How does being white disqualify a person from having empathy toward those who have suffered oppression?
I’m pretty darn white, and during the time of legalized slavery in the U.S., my ancestors were busy fleeing from various Eastern European pogroms, having ended up in Eastern Europe after being expelled either from the Iberian Peninsula or, farther back, Israel (I haven’t gone far enough back in my genealogical research to know exactly where the various branches of my family were from before they landed in Ukraine, Poland, and Latvia, respectively).
I think I have a pretty fucking clear idea of the consequences of oppression; it’s how I ended up being born in America, after all.
Originally posted by Airman Doors, USAF
In a sick sort of way, the ancestors of slaves should actually be grateful that their ancestors paid a price that they don’t have to pay so that they have the privilege of complaining about something that never happened to them anyway.
I should be happy that my ancestors were beaten, killed, raped, treated worse than animals, then when it was considered politically expedient set free to suffer more indignities. I should be grateful that my ancestors had to fight tooth and nail to get the right to be treated as humans in this country. I should be grateful that because some people went to Africa and decided they could take my ancestors and profit from their work, I now get to live in a country, in 200 fucking 3, where I have to teach my daughter to ignore people who say that her skin is not beautiful because it’s brown.
How in the flying fuck do you know what kind of condition the african continent would be in if it hadn’t been raped and pillaged by the civilized and enlightened euoropeans?
I am most decidely not grateful for being saved from a life in Africa. I am grateful that given the tremendous adversity placed upon them, my ancestors were strong enough to survive and overcome it, and because of their strength I can live here in relative comfort.
Our country is not yet colorblind. It is still a struggle for african american children to make sense of their history here and how it affects their lives now. I think that since this is still such a charged issue, a well-informed african american should teach an african american history class.
Can you not read? I said a “well informed african american”.
I think an african american, who has become well versed in american and african american history, would be a better choice to teach an african american history class because he or she would be more likely to have first hand knowledge of the effects of this history and because african american students might feel more comfortable talking about their experiences, and learning about their history from an african american.
Ummm, what about the non-African American kids? And how often does any given school have a choice of 2 equally qualified teachers, one white and one African-American?
This reminds me of a time here in Austin where an African-American organization was putting together a big art exhibit where they wanted to get one photographer, one painter, and one sculpter to help put together an exhibit that would help show “African-American Life in America.” The big hooplah was over the fact that, after reviewing many different artists, the all black commitee ended up picking work provided by all white artists. Everyone else complained so much, they threw out those choices and picked out new ones.
I think AHunter3 made a good point that many others overlooked due to his other big quote…the whole concept of teaching this history as an “Our story” kind of gig. When one wants to learn about their history and heritage, they want to learn it from the source. If one wants to learn about their Irish heritage, they’ll seek out books and such produced by Irish authors as a more credible source. It’s the same thing here, from what I can tell. Parents want their children to learn about their culture from someone who shares that culture, and there’s nothing wrong with that.
What is wrong is this woman’s attitude that any white teacher is “the kind of man who enslaved [our ancestors]”. That’s just racist shit and nothing but the sign of a true bigot. She’s not concerned with the fact that the children won’t get an honest, objective education full of information and facts, she’s just concerned that a white teacher’s going to profess lies to the students as truth, and is being just another tool of “white oppression”, and that shit’s just fucking sick.
Just out of curiosity, mornea, are you advocating that my ninth-grade Alabama History teacher shouldn’t have been a black woman? Because, after all, a black person (and a woman, at that!) had no say whatsoever – political, social, educational, etc. – in the majority of Alabama’s history. Heck, if George Wallace had had his way, black people wouldn’t even have been able to attend the state university.
Should I start a retroactive campaign to have my old teacher removed from her position?
On preview, I see that others have made similar points. I’ll close with one last thought:
Just because someone is well-informed doesn’t mean that person is automatically a good teacher. I took an algebra class in college that messed me over completely – and I was good at math. But the professor, the head of the mathematics department, wasn’t accustomed to teaching an entry-level class; he taught 400-level (fourth year) stuff. He simply couldn’t teach the lower levels of math. He was a brilliant man, and knew the information, theories, data and such backwards and forwards, but he sucked at conveying that knowledge. Out of 35 or so students who signed up for that class, only nine or 10 actually finished it. The rest (including me) dropped the class before mid-term.
How exactly does the qualifier “well-informed” cancel put the fact that you think skin color determines one’s ability to teach and knowledge of the subject?
Would you be willing to keep non-black students from attending African-American history classes? That would follow because you think “African-American students might feel more comfortable talking about their experiences, and learning about their history from an African American.”
Not in MY kids’ school, heretic! Need I point out the percentage of European Catholics?
So what we need is a white Catholic teacher for between 450AD and 1500AD, a team of Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, and Calvinist teachers for the next 500 years.
Where we will find enough believers in Zeus/Jupiter to teach Ancient European History may prove a problem so insurmountable we cannot offer the class anymore.
Obviously we need a white teacher to teach the white kids how to enslave the black kids, and a black teacher to teach the black kids it isn’t their fault.
Y’know the actual story is really more balanced than the reaction, here. That last quote by Ms. Hogan is silly, out of context, but the actual complaint was not simply a white-vs-black teacher issue.
Specifically, the black teacher has demonstrated exceptional competence over a period of seven years and the school appears to be saying that they are going to remove that particular teacher based solely on an unspecified “scheduling” problem. If I were in the Oberlin district, I think I would be upset that the school is treating the teachers as interchangeable pegs. I know darned well that personality (including personal history and culture) has a lot to do with the quality of presentation and that teachers are not interchangeable.
This does not mean that every black has a better ability to teach a course involving slavery than every white. A black teacher who is ill-informed or who believes (to the point of teaching it) that Cleopatra was black would certainly not be as effective a teacher as a well-informed white. Getting Ms. Hogan’s quote, however, is typical journalist sensationalism as there is no indication that the general complaints were based on color, but on experience.
(I also think that a case can be made for a teacher with a personal background being able to bring more to a course than one who is “merely” educated. The best courses I have experienced have been taught by people who had a personal connection to the material, whether it was a first-generation American discussing immigration or a combat vereran discussing military history or any of several other subjects. On the other hand, I have also had a really horrible course taught by a person with a vested interest who brought all sorts of personal issues to the class, so I don’t think that an a priori judgement can be made on that issue.)
No it does not follow that I would want to keep non-african americans children out of the class.
I think it would be beneficial to everyone. Having the authority figure in the classrom be someone that could be identifed with the subject matter being discussed (african american history) has several benefits, provided that the teacher is not prone to fostering an us v. them mentality and that the teacher is well educated.
It allows the non-african american students to gain additional access to african american experiences.
It gives african american students the opportunity and possibly makes it easier for them to ask questions they may feel uncomfortable asking anyone else.
By showing a well educated african american teaching the class, automatically the oppressive feelings that can be felt are diminished. By this person being present, the statement is already being made that we have come far beyond slavery.
These are my feelings and opinions on the subject, based on my personal experience and education. I think a lot of the comparisons being made in this thread are not equal. There is no other issue in american history that is this charged and has such an effect on the relations of people in this country.
I’m not suggesting that white people can’t understand african american history or that they can’t empathise or teach it well. I just believe that, all else being equal, at this point in time the students would be better served by having an african american teacher.
I respect your opinion, and can certainly empathize with the idea of wanting more black role models as teachers. But the trouble here is that all else is rarely equal.
While it’s true that teachers should not be treated as interchangeable cogs in the school’s machinery that in no way excuses the statements made by Ms. Hogan.
Stating that all white teachers are “the same as” the people who did the enslaving is, at best, very poor wording, and at worst outright racism. So far as I can see those quotes are not taken out of context and there are no other quotes from Ms. Hogan in the article which might indicate the more generous interpretation. While acknowledging the possible error in changing teaching assignments due to a scheduling conflict surely you (tomndebb) also recognize that Ms. Hogan’s concerns seem primarily caused by (what appears to be) a prejudiced viewpoint.
Note that Ms. Hogan apparently is from an outside organization and that her quotes are thrown in to cap the article in which none of the parents who have objected have said anything similar.
I actually have a certain sympathy for the philosophical viewpoint expressed (slightly differently) by AHunter3 and mornea. However, my experience indicates that there are sufficient human examples that contradict the point in the real world that I doubt that genuine hiring (or assignment) practices should be based on them. I certainly know several blacks than whom I would be a far superior teacher of black history or slavery or Jim Crow. Putting out incorrect information does no one any good in the final analysis. But I do agree with their points that there are subjects that can be much more fully (and correctly) explained by persons with appropriate cultural backgrounds.
As an example: We can read in history texts of the Know-nothing party, the KKK, and the Palmer Raids. Using sufficient information, any teacher should be able to address anti-Catholic prejudice in the U.S. However, if I were teaching such a class and a student raised a question on the issue, I have the experience of knowing that the land for each of the first two churches I attended had to be purchased through an anonymous middleman (in the 1920s and 1930s) because the Archdiocese of Detroit could not find a seller, despite large Catholic populations in the two towns where I grew up. I can recall specific taunts about the “criminal” nature of Catholics (and don’t forget all the babies buried in the convent walls) that I endured as a kid walking to a Catholic school amid other kids going to their separate public schools. I can reflect on the fact that my mom was physically intimidated by the KKK as a child in her own neighborhood in Indianapolis. These insights give me a better grasp of what it is like to be a minority or to face persecution than had I simply gotten the information from a book. (I do not consider any of my experiences or the experiences of my ancestors to be comparable to that of black Americans. I am only pointing out ways that my background enhances my ability to speak on issues of being a Catholic in the 20th century U.S.)
On re-reading the article, I notice that an A.G. Miller expressed sentiments similar to that of Ms. Hogan. However, he is also portrayed as an outsider (probably recruited by the parents for support because he teaches at Oberlin College).