To pick up on a theme I alluded to last time, let's start with an excerpt from Part 2.
But perhaps the trickiest aspect to prove out of all of the aspects listed up there is “reasonable fear.†American legal requirements are fraught with these ideas and concepts of what a “reasonable†person would do and feel. The reasonable person standard has evolved over time from being a reasonable white male standard to being a more inclusive reasonable American citizen standard. Historically, the reasonable man standard excluded all women and males of color for a very long time. It excluded people with mental disabilities and children. As the needs and the values of each of these groups integrated into the American social fabric, the concept of what is reasonable to an American citizen has changed slightly. Plus, it’s a bit fearful for any marginalized group to realize that mainstream society — the society that feels almost at home when it’s excluding or ridiculing someone on the margins of opportunity — considers itself a beacon of reasonable progress.
Before I go any further, allow me to share the source of the series title because its implications bothered me then. They still bother me now.
Remember this clip?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3RjiVcIlhY [1]
In the first few seconds, Richards tells African-American hecklers that 50 years ago, he and others would have them upside down with a f**king fork up their asses. And the audience laughs, howls, and cheers -- the same audience that files out of the club moments later when he starts calling the hecklers niggers.
Now pardon me for going very literal in this analysis, but what does it mean when a comedian can and does invoke a rather blatant allusion to lynching, he receives applause; yet when he uses a pejorative associated with the same history of racialized violence and oppression, the audience rebuffs him? You can apply the same interpretive evaluation with the recent Imus situation -- we get this overwhelming understanding from mainstream media that if Imus hadn't called the Rutgers basketball team "nappy headed hos," he'd still have a job. If he'd stuck with "hos," he'd have work. If he'd stayed in line with the analogies of those women -- predominantly black -- to animals, he'd be golden. Never mind the historical significances of such references and the violence perpetrated under its usage -- as a social collective, we as reasonable beings are expected to understand that in the world of humor and cynicism, such offhand references to oppressive conditions of marginalized groups only serve to amuse the general population. Reacting to such off-color jokes as offensive, degrading, or ignorant reveals hypersensitivity, a predisposition to find offense, or most importantly, an unreasonable reaction to the situation. You can argue the same goes for using the word "nigger." Someone rather [in]famously has. [2]
After Kathy Sierra spoke about the threats and the pictures she received, I felt sympathetic with limitations. I could not invest all my outrage into the situation because I'd seen and I'd heard worse threats online, directed towards my blogging counterparts. I'd seen them exposing these threats to light. I'd watch their frustrations when the threats to their wellbeing were greeted with silence. What do you do when you speak against indecency, you speak to counteract fear, and you're met with an accepting silence? [3] What happens if you expose those threats and those menacing you receive solidarity, support, and sympathy? [4] How much more severely damaged will you become when you realize if you cannot animate yourself as the perfect victim, the entire system will turn its back on you? [5] What about when you speak out and you receive inadequate protection? [6]
Will you step up? Will you speak out?
After Kathy Sierra spoke [7] with BBC [8] and the New York Times [9] listening, I fully expected a reaction like the one given by Markos Moulitsas [10] -- The Head Blogger in Charge himself. His reaction hedged on this idea of reasonable and unreasonable fear, and his language made no bones about who sets the standards of who should be afraid, what should frighten them, and why any other type of fear is unwarranted. Irrational. Hysterical. Imaginary. Grounded in fiction. Likely made-up. Shot dead before it could pretend to live.
For my part, I've gotten my fair share of such vile emails. Some of them have threatened my children. One or two actually crossed the line into "death threat" territory. But so what? It's not as if those cowards will actually act on their threats. For better or for worse, this isn't a country in which media figures -- even hugely controversial ones -- are routinely attacked by anything more dangerous than a cream pie.
And with that pronouncement, we sit silenced. Here we have a man (of dubious color) in a powerful position in the blogging world, a position recognized in mainstream media, setting the tone for a response to any fears a blogger may articulate about safety, about being threatened, about continuing to share information in a so-called free marketplace of ideas. It's akin to what people told the Dixie Chicks after they shared their political views with the world and their audiences rebuffed them. Kos imperiously demanded of the white female blogosphere to shut up and blog.
And BFP asks what happens to women of color? Our silence is presumed. You can't order us to shut up if you don't recognize we're speaking. [11] No matter how much we write, no matter how much we say, no matter how well we say it -- if we don't package it to the palate of mainstream society, our silence is presumed. If a woman of color is slighted, no one consults other women of color to receive their perspectives. [12] If we are, it's never out of understanding; it's almost always to ask permission. [13] Often in a hostile way. "So why can they call you hos and we can't?" [14] They can't call us hos; we don't tolerate it from anyone. Especially not you. "Who are those women in their videos, on their album covers, in their bedrooms?" [15] I'm not that woman in those places, and I don't tolerate it. "If you're not a ho, why does it bother you?" Do I even have to answer that question? "Seriously, it doesn't matter. You know we don't mean you. [16] Sticks and stones. No harm, no foul. A bird in the hand -- you know where I'm going with this right? Common sense." Yes, I'm sure all of that makes perfect sense to you. It's always phrased in the manner of "what can we get away with doing to you?" Everything and nothing. Or, should I say: everything coded as nothing. Nothing unreasonable, at least. Oh, and let's not forget this one: "We call you hos for different reasons, so we get a different standard." [17] Are you kidding me?
As a woman of color, I am aware of my race and my sex in every facet of my life. [18] I cannot fight the war of race trumping gender or gender trumping race [19] when it comes to my reality because I face the consequences of race and gender. We live beyond the territories of virtue [20]; any desire for our bodies or our ideas arise from a bestial, animalistic urge deemed perverse to human existence. Preferring our faces, our hair, our culture, and our lives to those belonging to our male counterparts or our white counterparts fight squarely with the hallmarks of reason. As women of color, we face no huge surprise when we shout "fire" in a crowded theater [21] and watch the patrons remain seated [22], opting to withstand the heat. So when I see insults and threats to my existence extolled under free speech, pardon my skepticism of your reason. When I'm told that allusions to my dehumanization throughout history functions merely as humor -- solely as humor -- pardon me if I question your estimation of my fear. Because personally? With a history of rape, abuse, degradation, silencing, marginalizing, and flat-out scorn for women of color? With a knowledge that even as we experience success society can remind us with its icons and its dregs how easily we can be raped, how quickly we can be lynched, how they view us as animals, how much value we lack in the eyes of our oppressors, the oppressed, and even ourselves? It scares the crap out of me. With reason.
[23] | 
[24] | 
[25] | 
[26] | 
[27] | 
[28]