Ravenwood - 01/22/04 01:00 PM
Back in 2002, I criticized the practice of hyphenating Americans as a means of describing physical appearance. Rather than refer to someone as black or white, politically correct people demand that black people be hyphenated, as if they all came from Africa, or all people from Africa are black. Neither is true. (I've known black people from Africa, Europe, and even Virginia and New York.) At the time I wrote about how confusing it must be to some people, when others describe someone's natural origin, but they are really referring to stereotypes about their race.
I believe that we are all Americans, and hyphenation only creates confusion and superfluousness under the guise of sensitivity. Hyphenation is best deserved to describe people that are actual immigrants to this country, and not people that are born here. Even then, it should be used to describe where they come from, not the color of their skin. Forty years ago, an Irish-American was somebody who had come over from Ireland. If you wanted to know what color they were, you had to look at them.Well, it turns out I was right. This week, several students were disciplined by their school, because they made the mistake of assuming African-American meant African-American, rather than just referring to black people.
A small group of Westside High School students plastered the school Monday with posters advocating that a white student from South Africa receive the "Distinguished African American Student Award" next year.Apparently the school really wanted to just honor black students. But rather than creating an award just for black kids, they created an "African-American" award that appears to be based on natural origin. Unfortunately for the kids, their confusion led to suspension when they expressed support for their white South-African friend. On top of that, a fourth student was suspended for circulating a petition that criticized the school for creating an award that was based not on a person's character, but on the color of their skin.
The sad part is the message this sends to children.
- Recognizing black student achievement: good.And to top everything off, all this occurred on the day honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, a great American who championed the notion of not judging a person by the color of their skin.- Recognizing white student achievement: bad.
- Criticizing a school that would discriminate based on race: bad.
- Exercising your First Amendment rights: bad.
Great post, Steve. You hit it right on the head with this one.
Posted by: Mays at January 22, 2004 1:59 PMsurprising? no, of course not. appalling, yes, surprising, no.
The only thing that keeps me from jumping out in support of these kids is the obvious fact that they were grandstanding..... look at the timing AND the method. They plastered basically every locker in the school. They never asked if he would be eligible, they never used due process.
In every instance of civil disobedience (and more specifically, rabble-rousing), there are consequences.
Posted by: Jim S at January 22, 2004 4:42 PMThat's a bunch of B.S. (the punishment not your comments J.S.) It looks like grand-standing but I think the kids have legal grounds to do what they did. Freedom of speech and it seems that they should have the right to nominate a white person since he is african American. It's like that Fred Phelps deal. (Someone whom I don't like all too much.) Phelps wanted to put an anti-gay monument up in a public park because a memorial was put up for a gay man who died of aids. In the 10th court ruling any public property that displays ten commandments must also be allowed to display other religious items from other religions. In this ruling they allowed Phelps to do the same. (the stature was removed so Phelps couldn't put up his statue.)
So my opinion in short, any rule they put into the system SHOULD be used against them just to show how flawed their thinking is. But in doing so the person doing it better be ready t fight it out via courts and boards.
Posted by: Rhett at January 22, 2004 5:24 PMThe United Negro College Fund retains that name, I think. I take it they found some dignity in it.
Elsewhere, it's been a succession of euphemisms trying to escape the bad reputation of the previous name. African-American seems to have stopped the sequence with the dignity of not-being-from-here (and so not one of those others).
If it's racial dignity that's wanted, rather than personal, which is easier, dignity will return when the idea that an African-American might do something for a White Person is permissible. Because dignity has only one source, and that's doing something for someone else. Dignity can't be given, and can't be withheld either. When you see a Poor White fund maintained by some African-American organization, the name changes will no longer be necessary and the whole thing will finally end.
As it is, you get clowns claiming that the fight will continue until dignity is finally granted to them. I guess that serves the organizational goal, but nothing else. Don't let becoming human wait on how others treat you. They treat you as a clown because you are waiting.
Posted by: Ron Hardin at January 22, 2004 6:08 PMAs I once heard on the Boortz show: the exact term for what they were looking for would be "sub-saharan nubian american".
Posted by: TNAR at January 22, 2004 6:41 PMDid a little research on the issue and came up with some names and emails of the schools administration involved.
John Crook [email protected] Principle
Kent Kingston [email protected] VP
Pat Hutchings [email protected] AP
Bob Reznicek [email protected] AP
Marty Kauffman [email protected] D
Maryanne Ricketts [email protected] D
They already have my email wanting answers. I hope everyone else demands the same thing.
I have a ' - ' in my name, does that make me black?
Confused of London
(c) Ravenwood and Associates, 1990 - 2014
