Have you seen the video of the woman talking about her discriminatory experience at Safeway?
Something struck me when I watched it, and I'm ashamed it didn't occur to me earlier.
She starts by explaining that her sister-in-law looks white. Which of course reminded me of the phrase "pass for white." We all know that means the individual has black parents or ancestry, but the individual's genetic variation expressed itself in a way that the person physically presents white with no hint of the black ancestry.
Yet people with the exact same ancestry whose genetic variation expressed itself in a way that the person physically presents black is never described as someone who can "pass for black." You might think, of course not, because the black skin is obvious.
But then so is the white skin in the person above, so isn't "pass for white" as meaningless a phrase as "pass for black?" No it's not, and there's our clue that something is wrong and that something is most definitely white privilege.
For one thing, the phrase doesn't just imply deception, it flat out states it. Something is being kept hidden. In many cases, things that we keep hidden are because they are considered shameful, or embarrassing, or disadvantageous were they known. The fact that "pass for white" means something to us while "pass for black" does not is a powerful reminder that white is considered normative, acceptable, and desired while black is not.
That one phrase right there should speak volumes. Until "pass for white" is meaningless and connotes no advantages to people whose genetic variation presents as white, we have no choice but to admit we live in an institutionally racist society.
= new reply since forum marked as read
