Study Hall! Raising multiracial children and addressing microaggressions.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
Happy Saturday!
Welcome to faces old and new! This Saturday recaps our emails from the previous weeks, answers questions that came in from the community, and offers resources others shared in response to the topics we discussed.
The Anti-Racism Daily started June 3, and all previous emails are available on our website organized by categories for easy review. We're also now on Instagram @antiracismdaily.
If you haven't already, know that you can make a one-time contribution on PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or contribute monthly on Patreon – but only if you choose. Thank you to everyone that's supported!
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Write out three questions you have from the content shared this week, and discuss one of them with a friend. If it's difficult, consider starting your questions with the following inquiries:
What would it look like if...
If this issue didn't exist, what would this newsletter be discussing about this issue in its place?
I never realized that...
What did I believe about this issue before?
GET EDUCATED
Your email mentioned, "shouldn’t we all be held to the same levels of accountability?" Can we create "one standard of behavior" across the board when it comes to race? When does setting different standards advantage the privileged or demean those who don’t hold privilege?
In response to Abolish qualified immunity, Monday, July 6.
I do feel we're missing a sense of standardization in how we hold each other accountable in relationship to the law. The qualified immunity conversation is fascinating to me because it makes it incredibly difficult to arrest and charge officials. Yet, we know that it is also much easier for Black people to end up in jail (previous newsletter). We already have standards of behaviors embedded in our Constitution that advantage the privileged or demean those who don't hold privilege.
In my opinion, we need to either abolish the standards that exacerbate the inequities or create new standards that counter the imbalance of power. We also need to be critical about who's creating the standardization, and what privileges their perspectives on the issue reflect. Your response mentions standardized testing (which is deserving of its own newsletters) as an example of standards that don't serve all. And it is in part because it wasn't designed to serve all.
Is it possible to create one standard that truly, equitably serves all? Perhaps not. But can we do a lot better from where we all now? Absolutely. And we must have these standards amend and iterate throughout time to best reflect the swiftly changing times we live in.
I know you referenced multiple times that cancel culture can be used in harmful ways and that it shouldn't be used to discredit the movement in general. But I think it's harmful not to name how harmful cancel culture can also be when it's not used appropriately.
In response to Understand the role of cancel culture, Friday, July 10.
I think right now the mainstream media is making that case well enough at the moment, which is why I didn't spend more time on it. I also think that appropriately is incredibly subjective – many people called cancel culture inappropriate when it was used to hold white men accountable during the #MeToo movement, and hold R. Kelly accountable re: sexual relations with minors. It wouldn't be my place to pick and choose examples of what is appropriate, or who is considered "well-informed" and who isn't, or whether victims of harm perpetuated against them are "taking it too far".
I also try to look at broader issues, like cancel culture, from an anti-racism lens, instead of the broader issue itself as a whole. That absolutely limits the scope of reporting on the issue itself and doesn't give a comprehensive look at the full picture. My hope is that we can understand how current events, and more importantly, our perception of them, can either accelerate or detract from dismantling systemic oppression. And as we watch dominant culture aim to cancel cancel culture, we need to understand how that can silence voices that need to be heard.
The action was to understand the role of cancel culture, not shield it from criticism. As we continue the work, especially on broad cultural and political conversations, it's important to remember that this newsletter cannot act as a single news source, single perspective, or sole comprehensive analysis. That's especially important to remember because there are so many -isms beyond racism that we need to dismantle, like sexism, ableism, homophobia and transphobia, etc, that are also impacted by these conversations. And although they often overlap, they each deserve their own lens (consider how the cancel culture movement gained fervor last week because of JK Rowling's transphobic comments, right off the heels of pride month and as so many trans lives have been lost these past few weeks).
Can I reference your emails when I contact my senator?
In response to Abolish qualified immunity, Monday, July 6.
Absolutely, share away. Whatever supports your activism. Feel free to forward our emails, or copy and paste content, however you need. But when you do, be sure to reference where it is from and who wrote it. You may notice this week we recently added bylines for contributors – as these conversations grow, it won't just be my voice anymore!
But I advise against signing anyone up for this email without their consent (local official, citizen, or otherwise). I understand the sentiment, but subscribing people in lieu of having a conversation about their racist behaviors likely isn't going to make an impact. It may even draw their animosity our way.
How are we supposed to know the breadth of microaggressions that a person can experience? And how can we assume that something we hear is a microaggression for someone else?
From Acknowledge the harm of microaggressions, Thursday, July 9.
There's not an expectiation that through this work you become an expert on all the topics immediately. There's a lot of binary thinking when it comes to anti-racism because there's a very binary goal – be actively anti-racist, or don't. But within it is a full scope and spectrum of learning and understand. The goal is to be consistently committed to the learning; a persistent student, always practicing the myriad actions we can take to dismantle white supremacy and learn along the way.
Side note: someone asked why I structure the emails with the action first, and the education following, feeling that it makes more sense to have the action at the bottom. But I want to emphasize, as I did in the paragraph above, that the active practice needs to be emphasized. It is the doing, not just the learning, that changes the world.
When it comes to racial microaggressions, there are more than enough instances of common questions, phrases, and terms used copiously to build a general understanding of what they are, and why they're harmful, so you can not use that language moving forward. And a healthy dose of empathy goes a long way. Paying closer attention to how your non-white colleagues show up in conversations, or respond to the language you're questioning, may also give you a clue that something isn't right.
You also mentioned that we can't assume that some microaggressions are considered microaggressions by everyone in the group. And you're right, it's never good to assume that all people from a same race are the same. But it is important to remember that if many people have actively said that language is harmful, it's likely to be harmful. So there's no need to use it and risk it, OR let someone else say it without addressing it.
I addressed a microaggression that a colleague made to a Black woman in our office, and she realizes her grave error. Should she now apologize to the Black woman?
From Acknowledge the harm of microaggressions, Thursday, July 9.
Great question! I wrote a whole newsletter on apologies on July 1, 2020; a follow up on one of the first newsletters we sent on checking in on June 6. I hope both of these perspectives are helpful as you continue to unpack this work.
Is there anything your parents did, or that you wish they did, that helped you to feel more comfortable embracing your biracial ancestry? What can I do for my children to help them navigate society and feel more confident in their identities?
From Honor the biracial / multiracial experience Tuesday, July 7
This is an excerpt from a response written by the original author Ebony Bellamy.
At a young age, I was educating my friends about being biracial because my dad and I always had open conversations about race. I grew up knowing I was different and that there was nothing wrong with that. My dad often shared stories about what it was like for him to grow up in NYC during the 60s and 70s (my dad was born in the late 50s). Those stories really shaped how I viewed my privilege has a biracial person because I learned how important it is to respect and honor different perspectives and cultures.
I think it's important to embrace all aspects of each race, so your children can grow up loving being biracial or multiracial. When they understand what makes each race beautiful and unique, they'll be able to embrace their racial identity with confidence.
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza