auto-da-fe

Everyone by now has heard about the white only prom in Georgia, but just to make sure we all agree on the details, here is what happened. Some white students in 2 high schools in Georgia, had private (i.e., non-school sponsored) parties, dubbeb as proms mostly by the media, and not by the students. This was seen as extremely racist and got the usual outcries from the usual PC policie.

Now, a guy named Michael Fletcher, who writes for The Washington Post, wrote the following concerning the graduation celebrations at Penn St. U.:

"The presentation of the class of 2003 was the central event at this year's Black Senior Celebration. The ceremony here, attended by almost half of the university's 140 black graduating seniors, followed separate celebrations that honored Asian American and Latino seniors in the weeks leading up to Penn's general graduation ceremony today. University officials say these racially and ethnically themed ceremonies are a way for minority students to celebrate their cultural connections."

After a little research, I have found that "Vanderbilt, Michigan State, Michigan, Stanford and Berkeley all host separate ceremonies for black graduates".

My question is this: How is this such a big deal? What is morally wrong with having seperate celebrations that are designed specifically only for members of the same culture? Wether it is black, white, latino, or even male or female, where is the morally wrong part of this? Just because people are having these celebrations, it does not mean they hold any bias towards members of a different culture. I think the actual segregation portion of it is more of a byproduct than an intention. IOW, they aren't doing it to specifically deny someone entrance, they are doing it to celebrate something particular, and a by-product of that is that certain people are denied entrance. I know it sounds like semantics, but it isn't. It all goes to intentions. I think for something to be racist, it has to be intentional (at least somthing as mundane as a prom, now if we were talking about something like slavery it would be different).

If the prom in Georgia was "racist", how are the celebrations at these various universities not? They are even school sponsored (and therefore more than likely paid for by the taxes of some of the people who weren't invited, or at least there parents), whereas the party in Georgia was a private affair with private money.

And if you think that the graduation celebrations are as morally reprehensible as the prom in Georgia, why has there been almost no media coverage of the black only graduation celebrations after the firestorm of media in Georgia?

Excerpts from Michael Fletcher at "The Washinton Post" and Patrick J. Buchanan at WorldNetDaily

dk

The Law says we are a racist society, so its a teleological truth.

brighid

Megadave,

The morality of the question I think comes into play with regard to intent. Was the white only private prom done because said students don't want to mingle with blacks because of negative, racial stereotypes held about minorities (such as laziness, uncleanliness, stupidity, moral and cultural inferiority, etc.), or was there other reasons for desiring such things?

Typically at culturally diverse ceremonies celebrating culture, religion, etc. it is rare that people not of that culture, religion, gender, etc. are banned or excluded from such functions. I have attended many multi-cultural ceremonies, events, etc. as a member of a minority (white, female) and have never been turned away. A celebration of African culture (for instance) makes no connotation of exclusion of non-African community members. Some caucasion community members might not find a desire to attend such a function, but they are not excluded because black or African people are celebrating their cultural identity. It is no more racist then the predominantly Irish, Catholic celebrations of St. Patricks Day or Jewish Passover celebrations.

If this private prom was set-up to exclude blacks simply because they are black (because of negative, racial stereotypes not indicative of all black people) then I would say this particular event can be seen as racist. This doesn't mean they do not have the right to set-up and participate in an "all white" prom. It simply means the motivation and rules appear to be racist, and hence deserve attention that other ceremonies do not warrant.

I don't see cultural celebrations that attract or invite a specific group of people as being racist, or deserving of media attention unless they deliberately exclude others because of negative stereotypes (and without legitimate reason.)

Brighid

auto-da-fe

What if the motives were different? What if the black students were excluded, but it was done not because of "racial stereotypes not indicative of all black people", but more of a celebration of the white culture (please do not ask me to define white culture, as that would only apply to the students in Georgia's perspective, which would be different from mine). Now to be fair, I have no idea which of the 2 ways it actually was, but becuase of that, shouldn't I reserve my judgement until more facts are known?

brighid

If the motivations were different it is possible that racist motives weren't a consideration. "White culture" is a pretty broad term and one example of "white" culture I gave was the St. Patricks Day celebrations by Irish Americans. However, celebrating white culture (of any legitimate kind) should not require the exclusion of other non-white people. There is a part of white, southern culture (as found in Georgia) that is deliberately racist and has a long history of racial discrimination, segregration, and illegal (lynching) and immoral activities. If this culture bred the desire to have a "whites" only prom then I would consider the motivations to be immoral. I would not deny the private right to do such a thing, but I would categorize it as racist.

Should you reserve your final judgments until more can be known? Yes. I think that is prudent. Is the media often reactionary? Yes. Has the media been reactionary in this case? I am not sure. It appears (at least if reports are correct) that the students did this for reasons other then celebratory and a part of a continued racial tradition that seeks to segregate whites and blacks because of cultural and moral ideas of superiority. Now, I am open to being wrong provided other facts, but from what I have been able to ascertain it doesn't appear to be a cultural celebration but rather they just don't want to mix with the "darkies."

Brighid

brighid

I have gone back and read a number of different articles on this particular case in order to refresh my memory so I could better respond to the known facts.

It appears that prior to desegregation there were “whites” only proms (but it doesn’t say what there was for blacks.) After desegregation the schools organized separate proms in order to avoid “problems arising from interracial dating.” I am not exactly sure what those problems would be, except what can be concluded from the racial climate at the time. I would say that the ruling, white majority did not want their children “mixing” with blacks. Desegregation did not suddenly end the racist attitudes of those who supported that system and had it forcibly removed. The “tradition” of these schools was to maintain separate proms in order problems to avoid the community backlash of interracial dating. I can only conclude that such attitudes are built on a solid foundation of racial superiority vs. racial inferiority – quite blatant racism in my book.

Edited to add: Over time proms became privatized and continued with that "tradition", but many other schools opted for integration.

Recently, the “tradition” was broken and the year prior an integrated prom was held. There are no reports of problems arising from interracial dating. It appears that this school is one of the last to relinquish this “tradition” of segregation. It appears that some students wished to return to this “tradition” and exclude people based entirely on the color of one’s skin and not necessarily cultural differences (although some exist between white and black southern American culture, however minor.)

In this case it appears this was a digression to a “tradition” deeply rooted in racism, and although it might not have been meant as an overtly or deliberately racist act it appears that those calling for the denouncement of this practice have reasonable cause to label this prom as "racist."

Brighid

auto-da-fe

If the underlying intentions have a racist bent to them, then I would agree that holding this prom was racist. However, if the intentions behind the event, had it happened in say New Hampshire, were not racist, and they had say a white only, and a black only prom, I would not construe this to be morally wrong.

brighid

Why? Are the people in New Hampshire any less racist because they don't live in the South? The East Coast has plenty of racist people, and there are racist traditions in some segments of that part of American society as well. I would think any segregationist prom built on the premise that different ethnic and culture groups shouldn't "mix" is inherently racist, regardless of locale (after all the notion that blacks are of a different "race" is patently false.)

I would also say that just because one lives in the South or is Southern does not make one a racist, nor is one not a racist because one lives in the North, etc. Again, that sort of character flaw should be judged on an individual basis and is not determinant by ones gender, ethnic, social or other background.

Brighid

auto-da-fe

i only mention the different locale because in your previous post, you concentrated on the fact that since this is coming from the south, and they have such a history of being racist, that this must be a racist prom. My arguement was that there are not enough facts known to say it was truly racist, and you passed judgement on them and used the fact of the racist southern culture to justify it.

And why does the exclusion of a particular race/sex/whatever mean that there is a hatred for them? Are all of the all-female or all-male soroities haters of the opposite sex? of course not, but it is kind of the same thing. You are assuming that since blacks were excluded from a particular event that everyone there must hate blacks. I contend that there are plenty of examples in life where one group is secluded from another for a variety of reasons, and it doesn't always have to be hate.

brighid

That is why I made sure to clarify my position, and since this discussion is about an event taking place in the American South (that does have an extended history of segregation and racism different from, but not exclusive of other parts of this country) is why I made mention of that history. I felt it important to point out that the locale does not determine whether something is or is not racist. The same action and motivation in the North or East would be equally racist. The fact that the South has a more recent and deeply embedded tradition of racism does not negate my previous statement.

There are plenty of facts to come to a cursory and reasonable judgment. I am not sure if we will ever know the full extent of the motivations behind this action.

It is reasonable to conclude that a community that has an extended tradition of segregation (even beyond it's other southern counter parts) and justification for such extended treatment is to "prevent problems arising from interracial dating", one can reasonably infer that at least part of the motivation for this continued segregation by these individuals has roots in racist tradition.

I am not, nor do I believe this paritcular situation has inferred that. Obviously the exclusion of some does not equate to racism, sexism, classism etc. It would be wrong to say that exclusionary organizations are such because all exclusionary organizations hate those they exclude. This is simply an illogical conclusion. There are legitimate reasons the have seperate organizations, and I support the rights of private individuals from organizing as they see fit, except when motivated by immoral reasoning such as racism, misogyny, etc. They may (in most cases) continue to discriminate and even have the legal right to do so, but morally speaking they may suffer societal consequences for practicing and modeling these behaviors.

I did not conclude that because blacks were excluded from this event that those attending hate blacks. I do not equate the broad spectrum of racist beliefs with out right hatred. Some racist hates black, others are uncomfortable with blacks, and still others hold negative stereotypes that do not equate to hatred but simply ignorance and laziness in the application of such stereotypes.

I do not have enough information to determine whether or not any white student attending this exclusive party hated blacks. I can conclude that they were at least uncomfortable enough around blacks to desire to exclude them from their party, simply based on the color of their skin. That equates to racism in my book. It isn't the KKK kind of racism, but racist none the less.

I agree with you conclusion about exclusion not equating to hatred. However, I do not see any evidence thus far (which doesn't mean it doesn't exist) that leads me to conclude that racism hasn't played a role, if not a pivotal one, in this particular decision. Other exclusive organizations or activities should be judged individually and not labeled as something they are not simply because they are "exclusive."

What reasonable motivations can you come up with that would absolve these particular students of racist motivations so as to justify and exclusively "white" prom (based on what has been presented?)

Brighid