Vision Circle

I think practically speaking, some fairly basic tactics would actually work. The difficulty is that the dignity of the offended must be assumed and maintained. I think this is where many efforts to curb bigotry fail, because so often the dignity of the offended is taught.

When folks start objectifying the value of 'black' behavior and 'white' behavior, they are setting themselves up to be gamed. But people who are not delusional do really understand when they are confronted with the real. And what's real in this case is that offense is taken, and presumably will not be tolerated. You don't walk around hurt and dainty, you shun the fool.

So what do you do when somebody is crude? You refer to them by their crudeness. "Oh, that was Johnson, you know, the thug/nigga wannabe". That person tarred themselves, simply let that be their reputation.

Again, this is a variation of the snappy answer to the stupid question 'Why cant whitefolks use the word 'nigger' if [niggers] do?' The answer is, who's stopping you, if that's the kind of person you want to be? Your choice, fool.

I think the the real balancing act is to determine how much of the law school's authority people want to appropriate. The more used, the more leveraged the 'plaintiffs' are, the less dignity they assume.

These are the days of social power politics, not human rights, not civil rights. The very fact that this is taking place in Law School ought to be enough to remind us of that. Use social power.

When I argue from time to time about the prospects for the black upperclass, these are exactly the types of situations I am talking about. Until such time as Old Schoolers such as we aim to be are as publically recognizeable as the 'JR Ewings' on the blackhand side, it's not going to be easy. But the ultimate solution lies in using the ways and means of social power to fight back against the diminishment of same.

BTW, I call this kind of smackdownable offense Crossing the Tibbs Threshold.

Ok...what law school...?? Call it out! Why facilitate the fraud? And in who's class? And what did the august Herr-Dr.-Professor-person do?
What has the Dean done? And how long did it take?

(If the answers are shoddy for these--as we should assume them to be--don't waste your time trying to train to untrainable.)

And the ghetto party, what's up with that "nigga" stuff... Doesn't it mean: Never Ignorant Gettin' Goal Accomplished"? I think that's what Tupac said. (But maybe that's besides the point since Rap is consumed primarily by rich American white folks anyway, right?)

I hope your friend was NOT surprised by all of this.

If I were you, I would leave the white-clowns to clown all by themselves.

I am much more worried about Julius Ceasar Watts and Condi apeing and pimping black con-(servative)-games, than two-bit, post-suburban, sheltered, mis-educated cracker jokesters.

My three-cents; to be taken or left.

Looks like my first post was killed...here goes again...If it does post, excuse this one...(but you might consider it...as some stuff is changed...)

Ok what law school? And in what professor's class?

No need to kept the fraud up...give up the truth and more shall be set free.

Thug party...rich white Americans ("neo-crackers") clearly do not have enough to do.

(One of these days I'm gonna sponsor a KKK dress-up clam bake! Just for kicks...of course. I think I will ask if Prince Harry can fly in and wear his German regalia. Of course the only party rules will be: no one is allowed in who can dance; and if you come you must bring at least one white friend, and they must wear shoes without socks--in the winter term of course (!) and promise to use washcloths in the shower for the rest of the week! But I digress...)

Lkspence, don't waste time tryin' to educate the uneducatable. This week's Bureau of Labour Stats data says that "college education" offers NO relative value added. Here we have an empirical case in point.

Let's be less bothered by the largely predictable behaviours of simple-minded, rich, white, suburban-clowns and more worried about the trickery of the black con(servative)-games in play by the likes of Julius Ceasar Watts, Condi, and their more crafty, white-handlers and agitators--starting with the Segregationalist President.

Understand what I am asking for here.

Consider this a thought experiment with practical applications.

If you were a black law school student, and you wanted to get beyond "let's bring Jesse in to fight for us" what would you DO?

[edited to add]

Now I KNOW there are more important battles to fight. But my friend wants to fight THIS one. And in as much as fighting smaller battles often give people the muscles they need to fight larger ones I'm of the mind to help him--even though I wouldn't sweat the party in particular. I just don't think the "diversity management" approach is helpful for ANYONE.

LkSpence...

Now seriously I think I would host that KKK Clam Bake or maybe call-it a Sub-Urban Party. Make of some quasi-real flyers for it. Post them (with a group of people--of course). Have the party ideally in a lounge of the law school. Let it start--seriously and about 30 or 40 minutes into it, STOP IT. And then have a pre-arranged discussion on "What the fuck is wrong with this AND that Other Thug-Party (and the Administration, faculty, etc.)"

How about that ...?

I would also leak this selectively to two or three press folks (that can trusted--or who are progressive enough to get it). The write-up alone (if done by a reporter who has his head screwed on right) will go down in history.

*A law school teacher told students that in dealing with her fear of public speaking she just thought about the scenario that scared her the most. She imagined three large black men in front of her. This in a class on public speaking.

What my friend wants me to do is conduct some type of workshop in order to teach blacks and whites how to deal with this issue.

To isolate this from the larger story if possible..I suggest that it's important to evaluate a tradeoff. Cost vs gain. Was the speaker's comment insensitive to blacks? Of course. But grant her one thing. What did she propose to do to these imaginary three black men? Communicate with them.

So what's the cost of taking this too seriously? Suppression of communication. Not the communication to the imaginary black men, but communication between real black people and real white people. Real discussion regarding the issues. If an insensitive, but wholly non-threatening remark can result in being subjected to a "workshop", you know, communication is suppressed.

Cobb could no doubt supply a snappy, appropriate response. Or, either publicly or privately, "did you really intend to suggest that large black men in an audience might be scary?". In either case, the point is made, the speaker is educated and changes the example, without suppression of communication. In the worst case, that the statement goes unchallenged, it's not as if very many students would transition from "not afraid of large black men in the audience" to "afraid of..".