On Donors and Board Members

I know, I know - more Honolulu posts promised, and I just haven't done it yet (haven't even gotten to the dark side, the real history). But my life is ridiculously busy right now, so I'm doing my best.

I'll take this moment to reference the sidebar - please read up on the AAYLC, any kind of help would be most appreciated.

In the meantime, I wanted to drop a quick post on an experience I had last night:

I don't know if I've mentioned it on this blog, but - on top of teaching - I work for a non-profit youth arts organization (primarily at the camp in the summer, but we run year-round programming in schools, mentoring kids and working with their families, etc.). So - last night - I found myself helping out at a fundraising event.

The event was - basically - a casual (but high-quality) hors d'ouvre-y kind of thing consisting of possible private donors (individuals with money, basically) and board members (also, coincidentally, individuals with money) shmoozing it up, watching a little video about the program, and listening to the founder (and one ex-camper) talk a bit. Relatively small (about 60 people).

So my job was managing the door. Since the event was held in a huge building (our offices are contained within a large advertising firm's building), we needed folks to help the donors and board members actually GET to the event upstairs. So my job was to greet folks as they came in, and send them to (and help them get on) the employee elevator (which needs an access key), where another staffer would be waiting, to accompany them to the event location.

Easy enough. Except the event, as I mentioned, was in a huge advertising agency building. At the tail end of work hours. So there was a constant flow of people coming and going - ad employees, visitors, etc. So I had to figure out which people were there for the fundraiser, and who weren't.

That should have made it difficult. Sadly, it wasn't.

I only asked one person who wasn't there for the event if they were there for the fundraiser. Every single other individual I was able to pinpoint the second they walked in the door, so I could go up to them and help them before they even asked for help. Every single one.

At this point, you may ask why (or you probably have it figured out)? Why was I able to do that? How? Do I have some incredible powers of intuition or ESP that others do not have?

Nope, I just leaned - heavily - on my own stereotypes of what a "private donor" or "board member" would look like and went with it. And it was 99% accurate, in this case. What was I looking for - more "fancily" dressed (perhaps "elegant" is more accurate - it wasn't a formal event at all, some people were in sweaters, but there was a particular price-threshold for what people were wearing, regardless of its formality, that I was able to see immediately). Then there was age - I assumed that they would be around 50 and older. I assumed race, as well - but that wasn't going to keep me from asking folks of color if they seemed to fit the other categories or looked lost.

But I didn't need to. Because not a single person at the event (with the exception of myself and a couple other staff members) wasn't white. Not one.

Not surprising, in the least, of course - but not exactly what I wanted to see. Considering the percentage (probably around half) of kids of color that are part of our program , it would have been nice to see a little bit of representation at the highest levels. It's harder to tell if anybody represented the kids' socioeconomic class (most from poverty) - I would assume no, but I can't say for sure that none of the folks that came hadn't "worked up from nothing." But knowing how often that actually happens, I have my guesses.

So - another stereotype that I didn't want reinforced held up to scientific rigour. 100% is pretty significant, statistically-speaking. It's a stereotype I know I hold - this one consciously - but I constantly hope to be proven an ass on this one; but it has yet to happen. It's the same with my school - the people that run things are white. Period. And so it's so hard for me to explain to any of them the importance of real diversity, as well as help them with some cultural competence in how they look at the program, and the changes they choose to make (or not).

Frustrating.

But I want to end on a positive note:

At first glance, the founder of the camp (and subsequent programming) would seem like the stereotype, as well. An older white guy with a TON of money (half the people that come to these events are just trying to get near him because he's so high on the social-status ladder). Further stereotypes would follow, regarding his intentions, what he thinks is important, how he uses his money, etc.

But I am happy to say that that is not the case. He has positive intentions, of course - but we all know how helpful intentions are when poorly carried out. No - importantly - he still has humility, in that, in spite of all these reasons he could feel like he's a god walking on dirt, he just treats people right. And, even more surprisingly - considering, he is constantly trying to learn and better himself. He's probably the only person of his status and position that could listen to me do some of my more race-and-class-conscious political poetry at camp (you should have seen some of the "lesser" board members cringe), and I know he's actually hearing it. He's come up and talked to me afterwards - not in the manner that uncomfortable white folks with money feel like they have to ("politically correct" and all that), but to delve deeper.

It's cool. He's let me and other staff push through changes and have conversations about working with our kids (about class or race) even while he admits that he doesn't fully understand/agree with it. And that's really an amazing thing - because, obviously, he has the power to veto everything (it also says a lot that he spends a large portion of the summer at camp with the kids, as opposed to being too "important" to mix it up a little). He's not perfect, of course - we have our points of contention - but he's actually trying; and that makes all the difference.

So. That kind of came off like an ass-kissing session there, but I just feel the need to point out the positive when I see it. The instances of hope. The breaking of a stereotype that all too often seems so true. It's not always about race. Or money. With a little humility and openness, people can transcend those boundaries.

I just wish it happened on a statistically-significant level.

Words are not Enough

This post has nothing to do with Cho Seung-Hui, but it might give all you non-Asian folks a slight idea of what kind of frustrations could cause a Korean kid in this country to lash out in such a terrible way.

This video makes the point more strongly than anything an adult could ever write. I wanted to cry and take this kid under my wing, tell him what's up and show him something different . . . wondering if it really is any different, as an adult (because I definitely could have made a pretty similar video when I was a kid).

THIS is how this country teaches Asian kids to think of themselves:

http://www.slanteyefortheroundeye.com/2008/11/video-ups-and-downs-of-being-asian.html

On Race and Competitive Sports

I love sports. More specifically, I love competitive team sports. And, above all else, I love American football. I'm also Asian. So what's up with that?

This is a post a long time in coming. The topic is one I've seen addressed a few times, but to such an unsatisfying (and disastrous) level that it makes me a little bit crazy. I seldom see anyone "on the inside" address it. And I've NEVER seen it addressed by someone "on the inside" who also has a hefty dose of science in their background. But there's a first time for everything, right?

The question is: how does race (and genetics) contribute to athletic success? I've seen various questions (and answers) regarding this in response to the Jamaican sprinting success at the Olympics (with a number of references to East African dominance in long-distance thrown in for good measure).

The answer I generally see tries to use science to suggest that black athletes (from wherever) have a set of physical traits that makes them better "athletes." I've seen studies about fast-twitch muscle fibers. Then I've seen references to endurance. I've seen references to slaves and how they were "bred" and/or "naturally selected" through the rigors of travel on slave ships or through living the life of a slave.

And I call bullshit. Right here, right now - complete and utter bullshit.*

Why are there no studies proving the "genetic" lung capacity of white swimmers? When Michael Phelps dominates the Hell out of the Olympics, why does nobody attribute it to his race's "genetic advantage"? Why does Lance Armstrong not represent "just another physically-advantaged" white cyclist? What about Roger Federer? Is it because he's white?

No. Dominant white athletes are treated as individuals. They are not held up as representatives of their race. Tom Brady does not lose credit for his success because of his race. Nor is he held accountable for the actions of other athletes of his skin color.

And this whole f-ing "black people have physical differences that make them better athletes" thing is just one more example of that same white privilege mentality that holds people of color as examples of their races, while white folks are merely individuals - not representative nor accountable for anything else their race does.

So let me drop some common-sense, science, and personal experience on you all to make my point clear (not necessarily in that order).

In fact, let's just start with my personal experience. I played football in high school. I got offers to play in college (but chose otherwise). I played semi-pro. And I coached high school ball. I've seen the look on people's faces when a black player walks onto the field. The expectations that come with that. The instant-respect and assumption of skill that ensues. The added patience if that player does not immediately fulfill those expectations.

On the flip side, when I played semi-pro, everyone assumed I was either Samoan (because Samoans have a history of success in football) or Latino. Nobody even considered that I could be part-Asian. In high school, I was constantly reminded that "Asians don't play football." My freshman year, most of the skill positions (those involving quickness and agility - tailbacks and defensive backs, specifically) were filled by Asian kids, but by the time I finished my high school career, it was just me and one other Asian kid.

I grew up in the Bay Area, where there was a large number of Asian kids, and yet this "Asians don't play football" thing still prevailed. When I was in elementary school, the local lore was that the Asian kids were the quickest (we always won the sprinting events), but somehow, by the time I finished high school, we had become almost completely absent from the sports scene (in every sport). Why?

I would suggest that it's a priming thing. To be brief, "priming" is the power of immediate suggestion. How women end up doing MUCH worse on tests in science or mathematics when they are "primed" (reminded, or made to think of) their identities as women right before taking the tests, as opposed to when they are "primed" to think of other ways in which they identify. Same as Asian-Americans doing much better on the same tests when they are reminded of their Asian-ness, while doing worse when reminded of other identities. African-Americans performing better on standardized tests when primed to think about African-American achievements (Olympic champions, MLK, etc.) as opposed to other aspects of African-American identity. Get the picture?

So, getting back to football - I was CONSTANTLY primed, as Asian, to think that I couldn't play football. That I was too small. Not strong enough. Didn't have the "natural" instincts and abilities. And so I watched all the other Asian kids on the team (who used to be some of the better players) drop off the team to do other things. Luckily for me, I was blessed with an over-active sense of self-confidence, so I was able to push through and continue competing, with great success.

The flip side? African-American kids who are primed to think that they are SUPPOSED to be good at sports. Having people EXPECT them to be better. And so, with those expectations comes the end result - more African-Americans play sports, CONTINUE to play sports, and therefore EXCELL in sports. Athletic dominance is about confidence. There is a reason you do not hear about great athletes and their self-doubt in critical situations. It's because confidence is everything. Confidence calms nerves and enables a player to make the "clutch" plays that their less-confident (and therefore more nervous) counterparts cannot make. That's a fact. Anybody who plays sports understands that fact. And so constant priming over the COURSE OF YEARS can make a drastic difference in regards to later confidence and success (as well as having an immediate effect every time the player steps onto the field).

And with that comes sticking to it or quitting. If you are convinced that you CAN'T do it (like the Asian kids on my team), you end up quitting, with no chance of coming through. If you are told that you CAN do it (and you get more chances from coaches and teammates alike, who EXPECT it), you are more likely to stick with it, keep working hard and practicing, and break through to success. Because, just like with the great white athletes, no black athlete becomes a great one without ridiculous amounts of hard work.

The science part is simple. First, priming is a real phenomenon. And it has ridiculous statistic validity in scientific tests with pretty drastic outcomes.* So I use that to support my previous claims. On the flip side - "race" is NOT a genetically valid category. None of the studies I have read about how black sprinters have "more fast-twitch muscles" are double-blind (ie. they test those they know to be black sprinters - then show they have "more" fast-twitch muscle fibers - as opposed to taking a whole lot of random black folks, white folks, Asian folks, etc., sprinters of all races, some random folks in between, and THEN trying to figure out which ones are the black sprinters based on presence of "more fast-twitch muscle fibers). Also, the physical qualities that make a good sprinter or football player are COMPLETELY different from what makes a great marathoner - and yet the same scientific arguments are applied.

Finally - a bit of common sense. Who do African-American kids have as role models in this society? Who are the successful, adult African-Americans that kids look up to? Mostly? Successful music artists (mostly hip-hop and R & B) and athletes. So who do these kids strive to emulate? Successful music artists and athletes.

Guess what (generally) leads to success - in any field - in this world? Practice. A lot of work. And a bit of luck and help. So do people tend to practice things that they want to pursue into the future? Do kids practice things that their idols are successful in? Of course. Do people work harder when they see people they identify with being successful in that same field? Of course. Do they work less hard or quit when they DON'T see people they identify with being successful in that field? Of course. And are people more likely to get a helping hand in a field where there are MORE people like them at the top or less? Where there are more, of course.

And there you go. Nobody would argue with any of those common-sense arguments if I was just sticking to music. Are there studies out there about the "rapping" gene? Was that specially selected-for because slaves needed good flow to survive the dangerous ocean travels from Africa to the Americas? Hell no. It's about exposure, and culture, and role models.

So why does it change when it comes to athletics? Is it because people want an "excuse" for why black folks actually are quite successful in that field? Does it bother the status quo to think that successful black athletes might just work their asses off and are confident because it's one of the few areas of life where they get consistent positive reinforcement? Is it scary to think about what might just happen if they got consistent positive reinforcement in the media, or in school? Or is it because the idea of an "athletic" gene helps us stick to the stereotype of African-Americans as more "brutish" or "savage" or "violent"? Make it more "scientifically valid" to claim that African-Americans are "naturally" less intelligent?

We have no problem blaming the woes of black America on gangsta rappers as poor role models - so why don't we equally give credit for black America's athletic success to positive black role models?

I am an artist, a scientist, a teacher, and an athlete. I'm tired of hearing people try to separate success in all of those fields. It's all about hard work. You do something a lot, you get better at it. You do it even more, and you get really good at it. People tend to work harder and practice more at things they get positive feedback for. Hence - they get better at those things.

So - the reason my African-American students tend to be my best math students? The same reason African-Americans tend to be successful athletes, of course. Because somebody has been telling them they are good at it, and they know - and believe - it to be true.

* I generally like to edit my swear words on this blog, but that's how strongly I feel about this particular topic.

** Anybody who wants some sources, just let me know, and I'll spit some statistical validity at you.

On Stereotypes (My Own)

So, in trying to be (or become) a somewhat politicized person of color, I often find myself in conversations about race (in the real world or online). And, holy crap, do I get sick of some of the repetition that occurs in those conversations, primarily, claims by other people about not having their own prejudice or - worse yet - being "color blind."

Every time I hear that I want to stick a fork directly into my eardrum, so I never have to hear it again (or into that person's voice box). Seriously - every time.

So why does it bother me so much? Because it's so ridiculous. And unnecessary. We all know that everybody else has prejudices and stereotypes in their heads. We also know that, in spite of that fact, there are still plenty of conscious people out there trying to make things better. It's human nature - we like to group things (and each other), and that's impossible without adhering to stereotypes (because, otherwise, there are so many more ways that each individual is different from any other than alike.

Therefore, if we take that knowledge just one extra step, we get to this: we all have prejudices and stereotypes in our heads. Not just everybody else. All of us. That includes you. And me. And that's okay. Because unless we acknowledge those stereotypes and prejudices and consciously attempt to handle them, we'll just live them out in our daily lives - and contribute to them. I'll go into more depth on this sometime in the near future (re: ignoring our problems doesn't make them go away), but that's not the point of this post.

No, the point is to return to my previously-mentioned statement: that we all have stereotypes and prejudices. And that includes me.

See? I'm going to start off the honesty-fest here by just acknowledging my problems. At least the ones I'm conscious of. Because it's this consciousness that helps me reduce their effect (if not get rid of them entirely). It's this consciousness that helps me teach kids while minimizing the amount of harm I do them - minimizing how often they feel like an "other" in my room. Ideally - it would never happen. But I'm not naive, nor am I a liar, so I do everything I can to see it when it happens and make sure it never happens again.

The big one - especially in the context of where I live and work - is that kids of color (specifically black and Latino) tend to be more "at-risk" than white kids. "At-risk" of getting involved in gangs. "At-risk" of being affected by poverty, drugs, single-parent homes, etc.

Now, statistics would argue that this is "true." Maybe it is. But if so, it is only "true" on a vague, generalized level, and I do my kids injustice if that's where I come from when I work with them. If I assume that their parents are going to be less involved in their lives, or that education is not as important to them, or that gang affiliation is a likely factor getting in the way of their success. The minute I feed that - in any way - the minute I cause that to be a reality. That's when all my kids start thinking that that is a truth. And that's when justifications start falling down: why it's okay for cops to target kids of color, why kids of color can't get educated, what kind of parents men and women of color are. And that's not okay.

It also affects the white kids negatively. Not just because it enforces their own prejudices, but because it doesn't give them credit. So often I see youth workers in Portland that like to emphasize how "troubled" the kids they work with are. That take a sick sort of pride in how "at-risk" their kids are. And, generally, they emphasize the color of their kids - because we all know that kids of color "need us" so much more, that they are more violent and "hard to reach," etc. Again - I'll address this in another post, but the point is that this hurts the white kids out here that live in the same world. They might have a few more theoretical advantages, but the second I try to start playing the "who needs help more" game, I'm hurting kids. And judging them more or less fit for extra effort. It also deems certain kids less able (kids of color) to help themselves.

And that's bullsh**. However, it pervades our society and the work I do, and I will say flat out that it confronts me, at times. I often feel that - as one of the few people of color (especially males) in my line of work - I need to put in the extra effort to pull up kids of color. And that does everybody an injustice (myself, included).

And that bleeds out into the rest of my life, as well. When I run into a group of Latino or black kids, I am more likely to assume that they are like "my" kids - the kids I work with. Which might as well just play into the white world's fears of poor, gang-afflicted and thuggish kids of color. Which also ignores the fact that the majority of the kids in my school are white - and almost nobody in my school isn't affected by gangs, violence, drugs, etc. My "scariest," most violent kids happen to be white kids. And yet I still fall back on the media stereotypes when walking out in the world - in spite of my personal experiences.

Switching gears, there's my prejudices about white people - namely that they are naive and blind to their own privilege (and ignorance). Sure, I have all sorts of experiences to "justify" those feelings (On Not Trusting White People), but that doesn't change a thing in regards to what it is: a stereotype. A prejudice. I'll say flat out that I'm more likely to give a person of color the benefit of the doubt over a white person. And that's not okay. And - again - people of color in my life don't exactly have the best track record in terms of their own understanding of races or experiences not their own, yet I still act on these stereotypes.

Asian folks? I have to admit that I cringe inside when I buy something from yet another Asian corner-market store owner. I want them to bust up that stereotype because I know it feeds everybody else, and those feelings end up causing me to treat them differently. It borders on self-hate. Not that I hate Asian shopkeepers, but I tend to mentally deal with them as a stereotype - and not as the individuals they are - which is exactly what I get pissed off about other people doing. Sure - I give them the respect that I assume others do not, and I converse with them (going beyond the accent) like I assume others do not - but it's the same way, each time. As if it is not a different person at each shop, but the same person that I switch into "respecting Asian shopkeeper mode" with. And I hate that.

I feel uncomfortable at Chinese restaurants, assuming that the servers and everybody else are hating me and my mixed background. Or I feel that they are denying my "Chinese-ness" every time I end up with a fork. I lump them in with experiences I had in Chinatown with my grandmother - not accounting for variability in behavior and perceptions even though I live in a very different city, and those here have different stories.

I have stereotypes of rural white folks (assuming they want to shoot me) when most of the time, those are the white folks that have been most real with (and subsequently, respectful of) me. I have over-the-top prejudices against "hippies" and "hipsters." I have stereotypes of white youth workers. I assume that obese people are sad, deep down. I expect gay men to have secret crushes on me.

Get the picture? I'm filled with stereotypes and prejudices. And that's a bit scary - because I am so consciously aware of how media representations work on our generalized "social consciousness" - and yet that does not make me immune to any of it.

But this is the key - I search within to find my prejudices, and to expose them. Every time I interact with somebody I mentioned above, I reach out, grab the corresponding stereotype, and do everything in my power to throttle it. On a general level, that usually works. Not always, of course, but I seldom act on those stereotypes when I am so conscious of them.

No - it's the sub-conscious ones that do the damage. Those are the ones that cause real problems - because I am unable to reign them in without being consciously aware of them. And that is why I continue to examine my thoughts and feelings when confronted with any type of person, looking to find another stereotype to smash.

It's also why I get so scared and frustrated when I meet other people who tell me that they "have no prejudices or stereotypes." Because - if they really believe that - then there's just no hope, whatsoever.