The Politics of Respectability (or Why can't you just be white like me?)

[AthenaAwakened]

This past September, during the first week of school, seven-year-old Tiana Parker wore dreadlocks tied in a bright pink bow to her school in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The Deborah Brown Community School, a charter school sponsored by the historically black college Langston University, sent Tiana home and told her parents that their child was in violation of a school policy prohibiting students from wearing “unusual hairstyles” that distract from the school’s “respectful” learning environment. Not only were “dreadlocks, Afros, Mohawks,” and other so-called faddish styles banned from the school, the school’s handbook also instructed that girls’ “weaved hair should be no longer than shoulder length” and that boys’ hairstyles are “to be short and neatly trimmed.”

Tiana’s parents withdrew her from the school, leading to public outrage across the nation. The school eventually modified (but did not end) its policy, but its rules regulating the personal conduct of parents and guardians have escaped public scrutiny. According to the handbook, female parents are banned from entering the school or going on field trips braless; male parents are prohibited from wearing pants that sag; vulgarity or cursing by parents is subject to prosecution under the state’s criminal penal codes; and the display of “inappropriate behavior” during school programs—such as holding a crying baby or using a cell phone—can get parents escorted from the school’s premises by security guards. These sorts of rules—devised by black elites, with the backing of the state and the support of ordinary blacks who believe in their efficacy—have their origins in the turn-of-the-twentieth-century black middle-class ideology: the politics of respectability.

What started as a philosophy promulgated by black elites to “uplift the race” by correcting the “bad” traits of the black poor has now evolved into one of the hallmarks of black politics in the age of Obama, a governing philosophy that centers on managing the behavior of black people left behind in a society touted as being full of opportunity. In an era marked by rising inequality and declining economic mobility for most Americans—but particularly for black Americans—the twenty-first-century version of the politics of respectability works to accommodate neoliberalism. The virtues of self-care and self-correction are framed as strategies to lift the black poor out of their condition by preparing them for the market economy.

For more than half of the twentieth century, the concept of the “Talented Tenth” commanded black elites to “lift as we climb,” or to prove to white America that blacks were worthy of full citizenship rights by getting the untalented nine-tenths to rid themselves of bad customs and habits. Today’s politics of respectability, however, commands blacks left behind in post–civil rights America to “lift up thyself.” Moreover, the ideology of respectability, like most other strategies for black progress articulated within the spaces where blacks discussed the best courses of action for black freedom, once lurked for the most part beneath the gaze of white America. But now that black elites are part of the mainstream elite in media, entertainment, politics, and the academy, respectability talk operates within the official sphere, shaping the opinions, debates, and policy perspectives on what should—and should not—be done on the behalf of the black poor.

link here

http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/the-rise-of-respectability-politics


How I dress, act or speak has had little to do with the uplifting of the race. When I do well, I get compartmentalized as a special case and when I do poorly I am just another example of what people already know.

Bigotry is the problem of the bigot, not any race.

 

[laughing dog]

I don't know if I'd want to be in charge of checking for bras and the bagginess of pants.

I have observed that sometimes a group (whether the grouping is based on ethnic, genetic, or professional characteristics) is its own worst enemy.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I don't know if I'd want to be in charge of checking for bras and the bagginess of pants.

I have observed that sometimes a group (whether the grouping is based on ethnic, genetic, or professional characteristics) is its own worst enemy.

I guess it would depend on the group.

I am reminded of the civil rights marchers in the sixties, dressed all in suits and dresses and pumps and wingtips, then having dogs attack them and hoses turned on them.

Exactly what was not respectable about them?
I often wonder.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Also from the OP link.

In 1895, as the economic, social, and political progress that black Americans had made under Reconstruction was being chipped away, Booker T. Washington chastised black America in his “Atlanta Compromise” speech for being “ignorant and inexperienced,” seeking political representation in Congress rather than acquiring “real estate or industrial skill,” and attending political conventions and speeches rather than “starting a dairy farm or truck garden.” He declared that, as blacks, “we should not permit our grievances to overshadow our opportunities.”

In the age of Obama, such sentiments are once again on the rise. Indeed, the current incarnation of the politics of respectability—where uplift entails transforming individuals rather than transforming communities—is one of the most undetected developments in black politics since the freedom movement. On the eve of the 2008 election, a poll by ABC News/Columbia University Center on African-American Politics and Society asked whether blacks thought that they should spend more time gaining political power or building economic power. Sixty-two percent reported that building economic power was more important, while 24 percent believed that political power was, even though another question in the survey documented that blacks felt that they had less political power than whites.

These findings highlight the yearning for economic uplift in black communities, which suggests why the politics of respectability has such mass appeal across social classes. Even though respectability evolved as an elite ideology, it operates as common sense in most quarters of black America. Indeed, it even has its own lexicon. The word “ghetto,” for instance, which a generation ago was used to describe poor, segregated neighborhoods, is now used to characterize the “unacceptable” behavior of black people who live anywhere from a housing project to an affluent suburb. Economic power is a needed development, of course, and one that can be used to leverage political power. But the politics of respectability has been portrayed as an emancipatory strategy to the neglect of discussions about structural forces that hinder the mobility of the black poor and working class.

The thing is, without political power, those things economic can be taken away.

Dudley Randall put it best

Booker T. and W.E.B.

Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. DuBois

By Dudley Randall

"It seems to me," said Booker T.,
"It shows a mighty lot of cheek
To study chemistry and Greek
When Mister Charlie needs a hand
To hoe the cotton on his land,
And when Miss Ann looks for a cook,
Why stick your nose inside a book?"

"I don't agree," said W.E.B.
"If I should have the drive to seek
Knowledge of chemistry or Greek,
I'll do it. Charles and Miss can look
Another place for hand or cook,
Some men rejoice in skill of hand,
And some in cultivating land,
But there are others who maintain
The right to cultivate the brain."

"It seems to me," said Booker T.,
"That all you folks have missed the boat
Who shout about the right to vote,
And spend vain days and sleepless nights
In uproar over civil rights.
Just keep your mouths shut, do not grouse,
But work, and save, and buy a house."

"I don't agree," said W.E.B.
"For what can property avail
If dignity and justice fail?
Unless you help to make the laws,
They'll steal your house with trumped-up clause.
A rope's as tight, a fire as hot,
No matter how much cash you've got.
Speak soft, and try your little plan,
But as for me, I'll be a man."

"It seems to me," said Booker T.--

"I don't agree,"
Said W.E.B.

 

[fromderinside]

How I dress, act or speak has had little to do with the uplifting of the race. When I do well, I get compartmentalized as a special case and when I do poorly I am just another example of what people already know.

Bigotry is the problem of the bigot, not any race.

Yes bigotry is the bigots problem.

As for the rest, sorry, that's probably bullshit. How one dresses and speaks, how one keeps up appearances, one's neighborhood are critical to civilizing.

The evidence is in. Expectations generate realities over time. If you think dirty streets don't have an effect then kill the people who studied such and found that dirty streets do have effects. Adjusting for race, income, community density, etc. Pinker, in the chapter The civilizing process in "Our Better Angels" reposts studies in the chapter on civilizing effects of removing knives from common use, the effects of cleaning up graffiti, providing paint and clean up crews for neighborhoods on crime, all,crime, but, with focus on murder. Public information, that information about one available for use in social commerce, is a big part of how we prepare to act publicly, and over time as a culture.

So while my feelings are with you the evidence I am forced to accept is that we are essentially a conforming social species where what we see and hear tends to drive how we behave. Hair style is important, cleanliness is important, courtesy is important. How we use that information is pivotal however. Therein lies the substance of what we make of conformance. If we are just followers we shant escape intolerance, hatred, or being driven by outdated beliefs and mores.

 

[laughing dog]

I guess it would depend on the group.

I am reminded of the civil rights marchers in the sixties, dressed all in suits and dresses and pumps and wingtips, then having dogs attack them and hoses turned on them.

Exactly what was not respectable about them?
I often wonder.

I don't. It was that they were demonstrating for civil rights which was not respectable in the eyes of the bigots and those who thought they had something to lose.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

How I dress, act or speak has had little to do with the uplifting of the race. When I do well, I get compartmentalized as a special case and when I do poorly I am just another example of what people already know.

Bigotry is the problem of the bigot, not any race.

Yes bigotry is the bigots problem.

As for the rest, sorry, that's probably bullshit. How one dresses and speaks, how one keeps up appearances, one's neighborhood are critical to civilizing.

The evidence is in. Expectations generate realities over time. If you think dirty streets don't have an effect then kill the people who studied such and found that dirty streets do have effects. Adjusting for race, income, community density, etc. Pinker, in the chapter The civilizing process in "Our Better Angels" reposts studies in the chapter on civilizing effects of removing knives from common use, the effects of cleaning up graffiti, providing paint and clean up crews for neighborhoods on crime, all,crime, but, with focus on murder. Public information, that information about one available for use in social commerce, is a big part of how we prepare to act publicly, and over time as a culture.

So while my feelings are with you the evidence I am forced to accept is that we are essentially a conforming social species where what we see and hear tends to drive how we behave. Hair style is important, cleanliness is important, courtesy is important. How we use that information is pivotal however. Therein lies the substance of what we make of conformance. If we are just followers we shant escape intolerance, hatred, or being driven by outdated beliefs and mores.

how I dress may or may not have an effect on how you see me, but it will have little effect on how you see my race.

Everyday white folk all over this nation walk pass black people in pants that fit, hear black people pronounce "th" and not "d" or "f", and glance over blurbs in the newspapers showing black students winning awards. But what do they remember? Perp walks, name badges with the name Shauniqua, and a black hand in the grocery store holding an ebt card.

think back if you can on images prior to desegregation of black folk. Can you recall any that lack respectability? Picture of poveryt, yes: and picture of victimization, no doubt, and pictures of back breaking labor, most assuredly. But disrespectful? And yet every manner of stereotype and bigotry and indignity was foisted upon those black people who looked as respectable as all get out.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I guess it would depend on the group.

I am reminded of the civil rights marchers in the sixties, dressed all in suits and dresses and pumps and wingtips, then having dogs attack them and hoses turned on them.

Exactly what was not respectable about them?
I often wonder.

I don't. It was that they were demonstrating for civil rights which was not respectable in the eyes of the bigots and those who thought they had something to lose.

ah, but the politics of respectability in today's parlance says dress, and speak, and buy a house like white folk and you will have no problem. Well, those folks did all those things and still HAD to protest (non violently and with dignity) because acting a white as miss Ann and mr. Charlie themselves somehow wasn't getting the job done.

 

[Mumbles]

I guess it would depend on the group.

I am reminded of the civil rights marchers in the sixties, dressed all in suits and dresses and pumps and wingtips, then having dogs attack them and hoses turned on them.

Exactly what was not respectable about them?
I often wonder.

I don't. It was that they were demonstrating for civil rights which was not respectable in the eyes of the bigots and those who thought they had something to lose.

ah, but the politics of respectability in today's parlance says dress, and speak, and buy a house like white folk and you will have no problem. Well, those folks did all those things and still HAD to protest (non violently and with dignity) because acting a white as miss Ann and mr. Charlie themselves somehow wasn't getting the job done.

I've said this one before, but back when I was a teen in the 1990s, I could be wearing a polo shirt and corduroy pants - made no damn difference. Store owners still followed me around, white women (not all, of course) would still freak out and run off. Hell, in 2012, Trayvon Martin was wearing a hooded sweater and a pair of khakis when Zimmerman decided he was "real suspicious" and a "fucking punk".

It's nice to think that if you do this or that, your problems will vanish. That's not always the case, and when other people are the problem, it's them who should change.

I'm going to combine two things, to make the point.

Here is Chris Rock, discussing "progress in the US. His view (and yes, he's a comedian by trade) is that white people got less crazy.

You might know where I'm going here.

In the next clip, starting at about 0:55, Elon James White discussed Dr Melissa Harris-Perry's quote on her thinking on the word "crazy" (I'd have quoted her directly, but I think the clip of her saying it herself is lost).

 

[Bronzeage]

I guess it would depend on the group.

I am reminded of the civil rights marchers in the sixties, dressed all in suits and dresses and pumps and wingtips, then having dogs attack them and hoses turned on them.

Exactly what was not respectable about them?
I often wonder.

I don't. It was that they were demonstrating for civil rights which was not respectable in the eyes of the bigots and those who thought they had something to lose.

ah, but the politics of respectability in today's parlance says dress, and speak, and buy a house like white folk and you will have no problem. Well, those folks did all those things and still HAD to protest (non violently and with dignity) because acting a white as miss Ann and mr. Charlie themselves somehow wasn't getting the job done.

I've said this one before, but back when I was a teen in the 1990s, I could be wearing a polo shirt and corduroy pants - made no damn difference. Store owners still followed me around, white women (not all, of course) would still freak out and run off. Hell, in 2012, Trayvon Martin was wearing a hooded sweater and a pair of khakis when Zimmerman decided he was "real suspicious" and a "fucking punk".

It's nice to think that if you do this or that, your problems will vanish. That's not always the case, and when other people are the problem, it's them who should change.

I'm going to combine two things, to make the point.

Here is Chris Rock, discussing "progress in the US. His view (and yes, he's a comedian by trade) is that white people got less crazy.

You might know where I'm going here.

In the next clip, starting at about 0:55, Elon James White discussed Dr Melissa Harris-Perry's quote on her thinking on the word "crazy" (I'd have quoted her directly, but I think the clip of her saying it herself is lost).

In 1975, I was nineteen, I wore a black t-shirt, tight jeans, I had a full beard, my hair was to my shoulders and I wore mirrored sunshades. Store owners followed me around and white women freaked out. They did not run away, but that is a different story.

I was fortunate to attend school in the 1970's when times were more enlightened. If I had been born 20 years earlier, I would have been kicked out of school for my hair, the t-shirt or the jeans. My pants would not have been called "jeans". The dress code would have prohibited "dungarees."

What was the problem with dungarees? They were the clothes of working class men, and worse than that, manual laborers.
Proper schools did not think this was correct attire for respectable middle class children. As far as I know, this was an urban prejudice. I have a picture of my father's class picture from sometime in the late 1930's. Half the boys are wearing denim overalls.

The politics of respectability is nothing new. We find it wherever school administrators do not trust parents to dress their children in an appropriate fashion.

 

[J842P]

I guess it would depend on the group.

I am reminded of the civil rights marchers in the sixties, dressed all in suits and dresses and pumps and wingtips, then having dogs attack them and hoses turned on them.

Exactly what was not respectable about them?
I often wonder.

I don't. It was that they were demonstrating for civil rights which was not respectable in the eyes of the bigots and those who thought they had something to lose.

ah, but the politics of respectability in today's parlance says dress, and speak, and buy a house like white folk and you will have no problem. Well, those folks did all those things and still HAD to protest (non violently and with dignity) because acting a white as miss Ann and mr. Charlie themselves somehow wasn't getting the job done.

I've said this one before, but back when I was a teen in the 1990s, I could be wearing a polo shirt and corduroy pants - made no damn difference. Store owners still followed me around, white women (not all, of course) would still freak out and run off. Hell, in 2012, Trayvon Martin was wearing a hooded sweater and a pair of khakis when Zimmerman decided he was "real suspicious" and a "fucking punk".

It's nice to think that if you do this or that, your problems will vanish. That's not always the case, and when other people are the problem, it's them who should change.

I'm going to combine two things, to make the point.

Here is Chris Rock, discussing "progress in the US. His view (and yes, he's a comedian by trade) is that white people got less crazy.

You might know where I'm going here.

In the next clip, starting at about 0:55, Elon James White discussed Dr Melissa Harris-Perry's quote on her thinking on the word "crazy" (I'd have quoted her directly, but I think the clip of her saying it herself is lost).

With regards to the Christ Rock interview, I got to say he hit the nail on the head. I've always cringed when people frame the dynamics of race relations in the USA as "blacks having made progress." No. White people got less evil.

I find it hilarious that the traditionalists/conservatives who bemoan "moral relativism" have such a hard time admitting that the white people who took part in or supported slavery and Jim Crow were evil. Suddenly, they will revert back to the defense that "they were different times" if one points out the obvious, that Thomas Jefferson, for example, was an evil slave-owning man.

 

[repoman]

I think that dreadlocks that are well done look great and are totally respectable, afros are ok up to a certain size limit - say 3 inches high more than that they are a distraction in an elementary school. Mohawks, being banned I agree with. Not sure about fades with symbols and writing, but that was not mentioned.

I think that truly saggy pants where you have to always hold up with one hand are fair to ban for parents on trips. Same with having the belt tied BELOW the ass. What the hell is that about? People who do that are going to get hip arthritis from lack of range of motion and look like mental deficients in the meantime.

 

[J842P]

I think that dreadlocks that are well done look great and are totally respectable, afros are ok up to a certain size limit - say 3 inches high more than that they are a distraction in an elementary school. Mohawks, being banned I agree with. Not sure about fades with symbols and writing, but that was not mentioned.

I think that truly saggy pants where you have to always hold up with one hand are fair to ban for parents on trips. Same with having the belt tied BELOW the ass. What the hell is that about? People who do that are going to get hip arthritis from lack of range of motion and look like mental deficients in the meantime.

Why should Mohawks or any other hairstyle, be banned? What actual purpose does it serve? I can't think of any. People always say that certain types of haircuts are a "distraction" to students. That was, as far I can tell, something made up out of whole cloth which eventually become a canard that was repeated over and over again until it became a part of "common sense." Well I call bullshit. I always err on the side of allowing people their own individuality unless there is some very real, measurable, harm associated with allowing it.