Source |
On September 23, 2014, National Geographic published an article by Martha Hamilton
entitled "Colorful World of Birding Has Conspicuous Lack of People of
Color." The gist: birdwatching is racist. Non-racist people must intervene
to ensure that birding and birders become "inclusive."
I live in Paterson, NJ. Paterson is two thirds Black or
Hispanic, with the nation's second largest Muslim population. My first job
after graduation from college was as a Peace Corps teacher in a remote African
nation, ranked as the poorest country on earth. I have taught and published on
racism and ethnic conflict. I care deeply about my students. I want their
futures to be better than their pasts.
I am a birdwatcher. I mentioned the National Geographic allegation in an online discussion list
dedicated to birding. I said that I found the article "off base." Rick
Wright, author of The American Birding
Association Field Guide to Birds of New Jersey, informed me that he would
henceforth block any messages by me. Others sent insults. Rather than saying,
"We have a Paterson birdwatcher. Let's dialogue," the senders of abusive
emails decided, "You disagreed with a liberal on race. You must be insulted
and silenced."
Almost fifty million Americans call themselves
birdwatchers. Birdwatchers spend billions of dollars on bird-related merchandise,
and we contribute significantly, through membership dues and activism, to
environmental conservation. When I am birdwatching, I experience what
psychologist Mihály Csíkszentmihályi calls "flow." I lose the sense
of time; I lose the sense of being encapsulated in a body with all its hungers,
aches, and limitations. I get lost in beauty and harmony, memory and knowledge,
pattern and depth. The borders between senses dissolve and I experience
synesthesia. The lilt of a Baltimore oriole's song melds with the scent of
honeysuckle and the warm air on my skin. Civilization melts away and I become
like my peasant ancestors who knew not just with their prefrontal cortex, but
with their entire bodies, bodies that were one with the earth. Birdwatching
taught me to observe, to question observations, and to wait for more to be
revealed. The twang of a nighthawk above a summer city street, the unreeling
rattle of a kingfisher's call along a stretch of waterway, crows' raucous
alarms: I register these even as I step in high heels through workday hustle
and bustle. Commutes and campuses take on new life to me when I note and decode
the revelations of their stray auditory, avian clues. Like most birders, I
donate time and money to environmental organizations, and I introduce young
people to birding.
One day recently I was walking across Broadway Bridge in
Paterson, NJ. I saw an African American child, perhaps eight or nine years old,
throw a bundle of garbage over the side of the bridge into the Passaic River.
The boy was walking with a white-haired man. The man reached into his shirt
pocket, removed some waste, and handed it to the boy. The boy then threw this
garbage into the Passaic River as well.
Those of us who care about the environment want to
communicate our vision of it to a wider population. How could I make that
grandfather and child see what I see in the Passaic River: a nest for ducks,
geese, herons, fish, and turtles, cradle for willows, elms and poplars? Does
the recent National Geographic article
hold the key?
In the National
Geographic piece, Clemson University Professor J. Drew Lanham alleges that
when he attends birding events, at least six white birdwatchers call him by the
wrong name. They do this, he reports, in spite of being "supposedly
observant people who can distinguish gull molts in a blizzard."
Another reason minorities don't embrace birding,
according to the article. They worry about "how onlookers might react to
seeing a black or Hispanic man with binoculars wandering the woods – or a suburban
neighborhood – at dusk, dawn, or night." For blacks, "nocturnal
birding is a no-no." Minorities don't bird-watch because of
"lingering fears about racism in the U.S. – like whether it's safe to go
to areas where the Ku Klux Klan had been strong, or where militias still thrive."
Racism in birding is nothing new. "About 120 years ago, birding organizations
were anti-immigrant."
White birders speak disrespectfully to minority birders.
Minority birders, in turn, "feel like they are not well understood, in
part because of the way they are talked to…They like to watch birds, even if
they don't know what species they are…They want to learn about birds, but on
their own terms. They don't want to be viewed as needing to be educated,
'fixed,' or deficient in skills or knowledge about birds."
Let's look at the unstated assumptions of the National Geographic piece.
One unstated assumption is that white people are
something close to omnipotent, and are, therefore, responsible for anything
that happens that is perceived as negative. The American Birding Association's Nathan
Swick was one of the commentators on the article. Swick wrote, "There are
those who are interested in a subject, but are unable to pursue it because of
societal pressures…Our own white privilege allows for the free expression of
our interests in a way that our friends who are people of color are not able to
experience." African Americans "may not want to deal with the hassle…it
would be nice if that was not a barrier…this crap won't cease." Swick
asked me to emphasize that he was posting on the National Geographic site as a private citizen expressing his own
opinion, not as a representative of the American Birding Association.
Is this assumption accurate? Are whites producing
"societal pressures" "barriers" and "crap" that
prevent non-whites from birdwatching? Are whites able to bird-watch thanks to
"white privilege"?
To bird-watch, two things are required: binoculars and a
field guide. The binoculars I use cost approximately one hundred dollars. One
must also have a field guide, available for eleven dollars, postage included,
on Amazon. Of course, one must have birds. On foot, within the city limits of
Paterson, I have seen bufflehead, great blue herons, osprey, turkeys, yellow
warblers, wood ducks and nighthawks.
The African Americans I pass as I walk through Paterson have
asked me why I walk so much, why I carry a walking stick, and if my walking is
in fulfillment of a religious vow. Though they are large and conspicuous, no
one has ever asked about the binoculars around my neck, or why I stare at
birds.
It is simply not plausible that white people exercise the
power to prevent black people from birdwatching, and that black people are
otherwise chomping at the bit to do so.
Another assumption. When an African American feels
uncomfortable in an encounter with a white person – when birders did not
remember Lanham's name, or when minority birdwatchers feel that they are being
talked down to – that is because the white person is expressing racism.
Birders have looked over my shoulder and said things like
"That's a green-winged teal." I am tempted to snap, "How stupid
do you think I am? Of course I recognize a green-winged teal." I bite my
tongue and remind myself that the birder who is "talking down" to me
is in fact sharing his passion with me. I respond, not by accusing, "You
arrogant racist!" but by saying, "Thank you."
Often my polite response leads to a pleasant interaction.
An angry response pretty much guarantees an unpleasant interaction. "A
gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger," counsels
the three-thousand-year-old Book of Proverbs.
I say to students, "Yes, the person you are
interacting with may dislike you because you are black. You can't know for
sure. That person may be having a bad day, or he may be a jerk. You may be thin-skinned,
slightly paranoid, or racist yourself, and projecting. What stance serves you best?
To indulge your worst suspicions? To return hate for hate? Or to be the bigger
man? You decide."
I know that not all birdwatcher rudeness is racism not
only because birders are often rude to me, and I am white as typewriter paper,
but because I am rude. When I am in the woods, I budget that limited time for
solitude, and I want to focus on birds, not interaction with other humans. Nice,
white people have spoken to me in a friendly manner, and, if I am hot on a bird's
trail, I have avoided eye contact, pretended I did not hear, and marched off
without even a monosyllabic reply. I am not proud of my rudeness, but this is
how birding works.
Another assumption. If whites encounter blacks in the
woods, whites will violently attack them. Minorities' fear of KKK or militia
assaults is one of the barriers preventing them from birdwatching.
America in 2014 is not the America of 1960. America has elected
an African American president twice; major cities have been electing black
mayors for decades. Professional surveys do not reflect a racist country.
There is, rather, another reason why a lone birdwatcher of
any race might feel anxiety encountering a black man in the woods. The article
never addresses this very real problem. Jesse Jackson did. "There is
nothing more painful to me … than to walk down the street and hear footsteps
and start thinking about robbery, then look around and see somebody white and
feel relieved." African American men commit a disproportionate amount of
violent crime. Three of my friends have been raped by black men. One was assaulted
while jogging alone on a city track. Confronting African Americans'
disproportionate representation as committers of violent crime is not just
important for white birdwatchers. It's vital for black survival. Blacks are the
most frequent victims of black violent crime.
There is another, less controversial factor that the
article significantly excludes. Every human cultural expression is disproportionate
by ethnicity. There are a disproportionate number of Polish cleaning ladies, Jewish
Nobel-Prize winners, Irish Catholic firemen, and Vietnamese nail salons. In a
September 23, 2014 article, Walter E. Williams had the courage to ask, "Do
Statistical Disparities Mean Injustice?" Williams points out that lightning
strikes six times more men than women. Should concerned citizens convene a
conference and devote tax dollars to getting more women hit by lightning?
All human activity is determined by push factors and pull
factors. National Geographic adduces
no evidence that there is a very strong factor pulling African Americans toward
birdwatching. In his book White Guilt,
Shelby Steele takes on the assumption that African Americans underperform at
academics because of white racism. Steele writes
"If a young black boy cannot dribble well when he
comes out to play basketball, no one will cast his problem as an injustice. No one
will worry about his single-parent home, the legacy of slavery that still
touches his life, or the inherent racial bias in a game invented by a white
man. His deficiency will be allowed to be what it is – poor dribbling. And he
will be told to practice more….but if this boy's problem is reading or writing
rather than basketball, white guilt will certainly prevent even a modified
version of this natural process from occurring. Career hungry academics will
assure him that he is a victim of racism."
Simply put – maybe more African Americans don't
bird-watch because they don't want to.
Maybe the solution to getting more African Americans
interested in birdwatching is not to approach the problem as "White birdwatchers
are racist and erect barriers. Black professionals and white liberals need to
re-educate racist whites to be more inclusive." Maybe the solution to
getting more African Americans interested in birdwatching, and, by extension,
in environmental preservation, is to say, "African Americans are human
beings just like us. How can we attract more of them to birds and environmental
protection?"
One must ask, "Cui bono?" Who benefits?
Perhaps there are foundation grant checks to be cashed
and academic awards to be garnered for those who have called birdwatchers and
bird-watching racist. For the white liberals, there is a lot of
self-congratulatory back slapping to go around.
So what if foundation grant money gets spread around, and
an academic builds a reputation on grievance? So what if a white liberal gets
another chance to feel good about himself because he was a keyboard warrior
against evil white racist birdwatchers?
The American Thinker recently ran my piece "Ten
Reasons I Am No Longer a Leftist." Fifteen years ago, a dyed-in-the-wool
leftist, I would have proudly served on the board of a commission devoted to
teaching white birdwatchers how to be less racist. Constant observation of how
left-wing policies affect my students changed me. The left excels at producing
conferences, glossy pamphlets, consciousness-raising sessions, speeches that
end up as bullet points on some ambitious resume, and then the grand exodus
back to the suburbs before darkness falls. I can hear that distinctive click as
car doors lock.
There is an unstated assumption in the National Geographic piece that makes my
blood run cold. In the article, African Americans are not subjects, making
their own choices, deciding their own fates, grabbing their own brass rings.
They are objects. Forces greater than they manipulate them as if they were marionettes,
or pawns on a chess board. White racists erect "barriers," white
racists give them "crap," and so they don't bird-watch. Black
professionals, in league with kindly white liberals, have decided that African
Americans will bird-watch, and so, African Americans will bird-watch – because
their betters have decided this.
Though this is never stated overtly, when I read the National Geographic piece, I heard this
as its message to African Americans. "There is something out there that
you want – a commodity, to use Marxist terms. This commodity could be health or
dignity or success – but in this case it is birdwatching. This commodity
belongs exclusively to whites. They monopolize it. You cannot achieve ownership
yourself. You must cultivate anger, and blame and shame allegedly racist
whites, and cultivate pathos, and beg from liberal whites. Then kindly liberal whites,
and shamed white racists, will sprinkle some of this commodity – in this case
birdwatching – upon you." This message emasculates African Americans.
Black professionals and white liberals are speaking this
way about the very people who marched from Selma, who risked violent assault in
the freedom rides, who broke Montgomery's bus segregation through a boycott.
Yes, these very same people need white liberals to help them to watch birds.
I first moved to Paterson over twenty years ago. I
witnessed immigrants of every hue taking advantage of every opportunity America
offers and moving up and out. African Americans have been told that white
racism prevents them from climbing the ladder of success. They must wait for
white liberals to bring them jobs, clean, safe streets, and, now, birdwatching.
I don't want African Americans to keep waiting. I want them to grab every
opportunity they can, including a pair of binoculars.
***
This article appeared at the American Thinker website on October 11, 2014
Here is my favorite response to this essay, from the Raptor Education Foundation, to which I just made a financial donation. And I encourage others to donate, as well, at the link below.
ReplyDeleteHere is their reply:
"...our organization presented programs for the students at East Side High in Paterson. The students raised the $ for our fee, and we were told that ours was one of the first programs the students actively competed to be able to attend. This program was our signature program featuring live raptors with a free flying segment, and the teacher who organized the initial program used it as a motivator for some very troubled students. It worked, the kids were curious, enthusiastic, and wanted to understand birds they had never seen."
Here's a link to donate:
http://www.usaref.org/