 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
INTRO
Residuals of Racism This book is primarily for Black women,
but I believe that women in general can profit from it sociologically,
politically, emotionally and sexually. It is an exploration into
the fundamentals of racism and sexism, which allows women to
realize how they are used sexually by men for sport, politics,
profit, and power. There is an underlying theme of sex power
in this book, as well as in the world. An interesting spin on “The Golden Rule” says: “he
who has the gold makes the rules.” However, this idea seems non-transferable
to women because the sexual power of women has been a natural
resource that white men, and men in general, have historically
mined and exploited; creating a world that has been continually
run on possessive policies for centuries: “my wife, my woman,
my girl” has been the male mantra for more than a millennium. This is not another male bashing book
because I check women and their nonsense too. But the politics
of sex and power is an interesting study, especially when one
looks at Why Black Men Love White Women. For Black people racism and sexism are one in the same, an issue
I will explore further in a later chapter. In the world of racism
and white supremacy, power and control through economics are
the key components for its survival, and the fuel for this survival
is often sexism. The white male world creates a false
sense of security for white women in order to increase their
power and control. This is done by using their stewardship to
ostensibly protect women and children. If there is a plane crash,
fire, flood, or other disaster, the priority is to save women
and children first. This is rubbish, because in kinder times
women and children are raped, beaten, abducted, abused, and murdered
habitually. Why are their lives more important during times of
crisis rather than in moments of calm? Governments also use women
as political fodder to gain sympathy and support for the next
atrocity they want to level on their enemies. How many times
have you heard politicians say that their enemies killed “innocent
women and children?” The hustle here is that they are not
worried about their “male selves” but their women are innocent,
helpless and are in greater need of protection: “so
could we have some more bombs so we can blow up more shit.” Calvin C. Hernton finds: “...white women are largely denied
the means and opportunities of economic, political, and social
advancement...”1 If women had been
equally included in all phases of their politics and society,
then they would not appear so helpless. But keeping women at
a certain societal standard encourages men to keep power exclusively
to themselves. This way they get to control the bombs and the
babes too. As it relates to Black people, whites
(males mostly) seek to control both sexes in order to perpetuate
the above. As a result, the white woman is psycho-socially conditioned
to fear the Black male and the Black female. They in turn become
the ultimate obstacles the white woman; the Black woman represents
a sexually competitive challenge and the Black man represents
a frightening physical one. One can take her man and the other
can take her humanity, and the white man represents the sheriff
that will protect her from both of them. Regarding the white woman Hernton
continues: “...their lives are drudged with the boredom of false
chivalry and uneventful days and nights.”2 Additionally, her male counterparts created fear and anxiety within
her by instilling the myth of the sex crazed Black Boogie man;
they then elect themselves as her sole protector, which thereby
increases their power. Historically, politicians have used this
hustle to pimp their way to power for centuries. Mississippi
Governor James Kimble Vardaman did just that. According to David
M. Oshinsky: “...the ability to protect one’s wife and daughter
from the black beast” had become a vital substitute - a compensation of sorts - for
the ability to shield them from the ravages of hunger and debt.”3 Vardaman’s campaign
banner read: A
VOTE FOR VARDAMAN IS A VOTE FOR WHITE SUPREMACY, THE SAFETY OF
THE HOME AND THE PROTECTION OF OUR WOMEN AND CHILDREN (emphasis
mine). Oshinsky continues: “...a vote for Vardaman meant that
a white man, however humble, could always consider himself superior
to the Negro.”4 Vardaman characterized
Blacks as “lazy, lying, lustful animals.”5 He claimed that
Blacks were “...demanding social equality, pursuing white women
and committing awful crimes.”6 It is this sexual climate that has
created a great deal of insecurity in many white women, confusion
in Black men, resentment in Black women, and power for white
men. O.J. is mentioned in this book often
because he, as well as his fate, are by far the quintessential
examples of this power play. But O.J. is not the only pawn used
to perpetuate power. In 1989 a white woman was raped in New York's
Central Park and a group of young Black and Latino boys were
arrested and later convicted of the crime. All hell broke loose
and everyone from Black preachers to white movie stars were on
television sobbing for the victim. New York’s first Black Mayor,
David Dinkins, called the boys “urban terrorists.” The white
world was in an uproar because the boys “confessed” to the crime.
It was an open and shut media case. Donald Trump - a private citizen - placed
a full page ad in the New York Times which levied harsh criticisms
against criminal activity in the New York area. Many in the Black
community thought this was a direct assault on the character
of the young boys, further inciting support against them. The
concern for this one white woman's life led to a witch hunt on
five innocent boys and a malignant neglect for the opinion of
millions. I say innocent because another child did not “confess” and
was not convicted - there
was nothing except their statements that linked them to the crime.
If the other boys had not “confessed” and “implicated” one another,
they may not have been convicted. Thirteen years later, it was
reported as a miscarriage of justice. At the time of the incident,
exculpating reports by the Black press went unnoticed because
the woman was adopted by the main stream media to the point of
delinquency. Various newspapers reported that no
physical evidence could be linked to the boys and even the semen
found on the woman matched none of them. Their “confessions” were
inconsistent and many experts said that they may have been coerced. According to interviews with ABC’s Primetime Live, two experts in coerced confession, Professor Richard Ofshe of
the University of California, Berkeley and Professor Saul Kassim
of Williams College, say that “interrogation techniques can encourage
false confessions.”7 They also point
out in “sixteen year old Kharey Wise’s confession, in which Elizabeth
Lerderer appeared to be guiding his answers”8 Ofshe says, “what you see is Elizabeth Lerderer
working like mad to try to get these kids to say things that
are consistent with the facts as she knows it.”9 According to Professor Kassim, the situation gets even worse when
the “police brought [Kharey] Wise to the crime scene before he
gave his confession... Kassim said that was a “flagrant” violation
because the point of taking a confession is to get a “free and
open narrative” that proves the suspect has first hand knowledge
of the details of the confession.”10 Kassim continues, “you
want to know from the confession was this the culprit, does he
know the scene? If you take him there, if you show him photographs,
you’ve not only compromised, but you’ve destroyed the diagnostic value of the confession.”11 (emphasis added) All of these issues were discussed
in the New York Black periodicals and on radio programs. In the
Black public there was more than reasonable doubt about the guilt
of these youngsters. But the life of five young boys was worth
nothing in comparison to that of this one white woman. Coerced or forced confessions are
nothing new according to New York Police Department Lt. Eric
Adams: “In 1968, George Whitman, a 19 year old African-American
male, signed a confession that he murdered two white female New
Yorkers, Janice Wylie and Emily Hoeffert. The chief of detectives
at the time boasted, “we got the right guy, no question.”12 This turned out
to be incorrect when the virtue
murderer was apprehended. During more current times in 1989,
Boston resident Charles Stewart caused the police to round up
Black Bostonians when he stated that a Black male shot his wife.
One of the men arrested allegedly wrote a detailed statement
confessing to the act. It was later revealed that the confession
was untrue because Mr. Stewart had killed his own wife.”13 Part
of the code of police deviancy directly relates to prejudice: “...situations in which minority groups receive less than impartial
neutral objective attention, especially those who are less likely
to have “influence” in city hall to cause an arresting officer
trouble.”14
|