“White People” (2015) is an MTV documentary about young White Americans. Jose Antonio Vargas, a Pulitzer Prize-winning, Filipino American journalist, travels the country, talking to White Millennials about – being White.
Cue awkward silence.
But then Vargas knew that: MTV’s own numbers showed that among White Americans, ages 14 to 24, four out of five admitted to feeling uncomfortable talking about racial issues.
By the numbers:
- Over 90% of their social world is White.
- About 75% think society would be better if people were colour-blind.
- About 50% believe that reverse racism is at least as bad as unreverse racism.
- Fewer than 33% have talked about race with their family.
Nearly all the ones he met said they were were colour-blind:
“I could care less what race someone is.”
Vargas talks to what appear to be focus groups of mostly young White people in different parts of the country. He sounds them out, mostly talking about White privilege. He tiptoes around their White feelings. They hold back.
The documentary features the stories of five White Americans:
Dakota, 22, North Carolina. He grew up in a lily-White town but now goes to a historically Black university. He invites two of his Black university friends home to dinner. One of them, Brittanee, is brought to tears when Miranda, a White friend of his, talks about acting “ghetto”, snapping her fingers above her head. Miranda seems unmoved by Brittanee’s tears. Brittanee is the one who has to explain herself.
Samantha, 23, South Dakota. She teaches at the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, having grown up in a mostly White world. Vargas reminds us that the school stands not far from Wounded Knee. We find out about the stereotypes students have about White people: Whites take, take, take. They cannot control their children. They are disrespectful. They are mean to Natives.
Katy, 18, Arizona. She believes in reverse racism: there are tons of university scholarships for race but none for her. In fact, though, Whites are 40% more likely to get a scholarship than non-Whites. A mixed-race friend informs her that he did not get a scholarship either.
Lucas, 21, Washington state. He runs a White privilege workshop – yet is too afraid to talk about race with his Fox News-watching stepfather. His stepfather had googled “White privilege”: he said the websites were slanted against Whites and, in so many words, were calling him a jerk.
John, 22, New York City. He lives in Bensonhurst, a neighbourhood that was once heavily Italian American, but now is less than half White. Many are coming from Asia to make a new home there – just as John’s grandfather once came there from Europe. Vargas, careful to point out Wounded Knee of 1890, says nothing about Yusuf Hawkins of 1989.
Vargas pushes talking about racial issues, not colour-blindness, as the way forward for White Millennials – who, by middle age, will find themselves a racial minority in the US. He sees this documentary as only a starting point.
Yet, as gentle as this show was, some on the Internet accused MTV of “race baiting” and “whiteshaming”, of being “divisive”.
– Abagond, 2015.
See also:
- YouTube: White People – 41 minutes
- White people – my own post
- Millennials
- “I don’t see colour”
- places
- other missionaries among the Whites:
566
I was wondering if anyone had any viewpoint about having Jose Antonio Vargas doing a documentary like this. Does it have any more or less credibility than if a black or white person did this?
Side note:
Technically, Mr. Vargas is NOT American. He is still one of those undocumented illegal immigrants that INS has threatened to deport.
I still have not seen the full documentary “Documented”. Has anyone seen the whole documentary on that?
LikeLike
OK, just watched the documentary.
The part that affected me the most was where white teachers were in the classroom in South Dakota teaching about US history on the Indian Reservation (around 12:00 – 13:30). Wondering how that must feel for them. How does one teach from the standard US history textbooks?
Where I grew up, race was the constant daily topic of discussion among everyone, white, black, everyone else. But that was during the small window in time between the Civil Rights movement and colour-blind racism era, a period of desegregation and affirmative action.
indeed Vargas did not. I wonder why. Maybe because residents in Bensonhurst forgot about their hatred towards blacks back in the 1980s, and now only think of their mostly Chinese neighbours.
I remember the Hawkins beating and murder. I was living in New York City at that time.
LikeLike
jefe, no human is illegal
LikeLike
I have yet to see this, so I can’t add much to the thread, but white people were mad as heck about this documentary. Vargas became the undocumented mexican. Even though he is not Mexican.
LikeLike
@ Jefe
He is not a citizen, but since he speaks with an American accent and has lived in the US a long time, it is hard for me not to see him as American.
LikeLike
@ Jefe
I think a White person would be more believable to a White audience, It would also seem less like an attack. On the other hand, Vargas, to give him credit, thought to do this. He got the idea for it like ten years ago and MTV is now at a place where they thought it was a good idea.
MTV is also running “Decoded”, a weekly video on racism “with” Franchesca Ramsey (Chescaleigh):
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_vPQ7P9p-I&list=PLnvZ3PbKApGM-hHuQ9lNc5oSKsusjn0Z6)
Not as good as her own videos, but they cover the ground far more methodically and come out far more regularly! It seems to have real money behind it, but also deadlines.
LikeLike
This can be viewed as progress. The idea of getting people to actually talk about racism instead of denying. Sure people are going to be angry, but they need to face facts.
LikeLike
It’s interesting to me that anyone would cry about racial slights. They have only ever made me feel angry, not sad that some ignorant racist doesn’t accept me as a human being. If those people don’t want to associate with me I don’t give a f**** All I want is my rights and to be left alone to live my life. That’s it. Their ignorant a** doesn’t have to be involved. Call me n** all you want; hope you can take a punch.
LikeLike
Why are white people so sensitive? You can’t even gently bring up racism without them feeling like they’re being singled out and attacked, can you? Then they get all defensive and aggressive. But you’re expected to sit and smile or even laugh as they say as many racist things as they like.
poetess – Different people have different reactions. You would think `Go back to China’ wouldn’t hurt me so much, but when it brings back memories of getting pelted with stones as a teenager, seeing a brick miss your 11-year-old sibling’s head by centimetres, being afraid in my own home and never feeling safe… Maybe this young woman has also experienced something similar, so the words and actions remind her of traumatic things. No one knows, but I’m more willing to give a PoC’s tears the benefit of the doubt than a random white person’s because you know they cry over nothing, but can remain poker-faced in the face of PoC dying.
LikeLike
Saw the trailer. Didn’t feel like being annoyed…
LikeLike
Was this documentary really necessary in 2015?
LikeLike
MTV? As in Music TeleVision, makes sense Wounded Knee is associated with one of the greatest songs of the 20th century:
Wounded Knee by Redbone,
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-1WgV_IxYo)
Which by its history, not being charted in the USA, and banned by several radio stations, though doing quite well in the “real world”.
LikeLike
I wanted to add: is a very well fine example of the issue.
LikeLike
@Glenn,
Thank you for reminding me for misspeaking.
I would have to say the same things about my grandparents and aunts.
LikeLike
To sharinalr:
but white people were mad as heck about this documentary..
Overall I found the documentary meandering, pretty superficial, and a bit boring. He raised the issue about a lack of Native Americans teachers in the Lakota town but it is never explained. Why bring it up and then not even bother trying to find an answer..?
I am not mad about it but there definitely a few broad distortions bordering on a lie, for example this is rather disingenuous: “In fact, though, Whites are 40% more likely to get a scholarship than non-Whites.” That’s only true for private scholarships which make up a whooping 4% of available aid. Here is the breakdown of sources of college grants: federal government (44 percent), colleges (36 percent), state governments (9 percent), employers (7 percent), and private scholarships (4 percent).
http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/the-college-solution/2011/02/01/7-things-you-need-to-know-about-private-scholarships
Also I do find it ironic that a man who has been living in the US for 22 years (18 knowingly..) in violation of multiple, was educated at US institution with a scholarship and has lead a privileged life, writing for the some of most prestigious news outlets in the country, almost assuredly better than what he would have had in the Philippines. With that in mind he decided to examines issues of being white and white privilege, and even in this movie it is made plain that he is here in the US illegally. They couldn’t find a Black or Native American whose family has been in the US for many generations to conduct the interviews..?
LikeLike
To Iris:
Why are white people so sensitive?
You mean to discuss racial issues on camera that will be seen by millions of people..? Ask yourself why the many of the posters here are anonymous including Abagond and myself.
File under “Anything you say may be used against you…”
LikeLike
@ Iris
As an insecure group of people, whites expect nothing but validation, admiration and kudos bordering on sycophantic fealty from their minority charges. When they can’t get that, they get hyper-defensive based on a long-standing, deep-set fear of insurrection and retaliation.
In short, they’re only comfortable around blacks and other minorities when said groups are not only a couple of rungs down on the socioeconomic food chain, but also when those groups have nothing but good things to say about their white counterparts.
Of course, said minority groups can also be subjugated into an enforced subservience. Whites seem to (and have been, in the past) be comfortable with that, too.
LikeLike
@UM
I really doubt that is the meaning here, nor the meaning interpreted by the majority of the readers on this blog.
Most of the defensive, overly sensitive white people I have encountered discussing racial issues are ones I know by name, either directly or as friends of friends. It seems like in the USA, you cannot bring up the subject of race. It is a taboo subject with most white people.
I am even nervous about bringing it up with white Americans overseas. I usually ask them their permission if we could discuss it (so that they won’t get offended). I wish I did not have to do that.
LikeLike
I don’t think that is unique to White Americans and racism, I have seen similar with people and their national history or religion. I think it happens when a treasured identity you have is questioned or associated with crimes. You instinctly jump to the defence of that identity, because you feel personally attacked even if you aren’t.
LikeLike
@Kartoffel,
Saying it is not unique to white Americans or to discussions of race per se does not offer any solution or angle to address the issue. All it does is rationalize the behaviour, which is something we do not want to do.
2 weeks ago I went to St. Mary’s City in Southern Maryland (the site of the first English settlement in Maryland around 1632 on top of one of the existing native villages) and stopped by the outdoor historical exhibits. I bypassed the English Colonial Manor house and went to the section which was a reconstruction a Yaocomoco Indian hamlet, complete with longhouses and filled with artifacts or replicas of artifacts known to be used by Chesapeake Bay Algonquian people. The two interpretation guides were white Anglo-American men who had grown up (not necessarily born) in Southern Maryland.
Anyhow, they had no problem to discuss the negative aspects of the behaviour and attitudes of the English who took over the region and removed the natives, obliterating the people and culture from the place we were standing. They feel some regret about it but did not offer any excuse or rationale for the behaviour of the English and Anglo-Americans at all. They knew it was based on pure greed and disdain for the Native culture and society. They admitted that they can never replace the Native people’s perspective, but hope that through their work they can try to educate the other Americans about what happened there.
They did not impress me the way the typical white person you meet in America acts and thinks. They felt no problem discussing about what was wrong and still wrong about the whole thing.
I wish I could meet more white Americans who would not
– get so sensitive about the subject of race; how can the negative aspects of an ideology used to build the country go away by suddenly not talking about it.
– try to cover up the crimes that the country was built on, or trying to push them back into ancient history
– avoid or deflect or block opportunities to right some of the wrongs. I was educated in Maryland, and learned a little about St. Mary’s City, the “oldest settlement in the State of Maryland”, but learned nothing about the people who were living there – – as if they never existed and still don’t.
LikeLike
@ Jefe
“Saying it is not unique to white Americans or to discussions of race per se does not offer any solution or angle to address the issue. All it does is rationalize the behaviour, which is something we do not want to do.”
That was not my intention at all. I agree that it is very destructive behaviour that prevents serious discussions and needs to be overcome. To do that I think we have to see the principle that is at the heart of it. Most identities are built on the idea that the constructed “we” are moral and have always been. Then any discussion about crimes and injustice becomes a challange to that identity.
What we need is a more mature identity, where we can feel sure about ourself without denying or rationalizing those crimes and injustices.
LikeLike
@Kartoffel
If you are not rationalizing the behaviour, what are you doing then? What was your intention?
I think nearly everyone here as well as the makers of the White People video are already quite aware of that “principle”. What is the point of pointing out that principle if the intention was not to indicate that it is some sort of “rational” human behaviour?
Isn’t that what the video is attempting to do? At least trying to launch that conversation?
LikeLike
One further point.
I remember before colour-blind racism became the norm of white American culture. There was no need for whites to feel overly sensitive about the culture and history of the USA. Defensive, yes, in fact, overtly justifying it, without the hypersensitivity endemic to most white people, esp. liberal white people in the USA today.
Also, my point was not about denying or rationalizing those crimes and injustices per se, but about rationalizing the hypersensitivity over discussions about race, which is what I thought the comment was about.
LikeLike
Rationalizing is excusing, I try to understand it without denying it’s negative impact. Just because something is understandable it’s not rational.
“My point was not about denying or rationalizing those crimes and injustices per se, but about rationalizing the hypersensitivity over discussions about race, which is what I thought the comment was about.”
I think the two are closely connected. I think the hypersensitivity about the discussion is caused by them knowing that flat out denying or excusing the negative history wouldn’t fly well. So they want to avoid the discussion at all, because they don’t want to face the challanges to their identity.
LikeLike
@Uncle Milton
“They couldn’t find a Black or Native American whose family has been in the US for many generations to conduct the interviews..?”—Sometimes people outside see things better than those inside. Either way I have yet to see it to make a real determination on it, but I see it as a start.
LikeLike
I just finished watching the documentary and it was kind of interesting the whites and their white centric views. I especially found it interesting how offended they get about the word “white privilege” that and the word “racist” are like being called the dreaded “N-word.” I kind of rolled my eyes and just sighed a huge sigh when one of the white young men mentioned how they watch Fox New and held that cretin Bill O’Reilly up as some kind of luminary, SMDH. That would explain why they have such apathy for blacks and other people of color. When Jose Antonio Vargas interviewed the guy in Bensonhurst and they talked about how it was once predominantly white(Italians) and now many Asians mostly Chinese have moved into the area. How polarized the community is. I always saw Bensonhurst as a very racist community. Mostly from watching Spike Lee movies. When the interviewed the Lakota students they referred to whites as “wasicu” meaning one who takes or is greedy. That would be an accurate description of many of them. The documentary was interesting but it didn’t really get to the crux of the matter of racism. It just skimmed the surface. Jose Antonio Vargus actually just tip toed and tried to be nice and not offend. But at this stage of the game who cares if they get offended they need to see what time it is in America. So, it really true when former Attorney General Eric Holder said “America is a nation of cowards when it comes to discussing issues of race”.
LikeLike
When that stupid white girl started talking about being ghetto and the black girl started crying. I got very annoyed. And she was giving zero damns about upsetting that girl.
LikeLike
..Nothing groundbreaking, nor surprising here about MTV’s whack azz, watered-down documentary if yah ask me..I saw it, but even before I sat through it admittedly had no serious expectations of the content delving into subjects that truly need be discussed. As per this network’s usual style, it was just a mishmash of short stories that were glossed over in a feeble attempt to appear tolerant and “edgy”..this network has stunk for ages now, if they’re going to avoid having honest discussions about important things such as equality in this nation I wish they would at least bring back its’ entertaining content-like ‘Liquid Television”, for example.
LikeLike
@Mary, Great quote from Eric Holder that you mentioned-a nation of cowards, indeed! As for that dumb bish talkin’ bout what she thinks “ghetto” is, all I can say is that heaux would have had her funky lil’ feelings hurt if that was me at that table, and I would’ve made sure she thought twice, three times about acting an azz in front of a sistah gurl again! They should’ve made this show into a series of vignettes on a weekly basis, then perhaps it might have made a better impact on audiences with the message it was intended to convey-but, of course MTV appears to be run by a bunch of “liberal”, PC cowards too so..
LikeLike
@Mz. Nikita: You know this queen. I would have had to snatch her wig and edges for being stupid.
LikeLike
P.S. Shame, shame shame on Vargas for tiptoeing around the Yusef Hawkins (R.I.P.) tragedy, someone who has worked with the extremely high-profile newspaper staffs that he has worked with (not to mention MTV’s prominent and highly visible studio right in New York!) has no excuses not to feign ignorance of such an important part of history as this.
LikeLike
Yayus fellow, yayusss! *Dead* at “wig and edges” being snatched, LmbO
LikeLike
..fellow queen, typo-am laughin’ so hard right now!
LikeLike
@Mz.Nikita: You know how we do. LOL!!!
LikeLike
To Kiwi:
In other words, Vargas is just an Ungrateful Darky who needs to learn to shut his mouth instead of criticizing White Americans and know his place in America because of everything White people have “given” him – never mind that his home country, the Philippines, was (and still is) on the wrong end of American imperialism. I mean, wow. And you think you are not racist.
Well first Kiwi, Vargas has stated repeatedly he is grateful to be in the US and considers himself American and I have to give him credit for his honesty as he has chosen not to acquire legal status through a fake marriage (I know of multiple situations where a green card was acquired through false marriages and after reading some of his articles I’d say it’s highly likely he pondered the notion and probably has had multiple offers).
The irony to me is that is not in the US legally and not a member of the dominant culture is funded by members of the dominant culture to exam the notion of dominant culture’s privilege (and by extension the dominant culture’s supremacy). To me that indicates the dominant culture’s supremacy, at least those in power, is actually quite tolerant.
LikeLike
@Mz. Nikita: I agree about the Yusef Hawkins tragedy if Vargas was not going to go in hard and trying to not offend the white people then this documentary was a waste of time. I feel Vargas should have went in hard. Instead he took the soft way out.
LikeLike
To Kiwi:
Surely the victims of Wounded Knee would like a word with you on the dominant culture’s “tolerance”.
Is it 1890..? Should I used the word current to clarify things for you?
The majority of current power brokers of the US clearly do not share the same attitudes about immigration to those from 1890, 1924, 1954, and possibly even as recently as 1970 or later. High levels of immigration (legal and not legal) along with outsourcing means that labor costs are kept low. Certainly helps the 1%.
America couldn’t possibly have been founded on two-faced racial double standards, right?
The US was founded on principals that were highly Eurocentric, both for culture and race. Why do you think they were two faced,,? Most of the founders (with a few exceptions..) were pretty clear and public with their opinions, hence I wouldn’t call it two faced.
Do explain why Vargas’ presence in America is any less legal than the English colonialists who massacred Natives and stole their land.
Yes the early European immigration into the US clearly did not work out well for the its ancestral residents.
So is your point that the US should dispense with all immigration laws..? Notice I didn’t say that Vargas should be deported. I know the score.. the wealthy are calling the shots and immigration benefits them, the fix is in. I am trying to recognize the pattern and make money from it.
LikeLike
Kiwi:
They were clear about freedom and equality for “all…
That’s the boiler plate, however if you read the public speeches and writing of the time.. they predominantly only considered that for males of European ancestry…Jefferson whom you paraphrased, initially thoughts blacks were inferior… As president, he signed a bill outlawing the transatlantic slave trade..As an older man, he advocated freeing and returning slaves to Africa..
So is your point that we should apply racist double standards to immigrants? That seems to be what you’re implying, even more so than what you’re inferring from my comment.
Don’t know where you get that… . A Russian residing in the US illegally has the same legal status in the eyes of the law as Mr. Vargas (less if the Russian has been convicted of a crime).
Oh, you mean White people aren’t currently still screwing over Natives? Yes, that does clarify things. *intense sarcasm*
Strawman, that’s not what I said Kiwi….
I am willing to have a civil discussion and you can call me racist all you want… but the continual logical fallacies are tedious.
LikeLike
To Kiwi:
faulted Vargas for criticizing White Americans
Straw Man again… I said it was ironic….as it is pretty clear that this and other projects of his are basically enabled and funded by white people.
grateful for everything … America …. “gave” him
Straw man again, he himself says he is grateful.
You are free to believe you are not racist, however, but that is your sad delusion, not mine.
Believe what you wish Kiwi, you continually misrepresented my position…. I don’t really care if you think I am racist or not as I’m anonymous and you can’t touch me. But you do provide a pretty good example of why many white people, at least face to face, are reluctant to engage people of color (and often other whites) over race in the US.
LikeLike
@Uncle Milton
“But you do provide a pretty good example of why many white people, at least face to face, are reluctant to engage people of color (and often other whites) over race in the US.”—That could be one reason, but I think it has more to do with an inability to want to be associated with anything wrong or bad. Plus they come to the table with the preconceived idea that POC are going to blame them for past atrocities such as slavery.
Even talks online are riddled with whites trying to avoid being called mean or evil or bad. Whites want to maintain the idea that they are good. Talking about race will remind them of the bad.
LikeLike
MTV should stick to “reality” shows about drunk college students on spring break. Based on the reviews of this show I doubt I would have gotten anything out of it. But at least they tried so now they can go back to their regular programming.
LikeLike
@ Mary B. exactly! It’s like they were just throwing POC a few bones and sayin’ “here, naw on this for awhile”..SMH
LikeLike
..gnaw..
LikeLike
@ Uncle Milton
You say this as though it’s something white Americans are reluctant to do, rather than something they quietly wish they could do. When white Americans get “burnt out” on race, what they really wish is for minorities to stop bringing it up so whites can quietly be absolved of any responsibility for how their nation handles itself when it comes to racial issues.
The Globe and Mail has this piece on Brazil and its racial issues. Brazil’s collective solution to its slavery legacy (and all of the lingering effects that entail) until recently has been to paper the problem over with progressively lighter shades of wallpaper. Many Brazilians of the lighter and wealthier persuasion wouldn’t mind being let off the hook.
LikeLike
@Mack Lyons, BOOM!
LikeLike
@ Uncle Milton
I agree with Kiwi. In your first comment on Vargas, you did seem to paint him as an Ungrateful Darky:
Nothing here about MTV’s “tolerance” that you shifted it to later. Rather, the message seems to be: “After all we Whites have done for him, how dare he criticize us!” Which is, as Kiwi noted, paternalistic.
LikeLike
And there ya go.
LikeLike
I think if the show were about the inability of POC to receive funding for these types of shows, that might be ironic. However, the show is not really about the oppression of POC, it is more about starting an open dialog on some of the more “mainstream” uncomfortable topics. Only by making the easy topics comfortable can we move on to more difficult topics. I think Kiwi and Abagond have categorized your statement as “paternalistic racism” because in order for the situation to be ironic, it must be perceived that Vargas’ immigration status, education, and funding sources show that no such conversation is even necessary.
You both provide an example as to why shows like this (however watered down they may be) are extremely necessary.
If you frequent this blog and yet truly believe that… well, there’s irony for you.
LikeLike
@ Kiwi
I had read that previously and understand that Abagond is simply using the blog as a sounding board to share insights, opinions and perhaps to also gain the perspective of others. It was unfair of me to assume anything different of the commenters. Also, I was probably trying to hard to be cute with that last line.
I guess, in the absence of any real desire to make things better, debating with another poster, like you were with Uncle Milton, seems either entirely pointless or entirely selfless. I say selfless because while you might not believe change is possible, your contributions are actually helping to facilitate it.
Come to think of it, same goes for Abagond… whatever the motives for the blog may be, the impact it has on others goes beyond that.
To bring this back around to on topic… this blog, the comments on it (even yours) and the MTV documentary are all facilitating a much needed dialog. I’m just hoping you’re wrong about the hopeless part and that the dialog may lead to changes for the better.
LikeLike
To Kiwi and Abagond:
you think of Vargas as an Ungrateful Darky…..for having the audacity to criticize White Americans
I don’t think the film criticizes white Americans. Even the Fox news guy whose stepson taught a class on white privilege (which initially bothered the father..) seemed to come around towards the end and said he was proud of his son. Yes I criticized the film as superficial (which very well could be the fault of MTV, it appeared at certain points there was some heavy editing..) but Vargas himself said it was a work in progress and what he considered to be a beginning of a longer process. If anything the film gives one a warm and fuzzy feeling (at least if you weren’t in the US) and Vargas is congenial and not at all hard hitting. So that makes me ask… why this guy..? If you have followed Vargas’ career.. his star really took off when he came out and stated he was undocumented (netting him two documentaries in the past four years and direct access to Presidential candidates…).
I don’t see Vargas as ungrateful (he has stated he is grateful to be in the US..) I see him as congenial and probably a more acceptable choice for this role, to an Upper class white person, than a Native American or black American … and I was avoiding this earlier.. but I think Vargas as a gay Asian man in broadcast journalism occupies a role similar to Asian women in the same field.
LikeLike
To sharinalr:
That could be one reason, but I think it has more to do with an inability to want to be associated with anything wrong or bad. Plus they come to the table with the preconceived idea that POC are going to blame them for past atrocities such as slavery.
Even talks online are riddled with whites trying to avoid being called mean or evil or bad. Whites want to maintain the idea that they are good. Talking about race will remind them of the bad.
All good points…my world view is often different from most people, not enlightened.. different. So sometimes.. I don’t get most white people let alone POC.
LikeLike
The only thing I was disappointed about was that Vargas didn’t bring up the fact that Affirmative Action benefits White women more than any other group. Since White women overwhelmingly date, marry, & reproduce with White men that means the dollars from those degrees and good paying jobs go back into the White community. All in all I would say AA has done a whole lot for Whites but considering that Whites have received de facto AA for the last 200 years I think that goes without saying.
LikeLike
@Uncle Milton
“So sometimes.. I don’t get most white people let alone POC.”—Then we are in the same boat. I have ran across some people that I just have to smh and not say a word. Jaw dropped and everything.
LikeLike