i’ve thought about this

About whether or not to write about, or more accurately, link about. When I was in college, I did a lot of work with race and gender. I really did more with race, but that kinda gets to the heart of the issue. Since leaving college, I’ve often talked about and written about these issues, but no real active involvement. Part of it is that I’m just kinda over it, over trying to explain the intersection of race and gender, tired of explaining to white women why my race is important, how I can’t separate them, how feminism has shut out the experiences of women of color. How I scan a room to see how many people of color there are but not really how many women there are. How a good friend and I consistently note how difficult we find it to get a long with white women but generally find most white men we come into contact with pretty cool. Latoya at Racialicious puts it beautifully:

In real life, I generally do not have cause to interact with white people on a regular basis. My friend group is diverse, encompassing people from various races, ethnicities, and backgrounds - but there is no white representation in my immediate circle. Besides one or two friends I held over from high school who I see semi-annually, I don’t see many white people socially. I hang in PoC areas, go to events dominated by other PoC, work for a international organization in a predominantly black department, I pay my rent to the rental office staffed by black and latina women, my neighborhood and my building is predominantly PoC - even the belly dancing classes I take are operated by and designed for women of color. Outside of my yoga studio - which is predominantly white, but still manages to attract a large mix of ethnicities to practice within its walls - I generally do not come into contact with white people on a regular basis. I see them commuting, on the metro, in transit - but my life is generally one long PoC party.

So, it is important to me to state that it is mentally taxing for me to go into non-PoC spaces on a regular basis. I find it exhausting. White dominated spaces are difficult for me to deal with because of all the issues involved with privilege and reference points. I find it tiring to be lectured at about my lived experience. I get weary when I see the same tired ideas rehashed over and over as if they have never been debunked before (i.e. - “Well, did you ever think that all the black actresses who tried out for that role weren’t as good, so they gave the role to a white woman?” Wow, no, I never thought of that! I guess that explains all those roles who are offered to certain actresses to accept or decline before they ever make it to the casting!)

While I understand how to navigate such a space, it is never a place I find comfortable and they are places where I am constantly on guard. One could ask why it has to be this way? Why should I assume I need to be on guard in a space created to foster discussion between women? It is because these spaces have been proven to be hostile - and dropping your guard in a hostile environment is the quickest way to get popped in the face.

I mean, she puts it perfectly. My life has a bit more day-to-day interaction with white people - school is dominated by it. But every other part of my life is pretty PoC - my husband, my best friends, my kid’s day care - all black. And that’s how a feel - like I’m navigating, not really a member, playing a role. And I know how to do it well, but when I have to over-do it…I feel drained.

I don’t know why I wanted to link to this, but it was just so true I couldn’t help myself. I hope no one is offended - it truly is not my intention.

plans

First, thank you for the be well wishes. I am still not well, but defintely on the case. I actually think I gave stress more credit than it should have gotten - there is definitely something funky going on in my body right now. Maybe it was triggered by stress, but I don’t think eliminiting stress is going to equal elimination of pain.

I had all these grand plans for my summer, from household stuff to research based stuff. So far, I have completed nothing. Ever since the quarter ended, I’ve been feeling lousy, but July 4th is almost here and I feel so under-accomplished. Some of my plans included:

• organizing the children’s clothing
• rearranging my office space
• cooking several vegan meals a week
• starting an exercise plan
• taking the children to some fun thing once a week
• completing my research interviews
• potty training the 2-year-old
• weaning the baby
• getting to my yoga center a few times
• sending a paper off to journals

These were my short term goals. I also started a list of longer-term goals, including 1-year, 5-year, and 10-year. I guess goals are just that - goals, not must-dos, but it sucks when you really want to be productive and your body is just not allowing it.

addendum, correction, ignorance on my part

In the previous post, I wrote about vegetarianism as a way to reduce cruelty against other living beings, animals and people alike. The people I referred to are those who are hungry across the world, in part due to the amount of grains fed to animals that could otherwise be fed to people. What I had not thought of, however, were the conditions under which people harvest vegetables and fruits, which are the staples of my diet. BFP writes a post about her memories of her father as a fruit and vegetable picker, and asks these questions:

Is a vegan lifestyle really a “cruelty free” lifestyle? Why is it so easy to prioritize cruelty inflicted on animals over cruelty inflicted on brown people? Why can people list a whole litany of wrongs committed against animals by the food industry–but at the same time those people “never really thought” about what happens to the workers?

Should I consider these things while contemplating veganism? Should I mourn them?

Can I bring myself to say with a straight face that I no longer eat meat because I care about ending violence against animals? Can I say to the workers, to myself, that even animals are more important to me than they are, than I am? Can I continue my own people’s erasure? Can I continue mine?

How do I make eating vegan/vegetarian a political choice about liberation without making the sacrifice one set of beings make with their bodies more important than another set of beings

One can never be sure, I guess, the plight of the people or animals in the food industry. I thought I was doing well by shopping for produce at the local farmers market, naively believing that “organic” and “local” farmers are treating people right. In some cases, they do state that their produce is pesticide-free, which addresses some of the concerns in BFP post. But even without the pesticides, how are the people treated?

* My best friend and I laugh at the story of my father riding our asses in the fields. We thought it would be easy and fun work–but my father road our asses into the ground with work. If we played or laughed too hard or got too caught up in our talking, we heard the mantra “We’re here to work, we’re here to work, we’re not here to mess around, get busy!”

* We laugh because we understand that The Mantra is our version of the “parental quirk” that other kids are horrified that their parents don’t hide–farting in front of friends, wearing hair rollers to drop kids off at school, etc. My old school Mexican father thought he was instilling values–instead he was just horrifying me and scaring the shit out of my best friend.

* But both of us as adults have expressed thankfulness for the experience–thankfulness that at 11 years old we had somebody driving us like full grown adults. Thankfulness that we had experienced what it was like to be “Mexican.”

But now I know that believing is not enough. I think this is part of the reasons people grow their own vegetables and fruits. While I don’t have the time to do that, I will make more of an effort to inquire about the lives of the people picking these vegetables and fruits that I self-admittedly felt so good about buying. And if I don’t like what I hear, I’ll be moving on. Because I do care more about people than animals. If it came down to it, I’d choose a person over an animal any day of the week.

h/t Anomie

perfectly fine

I’m almost done, but not quite. My first year in a PhD program is almost complete. One more paper is due Monday, and while it’s quite a bear, there is solace in knowing that once it’s handed in, it’s done. And then I’ll be completely done three days after being almost done. Which of course is not completely done as I need to re-run my ASA paper analysis, and then get started on collecting my data for my second year paper as well as read everything about my topic.

The paper I am working on now, in order to be quasi-done, was a choice of two options. The first option was to write your own paper, building upon earlier exercises in statistical methods. The second, the one I chose, was to replicate an existing article from a major journal that used the methods we learned and had publicly available data. It was by far the most difficult choice.

Why did I chose it? I keep asking myself the same thing, because I think it was a mistake. Our professor told us that by replicating we would learn more, but honestly, what I heard was that replicating was the harder choice so if you did it and did it well it would look more impressive. So despite the fact that I should be focusing on work that’s important to me, I chose to replicate an article on a topic that is not particularly important to me and that is super complicated. Am I learning about how to do what these authors did? Yes. Is it going to be particular helpful to me several years down the line when I may actually use these methods since I am using interview data for my master’s paper? No. Because by then, I won’t remember.

But I have no choice now but to continue plodding along, giving it my best effort for the next three days. But it’s taught me a lesson that one of my mentors stressed to me just yesterday. That lesson is to learn the difference between perfect and perfectly fine. It’s a lesson that I have really be trying to learn for a long time, and I think that a small part of my ego, which has been holding the lesson back, has been eroded, making a space for the lesson to finally sink in. It’s a lesson that I’ve really been learning this entire year, while doing what many people have said they can’t believe I am doing, grad school with two very small children. But I have to admit to myself that it’s been done by being perfectly fine because perfect is something I just cannot and will not ever be.

Truth be told, perfectly fine got me awarded a prestigious fellowship that frees me from the having-to-work-for-my-keep cycle. I haven’t told many people because I feel guilty for it, because I haven’t been perfect and felt like I could have done so much more so why did they choose me when I know other people have also been busting their ass.

tears of joy

Is there a need to say why?

disillusioned

Disillusioned commented about her concern with FMLA (Family and Medical Leave Act)* in academia:

I am in a non-tenure track position and when I told my chair I wanted to take FMLA I was told that he or she didn’t think it applied to me because I’m in a non-tenured position. This was quickly followed up with, “I helped write this university’s maternity leave policy. You should have seen it before.” I qualifed for FMLA. I know the law well (as does this chair) and had already discussed it with HR.

It is very annoying when people who are in supervisory positions make statements about policies without being correct. Many employees depend solely upon these people to know and are not as well educated about the law as D is.

I am also growing disillusioned by my field. Why are we patting academia on the back for extending the tenure clock one additional year for each child (this is not policy at all universities)? Why should I have less job security over a longer period of time because I’ve chosen to become a parent? These are people that know better (they understand the mommy penalty). Academia might be a “better” fit with parenthood than other careers but I’m growing less sure of that every day.

I’m not very familiar with the extension of the tenure track, but I thought it was more of an option that something that would definitely happen. Also, I thought that it was for the year after childbirth, when one might not be as productive. The way D puts it though, it’s as if because I have two kids, even though they’ll be like 8 and 6 when I enter the job market, my tenure clock will be extended. I don’t think I’d want that - it would be unnecessary and imposes a stereotype on mothers that may not apply. Are there others out there who have more experience with this? Is it an option? Does it apply to all mothers, regardless of the age of the child(ren)? Do people see it as a good thing or a bad thing?

I am also finishing up my doctorate and am growing frustrated over having to censor myself on social networking sites on the chance that potential employers (or my current employer) stumble upon my postings. I’m jealous of my non-academia mom friends that can post an ultrasound photo as their profile photo. I’m nervous posting it anywhere on my profile even though the profile is private, excluding the profile photo and headline.

If I were you, I wouldn’t hold that part of me back. If there is an institution that, after reviewing your dissertation, teaching portfolio, etc. that would not want to hire you because you have a child, then why would you want to work for them? I think it’s best to be straight-up in the hiring process because then everyone knows what they are getting. I also do not ever hide my kids when I don’t want to. My kids are all over my facebook page, I talk about them in my blurb on my department’s website, and I definitely plan to have more and talk about them, too.

My husband has also run into problems at his non-academic job. He is taking their paid parental leave and his boss told him he didn’t think he qualified because he isn’t the primary caregiver. What is a primary caregiver? He is no more or no less the primary caregiver than me.

Again, annoying. Although I sent my husband back to work after a week - I couldn’t take it

FMLA may be law but in practice intimidation is used inside and outside of academia to discourage workers from taking it.

You should read the work of these scholars at the ABF. They found exactly what you are talking about - employers using retaliation and intimidation to discourage workers from mobilizing their rights.

* In a nutshell, FMLA provides 12 weeks of unpaid leave for employees who have worked in their firm for more than a year at a firm who has over 100 employees. The real benefit of FMLA is job security - upon return to work, an employees must be restated at the same or better position than before the leave began. And the leave is not just for pregnancy - all medical issues with someone in the immediate family are covered.

Respect the Will of the Voters

Hat/tip to ADT:

Dear Friend,

Some leaders in the Democratic Party are playing with fire. They think that they can betray the will of millions of voters–and choose Hillary Clinton as the nominee, regardless of whether or not she is the choice of the voters. We can’t let this happen. It would be the largest disenfranchisement in modern history, and it would mean the Democratic Party giving their stamp of approval to a clear and consistent pattern of race-baiting by the Clinton campaign.

If we make our voices heard, we can stop it. Please join us in signing an open letter to leaders in the Democratic Party — DNC Chair Howard Dean, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and all super delegates — demanding that they reject an outcome that involves trampling voting rights and legitimizing the politics of division and fear:

http://www.colorofchange.org/dems/?id=2315-231446

By the time the last vote is cast on June 3rd under the rules of the Democratic Party, it’s unlikely Hillary Clinton will beat Barack Obama among voters. But there’s a chance that super delegates will hand Clinton the nomination anyway.

This would be a shocking attack on democracy, and it would destroy the Democratic party’s credibility on protecting the right to vote. Black people have a long history of fighting against voter suppression, and now the Democratic Party will be the enemy in that fight. As bad as that would be, there’s another reason that a coup by party insiders would threaten racial progress.

Senator Clinton’s plan to have super delegates hand her the nomination doesn’t make sense without a parallel strategy — she has to stoke enough division and race-based fear among Democratic voters to convince super delegates that white voters will not vote for Senator Obama in the general election. One of Clinton’s key arguments to super delegates is that America won’t elect a Black man, and therefore she’s the better choice for Democrats to beat John McCain. While she makes that argument in private to super delegates, in public Clinton’s campaign and her surrogates are doing everything they can to damage Barack Obama by ginning up fear and division and playing to the worst instincts of our society. It’s an insult to Black people and all Americans, Obama and Clinton supporters alike.

The pattern has been clear and consistent to some party leaders. Last week, according to the Washington Post, James Clyburn — who as House Majority Whip remains neutral and is the highest ranking Black member of Congress — accused the Clintons of marginalizing Black voters. Referring to this strategy in another interview, Clyburn said that “Nothing in this campaign has been by accident.”

Congressman Clyburn warned that “black people are incensed” over the divisiveness of the Clinton strategy and that it threatens an irreparable breach between Black people and the Democratic Party. He’s right. And if super delegates hand Clinton a victory despite her defeat among voters, they will be condoning and rewarding that strategy.

Some party leaders have expressed strong concern about super delegates overruling voters. But as a whole, super delegates have not made it clear that they will respect the will of voters. Today, we want to send a clear, unequivocal message to super delegates and other party leaders: Reject the idea that the nomination can be won with a strategy that preys on racism, sows division, and disenfranchises millions of voters.

Please join us: http://www.colorofchange.org/dems/?id=2315-231446

Thanks.

good night

I am so tired. That’s why I have been pretty lazy about blogging. The weekend was exhausting, although informative, and I made several contacts with graduate students and faculty from other universities. But it’s so hard to recover from being out of town. I had several assignments due during the week and a presentation to make tomorrow, so I haven’t even had time to unpack my suitcases. I did manage to go food shopping and celebrate my husband’s birthday, but I am keeping Starbucks in business and driving my family nuts with my moodiness because I am so freakin’ tired.

And that reminds me - I got sucked into taking a sleep survey this evening. I figured it was good karma in case I ever wanted to put out a survey for my own work. But I learned a lot about surveys in the process of taking it.

1. You should always tell someone how long the survey should take and then you should stick to that. I asked the woman, and she said she was going to go really fast to get through it. It took a half hour. That was not what I expected.

2. As a result, the questions at the end were not getting my full attention. I was really annoyed. So don’t make the surveys too long.

3. You probably shouldn’t answer the questions for the respondent based on what you think you know about this person. One of the questions was about stress, and she told me that she was going to say that yes, I’ve experienced a extremely stressful event in the past year because of the birth of my daughter.
I wasn’t allowed to answer the question myself. I actually didn’t consider the birth to be as stressful as afterwards, but I didn’t get the chance to say that. Is this a reason why surveys shouldn’t be trusted?

That’s it. I’m going to bed. Good night y’all.

wandering, day #2: race and the room

Race and the Room:

The conference takes place in a small auditorium with a balcony seating area. The first thing I immediately notice is the racial segregation of the room - it seems that most of the minority scholars are sitting in the balcony section, while the bottom section is holding mostly white men (older white men at that - it was like a sea of gray hair.) It is not very strict, as a well known white sociologist is sitting right next to me on the top row, and a white foreign sociologist is next to him. And, I think a big part of the segregation is that mostly students are sitting on the top, and perhaps most of the students present are racial and ethnic minorities.

Related to the segregation: a panel was presented on culture and entertainment, and one of the panelists presented a paper on hip-hop. The paper was very interesting, although the presenter, a non-black male, used the N-word when quoting some of the aspiring rappers he was studying. Every time he said it, in the slangish linguistic patterns of these young black males, in the halting patter of someone trying to speak in the black vernacular who is not used to speaking that way, it made my skin crawl.

Related to the old white men: I had a question for the panel, and was sitting in the very front row of the balcony. Time and time again, I raised my hand, only to be ignored each time in favor of a white man. It seemed that the moderator was making a special effort not to call on me, because by the time it was time for the forth question, the white man sitting next to me also raised his hand. He and the moderator were from the same university, and he then called on him by name. There was almost a riot in the balcony, for questioning was finished after his question. At least 15 people sitting in the balcony approached me during the rest of the day to discuss the blatant racial and gender issue that was going on.

wandering thoughts

I am currently in the Northeast for an academic conference. I’m not sure if what I will do in the future exactly fits with the theme of the conference, since it sounds pretty gritty and hard-core, but I love the method and the substance, so I trust that it will be an insightful and rewarding weekend. But as I travel more and more these days, things keep happening all the time that I just want to comment on them:

1. Men take up a lot of space that is not their’s to take. If I am sitting, let’s say in the window seat, on an airplane next to a man, who is in the middle seat, he seems to think that his knees, feet, and arms are entitled to extra space outside of the seat he paid for. I’ve had to say “excuse me” to insert my foot right up to the boundaries of my space just so he won’t take it. This has happened on several flights and at a concert I went to recently too. And they always have the nerve to look like I’m ignant for claiming my space.

2. The airport is extremely small. It reminded me how city-fied I am. My first instinct when I got off the plane was to call my hubby and say, “Yo, this airport is so small!”

3. US Air will never receive any of my money ever again. Last time I flew with them, earlier this month, they lost my luggage on the way to Philly, and I missed my connecting flight on the way back, having to spend the night in Vegas before getting home. This time, my luggage was lost again. I am supposed to attend this conference tomorrow, and I don’t even have a toothbrush or any toothpaste to rub on my teeth. And the guy at the ticket counter had the nerve to ask me if I had been through the claims process before so he wouldn’t have to waste his breath talking me through the process. This should not be something that happens to people multiple times. No more money from me. Next time we fly Southwest.

That’s all for now. Until tomorrow…