Abstract: This article is an exploratory look into the experiences of five ethnic-minority youth from the Los Angeles region who experienced and engaged with White Evangelical outreach organizations (WEOO) and short term mission (STM) groups over the period of five years. This article employs their qualitative narratives and examines the effects that race, gender, and racism had on them. Added narrative from emerging ethnic-minority adults is also applied in this article to discuss those impacts, albeit on a specific region of the country, of (STMs) which have become increasingly well-known over the past decade. The purpose of this article is to examine and explore the effects of WEOOs and STMs on the populations they are intending to serve. From the research findings, I will illustrate 1) subtle racism, microaggression, and patriarchy from WEOOs and 2) allow the narrative of ethnic-minority experiences to chronicle their experience in these types of organizations. Lastly, this article will briefly propose alternatives and insights from the data gathered.
One week ago (Saturday, May 21, 2011) we should have all been blown to cosmic dust, or raptured up into the Heavens, or put into purgatory, or…what is it about the end times that gets us all in a query of frenzy? What is it about mass death in the name of God that has a lot of religious pious individuals smiling from cheek to cheek and actually being overwhelmed with happiness? A lot of this has to do with the belief in something that is obviously bigger than us and brings us immense self-identity, self-worth, and a false sense of self-righteousness; the same concept happens with, say, health freaks, environmental zealots, and anyone who has found the “Gospel” in a “religious” type context. Sociologist J. Paul Williams depicts this religious process as 1) the secret level—which a person keeps to their self and does not discuss or divulge religiosity which transcends into 2) the private—in which the person divulges information with carefully selected people; then comes 3) the denominational—which the individual shares with many others in a large group and, lastly, 4) the societal—where the “gospel” is shared with all, typically vigorously, and with much passion (J. Paul Williams The Nature Of Religion 1962). It is at this point (The societal) which the person can become zealous and over-energetic to share this newfound “news” with others.
Durkheim (The Elementary Forms of
Religion 3 volumes) reminds us that religion is a functional part of society
and binds its members more closely together through rituals and symbols.
Therefore, it (religion) serves as a revitalizing function and creates hope,
vision, and societal “glue” that keep us from plunging into another dark age.
Still, this said, many religious and pious persons who have become over-zealous and filled with “hope” turned dysfunctional, almost welcome a cosmic Godly mass extinction—so long as they and their selected family and friends are spared. Remember Jonah? Yes, many of us do. But what we forget is that the book of Jonah ended on a crappy note; in fact, very crappy. Let’s recap: Jonah’s living a happy little life, God calls him to Nineveh—a known city of “bad” people, “villains,” sinners, and lost souls, Jonah refuses and runs away, on the boat, there is a big storm and Jonah knows it is for him, he’s tossed over right into the belly of some giant leviathan, spit-up after 3 days, goes to the city, the people repent, and all is good…right? Well in a Disney Pixar film this would have been the end; but the Bible has a lot of stories that end like this: Jonah is pissed. Pissed that he had to endure such hardship, he finally listens to God, but then God doesn’t kill the “evil-doers” as God had stated. Moreover, Jonah is angry with God for what seemingly he feels as God not living up to his end of the agreement. What is this attitude? What is it that makes him feel that others should perish? Compassion is lost—which is also a word used in this passage; both Jonah and God use it. However, Jonah misses the point of the word; it would seem, Jonah almost wishes the people would have perished. What the hell is that about? Remind you of some churches?
I cannot tell you how many Jonah’s I have met in my lifetime: no compassion, zealous, and awaiting hell/ damnation upon anyone who does not fit their ideal religious structure.
Consequently, it should come as
no surprise when we see hundreds of people clamoring to await the end of the
world. More importantly, they are happy that there would be such destruction of
the “wicked” and “evil.” Why is that? Doesn’t God talk about saving people?
Didn’t Jesus talk about loving your neighbor? A lot gets lost in that religious
process between the private and the societal. It is as if some almost hope that
the end comes and kills all those “evil” people—whoever evil people are.
Therefore, it is with no amazement that you have a historical timeline of fools
attempting to predict the end of the world; the end of civilization; the end of
life as we know it.
A film that most people did not
like was called Knowing (2009) staring
Nicholas Cage as a one John Koester who stumbles upon a code which reveals the
end of life on this planet—most people are all up for that: Armageddon, Deep Impact, 2012 all
deal with this theme in one way or another. But what most people want is a
resolution. You kill us all off, but some survive, right? There is a “new
Earth” right? What does that look like? Knowing
answers 2 of those 3 questions and leaves the last one unanswered…people hate
that, but in our theology, we don’t know. No one we know has died, been dead
for a while, then come back to life, wrote a book, went on Oprah, and now can
say without a definite doubt what the “next life” will be…Knowing not only embraces this mystery but acknowledges it as a
reality for all of us; most people want answers; we want to know, “I’m at least
saved, right?” “I did all the ‘right’ things, so I’m going to Heaven, right?”
We don’t know. None of us do.
Rapture, pre-millennial, post-millennial, 3rd angels message, time
of tribulation; we do not know. None of us. We should be ready in season and
out of season.
So I am all in favor of engaging in the societal level of the religious process and using religion as a functional part of our society. However, I am not willing to condemn and wish death upon someone just because they do not live the lifestyle I deem “moral” or “immoral.” I will not take a Jonahian ethos toward humanity nor engage in practices that encourage that worldview. People follow these bullsh*t theologies because they tap into the social identity function and create self-pious mantras within those people to actually want the destruction of the “damned.” Once again, Durkheim asserts that religion also functions as a euphoric function; it aides in establishing a “pleasant feeling” of social well-being; when this becomes maladjusted it is both tragic and dangerous. Harold Camping was able to tap into that dimension and therefore create a vicious line of belief which in turn thrust people from the private and denominational sector right into the societal one to tell people of this imposing doom. Thereby creating this media frenzy which in turn places “all” Christians as religious freaks—I am tired of that perspective because of a few fools like Camping.
We have to be leery of bullsh*t theologies such as this because if Camping was wrong about this, chances are he is wrong about a lot of other stuff too. Regrettably, there are way too many leaders such as Camping who infect their followers seeking that euphoric function and having little to no self-identity thereby creating a legion of ideologically diseased churchgoers wanting to tell everyone the “truth.”
Round two is coming up December 2012…let’s wait to see what happens on January 1, 2013.
While I plan to get deeper into this particular subject, I
felt it important to at least engage, albeit briefly, on the subject matter.
The Earth cracked, just a bit, for many Black pastors and
Christians when President Obama announced he was in support of gay marriage.
This tore open a slice in the gender constructs within Black cultural milieus
that has, especially in Christian circles, gone unengaged with for decades. Sexuality, sexual orientation, its twin cousin
gender performance is a continual issue for many Black Christians. The idea of
how do I act as a man; how do I act as woman; role performance;
femininity; masculinity; sexual awareness, are all issues that tend to be seen
as very binary for Black Christians—generally speaking. For example, you are
either having sex within marriage, in a heterosexual, monogamous relationship
or you are “sinning.” Therefore, when the President made his announcement it
caused a deep stir for many Blacks—just go to Twitter or Facebook and take in
the heated—at times even destructive—arguments that are occurring. Everything
from complete support to renouncing Obama as both a president and Christian are
being had.
Now, this is not to say that other ethnic groups are not
also debating and discussing this very issue as the LGBTQ discussion is far
from over with among Evangelical Christians. However for Blacks, this comes at
a time when the election is very important, the continuing significance of race
is a growing concern especially with the coming Obama campaign, and the
struggle to maintain a voice in the public sphere for Blacks is dwindling (See
here how a Black UCLA professor is dealing the racist tendencies toward him).
Therefore, many Black Christians would appear to be in tension between their “Biblical
beliefs” and their “political views.
For me, the bigger issue is this: it is overdue that we put
away the binary arguments of sexuality and engage with the very real issues of
sexual orientation, sexual identity, sexual development, and sexual role
performance within the Black community which has gone overlooked for far too
long. Moreover, it is high time that our arguments move beyond the basic understanding
of the Bible and move to see the grander historical, cultural, and social
context in which the Bible was written in. As Anthea Butler reminds us, “It is
high time to for the leaders of the black church to ‘put away childish things’
and to engage in a real conversation about sexuality, same-sex marriage, and
the homophobia embedded in the black church community. Pontificating and
posturing props up preachers, and does little to edify congregations.” I cannot
say it any better.
I am about loving my neighbor as Christ commanded me to do.
I am about equality for all—regardless of whether I agree with them or not. I
am about engaging with conflict and being ok with disagreement. I am about
diverse and vast views of the Bible while still maintaining my spiritual
journey with God. And I am about the spiritual ethos laid out by Billy Graham
at the 1996 inaugural luncheon of then President Bill Clinton when a reporter
asked him why he was in the presence of an obvious “sinner” such as Clinton;
Graham stated: “It is God’s job to judge. The Holy Spirits job to convict. And
my job to love. I’m here doing my job.”
I leave you with that as you ponder these videos moving
forward.
There I sat, anxiously awaiting the final scores for the women’s gymnastics all-around. Gabby had done an amazing job and so did the rest of her team. She had already won a gold medal for her team performance, but now, it was the individual gold. It finally came in. Gabby had won! Now, in times past I normally could care less about the Olympics; they take up valuable TV time and make me miss my favorite shows. But, since I got married, a lot of “things” have changed in my viewing appetite—this of course being one of them. I was floored. She actually won! Amazing. Stupendous. Unreal. And then, the racial construct ideology hit me seconds later. I wondered, how long it would take before Gabby’s racial milieu becomes the topic of conversation. So, I decided to do a little experiment, I grabbed my phone and set the timer to see how long it would take before something about Gabby’s “Blackness” (and all the social pathologies associated with being “Black”) would come to the forefront to shadow her success.
It took just over an hour for the
first article to surface about her hair. Within three, there were articles
discussing her “poor” mother. And within 24 (After which I shut the timer down)
there were over a dozen news articles commenting on either Gabby’s hair or how
her mother had filed for bankruptcy. Fox News even exclaimed how she was not
“patriotic enough” because she didn’t wear the American flag—or some kind of
mess like that.
So, why does all this matter? Why
should we care? Doesn’t this happen to anyone who is famous and in the
spotlight?
To start, I’ll answer my last
question first. No. No, this does not happen to everyone who is famous. Yes,
there is always “dirt” on people, but the way that dirt is handled in the media
is different if you are Black, Brown, or Asian. It is just that simple. We
didn’t hear how Raisman was having a “bad hair day.” No one commented on
Maroney’s parents and their financial history. Yet, when Gabby wins the gold
and does so in a decisive manner, the Black “pookie story” runs wild. Moreover,
Gabby is continued to be looked at as less
than in subversive passive manners blind to most without the critical eye
of racial awareness. Bankruptcy, hair, not being patriotic enough, barely
getting to the Olympics because she was “poor,” and of course the discussions
on her father all take center stage when your Black; these are the racial
narratives most Black athletes who do not fit the social stereotype of an
athlete have to contend with.
Because if you are Black,
aggressive, male, tattooed up, loud, from the ‘hood and play either basketball
or football and/ or run track, that is an acceptable form of a “Black Athlete”
because that is what “Blacks do” and
it fits the stereotype. But Gabby does not fit that social script. In fact,
since Dominique Dawes, she is the first African American female to compete in
the Olympics; and Dawes was back in 1996—that right there needs to sink in for
a minute. To add more insult to racial injury, Bob Costas on NBC read off a
scripted discourse that said there were no barriers anymore for Blacks and that
the “field is wide open” for Blacks, but that they still needed to announce
that Douglas was the “first” to win the all-around competition nevertheless.
Whoever wrote that needs to study the savage racial inequalities in the U.S.
just over the last century alone.
So why does this matter? Why
should we care? Because, we live in a time where it has been suggested that
racism is dead. It is a “post racial”
society (because of the “Black president”). We should not be talking about
racial issues anymore because they are a figment of our imagination. These are
all socially constructed myths which are debunked when someone like Gabby does
what she does and is then grilled over the racial coals. Anytime you have the
first of any type of racial/ ethnic group, we have not “made it.” That is
merely the beginning of a very long road ahead and that person then becomes
pioneerial. Gabby is that a pioneerial persona who is opening up doors to many
other Black athletes. This matters because as someone who works with and in
youth culture, the racial component is a big one and it is easy for many
White’s to ignore it because they themselves do not have to endure such comments
which then get thrusted back onto the rest of the culture, race, and ethnic
group as a symbol of the whole. This matters because Gabby is the face of many
teens in the ‘hood, suburbs, and rural contexts that do not get the credit for
having the amazing attitude, personality, drive, and spirit that they do. Black
kids are typically stereotyped and I am here to exclaim: Gabby is not an
anomaly among Black youth!
Lastly, this discussion is
important because it continues to reveal the deep seated racist interpretations
toward Blacks that the media has and has had for decades; it merely reveals
itself in passive ways. We have to remember, the “Devil” (in whatever form it
may take) never comes at us with the full entourage of horns, red face, glowing
eyes, goat legs, and a whipping tail. If it did, then we would all run in the
other direction. No. What does come forward is the passive, back seat, back
room, and subversive racial suggestions which come at us daily in the form of
commercials, ads, and sound bites which divulge racial bias’ that many of us
accept as “normal.” Gabby Douglas is that example.
Father’s Day is an interesting day. It is a day to remember
the fathers of the world—at least in this society here in the West. Father’s
Day is a day to recognize the influence, presence, and significance of the male
in a family unit—however one would define a “family unit.” This day is also a
time of clever marketing to get dad that special “hammer” or lawnmower he has
been wanting, or to treat him to a nice meal at his favorite burger joint—all
with special “incentives” like 50% off this and or “no tax” on that. Father’s
Day presents itself with a myriad of choices on what to do for dad. But, the
deeper issue is, what is a dad? What does a dad really look like in today’s
public sphere? Is dad someone who is relegated and minimized to tools, beer,
food, and ties? Or is dad someone bigger than that? Is dad a male or a female?
Let’s take a closer look. As many of you know, I have only ever
met my father twice in my life, once in July of 1980 and once in July of 1982, after
which, I never saw him again in my life. I’m sure he’s out there somewhere, but
I never knew a male authoritative figure in my life to which I called “father.”
Moreover, the only memories I have of “dad” from 1982 is that he bought me
pepperoni pizza, protected me from some deranged individual holding a bat, and
a picture that is now too dark to even make out who he really is. Thus, my life
was “dad” was not much. I remember early 1983 receiving a big box with a bunch
of toys, which I still have to this day. Other than those interactions, I have
never really had a “father” in my life.
Now, I’ve had male role models who performed fatherly duties
ranging from good, bad, ugly, so-so— always older males who have shown an
interest in me over the years and have been a wide assortment of characters. I
remember the first male I looked at as a “role model” came in the 4th
grade. There were 5 young men held back in ages between 12-14 years of age—yes,
in Texas at
that time you could get held back indefinitely. At that point I was being
picked on by many of the older White kids who disliked Blacks, these group of
older Mexican males, protected me—particularly Rene. Rene was the oldest and one
of the toughest. He showed me how to fight back and how stand up for myself in
real time—meaning beyond the sticks and stones crap you’re taught by people who
don’t have a clue of what you’re going through. Rene was it for me. Was he a
“good” “father” for me all the time? No, but then again, no father ever is.
But, he helped me through rough times, paid attention to me, communed with me,
and loved on me as a dad would. Growing up in Menard Texas, I was one of the only kids without a
father, but when I got to high school, I fit right in. Vince, the new “dad” in
my life, helped me my freshman year in high school and served as one of those
males who showed me the “ropes,” so to speak, and kept me out of trouble. Vince
was a young man who helped me transition from small town culture to big city
culture. Vince also possessed many of the qualities that Rene had.
Throughout my high school years there were different dads,
which took on that role model for me. They all had some of the same qualities:
caring, love, community, a genuine care and interest for my life, and helped
shape formative times in my life—just like a dad should. Again, were all these
men “the best?” Yes, at each interval, yes, they were; they were not perfect,
but had an important role. They had deeper qualities than just wanting a tie or
a good meal on a societal assigned holiday, they wanted to get to know me
better and help a younger boy find his way.
My mom was also a father to me when it was needed. There is
a slew of single mothers out there who raise boys that turn into great young
men—we tend to overlook many of the women who do this everyday. Moreover, stale
definitions of the family picture a husband and a wife raising kids—while that
is optimal for social, cognitive, and psychological development it is not
always the “best” and life doesn’t always work out with June and Ward Cleaver.
My mom stepped in often as a dad figure and taught me how to shave, ride my
first bike, listen to me when I kissed my first girl, and there to help me
through life’s struggles as a young male.
For me, there are two major distinctions in fatherdom: a
father—which fulfills the basic role of a being a father (being a figure to
look at as a parent, providing, protecting, and basic interactions); then there
is the dad, who has all those qualities of the father, but also is there
emotionally, has worked through (or begun to work through) their issues,
someone who teaches and educates, someone who is able to let their children
grown and mature, someone who is solid and admits their mistakes, and someone
who is spiritually available for their children. These two differences are key
in understanding how to find a good dad.
As I now have the great role of being a dad for my
biological child, I know that I want to give her something I never had; I know
I want to give her a future that is vastly different than my past; I know I
want to educate and train her that life is not fair and that as an ethnic
minority and a woman she will not be given anything in life; I want to teach
her that God is more than just a “father” God is a dad and a mom and within
that God head exists an abundance of love beyond what I could ever give.
This dad’s day I reflect on all those men and women who
influenced me and shaped me into the man I am today. I reflect back on a father
who was never really there—but thankfully I never had to wait on the corner for
a father who would never show up; I never had to listen to failed promises; I
never had to witness my mom being beat; I never had to deal with a father who
didn’t emotionally support me; not that my father was or did all those things,
but as I’ve worked with young people over the last 16 years one of the most
destructive forces in a young persons life is an absent parent—I never had to
experience that. Am I angry at my father? No. I never knew him. Moreover, he
never really knew me. I’m not the same 8-year-old gazing at him with awe back
in 1982. I’ve had plenty of examples of what a good dad should be in my life.
And I’m passing those on to my little girl and the young men I mentor.
Once we move beyond the stereotypes of Father’s Day, we find
that there are many young men who have only been taught to be just a father. My
hope is that we will be able to break through that stereotype and move into
being better dads. I know that’s my mission.
As a side note, the picture you see here is the only picture
I ever had of my father. Notice any resemblance?
