Collective Wisdom Through Racial Fluency

By: Mónica Byrne-Jiménez, Ed. D.

As a Latina always in search of wisdom, the nomination of Judge Sotomayor makes me hopeful, yet bewilders me by the lack of real dialogue about race/ethnicity. I heard Lani Guinier once say that we don't have a language with which to talk about race/ethnicity. The reality that we don't have a vocabulary limits our abilities to speak, hear and learn from each other. It seems we are missing a kind of "racial fluency." An educator for seventeen years, I know what happens when children are not fluent in the academic and social languages of schools. As a country, we need to purposefully develop our racial fluency as an integral part of our future, lest we grow further apart. So what, then, interrupts our attempts at fluency? I am not a scholar in this area, but as a Latina there are things that I have observed and learned that can add to our collective wisdom.

We think Racial Identity is something "Others" do

Those of us who identify ourselves as Latina/o constantly ask, "what does it mean to be Latina/o?" More specifically, "what does it mean to be Latina/o today (as opposed to yesterday or tomorrow)?" or "what does it mean to be Latina/o in this context (as opposed some other place/space)?" These questions encompass phenotype, language, gender, origin, etc. Many think that these questions only pertain to people of color. When I hear politicians question Judge Sotomayor about her "biases" or "temperament," I must ask, "When was the last time you asked yourself 'what does it mean to be a White man today/here'?" The answer, I suspect, is "never." The notion that only people of color have race or ethnicity undermines our ability to communicate with each other. I see the members of the senate judiciary committee and I see seventeen White men (and two White women) who have a defined race AND ethnicity. When the lens of racial identity is used on "others" (only you have race/ethnicity) and not focused inward, then the worldview that is created is half-blind.

We act as if only Racists have Racial Awareness

For many, to be "racially aware" is to be a "racist." Our standard for not being a racist is to be "colorblind." In my experience, "colorblind" is code for "White male." If you act in ways that are like White men or don't disturb White men, then no one will notice your race/ethnicity/gender (this goes for White women, too). If you don't, then you are labeled angry or anti-American or "bitch." I think we are all racially aware but have varying degrees of comfort with that. As if by recognizing difference in race/ethnicity we somehow betray our definitions of fairness or social justice. I am comfortable with being racially aware because I have had to be all my life. Do I think I am a racist, no! But can I act in ways that have racist undertones (based on stereotypes, misunderstandings), of course! To deny that would be a lie and would belittle the importance of racial awareness (mine and others). We feel the need to declare that we are not racists, as if only racists notice race or act on stereotypes and misunderstandings. So when Judge Sotomayor calls herself a "wise Latina" that makes sense to me, not just because I am Latina, but because she can publicly articulate her identity and its meaning.

Race relations are not a Zero-Sum Game

Early in my college experience I realized that the administration wanted us to think that if they "gave" us something they would have to "take it away" from someone else. So different groups were wary of each other and rarely thought to question the underlying equation. Those who seek to maintain the status quo frame complex issues as "either/or," "us/them" without recognizing (at least publicly) that, rarely, is anything that clear cut. By saying that she is a "wise Latina" who sees things from a different perspective, detractors of Judge Sotomayor would have us think that she must therefore hate all things "White" (recent vitriol against President Obama makes the same claim). Even though her decisions on the bench demonstrate otherwise, in the mind of some you "either do or you don't," as if context and time did not matter. By simplifying race relations into this false dichotomy, any chance of honest, open dialogue gets effectively quashed. Magnifying our fears and stereotypes, makes it easier to see any attempt at equity as taking something from "me" and giving it to "them." Yet, providing equal opportunity for some who have not had it, does not take opportunity away from others. Providing quality education and healthcare for some who have not had access before, does not create bad schools or hospitals for others. Being proud of your past, does not mean you cannot contribute to a common and better future.

As I prepared this, I am struck by the thought: what happens if this essay is ever taken out of context? Can this be used against me someday as proof of my racist/racialized agenda? What is the risk for me as a Latina scholar in a mostly White, mostly male field? I don't know. But I do know that the benefit of contributing to efforts to achieve racial fluency is well worth the risk.