I don’t know about breaking it down according to interest groups, but it is a good idea to give students the opportunity to look at history through one lens for a while, and then return to the general, “next war, please” approach. Maybe a women’s history month, a foriegn relations month, a class history month, that sort of thing.
Well this did come up in another thread. I’d leave it that generally all these proclamations get dutifully ignored anyway. They are feel-good resolutions that do little. My ethnic identity being in that list now merely feels condescending to me.
Mr. Freeman is wrong to think that we can or should ignore our hyphens though. Our hodgepodge stew of hyphens are what has given America its strength. It is of note to study the groups’ histories in America as individual group histories in addition to the contributions along the way. To understand the history of Irish immigration in America and how they were treated, Jews, Chinese, and of course Black Americans as well. Each culture has added its own flavor to the stew and influenced the others as well as the whole. Don’t ignore it. But enough with the condescending proclaimed months.
That must have been nice. My high school lit classes were pretty much the standard dead white guys (and chicks, there were dead white chicks too.) And it’s not like I had bad English teachers - I had several excellent English teachers in high school. But they didn’t deliberately include any black literature, which led to my classes not including a single book by a black author all through high school. (Though I read Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe for extra credit in my AP English class.)
Yep. I don’t know whether to be amused or disgusted by this constant refrain that says if we just stop talking about racism, it’ll disappear. Yeah, hiding our heads in the sand and making it impossible to discuss, let alone address, racial issues. That’s gonna help. I bet if we stop thinking about flu epidemics, none of those will ever happen either.
You know, some of Morgan Freeman’s best friends are black.
You’ve obviously not taken history in the US. My support for BHM rests solely on the fact that the US public education system has historically done a piss-poor job of integrating subcultures and disenfranchised peoples into their march of dead white guys (Dave Barry did an excellent spoof of this in his Sort of History of the United States). I don’t see this changing in the near future.
Also, as a side note, for some of my Afam Studies coursework (my minor in college), I worked with “From Slavery to Freedom: A history of African Americans” by John Hope Franklin. Man, that was fantastic. It covered the exact time periods most US history texts cover, but instead of the paragraph on blacks every chapter, it focused on their issues, conflicts, ect. So, instead of the Depression, I got to study the Nadir, etc. It was fascinating, and certainly more interesting in many respects than its ‘mainstream’ counterparts.
I’m sure this differs in other states, but you’re WAY off base when it comes to education in California. Having just completed my requisite American college history courses, I can honestly say that at least 40% of my American history education from grade school through college has been dedicated to black history. Early African exploitation, the plight of the slaves, integration and rights, etc. have far taken precedence over the ‘dead white guys’. That doesn’t even include the multiple novels by black authors in various english and writing courses.
Whenwas your last history class? If it’s been a while, you may be surprised how vastly the focus has changed.
There was a time I didn’t care for Black History Month for a variety of reasons. First, I thought it was divisive and secondly because it was pretty damn boring having to hear the same information about George Washington Carver got old. Several years ago I came to the realization that black history was just a part of American History and was no more devisive than other specializations in history such as European or the American Civil War.
Why do we need Black History Month? The obvious answer is because the contributions of black people in the United States had been ignored for many years. Growing up I had no ideas there were black people in the American West let alone black cowboys because they weren’t generally represented in motion pictures or in history courses. Thankfully, educators have gotten better about Black History Month and they present more people than Harriet Tubman and G.W. Carver and give us people like Bass Stevens (I think that was his name) who was the first black U.S. Marhsall west of the Mississippi River. He was Shaft before there was a Shaft and one bad mother— I’m just talking 'bout Bass. Or what about Steven Bond in Arkansas? Dude was born a slave but by the time he died he had acquired several farms in the Little Rock area and built himself up quite a fortune.
Filling out a school curriculium is difficult because there is a limited amount of time to teach it. That’s why most people have an incomplete view of history, and many say a very distorted one, because instructors only have time to teach the basics. So while I like black history month I do think those dead white guys are more important then even Harriet Tubman and literature courses will probably continue to be dominated by the likes of Dickenson, Twain, and Chaucer.
Marc
PS: I thought Tubman was a much better candidate for being put on the dollar coin. Far more important to American history and far more heroic than Sackajawea was.
Well… actually, I studied history all through Ohio public schools and a Pennsylvania prep school, where I was an AP U.S. History student. In college, I was a history minor and government major, with honors; my honors thesis was on presidential war-making powers. I don’t mean to brag, Stonebow, and please forgive me if it comes across that way. But I have “taken history in the US,” and I learned quite a bit about black history along the way. I suspect most other American-educated students of history, willingly or not, have done the same.
I’m also not into whatever-it-is-this-month, month. Do what the Irish, gays & lesbians do. Throw a big party. Make it fun. Don’t designate a whole month and expect I’m going to sit at home reading your books, contemplating and appreciating your specialness, and eating baked glazed ham in the school cafeteria thinking the whole time, “you know, if it weren’t for the wonderful contributions of African Americans, I wouldn’t be eating this delicious baked, glazed ham!”
Except that I’m gay. I don’t remember ever learning about gay history in school.
But I suppose the pride marches give America a nuanced, thoughtful look at the significance of gay people throughout history.
Well, I’m sure it’ll happen any time now.
Would you rather have a nuanced, thoughtful look at the significance of gays throughout history that bores people to tears, or a really fun kick-ass party a couple times a year that makes people actually want gays around?
:: checks location ::
Don’t fucking start with me. I have had it up to my fucking eyeballs with the freedom you breeders seem to feel to toss around stereotypes about gay people. No, I certainly don’t fucking think that Dykes on Bikes and guys in assless chaps represent gay people as a whole (though I certainly have nothing against either of them), and I find what you’ve said here grossly offensive on so many levels that I’m frankly shocked to see it here.
Not only do I think it’s not acceptable to decide that gay contribution to society is limited to the contents of parade floats, but I’m absolutely disgusted that you would decide to rate any group of people by whether they’re “fun to be around”. That’s the most utterly trivializing thing that I can ever remember hearing in my life. I certainly don’t give a rat’s ass whether you think I’m “fun to be around”, asshole (and I’m guessing you probably don’t.) Nor do I think being “fun to be around” is the major contribution that gay people have made to society, but I’m certainly glad you enjoy having my people around at your parties.
Jesus fucking Christ, when you type, do you actually look at the words that have dribbled off your fingers? Do you actually think that being “fun to be around” (for everyone else) is the limit of what gay people have brought to the cultural table? Gee, those negros sure used to be fun to be around. All smilin’ and playin’ music, dancin’ and singin’. Too bad they had to get all uppity.
You fucking asshole. I don’t doubt that you’re “bored to tears” by black history month, but that’s probably a sign that you were deprived of oxygen during birth and simply don’t have the capacity to think about anyone but yourself.
I’m not by any stretch trying to compare some hypothetical “gay history” to black history - I think that the United States has been shaped more by race relations than by any other single factor throughout its history. Not only did the history of black and white in America lead to the Civil War, but it has shaped every aspect of our modern country, from laws to the shape of our cities. I don’t expect you to give a crap about those things, but race relations are the history of the United States. And spending time to critically examine history from a strictly race-related point of view - hopefully with some scenic stops along the way to examine individual historical contributions by black people - is a matter of the utmost importance to providing any reasonable understanding of American history. I don’t think that gay people as a cultural group or a concept have had nearly this impact on the United States. I’m not trying to pretend otherwise. I think some time to examine the history of the gay rights movement, though, would be invaluable in education. It certainly never came up in my history classes. Other people may have had different experiences. Chances are pretty good that any special focus on gay people or on black people would be redundant in California or Portland or New York. But in other parts of the country, we’re still getting a lot of “Dead White Men”-type history, and if Black History Month is a first step in a more inclusive (and ultimately, more fruitful) examination of history, good. Let’s keep it. Let’s add in time for every individual group while we’re at it - but I think a strong historical case can be made that black history as a focus is a more productive and relevant one in many respects than most other possibilities.
levdrakon, I don’t expect you to care about the above paragraph. Black history month “bores you to tears”. Hopefully other people will enjoy it. For you, let me say that I’m absolutely not sorry in the slightest that it appears that gay people doing anything but throwing parties and being witty and sexless on sitcoms bores you. But hopefully, one day you’ll understand that what you’re bored by - probably a pretty broad spectrum of the human experience - is emphatically not what the rest of the world is, or should be, focusing on. I don’t care in the slightest that spending some time on black people in school “bored you to tears”. In fact, I hope very much that should any creature spring forth from your withered gonads, that it ends up being bored to tears by latino history, women’s history, gay history, and a hell of a lot of other kinds of history.
levdrakon, it’s clear that you’d like to see black people pipe down so they don’t “bore you to tears”. I hope above all else that you have very little company. I don’t expect you to understand how utterly demeaning it is to decide that an entire group of people with their own experience is valuable insofar as they’re fun for you. I hope, though, that you’re one of the few people left who is so small-minded as to think that way.
Incidentally, levdrakon, you may well not “want gays around”. I feel pretty certain that any other gay people who read what you wrote won’t want you around, though, you small-minded, pathetic, moronic little shit.
Aw, shit. Look at all I wrote. Bet levdrakon gets “bored to tears” trying to read it all.
Well no. I did get a bit cross-eyed. But not bored to tears.
Don’t worry, Morgan would just think you were a prick.