Knowing Your Triggers XIV

 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tell us that when it comes to death by firearm, Black folks are more likely to die from being shot by others, while they are much less likely to die from shooting themselves than Native Americans and white folks.

The CDC says these numbers increased between 2019 and 2020, with death by homicide rising most significantly among African Americans (from 19 per 100,000 to 27), and suicide most dramatically among American Indians (from 8 per 100,000 to 11). The homicide and suicide rates for whites held steady at 2 per 100,000 and 10 per 100,000, respectively.

I have no idea why destruction explodes among Black folks and seems to implode among Indians and whites. Maybe all of these actions are attempts to set right something that's wrong. 

Maybe in the case of Blacks, what's wrong is the community and the people in it. And maybe Native Americans and whites more often feel they are what's wrong, and the fix, if that's what we are to call it, is found in checking out. 

I don't know, but it's pretty clear to me that neither solution sets anything right.  They actually just compound the pain. 

Knowing Your Triggers XIII

 

Food courts in struggling malls speak to me. 

They seem to be sustained by people who, themselves, might be struggling with abandonment.

Women sporting 40-inch Brazilian weaves and Megan Thee Stallion talons order the #4 from the Mandarin Kitchen menu.

Men with spikey, banded henna-tinted dreads stand in line at Roscoe's in sagging jeans and Yeezys waiting for the pork chop sandwich with hot sauce and seasoned fries.

Pre-teens in Nike gear swing Jimmy Jazz shopping bags, while scrolling through Insta and Tik-Tok on phones with cracked screens.

No music is piped in. 

The only sounds come from blaring TVs in sports stores and the whirr of a siren from the kiddie park fire truck at center court.

A mall security guard steps through on the way out for a smoke break. 

And a sheriff's deputy's vehicle idles just outside the door. 

Knowing Your Triggers XII

 

At several points during Netflix's documentary The Murdaugh Murders: A Southern Scandal, the survivors of a fatal boat crash attributed to Paul Murdaugh, who would later be shot to death along with his mother, talked about their partying practices and under-aged drinking. Sometimes they did it with the permission of Paul's parents, Alex and Maggie, the other shooting victim. 

According to the documentary, the night of the fatal boating accident, Paul used his older brother's driver's license to purchase copious amounts of alcohol that the six friends drank on the boat that Paul piloted to an oyster roast. After the oyster roast, Paul and one of his friends went for more drinks at a bar before heading back home. The other five objected to Paul driving the boat, since he was highly intoxicated. But he prevailed and subsequently crashed the boat into a bridge. One of the friends, Mallory Beach, was thrown from the boat and lost.

Over the course of the seven days during which divers searched for the young woman's body, the survivors and their family members who were interviewed said they prayed to God. They never said what kind of intervention they were seeking for but the whole matter of praying for help out of a tragic situation that they created seems pretty arrogant and presumptuous and is likely why many people have so little respect for such Christian virtue signaling. 

Not once did one of the four survivors of the crash express remorse for behavior that they recorded on their phones and that were included in the documentary, apparently without embarrassment or regret. They poured their disdain on Paul Murdaugh even though they were active participants in the very behavior that led to the tragic death.

Knowing Your Triggers XI

 

I wonder if people who post reels of their fat cats and roly-poly raccoons on Instagram are trying to draw fire from scolds who scroll through sites looking for targets to shame about their lazy pet care.

Some postings get thousands of comments from people exclaiming "put him on a diet, you hateful thing!"

Maybe it's actually a giant web of co-dependency. Folks overfeed their pets, then parade them around, make them jump (or attempt to jump) from floor to bed or to retrieve something from the kitchen counter. They record every "hilarious" second of this misery for posting and wait for the trolls to attack, which they do -- eagerly and swiftly.

Everybody gets their jollies in this internet wreck of enabling behavior, except Garfield and Rocky, whose lives are being cut short by their owners' vanity -- and pasta.

Knowing Your Triggers X

 

I asked a friend while at lunch yesterday if he could imagine the world where it was equally as likely for a friend or associate, workmate or perfect stranger to lie as tell the truth, without cause or reason. 

"What would the world be like?"

"Total chaos," he said.

I agreed. 

If we were all just as likely to be false faces as truth tellers, then little of importance would get done.

The pricing of commodities in the market might be total fiction, the same with airline schedules and the ingredients in cans of soup. It would be a crap shoot and exchanges would grind to a halt.

Doubt would be the default. There would be no incentive to keep a promise, show up on time or finish tasks one was assigned.

Children would ignore their parents' instruction, claiming not to have heard or to have forgotten. (That actually may be happening now.)

I feel we're getting closer to the precipice of utter disregard for honesty and not just among congressional delegates and corporate moguls. When legislators want to remove from some professions the licensure that says this person is whom they say they are, qualified to do what they claim, then we're staring down the maw of disaster.

Will we soon see regular folk, tempted by money and inured to manipulation, parading like public officials who strut their perfidy peacock-style for the cameras, shrugging and saying, "It's all in the game, right?"

Knowing Your Triggers VIII

 

Recent exchanges with friends of good will have revealed a bit of alarm among them about "woke." 

They are troubled by the glee GOPers show while beating their opponents about the head and shoulders with the term.

As one who is more studied in the transitory nature of language -- and familiar with the mocking of schoolyard bullies, which the Trumpers are for the most part -- I won't yield the right-of-way to folks wanting to commandeer "woke" and its derivations.  

I like the term, even though it's not that rich or elegant. It "struts," while "aware" saunters. And I understand, too, that like other matters of fashion, it will soon be replaced by something else. 

I also detect a readiness on the part of some friends to concede that GOPers are right to claim many actions or opinions of the woke "gazpacho" are not really matters of social justice. This is most certainly true, and not a hill worth defending. 

But I also realize that just because Republicans charge that something is "woke" or wrong-headed does not make it either -- despite GOPers mastery of wrong-headedness.

I do urge my friends against too quickly throwing in the towel, especially if they are of a hue and gender that can more easily navigate treacherous anti-woke waters by simply remaining silent.

Knowing Your Triggers VII

 

One of my most stubborn triggers is the frustration I feel when social exchanges devolve into virtuous chest-beating, especially among the churched. 

A familiar passage from the Book of Isaiah begins "Come now, and let us reason together" (1:18, King James Version) and seems to be enjoining the tribes of Judah to cut the crap and get down to the business of fixing their problems. Being level-headed will make things right (obliterate all manner of sinfulness).

Other common translations render "reason together" as "talk over" (Complete Jewish Bible), "argue it out" (New Revised Standard), and "settle the matter" (Good News). In every case I found, the goal appears to be resolution and not pointless prattle or continued dispute.

Even so, I often get the feeling when I'm observing or participating in an exchange about pressing matters with church folk that they are more interested in undermining than understanding. 

I suppose that follows if one's models for public discourse are men and women whose purpose is to find support for why they are right in what they believe or do. Hermeneutics is not about seeking truth but evidence of what one is already convinced of. 

This might also explain why dogmatic church people and dogmatic politicians get along so well and are best avoided.

Knowing Your Triggers VI

 

Nearly three years ago, the New York Times and the Associated Press told readers why they were capitalizing "Black" when it was used as a racial and cultural designator.

I've had a few conversations with folks who objected to the change, most arguing that it appeared to be a step away from equality and toward more divisiveness. "Shouldn't 'white' be capitalized, too?", they asked.

Though I don't necessarily adhere to all of the logic articulated by The Times and the AP, I do follow the practice because, well, why not? I may cavil with their thinking about common cultural heritage uniting all Blacks because many African Americans I know give little thought to the "African" part of that descriptor. And the use of terms like "white privilege" does suggest a cultural unifier that is active in that attitude. 

In the end, capitalizing "Black" seems a small enough gesture of conciliation for centuries of denunciation in the press, a member of which I was for years. I also retain an affinity for the press and think this move was wise and welcome. 

It did occur to me that some folks might view the capitalization of "Black" through the same polarizing lens they saw Martin and Malcolm, that is, Martin was for integration and blending; Malcolm was for nationalism and separation. Capitalization was counter to the efforts by good people to reject differences and find common ground. 

Of course, over time the ideological lines between Martin and Malcom rose and converged. Martin more strident, Malcolm less so.

Knowing Your Triggers V

 

Some years back, drugstore chains would run newspaper ads that Afro Sheen and Ultra Sheen would be on sale during February in observance of Black History Month. 

That's always struck me as a measly attempt at creating goodwill and was glad when retailers dropped the practice -- at least for hair-care products. Walmart still hawks Nike's special line of Black History Month sneakers. Nothing says African American culture like basketball shoes, right? 

Marking down a popular commodity 20 percent or draping a product in kinte and pitching it as a celebration are uniquely devices -- but then so is a quasi-restitutional holiday. 

We're a nation that's all about commerce. Get over the sentiment about enslavement and disenfranchisement. Let's focus on dollars and cents.

And one way to move along the discussion of "full" restitution for Blacks would be to include the provision that whatever is given to African Americans would be managed by JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Citigroup. Turning restitution for centuries of exploitation and manipulation into a transaction would surely grease the skids.

Economic justice and equality brought to you by Well Fargo!

Knowing Your Triggers IV

 

   

I recently watched Kamau Bell's 2022 documentary on Bill Cosby, which is every bit as dispiriting as I'd imagined. It contains peculiar passages of classism and status-consciousness that while not altogether surprising were disappointing to hear. All while being oddly mute on Cosby's apparent predilection for white women as victims. 

During a section of the documentary on Cosby's educational bona fides, some of those interviewed questioned the legitimacy of the doctorate awarded to him by the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Some questioned if he'd actually written his dissertation, the subject of which was his animated television series Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids. 

While those are legitimate questions -- particularly in light of the claims by some former Cosby staffers that they did the work on his thesis -- I thought the commenters' relegating the doctor of education degree, which Cosby holds, to a tier below the Ph.D. was petty and self-serving, in that both interviewees had earned the Ph.D. 

One commenter compared holding the Ph.D. to playing in the NBA, and the Ed.D. to the G. League. And another took umbrage when Cosby, who had taken offense at something the Temple University professor had written about Cosby, refused to call him "doctor" while addressing him. Pulling at each other like crabs in a bucket.

For his part, Cosby, who is depicted in the film as a vile narcissist, is shown in one section belittling a reporter who had been covering the allegations of sexual assault filed against Cosby. He demeaned the reporter as only making "700 dollars a week" while he, himself, was making $60 million a year.  "He's jealous," Cosby said of the reporter. It's a despicable display. 

That Bell and Cosby's critics do not probe more thoroughly why two-thirds to three-fourths of the women who accused him of drugging and assaulting them were white women is strange to me. Some of those on camera dismissed the disparity as unimportant because Black women were among those victimized, too. But what does it say when most of those accusing him of rape are white or fair-skinned Black women? Wouldn't it lend greater credence to the claims and suggest that his predation was calculated? That he had a type?

Perhaps that line of inquiry was rejected because of this country's history of casting Black men as threats to white women. I can see that and can imagine the backlash. 

Still one of Cosby's accusers made a comment that struck me as echoing popular prejudices about Black bodies. She said she was surprised by how soft his skin was. 

Knowing Your Triggers III

 

I suppose I get especially exasperated with folks who fixate on symbols to the exclusion of more pressing material matters as they relate to race.

I remember talking with a Black psychologist many years ago who offered that Black folks' focus on the battle flag showed an unhealthy reliance on other people's views and opinions rather than a healthy and rational assessment -- a clear-eyed view -- of one's own.

"If somebody says you're a rat does that make you a rat? No."

I've held on to that lesson over the years, and while I supported efforts to take down the flag from the State Capitol, I never lost sight that the flag did nothing to define me. 

I pushed because I believed it materially was retarding state growth and was being used by the powerful to divert attention away from their chicanery by promoting divisive ruckus.

I know many are committed to the galvanizing power of symbols -- and I don't believe there's any doubting that. But I prefer substance over signage. 

Knowing Your Triggers II

 

American culture seems to be all about the sell - whether it's cars, cosmetics or candidates. Turning a buck is the dominant ethos. But that's not news.

In talking with a long-time friend the other day, I mentioned my ambivalence with what I see as the commodification of pain and protest. A whole sector of the economy seems to exist for the propagation of advocacy for those who want to air grievances, to set things right -- I call it the social movement industry. 

These folks who give paid counsel on branding and messaging and coordinate rallies and demonstrations are quite different from the grassroots organizers who met in community centers and church basements, raised money through donations and bake sales, who used phone trees to mobilize, may have even printed manifestos using hand-cranked mimeographs or spray-painted messages on bedsheets. Those ways and means seem somehow purer to me. 

Today's social movements need more sophisticated tools to reach their goals. Organizations like The Bridgespan Group and Purpose offer services to non-profits, charities and advocates around the world. Individual website builders and market researchers are in demand by groups seeking legitimacy and fund-raising through the internet and targeted appeals.

This evolution strikes me as both important and regrettable, reflecting my overall disappointment that fighting for fairness is still so needed -- but now is so much more expensive.

Inflation?

Knowing Your Triggers

 

Black History Month is a time for me to reflect on my racial triggers, those lingering annoyances that I can't seem to let go of or resolve -- though not for lack of trying. 

Pretty close to the top of the list is the Black nanny trope in popular culture.

Oddly, I have less of a problem with Hattie McDaniel's Mammy in Gone with the Wind (1940) than I do with Nell Carter's housekeeper / nanny Nell Harper, 40 years later in the Reagan-era sitcom Gimme a Break! 

Maybe I'm applying Maya Angelou's dictum here: “Do the best you can until you know better. Then when you know better, do better.” Network television should have known better by 1981, had they been paying attention to Norman Lear's troubles with Good Times (1974-1979)

Depending on the frame you use, Nell Carter's mouthy domestic could be viewed as an empowered Black woman who was standing up to "The Man" on the regular or as an updated version of the classic Sapphire stereotype -- a bossy, difficult Black woman, without children or a man of her own, who exists to serve white folks and intimidate. My view is the latter.

Nell Carter's career seemed on the verge of blossoming into something big but that never happened. Her early acclaim for her work in the Broadway ensemble review Ain't Miss Behavin' (1978) didn't seem to open doors to bigger and better things on the stage right away. Her casting in Gimme a Break! was timely and no doubt needed, so I don't begrudge her for going for a paying job. But the character was stale and stock, IMO. Even so, it garnered Carter notoriety -- a couple of Emmy nominations over the years.

Carter, who died in 2003 at age 55 of complications from diabetes, may or may not have been sensitive to this casting. I couldn't find anything suggesting otherwise.

Still, portrayals of childless Black women -- angry or not -- who nurture the children of white employers is pretty close to the bone of America's racial past and perhaps need not be a part of its racial present.