Paul R. Lehman,Ethnic bigotry on the judicial bench—a case in point

May 3, 2017 at 12:10 am | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, Bigotry in America, black inferiority, blacks, Criticism, democracy, discrimination, Disrespect, equality, Ethnicity in America, European American, European Americans, fairness, interpretations, justice, justice system, law, Oklahoma, race, Race in America, respect, skin color, social justice system, socioeconomics, the 'n' word, The Oklahoman, white supremacy | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Many Americans believe that as a society we have made tremendous progress in our acceptance of one another as equals regardless of our skin color. Although we would like to believe this, the fact of the matter is that ethnic bigotry permeates the whole of American society in the system of European American (white) supremacy. In many cases, the bigotry is subtle and often passes for ignorance or innocence. At other times, the bigotry is so apparent; it cannot be excused with some form of rationale. One of the features of European American supremacy is expressed in an attitude of superiority over the ideas, opinions, and statements of people of color, especially African Americans. A case in point occurred recently in an article by Randy Ellis, in The Oklahoman, “Black judge: Repeating ‘n’ word in appellate opinion was ‘unnecessary.’(4/29/2017)

According to the article, the only African American judge on the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Vice Presiding Judge David Lewis, made the statement regarding his fellow judge’s opinion: “I concur in the decision reached by the court in this matter. However I write separately to point out that the author of this opinion did not have to repeat the repugnant language used by the appellant.” Lewis’ words to his colleague, Judge Gary Lumpkin, were to alert him to the sensitivity of the word to him, and indeed to the public, and that he found its frequent repetition unnecessary. Lewis wrote that “The repeated use of the ‘n’ word in this opinion was unnecessary to the reader’s understanding of the language used by the appellant, and unnecessary to the court’s resolution of this case.”

In many cases like this one, the judge receiving comments of this nature would recognize the lack of sensitivity shown in his or her case and offer an apology for the offense and a “thank you” for the cautionary note from the colleague. One would think that a judge on the bench today would be fully apprised of the sensitive nature of the ‘n’ word. The article noted that: “Judge Lumpkin quoted the racial slur verbatim in his opinion, while Lewis used the euphemistic expression ‘n’ word in his criticism.”

What followed, according to the article, underscored the apparent ethnic bigotry that exists not only in society but also on the bench: “Robert Hudson, another judge on the court, defended Lumpkin’s decision to quote the racial slur.” Rather than accepting Lewis’ words to Lumpkin as a form of “corrective criticism,” and an appeal to his better judgment, Hudson interpreted Lewis’ comments as an affront to Lumpkin’s judgment and continued “Our cases reflect reality and that reality is oftentimes not pretty.” In other words, Hudson seems to imply that one reality trumps another reality; in this case, the reference to an African American slur word, which could have easily been avoided, should be used regardless of its offensiveness to his fellow judge and society. The question is why would a judge continued to use an offensive ethnic slur word when he knows that it can easily be avoided. European American arrogance?

Robert Hudson excused Lumpkin’s use of the ‘n’ word by noting that: “’…if we are willing to erase highly relevant—albeit offensive—facts from our opinions, we will send a terrible message to the bench, bar and public that the truth, when objectionable, should be redacted merely to avoid controversy.” Hudson tried to use aspects of the case to make his point, but it fails on the history of prior court practices. The details of a sexual attack perpetrated on some young female would be not reused time and again verbatim if the judge knew that the language was sensitive to her and the court.

The point relative to this article focuses more on the attitude and actions of the two European American judges rather than the actual case. For example, if the three judges were having lunch together, and one of the European American judges started to tell an offensive ethnic joke and the African American judge stopped him and asked that he not tell the joke in his presence because he found it to be offensive, common sense dedicates that a reasonable person would acquiesce and not tell the joke. However, if the other European American judge wanted to hear the joke and encouraged the teller of the joke to continue, we would realize that he had no regards for the feelings of his African America colleague. In addition, he showed disrespect by his actions, and that his selfish desire was more important than his colleague’s feelings and request. The African American’s request was that the joke not be told in his presence, not that it not be told at all.

The system of European American (white) supremacy has conditioned the European Americans to view African Americans and other people of color as inferior regardless of their social, economic, educational, political and judicial status. That system causes European Americans to view reality through a warped sense of value. For example, when the topic of race is ever brought into a conversation, the European American rarely thinks of him or herself as being part of a race. They have been falsely conditioned to view themselves as representatives of the human race—everyone else belongs to a different race. In addition, they see themselves as being the center of the universe and in control of society.

So, when Lewis, the African American judge said to his colleague that he found the repetition of the ‘n’ word to be excessive and unnecessary to the case, Hudson, a European American judge, and colleague of both Lumpkin and Lewis took exception to Lewis’ comments. Lewis had said previously that the repetition of the ‘n’ word verbatim had no direct bearing on the outcome of the case. Hudson used his sense of superiority to castigate Lewis for speaking the truth to his European colleague. So, Hudson had to put the African American judge in his “place” as an inferior. Hudson, seemingly, believed that his opinion regarding Limpkin’s excessive use of the ‘n’ word over-ruled or trumped the opinion of Lewis for no other reason than he was European American.

Some people might think that these comments are simply making a mountain out of a molehill by suggesting that ethnic bigotry was at the core of Hudson’s criticism of Lewis. When read carefully, the article noted that Lewis agreed with the finding of the case. He just felt the use of the ‘n’ word was excessive. Because of the socially biased conditioning of Hudson’s and European Americans generally, their ability to relate to insensitive words or phrases directed at ethnic Americans of color are rarely perceived and understood. However, even large learning curves can be overcome with effort

Riley Cooper’s fine for using an ethnic slur avoids the real problem

August 4, 2013 at 5:01 pm | Posted in African American, American Racism, Bigotry in America, blacks, Disrespect, equality, Ethnicity in America, European American, fairness, Media and Race, minority, Race in America, skin color, Slavery | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Many Americans like to play a game called “Let’s Pretend,” where they know something to be real, but pretend that it does not exist or they have no knowledge of it. Such is the case with comments surrounding Philadelphia Eagles’ wide receiver Riley Cooper. The team fined Cooper for saying that “he would fight every ‘n—–‘ at a Kenny Chesney concert in Philadelphia.” The pretending comes into play when many people react to the news like they did not know that many Americans still use the N word. We know that this ethnic slur is used on a regular basis by many Americans, so what is the problem?
The problem with Cooper using the N word is that he used it in a place he thought was safe to use it, but he got caught. He evidently forgot that being a high-profile person in a large city meant someone had a camera on him at all times. The owner of the Eagles, Jeffrey Lurie, remarked that “We are shocked and appalled by Riley Cooper’s words,” and continued by stating that “This sort of behavior or attitude from anyone has no role in a civil society. He has accepted responsibility for his words and his actions. He has been fined for this incident.” (Upi.com/Sports) For Cooper, the fine is a reminder to make sure the area is safe before any word is used that could result in another fine. As far as behavior and attitude regarding non-European ethnic American players are concerned, Lurie should address his concerns with the entire organization.
With respect to Cooper and his use of the N word, chances are he grew up in an environment where the word was used by people as part of their everyday speech. We Americans like to pretend that all bigotry and prejudice has been eliminated from society because we are now all civil. The reality is that many Americans did not get the memo about ethnic slurs being unacceptable in a civil society or if they did get the memo just ignored it. Many European Americans grew up in communities where the use of the N word was a regular part of everyday conversations. For anyone growing up in such a community considering the N word as something unacceptable was unthinkable. No one comes into this word creating his or her own values and standards, but simply learn and accept without question what is already in place. In many instances, some people do not learn until latter in life that certain words are considered ethnic slurs. My statements are not meant to dismiss the use and power of ethnic slurs regardless of how they were acquired. My concern is that when a problem such as Cooper’s occurs, simply fining him is not the answer to the problem. The problem is not that he used the N word, but why.
Society has done a disservice to many Americans by not clearing the air concerning the myth of race. America is a diverse society, but also one that embraced bigotry and prejudice. When American slavery created the two races—black and white, it also created the element of color to be used to keep these races separate. When one so-called race is made to think it superior to other so-called races, then bigotry and prejudice comes into play. America has yet to debunk the myth so many people still hold on to the belief that multiple races of human beings exist and are inferior to the so-called white race. We are led to believe that all is well in society because all people possess the same rights and privileges. While we know that bigotry and prejudice still exist, we pretend that they all in the past.
The fine accessed against Cooper does nothing to inform him relative to why the fine was given. The message that action sent to the other players was not to get caught using ethnic slurs. That is the wrong message to send because it does nothing to inform Cooper and others why the use of ethnic slurs are not socially acceptable. What Lurie should do is institute a program where his entire organization can learn about American diversity and how we are all human being with the same social value regardless of our skin color. An explanation of why using ethnic slurs would be more beneficial than just a fine. To some people who see nothing wrong with using ethnic slurs as long as one is not detected, they lack the knowledge and understanding of their perception of themselves and others.
America gets its strength through is diversity, so when Americans are educated about diversity it should not focus on the things that make ethnic groups different from one another, but what makes them alike. The differences among ethnic groups are derived through human efforts—economical, educational, geographical, and cultural; these differences have nothing to do with biology. So, the idea of ethnic superiority has nothing to do with color. If programs spend time teaching the differences among ethnic groups, then these programs are counter-productive. The concern in teaching about diversity is to show just how much alike human being really are, not what makes them different.
Cooper understands that what he did was not socially acceptable, he said “I shouldn’t have. I ‘m disgusted. And I’m sorry. That’s not the type of person I am. I wasn’t raised that way.” We, unfortunately, do not know what he meant by “that way.” He continued by stating that “I have a great mom and dad at home. And they’re extremely, extremely disappointed in me. They are disgusted with my actions.” What we see in Cooper’s comments is a lack of understanding of why he made the comment; he knows that he should not have made it, we just see how embarrassed he was about the negative press he received and how it affected his parents. In order to try and prevent a repeat performance, Cooper should be made aware of why he made the comment in the first place. He needs to know that he is not alone in this situation, that many of his colleagues are as ignorant as is he regarding the myth of race, diversity, and ethnicity; they just do a better job hiding their ignorance.

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.