December 1, 1955 sparked the beginning of the yet another U.S. Civil War when Rosa Parks—a seamstress from Montgomery, Alabama—refused to comply with de jure segregation. However unlike the battle that occurred nearly a century earlier, the outcome of the Second Civil War remains uncertain. America met the demands of a tired and determined people by enacting a series of laws that seemed to lay the groundwork for repairing the grievances that slavery and Jim Crow inflicted upon African Americans. The Civil Rights legislation that emerged from the 1960s conflict appeared to grant America’s blacks equal standing under the law. While the legislation benefitted a small percentage of African Americans, subsequent years would reveal its inefficacy in manifesting America’s promise of equality.
Affirmative action is arguably the most contested byproduct of the Civil Rights era. Opponents of affirmative action call it “reverse discrimination,” “unconstitutional,” “a hand out,” among other things. And yet, after less than one hundred and fifty years since the abolition of slavery and a little over fifty years since the Civil Rights Movement challenged the very fabric of Americanism, critics of affirmative action fail to recognize that since America’s inception, affirmative action has only ever been white.
Ira Katznelson tells one version of this story in his book, When Affirmative Action Was White: An Untold History of Racial Inequality in Twentieth-Century America. He points to a moment in history when affirmative action was explicitly white in order to strengthen the case for non-white affirmative action today. Katznelson explicates how the New Deal policies which emerged during the 1930s and 1940s served as a form of white affirmative action by excluding and disadvantaging blacks in order to almost exclusively benefit whites. This book attempts to link “the history of affirmative action for blacks since the mid-1960s, with the prior record of affirmative action for whites.” He follows the historical trajectory of New Deal policies in order to tie contemporary solutions to specific historical harm. Katznelson proposes a model of affirmative action that he believes will prove more palatable to those who currently oppose the measure.
The central questions that Katznelson seeks to address ask, “What are the historical instances of white affirmative action?” Additionally, “should affirmative action exist as a remedy for past and present injustice?” He answers the latter with a definitive “yes,” and the former by arguing that the 1935 Social Security Act, discrimination within the military and the Federal Housing Authority (FHA), the G.I. Bill, the 1935 National Labor Relations Act, and the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act, among others, fashioned a white American middle class while negating the same upward economic and social mobility for America’s blacks. Said another way, Katznelson argues that black disadvantage found its roots in the generation preceding the end of Jim Crow. In her book, Schools Betrayed: the Roots of Failure in Inner City Education, Kathryn Neckerman accounts for the problems within public education by advancing a similar argument. She maintains that the challenges of urban education possess historical roots and attributes them to the extensive legacy of local decisions that have governed school policy and implementation.
The New Deal legislation was characterized by its exclusion of African Americans. While the Social Security Act offered meager benefits to the few blacks who qualified, it excluded most of them. Katznelson notes that “fully 65 percent fell outside the reach of the new program” which failed to apply to occupations such as agricultural labor and domestic servitude, leaving out the vast majority of black Americans. During this time, Southern members of Congress organized to exclude farmers and maids, “the most widespread black categories of employment,” from the Fair Labor Standards Act and the National Labor Relations Act. Katznelson notes that “without this fine-tuning, a majority of southern blacks might have had access to protections negotiated by unions that would have shaken the political economy of segregation.” The G.I. Bill of Rights, which represents the broadest set of social benefits offered by the U.S. government through a single program, enabled millions of white veterans to purchase homes, attend college, start businesses, and plan for retirement. This bill almost singlehandedly created a white American middle class and spurned burgeoning suburbs throughout the nation.
The history of New Deal policies reveal that local control remained the key to maintaining the status quo and perpetuating institutionalized racism. Although the legislation lacked explicitly racist provisions, Congress charged administrators on the local level with their enforcement. Within the educational arena, as Neckerman makes plain, similarly race neutral policies contributed to the ultimate demise of urban public education. Local control over education policies precluded federal oversight which opened the door to discriminatory implementations. In a similar vein, Katznelson notes that “guided by the model of decentralization that the South had achieved in earlier New Deal laws,” southern members of Congress drafted a law “that left responsibility for implementation mainly to states and localities, including, of course, those that practiced official racism without compromise.” In 1954, local control would again undermine the promise of equality in an ostensibly landmark ruling. Michael Klarman explicates in Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement that the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education failed to fundamentally alter the conditions within black America. Similar to the claim advanced by Klarman, Charles Ogletree argues in his 2004 book, All Deliberate Speed: Reflections on the First Half Century of Brown v. Board of Education, that the critical flaw within Brown lay in the Justices’ decision to cede responsibility for its implementation to the states, allowing them to pursue desegregation with “all deliberate speed.” Southern Democrats indefatigably fought against centralized control over New Deal policies. “By decentralizing authority” Katznelson writes, “and fragmenting decision making, national policies could be administered to suit white southern preferences.” Southern congressional power ensured the preservation of the south’s racial order by strategically maximizing the flow of federal money while preserving local control.
Katznelson’s book possesses numerous strengths, one of which lies in his painstaking attention to the discriminatory development of New Deal policies. He places these measures within a historical context, grounding the argument for non-white affirmative action in historical facts that illustrate instances of specific harm suffered by African Americans. The underlying assumption girding his argument draws upon the age-old maxim, “what you do for one, you must do for all,” suggesting that past white affirmative action justifies non-white affirmative measures today.
There are some who, like Clarence Thomas, presume that affirmative action lowers standards for blacks. In his dissent in Grutter v. Bollinger Thomas maintains that “a university may not maintain a high admission standard and grant exemptions to favored races,” when in actuality, affirmative action aims to give qualified women and people of color the same opportunities that whites have historically enjoyed despite mediocrity and under qualifications. Thomas naively subscribes to the belief that after four hundred years of racism and sexism, and after only a century and a half since the abolition of slavery, America has now become a meritocracy that is intent upon giving minorities and women equal opportunities. Like many right wing conservatives, Clarence Thomas believes that blacks ought to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, “even if they don’t have any boots.”* As President Lyndon B. Johnson observed in his 1965 address at Howard University:
You do not wipe away the scars of centuries by saying: Now you are free to go where you want, and do as you desire, and choose the leaders as you please. You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, “you are free to compete with all the others,” and still justly believe that you have been completely fair. Thus it is not enough just to open the gates of opportunity. All our citizens must have the ability to walk through those gates.
And yet, after nearly forty years of affirmative action, black Americans are still far from equal. Despite the 1964 Civil Rights Act the prevalence of discrimination in home lending persists. Ostensibly, the Fair Housing Act passed by Congress equalized opportunities for African Americans to procure homes. In actuality, it achieved just the opposite by including discriminatory provisions that inhibited the law’s enforcement. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) introduced under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act undermined, rather than reinforced, endeavors to equalize employment opportunities for blacks. The commission instead served white interests by protecting the seniority rights of individuals who had attained positions due to past discrimination against blacks. This in turn insulated the vast majority of white workers from the widespread layoffs that would characterize the decade following the bill’s implementation. Since its founding, affirmative action has done relatively little to narrow the economic and educational gap between black and white Americans. Statistically, affirmative action has advantaged more white females than it has benefitted any other minority group. Despite over forty years of affirmative action and diversity efforts, white men still own sixty-four percent of the nation’s businesses and occupy the majority of the nation’s highest paying jobs even though they comprise only forty-one percent of the nation’s work force. White males are still:
70% of judges
70% of university professors
71% percent of air traffic controllers
73% percent of lawyers
75% percent of police detectives and supervisors
84% of construction supervisors
85% of boards of directors
89% of U.S. Senators
94% of fire company supervisors
95% of senior managers.
Neither affirmative action nor the legislation that emanated from the Civil Rights era has significantly altered the problems that have historically impeded black Americans. As Martin Luther King observed, “What good is it to be able to eat at a restaurant when you can’t afford a hamburger?” The United States has allowed black Americans entrance into the restaurant of Freedom, Equality, and Justice for All, however it has yet to offer them the necessary means with which to purchase a meal. Rather, the government contents itself upon throwing blacks scraps from the Master’s table—token programs and policies like Upward Bound and affirmative action that target not the roots of America’s institutionalized racial problems, but merely the symptoms of its social ills. To these, select individuals all too eagerly attach the label “progress!” while others scream “foul!”
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Monday, April 27, 2009
The Limitations of Desegregation Part 1
Brown v. Board of Education resonates deeply throughout American culture and occupies a prominent place within America’s Progressive Narrative. The 1954 case sought to dismantle state-sponsored segregation within public education, yet over fifty years after the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling, America’s public schools remain more separate and unequal than ever before. Like America’s Narrative, the Court’s decision in Brown espoused democratic ideals that the Justices embraced only in rhetoric. Their ruling, though later nullified by the Court’s decision in Brown II, reflected future promises that they hoped America would eventually live up to.
While it remains unpopular to suggest that Brown was wrongly decided, the years after the decision have exposed it as little more than a feel-good measure aimed at satiating blacks. Rather than granting black Americans educational equality, the decision offered only the appearance of it. Many of Brown’s critics attribute contemporary challenges within public education to the years after the decision and to Brown II, which undermined its de facto implementation. And yet, the tragic flaw—which would forever preclude Brown’s realization—can be traced back to the ideology of the very people who strategized the case. The NAACP’s decision to dismantle Jim Crow inequality by attacking segregation rather than fighting for the equalization of black institutions would slam the doors of educational opportunity shut for many of America’s blacks.
The original strategy taken up by members of the NAACP in the fight against Jim Crow was equalization for the purpose of integration. Their main objective did not reflect what the majority of America’s blacks wanted for themselves or for their children at the time. In Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement, Michael Klarman observes that prior to Brown “most southern blacks were more interested in improving black education, reducing police brutality, and securing access to decent jobs, than in desegregating grade schools.” He explicates what he terms, “inverse hierarchies of preference” between blacks and whites; grade school segregation remained at the top of the white supremacist agenda while blacks had vested interests in voting and civil equality. Contrary to what blacks wanted however, the NAACP viewed desegregation as a cheaper, more feasible pursuit. Yet behind the NAACP’s ostensibly utilitarian view of desegregation lay the belief that desegregation was the surest marker of equal citizenship. This belief was characterized by discomfort with racial separatism and suggests that blacks’ proximity to whites would solve the challenges within the black community.
And yet, the social and political milieu of the 1940s and 50s made equalization a feasible goal. America’s battle against fascism during World War II made Jim Crow inequality difficult to justify alongside democratic ideals. President Franklin Roosevelt encouraged the U.S. to “refut[e] at home the very theories which we are fighting abroad.” In the mid-1940s, the Cold War placed America upon an international center stage which profoundly impacted the federal government’s behavior. Klarman notes that during this period, “not only had the national government become more committed to civil rights, but it had also developed a greater capacity to enforce that commitment.” This climate fostered the burgeoning liberalization of white racial opinion throughout the south. Across America, there was a growing consensus towards egalitarianism. The opportune moment had arrived for black Americans to launch a full-scale campaign for equalization.
The NAACP made early attempts to fight for equalization. Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada (1938), a case that challenged the absence of higher educational institutions for blacks, held that states are constitutionally obligated to provide “equal services to blacks within their boundaries.” The courts allotted time for state officials to establish equalized facilities for blacks rather than requiring white universities to admit black students who were denied admission. For many southern whites and state officials, the equalization of black and white facilities seemed more palatable than desegregation. This suggests that a national attack upon unequal institutions would have been more cordially received by members of the status quo.
While it remains unpopular to suggest that Brown was wrongly decided, the years after the decision have exposed it as little more than a feel-good measure aimed at satiating blacks. Rather than granting black Americans educational equality, the decision offered only the appearance of it. Many of Brown’s critics attribute contemporary challenges within public education to the years after the decision and to Brown II, which undermined its de facto implementation. And yet, the tragic flaw—which would forever preclude Brown’s realization—can be traced back to the ideology of the very people who strategized the case. The NAACP’s decision to dismantle Jim Crow inequality by attacking segregation rather than fighting for the equalization of black institutions would slam the doors of educational opportunity shut for many of America’s blacks.
The original strategy taken up by members of the NAACP in the fight against Jim Crow was equalization for the purpose of integration. Their main objective did not reflect what the majority of America’s blacks wanted for themselves or for their children at the time. In Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement, Michael Klarman observes that prior to Brown “most southern blacks were more interested in improving black education, reducing police brutality, and securing access to decent jobs, than in desegregating grade schools.” He explicates what he terms, “inverse hierarchies of preference” between blacks and whites; grade school segregation remained at the top of the white supremacist agenda while blacks had vested interests in voting and civil equality. Contrary to what blacks wanted however, the NAACP viewed desegregation as a cheaper, more feasible pursuit. Yet behind the NAACP’s ostensibly utilitarian view of desegregation lay the belief that desegregation was the surest marker of equal citizenship. This belief was characterized by discomfort with racial separatism and suggests that blacks’ proximity to whites would solve the challenges within the black community.
And yet, the social and political milieu of the 1940s and 50s made equalization a feasible goal. America’s battle against fascism during World War II made Jim Crow inequality difficult to justify alongside democratic ideals. President Franklin Roosevelt encouraged the U.S. to “refut[e] at home the very theories which we are fighting abroad.” In the mid-1940s, the Cold War placed America upon an international center stage which profoundly impacted the federal government’s behavior. Klarman notes that during this period, “not only had the national government become more committed to civil rights, but it had also developed a greater capacity to enforce that commitment.” This climate fostered the burgeoning liberalization of white racial opinion throughout the south. Across America, there was a growing consensus towards egalitarianism. The opportune moment had arrived for black Americans to launch a full-scale campaign for equalization.
The NAACP made early attempts to fight for equalization. Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada (1938), a case that challenged the absence of higher educational institutions for blacks, held that states are constitutionally obligated to provide “equal services to blacks within their boundaries.” The courts allotted time for state officials to establish equalized facilities for blacks rather than requiring white universities to admit black students who were denied admission. For many southern whites and state officials, the equalization of black and white facilities seemed more palatable than desegregation. This suggests that a national attack upon unequal institutions would have been more cordially received by members of the status quo.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Sophia's Tips for Predicting Weather
1) Red sky in morning, sailors take warning; Red sky at night, sailor's delight.
2) If, by a campfire, you see the smoke hug the ground before it blows away, a storm is on its way; If the smoke flies straight up, you can expect warm weather ahead.
3) If the morning dew is on the grass, rain will never come to pass; When grass is dry at morning light, look for rain before the night.
2) If, by a campfire, you see the smoke hug the ground before it blows away, a storm is on its way; If the smoke flies straight up, you can expect warm weather ahead.
3) If the morning dew is on the grass, rain will never come to pass; When grass is dry at morning light, look for rain before the night.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Resurrecting Napoleon
The phrase, “the pen is mightier than the sword”—coined by Edward Bulwer-Lytton in his 1839 play, “Richelieu; Or the Conspiracy”—holds true today; for as history has proven, even the greatest warriors die, while words live forever. Since this nation’s founding, white Americans have wielded the power of representation. Such control has allowed for the construction of a society in which whiteness is perennially affirmed— on television, in art, within curricula, and inside the classroom. Spurned by the 1960s Civil Rights Movement, blacks—and subsequently women and other minority groups— began to demand inclusion in an American Master Narrative from which they were heretofore excluded, yet within which they played an integral role. Out of this era emerged the Black is Beautiful Movement, the development of Black Studies within colleges and universities, and a greater emphasis on Afrocentric education, each of which developed in response to their initial exclusion.
In her book, The Language Police, Diane Ravitch argues that a system of quiet censorship governs American education whereby sensitivity guidelines and expurgation choke intellectual freedom (163). Her central question asks: how did the regulation of offensive language evolve into a system whereby textbooks were purged of all material that “might annoy or offend the most agitated imaginations” (18)? She charts the trajectory of bias regulation beginning in 1997 with former President Bill Clinton’s education initiatives, through 2003 in an attempt to illustrate that what began as bias and sensitivity review has developed into unwarranted censorship which now threatens personal freedom, educational quality, and intellectual agency. In her chapter entitled, “Forbidden Topics, Forbidden Words,” Ravitch provides numerous examples of passages which a Bias and Sensitivity Committee deemed inappropriate for elementary school children, in an attempt to show that: 1) personal biases inherently govern which words, topics, and phrases members of the committee deem to be “biased” 2) the inanity behind the exclusion of certain topics does not warrant their exclusion and 3) bowdlerization reduces the quality of language and literature which results in banal material that fails to foster high levels of intellectual engagement among children. She argues that such purging paints a portrait of the past that is historically inaccurate, subscribing to Napoleon Bonaparte’s belief that “history is a set of lies agreed upon.”
Ravitch avoids explicitly condemning Eurocentrism within history textbooks and instead argues that radical academics, extremists, activists, social reformists, and curriculum experts have asserted that “traditional accounts of American history were not only racist and sexist but Eurocentric as well” (135). She unsuccessfully tries to advance the notion of reverse exclusion as it pertains to European history, claiming that “in the American history depicted in today’s texts, the only civilization that seems to be not so very advanced is Europe’s” (154). She also maintains that extreme multiculturalists who advocated for revised curriculums “ignored the dangers of turning history into a tool for group therapy” (136). Her claims, particularly the latter, fail to acknowledge that prior to the 1960s and long afterward, the model of Americanism advanced in schools served as a form of group therapy for white students by instilling into them a false sense of achievement and credit for modernity. Claims for inclusion, however radical, stemmed from the initial exclusion of non-whites from America’s narrative. While inclusion (multiculturalism) and historical accuracy are not mutually exclusive, Ravitch erroneously constructs a dichotomy between the two, writing that “texts try so hard to be positive that they are misleading and inaccurate” (147). She treats nondemocratic societies with an intolerable measure of condescension, claiming that history texts treat other civilizations with adulation while failing to admit “that many nations today are undemocratic societies ruled by dictators and despots, where ordinary people have few rights and freedoms” (148). In light of Howard Fuller’s article “The Continuing Struggle for School Choice,” and Goodwin Liu’s article on school choice—in which they demonstrate the extent to which one’s freedom and choices are circumscribed by race, poverty, and systemic inequality— one has reason to question Ravitch’s naïve view of democracy. Her own biases become explicit when she fails to recognize the peculiarity of the institution of American slavery. She writes that:
Most texts blame Europeans for African slavery, as if this horror were unprecedented before the arrival of the Portuguese on the west coast of Africa…One of the better texts observes that “slavery existed in Africa and other parts of the world for centuries…” (153).
Additionally, she challenges the legitimacy of textbooks which include the cultural achievements of the Anasazi, yet fail to mention the debate over “whether the Anasazi practiced human sacrifice and cannibalism” (154). And yet, she extols Henry Graff’s, America: The Glorious Republic, as “well written and comprehensive," though Graff undoubtedly avoids mentioning that the pilgrims habitually powdered and ate their dead relatives for sustenance before Native Americans—who they would later annihilate—showed them how to plant and harvest crops.
In her book, The Language Police, Diane Ravitch argues that a system of quiet censorship governs American education whereby sensitivity guidelines and expurgation choke intellectual freedom (163). Her central question asks: how did the regulation of offensive language evolve into a system whereby textbooks were purged of all material that “might annoy or offend the most agitated imaginations” (18)? She charts the trajectory of bias regulation beginning in 1997 with former President Bill Clinton’s education initiatives, through 2003 in an attempt to illustrate that what began as bias and sensitivity review has developed into unwarranted censorship which now threatens personal freedom, educational quality, and intellectual agency. In her chapter entitled, “Forbidden Topics, Forbidden Words,” Ravitch provides numerous examples of passages which a Bias and Sensitivity Committee deemed inappropriate for elementary school children, in an attempt to show that: 1) personal biases inherently govern which words, topics, and phrases members of the committee deem to be “biased” 2) the inanity behind the exclusion of certain topics does not warrant their exclusion and 3) bowdlerization reduces the quality of language and literature which results in banal material that fails to foster high levels of intellectual engagement among children. She argues that such purging paints a portrait of the past that is historically inaccurate, subscribing to Napoleon Bonaparte’s belief that “history is a set of lies agreed upon.”
Ravitch avoids explicitly condemning Eurocentrism within history textbooks and instead argues that radical academics, extremists, activists, social reformists, and curriculum experts have asserted that “traditional accounts of American history were not only racist and sexist but Eurocentric as well” (135). She unsuccessfully tries to advance the notion of reverse exclusion as it pertains to European history, claiming that “in the American history depicted in today’s texts, the only civilization that seems to be not so very advanced is Europe’s” (154). She also maintains that extreme multiculturalists who advocated for revised curriculums “ignored the dangers of turning history into a tool for group therapy” (136). Her claims, particularly the latter, fail to acknowledge that prior to the 1960s and long afterward, the model of Americanism advanced in schools served as a form of group therapy for white students by instilling into them a false sense of achievement and credit for modernity. Claims for inclusion, however radical, stemmed from the initial exclusion of non-whites from America’s narrative. While inclusion (multiculturalism) and historical accuracy are not mutually exclusive, Ravitch erroneously constructs a dichotomy between the two, writing that “texts try so hard to be positive that they are misleading and inaccurate” (147). She treats nondemocratic societies with an intolerable measure of condescension, claiming that history texts treat other civilizations with adulation while failing to admit “that many nations today are undemocratic societies ruled by dictators and despots, where ordinary people have few rights and freedoms” (148). In light of Howard Fuller’s article “The Continuing Struggle for School Choice,” and Goodwin Liu’s article on school choice—in which they demonstrate the extent to which one’s freedom and choices are circumscribed by race, poverty, and systemic inequality— one has reason to question Ravitch’s naïve view of democracy. Her own biases become explicit when she fails to recognize the peculiarity of the institution of American slavery. She writes that:
Most texts blame Europeans for African slavery, as if this horror were unprecedented before the arrival of the Portuguese on the west coast of Africa…One of the better texts observes that “slavery existed in Africa and other parts of the world for centuries…” (153).
Additionally, she challenges the legitimacy of textbooks which include the cultural achievements of the Anasazi, yet fail to mention the debate over “whether the Anasazi practiced human sacrifice and cannibalism” (154). And yet, she extols Henry Graff’s, America: The Glorious Republic, as “well written and comprehensive," though Graff undoubtedly avoids mentioning that the pilgrims habitually powdered and ate their dead relatives for sustenance before Native Americans—who they would later annihilate—showed them how to plant and harvest crops.
Friday, April 3, 2009
From a Strictly Mathematical Viewpoint
Today, Dad sent me the following email:
What Equals 100%? What does it mean to give MORE than 100%? Ever wonder about those people who say they are giving more than 100%? We have all been in situations where someone wants you to give over 100%. How about achieving 101%? What equals 100% in life?
Here's a little mathematical formula that might help you answer these Questions:
If:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Is represented as:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26.
Then:
H-A-R-D-W-O-R- K
8+1+18+4+23+15+18+11 = 98%
and
K-N-O-W-L-E-D-G-E
11+14+15+23+12+5+4+7+5 = 96%
But,
A-T-T-I-T-U-D-E
1+20+20+9+20+21+4+5 = 100%
AND, look how far the love of God will take you
L- O- V- E-O-F-G-O-D
12+15+22+5+15+6+7+15+4 = 101%
Therefore, one can conclude with mathematical certainty that:
While Hard work and Knowledge will get you close, and Attitude will get you there, it's the Love of God that will put you over the top!
Friday, March 27, 2009
I Lift Up Mine Eyes
I look up to the mountains--
does my help come from there?
My help comes from the Lord,
who made the heavens and the earth
He will not let me stumble and fall;
the one who watches over me will not sleep
Indeed, he who watches over me never tires and never sleeps
The Lord Himself watches over me
The Lord stands beside me as my protective shade
The sun will not hurt me by day,
nor the moon by night
The Lord keeps me from all evil and preserves my life
The Lord keeps watch over me
as I come and go,
both now and forever
Amen
--Psalm 121
does my help come from there?
My help comes from the Lord,
who made the heavens and the earth
He will not let me stumble and fall;
the one who watches over me will not sleep
Indeed, he who watches over me never tires and never sleeps
The Lord Himself watches over me
The Lord stands beside me as my protective shade
The sun will not hurt me by day,
nor the moon by night
The Lord keeps me from all evil and preserves my life
The Lord keeps watch over me
as I come and go,
both now and forever
Amen
--Psalm 121
The Question
"I can't be a pessimist because I'm alive. The future of the Negro in this country is precisely as bright or as dark as the future of this country. White people have to try to find out in their own hearts why it was necessary to have a nigger in the first place. Because I'm not a nigger. I'm a man. But if you think I'm a nigger, it means you need it. And white people have to ask themselves why they need it. The future of our country depends on that." --James Baldwin
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Acknowledging Privilege
In response to the "Making Whiteness Visible" video that I posted on my facebook profile a couple of days ago, a former white classmate responded by sending me the following antagonistic message:
"So ______ sent me that youtube video that you had posted to your profile. the white becoming visible part 1...are you kidding me Amanda?
I can understand about being angry and enraged about the past...but you HAVE to be kidding me saying that EVERYONE is a racist STILL. It really bothers me and makes me angry, because last time I checked I can't get a scholarship for school because of the color of my skin.
I don't know if you've actually looked recently but there aren't white ONLY colleges or Hispanic ONLY colleges... Now isn't that an interesting twist in pointing fingers at Racists? I sure as heck think so. You want to talk about oppression, how about my family AMERICAN INDIANS the very first people that F'ed over in this country. But did you know the only way I can get help for college is if I can actually PROVE what tribe and family name I came from... Would you have to do that? Do you think that in order to get help from UNCF (United Negro College Fund) you'd have to PROVE that you came from a slave family? hmm... didn't think so. "Minorites", I use that loosly because white are becoming the minority, are given GREAT opportunities that I'll never even see. I just really wish that they'd see that, before pulling the race card. OH and before you even get the idea about calling ME a racist...remember what church I grew up in...I WAS THE MINORITY."
"So ______ sent me that youtube video that you had posted to your profile. the white becoming visible part 1...are you kidding me Amanda?
I can understand about being angry and enraged about the past...but you HAVE to be kidding me saying that EVERYONE is a racist STILL. It really bothers me and makes me angry, because last time I checked I can't get a scholarship for school because of the color of my skin.
I don't know if you've actually looked recently but there aren't white ONLY colleges or Hispanic ONLY colleges... Now isn't that an interesting twist in pointing fingers at Racists? I sure as heck think so. You want to talk about oppression, how about my family AMERICAN INDIANS the very first people that F'ed over in this country. But did you know the only way I can get help for college is if I can actually PROVE what tribe and family name I came from... Would you have to do that? Do you think that in order to get help from UNCF (United Negro College Fund) you'd have to PROVE that you came from a slave family? hmm... didn't think so. "Minorites", I use that loosly because white are becoming the minority, are given GREAT opportunities that I'll never even see. I just really wish that they'd see that, before pulling the race card. OH and before you even get the idea about calling ME a racist...remember what church I grew up in...I WAS THE MINORITY."
Thursday, March 19, 2009
"ATL"
I flew into Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson airport on Friday afternoon, June 13th. I rode M.A.R.T.A. from the airport to downtown Atlanta where I was scheduled to meet up with Jamie Sadler, a twenty-one year old Emory Law student who would host me throughout the weekend. I stood on the escalator that would carry me up to the main street with my oversized black suitcase, my purse, and my laptop bag.
"Hey, hey, hey, how you doin' purty lady?" The man taking the escalator down into the subway across from mine spoke with a heavy southern drawl that was exacerbated by enormous, gold-capped teeth that protruded from his mouth. He grinned and leaned across the escalator, staring at me through mischievous eyes.
"I'm well, thanks" I said, smiling as I pulled out my phone and texted Jamie to let her know that I had arrived. The darkness swallowed him as he disappeared down into the subway. Meanwhile, I emerged onto the street and into the sweltering Georgia sun.
**
I found a sunny spot on the sidewalk where I decided to wait for Jamie to arrive. Feeling my skin becoming clammy from the heat, I peeled my hoodie from my body and tied it around my waist. Wearing my favorite black-and-white striped tank-top, I rolled up my Old Navy boot-cut jeans and took a seat on top of my suitcase. I took my cell phone out of my bag and dialed Dad's cell.
"Hey Manda!" Dad answered energetically. "I'm here with your Mom, and we're heading to the office." Dad and Mom sounded cheery, as they often did when gallivanting with each other.
"Oh, okay" I replied. "I just wanted to call you guys to let you know that I arrived safely."
"Manda," Mom piped up from the background, "you have to read Stolen Legacy by George G.M. James." She continued, "There's no such thing as 'Greek philosophy.'" My mom, a bibliophile who had done enough reading to have earned herself a PhD three times over, possessed a love for history that rivaled even my own.
"Who's it by again mom?" I asked, pulling a receipt out of my pocket and turning it over to write the name down on the back. "George G.M. James," Mom repeated. "He talks about how the Greeks were originally educated in Egypt. After the invasion of Alexander the Great, Egypt's libraries were pillaged and Aristotle converted it into a research center."
"Are you serious?" I replied, my interest genuinely peaked.
"Yes!" Mom continued. "Many of the books that historians currently attribute to Aristotle came from Egypt's libraries."
"That makes sense," I replied, "because even experts can't seem to explain how Aristotle supposedly managed to author so many books and across so many disciplines throughout his lifetime."
A gray sedan pulled up to the curb in front of where I sat and a tall, thin, woman with a pallid complexion emerged. Her large, curly hair was dyed jet-black and she sported a mini skirt, platform thongs, and a black tank top.
"Yo," she began, "Amanda?" She stared at me skeptically through dark-rimmed sunglasses.
"Yep," I said, looking up at her from where I sat comfortably on the sidewalk.
"Hey, I'm Jamie." She stuck out her hand to complete the introduction.
"Hey mom, can I call you back?" I said into the phone.
"Oh, no problem" Mom replied. "I'll talk to you later. I love you!"
By now Jamie stood behind her car with the trunk open.
"Okay, I'll call soon" I said. "I love you guys too."
"Hey, hey, hey, how you doin' purty lady?" The man taking the escalator down into the subway across from mine spoke with a heavy southern drawl that was exacerbated by enormous, gold-capped teeth that protruded from his mouth. He grinned and leaned across the escalator, staring at me through mischievous eyes.
"I'm well, thanks" I said, smiling as I pulled out my phone and texted Jamie to let her know that I had arrived. The darkness swallowed him as he disappeared down into the subway. Meanwhile, I emerged onto the street and into the sweltering Georgia sun.
**
I found a sunny spot on the sidewalk where I decided to wait for Jamie to arrive. Feeling my skin becoming clammy from the heat, I peeled my hoodie from my body and tied it around my waist. Wearing my favorite black-and-white striped tank-top, I rolled up my Old Navy boot-cut jeans and took a seat on top of my suitcase. I took my cell phone out of my bag and dialed Dad's cell.
"Hey Manda!" Dad answered energetically. "I'm here with your Mom, and we're heading to the office." Dad and Mom sounded cheery, as they often did when gallivanting with each other.
"Oh, okay" I replied. "I just wanted to call you guys to let you know that I arrived safely."
"Manda," Mom piped up from the background, "you have to read Stolen Legacy by George G.M. James." She continued, "There's no such thing as 'Greek philosophy.'" My mom, a bibliophile who had done enough reading to have earned herself a PhD three times over, possessed a love for history that rivaled even my own.
"Who's it by again mom?" I asked, pulling a receipt out of my pocket and turning it over to write the name down on the back. "George G.M. James," Mom repeated. "He talks about how the Greeks were originally educated in Egypt. After the invasion of Alexander the Great, Egypt's libraries were pillaged and Aristotle converted it into a research center."
"Are you serious?" I replied, my interest genuinely peaked.
"Yes!" Mom continued. "Many of the books that historians currently attribute to Aristotle came from Egypt's libraries."
"That makes sense," I replied, "because even experts can't seem to explain how Aristotle supposedly managed to author so many books and across so many disciplines throughout his lifetime."
A gray sedan pulled up to the curb in front of where I sat and a tall, thin, woman with a pallid complexion emerged. Her large, curly hair was dyed jet-black and she sported a mini skirt, platform thongs, and a black tank top.
"Yo," she began, "Amanda?" She stared at me skeptically through dark-rimmed sunglasses.
"Yep," I said, looking up at her from where I sat comfortably on the sidewalk.
"Hey, I'm Jamie." She stuck out her hand to complete the introduction.
"Hey mom, can I call you back?" I said into the phone.
"Oh, no problem" Mom replied. "I'll talk to you later. I love you!"
By now Jamie stood behind her car with the trunk open.
"Okay, I'll call soon" I said. "I love you guys too."
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Georgia on my Mind
September 9, 2008
I must confess that when I initially applied to volunteer with the Obama campaign here in Georgia, I could not have anticipated that it would lead me down the road which I am now traveling. Originally, I came to Georgia because I saw the enormity of the need here: there are close to one million unregistered voters in this state alone, over six hundred thousand of whom are black. Since working here in Macon, I've come to learn how the voter registration laws here have been crafted in a manner that deliberately makes it difficult for working people and for poor folks to vote. The Bibb County Board of Elections is the only place in Bibb County where people here can procure a free voter I.D. It's tucked away off of a remote road twenty minutes north of downtown, just out of the jurisdiction of the local bus routes, and is only open from 8:30am to 5:30pm Monday through Friday. No nights. No weekends. As you can probably imagine, people who work from 9am to 5pm, are in some cases taking public transportation, have children and so many other obligations have a difficult time making it there within operating hours to register. As such, many of them don't. For those that are lucky enough to reach the Board of Elections, the law requires them to show proof of birth, residence, utility bills, and a number of other documents that have successfully discouraged many people from going through the trouble. And yet, when one registers for either hunting or fishing licenses in the state of Georgia they are automatically registered to vote. You can see, probably all-too clearly, what we're up against.
But Senator Obama is right when he says that what is happening right now across America is not about him; every day I begin to realize this more and more. It isn't about Senator Obama, rather it's about Rosa Watkins, a woman who has raised a daughter and who is now raising a granddaughter, yet who comes to the office every day at 8:30pm, after having helped her grandbaby with her homework, to make phone calls; it's about Ms. Juanita, who ruins her freshly manicured, lime-green fingernails by spending four hours ripping off labels on old manila folders so that we can make up voter registration walk packets; it's about Mr. Ford who, when I come home from the office at 1am, I see sitting on the edge of his bed in his boxers and a t-shirt, writing the return addresses on voter registration forms from the day before so that we can mail them out the next morning; it's about Drew Benbow, Ashley Diaz, and Brooke Obie, Mercer University Law Students who, after exams and hours of studying, still find time to come out to the clubs with me until 2am or later to register voters as they wait in line; it's about Mrs. Arthena Caston, a working mom who, after working a ten hour shift at Geico, comes by the office to help us enter data; it's about Mrs. Beverly Ford who stays up until 2am printing off lists of housing projects that we still need to canvass; it's about Gwen Lipford who, though working a long day at Forsyth Prison, still comes to an organizational meeting in the basement of a church to turn in eleven voter registration forms that she was able to get filled out over the past week; it's about Ms. Montgomery, an elderly woman who walks a mile and a half from the bus depot to the campaign headquarters downtown twice a week in the sweltering heat to make I.D. calls; and it's about Tedra and Brett Hobson, two amazing individuals who saved up money so that they could work for the campaign for free. These are the unsung heroes who are the feet of this movement; these are the individuals who are the heart and soul of what has become much more than simply a campaign. It's a revolution. So many of us are tires of the same kind of politics; I'm tired of watching the same individuals overlooked, marginalized, underrepresented, and left without a voice.
I find that many people look back upon the Civil Rights era with nostalgia. They talk about what an awesome time it was to be alive, for black people had a cause that was worth living and dying for. And yet, it is easy to forget that not everyone was marching with Medgar Evars, who for a time was the Civil Rights Movement in Mississippi; not everyone participated in the Montgomery Bus Boycotts or in the Freedom Rides or in the Greensboro sit-ins. There are people who tell me every day that what we are trying to do here is impossible. And yet, I've seen people inspired and lives transformed before my eyes, including my own.
Even as I type these words I'm sitting in my car, with my computer on my lap, in the parking lot of a church where in minutes, I will be talking to congregation about the importance of working towards the change that this state, that this country, and that we all so desperately need. This movement has taught many of us to hope as we have never dared to hope before, that America, and that each of us, can be better. This is the change that we are all working for; this is the change that I feel so blessed to be a part of.
I'll write more when I can.
Amanda
I must confess that when I initially applied to volunteer with the Obama campaign here in Georgia, I could not have anticipated that it would lead me down the road which I am now traveling. Originally, I came to Georgia because I saw the enormity of the need here: there are close to one million unregistered voters in this state alone, over six hundred thousand of whom are black. Since working here in Macon, I've come to learn how the voter registration laws here have been crafted in a manner that deliberately makes it difficult for working people and for poor folks to vote. The Bibb County Board of Elections is the only place in Bibb County where people here can procure a free voter I.D. It's tucked away off of a remote road twenty minutes north of downtown, just out of the jurisdiction of the local bus routes, and is only open from 8:30am to 5:30pm Monday through Friday. No nights. No weekends. As you can probably imagine, people who work from 9am to 5pm, are in some cases taking public transportation, have children and so many other obligations have a difficult time making it there within operating hours to register. As such, many of them don't. For those that are lucky enough to reach the Board of Elections, the law requires them to show proof of birth, residence, utility bills, and a number of other documents that have successfully discouraged many people from going through the trouble. And yet, when one registers for either hunting or fishing licenses in the state of Georgia they are automatically registered to vote. You can see, probably all-too clearly, what we're up against.
But Senator Obama is right when he says that what is happening right now across America is not about him; every day I begin to realize this more and more. It isn't about Senator Obama, rather it's about Rosa Watkins, a woman who has raised a daughter and who is now raising a granddaughter, yet who comes to the office every day at 8:30pm, after having helped her grandbaby with her homework, to make phone calls; it's about Ms. Juanita, who ruins her freshly manicured, lime-green fingernails by spending four hours ripping off labels on old manila folders so that we can make up voter registration walk packets; it's about Mr. Ford who, when I come home from the office at 1am, I see sitting on the edge of his bed in his boxers and a t-shirt, writing the return addresses on voter registration forms from the day before so that we can mail them out the next morning; it's about Drew Benbow, Ashley Diaz, and Brooke Obie, Mercer University Law Students who, after exams and hours of studying, still find time to come out to the clubs with me until 2am or later to register voters as they wait in line; it's about Mrs. Arthena Caston, a working mom who, after working a ten hour shift at Geico, comes by the office to help us enter data; it's about Mrs. Beverly Ford who stays up until 2am printing off lists of housing projects that we still need to canvass; it's about Gwen Lipford who, though working a long day at Forsyth Prison, still comes to an organizational meeting in the basement of a church to turn in eleven voter registration forms that she was able to get filled out over the past week; it's about Ms. Montgomery, an elderly woman who walks a mile and a half from the bus depot to the campaign headquarters downtown twice a week in the sweltering heat to make I.D. calls; and it's about Tedra and Brett Hobson, two amazing individuals who saved up money so that they could work for the campaign for free. These are the unsung heroes who are the feet of this movement; these are the individuals who are the heart and soul of what has become much more than simply a campaign. It's a revolution. So many of us are tires of the same kind of politics; I'm tired of watching the same individuals overlooked, marginalized, underrepresented, and left without a voice.
I find that many people look back upon the Civil Rights era with nostalgia. They talk about what an awesome time it was to be alive, for black people had a cause that was worth living and dying for. And yet, it is easy to forget that not everyone was marching with Medgar Evars, who for a time was the Civil Rights Movement in Mississippi; not everyone participated in the Montgomery Bus Boycotts or in the Freedom Rides or in the Greensboro sit-ins. There are people who tell me every day that what we are trying to do here is impossible. And yet, I've seen people inspired and lives transformed before my eyes, including my own.
Even as I type these words I'm sitting in my car, with my computer on my lap, in the parking lot of a church where in minutes, I will be talking to congregation about the importance of working towards the change that this state, that this country, and that we all so desperately need. This movement has taught many of us to hope as we have never dared to hope before, that America, and that each of us, can be better. This is the change that we are all working for; this is the change that I feel so blessed to be a part of.
I'll write more when I can.
Amanda
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Inside My Back Pocket
je ne sais quoi (zhə-nə-ˌsā-ˈkwä) n. a quality or attribute that is difficult to describe or express; an unspoken and intangible essence that makes a person attractive.
insouciance: (in-soo'-sients) n. lighthearted unconcern; nonchalance.
squirrel: v. to store away for future use; to save for later.
preprandial: adj. suitable for the time just before dinner (ex: a preprandial drink)
recondite: adj. difficult to comprehend or understand; hidden from sight; concealed (ex: a recondite subject)
raconteur: (ra-kahn-ter) n. a person who is clever at telling stories.
repartee: (re-pər-ˈtē) n. a quick, witty reply or conversation.
bumptious: adj. presumptuously, obtusely, and often noisily self-assertive; obtrusive
arcane: adj. secret
metanoia: n. a transformative change of heart; a spiritual conversion.
maladroit: adj. clumsy
niggling: adj. petty; bothersome or persistent especially in a petty or tiresome way
ilk: n. of the same kind
bric a brac: n. a miscellaneous collection of small articles commonly of ornamental or sentimental value; trinkets.
mendacity: n. the quality or state of being untruthful; a lie.
veneer: n. a superficial or deceptively attractive appearance, display, or effect.
fin: n. (slang) a five dollar bill.
extemporaneous: adj. makeshift; produced on the spur of the moment.
platitude: n. the quality or state of being dull or insipid.
rapport: n. marked by harmony, conformity, accord, or affinity.
esoteric: adj. designed for or understood by the specially initiated alone; private; confidential.
apoplectic: adj. greatly excited or angered.
schadenfreude: ('shaw-den-froi-duh) n. a mischievous, slightly tickling feeling of delight procured by observing another's discomfort.
changeableness: I didn't think this was a word, but as it turns out...it is! It's a noun meaning, "levity; apt to vary; alterable."
prolix: adj. so wordy as to be tiresome; long-winded; using more words than necessary.
apple pie: adj. perfect; in order.
malapropism: (MAL-uh-pro-pism) n. the use of a word sounding somewhat like the one intended but ludicrously wrong in the context.
trichotillomania: (tri-kuh-ti-luh-ˈmā-nē-uh) n. an abnormal desire to pull out one's hair.
glib: adj. Marked by ease and informality.
chalet: (sha-ˈlā) n. a cottage with overhanging leaves (such as the one in Miss Potter :) )
raraavis: (rer-ə-ˈā-vəs) n. an unusual or extraordinary person or thing; the quality, state, or fact of being rare.
puissance: (PYEW-eh-sense) n. strength; power.
gregarious: (greh-GAR-ious) adj. sociable.
lickspittle: n. one who flatters with the hope of gaining favors; a parasite; toady; a sycophant.
ersatz: (air'-sahtz) adj. being a usually artificial and inferior substitute or imitation.
mordant:(mor'-dent) adj. penetrating; sarcastic
unpalatable: (un-pa'lat-able) adj. disagreeable; unpleasant.
impervious: (im-per'-vee-ous) adj. not capable of being affected or disturbed; impenetrable.
proclivity: (pro-KLIV-ity) n. an inclination or predisposition toward something; especially : a strong inherent inclination toward something objectionable.
inure:(in-yoor') tr. v. to accustom to accept something undesirable
obtuse:(ub-TOO-se) adj. dull; non-stimulating (as of a person or a conversation); lacking sharpness or quickness of sensibility or intellect: insensitive, stupid.
obsequious: (ub-SEE-kwee-ous) adj. subservient.
rigmarole: (ri’-gə-mə-rōl) n. confused or meaningless talk.
plucky: adj. spirited; brave.
sesquipedalian: (ses-kwə-pə-ˈdāl-yən) adj. using long words
glitterati: (gli-tuh-RAH-tee) n. pl. beautiful people; celebrities.
dumpy: adj. being short and thick in build; squat.
steatopygia: (stē-a-tə-ˈpi-j(ē-)ə) n. an excessive development of fat on the buttocks that occurs chiefly among women of some African peoples
emunctory: (i-mung-tuh-ree) n. related to nose blowing.
confabulate: (kon-FAB-yoo-late) adj. to chat
gratuitous: (gruh-TOO-i-tous) adj. given freely
pleonasm: (PLEE-uh-na-zem) the use of more words than those necessary to denote mere sense; redundancy.
banausic: (buh-naw'-sic) adj. dully mechanical, purely functional or materialistic.
sobriquet: (ˈsō-bri-ˌkā) n. a nickname
polemical: adj. controversial
blasé: (blah-zay) adj. bored; apathetic to pleasure or excitement as a result of excessive indulgence or enjoyment
zephyr: (zeh-fer) n. a gentle breeze.
argent: n. silver in color (the argent moon)
lurid: (loor-id) adj. causing horror or revulsion; gruesome; shocking; ghastly.
punctilious: adj. careful
glitterati: (gli-tuh-RAH-tee) n. pl. beautiful people; celebrities.
coup d'etat: (KOO-de-tah) n. the sudden overthrow of a government by a usually small group of people in or previously in positions of authority.
fauz pas: (foh-pAH) n. a social blunder.
corpulent:(KOR-pyoo-lent) adj. having a large, bulky body; obese. .
quixotic: (quix-ah'-tik) adj. marked by rash lofty romantic ideas or extravagantly chivalrous action; capricious; unpredictable.
swagger: (intransitive verb) to conduct oneself in an arrogant or superciliously pompous manner
defenestrate: (di-FEN-istrate) v. to throw a person or a thing out of a window.
mealymouthed: adj. not plain or straightforward; devious. (Hilary Clinton is a mealymouthed politician)
lemming: (pronounced as-is) n. a rodent; a despicable person.
rheum: (room) n. tears
goober: n. a peanut.
rime: (rhyme) n. morning frost
prevaricate: (pre-var-i-kate) v. to lie; to tell a falsehood.
scuttlebutt: (skuh'-dull-but) n. a rumor; gossip.
chimera: (ki-mer-uh) n. an impossible or foolish fancy; an illusion or fabrication of the mind; it can also be a fire-breathing she-monster in Greek mythology that has the head of a lion, a goat's body, and a snake's tail.
languid: (lang'-wid) adj. lacking force or quickness of movement; listless; sluggish as if from exhaustion; weak.
impalpable: (im-PAL-pa-ble) adj. incapable of being felt by touch; intangible
demure: (di-myur') adj. reserved; modest.
placate: (ˈplā-ˌkāt) v. to soothe or mollify especially by concessions; to appease; to pacify.
banausic: (bah-NO-sik) adj. merely mechanical; routine
doppleganger: (dä-pəl-ˌgaŋ-ər) n. a ghostly counterpart of a living person; a person who has the same name as another.
vicissitudes: (və-ˈsi-sə-ˌtüd) n. the quality or state of being changeable; mutability
logorrhea: (log-ah-REE-ah)n. excessive, incoherent talkativeness.
alexithymia :(ah-lek-sah-THI-mee-ah) n. the inability to describe emotions in a verbal manner.
viridescent: (vir-ə-ˈde-sənt) adj. slightly green; greenish.
acrimonious: (a-krə-ˈmō-nē-əs) adj. caustic, biting, or rancorous especially in feeling, language, or manner.
sardonic: (sär-ˈdä-nik) adj. disdainfully or skeptically humorous; derisively mocking; sarcastic.
implacable: (im-ˈpla-kə-bəl) adj. not capable of being appeased, significantly changed, or mitigated.
panacea: (pa-nə-ˈsē-ə) n. a remedy for all ills or difficulties; a cure-all.
haecceity: (hek-see'i-tee) n. the essence that makes something the kind of thing that it is and different from any other; a term used to express individuality or singleness; most literally, this-ness.
rhinotillexomaniac: (rino-til-ex'-o-maniac) n. someone who compulsively picks their nose.
superfluous: (soȯ-ˈpər-flü-əs) adj. exceeding what is sufficient or necessary; marked by wastefulness or extravagance; unnecessary.
cornucopia: (kor-ne-co'-pee-uh): n. an inexhaustible store; abundance.
insouciance: (in-soo'-sients) n. lighthearted unconcern; nonchalance.
squirrel: v. to store away for future use; to save for later.
preprandial: adj. suitable for the time just before dinner (ex: a preprandial drink)
recondite: adj. difficult to comprehend or understand; hidden from sight; concealed (ex: a recondite subject)
raconteur: (ra-kahn-ter) n. a person who is clever at telling stories.
repartee: (re-pər-ˈtē) n. a quick, witty reply or conversation.
bumptious: adj. presumptuously, obtusely, and often noisily self-assertive; obtrusive
arcane: adj. secret
metanoia: n. a transformative change of heart; a spiritual conversion.
maladroit: adj. clumsy
niggling: adj. petty; bothersome or persistent especially in a petty or tiresome way
ilk: n. of the same kind
bric a brac: n. a miscellaneous collection of small articles commonly of ornamental or sentimental value; trinkets.
mendacity: n. the quality or state of being untruthful; a lie.
veneer: n. a superficial or deceptively attractive appearance, display, or effect.
fin: n. (slang) a five dollar bill.
extemporaneous: adj. makeshift; produced on the spur of the moment.
platitude: n. the quality or state of being dull or insipid.
rapport: n. marked by harmony, conformity, accord, or affinity.
esoteric: adj. designed for or understood by the specially initiated alone; private; confidential.
apoplectic: adj. greatly excited or angered.
schadenfreude: ('shaw-den-froi-duh) n. a mischievous, slightly tickling feeling of delight procured by observing another's discomfort.
changeableness: I didn't think this was a word, but as it turns out...it is! It's a noun meaning, "levity; apt to vary; alterable."
prolix: adj. so wordy as to be tiresome; long-winded; using more words than necessary.
apple pie: adj. perfect; in order.
malapropism: (MAL-uh-pro-pism) n. the use of a word sounding somewhat like the one intended but ludicrously wrong in the context.
trichotillomania: (tri-kuh-ti-luh-ˈmā-nē-uh) n. an abnormal desire to pull out one's hair.
glib: adj. Marked by ease and informality.
chalet: (sha-ˈlā) n. a cottage with overhanging leaves (such as the one in Miss Potter :) )
raraavis: (rer-ə-ˈā-vəs) n. an unusual or extraordinary person or thing; the quality, state, or fact of being rare.
puissance: (PYEW-eh-sense) n. strength; power.
gregarious: (greh-GAR-ious) adj. sociable.
lickspittle: n. one who flatters with the hope of gaining favors; a parasite; toady; a sycophant.
ersatz: (air'-sahtz) adj. being a usually artificial and inferior substitute or imitation.
mordant:(mor'-dent) adj. penetrating; sarcastic
unpalatable: (un-pa'lat-able) adj. disagreeable; unpleasant.
impervious: (im-per'-vee-ous) adj. not capable of being affected or disturbed; impenetrable.
proclivity: (pro-KLIV-ity) n. an inclination or predisposition toward something; especially : a strong inherent inclination toward something objectionable.
inure:(in-yoor') tr. v. to accustom to accept something undesirable
obtuse:(ub-TOO-se) adj. dull; non-stimulating (as of a person or a conversation); lacking sharpness or quickness of sensibility or intellect: insensitive, stupid.
obsequious: (ub-SEE-kwee-ous) adj. subservient.
rigmarole: (ri’-gə-mə-rōl) n. confused or meaningless talk.
plucky: adj. spirited; brave.
sesquipedalian: (ses-kwə-pə-ˈdāl-yən) adj. using long words
glitterati: (gli-tuh-RAH-tee) n. pl. beautiful people; celebrities.
dumpy: adj. being short and thick in build; squat.
steatopygia: (stē-a-tə-ˈpi-j(ē-)ə) n. an excessive development of fat on the buttocks that occurs chiefly among women of some African peoples
emunctory: (i-mung-tuh-ree) n. related to nose blowing.
confabulate: (kon-FAB-yoo-late) adj. to chat
gratuitous: (gruh-TOO-i-tous) adj. given freely
pleonasm: (PLEE-uh-na-zem) the use of more words than those necessary to denote mere sense; redundancy.
banausic: (buh-naw'-sic) adj. dully mechanical, purely functional or materialistic.
sobriquet: (ˈsō-bri-ˌkā) n. a nickname
polemical: adj. controversial
blasé: (blah-zay) adj. bored; apathetic to pleasure or excitement as a result of excessive indulgence or enjoyment
zephyr: (zeh-fer) n. a gentle breeze.
argent: n. silver in color (the argent moon)
lurid: (loor-id) adj. causing horror or revulsion; gruesome; shocking; ghastly.
punctilious: adj. careful
glitterati: (gli-tuh-RAH-tee) n. pl. beautiful people; celebrities.
coup d'etat: (KOO-de-tah) n. the sudden overthrow of a government by a usually small group of people in or previously in positions of authority.
fauz pas: (foh-pAH) n. a social blunder.
corpulent:(KOR-pyoo-lent) adj. having a large, bulky body; obese. .
quixotic: (quix-ah'-tik) adj. marked by rash lofty romantic ideas or extravagantly chivalrous action; capricious; unpredictable.
swagger: (intransitive verb) to conduct oneself in an arrogant or superciliously pompous manner
defenestrate: (di-FEN-istrate) v. to throw a person or a thing out of a window.
mealymouthed: adj. not plain or straightforward; devious. (Hilary Clinton is a mealymouthed politician)
lemming: (pronounced as-is) n. a rodent; a despicable person.
rheum: (room) n. tears
goober: n. a peanut.
rime: (rhyme) n. morning frost
prevaricate: (pre-var-i-kate) v. to lie; to tell a falsehood.
scuttlebutt: (skuh'-dull-but) n. a rumor; gossip.
chimera: (ki-mer-uh) n. an impossible or foolish fancy; an illusion or fabrication of the mind; it can also be a fire-breathing she-monster in Greek mythology that has the head of a lion, a goat's body, and a snake's tail.
languid: (lang'-wid) adj. lacking force or quickness of movement; listless; sluggish as if from exhaustion; weak.
impalpable: (im-PAL-pa-ble) adj. incapable of being felt by touch; intangible
demure: (di-myur') adj. reserved; modest.
placate: (ˈplā-ˌkāt) v. to soothe or mollify especially by concessions; to appease; to pacify.
banausic: (bah-NO-sik) adj. merely mechanical; routine
doppleganger: (dä-pəl-ˌgaŋ-ər) n. a ghostly counterpart of a living person; a person who has the same name as another.
vicissitudes: (və-ˈsi-sə-ˌtüd) n. the quality or state of being changeable; mutability
logorrhea: (log-ah-REE-ah)n. excessive, incoherent talkativeness.
alexithymia :(ah-lek-sah-THI-mee-ah) n. the inability to describe emotions in a verbal manner.
viridescent: (vir-ə-ˈde-sənt) adj. slightly green; greenish.
acrimonious: (a-krə-ˈmō-nē-əs) adj. caustic, biting, or rancorous especially in feeling, language, or manner.
sardonic: (sär-ˈdä-nik) adj. disdainfully or skeptically humorous; derisively mocking; sarcastic.
implacable: (im-ˈpla-kə-bəl) adj. not capable of being appeased, significantly changed, or mitigated.
panacea: (pa-nə-ˈsē-ə) n. a remedy for all ills or difficulties; a cure-all.
haecceity: (hek-see'i-tee) n. the essence that makes something the kind of thing that it is and different from any other; a term used to express individuality or singleness; most literally, this-ness.
rhinotillexomaniac: (rino-til-ex'-o-maniac) n. someone who compulsively picks their nose.
superfluous: (soȯ-ˈpər-flü-əs) adj. exceeding what is sufficient or necessary; marked by wastefulness or extravagance; unnecessary.
cornucopia: (kor-ne-co'-pee-uh): n. an inexhaustible store; abundance.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
'09 Resolutions
1-Be more spontaneous
2-Take risks
3-Worry less. Trust God more.
4-Be more thoughtful
5-Learn to Latin dance (maybe take a class?)
6-Begin sketching again
7-Laugh more
8-Visit Sarah in Trinidad
9-Improve my vocabulary
10-Take myself less seriously
11-Go on an adventure
12-Watch the entire fourth season of House
13-Pay close attention to details
14-Become a better sibling/daughter/friend/person in general...
15-Stop biting my nails
16-Pick up a basketball more frequently
17-Be less self-critical
18-Continue spinning
19-Finish my memoir
20-Live
2-Take risks
3-Worry less. Trust God more.
4-Be more thoughtful
5-Learn to Latin dance (maybe take a class?)
6-Begin sketching again
7-Laugh more
8-Visit Sarah in Trinidad
9-Improve my vocabulary
10-Take myself less seriously
11-Go on an adventure
12-Watch the entire fourth season of House
13-Pay close attention to details
14-Become a better sibling/daughter/friend/person in general...
15-Stop biting my nails
16-Pick up a basketball more frequently
17-Be less self-critical
18-Continue spinning
19-Finish my memoir
20-Live
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
