July 14 - 05

Hello Everybody!
Here are some ramblings for your reading pleasure.
Tonight our group went to Nav Jiwan Tea Room, at the MCC Ten Thousand Villages store, somewhere out here in America. I am telling you, the food was incredible. There is something sooo good about jasmine in a dish. There were five or six different dishes from different countries: South Africa, Cameroon, Mexico, China, India.... I didn't eat the meat dishes, but the vegetable ones made my taste buds explode.
While bumming around the store, before dinner, looking at $4000.00 rugs and $250.00 chess tables, I actually had a game on one of them with an Ache, Indonesia-bound dude named Matt. He's a really good guy, even though he beat me in chess. We were a couple of minutes late for dinner because I was dying slowly, so when we went in, there was a back-table available. I was glad to have it because it was the low-table deal, where you sit on the big pillows and feel all cultural. After half an hour, though, my quads were burning good. After we sat down, this kid, Hans, came and sat beside me. Imagine that, some nine-year old thinking I'm cool. He's a really good kid (obviously, he thinks I'm cool). During dinner, conversation went around between the four of us sitting at the table (a South African-bound lady, Valerie, was sitting with us, too). Like always, I brought up music and Matt and I started talking about Wilco. I found that astounding because last week when I was grooving out to the Mermaid Avenue tunes, I remember thinking that I must be the ONLY person at orientation who loves Wilco. matt was telling me that the only Wilco cd he brought was YHF (Yankee Hotel Foxtrot, for all you non-wilco folks).
You might think this story sucks; that it has no point; but HEY, most of my stories have no point. That's why I ramble so much - I spend so much time looking for a point. 'So,' you think to yourself, 'why am I wasting my time reading this'? I don't know. Delete me!~ See if I care!
The point is, Wilco is awesome; and like other "w" bands (www.welkinband.com) you might want to check them out (www.wilcoworld.org).
Earlier today, we did the Meyers-Briggs personality deal and I am an ENFP: an Extroverted, iNtuitive, Feeling, Perceiver. And the thing that encouraged me, was when I was reading the "key" that goes along with it, one strong characteristic is that ENFP's can do anything they set their mind to, regardless of past experience. That meant a lot to me. Preparing to enter a whole new culture and a whole new deal, I have been feeling a little insecure about what could I possibly offer. Heather, my sister-in-law, was very encouraging to me before I left, countering every single one of my self-debasing statements with "You will do great," kind of encouragments. Thank you Heather, I hold your words dear to me, especially when I'm feeling chawbay chawbay ('useless' in phoenetical Nyanga).
So, now that we've weeded out the people who are bored and feel like I wasted their precious time (just like Wilco does, I feel it's important to alienate your audience to find your true "fans"), I've got a really interesting story about our session yesterday afternoon. It was the anti-racism workshop. I don't even know where to begin. Okay, from the start. I'm having a hard time, because I am trying to put things "nicely," so that you readers don't get all offended. Let me begin by saying that it was very difficult to sit through; very frustrating to be a white male, sitting through it; and even more frustrating because I am Canadian (I'll explain, I hope).
The session was three hours long; but the first thing that was told to us by the presenters was that they usually do a two-and-a-half day seminar and that they wouldn't be providing us with any answers or solutions; just a "glimpse of the complexity of the problem." It started out really fascinatingly and gut-wrenching. The two presenters were male and female, middle-aged. The man was black and urban; the woman was a white farm-girl "from around these parts." Conrad, the man, started out by telling us how his son was wrongfully accused and convicted of murder. After spending three years in state prison, the star witness came forward to say that she had lied and fingered an innocent man. We were not given all the ins and outs and what-have-yous; but Conrad told us that the judge threatened to give the woman 14 years in prison for perjury if she changed her testimony. Courageously enough, or maybe to assuage a troubled conscience, she did change her testimony. Conrad's son was taken from state prison and put in county jail, to await the legal proceedings on the new evidence. Two years later, still in county jail, waiting for results, Conrad's son was murdered.
Conrad then proceeded to tell us that he, too, had been framed by the coppers and convicted on trumped up charges when he was a young man. What had been so disconcerting for him was that he believed that because he truly was innocent, the system would prove that, or at least find it out, and justice would be served in his favour. First his experience, then the murder of his son made him "a very angry black man."
Sharon began to speak, telling us statistics and facts about racism and the history of profiling. She went over the MYTHS of the "oids": caucasoid, mongoloid, negroid, autraloid. She told us how these were racist distinctions and that DNA blew these categories away. It would have been nice to have some sources because, as far as I know, National Geographic still refers to these distinctions. She asked us if we knew why blacks played basketball better than whites (generally - sorry to Nash) and whites played hockey better (generally - sorry to Iginla). I remembered what this guy Michael Masse had told me once, about how blacks had extra leg muscles, from the evolutionary wonders of adaptation, etc. and that whites had better joint construction for lateral movements. Sharon said those, too, were racial MYTHS, and completely unfounded. The reason why blacks play basketball better, she said, was because of the availability of it in inner-cities and urban areas. And the reason why Canadian farm boys play hockey better is because it is simply more common for Canadian farm boys to play hockey. Okay, I thought; I am learning new things; this is interesting. I remember talking with KP many times about the genetic divisions, about how Indo-Canadians are caucasoids, sharing the DNA with whities. So, I found it very interesting to see the anti-racist people throwing these distinctions out entirely.
They also threw out the concept of "race." They gave us a history of the exploration of the "unknown world" by the Euros and told us about the measuring, the class definitions, the skin charts, etc. Their overwhelming point was that these explorers were all racist bigots who only had to address the question of the humanity of "people of colour" when people of colour started being Christians. I wanted to ask if all of this "exploration" was totally racist or if it is just as "primitive" as using leeches for medicine, like they did at that time. I was NOT about to ask, though, for several reasons. First, racism is serious business; especially in America. Second, the opening stories kind of set the tone of not questioning anything they were telling us. What I thought was interesting, as well as extremely frustrating was how they kept coming back to how the white person cannot enter into the discussion of healing or reconciliation because they are white. Again, my friend, Anne, (she's as boisterous as me and together we throw them 'Mericans for a real loop) and I wanted to ask why whites couldn't enter in, especially when their point was that "race" distinctions are false and "race" doesn't even exist as a concept. It seemed a little hipocritical.
OKAY, stop calling me a bigot in your head! I am aware of how white America treat(ed) black america, so I realise there are certain tensions. Just hear me out....
Sharon was giving facts about how racist Canada is, too. Now, I have no doubt about the real issues of racism in Canada - but the pair NEVER once mentioned either the Native American Indian or the Canadian First Nations. They only ever talked about white vs. black. So, when Sharon was giving her "facts" about Canada, she said "Canada, in 1792, issued a decree that negroes could be brought as property, into Canada." She also cited "studies" done in Toronto, about how 1 in 10 white kids in school were in the slower classes, but 1 in 5 black kids were. On the break, I went up to Sharon and said this: "I am very much aware that racism is alive and prevalent in Canada - please know that I am not saying it is not a problem there. But facts are facts, and Canada wasn't a country until 1867; so your statistic would be referring to the British Empire." When I told her that the British started the slave trade and ended it, I told her about wee Willy Wilburforce and she hadn't heard of him! I also suggested that the Toronto studies may be as a result of immigration. I remember my friend, Marvin, from Stratford, who was an immigrant from Jamaica and he was put in the slow class because he had a hard time understanding our fast speech, had a difficult time with our pretty advanced educational system. So, I said, it could be because of bigotry, or there could be other factors that the "statistic" does not take into account.
Well, she certainly didn't like that. She told me that I needed to be more sensitive. I told her that I am sensitive to racism, but that racism in Canada takes on different forms than it does in the States; and, for example, Canada has been much crueler and racist to the aboriginal community than that black community, which is all they were talking about. She was so offended and said again that I can't even talk about it because I am not sensitive and, in fact, I do not have the ground knowledge to even discuss this with her. SERIOUSLY FOLKS. So, I told her, politely, that she didn't know me - that she had told us she was a farm girl from these parts; but she had no idea where I was from, what I have seen or experienced, so she might want to listen to me as an equal.
Anne and a fellow Canadian man, Clarke, tried as well to explain to Sharon that although we are not denying racism, it is a different kettle of fish in CAnada - has different manifestations. The three of us, eventually walked away from a square-jawed Sharon and I explained to them the mystery of the pippie. The pippie makes issues so big that to even talk about them is impossible because they are enlightened and we are insensitive. If you've ever met pippies, you know EXACTLY what I mean.
Okay, break over. The next part of the session was talking about the systemic causes and not the individual causes. One example, given by Conrad, was how a bunch of insult-slanging Kluxers aren't nearly as racist as Texaco a couple of years back, who refused to promote people of colour even though they were qualified. A class-action law suit ensued.
When someone brought up systemic solution and wanted to discuss it, the presenters made a very firm point that we are in no place to even discuss with them because we didn't have the groundwork necessary to dialogue with them. We need to just listen to them because we haven't taken the two-and-a-half day course and we don't have a common language, so all we would do is "speak past them." Then they say, "any questions"? Like that makes any sense!
Well, a couple of super sweet Canadian ladies, who didn't know all the ins and outs of being black in America (and why should they) asked questions about political correctedness and how it seems to becoming more difficult to even talk about the issues because people are offended at the words used or not used. As a Canadian, their questioning comments made perfect sense. Julie asked Conrad, "how are we supposed to speak"? Upon which he went into such a tirade about how racist it is to worry about the words! Talk about confusion! First they say we don't have the common language, so we can't even talk to them about it - then they get mad when asked how we should address it. Being the sensitive dude that I am, and liking Julie and Eve very much I attempted to clarify to Conrad what they meant. He was very rude and made a melodramatic point of shaking my hand and saying "I don't say, 'hey white guy,' so why would you call me black"? I was pretty annoyed and not ready to back down.
First off, he does say "white guy" like crazy. He made SO many racist jokes about whites and blacks, et al. but because he's black, it's fine. As a white person, I can't say anything to him. Anne tried to come to my rescue by saying that she feels like her hands are tied because she's white. She said she has experienced systemic discrimination because she's female, so does that give her some leeway to enter the forum? She then said that she feels bad for white men because no matter what, we're wrong. Conrad wasn't done with me, yet and was going off about how I cannot individually respond because there is not a systemic change happening, so my individuality is useless.
Well, as Paul Simon says, "I've got that ace in the hole." I looked him straight in the eye and said "I don't want to be part of your systemic change because I'm canadian and so are these three women and we want to be a part of the systemic change in Canada. I am here to learn and ask questions, which you keep getting offended over - but I'm CANADIAN and don't share the same issues. So, yes, I can speak, I can offer my perspective and I can ask for others because I don't even want to be a part of change in America." Then I said to everyone in the room, "I DON'T EVEN CARE ABOUT AMERICA; IF ANYTHING I SHOULD CARE ABOUT CANADA. I CANNOT BE APART OF SYSTEMIC CHANGE, SO BECAUSE I'M WHITE, DON'T LUMP ME IN WITH THE REST OF WHITE AMERICA. IT DOESN'T APPLY!"
You know that pissed him off in a whole new way. Listen my dear readers, I am not trying to be a prick or cause problems or be a bigot. here's the deal: I am totally judged and assumptions were made of me and each of the three women because we're white. They assumed we were American and assumed we were totally incapable of carrying on a conversation about systemic racism. I'm not calling all of America ignorant - it's not about that; but I have noticed that Canadians are pretty up on our knowledge of general things. In fact it was me who told the group about Jim Crow laws when we were brainstorming about racism key-words- some of the Americans didn't know and heard it from ME!
Anyway, for the next half-hour there was TENSION and defensive talk, where we Canadians were trying to express that racism is real in Canada but different, and the presenters kept telling us that we can't even talk about it because "we don't have the background."
So, then, I was really interested in this dude's perspective about Dave Chappelle. So, I mustered up the words, "What do you think of what Dave Chappelle is doing"? Okay, a bomb went off in this dude's head. He said that I was unwittingly racist for even asking the question. He said "do you know what bothers me about white people? They watch Dave Chappelle, think it's funny, then think they can laugh." I was not intimidated by him, although I was totally frustrated. What I thought was interesting was the only ones asking questions and attempting to enter dialogue were Canadians. The Americans just sat there, looking straight ahead, not saying boo.
Let me get this straight. Race doesn't exist. But I'm white, so I cannot enter into the dialogue. And because I'm white I cannot watch Dave Chappelle. But race doesn't exist.
It makes me think of Ephesians 3. Jesus Messiah broke the dividing wall and made Jews and Gentiles one. Jesus gave us ACCESS together. But this anti-racism session was so busy making the problem so big and complex that they made the problem insurrmountable.
Finally, this guy from Paraguay, named Korny, put up his hand and said "all we've been talking about for the past two-and-a-half hours is the problem. Can you offer us any solutions?" Conrad and Sharon were still all ruffled and upset and said that they weren't here to offer any solutions, just to explain a "glimpse" of the problem. Then good ol' Korny, in his total Low-German accent, said, "Well, can you offer us a 'glimpse' of the solution"? At that point, Conrad stormed over to the flip chart and pointed at the words 'systemic problems' and said that the solution is "individual change plus sytemic change equals the solution."
Oh, so now individuals do have a voice and do matter. Just not white people?
In Canada, or at least in BC, I have come to recognise the pattern that it is uncool to bitch unredemptively. So, I found it very hard to be continually blasted with how the white man is a sonofabitch but there was no redemptiveness at all. I REALISE THAT RACISM IS HUGE AND COMPLEX AND CANNOT BE SOLVED IN A THREE-HOUR SESSION. IF YOU ARE CAUGHT UP IN THAT, THEN YOU ARE MISUNDERSTANDING ME. What I am saying is that as Canadians, we can learn principles to take with us; but
My friend Anne, looking over my shoulder wants to add that in that room, there was a movement of the Spirit, which was present and there were a number of people (mostly internationals), who were ready to take the issue deeper and really learn and interact; but this movement was stopped dead in its tracks because the presenters could not stray from their own agenda. Anne believes that the presenter, Conrad, has been so deeply hurt in his experience of racism, that he's not ready to really talk about it with white people. A number of people of colour approached both Anne and I after the session and thanked us for our input. Mari, an hispanic lady said sorry to me (Darren) afterwards. When I asked her why she should say that, she responded that she could clearly see the presenters putting up a brick wall and refusing to engage us. It's not Conrad's message, or what he's saying, it's that he believes he would get hurt in an honest discussion. This is not an assumption, they were actually his words, given to Anne, after the session, outside.
He said to Anne, afterwards, he felt that he needed permission to be honest in order to be safe. But Anne wanted to be honest also and Conrad, who held the position of authority, being the presenter, had the power to be honest; but refused us the same privilege.
WOW, what a tiring afternoon. When I went to my small group to evaluate and discuss, which we do for most sessions, I was talking with Jerry (the 1963 Birmingham civil rights guy), asking him what he thought, being virtually an expert of anti-racism himself. He said that he usually hates and avoids all kinds of anti-racism seminars and dreaded this one because they get so polemical. Then he said that this was the least polemical session on anti-racism he's been a part of. He said that he felt the presenters were well educated in their topic and knew what they were talking about.
Yes, of course they knew what they were talking about; I just wish they'd have let us enter in and participate. It's really frustrating and draining to be talked at, not with. And to be prejudged MYSELF because I'm white (even though I'm canadian and my skin colour is a moot point when it comes to racism in the UNITED STATES). The very discounting of "race" or "racial categorisation" by the presenters of people of colour was APPLIED to us as white folks. Sure, maybe they tried to piss us all off so that we could feel a taste of what they felt. I just think there's more effective ways to get the point accross.
Bottom line? I don't think that one needs to be filled with knowledge to love. I don't think I need to have a common language to be able to help heal. And I am NOT convinced that the idea of seeking a common language FIRST before entering into dialogue is practical or even possible. The common language is love, forgiveness, compassion; not statistics and loaded terms.
On a lighter note, we were talking about Gender in another session and Anne and I were talking quietly about how gender, these days, goes beyond male and female. There are real-live transgendered and transsexual people; so Anne raised the point that it may be helpful for Christians learning about "gender" to also include discussion about these valid and real humans. The sweet mennonite lady had no idea what to do with that and totally dismissed Anne, which bothered her. You have to understand that Anne and I have the exact same Meyers-Briggs personality and the same enneagram type so you can picture the two of us together! Two times the fun! She turns to me and says "dismissed," rather funnily, then leaned in and said "I'm dying to stand up and say that I am a gay man trapped in a woman's body." Man, I lost it; I started giggling so bad I had to leave the room; I was scared I was going to involuntarily fart!
The two of us together have had so much fun that several Americans have approached some of the other Canadians commenting that were "supposed to be Canadian!" HA HA HA
Well, if you made it this far, then you deserve to hear the words, well done, and I love you (to whom this applies).
D BLOCK OUT