Excellent. Now, I have one request. I urgently advocate for an immediate shift in language away from ‘because he was black…’ to: ‘because of racist ideology’. My fervent wish is that we never, ever, from this moment forward, locate the cause of discrimination with the targets rather than with the perpetrators of racism (be they individuals, corporations, or institutions). Locating the cause of racism with its target reinforces racist indoctrination, however subtly. In the scheme of things, it might seem like a small detail, but my experience as a white person having heard this framing all of my life, is that what is about to follow is a dramatic story of a Black person that ends in either tragedy or triumph, but it will all be on them, for having been Black, of course. It's glaringly obvious how irrational and immoral this framing is, and yet, it's so pervasive it is even more effective at deflecting responsibility from where the problem originates. Thank you for receiving this.
I appreciate this, and I take the underlying concern seriously. Language that treats Blackness itselt as the causal engine of harm, rather than the racism that acts on it, is a real and pervasive problem. But I'd gently distinguish this case: "dismissed because he was Black" is describing Harvard's institutional action and its stated rationale. The cause named is Harvard's racism, not Delany's Blackness. It is the same construction as saying "she was passed over because she was a woman." This is shorthand for identifying that the institution discriminated against the woman because of her gender. I think the framing you're rightly worried about shows up more in constructions like "his Blackness led to his dismissal." Notice in this construction, Blackness itself becomes the subject doing the causing. Still, I think you are right to remind us to be on the look out for these kinds of constructions when they do, in fact, show up. Thank you so very much for reading the piece.
Thank you, Dr. Rogers. I appreciate that distinction. I'm on a soap box about this particular wording because I know how it falls on white ears (although it applies in reference to women, LGBTQ, disabled, etc) and in my own small way am aiming for relentless truthtelling. I am very pleased to know about your work now and will be reading more. Thank you.
Apologies for belaboring this, but I want to acknowledge that I brought a narrow focus to a few words within a thoroughly excellent and edifying essay, which I learned a great deal from. Again, I appreciate your work and your kind response.
Excellent. Now, I have one request. I urgently advocate for an immediate shift in language away from ‘because he was black…’ to: ‘because of racist ideology’. My fervent wish is that we never, ever, from this moment forward, locate the cause of discrimination with the targets rather than with the perpetrators of racism (be they individuals, corporations, or institutions). Locating the cause of racism with its target reinforces racist indoctrination, however subtly. In the scheme of things, it might seem like a small detail, but my experience as a white person having heard this framing all of my life, is that what is about to follow is a dramatic story of a Black person that ends in either tragedy or triumph, but it will all be on them, for having been Black, of course. It's glaringly obvious how irrational and immoral this framing is, and yet, it's so pervasive it is even more effective at deflecting responsibility from where the problem originates. Thank you for receiving this.
I appreciate this, and I take the underlying concern seriously. Language that treats Blackness itselt as the causal engine of harm, rather than the racism that acts on it, is a real and pervasive problem. But I'd gently distinguish this case: "dismissed because he was Black" is describing Harvard's institutional action and its stated rationale. The cause named is Harvard's racism, not Delany's Blackness. It is the same construction as saying "she was passed over because she was a woman." This is shorthand for identifying that the institution discriminated against the woman because of her gender. I think the framing you're rightly worried about shows up more in constructions like "his Blackness led to his dismissal." Notice in this construction, Blackness itself becomes the subject doing the causing. Still, I think you are right to remind us to be on the look out for these kinds of constructions when they do, in fact, show up. Thank you so very much for reading the piece.
Thank you, Dr. Rogers. I appreciate that distinction. I'm on a soap box about this particular wording because I know how it falls on white ears (although it applies in reference to women, LGBTQ, disabled, etc) and in my own small way am aiming for relentless truthtelling. I am very pleased to know about your work now and will be reading more. Thank you.
Apologies for belaboring this, but I want to acknowledge that I brought a narrow focus to a few words within a thoroughly excellent and edifying essay, which I learned a great deal from. Again, I appreciate your work and your kind response.
How is this not being read by more of us on this platform? Well researched and written with such infectious force! Thank you, Professor.
Thank you so very much for reading the piece.