What I really worry about in the current situation
SignOn San Diego, the San Diego Union Tribune website, is reporting this morning that an SDSU student is suspected of having the swine flu. What concerns me is not that the student might have gone to my gym or perhaps even played basketball outside of my house last week. What concerns me is the seething outward racism and hatred aimed at Hispanics in the comments section of this and other related articles. For the record, these types of comments are ubiquitous on this particular website. But the swine flu causes me to worry a great deal about race relations. Here is a sampling of thoughts from people that live in my community (I do hope they’re outliers):
Does anyone think there will be mass marches of Illegal Aliens from Mexico in the streets this friday? After all it is May 1 (May day). This has traditionaly been the day of large public gatherings of illegal Aliens demanding rights in this country. How about free health care? Did you know that health care is socialized in mexico?
and
IF THE ILLEGAL ALIENS FROM MEXICO KNOW WHAT IS GOOD FOR THIER CAUSE, THEY WILL CRAWL UNDER A ROCK AND HIDE THIS FRIDAY.
and
Mass public gathering of Illegal Aliens from Mexico. Mass groups of Illegal Aliens demanding rights, all while waving the Flag of Mexico and other foreign countries. This Friday is May 1. I DON’T THINK SO. NOT THIS YEAR.
And…I just received this from a friend who’s a high school counselor in Texas:
“Today a friend of mine who works in another district has been receiving phone calls, emails and hand written notes from parents requesting their kid not be allowed to sit next to a Hispanic – in class, in testing, in the cafeteria, on the bus.”
Can we all just take a deep breath or is that simply too dangerous at this juncture?
I’m beginning to think I’m the only one left on the planet who isn’t completely engulfed in panic over The New Flu Pandemic. Don’t get me wrong: There are things about it that are disconcerting: Like everyone else, I don’t want my kid to get sick and I don’t want to get sick.
Admittedly, when I’ve allowed myself to dwell in that cordoned off yet inventive place within my head, I’ve managed to create a number of dreadful future scenarios that mimic José Saragamo’s Blindness. An all-encompassing outbreak of anything is not something I’d like to experience. Unless that outbreak is people being overwhelmingly kind to each other for no fucking explainable reason whatsoever, in which case, I’d be licking handrails and shopping cart handles and eating my daughter’s dropped raisins off the bathroom floor at the zoo. Which is huge for me because I hate raisins.
CNN ran the following headlines on their website tonight, in this in exact order:
- Specter move puts Dems close to magic number
- Face mask demand surges, but do they work?
- Regular flu has killed thousands in 2009
- Why has swine flu killed only in Mexico?
- Why swine flu scares us
- CNN answers your swine flu FAQs
- At least 4 die in California tour-bus crash
I glanced over this list of fear-inducing headlines and couldn’t help but wonder how many of the four victims of the tour-bus crash spent their last days/hours/minutes/seconds fretting about the Swine Flu. Using all the people I’ve spoken to since Sunday night as a sample size from which to extrapolate data, I’d hypothesize that at least three of the four now-deceased passengers were consumed with worry. My point being, what’s the point?
The way I see it, there really isn’t much we can do about this situation besides wash our hands a lot, stay home if we get sick and not eat mishandled raisins off the damp tile floors of public loos. Oh, and don’t go to Mexico.
Poor Mexico. My heart is breaking for Mexico.
I hope it goes viral
I dare you to be angry while watching this:
Playing For Change | Song Around The World “Stand By Me” from Concord Music Group on Vimeo.
Still a long way to go
The following Newsweek web exclusive was sent to me by a friend this morning. There are photos of the family on the Newsweek website. My heart did leaps and plunges while reading. I related to much of it and am heartsick by parts. I’m still percolating…
**********************************************************************************
Raising Katie
What adopting a white girl taught one black family about race in the Obama era.
by Tony Dokoupil
Several pairs of eyes follow the girl as she pedals around the playground in an affluent suburb of Baltimore. But it isn’t the redheaded fourth grader who seems to have moms and dads of the jungle gym nervous on this recent Saturday morning. It’s the African-American man—six feet tall, bearded and wearing a gray hooded sweatshirt—watching the girl’s every move. Approaching from behind, he grabs the back of her bicycle seat as she wobbles to a stop. “Nice riding,” he says, as the fair-skinned girl turns to him, beaming. “Thanks, Daddy,” she replies. The onlookers are clearly flummoxed.
As a black father and adopted white daughter, Mark Riding and Katie O’Dea-Smith are a sight at best surprising, and at worst so perplexing that people feel compelled to respond. Like the time at a Pocono Mountains flea market when Riding scolded Katie, attracting so many sharp glares that he and his wife, Terri, 37, and also African-American, thought “we might be lynched.” And the time when well-intentioned shoppers followed Mark and Katie out of the mall to make sure she wasn’t being kidnapped. Or when would-be heroes come up to Katie in the cereal aisle and ask, “Are you OK?”—even though Terri is standing right there.
Is it racism? The Ridings tend to think so, and it’s hard to blame them. To shadow them for a day, as I recently did, is to feel the unease, notice the negative attention and realize that the same note of fear isn’t in the air when they attend to their two biological children, who are 2 and 5 years old. It’s fashionable to say that the election of Barack Obama has brought the dawn of a post-racial America. In the past few months alone, The Atlantic Monthly has declared “the end of white America,” The Washington Post has profiled the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People’s struggle for relevance in a changing world, and National Public Radio has led discussions questioning the necessity of the annual Black History Month. Perhaps not surprising, most white and black Americans no longer cite racism as a major social problem, according to recent polls.
But the Ridings’ experience runs counter to these popular notions of harmony. And adoption between races is particularly fraught. So-called transracial adoptions have surged since 1994, when the Multiethnic Placement Act reversed decades of outright racial matching by banning discrimination against adoptive families on the basis of race. But the growth has been all one-sided. The number of white families adopting outside their race is growing and is now in the thousands, while cases like Katie’s—of a black family adopting a nonblack child—remain frozen at near zero.
Decades after the racial integration of offices, buses and water fountains, persistent double standards mean that African-American parents are still largely viewed with unease as caretakers of any children other than their own—or those they are paid to look after. As Yale historian Matthew Frye Jacobson has asked: “Why is it that in the United States, a white woman can have black children but a black woman cannot have white children?”
That question hit home for the Ridings in 2003, when Terri’s mother, Phyllis Smith, agreed to take in Katie, then 3, on a temporary basis. A retired social worker, Phyllis had long been giving needy children a home—and Katie was one of the hardest cases. The child of a local prostitute, her toddler tantrums were so disturbing that foster families simply refused to keep her. Twelve homes later, Katie was still being passed around. Phyllis was in many ways an unlikely savior. The former president of the Baltimore chapter of the National Association of Black Social Workers, she joined her colleagues in condemning the adoption of black children by white families as “cultural genocide”—a position she still holds in theory, if not in practice. She couldn’t say no to the “charming, energetic” girl who ended up on her front doorstep.
Last November, after a grueling adoption process—”[adoption officials] pushed the envelope on every issue,” says Mark—little Irish-Catholic Katie O’Dea, as pale as a communion wafer, became Katie O’Dea-Smith: a formally adopted member of the African-American Riding-Smith family. (Phyllis is her legal guardian, but Mark and Terri were also vetted as legal surrogates for Phyllis.)
To be sure, it’s an unconventional arrangement. Katie spends weekdays with Phyllis, her legal guardian. But Mark and Terri, who live around the corner, are her de facto parents, too. They help out during the week, and welcome Katie over on weekends and holidays. As for titles: Katie calls Phyllis “Mommy” and Terri “Sister,” since technically it’s true. Mark has always been “Daddy” or “Mark.”
“Let me just put it out there,” says Mark, a 38-year-old private-school admissions director with an appealing blend of megaphone voice and fearless opinion, especially when it comes to his family. “I’ve never felt more self-consciously black than while holding our little white girl’s hand in public.” He used to write off the negative attention as innocent curiosity. But after a half-decade of rude comments and revealing faux pas—like the time his school’s guidance counselor called Katie a “foster child” in her presence—he now fights the ignorance with a question of his own: why didn’t a white family step up to take Katie?
Riding’s challenge hints at a persistent social problem. “No country in the world has made more progress toward combating overt racism than [the United States],” says David Schneider, a Rice University psychologist and the author of “The Psychology of Stereotyping.” “But the most popular stereotype of black people is still that they’re violent. And for a lot of people, not even racist people, the sight of a white child with a black parent just sets off alarm signals.”
Part of the reason for the adoptive imbalance comes down to numbers, and the fact that people tend to want children of their own race. African-Americans represent almost one third of the 510,000 children in foster care, so black parents have a relatively high chance of ending up with a same-race child. (Not so for would-be adoptive white parents who prefer the rarest thing of all in the foster-care system: a healthy white baby.) But the dearth of black families with nonblack children also has painful historical roots. Economic hardship and centuries of poisonous belief in the so-called civilizing effects of white culture upon other races have familiarized Americans with the concept of white stewardship of other ethnicities, rather than the reverse.
The result is not only discomfort among whites at the thought of nonwhites raising their offspring; African-Americans can also be wary when one of their own is a parent to a child outside their race. Just ask Dallas Cowboys All-Pro linebacker DeMarcus Ware and his wife, Taniqua, who faced a barrage of criticism after adopting a nonblack baby last February. When The New York Times sports page ran a photo of the shirtless new father with what appeared to be a white baby in his arms (and didn’t mention race in the accompanying story), it sent a slow shock wave through the African-American community, pitting supporters who celebrated the couple’s joy after three painful miscarriages against critics who branded the Wares “self-race-hating individuals” for ignoring the disproportionate number of blacks in foster care. The baby, now their daughter, Marley, is in fact Hispanic. “Do you mean to tell me that the Wares couldn’t have found a little black baby to adopt?” snarled one blogger on the Daily Voice, an online African-American newspaper.
For the relatively few black families that do adopt non-African-American children, and the adoptive children themselves, the experience can be confusing. “I hadn’t realized how often we talked about white people at home,” says Mark. “I hadn’t realized that dinnertime stories were often told with reference to the race of the players, or that I often used racial stereotypes, as in the news only cares about some missing spring-break girl because she is blonde.’”
Katie, too, has sometimes struggled with her unusual situation, and how outsiders perceive it. When she’s not drawing, swimming or pining after teen heartthrob Zac Efron, she’s often dealing with normal kid teasing with a nasty edge. “They’ll ignore me or yell at me because I have a black family,” she says. Most of her friends are black, although her school is primarily white. And Terri has noticed something else: Katie is uncomfortable identifying people by their race.
Is she racially confused? Should her parents be worried? Opinions vary in the larger debate about whether race is a legitimate consideration in adoption. At present, agencies that receive public funding are forbidden from taking race into account when screening potential parents. They are also banned from asking parents to reflect on their readiness to deal with race-related issues, or from requiring them to undergo sensitivity training. But a well-meaning policy intended to ensure colorblindness appears to be backfiring. According to a study published last year by the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, transracial parents are often ill equipped to raise children who are themselves unprepared for the world’s racial realities.
Now lawmakers may rejoin the charged race-adoption debate. Later this year the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, an independent federal think tank, is expected to publish a summary of expert testimony on adoption law—much of which will ask Congress to reinstate race as a salient consideration in all cases. The testimony, from the Evan B. Donaldson institute and others, will also suggest initiatives currently banned or poorly executed under existing policies, including racial training for parents and intensifying efforts to recruit more black adoptive families.
Would such measures be a step back for Obama’s post-racial America? It’s hard to tell. The Ridings, for their part, are taking Katie’s racial training into their own hands. They send her to a mixed-race school, and mixed-race summer camps, celebrate St. Patrick’s Day with gusto and buy Irish knickknacks, like a “Kiss Me I’m Irish” T shirt and a mug with Katie’s O’Dea family crest emblazoned on it. But they worry it won’t be enough. “All else being equal, I think she should be with people who look like her,” says Mark. “It’s not fair that she’s got to grow up feeling different when she’s going to feel different anyway. She wears glasses, her voice is a bit squeaky, and on top of that she has to deal with the fact that her mother is 70 and black.”
But even if Katie feels different now, the Riding-Smiths have given her both a stable home and a familiarity with two ethnic worlds that will surely serve her well as she grows up in a country that is increasingly blended. And it may be that hers will be the first truly post-racial generation.
And P.S.
“My girlfriend…she sometimes claims I’m racist, so we have this running joke where if I meet a black person…whether that’s on the basketball court or at a party, I say “Hey…I have a new black friend, I can’t be racist.” -Josh Board, San Diego Weekly Reader, April 8, 2009
Hahahaha! Isn’t that funny? Hahahahaha. Haha. Ha.
(And no, I’m not providing links because Board doesn’t deserve the traffic. I know those of you who might be interested are savvy enough to find what you need.)
The San Diego Reader endorses racism
Josh Board is a writer (if he can be called that) for The Reader, another local San Diego paper. He sent me some fan mail earlier this month saying he thought I was a great addition to CityBeat. We chatted back and forth for a minute, during which time I politely outed myself as a vehement critic of a particular piece he’d written in March. He didn’t seem too phased and continued to compliment my writing and also commented on my “cute kid” (he must have looked at the pics here). He subsequently referred to Ruby as “him” and “he” but it doesn’t much matter as it all seems completely disingenuous now.
Yesterday, on the blog he writes for The Reader, Board attacked a recent CityBeat editorial. He then sent a link to our editor, Dave Rolland, who sent it to a number of the CB writers. I, of course, responded to everyone in the string, calling Board out on his nonsensical, racist diatribe (I have called him on his sexism before, too) and his complete lack of ability to weave coherent sentences together. Then I suggested that he educate himself about racism by reading Why Are All The Black Kids Sitting Together In The Cafeteria?, by Beverly Daniel Tatum. He had some suggestions for me, too, in an email that he removed from the string and sent only to me:
You should try finding (or writing) a book about why black kids sit in cars, with their stereos blasting, as if they think everyone else wants to hear 50 Cent. Or, why they sit in movie theatres making noise, talking on cell phones or at the screen, as if they are Chris Rock.
I’m sure you’ll get to deal with all that fun, when your little one grows up.

(read Freakanomics, they talk about how adopted kids are never as smart…because they get the intelligence from the folks that gave them up).
So, good luck with that.
Geez, now that I think about it, it’s probably good you couldn’t have kids. It’s one less idiot that has your genes in this world.
J
This man is employed by The Reader.
Please consider this the next time you pick up the publication.
What not to wear: Michelle Obama must stay the fashion course
I love Vera Wang. As I type this, I’m wearing a silver-white, floor-length nightgown by the designer, an impulse purchase made a few years back (it was on sale!). It’s got a smidgen of black-lace piping at the bodice and shoulder straps nearly as thin as dental floss. It’s simple and elegant and doesn’t make any noise when I slip out of it and let it drop to the floor—which I might have to do soon because I’m pissed at Wang. It’s why I recently decided to pair my gorgeous nightie with my husband’s hideous UGG slippers.
Earlier this month, as Michelle Obama toured Europe in garb designed by various no-names, mixed with pieces from the J. Crew Collection, Wang joined the voices of elite designers whining about being snubbed by the magnetic first lady.
“I love seeing young designers and their vision and how they grow and all of that,” Wang said in an April 2 story in Women’s Wear Daily, as if it’s so quaint to be an up-and-comer. “On the other hand, of course, I wish she would consider some of us, because I think we also have contributions to make.”
In the same story, Oscar de la Renta—a Laura Bush favorite—practically swooned with the vapors when Obama wore a sweater to meet the queen. “You don’t… go to Buckingham Palace in a sweater.” Oy! The nerve of a girl with working-class roots who dares to wear some anonymously stitched schmatte.
With her WWD article, writer Bridget Foley provides these upper-echelon designers with a bullhorn and a runway-shaped pulpit from which to air their grievances.
“I hope and believe that this is just a moment,” offers Donna Karan. The successful designer hopes “to be able to dress her, and not only dress her but address her, sit down—I’m interested in her totality as a woman.” Obviously, Michelle choosing the clothes of more obscure, struggling designers doesn’t already exemplify her totality-ness.
Foley’s piece is accompanied by an image of a model in Ralph Lauren, with Michelle Obama’s head Photoshopped onto it, illustrating how much better the FLOTUS would look if only she had the expert guidance of the establishment. And no hips. And a size zero waist. And skinny white legs.
The article highlights the elitism of both the already-arrived designers and the fashion industry. I heard the author’s voice in my head as a faux Hepburn-style drawl pointing out that Mrs. Obama could—nay, should—help the ailing fashion industry, which is in crisis “[l]ike the auto and financial industries.” Isn’t that sublime?
Rather than opting for clothes by unknown designers like Jason Wu and Isabel Toledo, Foley sneers, Obama should choose “major players—those whose collective vicissitudes play into the economy in a considerable way and whose individual swings of fortune impact the lives of countless working people up and down the supply chain.”
Anyway, if she can’t knock it off with the altruism toward unknown artists, she could at least support the GOP proposal of sweeping tax cuts for the wealthy. Surely this gesture would show her compassion for the most prestigious of the rebuffed industry folks, people like “Ralph, Calvin, Oscar, Marc, Vera, Tommy and Isaac.” I admit it: I had the urge to thwack the writer upside her Hérmes-wrapped, first-name-dropping head with my Mizrahi-for-Target hobo bag.
Citing the almost immediate sell-out of the beaded J.Crew cardigan Obama wore in London, Foley asked, “might not a chic sighting of the First Lady in Ralph Lauren or Donna Karan prod some women to stroll through Saks Fifth Avenue or Neiman Marcus?” Some women? Mmm-hmm. But not the everyday woman, and that, I think, is Obama’s point.
Foley lives in a parallel universe if she thinks the women who wander the halls of Saks or Neiman are going to be what saves the “ailing” industry. The fact of the matter is more women can afford J. Crew (and knockoffs) than the alternative, and many of those who can afford designer labels are opting for the cheaper options if only because it’s hip to be thrifty. What the author seems to not understand is that Michelle Obama is practicing what she preaches. The economy is circling the drain, and Obama’s realism is a salve for working people who can no longer afford (if they ever really could in the first place) the lifestyle that WWD is peddling.
“I think I understand what [Obama and her advisers] are doing,” de la Renta told Foley. “But I don’t think that is the right message at this particular point….” But it’s exactly the right message at this particular point. Americans would surely be making more noise than a few miffed designers if Michelle Obama embraced the expensive and gaudy let-them-eat-cake tastes of Cindy McCain. We rejected the ostentatious, frozen-faced, stiff-haired first lady model last November. Outfits that cost an AIG bonus would not quell the current wave of populist outrage, and Michelle Obama knows this.
What’s more is that her effort is not contrived. Sure, it’s mindful of the times in which we live, but it’s also appropriate for who she is: A strong, independent, risk-taking, fit, sexy, smart, self-confident woman who isn’t afraid to dress like the commoners.
Or get dirty like them. Last Thursday, she appeared covered in dirt in the White House garden. And while Vera Wang might gasp at house slippers worn with one of her negligées, I’d be willing to bet she’d need smelling salts if her $1,100 Sequined Shoulder Tank and $800 Narrow Pants had to withstand earthworm juice.
I hope Obama will ignore the crocodile tears of the fashion-industry heavies and continue to go her own way, showing her awesome arms and supporting the new kids on the block.
(As published today in San Diego CityBeat.)
I told him once that I don’t blog about my friends
Tomorrow morning, while I sleep, my friend Rich is going to kiss his wife goodbye. I imagine he will linger a little longer than usual at the bedside of his (hopefully) sleeping toddler son and the crib of his six month old daughter. Then he will catch a flight to North Carolina where he will spend an uncertain amount of time preparing for a deployment of an uncertain amount of time. My friend Rich is going to Afghanistan.
On Saturday night, Rich and his wife, Diana, had a few friends to their house to say good-bye…
…and while Rich isn’t a hippie, I have to admit I was a little stunned by the new, shorter haircut. I couldn’t help but run my fingers over it when he stepped into the hall to greet me. When I say he’s not a hippie, I mean that only in the physical sense because, really, he’s a hippie with a crew cut. The man ran naked on election night and what could possibly be more hippie than running naked through the streets on election night?
You see, Rich is a tree-hugger extraordinaire. I used to bump into him at the farmer’s market on occasion (before he was hypnotized into thinking the ‘burbs were better than the ‘urbs) and he was always weighted down with organic fruits and veggies. Diana finally put him on a budget because, untethered, he would blow their monthly grocery allowance in one evening. The man has no self control when it comes to being green: He drives a Prius, and he loveslovesLOVES Al Gore. I think he might just have sex with Al Gore if doing so wouldn’t get him kicked out of the Navy. Then again…
Rich is a uniquely special kind of person with an unusual blend of wit and naiveté. He has an unassuming innocence that I always find refreshing and sweet. His hugs are strong and generous and sincere. His eyes shimmer when he smiles and he throws his head back when he laughs, face open to the sky. Rich is wholesome and endlessly positive. All of his sentences end with his voice in an upward lilt. He is the nicest—absolute nicest—guy I have ever met. I’m pretty sure I’m not the only person who feels this way about him. And yet.
He has a mischievous streak that makes him irresistibly endearing. Last summer, he blew my mind when he launched into a spontaneous version of The Aristocrats. I’d never heard Rich say the word “fuck,” much less “pussy.” Certainly, I’d never heard him say those kinds of words as they pertain to a grandmother and a donkey, but use them he did. And those are the G-rated words he used in his storytelling! Rich was a poet that night, a weaver of tales, a builder of imagery. He was very, very naughty and, well…I do like my friends a little naughty.
He and our friend Steve riffed off one another seamlessly, making the story progressively more absurd and obscene until the group of us listening was practically drooling over ourselves with laughter. Without question, it was the raunchiest joke I’ve ever heard in my life.
Despite intentions, Rich didn’t get around to the joke the other night. The evening was filled with laughter but there were also some tears. Mine came in private moments while reading emails he’d sent home during a deployment to Iraq in 2004.
Diana had placed all of her memorabilia–the scrapbooks, the emails, the pocket guides–out on their coffee table for us to browse. “It’s a different world,” he wrote. “Nothing I really trained for.”
It was all personal, much of it was dark and I feel honored to be included in their lives in such an intimate way. But it was heart-wrenching, to be honest, to have a glimpse into this other side of Rich. It made me worry for him.
This is a new experience for me: I’ve never known anyone in the military. I’ve never gone to a send off. I’ve never had to say such a serious goodbye. Even while they worked to put me and our other friends at ease, I felt awkward at moments and wasn’t really sure what to say to Rich or to Diana. My hope, of course, is the same as I suppose everyone else’s hope is when they send someone they love off to war: That they stay safe, that what they see doesn’t scar them too deeply and that they come home to those of us who love them as quickly as possible.
I want to be his girlfriend
Or his fag hag or whatever.
I just want to chill with this guy.
Hung Up On My Baby from Mike Long on Vimeo.














