*** TRIGGER***

This piece contains UNCENSORED references to racist, sexist, homophobic and ableist slurs. They by NO MEANS represent my own views, I will be using them to highlight prejudice issues. I apologise in advance, if, like me, these words make you upset or uncomfortable. I feel it’s necessary for me to use them.

There will also be some swearing. But if you’re going to follow this blog, seriously just get the f*** over it.

This week our league dealt with an issue we had completely taken for granted would never occur.

None of us are racists, so of course racism couldn’t happen!..

SCERD is a very inclusive league and I’d say relatively diverse if you looked at race, gender, sexuality, ability (though a couple of those categories have fluctuations where we’re not diverse at all). We pride ourselves on our non-binary definition of “coed”, and tbh racism felt like an irrelevant subject, because we have never seen any evidence of racism.

Until we were reminded, the hard way, that racism doesn’t always directly mean hatred or fear. For me, there are three categories of racism- the initial prejudice, which comes from stereotypes, and leads to discrimination. So they’re often intrinsically linked, but in the case to which I will allude in a moment, sometimes one can be formed entirely without the others.

To most people, the act of a white person’s face being painted black evokes mocking images of minstrels and the general, intellectual and artistic exploitation of black people over centuries. It is the same reason people are uncomfortable about golliwogs. These two examples symbolise, not celebration, but oppression. And here is where “harmless fun”* becomes offensive.

As much as I might genuinely look at golliwog dolls as great little stylised characters with a monochrome aesthetic, I can’t dispute the fact that they and their imagery are borne of the slave trade. To me, they don’t look remotely like black people, but because that is how they were created to mimic the people they symbolise, they are poisonously offensive. How can they be taken any other way? A child’s plaything? Worse, a reminder on your jar of marmalade as to the historic nature of how that sugar was procured?

Just because the object itself does not represent black people to me, I can not ignore the degradation of millions of innocent people behind its history.

And therefore, I will never buy one. If I do, I am selecting which symbols of oppression I think are acceptable. And of course, there are none.

And, in answer to a serious question someone asked, “yes, it is ok” (for the Wayans to “white up” in White Chicks). Because for a start they aren’t doing it to degrade all Caucasians, even though there are mocking elements, but mainly, there is no history of white oppression. THERE SIMPLY ISN’T**. So whilst it might sting a bit if you too have blonde hair, a tiny dog and a shopping addiction, you’re not flashing back images of your ancestors in shackles, being forced into exhaustive labour, violently raped, lynched, with two centuries of laws protecting a group of people’s rights to continue to do those things.

It’s the difference between being heckled at a stand-up gig because of your looks (embarrassing), and being systematically denied every opportunity in life because of your looks (devastating).

So, yes, words and actions hurt. Stereotypes (even historic, “irrelevant” ones, like the physical features of black people depicted in minstrel shows and golliwogs) still inflict pain.

Let’s talk about a related subject, whilst we’re thinking about historic references. Words, and specifically, reclamation.

How do you feel about these words?:

Nigger. Wog. Darky. Paki. Chinky. Fag. Dyke. Spastic.

*shudder*

I’m in a cold sweat just typing them. I am someone for whom throwing out swear words means little. I swear a lot, rarely at people, rarely to deliberately offend, and therefore words like “cunt”, with no link to any particular demographic, to me, don’t represent hatred or irrational fear.

In the case that came up this week, part of the offending article alongside the “blacking up”, was the use of the word “negro” (within a pun, which I’m not going to use).

Our skater, upon hearing that, very rightly, people (of varying ethnicities) were extremely offended, was utterly mortified to have made such an error- there was no intent behind her racist action. Her friend, on the other hand, used it as a chance to #whitesplain (to a black skater, no less) how the word was NOT offensive, and simply meant “black” in Spanish. (Oh, and then to just fuck off if she was offended.) Thank you, racist lady, for telling us all what constitutes racism.

Where in the blue hell do you start with that? So yes, technically, the Spanish word for “black” is “negro”. However, with no other Spanish context, we’re simply talking about a black person (actually, combined with the blackface, a minstrel, specifically). Nobody, NOBODY I know refers to black people as negroes. It is offensive. There is no justification of it. Ignorance is the only forgiveable explanation as to how someone in 2016 can not know that.

Some people from older generations still might use these sorts of terms. Maybe because they simply missed the memo that it’s not acceptable. Most would be mortified to realise they are causing undue upset to people. (Some of course, are simply racist old bastards.)

But let’s get back to the point. Yes, “negro” is a word. Yes, it probably carries less potency than it’s derivative, “nigger/nigga”. However, as a woman of mixed Asian and European descent I still can’t hear these words (or type them) without thinking, “slavery”, “exploitation”, “sex abuse”, “lynching”. That is hurtful enough for someone relatively unconnected to that history. I can only imagine the deep hurt they cause to someone with Afro-Carribean or African ethnicity.

So, what happens when these words are “reclaimed”?

Can a black person say “negro”? Can I say “Paki”? (I’m not remotely Pakistani, but since when did that matter?)

When I listen to NWA using those words, in the direct context of the continued oppression they were experiencing, they are, in my mind, used positively. They are reclaimed as part of the fight for emancipation. When Jay-Z and Kanye are referring to themselves as “N****s in Paris”, then I believe we have a problem. Running around in Paris acting like a misogynistic prick, throwing money around isn’t reclamation of the derogatory terms you’re using; you’re not using those words to highlight the history they represent. All we are seeing is two black people using “niggas” as a synonym for black people. And just because some black people use these words, forgetting what they mean, doesn’t mean most have.

When someone says “Paki” around me, meaning no offence, I might personally take none, even though thirty-odd years ago when I was a baby that

word carried utter vitriol. I cringe when I hear it, no matter who says it, no matter what they’re referring to. Because although I don’t suffer direct racial abuse, for me it means my hardworking and gentle grandfather being broken to tears as his white neighbours flooded his bins and letterboxes with maggots and excrement. Or my mother being subjected to racist bullying as a child. And yet, we (my interracial immediate family) laugh full and unadulteratedly when Sajid runs through the street, into his home yelling “the Pakis are coming” (literally referring to Pakistanis though). Again, for me, there is an element of context. However, the word is still offensive, even with the element of reclamation.

Thank you for sticking with this. Here is the point.

These words hurt people. They can make people feel a spectrum of negative emotions from embarrassment to trauma. They isolate groups of people.

And yet, some people, in this case someone who as a white person can’t have experienced true racism (systemic, not individual), are completely unaware.

So what do we do? A witchhunt? Our skater received actual verbal abuse. There were threats to hurt her should she be met on track. Her child’s photo was shared without her consent, just so others could shame her. This to me is unacceptable. We punish people for making mistakes even after they apologise? Is that how we progress?

F U C K N O.

Our league, after shaking ourselves down from the shock of the incident, received a lot of support from skaters all over the country and around the world, who seemed to appreciate that we wanted to make things right.

So we decided to do some training, periodically, so that in future, every member who becomes part of our league is given education on what constitutes stereotyping, prejudice, discrimination (and harassment, which is already in our behaviour policy). We now have an Inclusion Officer, Rebel Whirl, who has kindly produced a fantastic resource- our “Equality & Diversity Policy”, and she will delivering training to all existing members and quarterly thereafter. We forgave our skater for making a genuine mistake. But it made us realise, THE HARD WAY, that there is work to be done so that good people, who don’t have hate in their hearts, don’t display symbols of hate, even by accident.

** EDIT- yes, as I have been reminded, there is a history of white oppression. I was not unaware of this. However, I think when we’re talking about examples such as the Holocaust, we are still talking about white people as oppressors (with, in this case, white victims). This isn’t an anti-white piece, nor am I claiming status as a historian. I am simply pointing out (IN ONE POINT in the whole piece) that “whiting up” can’t be as offensive as “blacking up” because historically no one was oppressed for being white, by other groups. Persecuted for religious beliefs, yes, oppressed for skin colour, no.

*not my quote!