When dialogue about race just isn’t enough
by Carmen Van Kerckhove
In the last few days, I’ve written critically on Twitter (you can follow me @newdemographic) about a couple of items: a Washington Post op-ed on diversity and a new documentary on multiracial identity.
Among the many responses I received to each tweet, there were a handful that said something along the lines of, “Even if it’s not a good article/film, at least it’s creating dialogue!”
Well, sometimes “creating dialogue” is just not good enough.
You might be surprised to hear me say that, since my whole mission is to facilitate relaxed, authentic, and productive conversations about race.
But I’ve seen too many instances of people tolerating, or even justifying, ignorant behavior because of its ability to “create dialogue.”
You know what? I could do without the dialogue if it means not being subjected to the ignorance in the first place.
Why? Because not all dialogue is created equal.
It’s not a coincidence that I use the word “productive” to describe the types of conversations I specialize in facilitating.
There’s nothing particularly useful about rehashing the same tired arguments over and over again: “Why can black people use the n-word but white people can’t? Are Asian women selling out Asian men when they date interracially? Aren’t people who identify as multiracial just running from their blackness?”
Snore…
What many people don’t seem to realize is that the type of “dialogue” sparked by ignorant behavior is almost always exactly of this non-productive nature.
It’s time we raised the bar and realized that we need to aim for quality dialogue about race — not its mere existence.
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of 
RaymoEJ Said,
April 27, 2009 @ 10:51 pm
Here here, Carmen.
I personally feel that the progress in these discussions are slowed because of the philosophies of the language we use. There is a sense of separatism pervades the ‘Race’ dialog that somehow smothers individualism. The institution of Race is oversimplified and does not allow for much transcendence beyond the tolerance of ‘others’–as opposed to promoting understanding and acceptance which may better progress.
I’ve gone as far as to vow to myself never to ‘believe’ in Race and am working backwards to rendezvous and sync up with this Race conversation.
In the global stage discussions on ethnicity and culture (plural or not) have something more to offer, and simultaneously I trust the race conversation is also necessary. Perhaps we need to rev up the dialog concerning the science of skin tone and the violence and fallacy that is the color hierarchy in relation to success.
All in all, I enjoy what you are doing here, and I learn a lot about the trouble with Racial issues in the collective American psyche.
/kabuki
((I wanted to get my thoughts down before looking at your “whole mission”))
Indigo Said,
April 28, 2009 @ 2:45 pm
I think quality dialogue is definitely needed. I’m wondering, however, what themes are important to you for people to be talking about and working on.
You dismiss a couple of things as “ignorance” without fully explaining. I think I understand what you’re saying about cliched understanding of multiracial identity, etc. and people’s right to claim them. However, the phenomenon of negation of blackness as a pervasive function of racism and colorism (i.e. white supremacy) in the Americas and in the world is a quality dialogue to be having, not resting on multiracial people and their identity choices per se, but something to talk about as the function of the system.
I also think the issue of racial identity and history in the use of the n-word is an important dialogue to be having, because it opens up the question of language and power. I think that done well, whether the n-word should be used could be a quality dialogue.
We have to be talking about both/and instead of either/or. Race is like that — complicated.
Roger Green Said,
April 28, 2009 @ 3:31 pm
While I agree that the examples you bring up are tired to me, I can’t help but to think that it’s new to some people who actually want to know about the use of the n-word or whether cross-racial dating is “selling out”. To dismiss them as “been there, done that” quite possibly will breed the frustration and antipathy that we’re trying to overcome.
Keith Said,
April 29, 2009 @ 3:24 pm
I do believe this is an old issue,but my understanding of the N word is that when African American people call themselves the N word, It’s because they have been indoctrinated with that word since slavery.
When you have been called that name for at least 400 years, people begin to believe it, and call themselves the name that was used to degrade them. I think thats why they try to justify using the N word.
The Hip Hop industry doesn’t make it any better, when they’re using it constantly.That’s why African Americans are the only race that I can think of that call themselves names that they don’t want anybody outside of their race calling them.
I don’t think calling yourself multiracial means you’re running from you’re race, and I don’t think dating outside of you’re race is selling out, I think selling drugs,shooting you’re own people, and not giving back to your community, to me is selling out. I think the solution is re education not indoctrination.
Angela Said,
May 7, 2009 @ 11:45 am
I think your entry here is the main reason race discussions fail – you presume to know what is or isn’t important to discuss. While you may be bored by some of the examples you use, others are interested in having these conversations. They don’t because they are dismissed as trite. In my opinion, talking for the sake of understanding the other side is valuable. It’s even more valuable to listen to another’s opinions despite thinking of them as ignorant, tired and useless. I typically like what you have to say, but disagree here.
“I’m Not Racist…My Child Is Not White!” and Other Lessons from Charm School at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture Said,
June 4, 2009 @ 12:17 pm
[...] about exonerating the accused, not moving things forward. Carmen nails it in one of her articles about the differences between conversations: In the last few days, I’ve written critically on Twitter (you can follow me @newdemographic) [...]
Marcy Webb Said,
June 25, 2009 @ 4:23 pm
This is one of the main issues @ my place of employ. There are colleagues who believe that talk is substantive. I disagree. Especially when there are so many conversations going on @ the same time, and those conversations are not being taken to the next level. Perhaps they really don’t know the true meaning of “Walk the walk, talk the talk.” So, for me, having a conversation in and of itself doesn’t signal, “Game Over.”
Why is it so important to have productive conversations on race? | Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture Said,
December 10, 2009 @ 9:01 am
[...] wrote about this in post called “When Dialogue About Race Isn’t Just Isn’t Enough:” There’s nothing particularly useful about rehashing the same tired arguments over and [...]