The NAACP Symbolically Buries the N-Word

By Desireé Vega, Summer Intern at the Kirwan Institute



On Monday July 9th, 2007 during its annual convention, the NAACP held a funeral to symbolically bury the N-word. A wooden box with a bouquet of fake black roses was pulled by horses during their march. The coffin will be placed at the historically black Detroit Memorial Park cemetery where it will have a headstone. To read the entire article, visit NAACP Burys the N-word.

As I read through this news article, I wondered what effect this act would have on the Black community. I read reactions and comments posted on the internet; some felt that the NAACP was making a big step in trying to eradicate the usage of the word. Others felt it was a joke and that there would not be any change in the words usage because it is used so commonly and has been popularized by the Black hip-hop community.

Historically the N-word has had negative connotations directed towards Blacks. It was used to refer to slaves in the 1700 and 1800s. Caricatures of Black people in the 1900s encapsulated the definition of the N word- lazy, no self-respect, ignorant, stupid, and did not speak proper English. The Harlem Renaissance era challenged this definition: Blacks were encouraged to embrace their culture and history. Racial pride emerged during the 1960s, the term ‘black’ was taken on by the African American community as positive. The N-word was strongly denounced during this period.

Today though, attitudes are different about the usage of the N-word. The –er has been dropped and the word is used with an –a at the end instead. Many accept this term and use it in their everyday language as it has become so popularized. Others oppose it and do not use it at all. Because the word has been popularized and the connotation used by Blacks is not the same as when Whites use the word, do Blacks really have a problem with the use of the word? If they do, how can an end be put to its usage? Is this symbolic burial by the NAACP meaningful to the young Black community who may not fully understand the history of the word and how it has been used to denigrate their culture? What significance does this event hold to people who are not Black?

Leaders in the hip-hop and entertainment community such as Russell Simmons, Master P., and Paul Mooney have denounced the usage of the N-word, but is that enough? Websites such as abolishthenword.com ask people to take a pledge to stop using the word and spread the word to other people of color. If black people do not know the history of the word or if they do not see a problem with using the word, how can the NAACP’s actions be taken seriously? If the word should indeed be removed from public and popular vernacular, how can the painful history of the word be taught? And if the n-word was to be eliminated, what effect would this have on opportunities for Blacks and how they are viewed in society?

Less black, less white?

By Christy Rogers, Research Associate at the Kirwan Institute

When the question of whether or not Barack Obama was “black enough” for the black community cropped up, I was startled to hear an African-American woman interviewed for NPR state that Barack “self-identified as black, married a black woman, and has black children, and that’s black enough for me.” Your race is determined by whom you marry? Sure, I knew the academic term – race is a “social construction.” But it had never struck me in such a stark way before. I wondered to myself, do white women make similar assessments?

I thought back to a conversation I’d had years before, with a colleague in a planning firm. I had admired her, because the construction and development world is largely male, and although she was young she could easily hold her own in a room of “town fathers” trying to patronize her. She was talking about a friend of hers.

“You know, she’s one of those white girls you can just tell will date a black guy,” she said.
“What?”
“You know – you can tell them. You know what I mean.”
“No, I don’t know what you mean. Tell me what you mean.”
“Forget it.”

I guess you aren’t white if you date across the color line. Or if still white, a different “species” -- identifiable like some sort of invasive weed.

Last week when I went to pick up my daughter at daycare, I ran into the mom of my daughter’s best friend. I was really glad to see her, because in the fall, my daughter is starting a new school and leaving all of her current friends. I wanted to propose a weekend play-date. I was relieved and pleased when she seemed committed to maintaining their friendship outside of school. She suggested a joint trip to Lowe’s on the first Saturday of every month, when they have a special kids’ work session. I couldn’t imagine my daughter happier: in a tiny orange apron, clattering around with her best buddy. And most of all, I was relieved because my daughter is white and her son is black, and for the two of them to keep what they have – a delighted friendship – is going to take help, and work. For now, we only have to pick which month we go to Lowe’s. In the years to come, we’re going to have to acknowledge that their friendship, in the eyes of some, will make her son less black, and my daughter less white, and what that means for us, and for them.

Living Wages and Health Care: Ramifications of Communication?

By Alana Krivo-Kaufman, Summer Intern at the Kirwan Institute

I was reminded of the book "Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America" by Barbara Ehrenreich as I watched "Sicko”, the Michael Moore movie critiquing our for profit health care system. Policies regarding living wages and health care obviously have huge intersections with race, ethnicity and gender, and disproportionate affects on these populations due to historical discrimination and structural racism. My question is, how should we conceptualize the methodology through which the issues are addressed, and what effect does including, intentionally ignoring, or portraying an issue within a single demographic frame have on the relevant activism, public opinion and therefore policy? And if the two above examples manage to support the implementation of desirable policy, but in doing so skip over the complexities of the intersections, is that positive or negative?

Both works present their issues within the frame work of ‘white America’. In “Nickel and Dimed” the author, a white woman, does an experiential exposé on the situation of the working poor, and chose the demographics of her living and working environments to portray her story in a predominately white setting. The book aimed to strike fear in the heart of the American dream by pointing out a glitch in the system: people work hard forty hours a week, and still don’t get by. Moore’s argument of the dysfunctions within the healthcare system was set up very explicitly by a similar ‘failure of the American dream’ premise, using clips and pictures of a 1950’s picket fence white suburban family, complete with homemaker, breadwinner, and two golden children. This was followed by a stream of insured people, predominantly white Americans sharing compelling stories of their healthcare woes. (The film does include one African-American woman, as well as an inter-racial couple questioning if the husband would have received the same denial of coverage were he a white man, but they are definitely outnumbered.)

The back cover of “Nickel And Dimed” describes the book’s message as "inspired in part by the rhetoric surrounding welfare reform, which promised that any job equals a better life". Within "the rhetoric surrounding welfare reform”, race is necessarily a factor, either explicitly or implicitly, in description, in statistics, or in public conception. Yet, the book is a one subject piece on the job and life prospects as experienced by a white woman author, which does not portray any structural racism within the system of low income or unskilled jobs, or discrimination and profiling within the system. The health care system is similarly portrayed by Moore through the lens of white Americans, critiquing the underlying flawed system of U.S. health care in a general way, but not really exploring any skewed racial connotations of that system.

Affecting policy implementation is tricky and requires attention from multiple perspectives, including analysis and communication. Neither Moore nor Ehrenreich’s work openly strives to weaken OR address structural racism or discrimination within any of the systems they focus on. They simply point out broader all encompassing flaws within healthcare and non-living wage low skill jobs, and what we expect from them. Avoiding directly addressing issues of race was a deliberate move on both parts, but does this hinder or help policy in the long run? If a story has to be told from a white perspective to garner sufficient attention, does using those modes of communication necessitate the use of the same approach in the future and further disempower people, or is it simply a good way to get things done?

Intersecting Race and Sexuality

By Nick Webster, Graduate Research Associate at the Kirwan Institute

There has been an unfortunate story from Ohio running through all of the major news sources recently -- police officer from Canton has been charged with the murder of his pregnant girlfriend and her nearly full-term fetus. The woman was missing for a week before her body was found, and the national media has been fanatically following the case throughout the search and the investigation. Although it is difficult to say why any one story becomes media gold, I was struck by this particular story's popularity because it so clearly fits a pattern that seems to unfailingly capture the attention of the American public.

You see, the man accused in this case is Black, and his deceased girlfriend was White. Many commentators have rightly pointed out that searches for missing women of color are rarely publicized to the same degree as those for White women, and that Black-White crime is often sensationalized above crime within minority communities. But in addition to both of these points lies the fact that, like in the recent Duke rape controversy and the O.J. Simpson case, this story involves an interracial sexual relationship. The fascination with which American viewers follow stories involving sex between racial groups (and the persisting social taboo of such actions) points to the salience of intersections between race and sexuality.

Even in today's era of "colorblind" rhetoric, when many Americans claim that they "do not see race," newer, subtler forms of racism continue to incorporate sexual undercurrents. Interracial relationships remain rare and fraught with challenges, racially-charged pornography sells continually well, "sex tours" to a variety of developing countries are packed with eager American citizens, and, of course, news stories with any hint of sexual relations between persons of different races (as long as one participant is White) skyrocket in popularity. Clearly, adding sexuality to the already turbulent waters of race in America can produce a variety of interesting results, from covert disgust to the fetishization of the "exotic."

I believe that the intersection between race and sexuality provides an important avenue for examining the ramifications of "colorblindness" precisely because it can serve to destabilize the foundations of this form of racism (i.e., "colorblindness"). Discussing race and personal sexuality can bring the implications of a racialized society close to home for many White Americans, while adding the sexual dimension to popular discussions of race may help expose some of the more hidden aspects of structural racism. I hope we can continue to take advantage of intersectionality in this and other forms to advance and challenge our work fighting racism.

Can Opportunity Be Defined?

by Denis R. Rhoden, Jr., Research Associate for the Kirwan Institute

It has been over four years since the Institute embarked on its mission “to deepen our understanding of the causes of and solutions to racial and ethnic disparities and hierarchies.” In carrying out this charge an emerging philosophic and empiric tension arises. The activities required for knowing (through analysis) and those for doing (engaging clients in strategic and policy solutions to persistent problems) often require a ‘bridge’–the multiple spatial, psychological, social and spiritual states of opportunity.

As practitioners, our understanding of opportunity centers on a place-based, often regional, interpretation of opportunity and its proximity to households, individuals and neighborhoods. In this form opportunity appears to function as a comprehensive, often interdependent bundle of investments that create wealth and meaningful connections to society as a whole. Over time this understanding, coupled with technology, developed a quantifiable sense of “opportunity.” The opportunity based model over time has been adopted as part of policy-making, advocacy and grass-roots organizing by the legal community, industry, advocacy and academia.

Adoption has further shaped the discussion, challenging supporters and practitioners to examine the merits of defining opportunity. A call by the more skeptical of the Kirwan’s position on “opportunity” frequently asks “what does it mean to be located in, or exposed to, a high (or for that matter a low) opportunity area?” As we have gained an unprecedented amount of experience in the subject matter, additional supporters and resources to explore new applications, it becomes clear that operationalizing opportunity was necessary to convey the importance of the work.

Below you will find the applied definition of opportunity, an attempt to provide a grounded understanding of the relationship between opportunity and its antecedents: people, place and linkages. At a minimum the definition aims to enhance awareness of and the implications for, distribution, proximity and access for communities in your region. At its best, this time also provides a moment where readers can reflect and share how they relate to this definition, and how a definition of opportunity provides value in your own work.

“Opportunity in our definition includes the structures and environmental conditions which contribute to community stability and individual advancement, such as sustainable employment, high quality educational institutions and experiences, healthy and safe communities, stable and safe housing or health care. Expanding and maintaining access to opportunity means deliberately connecting people to the critical resources needed to excel and succeed in our society.”