by
Mark Horne
It was a fascinating thing to behold when on Saturday President Obama spoke somberly before the press (full transcript
here) on the George Zimmerman ruling--what he called the Trayvon Martin ruling, but I'll forgive him. The highlights:
“[W]hen you think about why, in the African- American community at least, there’s a lot of pain around what happened here, I think it’s important to recognize that the
African-American community is looking at this issue through a set of
experiences and a history that . . . doesn’t go away.”
I wonder why it doesn’t go away. Today, sixty years after the
Cambodian Communists, the Khmer Rouge, executed everybody with glasses,
there are no glasses-rights public figures in Cambodia stoking the
embers of this tragedy among the bespectacled in an effort to
keep the troubles.
Today, Cambodians with glasses aren't resentful because they don't have
"leaders" like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Barack Obama to tell
them that they're still in danger.
“There are very few African-American men
in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when
they were shopping in a department store.”
So?
“And there are very few African-American
men who haven’t had the experience of walking across the street and
hearing the locks click on the doors of cars.”
So?
“There are very few African-Americans who
haven’t had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman
clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a
chance to get off.”
I must contest this one. I doubt very much that most blacks have
experienced this. Most blacks, let alone people in general, waiting for a
slow-moving elevator are not looking to commit a crime while in said
elevator. In addition, you will find more black people in suit and tie
in environs where there are elevators, such as office buildings, than
you will just walking around the city. Nobody is afraid of a seriously
dressed black person. But if the black person in the elevator is dressed
like, oh, a Trayvon Martin-type figure, what would be the problem with
holding tight to one's valuables? Are women supposed to live in fear of
being another statistic--or, more exactly, the victim of a statistic?
Are women supposed to take the risk of being robbed in order that a
pants-sagging black kid doesn't get his feelings hurt? As President
Obama himself acknowledged on Saturday with uncharacteristic candor:
“. . . African-American young men are
disproportionately involved in the criminal justice system [and] are
disproportionately . . .perpetrators of violence. . . . [T]here are
these statistics out there that show that African-American boys are more
violent . . . .”
Well then which is the bigger problem: white people cautious of a
well-established pattern, or black people being offended that whites
have the temerity to notice it?
We can expand the view of crimes, though, and, ignoring race, find
that most criminals, particularly muggers, are male, and that most of
their victims are female. Given this, should any man be offended if a
woman is extra cautious around him? My mother locks the doors in her car
when a man of
any race walks by as she’s sitting in it, and I'm glad because I'd rather he be offended than she be dead.
Even if that means having to hear the President mope about it on national television.
No comments:
Post a Comment