Conversation On Race, II: We Address Matters of Race or We Suppress Them

Preparing For An Honest Dialogue: Examining The Sociology Of Race

Compiled by, Matthew A. Jendian, Ph.D.
Associate Professor & Chair of Sociology
California State University, Fresno

(The following essay is compiled from excerpts of Allan G. Johnson’s Privilege, Power, & Difference, McGraw Hill, 2000, and Paula S. Rothenberg’s White Privilege, Worth Publishers, 2005, which I have adapted, personalized, and made directly applicable to my paper.)

Publisher’s Note: We begin this historic dialogue on race relations with an essay written by Matthew A. Jendian, Ph.D., that we believe is very valuable in outlining the barriers that have entrapped us and prevented us from engaging in a sustained conversation about the complexities of race relations in America and across the globe. Moreover, we believe that the framework Dr. Jendian presents will enable us, if we are truly willing, to have an honest and open discussion that will yield meaningful and lasting results. Dr. Jendian’s essay will be presented in four parts and will guide our conversation over the next four weeks.

Janice S. Ellis, Ph.D., M.A.
Founder, Publisher & Executive Editor
USARiseUp.com

We Address Matters of Race or We Suppress Them

Many people have an immediate negative reaction to words like racism, sexism, or privilege. They don’t want to look at what the words point to. People ignore the trouble by trying to get rid of the language that names it. They discredit the words, twist the meaning into a phobia, or make them invisible. It’s become almost impossible to say racism or white privilege without most whites becoming so uncomfortable and defensive that conversation is impossible. And that’s part of the privilege – to ignore the reality of racism when it makes us uncomfortable, to rationalize why it really isn’t so bad, or to deny our role in it.

Since few people like to see themselves as bad, the words are taboo in polite company, including many diversity training programs. So instead of talking about the racism and sexism that plague people’s lives, people talk about “diversity” and “tolerance” and “understanding difference.” Those are good things to talk about, but they are not the same as the “isms.”

How do you talk about the consequences of social domination, subordination, and oppression without saying the words dominant, subordinate, or oppression? Our collective house is burning down, and we’re tiptoeing around afraid to say “Fire.”

The bottom line is that a trouble we can’t talk about is a trouble we can’t do anything about.

Words like racism and privilege point to something difficult and painful in our history that continues in everyday life in our society. That means there is NO WAY to talk about it without difficulty and without pain. It is possible, however, to talk about it in ways that make the pain worth it. To do that, we must reclaim these lost and discredited words so that we can use them to name and make sense of the truth of what’s going on.

Reclaiming the words begins with seeing that they RARELY mean what most people think they mean. Racist isn’t another word for “bad white people,” just as patriarchy isn’t a bit of nasty code for “men.” Oppression and dominance name social realities that we can participate in without being oppressive or dominating people. You’d never know this by listening to how these words are used in the mass media, popular culture, and over the dinner table.

Members of privileged groups will have an easier time in this paper if they try to tolerate the discomfort of such words and NOT take them as personal accusations. That’s not how I use them. As a person who is white, male, middle-class, and heterosexual, I know that in some ways these words are about me. But in equally important ways, the words are not about me because they name something much larger than I, something I didn’t invent or create, but that was passed on to me as a legacy when I was born into this society – positions I occupy in the social structure.

If I’m going to be part of the solution to that legacy, it’s important to step back from my defensive sensitivity to such language and look at the reality it points to. Then I can understand what it names and what it has to do with me, and most important, what I can do about it.

What do you think?