Local Academic Gets Glamour-ized

I'm glad the little information I had to go off of was misleading and sensationalized and then when I expressed an opinion about it I got told to read the book and called a troll.

I'm glad you base your judgments about this woman's work on what you know and not merely what you think you know, LM.

"You are all racist, but nobody else is and there is nothing you can do about it".

I like to think that everyone can just all be cool with each other someday while keeping whatever hateful feelings they feel for another race to themselves. This is a roadblock in my mind. It's telling people, "There's nothing you can do about it so why even try?"

That's my main problem, the thought that racism is somehow different among different ethnicities. If she's saying that all white poeple are racist, then why not just say everyone in the United States or the world is racist in the same way? I know that institutionalized racism exists. I do not believe that passive racism, whatever you want to call it, is something that I need to be worried about or named. What good does that do to tell white people, "You are all racist, but nobody else is"? She only spoke to white women when writing this book? I hope she also spoke to some black women too to get their views on this continuum of racism idea.

i'm glad someone's got a book on that.

i know i've talked to people about it before, and i heard a uni radio station in DC (Howard U?) talking about it, once, but we still need a better term for it.

I used to call it (and still do) 'passive racism'. I guess 'silent racism' could work, too. it definitely is a concept that needs more attention, though. i figure most white Americans are significantly/problematically/etc racist in this 'passive' sense, and there are a bunch of reasons for that, but one of them is not being familiar with this concept.

my guess as to why her work focuses on black/white race relations as opposed to black/latino, latino/cuban, or anything else, is because:

* whites are the majority race in America

* white people have the over-majority of money and power in America - corporate boards rooms, government, police/fbi/cia/homeland hilarity and other terrorist organizations of the State

* the black/white race divide in America is unquestionably the biggest, most important, most acrimonious one in America

* the black/white race divide in America has a special history known as 'slavery' that is central to American History and the current state of affairs

* the civil rights movement was a black/white affair

* etc.

as for the subtitle of the book, 'How Well-Meaning White People Perpetuate the Racial Divide' - that might could use a little engineering. even if she decided to use only data from white people/women, i probably wouldn't have used the 'white' qualifier - it makes it so that people can't even get past the title of the book.

that said - it is what it is. it's a very specific allegation/accusation, and if she can back it up with solid evidence then it seems she should be able to write it. after all, she is not saying 'How *Evil* White People Perpetuate the Racial Divide'.

the problem with the title is a picture of Ms. Trepagnier's white face is not with it. that might help explain the title. whatever race you are, you can get away with a lot more accusing your own race of something, while avoiding the 'racist' label.

now i'm curious - did she ever consider how using the 'White' description in the title of the book would sound? my guess is 'yes', but now i'm curious to hear why she didn't think it was important enough to drop.

As for the young woman up there, she is beautiful, but she looks horrible in that outfit so if the whole thing that incited this was that afros are a fashion don't, you should have considered the context of the piece before picking a picture of such an ugly outfit on a beautiful woman. It makes it seem like you're saying afros really are a fashion don't.

Now who can I sue for a couple of trolls calling me a troll?

Just because someone disagrees with you, or tells you that you can't write worth a shit doesn't mean they're trolling you, stupid.

You have got to be fucking kidding me.

Ahh sometimes we all get sucked into troll-ville. Thanks for the reality check, LB!

"I am not even going to take that shot. It's too easy."

Because you.. work for NASA? Have your PhD in trolling? Fill me in, please.

Loudmouth:

I picked that picture because I thought the woman in it was gorgeous with her Afro. "Classy" is subjective.

I can see where you might have thought that I meant all racism since I did not qualify the term. Given the context, I did not (and still don't) feel the need to. If you're interested in her work, please check out her web site or, better yet, read the book.

Understood LM. Please keep in mind that my comments are isolated to the reference to Dr. T's work, not this article.

One more thing, why did she have to pick a photo of a black woman dressed like Peg Bundy to illustrate that having an afro is not a fashion "don't"? Are there really no classy woman with afros on flickr?

GrapeApe, I just think it's stupid to fight racism by saying, "All people that look like this act like that" which is how Kristina represented her ideas in this write up.

I still think it goes both ways and it's ignorant to act like white people are the only perpetrators of racism in this day and age. I just know that this woman has come up before, among friends, and it's just kind of funny how people are lapping this up without seeming to even think about it.

LM, I believe she had to specify her topic here. Taking it on from all perspecitves would be a massive undertaking and probably confusing to most readers if they had to digest all of the varying principles guiding racism from each group. She was very open to discussing racism from a "insert non-white group here" towards white racism direction, at least with our class because I brought it up myself. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the subjects of the focus group were all educated white women as well. You can take that FWIW, but it's highly unlikely she is saying that all educated white women represent all white people. This is why understanding her topic focus is important to understanding her message.

Unless her entire argument has been misrepresented here in which case, you have some explaining to do, Kristina B.

I certainly didn't write that she thinks that white people are the only guilty party. It's just that Trepagnier's particular research focuses on white people. So, in other words, no one's denying that there's racism all over the place. It's just that this particular research is focused on white on black racism, a form that has been particularly damaging in American history.

If I'm wrong, excuse me, but saying that white people are the only people that are racist is for lack of a better word, ignorant. We're never going to improve race relations until she can stop pointing fingers at white people and say, "It's all their fault". If she does a story about how all black, hispanic, and asian people are racist, just in different degrees, then I might take into account the rest of what she has to say but she starts out at a disadvantage by saying this is a problem confined to white people.

Yeah, that's pretty much her point GA. Well said!

I'm going to disagree with you here LM. I had Dr. T as well and I agree with a lot of what she has to say. I do believe that her message is interpeted differently based on the way and where one grows up though. Racism is built into our culture, there can be no denying that; and understanding why is key to recognizing why racism still exists today on multiple levels. It goes a little deeper than simply saying you're either a member of the Klan or you're not.

She's both a fantastic lecturer and an important researcher on the topic of racism.

I am not even going to take that shot. It's too easy.

Dr. T was the best liberal arts professor i had in college.

That woman is so racist. I won't tell you how I know, I just know.