"We wear Black"

[Salty]

I just came across this - was in the newspaper - on 9 Feb.

"At the UCA of CNY, where i am the first Black president and CEO, we havae joined with other YMCA's around the country to take part in the 'We Wear Black' initiative during Black History Month."


"Under my leadership as National Chair, the Y-USA’s African American Resource Network (AARN) started a movement in 2018 as a response to the societal awakening to systemic racism, imploring all YMCAs to become anti-racist, multicultural organizations that intentionally lead and boldly model diverse and inclusive cultures that impact and strengthen the foundations of our communities. We acknowledge that to dismantle these systems of oppression, we must work in solidarity against all forms of social inequality and oppression.
There is more work ahead and I am excited to see advancement in making the YMCA a more accepting and inclusive place. Join us in solidarity across the country by participating in “We Wear Black” on February 24, 2023, and take a stand against injustice and racism."

There is no doubt in my military mind, that this will be in the news next Feb.

So what are your thoughts?

 

[Bible Thumpin n Gun Totin]

I suppose my thoughts are confused.

Blacks are so oppressed in New York state that they can become the CEO and President of YMCAs?

Hmmm....

 

[Salty]

I suppose my thoughts are confused.

Blacks are so oppressed in New York state that they can become the CEO and President of YMCAs?

Hmmm....

Yea - you are right -
think of how far he could have went if he wasnt .... oh forget it

 

[MrW]

My thoughts are I’m tired of it.

 

[MrW]

I'm looking for "White History Month" and "Red History Month".

I haven't found them.

 

[Baptist Believer]

There is no doubt in my military mind, that this will be in the news next Feb.

I wouldn't count on it, but I hope you are right.

So what are your thoughts?

It's exactly the kind of thing that God's people should support.

Many white people only see ethnic prejudice in individualistic terms (usually involving malice and/or contempt), but fail to recognize systemic oppression since it does not affect them. Historic practices such as redlining and deed restrictions have made it very difficult for African-Americans to obtain generational wealth, since home ownership is usually a means to build a financial legacy for one's children. The massive growth of the middle class after World War II due to favorable mortgage terms offered to returning soldiers largely bypassed African-American veterans since they were not allowed to purchase homes in areas where mortgage companies were willing to invest in home purchases.

My home was built in 1947 in the rapid expanse of Fort Worth immediately after World War II, and the deed has very specific restrictions against African-Americans not only purchasing the home, but staying overnight in the home unless that person was a domestic servant. It was a startling thing to see after I purchased the home. Obviously, that part of the deed has been nullified by federal law since it was written, but it was in force for about the first 20 years of this subdivision's history.

As the Hebrew prophets tell us, God hates injustice and oppression.

 

[Baptist Believer]

I'm looking for "White History Month" and "Red History Month". I haven't found them.

Look at little closer. Society focuses on "white" history in January, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, and December. In February, "white" history shares the month with "black" history.

If, by "red" history, you are referring to First Nation* (aka Native American) history, then we don't focus on it much at all. We should have a First Nations history month.


* The reason my preferred term for the original primary inhabitants of the Americas is First Nations (like the Canadians) is that the original primary inhabitants of the Americas migrated here. They were not a separate creation of God in the Americas.

 

[JonC]

Look at little closer. Society focuses on "white" history in January, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, and December. In February, "white" history shares the month with "black" history.

If, by "red" history, you are referring to First Nation* (aka Native American) history, then we don't focus on it much at all. We should have a First Nations history month.


* The reason my preferred term for the original primary inhabitants of the Americas is First Nations (like the Canadians) is that the original primary inhabitants of the Americas migrated here. They were not a separate creation of God in the Americas.

History is history (it is not race specific, although I do get that for a long time history was presented only from the perspective of the majority).

Anytime we make history subjective to race we devalue that race ("Black History" essentially negates the impact of Black people to history by extracting the race from history as a whole).

Interestingly, we now have an issue of "black washing". I noticed an Egyptian lawyer suing Netflix for their "historical" presentation of Cleopatra. The issue is Netflix used a Black actor than an Egyptian actor (Cleopatra was a Greek Ptolemaic queen).

At first ai thought it silly. BUT think of how this would look if an Egyptian documentary hired a White actor to play MLK.

Now, I know movies are for entertainment purposes. At the same time such media has an impact on our society.

 

[MrW]

Look at little closer. Society focuses on "white" history in January, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, and December. In February, "white" history shares the month with "black" history.

If, by "red" history, you are referring to First Nation* (aka Native American) history, then we don't focus on it much at all. We should have a First Nations history month.


* The reason my preferred term for the original primary inhabitants of the Americas is First Nations (like the Canadians) is that the original primary inhabitants of the Americas migrated here. They were not a separate creation of God in the Americas.

No. All months should be all America's history. Singling out a month for a racial/ethnic group CAUSES DIVISION.

We are supposed to be the UNITED States of America, not the UNTIED States of America. ALL AMERICAN history EVERY month--no black, no red, no white. Rather, ALL. United. Not divided.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

History is history (it is not race specific, although I do get that for a long time history was presented only from the perspective of the majority).

Anytime we make history subjective to race we devalue that race ("Black History" essentially negates the impact of Black people to history by extracting the race from history as a whole).

Interestingly, we now have an issue of "black washing". I noticed an Egyptian lawyer suing Netflix for their "historical" presentation of Cleopatra. The issue is Netflix used a Black actor than an Egyptian actor (Cleopatra was a Greek Ptolemaic queen).

At first ai thought it silly. BUT think of how this would look if an Egyptian documentary hired a White actor to play MLK.

Now, I know movies are for entertainment purposes. At the same time such media has an impact on our society.

This highlights the real problem. Bias is inevitable. Those who imagine they are better because of their race had best go look really hard in “The Mirror,” much harder than they appear (no pun intended).

A black who is a Christian should certainly know better than all of this racist nonsense based on CRT, etc. But I’ve met far too many that just can’t see themselves and their own race for what they are—just as flawed as everyone else on the planet.

 

[Baptist Believer]

History is history (it is not race specific, although I do get that for a long time history was presented only from the perspective of the majority).

Anytime we make history subjective to race we devalue that race ("Black History" essentially negates the impact of Black people to history by extracting the race from history as a whole).

I agree, but having an emphasis on black history is better than what we have had.

No. All months should be all America's history. Singling out a month for a racial/ethnic group CAUSES DIVISION.

We have division before, and much of it was based on bad history that was presented as "America's history." For instance, I was taught the "Lost Cause" approach to history which was a severe distortion of the United States' legacy of enslavement and the causes of the Civil War. It was actually only a few years ago that I read the primary documents and discovered that I had been lied to by my history teachers. Of course, they may not have known they were repeating a lie, so I don't blame them personally.

 

[JonC]

I agree, but having an emphasis on black history is better than what we have had.


We have division before, and much of it was based on bad history that was presented as "America's history." For instance, I was taught the "Lost Cause" approach to history which was a severe distortion of the United States' legacy of enslavement and the causes of the Civil War. It was actually only a few years ago that I read the primary documents and discovered that I had been lied to by my history teachers. Of course, they may not have known they were repeating a lie, so I don't blame them personally.

I would rather have segregated history than history excluding portions because of race.

I never was taught "Just Cause" history but I know what you are talking about. I think the truth is between the "Just Cause" idea and "simply because of slavery".

I read a letter by Robert E Lee condemning slavery, not because it was (in his mind) inhumane or evil but because he concluded that if slavery was to continue it would be the economic downfall of slave states. We were taught in school, however, that Lee was not opposed slavery because he was a Confederate general.

Ulysses S. Grant said he was not an abolitionist, nor was he anti-slavery (Grant owned a slave but freed him prior to the Civil War). Yet we often look at him as an abolitionist because he was a Union general.

History is always more complex than we would like.

 

[Salty]

History is always more complex than we would like.

You just hit the nail on the head!

I contend that we should listen to all three sides

 

[Scarlett O.]

I'm looking for "White History Month" and "Red History Month".

I haven't found them.

I taught several histories [American, Louisiana, and World] for years and years.

TRUST ME - white male history is year round. It's too late to change any of that. Ergo, certain groups have their "month" and that's added to the traditional histories taught.

Red? = Are you speaking of Native Americans?

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

I taught several histories [American, Louisiana, and World] for years and years.

TRUST ME - white male history is year round. It's too late to change any of that. Ergo, certain groups have their "month" and that's added to the traditional histories taught. ...

If we’re going to compare, how about keeping it apples to apples? This is not about teaching in school. This is about making it front and center in the media.

As for school, I go well back and black history was a big part of the curriculum even then. However, it was mostly about slavery, the slave trade, the underground railroad, abolition, emancipation, jim crow.

 

[MrW]

History should be mankind's history, not segregated by races. That's racism, to have different races different months.

My opinion, and I will stay with it.

It causes division, not unity, and division is weakness, but unity is power.

 

[MrW]

"Red" is Native Americans, yes.

 

[MrW]

I agree, but having an emphasis on black history is better than what we have had.


We have division before, and much of it was based on bad history that was presented as "America's history." For instance, I was taught the "Lost Cause" approach to history which was a severe distortion of the United States' legacy of enslavement and the causes of the Civil War. It was actually only a few years ago that I read the primary documents and discovered that I had been lied to by my history teachers. Of course, they may not have known they were repeating a lie, so I don't blame them personally.

We were doing fine before the obamas.

 

[Baptist Believer]

We were doing fine before the obamas.

I don't know who you mean by "we," but the long-held practice of ignoring black history and, especially, white-washing the history and legacy of slavery and discrimination was anything but "fine."

I know that a lot of white people who got very upset that a person of "mixed-ethnicity" became President, since it signaled that white supremacy (white persons always ultimately being in charge*) was losing its cultural hold.

* Many people imagine that "white supremacy" is limited to person contempt to persons of non-white ethnicities, or membership in 'white power' organizations. However, if you are a white person and -- all other things being equal -- would not consider being a member of a church where the pastor is a non-white person, you are a "white supremacist." That doesn't mean you hate anyone, but simply that you don't trust someone who is not white to lead you. You desire a white person in the supreme position of authority.

 

[MrW]

“We” means “Americans, whites and blacks”.

If you truly want to see a mistreated ethnic group, look at the American Indians.

People who love America would have despised obama if he were lily-white. His race/color meant nothing. It was his rhetoric, policies, and actions—same as biden, except white supremacist biden is worse and more despised than obama.

It’s not color—it’s character, rather the lack of it.