ARCHIVES
EDUCATION | COVID-19 | TECH | SOCIAL | WORK | ENVIRONMENT | POLITICS | CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Don’t forget to subscribe ›
Decriminalize sex work.
Happy Friday! I became quite passionate about today's topic after hearing Layleen Polanco's story, and the injustice she suffered after being arrested for prostitution and drug charges in NYC. Meanwhile, solicitation charges against Robert Kraft were dismissed yesterday in court. The sex worker industry disproportionately harms communities of color and other marginalized populations. Ebony walks us through the relationship between consensual sex work and law enforcement below.
Also, many of you noted some strange link issues with the social graphics. Not sure why. Hopefully, they're fixed now, but know that we also post them on Facebook and Instagram each day (in fact, we share more images than we include here)!
Thank you for your contributions. If you enjoy this newsletter, you can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $5/mo on our Patreon.
– Nicole
TAKE ACTION
1. Tell your senator to oppose the EARN IT (Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies) Act, which will implement dangerous online censorship that will disproportionately impact marginalized communities. Learn more and sign >
2. Do your research and see how your state representative voted for SESTA/FOSTA and other prostitution-loitering laws.
3. Support organizations such as Sex Workers Outreach Project, Helping Individual People Survive (HIPS), and Erotic Service Providers Legal Education and Research Project (ESPLERP), who are actively fighting for sex workers’ rights.
GET EDUCATED
By Ebony Bellamy (she/her)
Note: This article discusses sexual assault and violence against sex workers. Please be aware this content may be triggering. Read with care.
Sex workers are regularly targeted, abused, and profiled. And marginalized communities suffer the most from this. Of the 41 sex workers who were murdered in the US in 2015, 17 were Black, and 12 were transgender women (Amnesty International).
In 1985, in Los Angeles, the L.A.P.D. knew a serial killer targeted Black women in the South Central community, yet waited until 2007 to alert the public about the murders (Vanity Fair). The killings were occurring for 22 years before the general public knew about it. To keep these crimes secret, police officers allegedly used “the unofficial acronym ‘N.H.I.’ (“no humans involved”) to describe the slayings of prostitutes and drug addicts” who were the main victims of the serial killer (Vanity Fair).
Between 2012 and 2015, the State Division of Criminal Justice Services reported that 85% of the individuals arrested in New York for loitering for prostitution were Black or Latinx (Survivors Against SESTA). At that time, anti-loitering policing was highly concentrated in Bushwick, Belmont/Fordham Heights, East New York, Hunts Point, and Brownsville because their residents were predominantly people of color (The Village). And approximately 68.5% of arrests for loitering prostitution* were made in those communities, with a vast majority being women.
In Calfornia, Black women made up 42% of all prostitution-related arrests in 2015, despite representing only 2.8% of the state’s population (Survivors Against SESTA). In Chicago, 90% of all prostitution-related arrests in 2017 were connected to selling sex, and 8% were for buying sex (Chicago Reporter). This means women of color are more likely to be arrested for sex work than men who receive their services.
This stems from loitering laws being based on whether or not an officer believes someone is “loitering for the purpose of prostitution” (Chicago Reporter). Police can make prostitution-related arrests even if they don’t have evidence the person committed a crime. In NYC, officers have regularly cited a woman’s clothing as evidence of her engaging in prostitution (The Village). And everything from tight leggings to a bra strap showing has been listed as evidence.
“When you have factors like an article of clothing or the fact that you are one gender and you are talking to people of another gender, you have to expand your view and ask, where is this happening that’s not being policed? And our answer with the loitering case is, everywhere, except these places when the police decide these are the arrests they are going to make.”
Sarah Mogulescu, a survivor of anti-loitering policing via The Village
These arrests happen so frequently that in 2015, the FBI reported more than 30,000 prostitution-related arrests. And of those, 39.9% of arrestees were Black, and 18.7% were Latinx (FBI). But, when violence is committed against sex workers, police often neglect or ignore these cases (Amnesty International).
According to a 2015 report conducted by the DC Trans Coalition, approximately 23% of Black transgender individuals were physically or sexually assaulted by the police because they were perceived as transgender and involved in the sex trade (Amnesty International). This interaction has made transgender sex workers weary to ask for help. About 27% feel somewhat uncomfortable, while 32% feel very uncomfortable (31.8%) seeking help from the police (Meaningful Work).
This community is heavily policed because officers assume transgender women of color are involved in the commercial sex industry (Chicago Reporter). Commercial sex work includes stripping, street prostitution, brothel prostitution, paid domination, and sexual massages, among other things (National Association of Social Workers). And this belief has caused officers to frequently police places they know transgender women socialize at (Chicago Reporter).
Police even target people with prior arrests for prostitution, despite their charges being dismissed. They often follow these individuals around until they catch them engaging in prostitution-related acts such as “approaching a vehicle” and “beckoning to multiple vehicles passing by with male drivers” (The Village). This, unfortunately, creates a cycle of arrests and incarcerations for transgender women, whether they’re involved in the sex trade or not (Chicago Reporter).
And this level of policing will only intensify as bills such as SESTA/FOSTA continue to be passed. Introduced in 2018, this group of bills was meant to curb online sex trafficking. However, many sex workers say SESTA/FOSTA has significantly affected their ability to make a living in consensual sex work because it has prevented them from advertising (Rolling Stone). It has also removed the online safety networks they used to vet potential clients and has driven them into the streets, which increases their chances of experiencing violence and sexual assault (Rolling Stone).
Between SESTA/FOSTA and anti-loitering laws, people of color and members of the LGBTQ+ community are continually being targeted by the government for being different. It’s time to shift the way people think and support sex workers trying to earn a living like everyone else. And we can start this work by decriminalizing sex work because sex work is work.
*The term prostitute/prostitution is considered a derogatory phrase by many in the sex worker community. We use it here only in law enforcement related terminology.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
1. In New York, between 2012 and 2015, 85% of the individuals arrested for loitering for prostitution were either Black or Latinx (Survivors Against SESTA).
2. 90% of all prostitution-related arrests in Chicago in 2017 were connected to selling sex, and 8% were for buying sex (Chicago Reporter)
3. The FBI reported more than 30,000 prostitution-related arrests. Of those, 39.9% of arrestees were Black, and 18.7% were Latinx (FBI).
4. Approximately 23% of Black transgender individuals were physically or sexually assaulted by the police because they were perceived as transgender and involved in the sex trade (Amnesty International).
5. SESTA/FOSTA is a group of bills created to curb online sex trafficking but has severely affected the way sex workers conduct their business.
RELATED ISSUES
9/20/2020 | Make the justice system more diverse.
9/3/2020 | Support mental health response services.
8/27/2020 | Help decriminalize drug possession.
8/26/2020 | Be an active bystander.
8/23/2020 | Support those incarcerated and impacted by COVID-19.
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
Fight for paid sick leave.
It's Wednesday!
And we're unpacking the importance of paid sick leave as we head into fall in the midst of a pandemic. Ebony shares more about the importance of paid sick leave, particularly for marginalized communities. Luckily, recent legislation has passed for Philadelphia and California, showing that local advocacy efforts are generating results. Join in by examination paid sick leave legislation in your city and state, and consider how you can encourage the same policies at your workplace.
If you're enjoying these newsletters, consider making a contribution to support our work. You can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $5/mo on our Patreon.
– Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Support the Healthy Families Act by signing this petition, which urges Congress to pass a national sick leave policy.
If you live in a state or city that has enacted a paid sick leave law, know your rights by researching how you are protected as an employee. Use this resource to get started.
Reach out to your local politicians and ask them to create a paid sick leave law for your city/state.
GET EDUCATED
By Ebony Bellamy (she/her)
As COVID-19 cases continue to rise and flu season quickly creeps upon us, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention has emphasized that reducing the spread of germs and respiratory illnesses is extremely important this fall and winter (CDC). And the best way to reduce the spread of both is for individuals to stay home when they’re feeling sick. However, this isn’t a luxury many workers have since there is no national sick leave policy in place.
The workers who are most affected by this are people of color and immigrants. For immigrants, only 50% have paid sick days compared to 60% of their native-born counterparts (The Center for Law and Policy). At the same time, more than 7.3 million Black workers can’t earn a single paid sick day (National Partnership for Women and Families). That’s roughly 40% of Black employees, and of those workers, 41% are Black men, and 36% are Black women (National Partnership for Women and Families).
And these numbers are even higher within the Latinx community. Despite them having the “highest labor force participation rate of any racial or ethnic group in the US and the fastest-growing segment of the workforce,” almost 15 million Latinx workers are unable to earn a single paid sick day (National Partnership for Women and Families). This includes 55% of Latinx men and 51% of Latinx women (National Partnership for Women and Families).
With Black and Latinx people primarily being paid less than their white and Asian counterparts, they can’t afford to take a day off. The median weekly earnings, in 2020, for full-time Black workers are $806 and $786 for Latinx workers while full-time white workers earn about $1,018 (Bureau of Labor Statistics).
Compared to 83% of full-time workers who receive paid sick days, only 43% of part-time workers have paid sick leave (The Center for Law and Policy). With over 4 million people working fewer hours than they’d like and having to work multiple part-time jobs to support themselves and their families, they’re less likely to have guaranteed paid sick leave (The Center for Law and Policy).
Unfortunately, workers with low-wage jobs are more likely to deal with financial burdens. For example, more than 30% of black households have no savings or assets to utilize if a family member unexpectedly loses their job (National Partnership for Women and Families). And as of 2015, more than one in five black families were living in poverty (National Partnership for Women and Families). The same is true for Latinx families. Approximately 27% of Latinx households have no savings or assets to utilize during an unexpected loss of income. As of 2018, more than one in six Latinx families was living in poverty (National Partnership for Women and Families).
For low-income families, missing a few days of work can equate to losing a month’s worth of groceries, missing a rent payment, or not being able to pay a majority of their bills. But, maintaining perfect attendance at work means being able to feed their family, not being homeless, and not going into debt.
A lack of sick leave is extremely devastating to those who also serve as caregivers. Not only are they risking their health, but they’re risking the health of family members since they don’t have time to attend or prioritize medical appointments and emergencies (Essence). One in five Black people act as a caregiver to an adult family member or someone close to them, and 52% of these caregivers work full time (National Partnership for Women and Families). While more than one-quarter of Latinx individuals live in multigenerational households, so about 20% of them are caregivers for loved ones (National Partnership for Women and Families).
People of color need paid sick leave so that they can take care of themselves and their families. Yet, only 13 states and Washington D.C. have enacted laws that require employers to offer paid sick leaves. Depending on the state, you can receive one hour of sick leave for every 30, 35, or 40 hours of work. Some states require more, and those hours equate to three to seven paid sick days (National Conference of State Legislature). Unfortunately, each state has specific guidelines that determine who qualifies for paid sick leave, so do your research because not all employees are covered.
Even though some states have a paid sick leave policy in place, people of color are often reluctant to take advantage of it. A Pew Research study found that 69% of employees took less sick leaves because they couldn’t afford to lose money, while 47% were afraid they would risk losing their job if they asked for a sick day (Essence).
And some people don’t even know paid sick leave is an option for them. About one in five people don’t know if their employers offer any form of paid leave for situations such as routine doctor appointments, minor illnesses, and vacations (Essence). To fix this, employers need to let their employees know paid time off is available to them. They should have their policies posted in highly visible places around the office and ensure it’s written so that employees can understand them, which means posting the sick day policies in various languages (Essence).
To ensure all employees can take advantage of paid sick leave, we need to support the Healthy Families Act. This legislation ensures all American employees can earn up to seven days of paid sick time per year. Employees earn this by gaining an hour of sick leave for every 30 hours they work, and these sick days can be carried over to the next calendar year if they’re not used (The Center for Law and Policy). Sick days can be used for a multitude of reasons such as caring for their own physical or mental illness, caring for an injury or medical condition, obtaining a medical diagnosis, receiving preventive care, and caring for a family member, child, spouse, or loved one (The Center for Law and Policy). Read the National Partnership for Women and Families Fact Sheet to learn more about the Healthy Families Act.
There are over 32 million workers, who can’t earn paid sick leave, and we need to change that. No one should feel forced to choose between their health, their families’ health, and their financial security when they’re feeling sick.
Key Takeaways
Approximately 7.3 million Black workers and 15 million Latinx workers can’t earn a single day of paid sick leave (National Partnership for Women and Families).
People of color make less than their white counterparts, which hinders their ability to take a day off.
83% of full-time workers receive paid sick days, while only 43% of part-time workers have paid sick leave (The Center for Law and Policy).
Only 13 states and Washington D.C. have laws that require employers to offer paid sick leave (National Conference of State Legislature).
69% of employees took less sick leaves because they couldn’t afford to lose money, while 47% were afraid they would risk losing their job if they asked for a sick day (Essence).
The Healthy Families Act is a legislation that aims to create a national paid sick leave policy.
RELATED ISSUES
9/9/2020 | Make the census count.
8/9/2020 | Understand the unemployment gap | COVID-19
7/23/2020 | Know our racist presidential history.
7/21/2020 | Honor the legacy of Rep. John Lewis.
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
Tell museums to replace stolen artifacts.
It's Friday! Last week's newsletter on art generated a lot of discussion. Ebony continued her research to unpack how the art industry is reckoning with its history of colonialism. Her newsletter today unpacks why many museums are sending artifacts back to their home countries. It's a good reminder that in order to do this work, we must change our actions moving forward while acknowledging and repairing the past, as best we can.
Tomorrow is Study Hall, where we reflect on the key topics from this week and any questions from the community. Share your questions and insights by replying to this email, and I'll do my best to answer them!
As always, your contributions are so appreciated! You can give on our website, PayPal, or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe monthly on our Patreon.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
The next time you visit a museum (even virtually), do the following:
Research how artifacts on display were brought to the museum
Look for stories of that museum participating in repatriation
Ask: How does the museum verify how objects from collectors and dealers are obtained?
Consider how your desire to support museums contributes to stolen artifacts being on display.
GET EDUCATED
In 2013, the Metropolitan Museum of Art made headlines after announcing plans to return two statues to Cambodia. This announcement came after Cambodian officials were able to prove the two 10th-century Khmer statues, which were donated to the museum as separate gifts between 1987 and 1992, were smuggled out of a remote jungle temple around the time of the country’s civil war in the 1970s (New York Times).
This isn’t the first time a museum has been accused of acquiring stolen artifacts. The most notable is the British Museum, which displays various well-known artifacts from marginalized communities. The British Museum, along with museums in the UK, Germany, Austria, and the US, have bronze sculptures on display that were stolen in 1897 after British troops invaded the Kingdom of Benin, which is now southwestern Nigeria (History.com).
Nigeria has repeatedly asked the UK to return the sculptures, and in 2018 the two countries agreed to a deal that required the British Museum to send a few sculptures to Nigeria for the Royal Museum they plan to open in 2021 (History.com). However, the British Museum claims the bronze sculptures are on loan and expect Nigeria to return them.
In a 2007 United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) forum, they found that between 90% to 95% of sub-Saharan cultural artifacts are housed outside Africa (NPR). Many, like the bronze sculptures from Nigeria, were taken during the colonial period and now reside in museums across Europe and the US.
The British Museum is notorious for refusing to return artifacts to their country of origin. In 2016, Australia asked for the Gwaegal shield to be repatriated, which is the process of returning something or someone to their country of origin (Merriam-Webster). The shield was stolen from Australian Aboriginal people in the late 18th century by the British (History.com). Instead of returning the shield, the British Museum let Australia borrow it with the expectation that it will be returned to them, which it was. And the list of stolen artifacts the British Museum refuses to give back is long and includes Egypt’s Rosetta Stone, Easter Island’s Hoa Hakananai’a statue, and Greece’s Parthenon marbles (History.com).
Despite us knowing the origins of these famous artifacts, it’s extremely difficult to pinpoint the provenance of most items because once they’re removed from their original home, they’re sold to private collectors who sell them to museums and claim the items were legally acquired (The Verge). The Archaeological Institute of America estimates that roughly 85 to 90 percent of classical and various other types of artifacts don’t have a documented place of origin (The Verge).
This makes it extremely difficult to determine which artifacts should be considered for repatriation because there is no specific way to decide whether or not an artifact was stolen or acquired legally. To deal with this, the UN created the 1970 convention, which was designed to end the export of stolen artifacts and allow countries to file repatriation claims and pay to have their items returned to them. But, a 2012 UN report showed that the 1970 convention had “serious weakness,” such as a lack of staff and limited international laws to support its mission (The Verge). So, the UN committee was created and it has presided over six successful restitution cases in the last 40 years (The Verge).
UNESCO and Interpol have also been helping maintain watch lists for artifacts that are reported stolen (The Verge). But, despite all their efforts, when it comes to American museums, repatriation occurs on a case-by-case basis, normally when foreign governments provide museum officials with solid evidence that an artifact was stolen (The Verge).
As a result, there’s no adequate way to keep track of how many repatriation claims have been filed over the years. Within the US alone, both the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) and the American Alliance of Museums (AAM) admitted they don’t keep records of repatriation claims and returns (The Verge). Despite the lack of records, museums are still actively returning stolen artifacts to their countries of origin.
Last year, the Metropolitan Museum of Art returned a stolen 2,100-year-old coffin to Egypt after officials discovered it was looted and smuggled from the country in 2011 (BBC News). In 2010, the Brooklyn Museum parted ways with 4,500 pre-Columbian artifacts that were stolen a century ago. They offered these pieces to the National Museum of Costa Rica for $59,000 because the Brooklyn Museum’s closets were “overstuffed with items acquired during an era when it aimed to become the biggest museum in the world” (New York Times).
In 2018, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that 26 bronze artifacts, which were “looted during General Dodd’s bloody siege on the Béhanzin palace in 1892,” will be returned to the country of Benin (artnet News). This a part of a five-year plan to “enact a permanent restitution agenda for all art taken ‘without consent’ from Africa during the colonial era” (artnet News). This means that all museums in France will have to return all or most of their African artifacts.
To implement Macron’s vision, a study was performed, which recommended: “the restitution of any objects taken by force or presumed to be acquired through inequitable conditions by the army, scientific explorers or administrators during the French colonial period in Africa, which lasted from the late 19th century until 1960” (The Guardian). Once this was released, museums across Europe raced to develop new policies on restitution and repatriation, so they wouldn’t have to forfeit artifacts they’ve had at their museums for years (The Guardian).
This response shows museums’ blatant disregard for the history they’re trying so hard to preserve. Yes, these artifacts are valuable pieces of history that should be available for everyone to see. But, they should also be accessible to the nations and countries they were stolen from. Those places deserve to have ownership of essential pieces of their heritage and culture. They didn’t ask to have their history stolen or their people enslaved and murdered.
So, we as a society, we should acknowledge our theft of artifacts and culture and work to make marginalized communities and countries feel seen and appreciated.
key takeaways
Repatriation is the process of identifying a stolen artifact and returning it to its country of origin.
It’s difficult to pinpoint the provenance of an artifact because private collectors can claim the items were legally acquired with forged documents.
The 1970 convention, UN committee, Interpol, and UNESCO help prevent the export of stolen artifacts and allow countries to file repatriation claims.
In American museums, repatriation occurs on a case-by-case basis, normally when foreign governments provide museum officials with solid evidence that an artifact was stolen.
RELATED ISSUES
8/25/2020 | Rally against racism in America’s art museums.
8/6/2020 | Don't do digital blackface.
7/16/2020 | Respect AAVE.
6/25/2020 | Capitalize B in Black and I in Indigenous.
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
Rally against racism in America’s art museums.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
Thank you to everyone who rallied for Jacob Blake yesterday. We'll continue to add updates to the story on our website. Since yesterday morning's publication, a GoFundMe for Jacob Blake and his family was created. There is also a change.org petition you can sign. Please continue to keep Jacob and his family in your thoughts and hearts.
Today Ebony is giving insight on the lack of representation and discrimination in the art world, which impacts people of color and other marginalized communities. We know how much representation matters. Art is necessary for honoring the past and imagining a new path forward. In both perspectives, we need to celebrate the cultures and identities of all of us – right here, right now.
As always, you can support our efforts by making a one-time contribution on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza). You can also subscribe monthly on Patreon.
Thanks to everyone that's here doing the work with us.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
1. Sign the open protest letter to hold NYC institutions accountable.
2. Donate to Black Art Futures Fund, a collective of emerging philanthropists who seek to promote and strengthen the future of Black art
3. Use this guide to support Black-owned and Black-operated art galleries in your state
GET EDUCATED
Back in June, an open protest letter was written by current and former employees of NYC museums, such as the Guggenheim Museum, the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA), and the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The letter, which was signed by over 200 people, urges museums to “rectify in-house racial disparities, review ‘terminations both voluntary and involuntary’ involving employees of color, and adopt a ‘zero-tolerance’ policy for ‘racially-charged’ statements by staff members” (HypeBeast) amongst other things.
And this isn’t the first time staff has brought attention to the deep-rooted racist practices at these cultural institutions. The most notable incident happened in 2019 at the Guggenheim Museum. Founded in 1939, the museum never had a Black curator single-handedly organize an exhibition based entirely on their research (HypeBeast). That changed when they hired Chaédria LaBouvier to curate the Jean-Michel Basquiat exhibition.
As the first Black curator at the Guggenheim Museum, this should have been an incredible experience for LaBouvier. However, in a series of tweets, she revealed that working with Nancy Spector, who is the museum’s artistic director and chief curator, was the most racist professional experience of her life. Read Chaédria LaBouvier’s Twitter thread to learn more about her experience working at the Guggenheim Museum.
To combat this, the museum launched an investigation into LaBouvier’s experience and announced they approved a two-year initiative to expand diversity and end racism in their workplace. The Guggenheim Museum is one of the first major cultural institutions to propose such a plan (New York Times).
This plan features a number of measures including the establishment of paid internships for students from underrepresented and disadvantaged backgrounds and a partnership with historically Black colleges and universities to promote job opportunities (HypeBeast). The museum also plans on hiring a high-ranking manager to oversee diversity strategies, creating an industry-wide network for people of color working in the arts and forming a committee that will investigate the museum’s exhibitions and acquisitions “through the lens of equity and diversity” (New York Times).
But it’s going to be hard to enforce this plan when the museum’s targeted demographic doesn’t represent the cultural diversity of NYC. A 2018 study conducted by a marketing firm found that nearly 73 percent of the museum’s visitors identified as white, despite white people representing 43 percent of NYC’s overall population (New York Times). This lack of visitor representation might have to deal with the Guggenheim Museum not showcasing exhibitions that highlight artists from various marginalized groups. The writers of the diversity plan pointed out that “the museum has never held a solo exhibition of a Black artist, a woman artist of color, an Indigenous artist, or a trans-identified artist” (HypeBeast).
Although the Guggenheim Museum is taking a step in the right direction, many of its employees doubt the plan will create lasting change since a majority of the museum employees, who identify as people of color, were furloughed in April and therefore excluded from the development of the diversity plan (New York Times).
The mistreatment of employees of color extends further than New York. Last month, a group of former staff and board members at the Smithsonian National Museum of African Art wrote a letter accusing the leadership of promoting a culture of racism and ignoring complaints about discrimination and racial bias (Washington Post). Within the letter, they state that “more than 10 former or current Black employees have reported or experienced incidents of racial bias, hostile verbal attacks, retaliation, terminations, microaggressions and degrading comments” (HuffPost) and these incidents occurred over the last five years.
“We write to inform you that we will no longer tolerate your blatant disrespect and egregious acts of white violence toward Black/Brown employees that reflect the oppressive tactics to keep Black/Brown employees maintained and subordinated.”
Authors of the open protest letter to NYC museums
With a predominately white staff and no curator of color, the Smithsonian National Museum of African Art, like other museums, has become a breeding ground for systemic racism. According to a former employee, right before they left their position at the Smithsonian, of more than 40 staff members, only five full-time positions were held by Black people (HuffPost). It was also reported that Black staff members were fired with no explanation and mangers often created obstacles that inhibited Black employees from doing their jobs but granted white employees, who didn’t exceed at their job, new responsibilities, promotions, and various growth opportunities (HuffPost). And this toxic culture continued despite the museum being led by three Black directors from 2008 to 2020.
Employee diversity is a well-known problem in America’s museums. A 2015 survey, conducted by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, found that 84 percent of the country's museum staff, which includes curators, educators, conservators, and upper-level administrators, were white. While four percent were Black, six percent were Asian Americans and zero percent identified as Native Hawaiians and Native Americans (NPR). This survey also revealed that women made up about 60 percent of a museum’s staff and people of color were more likely to have positions in security, human resources, facilities, and finance (NPR).
Unfortunately, it’s not uncommon to have white individuals oversee art collections from a different ethnic group. In 2018, the Brooklyn Museum appointed a white woman to oversee the museum’s African art collection and the Art Institute of Chicago hired a white man to supervise its Chinese art collection (NPR). With a lack of diversity in museums, underrepresented groups are rarely the ones in charge of overseeing art from their cultural and ethnic background.
To address the lack of diversity, museums need to own up to their racist culture. They need to fire the members of leadership who have bullied, harassed, and discriminated against non-white employees. And issue a sincere apology to the people of color in their institutions who’ve felt belittled and inferior while working there.
The Black Lives Matter movement has inspired people of color to speak up against all forms of discrimination and racism. Now, they have the power to put pressure on cultural institutions to change the way they operate. As people of color at museums continue to speak out, we can support them by letting those museums know they need to seriously re-evaluate what diversity and equality mean at their workplace.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Most museums have predominately white staff members and don’t have people of color as curators.
Employees of color are frequently victims of race-based discrimination, verbal attacks, unjustified terminations, microaggressions, and degrading comments.
Only four percent of museum staff members are Black while six percent are Asian Americans and zero percent identified as Native Hawaiians and Native Americans.
People of color are more likely to have positions in security, human resources, facilities, and finance at museums.
White staff members regularly oversee art from underrepresented racial groups.
RELATED ISSUES
8/18/2020 | Support athletes in taking action.
6/15/2020 | Diversify your media consumption.
7/10/2020 | Understand the role of cancel culture.
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
Support Black mental health.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
It's Friday! And we're rounding out the week with our first of many stories on the racial disparities of mental health diagnoses and treatment. It comes at no surprise, but I was still shocked to read the psychological impact of the protests is profound, noted in this recap of the current state of Portland. As our nation rallies for change, it is also grieving and trying to heal. Adequate mental health resources are critical for us to move forward, and I appreciate Ebony's insights below.
If you prefer reading our resources weekly, you can edit your profile settings here. You'll only receive our emails on Saturdays, where I answer questions and insights from the community regarding the content from the past seven days. Have a question? Respond to this email and we'll get back to you.
As always, consider making a contribution to help this work grow. You can give on our website, Paypal, Venmo (@nicoleacardoza) or subscribe $5/mo on Patreon. A huge thank you for those that have already supported!
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
1. Donate to BEAM, a non-profit organization committed to the mental health of Black communities.
2. Share resources like the Therapy for Black Girls podcast and database of providers
GET EDUCATED
Lately, the news has been flooded with stories about Black celebrities and their mental health. From Kanye West’s strange, erratic behavior (New York Post) to Tamar Braxton’s possible suicide attempt (Essence), their actions have accelerated conversations surrounding Black mental health and the disparities Black people face to receive adequate treatment.
Compared to white people, Black and African American people have a higher risk of developing mental health disorders because of the historical, economic, social, and political influences they’ve been systemically exposed to for decades (Columbia University). This race-based exclusion makes their community more likely to experience poverty, homelessness, incarceration, and substance abuse (Mental Health America). And these factors are known to be damaging to a person’s psychological and physical health.
Approximately 46 million individuals identify as Black or African American in the U.S., and of those people, over 16 percent reported having a mental illness within the past year (Mental Health America). That’s over 7 million people.
Unfortunately, these numbers have drastically increased since the video of George Floyd’s death was released. Within a week, the Census Bureau reported that “anxiety and depression among African Americans shot to higher rates than experienced by any other racial or ethnic group, with 41 percent screening positive for at least one of those symptoms” (Washington Post). The number of Black people showing clinical signs for anxiety or depression jumped from 36 percent to 41 percent, which means approximately 1.4 million more people started struggling with their mental health (Washington Post).
Yet, in 2018, it was reported that 58.2% of Black and African Americans between the ages of 18 and 25 and 50.1% of adults between the ages of 26 and 49, who have a severe mental illness did not receive treatment (SAMHSA).
There is a “lack of trust in the medical system due to historical abuses of Black people in the guise of health care, less access to adequate insurance, financial burden, and history with discrimination in the mental health system” (Columbia University). These factors have caused Black people to feel reluctant about seeking psychiatric help when dealing with a mental illness.
In the United States, during the 1800s and 1900s, scientific racism was used as a way to justify slavery and the mistreatment of enslaved people (Counseling Today). During this time, prominent physicians and psychologists were known to discover “new” mental illnesses that only affected enslaved people. Prime examples of this were “ ‘drapetomania’ which was a treatable mental illness that caused Black enslaved people to flee captivity and ‘dysaethesia aethiopica’ an alleged mental illness that was the proposed cause of laziness, ‘rascality’ and ‘disrespect for the master’s property’” (Counseling Today). And to treat these “illnesses,” whipping and other forms of physical abuse were recommended.
The mislabeling of mental illnesses with Black people continued well after slavery was abolished. In the 1960s “schizophrenia was described as a “protest psychosis” in which Black men developed “hostile and aggressive feelings” and “delusional anti-whiteness” after listening to or aligning with activist groups such as Black Power, the Black Panthers or the Nation of Islam” (Counseling Today). And today, Black and African American adults are more likely than white people with similar symptoms to be diagnosed with schizophrenia (Mental Health America). Black men, in particular, are overdiagnosed with schizophrenia. They are four times more likely than white men to be diagnosed with it. And are underdiagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder and mood disorders (Counseling Today).
This overdiagnoses of schizophrenia caused people to believe the Black psyche should be perceived as unwell, immoral, and inherently criminal (Counseling Today). Society even used this belief to justify police brutality during the civil rights movement, the creation of Jim Crow laws, and mass incarceration in prisons and psychiatric hospitals (Counseling Today). Unfortunately, this old belief has negatively impacted the way people view Black mental health today.
Black and African American adults with mental health illnesses, specifically those that involve psychosis, are more likely to be placed in jail or prison than people of other races (Mental Health America). In 2016, it was reported that the imprisonment rate for Black and African American men was six times greater than that of white men. The imprisonment rate for Black and African American women was nearly double that of white women (Bureau of Justice). Due to this tremendous incarceration rate, “there are more than three times as many people with serious mental illnesses in jails and prisons than in hospitals” (Counseling Today).
Rather than receiving treatment for mental illness, Black and African American adults are punished and incarcerated for their mental health struggles. This wouldn’t need to happen if access to affordable health insurance was made available sooner. Before the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was introduced in March 2010, “nearly one in three Hispanic Americans and one in five Black Americans were uninsured, compared to about one in eight white Americans” (Brookings Institution). Although the ACA has helped communities of color gain health insurance, there are still 30 million people in America without insurance, and half of those are people of color (Brookings Institution).
“There's a strong relationship between socioeconomic status and health such that people at the lower end, people in poverty tend to have poorer health and tend to have fewer resources ... for dealing with the stressors of life.”
Diane R. Brown, Professor at the Rutgers School of Public Health and author, for HuffPost
Despite more Black and African American adults having access to affordable health insurance, they’re still hesitant to seek help due to a lack of representation in the mental health field. Approximately 60 percent of psychologists are white, while less than two percent of American Psychological Association members are Black or African American (American Psychological Association).
This lack of diversity among providers makes individuals doubt that therapists or psychologists will be culturally competent to treat their mental health struggles (Mental Health America). Researchers recognize that a therapist’s lack of cultural responsiveness, cultural mistrust, and potential negative views from a therapist can significantly impact the level of care and service the Black community receives for their mental health (Columbia University).
To combat this, providers have been practicing cultural responsiveness. Being culturally responsive is when a provider recognizes and understands the role culture plays in their and their patient’s life and use that understanding to adapt a treatment plan that meets their patient’s needs within their cultural framework (Columbia University).
Although mental health facilities have spent the last four decades increasing cultural awareness and cultural competency training (Counseling Today), there’s still a lot of work that needs to be done to ensure Black and African American adults receive access to mental health services and receive adequate care. We can start by understanding how someone’s race and ancestral history impacts their mental health.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Black people have a higher risk of developing mental health disorders due to the historical, economic, social, and political influences they’ve been systemically exposed to.
Over 7 million Black and African American adults deal with a severe mental illness.
Black and African Americans are less likely to seek psychiatric help because of a lack of trust, limited access to affordable insurance, and a history of discrimination.
Black and African American adults with mental health illnesses, specifically those that involve psychosis, are more likely to be placed in jail or prison than people of other races.
Only two percent of psychologists are Black or African American.
RELATED ISSUES
8/3/2020 | Stay awake.
7/19/2020 | Rally for representation in science and research: COVID-19 and CDC.
7/12/2020 | Learn how air pollution exacerbates COVID-19.
6/28/2020 | Understand disparities in healthcare treatment.
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
Analyze representation in media.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
It's Friday!
And Ebony is discussing Hamilton today, which many of you have asked about after our newsletters on Independence Day and cancel culture. Ideally, this sparks a regular practice of analyzing representation in all media, and advocating for more inclusive, diverse storytelling.
Each Saturday I dedicate the newsletter to answering questions and sharing insights from our community. It's a good time to reflect and deepen your understanding of topics this week. If you haven't already, email us your thoughts. I don't offer 1:1 consulting and can't get back to everyone, but I do my best!
If these emails support your anti-racism practice, consider giving $5/month on Patreon, or making a one-time contribution on our website (new!), PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza). You can also now share this with your whole workplace with a custom enrollment link and reporting.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
1. The next time you watch a movie with a historical context (fictional or otherwise), consider...
Who's voice may be missing in this narrative?
Who shaped this story? What are the backgrounds of the writer, director, etc?
What part(s) of history may I be missing?
2. Explore other conversations about #RepresentationMatters on Twitter.
GET EDUCATED
"Why are people mad about Hamilton?"
Hamilton has become a cultural phenomenon. Written by Lin-Manuel Miranda and inspired by a recently published biography, this musical tells the story of Alexander Hamilton through hip-hop, R&B, soul, and show tunes. Since its debut in 2015, it “has grossed $500 million, won 11 Tony Awards and a Pulitzer Prize, and was staged for three US tours, a production in London’s West End, and one in Chicago” (IndieWire). With this level of success, it’s no surprise Disney spent approximately $75 million for a recording of the musical featuring the original Broadway cast.
Disney released Hamilton on Disney+, their streaming service, on 4th of July weekend as a celebratory statement during fraught times. This reignited, and accelerated, conversations around representation. On one hand, people praise the casting team for hiring a diverse crew, and praise the musical for celebrating Black culture through its music. And on the other, critics question the lack of representation within the story. Both sides have valid points of view that need to be addressed.
With a lack of diversity still being present in both the film and theater industry, Hamilton made a name for itself by centering its production around non-white actors and performers who regularly face disadvantages in their field. This level of representation inspired other theater companies to make a bigger effort to ensure all cultures and ethnicities are portrayed accurately so there can be proper representation throughout their production (DC Metro, Theater Arts).
“Hamilton is the first of its kind to present a bounty of multicultural artistry – white actors included – because it doesn’t present actors of color just to put them on a stage," writes Don Michael Mendoza (DC Metro, Theater Arts). “It places them in a meaningful story about the founding of our country that is also a comment on the diversity of what America is comprised of, which is many cultures as one".
Hamilton challenged the status quo and made people rethink the roles people of color should play. Having diverse actors portray white historical figures in a compelling way is a refreshing change to the whitewashing we normally see in the entertainment industry (The Guardian). The same year Hamilton was released, only 13.9% of all available roles on Broadway were cast without regard to race or ability, and shows that hired predominantly people of color were rare (Playbill).
Yet Hamilton doesn’t accurately represent the narrative of marginalized communities within the storyline. Consider the characters: there is no representation of Black or Indigenous people in the story despite their active contributions to the development of our nation. The identities of enslaved people were completely erased, evident in the line “no one else was in the room where it happened” from the song “The Room Where it Happens” (Youtube). Hamilton also neglects to mention the African Americans soldiers who fought in the Revolutionary War for both British and American armies (American Battlefield Trust).
Along with the erasure of Black and Indigenous people, this musical marginalized its female characters. There were only three female leads, each defined by their romantic connection to Alexander Hamilton. They are Eliza who was Hamilton’s wife, Angelica who was Eliza’s sister and Hamilton’s close friend and true love, and Maria Reynolds, Hamilton’s mistress. These women were drastically featured less compared to their male counterparts, and there’s a “clear difference in freedom of expression and representation for the women in Hamilton, who sing in only 14 of the 46 songs” (The Conversation).
Hamilton himself is introduced as a “scrappy and hungry” immigrant, passionate about freedom for all. But that wasn’t exactly true. Historian Annette Gordon-Reed notes that Hamilton qualified as a U.S. citizen and bought and sold slaves for his family. He never promoted an anti-slavery agenda in his leadership (Harvard). (Hamilton himself may have owned slaves, too – details in the NYTimes).
The play also glorifies the other Founding Fathers and glosses over their involvement in slavery. For example, James Madison, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson were all known slave owners, and all supported the genocide of Native Americans (Counterpunch). Although Jefferson declared “all men are created equal” in the Declaration of Independence, the Founding Fathers didn’t extend that idea to every person on the nation’s lands (History).
Screenshot via Oprah Magazine
Our perception of representation is evolving.
It’s important we rethink what representation should look like on stages, television, and movies. First, we still need to make progress with on-screen representation. Even though 40% of the population is non-white, only 19.8% of lead actors in films were non-white in 2017 (PBS).
But, we also need to share the stories and histories of all ethnicities, sexual identities, genders, disabilities, and religions of those people (Los Angeles Times). And that will take more representation off-screeen; we need more people from marginalized groups to create, write, direct, and produce content that accurately reflects their lives.
This can be seen in the FX show “Pose” which is about the Black and Latino LGBTQ+ ballroom culture scene in NYC during the 1980s (FX). This show has “the largest transgender cast of any commercial, scripted TV show” and features both cast and members who directly identify with the characters and stories of the show (The Guardian). This show is changing the rules on how the entertainment industry should tell the stories of non-white people.
If Hamilton took this same approach, its audience could have seen how Black and Indigenous people played a vital role in the country’s creation. The addition of a character or two could have enhanced the storyline without completely erasing elements of our history. For example, there could have been a mention of one Washington’s most trusted servants, William Lee, who acted as Washington’s valet and assistant when he was in the Continental Army (American Battlefield Trust).
In order to honor our history, we need to acknowledge all aspects of it, including the painful parts. Without those aspects, we'll never truly understand the confusion or pain some people of color might feel when they watch musicals such as Hamilton and don’t see any mention of their ancestors. Hopefully, the popularity of this revolutionary musical and its astronomical success will encourage all of us to be more inquisitive of our nation’s history, and commit to representing all of its diverse and essential stories.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Hamilton is a trailblazer for diversifying a story of white historical figures.
The erasure of Black and Indigenous people with Hamilton neglects to shine a light on a part of American history people often try to forget which is slavery.
Representation should extend further than just diversity on-screen but behind the scenes, too.
We must be committed to telling all parts of our history whenever we can.
Related Issues
July 2, 2020 | Remove police from our public schools.
July 8, 2020 | Investigate school district funding disparities.
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
Respect the roots of Black hair.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
Happy Monday!
Today's email is the first in our series on cultural appropriation – another potent question and inquiry in the newsletter responses. It's a broad topic that can't be fully expressed in just one newsletter (or maybe even 100). But as you read them, ask yourself: who is allowed to celebrate the culture of marginalized people in our society? What does stealing culture for coolness look like, vs. honoring it with reverence?
Ebony's comprehensive overview on natural hair is a good place for this conversation to start. And a good continuation from last week's newsletter – if you dove into the links, you'll see that comments about hair tend to be a common microaggression that non-white people experience.
If you identify as non-white and have a story to share, send us a message. And as always, you can make a one-time contribution on PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or contribute monthly on Patreon.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
1. Sign the CROWN Act Petition to encourage states to ban hair discrimination in workplaces and schools.
2. Reflect: Have you experienced hair discrimination before? If not, how would you feel if you were sent home from work because of a hairstyle that has cultural ties to your racial identity?
GET EDUCATED
Cultural appropriation and hair discrimination
Within the last 10 to 15 years, cultural appropriation has become a term we can’t avoid hearing. Whether it’s Vanessa Hudgens being called out for wearing box braids (Allure) or a fashion designer sending mainly white models down the runaway in cornrowed, lace front wigs (Essence), more and more people are adapting aspects of Black culture, especially when it comes to hair, without understanding the history behind these hairstyles or respecting the people who created them.
What exactly is cultural appropriation? Cultural appropriation can be defined as, “the adoption or co-opting, usually without acknowledgment, of cultural identity markers associated with or originating in minority communities by people or communities with relatively privileged status” (Dictionary). This term is normally used when Westerners of all races adopt aspects of Eastern culture into their own or when non-POC use elements of a marginalized group’s culture to be trendy.
A repeat offender of cultural appropriation is Kim Kardashian West – who has, on numerous occasions, worn Fulani braids (Teen Vogue) and referred to them as “Bo Derek braids.” Bo Derek, a white woman, wore this hairstyle in the 1979 film “10” (IMDB), and in 1980 People Magazine credited Derek for making them a “cross-cultural craze.” But, what People Magazine and Bo Derek failed to do was understand the history behind this hairstyle.
Fulani braids originate with the Fulani or Fula people who are from West Africa. Hair played a significant role in African culture and society then and was used to identify someone’s social status, religion, age, marital status, and the clan they belonged to (Africa.com). Hairstyles were even passed down from generation to generation.
When African women were brought to America during the slave trade, their heads were shaved as a way to strip them of their identity, humanity, and culture (Essence). Once in the states, the complex, ornate braids they used to wear had to evolve into simple, easy to manage styles. These new braids became more functional and even developed a new level of importance.
Enslaved people used their braids as a form of communication to relay messages about freedom without their masters’ knowledge. “People would use braids as a map to freedom,” explained Lori L. Tharps, an associate professor at Temple University and the co-author of Hair Story: Untangling the Roots of Black Hair in America. For example, the number of plaits an enslaved person wore would indicate “how many roads people needed to walk or where to meet someone to escape bondage” (Essence).
When enslaved people gained their freedom on June 19th, 1865, women started abandoning their braids and cornrows and preferred straightening their hair to appeal to society’s standard of beauty. And for several decades, straightened hair became the norm for Black women in American society (PBS).
“A braid was a sign of unsophistication, a downgrade of [a Black woman’s] image”.
Lori L. Tharps, associate professor of journalism at Temple University and the coauthor of Hair Story: Untangling the Roots of Black Hair in America, for Essence
The way Black women viewed their hair changed in the 1960s when the Black Power Movement gained momentum. This movement encouraged Black people to embrace their African roots and culture. And over the last 60 years, Black hair has become a symbol of self-love and perseverance which is why Black people get upset when non-POC wear hairstyles that have deep roots in Africa. It hurts to see non-POC wear hairstyles because women such as Kim Kardashian West and Kylie Jenner wear them to be trendy and don’t understand the cultural history behind them. Read Hair Story: Untangling the Roots of Black Hair in America to learn more about the history of Black hair.
Why is it harmful?
When non-Black women wear braids and cornrows, they’re unknowingly removing the cultural significance behind them and misrepresenting how people should view Black women when they wear similar hairstyles (Essence).
And despite the fact that white people culturally appropriate Black hairstyles, Black people themselves are still judged, criticized, and shamed for reclaiming their own cultural identity. Black hair has created harmful stereotypes that have caused people to make inaccurate assumptions about what they deem “acceptable.
Students have been sent home because their hair doesn’t fit into the school’s “hair” policy (CNN). Chasity Jones had a job offer revoked after refusing to get rid of her locs (Teen Vogue). Black children are growing up thinking their natural hair will never be enough. When they’re being reprimanded by school officials and watching their white counterparts have the freedom to express themselves with their hair, they’re subconsciously being taught white is better.
Ever since Black people were brought to this country, they’ve been facing discrimination based on aspects of themselves the average person would never be asked to change. This is why the introduction of the CROWN Act in 2019 was so monumental. This initiative aims to end hair discrimination in a country that continues to rip Black people of their cultural identities, urging states to pass laws that make hair discrimination illegal. Six states – California, New York, New Jersey, Virginia, Colorado and Washington – have signed on so far (Glamour).
“The passage of the CROWN Act in New York State makes a clear statement that we value black people and will not tolerate policies that attack their dignity,” New York Assemblywoman Tremaine Wright, who worked to have the CROWN Act passed in New York told Teen Vogue, “I hope that young women see this and understand that their hair in its natural state is beautiful and should they choose to wear their hair naturally they should not be subjected to discrimination. I want young women to celebrate their autonomy, self-determination, and natural beauty.”
The 2020 Oscar-winning animated short Hair Love, which features a Black father learning how to style his daughter’s hair, kickstarted another natural hair movement and hopefully, this inspires society to embrace natural hair. Natural hair is beautiful and until Black people are able to wear their hair how they like, we shouldn’t praise non-Black people for wearing the same hairstyles or give them credit for making it “trendy.”
Instead, let’s respect Black hair for its roots in Black and African culture and identity.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Cultural appropriation is the practice of co-opting cultural identity markers that come from marginalized communities
Cultural appropriation of Black hairstyles is especially harmful, considering how many Black people experience hair discrimination to this day
Expression of Black hairstyles has deep roots to our history, during and before enslavement in America
We must end hair discrimination so that Black people can wear their hair without repercussions
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