ARCHIVES
EDUCATION | COVID-19 | TECH | SOCIAL | WORK | ENVIRONMENT | POLITICS | CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Don’t forget to subscribe ›
Study Hall: Recognizing complicity and making investments.
Happy Saturday! Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. I hope this week's content illuminates more on the topics we unpacked this week.
Happy Saturday! Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. I hope this week's content illuminates more on the topics we unpacked this week.
If you subscribe to just the weekly digest, this is the only email you will receive (hi Saturday readers 👋🏾) You can click through to read all original pieces on the archives and get this recap, too. Change your email preferences by updating your profile information here.
As always, your support is greatly appreciated. You can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $7/mo on our Patreon. Thank you to everyone that shares, donates, and puts this content into action, and sends well-wishes.
Nicole
If this email was forwarded to you, welcome to the Anti-Racism Daily. You can subscribe on our website at antiracismdaily.com.
TAKE ACTION
1. Reflect on the questions prompted by our community.
2. Discuss with a friend: what did you uncover this week that you never heard of before? What power and privilege may have protected you from unpacking this concept? Or, which trauma(s) may have shielded you from learning more?
GET EDUCATED
We've published 170 newsletters on racism over the past 170 days. Here are the newsletters we published this week.
11/20/2020 | Honor Transgender Day of Remembrance.
11/19/2020 | Decolonize your reading habits.
11/18/2020 | Advocate for missing Black women.
11/17/2020 | Cancel student debt.
11/16/2020 | Understand your local law enforcement.
11/15/2020 | Learn the key terminology.
Read all previously published newsletters on our archives >
Q+A
Would you be in favor of canceling student loan debts incurred by a wealthy family whose student will be a high earning professional after graduating? I’m more in favor of canceling student loan debt for those who are struggling with repayment. If someone took hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loans to get a high paying job, why should that be forgiven? We could help many people with smaller debts or bail out a few of the top 5%. Which would you choose?
From Cancel student debt, published 11/17/2020.
This is a common narrative when talking about this work and, quite frankly, a bit exhausting. Many people feel that equitable initiatives may support people that "don't deserve it as much." But we have to remember that solving an inequitable system isn't perfect. If some people gain that already have wealth, sure, it's not ideal. But pausing an initiative that could help thousands that could really need it, just because a few lucky others may benefit, is far worse. I think it's also important to note that Biden's proposed plan caps forgiveness for undergraduate tuition and people making up to $125,000. Learn more >
And that kind of zero-sum thinking is how we got here in the first place. Remember that, generally speaking, a privileged few almost always benefitted at the cost of many others. Applying the same logic with the players in different positions doesn't change the game. It just rearranges the pawns and protects the status quo in the process.
We need to change the game entirely – in this case, reimagining an inequitable education system. And that can start with (but certainly doesn't end with) eliminating debt for all people, regardless of where they're positioned on the board.
Lastly, I don't think anyone should be penalized for trying to become a high-earning professional. There are many reasons why someone would take hundreds of thousands of dollars to get a high-paying job: maybe because they will be the main breadwinner of their family. Or maybe their family sacrificed everything to bring them to this country to be successful. And maybe they did ALL of that and still found themselves out of a job because of COVID-19, or had to leave the profession because of an illness, or were wrongly terminated and can't find a job again. I went to school to study finance because I knew how much it meant for my family to go to college. I didn't end up working there, but does that make my debt unforgivable?
When you're thinking about issues like this, consider: what part of my decision-making process supports how we got here? How am I protecting an inequitable system? Am I looking for equality or equity? What is the difference between fairness and justice?
Q+A
I try buying from Black-owned bookstores, but they're not as fast, cheap, or reliable or Amazon. How do I find a Black-owned business that I can depend on?
From Decolonize your reading habits, published 11/19/2020.
Oftentimes, shopping at local businesses, small businesses etc, means unlearning the unrealistic expectations these big box businesses have created when it comes to commerce. Since when did we need everything delivered in less than 24 hours? Unlimited access to every product on the planet at our fingertips? Prices that are cheap only because they exploit the people that make it possible?
Doing this work sometimes means taking our comfort out of the equation. And if that means investing time to make a purchase, doing research, waiting longer, and paying more, then so be it. I know it may not be possible to do this for every purchase, but I think we can when we're talking about buying a book.
Also, the only way that a Black-owned business could compete with Amazon is if more people committed to buying there, especially when it's hard. If you want to see stronger locally-owned businesses, invest in them.
Q+A
What are your thoughts on bringing yoga to law enforcement and police?
I've grappled a lot with this as a yoga teacher, and was contacted by my local police department to offer yoga to officers (due to scheduling it never happened) because it's obviously not a be all, end all, measure.
But I'm struggling with the idea of whether this helps officers cope with and manage stress (thereby theoretically reducing the use of force), or whether it falls into the category of "more training" and thereby doesn't actually work to deconstruct the current system as it looks now.
I worry that this will become an acceptable "solution" to the issue of police brutality and excessive use of force, when in reality, it may do more harm than good?
From Understand your local law enforcement, published 11/16/2020.
I think that's a call you have to make for yourself. I think you're trying to decide which of your two points is the "right" one, but I think the real answer is both: you could both help officers reduce and manage stress and add "more training" that doesn't deconstruct the current system.
There's a lot of "boths" in this work when you're operating within a system and trying to dismantle it. I'm not the right person to tell you which to do, but I think it's important that we all recognize where we may be complicit, even as we do work we deem as necessary and productive.
Q+A
I read a LOT but find it difficult to travel with physical books for lack of space. Enter >> my Kindle. This year I've made it a point to buy books written by Black authors no matter the genre but I'm still buying from Amazon because that's what the Kindle is linked to. Are there other alternatives or recommendations for me? How can I avoid Amazon in this scenario or are the authors still benefiting from my purchase?
From Decolonize your reading habits, published 11/19/2020.
This is a match-making Q+A! I'm copying/pasting a helpful recommendation from another newsletter reader below as a response:
I just wanted to share a reading resource (at least for those living in the U.S); Libby and OverDrive are both free apps offered by the public library.
They are essentially digital libraries where you can check out audiobooks and ebooks straight to your phone/tablet, and all you need is a library card to access them. (perfect for social distancing—no human contact woo!)
Unfortunately, the selections are very limited, especially when it comes to diverse authors (at least in my county. The selections offered vary from county to county, as the apps link up directly with your local library branch)
But, you can recommend titles for your library to purchase that will become part of your library’s circulation. (Recommendations can be made both in physical libraries and on OverDrive, Libby doesn't have a place to make recommendations yet, but apparently, they are working towards making it a feature) And I figure, the more people who use these apps and make recommendations for more diverse books, the better access readers will have in the future.
You can find both apps on OverDrive.com. Also, in looking through OverDrive.com to make sure I had all my information straight, I found out that they also offer an app for public-school students that can be accessed with a student ID.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
The federal government offered a series of treaties to Indigenous communities across the U.S., but broke nearly all of the agreements
The forceable removal of Native communities from their lands has stripped people of their culture and connection to their ancestors
Initiatives to return stolen lands aren't just reparations, but a clear way to disamantle white supremacy and center Indigenous communities in climate justice
RELATED ISSUES
11/24/2020 | Stop violence against Native women.
11/15/2020 | Learn the key terminology.
10/21/2020 | Change racist sports team names.
10/12/2020 | Honor Indigenous Peoples’ Day.
7/5/2020 | Support the Navajo Nation through 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
Study Hall! Whiteness voted for Trump.
Happy Saturday! Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. This week we're diving into some FAQs from the content this week, mainly the election.
Happy Saturday! Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. This week we're diving into some FAQs from the content this week, mainly the election.
If you subscribe to just the weekly digest, this is the only email you will receive (hi Saturday readers 👋🏾) You can click through to read all original pieces on the archives and get this recap, too. Change your email preferences by updating your profile information here.
As always, your support is greatly appreciated. You can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $7/mo on our Patreon. Thank you to everyone that shares, donates, puts this content into action, and sends well-wishes.
Nicole
If this email was forwarded to you, welcome to the Anti-Racism Daily. You can subscribe on our website at antiracismdaily.com.
TAKE ACTION
1. Reflect on the questions prompted by our community.
2. Discuss with a friend: what did you uncover this week that you never heard of before? What power and privilege may have protected you from unpacking this concept? Or, which trauma(s) may have shielded you from learning more?
GET EDUCATED
We've published 157 newsletters on racism over the past 157 days. Here are the newsletters we published this week.
11/6/2020 | Don’t homogenize Latinx identity.
11/5/2020 | Abolish the electoral college.
11/4/2020 | Understand intergenerational trauma.
11/3/2020 | Vote.
11/2/2020 | Make an election safety plan.
11/1/2020 | Question billionaire philanthropy.
Read all previously published newsletters on our archives >
Q+A
Bezos does not have $180 Billion dollars in his bank account. Most of his wealth is not actual liquid money, right? I don't think we have public data on how much a guy like him has in liquid assets, but presumably, he doesn't just have billions of dollars lying around ready to be put to better use.
From Question billionaire philanthropy from 11/1/2020.
This is correct, Bezos is not sitting on $180 billion in his bank account. Most billionaires are not billionaires because they have billions of dollars in the bank; it’s because of the wealth they own in assets (like real estate and cars) and the companies they own. However, regardless of how much money is there, Bezos’ historically has given significantly less than others of his stature (Business Insider).
Also, some of Bezos’ charitable acts that receive press are actually donations on behalf of the company itself. Corporate philanthropy is a common way many organizations receive tax write-offs that ultimately save them that money otherwise. Individual donations work this way too. Furthermore, individuals can invest in vehicles like a donor-advised fund which allows them to immediately reduce taxes after a windfall but make donations on their own schedule, which means that tax money isn’t received to re-invest in public social services.
These tactics are publicly available loopholes that many companies and individuals use, regardless of their income – you may have created a tax-deduction yourself by donating to a 501c3. But beyond that, we have the capacity to both celebrate donations to create solutions – and criticize how those same people contribute to problems. There’s plenty he could do to increase working conditions within his company and ensure his employees are adequately paid and protected – at minimum.
Also, the solutions are often short-term stop-gaps to long-term issues. Consider a donation to support homeless shelters in Seattle, a city with a swiftly rising income disparity, partially due to the rapid expansion of tech companies like Amazon. Does the displacement of people feel equitable to displaced people in a homeless shelter? Is that justice?
Once again, the goal of this inquiry isn’t to condemn or admonish, but to stay in inquiry. But asking whether or not the money is “technically” in Bezos’ bank account isn’t the right question for this exercise. It’s how someone has that much power and privilege from an inherently inequitable company, and how their efforts – philanthropically or otherwise – are exacerbating critical issues. I highly recommend reading books like Decolonizing Wealth and Winners Take All to start orienting yourself more on this subject.
Does this explain why Black people voted for Trump too?
From Don’t homogenize Latinx identity on 11/6/2020.
I want to emphasize that it’s whiteness – not Black, Latinx, or other people of color – voting for Trump. When whiteness is dictated as the dominant culture, it forces people to surrender their own cultural background to be accepted by the majority. Being accepted as a part of whiteness is marketed to offer safety and security – education, decent job, protection from law enforcement, etc. And an easy way to show that solidarity is by voting.
This has happened to white people throughout history. Italian Americans and Irish Americans both used political engagement to be accepted into dominant culture (more via Michael Harriot on Twitter).
And what’s worse? Accepting dominant culture requires us to disparage any other cultural or societal norms. That can happen on an individual level; by learning to be ashamed, guilty, judging or hateful of the parts of you that connect you to narratives outside the “norm.” It also happens on a group level by taking public action to diminish people of color. And this is how racism is wielded to maintain dominant culture.
And it’s taught that this assimilation is essential to survival. So many people will choose it – especially when their lives feel threatened. And right now, everything is strained: we’re facing economic uncertainty, a persistent global pandemic, an uncompromising racial reckoning, environmental threats. The current President has consistently referred to people of color as “rapists" and “terrorists,” “thugs” and “criminals.” As a person of color, distancing yourself from the narrative in this environment may feel like the safest thing to do.
And white people vote for white supremacy the same way. Here, it’s a vote for the safety of dominant culture that feels threatened. And we could spend endless time analyzing how other aspects of our identities – like being a woman, or having a disability – may also influence how we feel about participating in dominant culture.
I also want to emphasize that despite a growing number of people of color voting, they still represent the vast minority of non-white voters. And fades in comparison to the number of white people – and the increased number of white women – that voted for Trump.
But white people in particular are absolutely using the decisions of those more marginalized to justify their own actions. But they should be ashamed. Because when white people feed white supremacy, they force everyone else to, too.
Q+A
As I am a junior in high school, I’m concerned I won’t have the time to fulfill tasks listed on the Safety Checklist. Do you have any recommendations for steps I can take to simultaneously balance schoolwork and extracurriculars, as well as the missions that the Checklist outlines?
From Make an election safety plan on 11/2/2020.
I first want to send a BIG hello to all the youth on this list! I know you have been our most vocal and engaged readers, and if you’re based in the U.S., I can’t imagine how it feels to watch this election unfold right now. Thank you for being here and doing the work – I know many of you are doing the work in households that have more conservative views, and that takes strength.
This Safety Checklist should be a practice, not a one-time action. We initially shared this resource on Monday – and the rhetoric of our election has changed significantly since then. Furthermore, most of the action items listed here are best practices for how to be in community anytime, not just during conflict.
I would recommend adding time in your day to check-in with this, and take on one section. It could be to complete it for the first time, or to revisit as it goes. And always start with your own well-being – we must be resourced to resource others.
Q+A
Of COURSE it's unfairly biased, but how in the world will the people who have the outsized power ever give it up? Certainly, with the Senate looking like it does, there is no WAY it will happen.
From Abolish the electoral college on 11/5/2020.
They likely won’t – and this is why many people call not just for reforming policies and practices, but abolishing them overall, and pushing for more radical revolution than expecting our current government to take action. It doesn’t offer a fast or simple solution, but rarely does the most critical work. I know that this doesn’t answer your question, but I want to emphasize how important it is to keep asking.
CLARIFICATIONS
In our 11/3/2020 article, we misspelled the name of the political analyst with a two-minute analysis of Trump. His name is Mehdi Hasan, not Medhi Hasan. This has been updated in our archives.
RELATED ISSUES
9/16/2020 | Fight for paid sick leave.
10/5/2020 | Protect undocumented Americans.
8/10/2020 | Respect the relationship between name and identity.
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
Study Hall! The scary truth.
Happy Halloween! Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. This week we unpack the futility of marginal change, Halloween, and the Supreme Court.
Happy Halloween! Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. This week we unpack the futility of marginal change, Halloween, and the Supreme Court.
If you subscribe to just the weekly digest, this is the only email you will receive (hi Saturday readers 👋🏾) You can click through to read all original pieces via the archives, and get the recap in one place. Change your email preferences by updating your profile information here.
As always, your support is greatly appreciated. You can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $7/mo on our Patreon.
Nicole
ps – you can also sign up for our advocacy program, which helps you track referrals to the newsletter and unlock perks along the way! Learn more.
TAKE ACTION
1. Reflect on the questions prompted by our community.
2. Discuss with a friend: what did you uncover this week that you never heard of before? What power and privilege may have protected you from unpacking this concept? Or, which trauma(s) may have shielded you from learning more?
GET EDUCATED
We've published 150 newsletters on racism over the past 150 days. Here are the newsletters we published this week.
10/30/2020 | Don't be racist this Halloween.
10/29/2020 | Fight racist death row sentencing.
10/28/2020 | Unpack the history of social work.
10/27/2020 | Expand the court.
10/26/2020 | Support diversity in animated films.
10/25/2020 | Learn the history of the Texas Rangers
Read all previously published newsletters on our archives >
Q+A
Just because we Democrats are disadvantaged now, I don't think we should stoop to Trump’s level. Are there future repercussions if Biden were to pack the court?
From Expand the court on 10/27/2020.
There's certainly repercussions to restructuring the court; it could divide the two parties even further and make the Supreme Court a critical part of every future election. Some are calling for different ways to restructure the court, like implementing term limits, that might not feel as radical as changing the number of seats altogether.
We could also have a court that changes more rapidly, offering more diverse perspectives on cases than what we've had historically.
But I think many people feel (including myself) that the stakes are too great to worry about the optics or the repercussions. The repercussions that the American people will experience outweigh any political maneuvering. Some of the most foundational human rights are at stake, and if we believe this democracy is designed to protect them, we need to make rapid changes so it can.
Q+A
This election I have the chance to vote for more environmental protections for my city. The plan notes that it will raise taxes to achieve its vision. I know we've talked about how important environmental protections are for marginalized communities in particular, but we've also talked about how the tax system disproportionately impacts the same community. How do I vote in a way that actually helps, not hurts?
From Fight for environmental protections on 10/23/2020.
When writing one newsletter on one topic each day, we oftentimes fail to demonstrate the complexities of this work. Unfortunately, our best efforts on one issue don't exist in a silo, and often come in direct conflict in what we believe our best efforts are in another. This is a great example of that paradox.
When abstracted, this is an example of a futility cycle, which some radical abolitionists point to in discussions about changing the current system. Because our entire society is built upon oppression, it's incredibly difficult to make monumental change. We can rally to change in one aspect of our lives, but overhauling everything is going to take more drastic action. It's akin to rebuilding a house on a rotting foundation. At some point, we need to raze the entire structure and start anew.
I don't know the specifics of the issue on your ballot this year, and sure, there might be one of the two choices that are slightly better. But let's focus on the paradox at hand. How can we look at both issues past the ballot and fight not for reform, but for abolition? Like in your scenario, taxes often come at the "cost" of other threats – poverty, housing insecurity, hunger – so what would it look like if we abolished the tax system entirely? How can we start today to push for a reimagining of taxes tomorrow?
I don't have the answers, but community activists in your city may. You're asking all the right questions. Keep listening for more tangible ways you can reshape the system. And in the meantime, keep doing what you can and make the decision that marginally moves things forward.
Q+A
I disagree with some of the costumes you say are offensive. Humor is healing, so zombie cops or coronavirus in chains could be a good way to look at where we are right now.
From Don't be racist this Halloween on 10/31/2020.
It may be for you! But I'll be honest, I had a visceral reaction to thinking about someone draped in chains walking down the street – regardless of what they're dressed as. I personally hold my breath when I see any cop while walking down the street; I don't think realizing one in particular is a Halloween costume as I approach will assuade that gut check.
Your response centered your assumption on how other people will feel based on what you deem funny. This work always encourages centering your assumptions on how people most vulnerable may feel; those that have had to live with the real-life horrors of cops and sickness. I don't think it's right to assume that everyone will appreciate a joke over the assumption that someone could be offended.
When it comes to humor, this take is often hotly contested. Comedians, for example, are both praised and condemned for making light of difficult situations. But I personally think that Halloween costumes occupy a different territory than a space designated for those kinds of statements. To me, Halloween is a way to escape the horrors of the day-to-day, not place them center stage.
Q+A
I heard that the term "spooky" is rooted in a slur against Black people and we shouldn't use it. Is that true?
From Don't be racist this Halloween on 10/31/2020.
Kind of. The term "spook" derives from the Dutch word for apparition, or specter, as did all of its variations (like "spooking" or "spooky").
But the word "spook" became a derogatory term for Black people in WWII, when Black Army pilots who trained at the Tuskegee Institute were referred to as the "Spookwaffe". Referring to someone – particularly a Black person – as a "spook" or "spooky" is absolutely uncalled for (NPR).
However, the term is "spooky" is still used as a colloquial statement towards general specter related activities (I clearly used it without thinking even though I already knew this). There's definitely more adjectives we can use instead of this term that's been co-opted in our history to have this meaning.
CLARIFICATIONS
In our 10/25/2020 newsletter, Learn the history of the Texas Rangers, we mistakenly insinuated in an early release that the police officer involved in the shooting of Jonathan Price was a Texas Ranger. It was the police officer involved in his arrest, not the shooter. The issue was changed in subsequent releases of the newsletter and on our archives.
RELATED ISSUES
10/17/2020 | Study Hall! Tone policing and language.
9/26/2020 | Study Hall! How we learned about slavery.
9/19/2020 | Study Hall! Equity v. equality and the burden on WOC.
9/12/2020 | Study Hall! Youth activism, Prop 22, and being multiracial.
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
Study Hall! Tone policing and language.
Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. This week I dove deeper on some pressing topics from our community.
Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. This week I dove deeper on some pressing topics from our community.
If you subscribe to just the weekly digest, this is the email you will receive. You can click through to read all original pieces via the archives, and get the recap in one place. Change your email preferences by updating your profile information here.
As always, your support is greatly appreciated. You can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $7/mo on our Patreon.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Reflect on the questions prompted by our community.
Discuss with a friend: how did you learn about slavery growing up? How does that inform your perception on the civil rights movement of today?
GET EDUCATED
By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)
We've published 136 newsletters on racism over the past 136 days. Here are the newsletters we published this week.
10/16/2020 | Abolish the grand jury.
10/15/2020 | Understand Judge Amy Coney Barrett's stance on racism.
10/14/2020 | Make the outdoors more equitable.
10/13/2020 | Support Chinatown during COVID-19.
10/12/2020 | Honor Indigenous Peoples’ Day.
10/11/2020 | Support climate justice.
Read all previously published newsletters on our archives >
Q+A
I have to say, the language in this is super harsh. I feel if the writer was nicer with their tone they'd get more of us white people to actually do better.
From Make the outdoors more equitable on 10/14/2020.
This is tone policing, a personal attack against someone for expressing emotion to detract from the validity of the statement itself. This can be wielded against anyone, but it's particularly harmful when it's leveraged in conversations on inequity – including race.
"At its best, tone policing is an irritating behavior pattern that blocks meaningful conversation. But at its worst, tone policing is an insidious and sometimes hard-to-grasp method of reinforcing elitism and structural racism". Naomi Day, Medium
The stories we publish here are valid regardless of how they make you – the reader – feel. And to be in this work we must be committed to making space for the pain and trauma that individuals experience, and how they choose to express it. Honoring both the message and the tone is a way to acknowledge another's humanness. In contrast, placing your own slight discomfort above the suffering of another is a form of oppression. And there's no space for that here – in this work, and particularly in the discourse of this newsletter. I'm proud to share a wide range of stories and perspectives.
Q+A
There's no Chinatown in my community. How can I help other Chinatowns?
From Support Chinatown during COVID-19 on 10/13/2020.
If you can't support one in your direct community, consider adding a visit the next time you're in a city that includes one! And although there might not be a Chinatown per se, I can imagine there are Asian American-owned businesses that have also experienced some type of anti-Asian racism or bias since COVID-19 launched. Go and support them.
We also have additional resources in a previous newsletter on standing against this rise of anti-Asian racism. You can stand for representation at your business, in your local city council, your child's schools, and other community touchpoints.
Q+A
I noticed you used ACB as an acronym for Judge Amy Coney Barrett. I'm worried conservative are doing this to make her feel like the next RBG, which is a major NO for me. How can we stop this association?
From Understand Judge Amy Coney Barrett's stance on racism on 10/15/2020.
Whew I hear you on this! I can imagine that many are quick to insert Judge Barrett into the same fervor of appreciation and respect that Justice Ginsburg gleaned in her tenure. And a three-letter abbreviation does help.
But I think these abbreviations are more akin to how social media dominates how we stay informed. With constraints around tweet and Instagram copy length (and subject lines, which is where I abbreviated to ACB) it's difficult to share without the abbreviation, especially when many include the word "Judge" in front as a sign of respect. We are quick to shorthand, not just to show our affinity and familiarity, but for brevity's sake, too.
We've also got many men historically that have the same monikers – MLK, FDR, LBJ, JFK, and RFK, for starters.
CLARIFICATIONS
10/15/2020 | Understand Judge Amy Coney Barrett's stance on racism.
As I built the case for Judge Barrett's stance on racism, I wanted to focus on how racism influenced issues such as abortion, immigration, etc. But as I did that I somehow forgot to include the issue that sparked me to investigate this the first place:
Judge Barrett was a judge on a 2019 case involving a Black Illinois transportation employee who sued the department after he was fired, citing that his supervisor had "created a hostile work environment and called him the N-word" (NPR).
When ruling on whether race played a factor, Judge Barrett stated that "being called the N-word by a former supervisor was not sufficient — in the context of that one particular case — to support a claim of a racially-based hostile work environment".
Many people are using this to say that Judge Barrett believes that the N-word is not racist. From what I understand watching the confirmation, it was more of a statement that this was the only racially-motivated example of a hostile work environment submitted for the judges' consideration, and there weren't more examples to substantiate the claim. It's still messed up, but not as damaging as the highlights I read. This encouraged me to dive deeper.
RELATED ISSUES
9/26/2020 | Study Hall! How we learned about slavery.
9/19/2020 | Study Hall! Equity v. equality and the burden on WOC.
9/12/2020 | Study Hall! Youth activism, Prop 22, and being multiracial.
9/5/2020 | Study Hall! Defund the police or add more training?
8/29/2020 | Study Hall! The trauma of police brutality videos, active bystander trainings.
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
Study Hall! How we learned about slavery.
Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. This week I dove deeper on some pressing topics from our community.
I focused on sharing our collective experiences learning about slavery in school. I think it's a good reminder of how necessary our commitment to anti-racism work is, and how so many people are coming to this place with an insufficient foundation. I hope it's both encouraging and motivating to keep going.
If you subscribe to just the weekly digest, this is the email you will receive. You can click through to read all original pieces via the archives, and get the recap in one place. Change your email preferences by updating your profile information here.
As always, your support is greatly appreciated. You can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $5/mo on our Patreon.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
1. Reflect on the questions prompted by our community.
2. Discuss with a friend: how did you learn about slavery growing up? How does that inform your perception on the civil rights movement of today?
GET EDUCATED
In review: The newsletters we published this week.
9/25/2020 | Decriminalize sex work.
9/24/2020 | Demand justice for Breonna Taylor.
9/23/2020 | Reject the modern-day poll tax.
9/22/2020 | Learn about sundown towns.
9/21/2020 | Support the 1619 Project.
9/20/2020 | Make the justice system more diverse.
FROM THE COMMUNITY
How did you learn about slavery growing up?
From 9/21/2020 | Support the 1619 Project.
Monday's newsletter emphasizes the importance of teaching the truth of our history. In the original newsletter, I asked you to respond with your own stories on how you learned about slavery. I read through hundreds of responses and compared them to the seven key themes that the Teaching Tolerance study found in their research. Unsurprisingly, our collective experience matches – almost exactly. I've summarized their key themes and added anonymized examples from our experiences below.
1. We teach about slavery without context, preferring to present the good news before the bad.
"What I learned about slavery was a sanitized version. I learned nothing about how the South and others who did not agree with emancipation undermined the declaration and then in concert with Northern politicians permitted the birth of the Jim Crow era. I did not learn that the freed [enslaved people] were promised land upon their freedom and that promise was never fulfilled. I did not learn of that southern plantation owners grew rich on the back of [those enslaved]."
2. We tend to subscribe to a progressive view of American history that's "growing perfect".
"I am appalled by my own lack of knowledge or connection to the fact that my own grandparents lived in segregated times and that my parents were born before the Civil Rights era ended. I did not make this connection as a young child, when history seemed so far away. Why was none of this discussed in our history lessons? Why did we get the "America is the Greatest Country" story, glossing over the facts, and failing to connect history to the actual present we can experience and make an impact on now?"
3. We teach about the American enslavement of Africans as an exclusively southern institution.
"We didn’t learn that the northern states were still allowed to enslave people...We just knew that the southern states were bad and slavery was bad...Slavery was always presented as a southern problem as well, I grew up in Michigan so I am not sure if that has anything to do with it but I remember thinking it wasn't something anyone I knew or was related to could have been involved in."
4. We rarely connect slavery to the ideology that grew up to sustain and protect it: white supremacy.
"When I was in school, I learned as a general idea that slavery happened, and was over. There wasn't any detailed info about the horrors that followed such as segregation, Jim Crow laws, or the thousands of lynchings. I didn't know about Juneteenth, or the Black Wall St until I had children of my own."
5. We often rely on pedagogy poorly suited to the topic.
"I went to public school in California, and when I took AP US History in 2012-13, we read “A People’s History of the United States" by Howard Zinn. Reading that book was pretty much as in depth into the history of slavery in the United States that we went. We also watched the first episode of the TV show “Roots”, but that is all that I remember of any other representations/resources about slavery that we studied as a class.
I also just wanted to say that the year prior, when I was in a World History class, we went very in depth into the Holocaust and studied that for quite a few weeks. I also don’t remember studying anything about any history pertaining to the African continent in that class, either."
6. We rarely make connections to the present.
"So learning about slavery in school - our school did “teach” it, but that is was a very American problem. It was the Americans that owned [enslaved people] and shipped Africans over. There wasn’t any mention of our involvement. It was also plain facts so to be fair we did learn about some of the terrible conditions but we were never taught to empathize (“how would you feel”, “what do you think about this”..) or to form our own opinion. It was just something that happened. But also exactly that, happened, past tense, there was also no conversation or discussion on how it still impacts lives today
By no means did we ever learn that the colonies’ success, and eventually the U.S. economy, was almost entirely propped up by slavery, and if that system had been disrupted earlier this country would have never prospered. Nor did we go on to learn about what life for Black people was like during the nearly 100 year period between abolition and the modern civil rights movement."
7. We tend to center on the white experience when we teach about slavery.
"I took AP everything in high school and could count on one hand the kids of color that were in that track. At any rate, I recall in AP History skipping the Slavery chapter of the history book. I thought surely, we wouldn’t. It was AP after all – given the heightened reading requirements, I thought we would be able to squeeze it in. In fact, me and the only Black girl in the class discussed what we would do if we skipped the chapter. And sure enough, our white cis-male teacher did. So I raised my hand and asked him why we weren’t doing the slavery chapter. And he bumbled through a response about a lack of time and the content on the AP exam and then carried forward. He did look startled though. I would like to think he reflected on it later."
"I don't remember being given many facts and true histories of slavery, and now that I think back, most of those historical fiction narratives focused a great deal on hope and redemption: "Look at these people, freeing themselves and finding liberty up north" or "Look at this nice white lady letting this freed [enslaved person] work for her." The full picture of the horror wasn't adequately captured, and I only became aware of, say, the Tulsa race massacre because of watching Watchmen. Which was a huge red flag for me."
Q+A
What is SESTA/FOSTA?
9/25/2020 | Decriminalize sex work.
A few people asked for more information on SESTA/FOSTA referenced in the article, two laws passed in 2018 that aimed to curb sex trafficking in the U.S. FOSTA, the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act, and SESTA, the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act, aimed to hold personals sites accountable for their participation in sex trafficking — in particular, Backpage.com.
But research shows that providing sex workers with digital spaces to find and vet clients is much safer than the alternative – meeting people in person and finding new clients on the street. Much of the violence between sex workers and law enforcement referenced in our newsletter is because of that.
The acts also don't distinguish between consensual sex work and nonconsensual sex work, which are vastly different practices and require much different forms of government intervention. And unfortunately, these regulations make both communities less safe. (Read more on Vox). It's also unclear whether these acts have effectively curbed sex trafficking (Meaww).
On a side note, these rules also had broader implications, including many sites severely limiting any sex-related content on their site. Many users expressed that, beyond sex work, it also greatly limited sites' abilities to post educational content about sex or feature more diverse, inclusive porn (Wired).
Clarifications
9/20/2020 | Make the justice system more diverse.
In my intro for this newsletter, I mention the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and said "rest in peace," not knowing that this term references the Christian afterlife, which is not inclusive and inappropriate considering her Jewish background. I apologize for the error and have updated the language in the archives.
RELATED ISSUES
9/19/2020 | Study Hall! Equity v. equality and the burden on WOC.
9/12/2020 | Study Hall! Youth activism, Prop 22, and being multiracial.
9/5/2020 | Study Hall! Defund the police or add more training?
8/29/2020 | Study Hall! The trauma of police brutality videos, active bystander trainings.
8/15/2020 | Study Hall! Affirmative action, sliding scale pricing, and the right intentions.
8/8/2020 | Study Hall! Emoji blackface, the "family card," and starting conversations.
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
Study Hall! Equity v. equality and the burden on WOC.
Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. This week I dove deeper on some pressing topics from our community.
Ironically, I wrote most of this on a plane before I learned of the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsberg. Now, as I add the last touches, I write with both deep sorrow and appreciation of her legacy.
If you'd prefer to receive just one email a week, this is the email you'd receive. You can change your email preferences by updating your profile information here.
As always, your support is greatly appreciated. You can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $5/mo on our Patreon.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Reflect on the questions prompted by our community.
Ask yourself two questions about one of the topics we discussed this week. Discuss these questions with a friend or colleague.
GET EDUCATED
In review: The newsletters we published this week.
9/18/2020 | Reject racial gaslighting.
9/17/2020 | Abolish ICE.
9/16/2020 | Fight for paid sick leave.
9/15/2020 | End Hollywood whitewashing.
9/14/2020 | Stop the use of ketamine in arrests.
9/13/2020 | Understand representation in vaccine trials.
Q+A
Do you have any recommendations on words to diffuse the gaslighting?
From 9/18/2020 | Reject racial gaslighting.
Jacquelyn Ogorchukwu Iyamah is a social wellness designer that consistently unpacks interpersonal racism on her Instagram. In an article with Refinery29, she offers the following for Black people that may experience this:
"calling out: publicly pointing out the person’s harmful behaviour"
"calling in: scheduling a one-on-one with the person to discuss their behaviour"
"removing yourself from the conversation to preserve your energy and peace of mind, writing down exactly what happened so that you can refer back to it if you find yourself questioning your truth, or sending the person educational resources and establishing boundaries around the person who racially gaslighted you to limit your interactions with them."
For those with white privilege, I encourage sticking with the conversation on behalf of the communities of color that have to deal with it.
Q+A
Why would anyone even work at ICE, to begin with, especially a Black woman, considering how long allegations of abuse have been happening?
9/17/2020 | Abolish ICE.
Let's start with the professional aspect of this conversation. Dawn Wooten is a licensed professional nurse, a role that has increasingly limited opportunities in the healthcare industry, driven in part by the industry's history to disregard women of color and queer practitioners. Monica McLemore breaks this down further on Twitter.
Our society is quick to place the blame and burden on women, particularly women of color, for transgressions like these. Here is no different. Just because our bodies are on the line does not make them the shields for harm. And it's unfair to ask people who are already barred from equal opportunities to sacrifice themselves and their families' wellbeing and leave the system. That is certainly their right, but not their obligation.
I don't know Dawn Wooten personally and can't speak for her. No one should have to. It's not productive to blame anyone – especially people from marginalized communities – individually for this system of abuse (especially if she did speak out against it).
Q+A
I have spoken with people about this, and their response to me is that only 13% of the United States is Black, so why would this group get more representation than that? This is not an idea I agree with, but what would be a factual response that explains that?
9/15/2020 | End Hollywood whitewashing.
A few people had questions about this survey generally, which wasn't aiming to only demonstrate general stats on the ethnic breakdown, but the fact that there's been little to no change over the course of six years, even though our country is rapidly diversifying. I haven't seen a more recent study with this breadth of data yet.
I'd also consider the movies and roles that may have increased representation on film during these times. Films like 12 Years A Slave, The Help, and The Butler may have contributed to Black actors' representation, and all display Black people enslaved or in servitude. Consider that the two Black women that won Oscars during this time frame were playing Black women overcoming racism and/or horrific violence because of their identity (Halle Berry in Monster's Ball and Lupita N'gonyo for 12 Years A Slave). As did Morgan Freeman, who won the Best Actor role for his depiction of Nelson Mandela, and Chiwetel Ejiofor for 12 Years A Slave.
Let's say these movies and the resulting representation did represent the breadth of stories and narratives that the film industry produces each year. Looking at racism as percentage points aren't enough. That's a lens of "equality" – that everyone gets resources based on population size. But it doesn't take into account the struggles and difficulties that some people have to get there. When it comes to representation in film, likely, we've only just gotten to proportional representation based on population size. It certainly hasn't always been like this, and the movies we're heralding are still perpetuating limited stories of Black people and their experiences.
In my opinion, we need to look at this from the point of equity: what's "proportional" based on the systemic inequities that people have color experienced? What are the systems that have caused this to exist? What would it look like if the industry was truly celebrating Black actors and filmmakers, and a breadth of stories and perspectives?
Q+A
If people of all races are biologically the same, why does there need to be diverse representation for drug trials?
From 9/13/2020 | Understand representation in vaccine trials.
The importance of diverse representation is to ensure that a wide range of health conditions and genetic compositions are represented in the trials. We've discussed in previous newsletters how racism – not race – can shift health outcomes for various populations. It's important to ensure that they're all represented.
It's also equitable, based on our history of medical bias and violence, for us to establish a more equitable practice of testing with broader populations. It means reconciling the deep rifts of distrust, including more diverse medical professionals and institutions, and holding ourselves accountable for a more equitable healthcare system.
Clarifications
9/17/2020 | Abolish ICE.
In our story on forced sterilization, we referenced how transgender people are being forced by state laws to undergo surgery to have their gender legally recognized. The term used by the source we referenced was “sex reassignment surgery,” but the preferred term in the trans community is “gender confirmation surgery”. We have corrected this language in our archives.
RELATED ISSUES
9/12/2020 | Study Hall! Youth activism, Prop 22, and being multiracial.
9/5/2020 | Study Hall! Defund the police or add more training?
8/29/2020 | Study Hall! The trauma of police brutality videos, active bystander trainings.
8/15/2020 | Study Hall! Affirmative action, sliding scale pricing, and the right intentions.
8/8/2020 | Study Hall! Emoji blackface, the "family card," and starting conversations.
8/1/2020 | Study Hall! Racist actions, doulas, and intersectional change.
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
Study Hall! Youth activism, Prop 22, and being multiracial.
Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. Many of these questions from this week are actually newsletters en queue, but I added a couple I felt I could address in the short space here.
If you'd prefer to receive just one email a week, this is the email you'd receive. You can change your email preferences by updating your profile information here.
As always, your support is greatly appreciated. You can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $5/mo on our Patreon.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
1. Reflect on the questions prompted by our community.
2. Ask yourself two questions about one of the topics we discussed this week. Discuss these questions with a friend or colleague.
GET EDUCATED
In review: The newsletters we published this week.
9/11/2020 | Protect Black women.
9/10/2020 | Fight for fair labor.
9/9/2020 | Make the census count.
9/8/2020 | Reject the model minority myth.
9/7/2020 | Learn about critical race theory.
9/6/2020 | Protect the aging population from COVID-19.
RESOURCE
Black women services in Atlanta, GA
From Protect Black women on Friday, September 11.
From reader Maria:
This article is a critical reminder of the ways in which Black women experience intersecting violence from all corners of society. I wanted to share a resource that is working to serve Black women survivors of domestic violence and suicidality in Atlanta, GA. They provide 100% free psychological services and work to address transportation and other barriers to provide Black women with much-needed support, including practical support (clothing, feminine products). The program has been developing a culturally adapted intervention for Black women survivors of DV for ~20 years now. This program also trains mental health and medical professionals to be more culturally competent. Resources like these are too few and far between, but this is a program that is really doing good work. The website is below:
https://theniaproject.wordpress.com/
Q+A
You mentioned that many people don't know about our history because it's not taught often in school. What can we do to ensure our education system is educating our kids about history more equitably?
From Reject the model minority myth on Tuesday, September 8.
This is worth a whole newsletter – which I'm planning on publishing next week! Because our education system is a critical component of how we view the world, particularly when it comes to racial equity.
I'll dive into it further in that piece, but it starts with active participation. Parents have a particular influence on the curriculum brought into classrooms. Review your child's syllabus and consider how many diverse stories and perspectives are included. Flip through their textbooks and note how their lessons on history, geography, etc. may prioritize certain places and parts of our timeline.
Also, consider the representation of your school district – not just in its teachers (which is critically important) but in the administrators, district leads, and educational boards. There's still state and federal mandates, but as you'll read next week, public participation can greatly influence it, for better or worse.
INSIGHT
Prop 22 protects more than just low-wage workers that are employed by tech companies.
From Fight for fair labor on Thursday, September 10
From reader Julia:
It’s good to see some love towards Prop 22! More than gig workers are affected by the current policy.
Right now businesses are allowed to try workers as contractors before they commit to them as employees. Depending on the cost of the contractor, businesses can be tempted to keep workers (performing essential functions to the business) as contractors indefinitely.
This subjects so-called “freelance” workers to a sometimes full time schedule with one single business, without the health benefits, stock benefits, retirement benefits, bonus benefits, or pay that their employee peers receive.
Q+A
I'm under the age of 18 so I can't take the census, or get a census job. How else can I support?
Actually, anyone age 15 years or older can do the census on behalf of their household! Be sure to check with the people you live with to see if someone else has already completed it on your behalf. You do have to be 18 to get a census job.
After you've sorted this out, spread the word! Maybe you have friends that are also under the age of 18 who thought the same thing you did. And maybe you can rally your friends on social media to take action!
I can imagine it's especially for anyone too young or disenfranchised from voting to watch what's unfolding in the U.S. right now and not be able to take civic action. It might sound simple and dismissive, but I mean this earnestly – now is the most important time to use whatever power you have to share your voice. It might not feel like you're making a difference. But luckily, we all don't have to change the world alone. If we can each change one heart and mind, only half of us have to be successful for all of us to thrive. Start where you are and do what you can. You've got this.
Q+A
How does the model minority myth impact individuals with mixed identities? As someone who's both Asian and Black, for example, have double the expectations for success?
From Reject the model minority myth on Tuesday, September 9.
I am not both Black and Asian, so I can't speak to this from personal experience. I can imagine it's a unique experience for each person, and influenced by their perceptions of how their identities are perceived in the world around them.
From what I learned in Jami's newsletter, model minority myth, like many racial biases, isn't just internalized. It's something that individuals experience from the world around them. So it's not just "how do I relate to this concept," but "how does the world view me in this light, and what does that mean for my safety and well-being?"
Regardless of how it does, I think we should all be sensitive to how it should. And, know that we can listen and learn to understand, instead of intentionally or unintentionally promoting the same myth.
Clarifications
9/10/2020 | Fight for fair labor.
I meant to write that voting No to Prop 22 protects low-wage workers from exploitation. Not "Yes to Prop 22". The campaign for "Yes to Prop 22" is a well-funded marketing campaign from tech companies, including Uber. I've made that clarification in our archives.
RELATED ISSUES
8/29/2020 | Study Hall! The trauma of police brutality videos, active bystander trainings.
8/15/2020 | Study Hall! Affirmative action, sliding scale pricing, and the right intentions.
8/8/2020 | Study Hall! Emoji blackface, the "family card," and starting conversations.
8/1/2020 | Study Hall! Racist actions, doulas, and intersectional change.
7/25/2020 | Study Hall! How to be a better ally, petitions, and plastics.
7/18/2020 | Study Hall! Ebonics, capitalizations and cultural appropriation.
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
Study Hall! Defund the police or add more training?
Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. This week's responses focused mainly on the role of law enforcement in our society, which to me is one of the most pressing issues of our time. I answered a couple of questions on that and other things below.
If you prefer to read our newsletter only weekly, this is the email you'll receive. You can change your email preferences by updating your profile information here.
As always, your support is greatly appreciated. These contributions are our only source of funding and help us pay writers and develop new resources. You can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $5/mo on our Patreon.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
1. Reflect on the questions prompted by our community.
2. Ask yourself two questions about one of the topics we discussed this week. Discuss these questions with a friend or colleague.
GET EDUCATED
In review: The newsletters we published this week.
Friday, 9/4/2020 | Tell museums to replace stolen artifacts.
Thursday, 9/3/2020 | Support mental health response services.
Wednesday, 9/2/2020 | Rally for fair appraisals.
Tuesday, 9/1/2020 | Learn the legacy of Japanese American incarceration.
Monday, 8/31/2020 | Condemn colorism.
Sunday, 8/30/2020 | Protect housing rights during COVID-19.
Additional Resources
One of our readers, Mallory, runs Don't Call the Police, a national database of local alternatives to dialing 911 when there's an issue. Learn more here: https://dontcallthepolice.com.
Q+A
Is the person calling 911 really able to discern whether police or mental health professionals are needed? What physical harm or risk may be present that requires a trained policeman to handle an altercation? The caller is probably very afraid of the actions of said person and just want the situation to be deescalated.
The individual calling 911 might not be able to discern enough, but there's ample research that shows that often, 911 responders can't, either. When the individual calls an alternative phone number, those trained responders are often more likely to gauge the situation and decide on the proper intervention – they could easily arrive with law enforcement if they deem it appropriate, OR encourage the caller to dial 911 outright.
When we have an assumption that the "caller is probably very afraid of the actions of said person" and only want to de-escalate, we're allowing that their fear and implicit biases lead the response. That centers the caller, and often not the needs of the individual, which is the point of offering more options.
Q+A
Does it make more sense to train police officers better in de-escalation especially with someone who potentially has mental health issues?
At a minimum, yes. On average, law enforcement spends about 58 hours on firearm training and just 8 hours on de-escalation or crisis intervention (Police Forum). So there's a ton that can change there. But considering the broad examples of harm already, compounded by the racial bias pervasive in law enforcement, there are more urgent calls to defund law enforcement and re-invest in other resources. There's no reason that we need to have law enforcement equally equipped to handle such a broad range of 911 calls. Medical professionals are likely best for health-related calls.
Furthermore, calls for re-investment argue that we can invest in mental health care support that prevents the 911 calls altogether. A punitive based approach to health doesn't change the health equity of any community. It instead focuses on de-escalating problems that preventing them altogether. And we deserve more resources to live healthier, happier lives.
Your question was followed with the statement that defunding might not be the answer, but remember that defunding the police doesn't mean getting rid of them entirely. It means analyzing where we can re-allocate funding to invest elsewhere, all of which should help from us overwhelming them with a wide range of social issues.
Q+A
When it comes to stolen art, why can’t museums buy the pieces from their original countries?
I suppose they could, perhaps as some form of reparations. But from what I understand, the goal now is to change the system entirely by building more points of accountability within the acquisition process. Also, the examples stated make it seem that most countries are more interested in preserving their culture than receiving financial compensation for it.
It begs a broader question: who deserves to have access to the art? Why was it ever okay for us to loot objects for our gain? And remember that the art world financially profits off of these objects as they change hands and remain on display for patrons. If monetary gains fuel this process of colocalization, I don't think we can justify it by sending money back to the countries (unless, of course, the countries themselves deem this the proper response).
Moving forward though, yes, a legal obtainment through a financial transaction seems more equitable than looting.
Reader Courtney shared the following on how the Field Museum is honoring art looted from Indigenous populations (which is a very similar story we're unpacking in a later newsletter):
The Field Museum in Chicago had the best response to Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act in the US that I have seen. They work with the tribes to either return the artifacts or work with the tribes to display the artifacts respectfully. They also educate about how the artifacts were not given by the tribes initially. It was the most honest and open I had ever seen a museum talk about how they received Native American artifacts and have tried to rectify that with respect and honor moving forward. They also took full ownership for a racist exhibit that was in their museum for decades. Now they use it to contextualize racism in science. It was amazing to see and learn, especially since museums are inherently elite, it felt very honest in a good way. They apologized for their history, but promised to do better now.
Bit more about their work here:
https://news.uchicago.edu/story/exhibition-upends-traditional-native-american-representations
Q+A
My family is Italian American and I have some family members who have over the years expressed frustration that “Japanese Internment” was taught to us but not the internment of Italians and Germans during the war. They have also complained that the Japanese American victims received compensation whereas the Italian and German victims did not. I've shared my disapproval with them on this already and would love to hear your thoughts.
Over 120,000 Japanese Americans were incarcerated. In contrast, approx. 10,000 German Americans and "hundreds" of Italian Americans were incarcerated. Both German American and Italian American citizens as a whole were deemed too valuable to the U.S. economic and political system for large-scale incarceration, which says a lot about the perception of Japanese Americans during that time, how our government valued human life, and the racial discrimination our country is still reckoning with.
As a result, there are broad differences in the scale of these decisions. We have to remember the devastating impact this had on the Japanese American community as a whole. The lasting physical and psychological harm, the mass loss of property, the fracture of families, and a long-lasting prejudice against Japanese people, which contributes to this country's racial bias against Asian communities. Comparatively, we do not see the same level of systemic and interpersonal racism against German American and Italian American people today.
I'm not saying that it shouldn't be taught, minimize any harm they experienced, or that the victims don't deserve compensation. It is all wrong, and all groups deserve justice. But these narratives are often a way to minimize the pain of marginalized communities to center the pain of those with more privilege. When people take that stance, they inherently continue to cause harm against Japanese Americans and insinuates that their struggles are less important.
Clarifications
The key takeaways for the Thursday, 9/3/2020 article were incorrect in the text portion of the email. That has been corrected in the archives.
RELATED ISSUES
8/29/2020 | Study Hall! The trauma of police brutality videos, active bystander trainings.
8/15/2020 | Study Hall! Affirmative action, sliding scale pricing, and the right intentions.
8/8/2020 | Study Hall! Emoji blackface, the "family card," and starting conversations.
8/1/2020 | Study Hall! Racist actions, doulas, and intersectional change.
7/25/2020 | Study Hall! How to be a better ally, petitions, and plastics.
7/18/2020 | Study Hall! Ebonics, capitalizations and cultural appropriation.
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
Study Hall! The trauma of police brutality videos, active bystander trainings.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. We have such a wide range of readers from various different backgrounds and industries, and I always appreciate reading how this work is showing up for you.
This week was the longest year of my life, honestly, and we covered critical issues preventing our collective liberation. Spend some time reviewing the questions and insights below, and resource yourself for the work ahead.
As always, your support is greatly appreciated. These contributions are our only source of funding and help us pay writers and develop new resources. You can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $5/mo on our Patreon.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
1. Reflect on the questions prompted by our community.
2. Ask yourself two questions about one of the topics we discussed this week. Discuss these questions with a friend or colleague.
GET EDUCATED
In review: The newsletters we published this week.
8/28/2020 | Start seeing color.
8/27/2020 | Help decriminalize drug possession.
8/26/2020 | Be an active bystander.
8/25/2020 | Rally against racism in America’s art museums.
8/24/2020 | Demand justice for Jacob Blake.
8/23/2020 | Support those incarcerated and impacted by COVID-19.
Q+A
Q: It seems like there was a lot of misleading information published about the attempted murder of Jacob Blake. How do we know which news sources to trust?
A: I recommend always checking multiple sources to ensure what you read is true. The news is often sensationalized, so move past the headlines you see on social media and read the full article. Also, just because something is shared often doesn't make it true.
I also recommend following local journalists, both in your community and when you're learning more about news that's occuring in a specific area. Many local journalists will report in real-time during a crisis on Twitter, which is what we used to publish our initial report on Jacob Blake on Monday.
U.S. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez shared more about this on her Instagram, which was reposted on this Twitter thread.
From Demand justice for Jacob Blake. on Monday, August 24.
Insight
We often get questions from readers internationally on how to take action from their countries. Usually you'll find the same injustices occurring closer to home. Here's a note from a Canadian reader on how Tuesday's conversation on racism in. America's art museums is reflected in Canada:
This isn’t specifically related to art galleries or museums but, here in Winnipeg (in Canada), we are home to the Canadian Human Rights Museum. There has been much controversy attached to this museum since its inception but has recently come under fire for racism experienced by employees of colour and censoring content (such as a queer rights display) for different tour groups.
Just wanted to pass this on in case it is helpful for some Canadian content. Here’s a link to the full article: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/pervasive-and-systemic-racism-at-canadian-museum-for-human-rights-report-says-1.5674468
From Rally against racism in America’s art museums. on Tuesday, August 25.
Insight
Linda shared this quote that embodies the act of an active bystander:
"We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." Elie Weisel
From Be an active bystander.on Wednesday, August 26.
Insight
Many people also shared that Hollaback has a series of free active bystander trainings that you can take, including one to intervene on harassment to people from AAPI backgrounds, and one to counteract implicit biases. You can learn more here or make a donation to support their work.
From Be an active bystander on Wednesday, August 26.
Q+A
Q: You mentioned that we shouldn't share videos of violence against people of color. But other people are saying that it's important that we "don't look away," because so much of these injustices have been overlooked for decades. How do we balance the two?
Here's the thing. We shouldn't need graphic videos of violence against communities of color for us to be believed. There are already countless graphic examples of the brutalization against us throughout history, available readily on the internet. These videos are proven to be traumatizing for African Americans. It is offensive for anyone to argue that the education of a white person should come before the safety and health of a non-white person; in fact, it's another form of violence.
This argument also forgets the importance of choice. Emmett Till's mother made the brave decision to share the photos of the mutilation of her child's body when he was murdered 65 years ago. But many of these videos circulating were not shared with the consent of the individual or their kin.
I can trust the accounts of eyewitnesses, and do my work to cross-reference sources from journalists. I don't need a video to believe a Black person when they call attention to the injustices so ingrained in our society.
Read more:
https://newrepublic.com/article/153103/videos-police-brutality-traumatize-african-americans-undermine-search-justice
From Be an active bystander on Wednesday, August 26.
Q+A
Q: The threat of incarceration can be powerful motivation for people to not use drugs, or fight a drug addiction. Shouldn't we keep it instead of decriminalizing it?
A: No, y'all. Why would we hold onto a rotten system in the hopes that it will encourage healthier behaviors? It would make much more sense to divest these funds into community support that can provide drug awareness and rehabilitation. In fact, it's believed that decriminalization will further encourage people to seek help.
From Help decriminalize drug possession on Tuesday, August 27.
RELATED ISSUES
8/15/2020 | Study Hall! Affirmative action, sliding scale pricing, and the right intentions.
8/8/2020 | Study Hall! Emoji blackface, the "family card," and starting conversations.
8/1/2020 | Study Hall! Racist actions, doulas, and intersectional change.
7/25/2020 | Study Hall! How to be a better ally, petitions, and plastics.
7/18/2020 | Study Hall! Ebonics, capitalizations and cultural appropriation.
7/11/2020 | Study Hall! Raising multiracial children and addressing microaggressions.
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
Study Hall! Affirmative action, sliding scale pricing, and the right intentions.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
Welcome to our weekly Study Hall where we answer questions and reflections from the previous week. We dove into some tricky topics this week, and I appreciated your kind and thoughtful reflections.
Remember that you can always respond to these emails with a question and we'll do our best to add it to future newsletters! It can be related to the topic or something else that you're learning about. Sometimes it sparks an idea for a future newsletter!
As always, your support is greatly appreciated. These contributions are our only source of funding and help us pay writers and develop new resources. You can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $5/mo on our Patreon.
Nicole
ps – if you opted-in to weekly digests this is the only newsletter you will receive. If you prefer to get weekly newsletters than the daily ones, update your profile here.
TAKE ACTION
1. Reflect on the questions prompted by our community.
2. Ask yourself two questions about one of the topics we discussed this week. Discuss these questions with a friend or colleague.
GET EDUCATED
In review: The newsletters we published this week.
8/14/2020 | Support Black mental health.
8/13/2020 | Don't tokenize people of color.
8/12/2020 | Demand justice for Elijah McClain.
8/11/2020 | Travel for diversity and inclusivity.
8/10/2020 | Respect the relationship between name and identity.
8/9/2020 | Understand the unemployment gap | COVID-19
You mentioned that the government should do more to support unemployed workers right now. What do you think that should look like?
From Understand the unemployment gap | COVID-19 on Sunday, August 8.
I'm certainly not an economic expert, so I'll leave this up to the officials. But I do think we need a more long-term, sustainable solution than the federal aid announced last weekend. And that proposal was more generous than the actual outcome; it looks like most people will receive $300, not $400, and these extended benefits don't support some of the lowest-wage workers. Workers must qualify for at least $100 a week in unemployment benefits to be eligible. According to the NYTimes, would exclude roughly one million people, nearly three-quarters of them women (NYTimes).
I agree with the importance of learning names as parts of identities. It's also important to honor when individuals choose to use their Americanized names instead of their given names, too!
From Respect the relationship between name and identity on Monday, August 9.
Absolutely. Some people may choose to adopt a name that's easier to say for their own comfort and ease. And if that is their choice, it's our responsibility to respect that. Names are an important part of our identity, regardless of which ones we choose to adopt. Your response cautioned us not to "bulldoze people with our good intentions" of asking for a different name or using it without consent, which I appreciate. Thank you for this important note, Risa!
Why didn't this piece talk about how the travel industry exploits different communities and harms the environment?
From Travel for diversity and inclusivity. on Tuesday, August 11.
There's many ways we can look at how white supremacy impacts certain industries, including travel. We are committed to publishing one newsletter a day in perpetuity – that's 365 opportunities to talk about racism this year. We often publish a newsletter / day that focuses on one aspect of large and complex issues. This issue was about Black representation and stigmatization in the industry.
When we write about one issue, we don't consider it the only issue. And one issue within an industry shouldn't minimize the issues of another. We have a lot of work to do to unpack the patriarchal, colonized approach to travel in America, and reckon with its environmental impact. But as we do, we can also rally for inclusivity and representation to make the industry safer for those marginalized.
Many of the issues that affect communities of color are sidelined because they don't seem "as important" as others. That dismissal in itself is systemic oppression in action. As we continue this work remember that there is enough space in our hearts and minds to take action on a wide range of issues, even if they're not "as important" to you.
How does tokenization differ from affirmative action? I know that affirmative action is looking to add more representation in certain spaces, but can it cause more tokenization as a result?
From Don't tokenize people of color. on Thursday, August 13.
I had a feeling this question would be coming, so I'm writing a whole newsletter on affirmative action for next week. But in short, there's absolutely a relationship between the two. Tokenization can happen consciously or unconsciously. Our newsletter last week looked at more conscious examples of how we can tokenize people – hiring them and placing them in visible roles without addressing racism internally, using people of color as examples that "racism doesn't exist anymore," etc.
But tokenization can also happen because of other structures and systems that place people of color into visible and inequitable spaces. Affirmative action is one of them. Although the intentions of affirmative action may not be to tokenize, the impact may be the same. And, there are absolutely affirmative action programs that are intentionally designed so organizations "look diverse" without "being diverse;" using the diversity data of new members to avoid blame and guilt, and maintaining oppressive systems that don't truly support non-white communities. We see this often in colleges and universities.
I'm a therapist and when I was starting private practice, I wanted to advertise a sliding scale fee for BIPOC to decrease barriers to services. I've seen a few organizations do this. But colleagues responded that I should not do this as it assumes BIPOC people don't have the capacity to pay. What are your thoughts on the two perspectives?
General question
Sliding scale pricing (which means providing a range of payment options for products and services) is a great way to increase accessibility for people of all socioeconomic statuses. And non-white people are more likely to be lower-income than white people (Pew Research). But, as your colleagues mentioned, advertising services that connect socioeconomic status with racial identity does infer that all non-white people can't afford to pay, which is likely untrue. I also think it alienates the white people that could also benefit from lower prices – most lower-income people by population size are white, most lower-income individuals are feeling the strain of the economic impact of COVID-19.
I'd recommend offering sliding scale pricing for everyone, regardless of racial or ethnic identity.
RELATED ISSUES
8/8/2020 | Study Hall! Emoji blackface, the "family card," and starting conversations.
8/1/2020 | Study Hall! Racist actions, doulas, and intersectional change.
7/25/2020 | Study Hall! How to be a better ally, petitions, and plastics.
7/18/2020 | Study Hall! Ebonics, capitalizations and cultural appropriation.
7/11/2020 | Study Hall! Raising multiracial children and addressing microaggressions.
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