The Buttons On Men's Button-Up Shirts are on the Opposite Side of Women's. It's Hard Putting on A Men's Button-up Shirt.

Towards the beginning of chapter 3, Wise refers to a major change in his social life that took place during his adolescent years. Before Junior High school Wise mentions that he wasn't, "really close to any white people"(59). He recollects a time where the demographics of his friend group began to change. Not because he consciously wanted more white friends but because he entered a school that systematically made his friendships less possible. This was operated by tracking, which made (makes) segregation legal in schools. Wise goes on to say that he, "was having to relearn everything: how to make friends, how to interact with people whose interests were different, and how to basically be white again"(59). I found this passage particularly interesting being that I can somewhat relate. This shift he had to deal with was made within the same community system he has been part of his whole life. It's just that now, it is directly affecting him on a more extreme level. As he mentions previous to this in his book, even in early elementary school he noticed the segregation. Although he chose to interact with the black students early on, the presence of whiteness, their presence as the majority, and their identity was still ever present from kindergarden--onwards. While my experience of that differs because the town and school I was raised in is extremely colorful (blacks being the "majority" and whites the "minority) I can identify with having to relearn certain ways of acting. Because of the community I grew up in and probably a few other factors, my environment nurtured me into my self that finds it hard to relate to the white community. I have had some exposure (pre-college) to being placed in a white community. But even for the short amount of time/few times I was in that situation, I felt disconnected and uncomfortable and felt that people made cliques where they all "clicked" and I couldn't find people I could click with. Now looking back, and having more experience, I understand what I thought was me not having friends because people didn't "like" or "get" me. Times when I was in a white-majority situation was like when I went to camp. Everyone came from different places but similar backgrounds. And their background I hardly relate to. Upon entering college I was also suddenly surrounded by so many white people. At camp it was different. It was not my home, and the people there were not my friends--because my friends were at home. Now being situated in a place, where everyone came from different places, like camp but now my new "permanent-ish" community,  forcing to be in a space of whiteness and making it my "space" too--I found, somewhere in the back of my head, of how to interact or be friends with white people. Similar to how Wise had the idea that he shouldn't or should like something. I have no idea where these ideas came from, but I took being friends with white people as being polite, submissive, and oddly more passive aggressive. Basically, the relationship I have with most white people here I would label as acquaintances. Thinking consciously now, I only have one white friend. As Wise said, "I wasn't really sure how to be white, but I figured I could fake it"(60).  I became conscious of little things that prevented fluid relationships. Like what I say (or even how I say it) (because I was realizing that what I would say normally was not "white language". My old roommate once told me that she could not understand my two friends and I half of the time she was around us).

From what I gathered the way Wise reacts to trying to change his identity as he describes, I think holds more general meaning. Because he could not relate to white music and felt he should not like black music he, "just stopped listening to music altogether". This might stand as an allegory to describe more generally how he couldn't relate to what he was trying to adjust his identity to, so he'd rather dismiss it all together.

babies are crying.. my computer is dying.

(fyi) This is going to be a pretty short prompt because I have 13% battery and no charger... So my apologies for the not so in depth-ness of my post. Anywho, Tim Wise's White Like Me, offers a very different perspective from Taylor's. He involves much more of his personal history, which in this case, I think is the more appropriate rout. It allows the targeted reader to find grounds of relation--which statistics cannot do. The old saying is right, there is a difference between showing and telling. To tell allows the other person to block off or choose what they here. But to show does not allow the other to make any excuses for misunderstanding. It also some how forces the viewer to look back the same way he is critically looking back at his lineage. I thought it was pretty interesting how one side of the family has been rooted in America since what seemed like forever. And contrastingly his other side with Jewish heritage provides a different perspective on the white foundation of America's whiteness. I think that allows this reading to lend itself to a greater audience, whom otherwise would have discredited his point of view in relation to their own groundings in America. I'm really interested to go, not just further with the reading but to see how our class discussions move in conjunction with it. So far this first chapter (still working on the second, but wanted to get the blog in before my computer goes night night) has really set a tone that seemingly will be beneficial overall. As a side note, I do enjoy his writing as well. It's almost novel-like. Taylor was interesting because the philosophical and statistical information he presented, while Wise says things in an interesting way... with interesting stories of information. Definitely a switch up. Next week's blog won't be cut short by my computers impending death.

Trick coin: 2-faced, 1 face; Colorblindness: 2-delude, 1 disposition. Both bear no fair finish.

On page 184 Taylor quotes a statement that a journalist made, which he claims epitomizes his post-racialist racism (in accord to politics specifically), "'In the post racial era personified by Obama...Americans start to make race-free judgments about who should lead them'".  I really enjoyed how Taylor framed this statement with such dripping sarcasm (at least thats the way I read it). Right before quoting this journalist Taylor says, "When the black-identified" (<-I find that phrasing to be particularly important, because Taylor discusses much earlier in the book that there was a movement from mulatto to identifying as black, and then the 1 drop rule) "son of a racially mixed-marriage between a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas can become president of a country built on racial slavery and a horror of miscegenation; when, moreover, he can do this in the post-9/11 USA despite bearing (what the President himself described as) a funny, Muslim-sounding name; when things like this happen, the post racialist concludes, we have put race behind us and embarked on a new phase of human social relations"(184). Making clear that Obama, himself, declared his name as, "a funny, Muslim-sounding name" acts as a slap to the reader's eyes. Many points are made just within this statement that expresses how false and misleading this post-racialist thinking is--starting off with Obama being identified and identifying himself as a "black man". That being followed with his own explanation of his name, where he identifies it as "funny" (funny-similar to ethnic-'ethnic' to the majority, 'funny' sounding-to the majority). First he, himself, identified with two different radicalized groups which, if colorblindness was a real thing he A-wouldn't have done that and B-wouldn't have needed explain what his name to americans as "funny" and "Muslim-sounding". The reason why he did, and why he most likely felt pressured to, is because America is so far from actually being colorblind. Minorities need to constantly explain themselves (i.e. Obama clarifying that his name might sound funny and a little like a Muslim name--but it's stops at just "sounding" like it. So to assure the public that he is not black AND Muslim... just black with a Muslim-sounding name), all while the majority's position is pre-secured and accounted for as a "normal" American. I.e. president Bush did not need to disclose what his name might sound like along with an adjective that could be viewed as demeaning and belittling to those who actually fall under his unwanted label. Bush had no need to put forth effort in explaining  his name and how it's 'un-American' (or just non-white) sound is just 'something-else-sounding' --in fear of being misidentified, mislabeled, mis-colored, and misconstrued as being someone of a 'funny', 'scary', or 'barbaric' nature. These small and simple instances, which might seem insignificant, actually expose the objective unconscious of how objectifying Americans still are ...especially racially. Thus completely discrediting any claims of colorblindness. Taylor then follows the journalist's quote with pointing out that, "this willingness to set race aside when it comes to questions of leadership is, for the committed post-racialist, just one example of a wider commitment to colorblindness in all spheres of human relations"(184). This statement working with the one he makes directly before the journalist's quote, work together to further emphasize how false the claim of colorblindness really is. Especially that our own president has to justify, explain, and detach the sound of his name from  a group of people that are currently being criminalized in this country. It is also indicating that if this is happening on a political level (especially so high), there is no doubt that this colorblind (but really mindblind underlining racism) concept is being implemented and mobilized through human social relations.