I am not sure in the case of the Michelle story. I am not sure at all she means that as an example of skin color bias, just that the First lady wasnt recognized.
Thank you. So it sounds like she did not think that this incident was an example of racism at all.
Or, she used it in different contexts to mean two different things. I’m still finding it impossible to believe that she was talking about anything other than racism given the context of the interview and all the other stuff she said. Unless it was really, really bad reporting but keep in mind that we are talking about T[del]he New York TImes[/del] People Magazine here.
I think People Magazine took it out of context. Reading her exact words, in both excerpts, does not indicate anything where she thought it was racist.
Here’s the source article. It’s too short to quote enough to put it in context without exceeding the copyright rules here, so read the whole thing.
Note that in Shodan’s link, she describes herself as being “under cover”. In this article she says she is “not highly disguised”. Memory is a very pliable thing.
This may sound conceited if that’s true, but wouldn’t you think that people would recognize the First Lady, if not others but then at the very least Michelle Obama, who has been in front of the news a lot more than say, Laura Bush?
Look how she was dressed:
cap, sunglasses, dressed down. I wouldn’t recognize her.
Wow! I see a lot of truly effective/compassionate communication happening here. <<<note sarcasm
Okay, so much for my dumbassed opinions… on to my true-life experiences.
For whatever it might possibly imply to anyone…I am white, German/Jewish+Scottish/French. Gee, a whooole lot of alcohol must pass through my bloodstream on a daily basis, huh? GRIN
All 3 of my caucasian blood-sisters have children w/black men. All of the guys are loving kick-ass money-making providers. Thank GOD, otherwise, as The Alaskan Badass, steps WOULD be taken. I was the unbeaten Alaskan Hells Angels arm-wrestling champion for 20 years until I was offered a job as a security guard in Maui, HI 5 years ago.
What it all comes down to >for me< is that people are people. We’re all different, color aside, alot of which stems from our individual PARENTING. It isn’t COLOR itself that decides our individual selves.
Merry Christmas.
I am not here to argue/fight/namecall, but to intelligently discuss & debate. Feel free to rip my argument into shreds as best you can. 
Welcome to the Dope!
Thank you! I was here several years ago - it’s good to be back1
Right, but the whiskbeerbeaujolevitz has to taste pretty nasty!
Yeah, I think the point of the First Lady’s story was that, when the veneer of her status in society as the FL was removed, and she became just another person, she was assumed by another party to be in a service role.
So, trying to claim that it exacerbates the situation because “someone saw the first lady, but because she was black, they asked her to serve them”, is missing the point.
The Obama’s were trying to say that all things being equal, black people are viewed as lower status on initial assessment by the general public. I find it hard to believe anyone would disagree with their assertion given the countless mounds of sociological research supporting the notion. Such as studies about the hiring practices with “black sounding names”, perception of danger studies and even dispensation of pain medication studies.
That was the point of the story the second time she told it. When she told it the first time, on Letterman, it did not sound like she felt herself to be put into a service role - she was happy about being asked, the reason was that the lady who asked her was short, there was no hint that she was being put down at all.
Then the second time she told it, it became an example of insidious racism.
Regards,
Shodan
I’m of South Asian descent, and when I go into the local grocery store after work in a business suit, I’m asked by little old ladies if I could help them find some item or another. Having been raised to be considerate toward my elders, I usually do help them. Though I was often a bit peeved.
I recently realized that this wasn’t so much racial stereotyping as mistaken identity. The met the store manager, an Indian gent approximately my age. I guess the little old ladies are used to asking him for help, and are confusing me with him. I will point out that I am at least 50 pounds heavier, and my suits are probably three times the cost of his, but those are just minor details. There are very few Asians in our area, almost none until the last 20 years or so.
What does bug me is my coworkers asking me for help with technology problems. I work in Finance. There is no reason to assume I know more about networking or printer setups than anyone, except that I “look like” a lot of guys in IT. I even got asked by the department head to be the backup for the Planning System Admin. I’m not even a frequent user of the system.
Hmm, some gentle and kindly words of advice.
But here’s the interesting thing. I didn’t say anything about picking isolated sentences and picking on them, as you imply. What I was talking about was “pick[ing] on isolated sentences of this post and tak[ing] them out of context”. Which, ironically is exactly what you’re doing here, in leaving out the underlined clause. And is also exactly what you were doing in the other examples where my reaction so displeased you.
Speaking of picking on for extended periods, this seems to have really gotten under your skin, and you’ve continued to bring the matter up again and again in unrelated threads. If you want some gentle advice for yourself, that approach is not going to work. Try to become a new and improved LHOD, and take more honest approach which does not rely on slick wordplay and misrepresentation, and you’ll do a lot better. Snarking at me in thread after thread is just going to get you more of the same.
The rest of your post was substantive and raises a valid point, but as I’ve already said, I am not inclined to address these issues in this thread.
That wasn’t actually interesting. Or, y’know, remotely accurate.
Ah well. Worth a try, I suppose.
But she never said that. She was simply asked (as a very tall person) to help a shorter person get something down from the top shelf. This happens all the time if you’re tall. Nor was she dressed as someone in a service role, since she was wearing a baseball cap and sunglasses, which Target employees dont do. Nor was she wearing red.
The second time- People magazine took it out of context. There’s nothing in her words that indicate she thought there was anything racist going on.
I think there are many explanations for the different interpretations of the story. Some of them involve MO having a poor memory, or misinterpreting what happened, or changing her mind.
But being disingenuous? That makes no sense.
“Aha!” she would think. “I would like to trick white Americans into thinking that there is still racism! To do so, I will take a story I have told before in which there was no racism, and which I’ve told before without including racism, and tell it again, only this time I’ll say that there was racism involved!”
If you want to trick white people into believing there’s still racism in the world, that would have to be about the dumbest possible way to go about playing the trick. Why not just make up a new story?
AFAICT you are correct. It appears People magazine assumed she was giving it as an example of racism because President Obama was talking in that context.
Regards,
Shodan