When you have a platform for your voice, it is important to use it at times when most would simply stay silent. This blog is an excellent platform to bring awareness to issues in the LS community. Everyone is typically focused on when the next big party is, or where they can capture their unicorn. Unfortunately, with many of these Facebook groups, there are admins who feel they know better than you how things should be. They want to “protect” you. Well, mostly just their friends. We understand it is, “their” group. However, much like this blog, when it’s open to so many, it becomes a platform for like-minded individuals. For all to feel heard, and equally protected, the rules must be equally applied.
We may share this world of non-monogamy, but for many, that’s where it ends. The deep-seeded beliefs and prejudiced behaviors that plague our world can leak into our “accepting” community. Often right in your face from people you thought saw the world at least a little more as you. Whether it’s slut-shaming women for not behaving the way you would, excluding bi-men, or publicly shaming individuals for petty grievances, it leaves a bad taste, and a trail of individuals left fighting to preserve their character. We as a community are better than this. Admins are not dictators.
Today’s Guest post comes from an individual who has grown tired of controlling, and hate filled unfair actions all too often displayed by a few. Hopefully, we can all learn something from her, have these conversations, and find ways to be more inclusive and empathetic to everyone around us.
Dog Whistles
Guest post by Vikki
Words have power.
Words levied by those who have power, against those who don’t, have a special kind of power.
And when those disempowered people are already fighting centuries of stereotypes, systemic oppression, and white fear (as is the case with the black community), words can actually be dangerous, even deadly.
We easily recognize some of these words: thug, gangster, hood, ghetto, pimp, and the ubiquitous N-word. Most white people who aren’t out-and-proud racists strive to conscientiously avoid these words. We know they are offensive, hateful, and dangerous. These are words that we hope will die out entirely from the vernacular of white people with our grandparents and parents.
Unfortunately, such words becoming verboten is outpacing the actual erasure of bias, both explicit and implicit. And where bias exists, language adapts.
New words are replacing these old terms, and this new language is insidious. Those perpetuating these new words are often unaware or in denial of their own biases and cannot see the harm of their word choices.
These are dog whistle words, and they are uniquely powerful.
I am a white woman who adores words. I wield words like a sculptor wields clay, writing both poetry and prose, and I take pride in my gift. I choose my words carefully – I say what I mean, usually eloquently. I say this to illustrate how very hard it is for me to accept that my words don’t always mean only what I intend them to mean. I have been humbled time and again over the years by my two black male partners. They have spent an enormous amount of emotional labor teaching me about seemingly innocuous words that become offensive and dangerous under certain circumstances. I know I am not racist, and they know it as well, but being “not racist” is not enough. Well-intended allies can and do inadvertently harm those they wish to support, either directly or by their ignorant silence. It is incumbent upon us to listen when those who are aggrieved by our actions speak: listen actively, without pride or defensiveness, with a mindful willingness to do better. Fortunately, my desire to do better is ultimately stronger than my desire to be right, and I have been able to learn so much from the men I love.
After downing more than a few servings of humble pie, I understand, and want to share with the white community, that dog whistle words are everywhere. These are words that surreptitiously play to both conscious and subconscious tropes, biases, and fears about black people that remain deeply entrenched in white society – so deep that we often have no idea they persist. Discovering them is a humiliating process for anyone who considers themselves to be an ally, but it is an essential step in the constant quest for improvement.
Take, for example, words like “aggressive,” “hostile,” or “pushy.” These words capitalize on the “Angry Black Man” stereotype, which has triggered fear in white people for centuries. An angry black man is seen as a dangerous thing – far more dangerous than an angry white man. The society we live in today in the US was built, and continues to be shored up, with the goal of keeping him contained. He could be dealt with swiftly and harshly, or shunned altogether, but he must be disempowered. While my above example adjectives aren’t positive for anyone, for a black man attempting to overcome decades upon decades of oppression driven by white fear, such words can become a permanent scarlet letter.
Or consider “arrogant,” which is the new “uppity:” both words which allude to the idea of a black person not “knowing their place” in white-dominant society. An intelligent, confident, vocal black man is just as scary as an angry one.
Consider, too, the nonverbal expectations that whites place on blacks. To be accepted in predominantly white spaces, a black person will fare much better if they are quiet, conservative in appearance, and smile a lot. This “code switching” behavior is modeled for, and taught to, all black people in the US, from birth, and so it is seen as “normal,” yet it is not the norm in black-dominant societies.
All of this sounds a lot like leftover expectations from the not-so-good old days, doesn’t it?
Dog whistles and their ilk are damaging enough in mainstream society. But consider their impact in smaller communities, like the LS – a predominantly white space. The black community is disproportionately underrepresented in the LS, and its members are frequently fetishized by white women and couples. Black men, in particular, are commonly reduced to bucket list items or objects of pleasure, and are often seen through the lens of what they can offer, not who they are. Couples advertise that they are looking for “a BBC,” not “a black man with a big cock.”
Black bluefish are working against multiple negative perceptions: those that accompany being a black man, as already discussed, and those that go with being a bluefish, regardless of race. Insecurity is rampant in the LS, and bluefish are already handled with extreme caution, generally perceived at least as a slight threat to couples, most often by the man in a couple. A different dick is always risky; it could steal away a wife, ruin a marriage, or provide more pleasure to her than her partner’s. That’s some scary stuff. Now give that bluefish dark skin, confidence, and a big cock, and he just became exponentially more scary. He may very well now be viewed as a necessary threat to be managed, not a whole human with whom to collaborate or celebrate.
Finally, combine this white male fear with generations of ingrained (often unconscious) dehumanization, and sprinkle in some of the dog whistles mentioned. When you are already seen as subhuman, or a pleasure tool, and you become labeled as dangerous, people will be reluctant to look deeper into your humanity. It is far easier, and requires far less uncomfortable introspection, to replace a problematic BBC with another, more docile, less threatening BBC.
I was recently banned from a LS group because one of my partners (a black man) questioned why another black man was being publicly named and shamed for violating a group rule about messaging/friend requesting without public consent. Yes, I know there are very strong opinions for and against, and it’s a dead horse that has been beaten beyond recognition, but that actually isn’t the issue. The Name and Shame post was a screenshot of this man’s personal profile, an explanation of the rule violated, and the phrase admonishing, verbatim, “Don’t be an (insert his name here).” Tacky? For sure. Juvenile? I thought so. But where I really took issue: dangerous.
My partner made several comments on the post. He was not questioning the consequences being levied (being banned from the group); rule breakers should receive agreed-upon appropriate consequences. He was questioning the idea of adding “naming and shaming” as a consequence, and asking whether all those who violated rules would be treated the same. He questioned the motive of public ridicule and branding of a man who could no longer see the post. My partner was subsequently banned himself, and then called “hostile” by the (white, male) admin, for requesting clarification of, and politely disagreeing with, his ban (screenshots exist). I then received a 30 day temporary ban for commenting that rule-breakers should be banned, but I was wanting to know whether this Name and Shame punishment would be applying to ALL rule-breakers, because despite the group existing for a few weeks, this was the first time it had happened. When I questioned my own ban, I was told it was for stirring drama, and for associating with my boyfriend.
Funny, neither myself nor my partner were named and shamed in the group for OUR rule violations. And at least one white man, who violated the same rule as the black man who was called out, has – to date – still not been named or shamed for his actions. One person was singled out, and that person was a well-known black bluefish. When another black bluefish questioned the actions of admin, he was labeled hostile, and banned. Coincidence? Maybe. But once you spot the pattern in the LS, and in certain groups, it’s really hard to unsee it.
I pointed out to the admin that his actions gave the appearance of being racially biased, and were being perceived as such by the black community. I did not call him a racist, but he immediately took offense saying I labeled him both racist and a bully. He went on a tirade about having black partners and family members, and everything he had done for the black community. I explained to him that again, I was not labeling him racist, only pointing out appearances, and that perception is what matters, regardless of intent. I told him that those who truly have the best interest of the black community at heart would not be defensive when told their actions might be perceived as racist. We can consider ourselves allies and still unknowingly behave in ways that are harmful to those we strive to support. He claimed he didn’t know the man he shamed was black (despite him being a very well-known, OG, black bluefish, with a black-sounding name, who posts regularly about black issues), and wished me the day I deserve.
A perhaps-not coincidental side note: my partner had already been denied membership in a sister group, after being labeled “aggressive,” “pushy,” and “unsafe,” by the admins – a white couple who do not know him. These accusations were based on the words of a nameless accuser stating that he behaved in these ways at one of the group’s parties. When he politely pointed out that he had NEVER ATTENDED any of this group’s parties, the admins didn’t care. I was also subsequently shunned from the group by proxy, despite having zero dealings with the couple.
I have been with my boyfriend for a year. My husband has known him for that long as well. We, and anyone who knows him, know him to be respectful, kind, and courteous. Unconventional? Yes – he is not from the US originally. He was not raised in a country where black people are taught from birth how to make themselves more palatable to the white majority. Regardless of his true character, these slanderous dog whistle words are now out there, attached to him, and are producing their predictable ripple effects.
IDGAF about those groups or being booted from them. People who know me, know my character. There are plenty of other LS groups with admins that are welcoming, willing to engage in constructive discourse, and whose vision aligns with my own. But this situation ripped the scab off a wound that, for my partners and those who look like them, never heals. As someone who loves them I can’t, in good conscience, stay silent.
Please be mindful of the words you use when describing or labeling those with less power than you. For white people, this is all other races. For men, this is all other genders. For heteros, this is all other sexualities. Be aware of the weight words can carry in the larger picture. Does the word that comes to mind cater to inflammatory stereotypes? Why is it the first word that comes to your mind? Does it perhaps indicate biases you may not know you have? Is it a word that has been used to oppress, belittle, devalue, dehumanize? Will it perpetuate harm upon the person it is used against? Will it stay with them like a scarlet letter?
Think twice before speaking or judging, and be on a mission of understanding, not victory at any cost.
The LS is supposed to be a place of open minds and acceptance. We all could use a reminder, now and again, to check ourselves. We all have opportunities to be better.
