those who he calls.

4. Do I have the time, attention and energy to develop a trusting, healthy relationship?

• It takes time to develop trust, and deep trust to have transparency. Unless you have the social capital   to invest, your foundation is shaky.
• Vocational stresses, emotional wounds, familial obligations, and health problems can rob you of the time, vigilance and energy needed to develop a healthy relationship. There is no quick way to         develop  the proper foundation.

5. Am I emotionally healthy enough to give and receive affection and develop healthy boundaries.

• Wounds and neediness destroy healthy boundaries. Neediness allows premature intimacy and            wounds cause prolonged distance.

 

By the way, these questions work well for men desiring marriage as well!

 

Feel Free to leave comments or add questions of your own.

 

God bless,

 

Pastor M Traylor

African Americans and Immigration reform

CNN reported that Arizona Governor Jan Brewer will be meeting with President Obama in the near future regarding the state's recent attempts at immigration reform. Governor Brewer has been in the spot light recently for two controversial laws.

The first law amounted to the fact that people would be required to carry "proof of citizenship" and any "suspected" of being illegal, can be stopped and held if proof is not available. Law enforcement officers as well as the state government are also held immune from lawsuits with regards to false imprisonment and detention. This amounts to be able to detain any Mexican-American appearing person who is not walking around with a birth certificate or visa. Most of us do not carry our birth certificate around with us.

The second law abolished "ethnic studies" as the government has determined that they "demonstrate ethnic superiority by stating the Mexican-American have been oppressed by Whites". This is done while admitting that the curriculum used by many Arizona students does not address racial tensions between Whites and Mexican, native American, and African-American populations.

This type of profiling and censorship resurrects some of the worst types of racism and racialization. Cases all over the country show a spreading web of divisive and racializing events (see http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/25/deportation-nightmare-edu_n_588788.htm)

What is the role of African-Americans in this debate. As those who have struggled to overcome some of the foundational racialization of American culture, do we have something to offer in this debate?

While the immigration issue is complex and multi-faceted, I believe that we must advocate for those who are steotyped and profiled. I believe that African-Americans have often held a prophetic witness, calling America to justice. I believe that we dare not be silent.

Let me know what you think,

God bless,

Pastor M Traylor

Culture, Spanking, and Aggresiveness

A recent article on spanking suggests that spanking toddlers increases aggressive behaviors. You can read the review of the orginal article at:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20100412/hl_time/08599198101900

In the African-American community, spanking is nearly a universal phenomena. I was spanked (frequently!) and I used spanking for my own children (infrequently!). Of the patients in my pediatric practices over the 17 years, nearly all of my African American families used spanking in some form or fashion.

Over the past 10-15 years there have been numerous campaigns by child advocacy groups to discourage the use of spanking and the American Academy of Pediatrics now officially advocates against any form of corporal punishment.

So, is the common practice of spanking within African American families a demonstration of pathology? Does our aggressive behavior, particularly in the males who are incredibly over-represented in our penal system influenced by the well intentioned, but according to the mostly white researchers, destructive practice of spanking?

I would suggest that the study demonstrates that those who were spanked were indeed more aggressive, but it does not investigate whether the spanking was due to the fact that those children may have been more aggressive in the first place. In other words, spanking may be used more frequently in children who were inherently more aggressive. Just as African American families are not monolithic in their actions and attitudes, African American children are incredibly diverse in their aggresiveness and sensitivity. Within families who do spank, the frquency is not even distributed but is often a response to the activities of those children.

I was spanked more than my wife was. Our temperments are completely different and our sensitivity to other types of discipline were also different. A time out for me was often not effective. I am and always was a daydreamer. Giving me a timeout was an excuse to return to dreaming and my mother realized that it did not alter my behavior. It does not invalidate the usefulness of timeouts, but points out that different behavioral approaches have differing levels of effectiveness in different children.

What is your take on spanking? Are we, as researchers suggest, creating aggressive children? Is there a level of cultural ignorance, or conversely cultural pride when talking about this?

Leave you comments below,

Pastor M Traylor

Defining Whole

The argument goes something like this:  Is media shaping who we are (influencing our understanding of our self-identity) or is it simply reflecting reality and persona (demonstrating our reality as well as our desires).  Every since the advent of TV, we have railed against media as the former, an influence that shapes our identity.  The concept has a familiar ring, as nearly a century ago, WEB Dubois decried the fact that African Americans often see themselves through the lenses of other (The Souls of Black Folk).

However, I think that this concept is too simple, too naive, and far too irresponsible.  When we look at networks such as BET, we see negative image after negative image portrayed.  Music videos are grossly oversexualized and the artistry and prophetic content that launched hip-hop has been covered by commericialism and the culture of greed.  BET has those images because African Americans choose to watch them.  If African Americans were not watching BET, then it would not survive.  In this way, African Americans are responsible for the media's portrayal of young men's material-centered lifestyle (money justifies the job, think 50 cent's "masterpiece" called "Get rich or die tryin") or young woman's use of sexuality as nearly the sole source of value and worth. 

What if both are true? Media influences and is a reflection of who we are.  What if African American people, such as myself, took responsibility for images that are being formed by choosing to support programming that produces realistic and healthy images of ourselves.  This does not mean that healthy images are devoid of sexuality or even the realism of commericialsim, but that those images are defined holistically and defined by a single factor.

As I was watching Tyler Perry's "Why did I get married 2" (saving the review for another time), I was reminded of the need for balance and contrast.  Balance in that we want to be realistic in our portrayals of ourselves while also contrasting what "could or should be".   Regardless of how we feel about his writing or the quality of the acting, I commend Tyler Perry as one of the few writers who has tried to satirically look at the images that African Americans desire and develop.

Let me know what you think about this.  Is the self-identity of African Americans a reflection of media or do we actually have some responsibility?

God bless,

Pastor M Traylor

Good Hair and self Identity

Several weeks ago, My family and I watched Chris Rock's documentary called "Good Hair"  (http://www.goodhairdvd.com/).  It was fairly well done in that it attempted to look at the "hair" industry and the roots of the understanding of what is "good" hair and what is "bad".

WEB Dubois wrote in his classic book "The Souls of Black Folk" that African-Americans are unusual in that they define themselves through the eyes of another.  He understood at the turn of the 20th century what we continue to experience in the 21st, that European perceptions of health, wealth, and beauty continue to shape and inform our self identity. 

My goal is not to review the movie in its entirety, but to briefly point out some of the issues that arose in the movie to help stinulate conversation regarding these difficult issues.

1. African American Women often judge their own beauty by European standards, despite the fact that Eurpopean American women continue to adopt African-American traits as symbols of beauty (lip injections, hip injections, tanning beds, etc).  What is  missing is the link between African American women's self-identity and African-American men's perception of beauty.  Do African-American women also frame and reinforce the European model of beauty with its long straight hair and thin lips?

2. African American women spend an exorbitant amount on hair and hair products, particularly weaves.  Chris Rock documents that many women will pay upwards to $5000 for a good weave.  Some even put their hair on "lay away" while they sacrificed and saved.  This may be a circular arguement where many AA women can maintain that a certain level of sophistication is required vocationally, and that means processed hair or extensions.  It is difficult to know which came first!

3. The hair industry that is specifically for AA people is controlled exclusively by non AA people.  Al Sharpton (who has his own hair famously processed) is interviewed in the documentary and calls the exploitation "Financial retardation".  This is a multi-billion dollar industry where AA people are strictly consumers, but not producers or distributors.  The source of the hair is equally disturbing, but that's a different blog.

Is it time that we arrest the acceptance of European based beauty?  Maybe, as some have argued, the light-skinned model with long hair, thinner hips and light eyes represents the American ideal of beauty.  Maybe we have moved past the Afro-centrism of the 1960's and 70"s and adopted a generic American ideal.  My question for you is whether this is healthy?  Is this disturbing or simply acculturalization of a people to the American ideal.

Please leave your comments,


Pastor M Traylor

If you are African American and live in Cleveland, OH, you are generally expected to speak when you pass another person of color.  It is a common sign of courtesy and  respect.  African American culture is not homogeneous, but differs by region, socioeconomic status, and history.  For instance, when I visit my brother who lives near New York City, no one speaks unless they know you or want you to  purchase something.  Respect is understood by my willingness to avoid eye contact in the context.  It reminds me of how more primitive animals will avert eye contact when they are being submissive to a dominant leader.  In Columbia, SC, speaking is not enough.  It is courtesy to stop, have a conversation and you need to be sure to ask about parents, children, and work.  I learned that the hard way when I once rented a car from a Hertz there.  I learned about the Hertz worker's family, church, and his political philosophy.

I am writing because there is a more insidious problem that has gone unspoken within the African American culture that I think actually is more important than whether we speak, nod, ignore or fist-bump each other.  At first, this may seem strange, but I want you to think about this.  In the African American community, there is a tendency to oversexualize gender relationships.  You may not agree, but I want to share an experiment that I have done over the past week in Rochester, NY.

I have been convicted over the past several months that one of the ways of ministering to others is simply to recognize them.  Many people feel invisible.  They feel that nothing they do matters.  Their feelings and ultimately, their person has no influence or impact.  So I decided that I would look people in the eyes as I passed and speak if they returned a glance.  I found that this experiment had two different effects when I spoke to African American women.  Either, the women quickly looked away and avoided me or they began to flirt.  My theorum is that my glances were almost always read as sexual, even though I was intention to make my glance brief, and to keep my body language neutral.

This may because  many times African American men speak to African American women in a flirtatious and provocative way.  Its sort of the chicken and the egg.  I know of African American men who feel that unless they are flirtatious and provocative, women tend to ignore them.  This is why all the male African American intellectuals wonder why all of the "smart" African American women still love the "bad boys".  In other words, do men speak to women this way because it is effective or are women simply reacting to the overwhelming sexual behavior that is directed towards them.

Whatever the reason, I feel sad that potential opportunities to recognize and honor one another is twisted by our tendency to oversexualize.  I know that some will disagree with the assumption in this post, but I can not explain high rates of early sexual participation found in the African American culture (which is significantly higher than whites) without recognizing that the adolescents are seeking to establish an adult identity, and that identity in our culture and community, is defined sexually.

Leave some comments on this topic and your experiences