In our third post of the semester, we will be questioning and dissecting the current defects within American Racial terminology and historical categorization based on minority racial experiences. The struggle of Anti-Blackness is global and comes from individuals from varying racial and ethnic backgrounds and that often includes individuals who are labeled as POC. We will interrogate the current terms and attempt to present a solution, this will be separated into 3 sections labeled and authored by the following, Problem by Rachel Kopniske, Context by A., and Solution by Obie Stillwell.

Problem: To get at the root of the tension between these two terms, we have to look at who they are used by and how they are employed in social contexts. In the racialized world, the term Black is used to refer to the racial category that was imposed on African people at the beginning of European colonization and imperialism. It currently refers to both African people and those of the diaspora. The signifier, Black, carries the meaning of the racial category, which is tied to a history of political struggle. The term person of color (POC) traces its popular use back to the Civil Rights Movement, where it was used by Black activists to tie together the struggles of racialized and colonized people worldwide. Although first used by Black activists, the term POC is largely used by white western people today.

How can this distinction contribute to anti-Blackness? Anti-Blackness pertains to the beliefs and practices that collectively erode the humanity of Black people (Unapologetic by Charlene Carruthers). What does it say that the majority of the people who use the term people of color are NOT people of color? It has something to do with recognition. The term groups together all non-white minorities and is often employed in the discussion of political issues such as police brutality, gentrification, and wealth inequality, which have been shown to impact Black people at disproportionately higher rates than other racial groups. Because of the political and seemingly moral connotations the word Black carries, POC is used as an alternative that allows white people to sidestep the uncomfortable feelings that naming race in a straightforward way brings up. Why not just refer to people as Black? 

Context: Non-Black people conflate being a person of colour with being Black. Historically white supremacists called Black people coloured. This violently anti-Black term was used to solely define Black people by their colour, focusing not on their humanity, but on their race. As a result, Black theorists spoke militantly back to power, declaring themselves people of colour to place the emphasis on being people first. In addition to Black people being deemed coloured people, communities of Asian and indigenous North and South American people have also been called minorities or people of colour. This conflation was heavily popularized by the mobilization of the Chicago chapter of the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense Chairman Hampton’s Rainbow Coalition which worked to unite Black and brown people of colour together to confront the white power structure. Years prior, Black actress and activist, Josephine Baker also theorized that overthrowing white supremacy could be done through people of colour standing as a united front against the white power structure. In fact, she adopted and raised children from different ethnic backgrounds, called the Rainbow Tribe, to accomplish this. She theorized that if children were raised anti-racist, they could tackle white supremacy head on. Although operating as a united front against white supremacy is beneficial, it fails to recognize the very vastly different injustices Black people experience. This results in the conflation of non-Black people of colour pitting their lived experiences with Black peoples’ dehumanization. The injustices non-Black people of colour face pale in comparison to the dehumanization of Black people. Therefore, the experience and identities of non-Black people of colour cannot be conflated with the lived experiences and identities of the Black community.

Solution: It’s interesting that there are so many different variations of “People of Color” v “Black” identifier that bring about variety of emotions from various generations. The response from someone who grew up in the 50s and 60s versus someone who grew up in the 70s and 80s and/or 90s versus those who are experiencing “Blackness” now, varies within the African – American community.

It is significantly different to say, “Colored People” versus “People of Color” we also must be conscious that “Black” or “Blackness” and more specifically Anti-Blackness has had its derogatory identification also. But I believe that from a political standpoint it is important to identify who you are speaking of, who you are speaking for, and whom the policy, law, regulation, or legislation is intended to affirm, progress, or reconcile.

Black people specifically experienced Jim Crow, Segregation and Redlining and these policies were specifically connected to skin color. Today, when many say “People of Color” they are being more inclusive of those individuals who are Bi-racial, Latin X, Asian and of African descent in the past 30 years.

There are still issues today that affect Black people that need to be addressed for Black people. If other racial categories received their “liberation” as a byproduct of “Black liberation;” so be it. But America must be extremely specific when speaking of policies that are to “right the wrongs” of historical Discrimination, Jim Crow and Segregation against Black people. As the wording that proceeds and defines any Legislation must be clear as these words that address the specific disenfranchisement of Blackness; also acts as a healing balm to the wombs of racial discord, in this great country we call America.

With an ever-evolving consciousness we now have a greater understanding of the impact that Black people being the only enslaved ethnic group on American soil has had. A dehumanizing, commercializing and criminalizing ideology of “Blackness” has forced the African American Community to arrest, indict and hold in custody the identifier of “Black” over the identifier of “People of Color”. In a desperate attempt to bring under submission a narrative that has strangled Black progress in America.

So, we as America must continue the plight of re-commercializing, re-defining and re-humanizing both of these terms “Black” and “People of Color” and in doing so, rewrite our own “united” narrative in which we truly begin to judge one another by the content of our character and not the color of our skin.

In our second post of the semester, we will be taking a look at how Anti-Blackness played out in the interview of Miya Ponsetto. Miss Ponsetto falsely accused Keyon Harold Jr, a 14 year old black boy, of stealing her cell phone and proceeded to physically attack him over the false belief. These actions led to her being interviewed on CBS This Morning by Gayle King. Which is what we will interrogate in the ensuing post. First, A. will breakdown exactly what were the concerning issues in the interview. Next, Rachel will provide context so that we can build a full picture of the issue at hand. Finally, we will have a prospective solution provided by Obie.

The Problem:

Ponsetto’s interview with CBS journalist Gayle King profoundly highlights her rampant Anti-Black racism as she vulgarly cuts King off in mid-sentence, attempts to control the direction of the interview and silences King by putting her hand in front of her. These classic outbursts employed by Ponsetto directly demonstrate how she believes she has a right to exercise power over King. As a white woman, she strategically uses her power to speak over top of King-while going to the extent of calling her by her first name. Historically white women have called Black women by their first names in order to belittle them in professional settings. Essentially, this reduces Black women who are professionals to that of amateurs. In Ponsetto’s graphically Anti-Black interview, she purposely calls King by her first name to put her in her place. Ultimately, King faces the wrath of Ponsetto, and the problem is that she is not the only Black woman to have to endure this very same fate at the workplace. In the workforce, countless Black women are subjected to the violence of white women. Worst of all, they are expected, by default, to turn the other cheek. Ponsetto expects the same of King and this expectation plays directly into the humbling of Black women: a phenomenon in which no matter how cruel Black women are treated, they are expected to be the bigger person in the face of injustice.

Context:

The context of this interview begins with the assault on Keyon Harrold Jr. by Miya Ponsetto on the afternoon of December 25th,2021 in a hotel lobby in New York City. Ponsetto had misplaced her phone, asking hotel staff for assistance in finding it. At some point, Ponsetto fixated on Keyon Harrold Jr, a 14 year old boy who was going to have lunch with his father, accusing him of being the one who stole her cell phone and insisting that he show hotel staff his cell phone proving it was not her property. When Keyon dismissed her requests, Ponsetto proceeded to jump on him, attempting to stop him and steal his phone from his hands, and exclaiming she would not let him get away with her phone.

Miya Ponsetto was not initially charged or arrested for the incident and went on to have an interview with Gayle King of CBS This Morning, sharing her stance on the attack with her attorney by her side. This was prior to her arrest on January 8th. In the interview, Gayle King prompts Ponsetto to share her side of the story, knowing viewers had seen the viral video of her assaulting Keyon. She is immediately defensive, dismissing the incident and feelings of both Keyon Harrold Jr. and his father, saying they were unbothered by what happened because they ate a meal afterwards. Ponsetto denies the claim that her actions could have been racist because she is a Puerto Rican woman of color, and says that “her accusation [of Keyon Harold Jr. stealing her phone] is not a crime,” failing to mention at all her attack on Keyon, the crime she was charged with. Her flippant attitude towards the impact of her actions is reflected in how she interacts with Gayle King throughout the interview, often trying to dictate the dialogue, refute and critique the questions Gayle poses, and disrespect her as a professional by cutting her off and challenging her credibility at the end of their interview.

The Solution:

It is always interesting to me that the solution to racially infused problems, issues, and challenges such as these are not hidden in a new or an improved policy, rule, or regulation. But in the consistency of the laws that have already been put in place. The biases that occur are blatant; these biases that occur are to protect whiteness and to promote anti blackness. America still struggles with the language of the constitution and the 14th amendment. This is America’s Achilles heel.  The solution is to enforce the law and enforce equal protection of the law to all people. The fact that Miss Ponsetto was able to walk away from this incident after physically attacking a black young man who was also a minor is disheartening but not surprising. The fact that Miss Ponsetto who as a white woman was able to gather herself, go back home, get proper legal representation and not only that; was able to utilize white privilege to get on national television and attempt to rewrite the narrative. Miss Ponsetto desired to re write a narrative to create a new context and soften the cruelty of her actions, this access and liberty expresses the power of being white in America still in 2021.

We see this time and time again this does not surprise anyone but the solution again I say is enforcement. Enforcement of the law to all people and that means the protection of the law to all people. We can sit back and play blind to this situation, but we who are “woke” all know that if it was this young black boy who attacked Miya Ponsetto unjustly in this same manner; this young man would still be in jail and he would not have received the opportunity to rewrite history on national television.