Now Playing Tracks

gradientlair:

20 Feet From Stardom is a film about the women who weren’t the headliners but supported them with powerful vocals and creativity that help make the songs and the stars who they are. And…I think we can safely surmise that they are usually Black. (Even in this trailer they are). Think of EVERY performance, video, or concert you have viewed/attended. Who are the backup singers? Do you ever notice? I do. Every time.

Unfortunately, this film only plays in select areas in NY/LA from what I’ve seen. Yet another picture that I will have trouble seeing or have to wait for DVD.

afrofuturistaffair:

posttragicmulatto:

Policing Feminism: Regulating the Bodies of Women of Color

5892994892_c0a0935990_z

The decision to feature Beyoncé Knowles-Carter on the cover of the latest issue of Ms. magazine ignited controversy among its feminist readership, and as the author of that cover story I’m not all that surprised. Indeed, my article is precisely about the “debates” over such a high-profile celebrity and sex symbol identifying as a feminist.

Still, what is surprising to me is the level of vitriol and mean-girl over-the-top outrage that accompanied the news of Beyoncé’s cover on the Ms. Facebook page. Whatever one may feel about Beyoncé as a feminist icon, when did it become acceptable to call this married mother of a toddler daughter a “stripper” and a “whore”?

LawI’m the first to admit that Beyoncé’s “fierce feminism” often seems contradictory in its public delivery. But after the heated response to her Ms. cover, I wish I had delved further into our queasiness over her “sexiness.” This isn’t simply a rejection of a sexy-image-as-defined-by-patriarchy: This is in the vein of pearl-clutching, although the opposite of sexiness—modesty—is hardly viewed as women’s salvation since it represents a different policing of women’s bodies.

Indeed, just back in April, when the mostly white Ukraine-based group Femen staged a “Topless Jihad Day” across Europe in solidarity with Tunisian Femen member Amina Tyler (who was penalized for posting topless photos of herself on Facebook), some took that opportunity of “solidarity” to exhibit their Islamophobia by marching topless in immigrant Muslim neighborhoods and demanding their Muslim sisters to “get naked.” Of course this did not sit well with some Muslim women in the West, who responded in kind with their own “Muslimah Pride Day,” reminding non-Muslim women that they don’t need saving nor do they want to discard their hijabs.

So, what’s going on in the sphere of Western feminism? In one area of the world they’re condemning women of color such as Beyoncé for “not covering up,” while in another part of the world they want Muslim women to “get naked.”

There is an uncanny pattern here between the condemnation of Beyoncé’s booty (how she displays it and how she shakes it) and Muslim women’s hijabs (how, when and where they wear it). What certain feminists clearly want is to regulate the bodies of women of color in order to eradicate difference. Since when did feminism reinforce dress codes instead of women’s autonomy and solidarity with other women, in which we support all of our choices while also recognizing how those choices are sometimes limited by intersectional oppressions (and no one is immune from this)?

And let’s not forget context. An Amina Tyler mounting a naked protest is about her autonomous right to her own body in a conservative society that would sooner punish her for “not covering,” while getting naked in Western culture could lead to slut-shaming and pornographic ogling. On the flip side, “covering up” in the West, especially in a hijab, could lead to hate-crime targeting, as had occurred with some Muslim women in the wake of the Boston bombings.

As Jada Pinkett-Smith aptly questioned on Facebook, in defense of Beyoncé’s choices: “Whose body is this anyway?” It seems some of us in feminist movements need a not-so-subtle reminder: Our bodies are our own! If feminism becomes yet another space for the regulation of our differences, rather than an embrace of our differences, then we have impeded our progressive move forward in our collective political consciousness.

Sure, we may ask, in the vein of Barbara Smith: “How does this free us?” (This in reference to Beyonce’s sexiness or Muslim women’s hijabs). But, if feminism looks like Beyoncé and a Muslim woman who covers and a Middle Eastern woman who engages in naked protest and a white woman who questions her power and privilege in relation to her sisters of color, then the message becomes loud and clear: Feminism is about politics, not a one-size-fits-all uniform.

And the story doesn’t end there. This is just the beginning. What more could be accomplished when we build on our differences, complicate our perspectives, and come together in solidarity? All I know is this: When my students try to creatively engage feminist consciousness and use symbols from pop culture, Beyoncé is their go-to-person. When one of my graduate students worked with middle-schoolers on a dance performance raising awareness about sexual violence, whose music did these girls choose? Beyoncé and Destiny’s Child.

I’ve learned a long time ago that our pop icons have been a gateway for young women and girls in the articulation of their feminist consciousness. Music is so ubiquitous, and exists in the most intimate spaces of their everyday lives, that it’s counter-productive to call a woman they admire a “stripper” and a “whore.” Beyoncé might very well lead them to other feminists existing beyond commercial boundaries. The widespread condemnation of her (interpreted as “feminist critique”) could stop them in their search.

Let’s stop fearing our differences. In the words of bell hooks, Feminism is for everybody!

The latest issue of Ms. magazine, featuring Janell Hobson’s cover story on Beyoncé, is available for your mobile devices or in the traditional print version. Find out how to download the Ms. app and get a year’s worth of Ms.!

Photo of Beyoncé performing in Central Park in 2011 by Flickr user asterix611 under license from Creative Commons 2.0

Not necessarily afrofuturist (although, kinda), but this discussion needs to be shared widely.

gradientlair:

I truly love this amazing poem by Hiwot Adilow, a part of Brave New Voices, and performed in 2012. “I’m tired of people asking me to smooth my name out for them. They want me to bury it in the English so they can understand. I will not accommodate the word for mouth. I will not break my name so your lazy English can sleep its tongue on top. Fix your lips around them. No you can’t give me a stupid nickname so that you can replace this gift of five letters.” 

A reminder of how White supremacy implies that Eurocentric names are superior, how racism makes discrimination based on this acceptable, and how White privilege allows Whites to pretend that this is not what is occurring, since it doesn’t happen to them.

(H/T afro art chick)

newwavefeminism:

strugglingtobeheard:

my-opossum-is-awesome:

strugglingtobeheard:

sweetlexi:

memoriasconsazon:

Pictures from “You Can Touch My Hair” Interactive Exhibit @ Union Square June 9, 2013.

Bahaha

omg tho. yesssss. wow.

Comparing this to Sarah Barratman is just sooooooooo far fetched. Come on now, its hair. If you don’t want people touching your hair then don’t let them! But if someone wants to let other people touch their hair then so be it! I’ve never seen something so small be made into such a big deal.

i don’t know if you’ve been following this supposed art exhibit. but the woman who started this said she didn’t understand why people might feel like an animal in a zoo by having their hair touched by white people and literally said she just wanted to help white people get over their curiosity. she asked white people why they were curious and they said it was because oh it’s just like a snake when you wanna touch it you’re curious. the white woman equated black people to animals that you just wanna pet because… curiosity. the woman running the exhibit has brushed aside other black women’s thoughts and feelings on that, said they were extreme and that was the birth of this. to shit on other black women to allow white people to satiate a curiosity.
are we going to pretend this wont have real life consequences? the situation isn’t the same as sarah baartman but the mentality of whites is. especially since when one black person says it’s ok, white people think it’s cool. and then they gon wanna touch other peoples head without consent, which they do. which is why women are mad. cause no. and just like white people thought they had ownership of black womens bodies and could do whatever by seeing how baartman was treated and how they flooded to see her, this is a similar mentality where white people want to observe and touch without actually engaging. if that’s nothing to you cool, but don’t play like this doesn’t have real life consequences and the woman who started this is taking a stab at other women who have asked white people constantly, don’t touch my shit.

^ the bolded.
I think the context and the intent behind this exhibit is crucial and important and completely open to scrutiny. 
It affects everyone when the premise to your exhibit “you can touch MY hair - them other uppity chicks are just trippin”
it’s not just about the experiment in a vaacum, or the singular objective, or the art, it’s about the message too. 
Zoom Info
newwavefeminism:

strugglingtobeheard:

my-opossum-is-awesome:

strugglingtobeheard:

sweetlexi:

memoriasconsazon:

Pictures from “You Can Touch My Hair” Interactive Exhibit @ Union Square June 9, 2013.

Bahaha

omg tho. yesssss. wow.

Comparing this to Sarah Barratman is just sooooooooo far fetched. Come on now, its hair. If you don’t want people touching your hair then don’t let them! But if someone wants to let other people touch their hair then so be it! I’ve never seen something so small be made into such a big deal.

i don’t know if you’ve been following this supposed art exhibit. but the woman who started this said she didn’t understand why people might feel like an animal in a zoo by having their hair touched by white people and literally said she just wanted to help white people get over their curiosity. she asked white people why they were curious and they said it was because oh it’s just like a snake when you wanna touch it you’re curious. the white woman equated black people to animals that you just wanna pet because… curiosity. the woman running the exhibit has brushed aside other black women’s thoughts and feelings on that, said they were extreme and that was the birth of this. to shit on other black women to allow white people to satiate a curiosity.
are we going to pretend this wont have real life consequences? the situation isn’t the same as sarah baartman but the mentality of whites is. especially since when one black person says it’s ok, white people think it’s cool. and then they gon wanna touch other peoples head without consent, which they do. which is why women are mad. cause no. and just like white people thought they had ownership of black womens bodies and could do whatever by seeing how baartman was treated and how they flooded to see her, this is a similar mentality where white people want to observe and touch without actually engaging. if that’s nothing to you cool, but don’t play like this doesn’t have real life consequences and the woman who started this is taking a stab at other women who have asked white people constantly, don’t touch my shit.

^ the bolded.
I think the context and the intent behind this exhibit is crucial and important and completely open to scrutiny. 
It affects everyone when the premise to your exhibit “you can touch MY hair - them other uppity chicks are just trippin”
it’s not just about the experiment in a vaacum, or the singular objective, or the art, it’s about the message too. 
Zoom Info
newwavefeminism:

strugglingtobeheard:

my-opossum-is-awesome:

strugglingtobeheard:

sweetlexi:

memoriasconsazon:

Pictures from “You Can Touch My Hair” Interactive Exhibit @ Union Square June 9, 2013.

Bahaha

omg tho. yesssss. wow.

Comparing this to Sarah Barratman is just sooooooooo far fetched. Come on now, its hair. If you don’t want people touching your hair then don’t let them! But if someone wants to let other people touch their hair then so be it! I’ve never seen something so small be made into such a big deal.

i don’t know if you’ve been following this supposed art exhibit. but the woman who started this said she didn’t understand why people might feel like an animal in a zoo by having their hair touched by white people and literally said she just wanted to help white people get over their curiosity. she asked white people why they were curious and they said it was because oh it’s just like a snake when you wanna touch it you’re curious. the white woman equated black people to animals that you just wanna pet because… curiosity. the woman running the exhibit has brushed aside other black women’s thoughts and feelings on that, said they were extreme and that was the birth of this. to shit on other black women to allow white people to satiate a curiosity.
are we going to pretend this wont have real life consequences? the situation isn’t the same as sarah baartman but the mentality of whites is. especially since when one black person says it’s ok, white people think it’s cool. and then they gon wanna touch other peoples head without consent, which they do. which is why women are mad. cause no. and just like white people thought they had ownership of black womens bodies and could do whatever by seeing how baartman was treated and how they flooded to see her, this is a similar mentality where white people want to observe and touch without actually engaging. if that’s nothing to you cool, but don’t play like this doesn’t have real life consequences and the woman who started this is taking a stab at other women who have asked white people constantly, don’t touch my shit.

^ the bolded.
I think the context and the intent behind this exhibit is crucial and important and completely open to scrutiny. 
It affects everyone when the premise to your exhibit “you can touch MY hair - them other uppity chicks are just trippin”
it’s not just about the experiment in a vaacum, or the singular objective, or the art, it’s about the message too. 
Zoom Info
newwavefeminism:

strugglingtobeheard:

my-opossum-is-awesome:

strugglingtobeheard:

sweetlexi:

memoriasconsazon:

Pictures from “You Can Touch My Hair” Interactive Exhibit @ Union Square June 9, 2013.

Bahaha

omg tho. yesssss. wow.

Comparing this to Sarah Barratman is just sooooooooo far fetched. Come on now, its hair. If you don’t want people touching your hair then don’t let them! But if someone wants to let other people touch their hair then so be it! I’ve never seen something so small be made into such a big deal.

i don’t know if you’ve been following this supposed art exhibit. but the woman who started this said she didn’t understand why people might feel like an animal in a zoo by having their hair touched by white people and literally said she just wanted to help white people get over their curiosity. she asked white people why they were curious and they said it was because oh it’s just like a snake when you wanna touch it you’re curious. the white woman equated black people to animals that you just wanna pet because… curiosity. the woman running the exhibit has brushed aside other black women’s thoughts and feelings on that, said they were extreme and that was the birth of this. to shit on other black women to allow white people to satiate a curiosity.
are we going to pretend this wont have real life consequences? the situation isn’t the same as sarah baartman but the mentality of whites is. especially since when one black person says it’s ok, white people think it’s cool. and then they gon wanna touch other peoples head without consent, which they do. which is why women are mad. cause no. and just like white people thought they had ownership of black womens bodies and could do whatever by seeing how baartman was treated and how they flooded to see her, this is a similar mentality where white people want to observe and touch without actually engaging. if that’s nothing to you cool, but don’t play like this doesn’t have real life consequences and the woman who started this is taking a stab at other women who have asked white people constantly, don’t touch my shit.

^ the bolded.
I think the context and the intent behind this exhibit is crucial and important and completely open to scrutiny. 
It affects everyone when the premise to your exhibit “you can touch MY hair - them other uppity chicks are just trippin”
it’s not just about the experiment in a vaacum, or the singular objective, or the art, it’s about the message too. 
Zoom Info
newwavefeminism:

strugglingtobeheard:

my-opossum-is-awesome:

strugglingtobeheard:

sweetlexi:

memoriasconsazon:

Pictures from “You Can Touch My Hair” Interactive Exhibit @ Union Square June 9, 2013.

Bahaha

omg tho. yesssss. wow.

Comparing this to Sarah Barratman is just sooooooooo far fetched. Come on now, its hair. If you don’t want people touching your hair then don’t let them! But if someone wants to let other people touch their hair then so be it! I’ve never seen something so small be made into such a big deal.

i don’t know if you’ve been following this supposed art exhibit. but the woman who started this said she didn’t understand why people might feel like an animal in a zoo by having their hair touched by white people and literally said she just wanted to help white people get over their curiosity. she asked white people why they were curious and they said it was because oh it’s just like a snake when you wanna touch it you’re curious. the white woman equated black people to animals that you just wanna pet because… curiosity. the woman running the exhibit has brushed aside other black women’s thoughts and feelings on that, said they were extreme and that was the birth of this. to shit on other black women to allow white people to satiate a curiosity.
are we going to pretend this wont have real life consequences? the situation isn’t the same as sarah baartman but the mentality of whites is. especially since when one black person says it’s ok, white people think it’s cool. and then they gon wanna touch other peoples head without consent, which they do. which is why women are mad. cause no. and just like white people thought they had ownership of black womens bodies and could do whatever by seeing how baartman was treated and how they flooded to see her, this is a similar mentality where white people want to observe and touch without actually engaging. if that’s nothing to you cool, but don’t play like this doesn’t have real life consequences and the woman who started this is taking a stab at other women who have asked white people constantly, don’t touch my shit.

^ the bolded.
I think the context and the intent behind this exhibit is crucial and important and completely open to scrutiny. 
It affects everyone when the premise to your exhibit “you can touch MY hair - them other uppity chicks are just trippin”
it’s not just about the experiment in a vaacum, or the singular objective, or the art, it’s about the message too. 
Zoom Info
newwavefeminism:

strugglingtobeheard:

my-opossum-is-awesome:

strugglingtobeheard:

sweetlexi:

memoriasconsazon:

Pictures from “You Can Touch My Hair” Interactive Exhibit @ Union Square June 9, 2013.

Bahaha

omg tho. yesssss. wow.

Comparing this to Sarah Barratman is just sooooooooo far fetched. Come on now, its hair. If you don’t want people touching your hair then don’t let them! But if someone wants to let other people touch their hair then so be it! I’ve never seen something so small be made into such a big deal.

i don’t know if you’ve been following this supposed art exhibit. but the woman who started this said she didn’t understand why people might feel like an animal in a zoo by having their hair touched by white people and literally said she just wanted to help white people get over their curiosity. she asked white people why they were curious and they said it was because oh it’s just like a snake when you wanna touch it you’re curious. the white woman equated black people to animals that you just wanna pet because… curiosity. the woman running the exhibit has brushed aside other black women’s thoughts and feelings on that, said they were extreme and that was the birth of this. to shit on other black women to allow white people to satiate a curiosity.
are we going to pretend this wont have real life consequences? the situation isn’t the same as sarah baartman but the mentality of whites is. especially since when one black person says it’s ok, white people think it’s cool. and then they gon wanna touch other peoples head without consent, which they do. which is why women are mad. cause no. and just like white people thought they had ownership of black womens bodies and could do whatever by seeing how baartman was treated and how they flooded to see her, this is a similar mentality where white people want to observe and touch without actually engaging. if that’s nothing to you cool, but don’t play like this doesn’t have real life consequences and the woman who started this is taking a stab at other women who have asked white people constantly, don’t touch my shit.

^ the bolded.
I think the context and the intent behind this exhibit is crucial and important and completely open to scrutiny. 
It affects everyone when the premise to your exhibit “you can touch MY hair - them other uppity chicks are just trippin”
it’s not just about the experiment in a vaacum, or the singular objective, or the art, it’s about the message too. 
Zoom Info

newwavefeminism:

strugglingtobeheard:

my-opossum-is-awesome:

strugglingtobeheard:

sweetlexi:

memoriasconsazon:

Pictures from “You Can Touch My Hair” Interactive Exhibit @ Union Square June 9, 2013.

Bahaha

omg tho. yesssss. wow.

Comparing this to Sarah Barratman is just sooooooooo far fetched. Come on now, its hair. If you don’t want people touching your hair then don’t let them! But if someone wants to let other people touch their hair then so be it! I’ve never seen something so small be made into such a big deal.

i don’t know if you’ve been following this supposed art exhibit. but the woman who started this said she didn’t understand why people might feel like an animal in a zoo by having their hair touched by white people and literally said she just wanted to help white people get over their curiosity. she asked white people why they were curious and they said it was because oh it’s just like a snake when you wanna touch it you’re curious. the white woman equated black people to animals that you just wanna pet because… curiosity. the woman running the exhibit has brushed aside other black women’s thoughts and feelings on that, said they were extreme and that was the birth of this. to shit on other black women to allow white people to satiate a curiosity.

are we going to pretend this wont have real life consequences? the situation isn’t the same as sarah baartman but the mentality of whites is. especially since when one black person says it’s ok, white people think it’s cool. and then they gon wanna touch other peoples head without consent, which they do. which is why women are mad. cause no. and just like white people thought they had ownership of black womens bodies and could do whatever by seeing how baartman was treated and how they flooded to see her, this is a similar mentality where white people want to observe and touch without actually engaging. if that’s nothing to you cool, but don’t play like this doesn’t have real life consequences and the woman who started this is taking a stab at other women who have asked white people constantly, don’t touch my shit.

^ the bolded.

I think the context and the intent behind this exhibit is crucial and important and completely open to scrutiny. 

It affects everyone when the premise to your exhibit “you can touch MY hair - them other uppity chicks are just trippin”

it’s not just about the experiment in a vaacum, or the singular objective, or the art, it’s about the message too. 

A call to end the unfair exploitation of Africa's resources - Opinion - This Is Africa

Today, the world has slipped back into the abyss of massive discrimination rooted in self-aggrandizement — specifically in the global financial sector and in the extractives industries. As was the case in the financial downturn, years of unethical mining transactions and practices leave in their wake enriched mining moguls, companies and governments officials while masses are impoverished. This malevolence is elucidated in this year’s Africa Progress Report (PDF download) titled “Equity in Extractives: Stewarding Africa’s natural resources for all”, and launched a couple of weeks ago to global media coverage. But why all the media attention? There have been other reports about extractives (oil, gas, mining, chemicals). What makes this one released by the Africa Progress Panel different? The answer lies in the impressive profile of the Africa Progress Panel and its Chair Mr. Kofi Annan, and their willingness to confront a glaring injustice of our time without worrying about whom they offend or make uncomfortable, or the charge of political correctness. That charge is usually only a muzzle to silence those who have been blessed with a voice and keep them from speaking out on behalf of those who do not.

Short Films

From the authors: “Set in a site haunted by bad luck where those trying to settle often end up losing all hope, a lonely traveler is sucked into the shell of a failed dream only to find out that the building acts like a cage trapping souls to be its company though time, towards its inevitable decay. Inside another soul is hidden, waiting to pass the curse to someone else and to be set free

The Root of the Issue: The Politics of Black Women’s Hair

Models from the You Can Touch My Hair Events

The internet has been up in arms about the ‘You Can Touch My Hair’ exhibit held at Union Square in NYC, organised by Antonia Opiah, founder of un-ruly.com. The two-day event involved several models holding up signs that read ‘You Can Touch My Hair’ (and, in protest at the second event, signs saying ‘You Can’t Touch My Hair’). On June 7th, The Sanaa Circle, a group affiliated with the National Museum of African Art presented a panel and discussion at the Smithsonian in Washington, DC. The panel took on questions of health and beauty surrounding contemporary black women’s hair. The issue was grounded in relation to the heritage and history of Africa, with historians, medical professionals, models, and a curator presenting the discussion.

A group of us came together to discuss the politics of black women’s hair in these two events, and the greater national and global conversations about othering blackness, femininity, and the perils of nonblack ‘curiosity’.

black-hair-you-can-touch-my-hair-politics

ZEPHYR: Part of my hesitance to commit some thoughts to paper came from my initial thought around the “You Can Touch My Hair” event: that it was mind-numbingly silly. I wasn’t sure how to formulate some cohesive thoughts on the whole thing…but its a necessary conversation, and one I’d like to contribute to at least in a small way.

MARYAM: There’s a contrast to the National Museum of African Art discussion and the ‘Can I Touch Your Hair’ exhibit that basically speaks to my feelings on both. The panel discussion is interesting in that it recognizes a history then seeks to discuss it and problematize it. I don’t see it as different from art expressions that have represented fashion/politics and overall cultural understandings of ‘dress’ which hair is in many ways.

AYANA: I appreciated the ‘Health, Hair and Heritage’ panel’s attempts to at least situate their conversation historically. It definitely makes sense to have had that discussion in a museum where questions about aesthetics, politics, history and authenticity are primary concerns.

DERICA: When you’re dealing with this subject, you’re also taking on the issue of U.S. society’s attitude to black women more broadly and that’s a minefield of racialised + gendered power dynamics. Like both Ayana and Maryam, I’m here for discussions and art-making that situate hair within specific social and cultural contexts: and that can be in a museum or on the street. But this ‘You Can Touch My Hair’ piece is not the one, given what I’ve read in this Huff Po article, the twitter responses, and in this video

MARYAM: As for the ‘Can I Touch Your Hair’ ish, I’m just not about it. I saw a lot of women tweeting from the exhibit mentioning having rich discussions during the exhibit so I guess that’s productive, but what makes the exhibit particularly hard to mess with is Opiah’s HuffPo article. Neither the argument nor the exhibit seems to be problematizing the ‘otherness’ of black hair or the curiosity. It just read as though she was trying to justify exoticism, which I didn’t know we were trying to justify at all (smh at her dismissal of how asking to touch black people’s hair is about the ownership of black bodies). If I’m not mistaken, history strongly suggests that we need to stop indulging white curiosity and trying to placate it no?

ZEPHYR: I don’t want to repeat what I think you three ladies already did a wonderful job of addressing. Clearly, the impetus behind such an event is not to interrogate these very important questions of body ownership, race, gender, and permission, as it seems the Smithsonian exhibit is at least attempting to do. Like Maryam, it read to me much more as a way to depoliticize a “hot topic” issue in order to make it accessible to white people. What strikes me most here, though, is the illogical thinking that allows someone to create an event like this, while insisting “there’s nothing political here! it’s just hair/curiosity!” Does the author not realize that without the race and gender politics at play here, there wouldn’t even BE a “natural hair movement” or anything of the sort? It’s there, whether she or anyone else wants to acknowledge it.

AYANA: Maryam, I’m with you about the ‘Can I Touch Your Hair’ article and exhibit. Reading the article was a cringe-worthy experience. It was as though Opiah wants to invite the fetishization of black hair by nonblacks, while shaming (or at the very least dismissing out of hand) the blacks (and nonblacks) who feel immediately uncomfortable about the idea. Her reductive “research” came to a dangerous conclusion (it’s not about a black woman’s hair, it’s just “curiosity” about “strangers”). At the end, the Opiah has what she calls a “loaded call to action” around hair that worries me because it also presumes equality in/around friendship. Basically, if you’re curious about black hair and have a black friend (or someone you think is a friend) it should be fine to ask them to give in to your voyeuristic desire?

DERICA: Rather than engaging thoughtfully with those issues, I see an attempt to shirk them by making “curiosity” the buzzword: “ohhh, white people are just curious!” “nonblack people just fascinated by difference!” That said, I understand that one justification for this exhibit/performance is to allow black women to take back agency by preempting the invasive touch with the “You Can Touch My hair” sign. But I’d have liked the whole thing to challenge the power-dynamic even further. Something along the lines of: “You Can Touch My Hair…But then I get to touch you anywhere”.

ZEPHYR: I also understand the attempt to create some semblance of agency for the black women participating by holding up the signs, but it seems to me the onus is once again being placed on black women having to justify their physical existence in response to white curiosity. It is never the other way around—why is no one asking why white people need to touch our hair so bad to begin with? Where’s the political interrogation on that side? Maybe if it this wasn’t one-sided, I could begin to be okay with it…but that’s rarely been the case.

DERICA: I also think Opiah’s out of hand dismissal of the argument that a sense of “white ownership” of black people might still pervade interracial interactions, denotes a failure on her part to properly engage with the history of the United States. Let’s be real: as recently 150 years ago, black people in America had their heads forcibly shaved and were put on auction blocks where their bodies could be touched, tugged and prodded without permission. The legacy of that system and those actions takes some real working out.

ZEPHYR: This exhibit follows the age-old American tradition (not that we’ve been the first or last to do it) of re-writing history without its troublesome contexts to make things easier for white audiences to swallow. I can’t be the only one who is sick of black history being reduced to sterile, uncontroversial “let’s all just get along!”-type clips so that audiences won’t be made uncomfortable. But without that history, the conversation doesn’t actually exist, so what is the real point?

The other thing it does is assume that these conversations are not already taking place when they are, all the time, in communities around the country and the world. I think if nonblack people want to be involved in this “politics of hair” conversation—and I think everyone should, not just black women—they should be willing to acknowledge the legacy of race and gender power at the core here, and start from there. Without that, the ‘Can I Touch Your Hair’ event to me is nothing more than another instance of placating white desire to be down with black culture when its trendy to do so, without doing any of the real thought or work required to make that participation meaningful.

Like Paul Mooney said, “Everybody wants to be a nigger, but nobody wants to be a nigger.” I’ll leave with that.

To Tumblr, Love Pixel Union