# Trayvon Martin Cover Reveal



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

This is for an essay on the subject. It's kind of quiet. Doesn't really pop. Don't know if I want it to be more violent visually. I took color cues from the hood. Reds don't work well against the hood. It's a comp image. What do you think?

http://hudowen.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=966


----------



## Sapphire (Apr 24, 2012)

I think low-key is good. Definitely don't use any red. Are you sure you want to write this piece at this time?


----------



## Wansit (Sep 27, 2012)

Are you sure you can write a book/biography/whatever this is on such a public figure AND use their name in the title? I can't imagine their lawyers wouldn't come down on you.

I mean Scarlett Johanss** objected to the use of her name & image in a book: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/scarlett-johansson-sues-bestselling-author-for-using-name-in-novel-tribute-8650285.html


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

I feel like that font is too common. Is it Copperplate Gothic? It looks like a very "standard" font, in any event.

I share in Wansit's concern that it might be imprudent to use someone's name that way. I'm no lawyer, but I'd be wary of doing it. And if the essay is heavily about the case, I'd have it vetted to make sure I didn't phrase anything in a potentially libelous way.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

I don't know the content, but you could have some problems. Definitely, some problems.


----------



## Quiss (Aug 21, 2012)

The font doesn't work for me. Looks a little home made. The model doesn't have the same appeal as Trevon Martin does, but of course you can't actually use him for this.

My concern is more practical. At this point, the interweb is choked with everyone's opinion on this issue which still isn't resolved and will continue to spew fallout. It may actually change the status quo of "race in America". Why would someone pay for an essay about his now?


----------



## Joseph Turkot (Nov 9, 2012)

No offense , but sounds like a money grab. If it's an essay, pub it through a blog.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

Sapphire said:


> I think low-key is good. Definitely don't use any red. Are you sure you want to write this piece at this time?


Sure I do. You can bet there are big time authors backed by big time publishers doing the same thing. The only advantage I have is that I have an essay not an entire book to put out, in a week or so.



Joseph Turkot said:


> No offense , but sounds like a money grab. If it's an essay, pub it through a blog.


Again, there will be thousands of books and articles published on this subject. Think of all the books published after the O.J. Simpson verdict.



Quiss said:


> The font doesn't work for me. Looks a little home made. The model doesn't have the same appeal as Trevon Martin does, but of course you can't actually use him for this.
> 
> My concern is more practical. At this point, the interweb is choked with everyone's opinion on this issue which still isn't resolved and will continue to spew fallout. It may actually change the status quo of "race in America". Why would someone pay for an essay about his now?


The font is not home made. Maybe hum drum. Why? Because it's a hot topic. Strike while the iron is hot.



Wansit said:


> Are you sure you can write a book/biography/whatever this is on such a public figure AND use their name in the title? I can't imagine their lawyers wouldn't come down on you.
> 
> I mean Scarlett Johanss** objected to the use of her name & image in a book: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/scarlett-johansson-sues-bestselling-author-for-using-name-in-novel-tribute-8650285.html


I'm pretty sure I can put a name in the news on the cover of a book. I am protected by the commentary clause in copyright law. Quotes inside the book are short.


----------



## Catchy (Mar 3, 2012)

I don't like the use of the image...find a darker hoodie, do something with more impact. Don't show any face. 

The font is not a good for this project. The layout is also too broken up: flush left, centred, flush right. It's too much. Sorry. I'm having trouble with all of the elements.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Quiss said:


> The font doesn't work for me. Looks a little home made. The model doesn't have the same appeal as Trevon Martin does, but of course you can't actually use him for this.
> 
> My concern is more practical. At this point, the interweb is choked with everyone's opinion on this issue which still isn't resolved and will continue to spew fallout. It may actually change the status quo of "race in America". Why would someone pay for an essay about his now?


Sure, people will pay for it now. In fact, now while it is a large issue is when they are most likely to pay for it.

The image doesn't pop, but a dark image might be the way to do with this. In fact, I might try darkening it slightly to try to get the font to pop more and perhaps try out some different fonts.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

Catchy said:


> I don't like the use of the image...find a darker hoodie, do something with more impact. Don't show any face.
> 
> The font is not a good for this project. The layout is also too broken up: flush left, centred, flush right. It's too much. Sorry. I'm having trouble with all of the elements.


Noted.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

JRTomlin said:


> Sure, people will pay for it now. In fact, now while it is a large issue is when they are most likely to pay for it.
> 
> The image doesn't pop, but a dark image might be the way to do with this. In fact, I might try darkening it slightly to try to get the font to pop more and perhaps try out some different fonts.


Will definitely try different fonts. Thanks.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

David Stephens said:


> It looks like a mushy, boldy version of Copperplate Gothic and is a terrible choice for book cover. Copperplate Gothic works best in smaller sizes. In all my years in typesetting I don't recall ever seeing it used much above above 18 point. Many years ago was widely used on business cards, announcements, stationery, checks, stocks, bonds, certificates and such. No business card shop was complete without it.


Not sure about the mushy part, but you might be right that CG Bold works better in smaller sizes.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

My feeling (and God knows I am NO cover designer) is that since the illustration doesn't pop, that you want the font to pop. To do that, I think you need strong contrast, so a rather stark font that works well in reverse print would probably be best for the purpose. To me, that font isn't very dramatic.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

JRTomlin said:


> My feeling (and God knows I am NO cover designer) is that since the illustration doesn't pop, that you want the font to pop. To do that, I think you need strong contrast, so a rather stark font that works well in reverse print would probably be best for the purpose. To me, that font isn't very dramatic.


I agree with you. I am working in haste. I should slow down.


----------



## Guest (Jul 22, 2013)

Joseph Turkot said:


> No offense , but sounds like a money grab. If it's an essay, pub it through a blog.


*nods*

I am curious as to Hudson's credentials for speaking on this subject. It's one thing to post a blog post sharing thoughts about current events. It is quite another to sell for profit something that you have limited ground to speak on. Does the OP teach some course in college on the subject? Does the OP know the family and wants to help tell their side of the story? Has the OP been in a similar situation?

The beauty of America is that we can write what we want. But to paraphrase Dr. Malcolm, sometimes we get so caught up in if we CAN do something that we never stop to ask if we SHOULD. I think a lot of people are going to see an "old white man" talking down to them about race relations and trying to profit off of a teenager's death. Prepare for a sea of one stars.


----------



## Teri Hall (Feb 10, 2013)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> But to paraphrase Dr. Malcolm, sometimes we get so caught up in if we CAN do something that we never stop to ask if we SHOULD.


This ^^^^^^ is very true. About lots of things.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> *nods*
> 
> I am curious as to Hudson's credentials for speaking on this subject. It's one thing to post a blog post sharing thoughts about current events. It is quite another to sell for profit something that you have limited ground to speak on. Does the OP teach some course in college on the subject? Does the OP know the family and wants to help tell their side of the story? Has the OP been in a similar situation?
> 
> The beauty of America is that we can write what we want. But to paraphrase Dr. Malcolm, sometimes we get so caught up in if we CAN do something that we never stop to ask if we SHOULD. I think a lot of people are going to see an "old white man" talking down to them about race relations and trying to profit off of a teenager's death. Prepare for a sea of one stars.


A lot depends on packaging-as you may know. Sometimes a word or two makes all the difference. Now I agree that the title carries with it an air of expertise. But add the words "reflections on&#8230;" or better still, "one man's reflections on&#8230;" and the OP is no longer presumptuous-unless, of course, it turns out that he is preaching. But that remains to be seen because the title will no longer be doing it.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> *nods*
> 
> I am curious as to Hudson's credentials for speaking on this subject. It's one thing to post a blog post sharing thoughts about current events. It is quite another to sell for profit something that you have limited ground to speak on. Does the OP teach some course in college on the subject? Does the OP know the family and wants to help tell their side of the story? Has the OP been in a similar situation?
> 
> The beauty of America is that we can write what we want. But to paraphrase Dr. Malcolm, sometimes we get so caught up in if we CAN do something that we never stop to ask if we SHOULD. I think a lot of people are going to see an "old white man" talking down to them about race relations and trying to profit off of a teenager's death. Prepare for a sea of one stars.


Where is the "I love Julie" thread?

I'd even go as far as saying that as writers, trying to reach out to a general audience, we should probably try to mute our political and religious opinions on blogs etc., unless we have specific authority to speak about the subject or unless raising s***storms is part of your sales tactic (which I'm not sure works).

I would find dissertations from a writer of fiction on political subjects a turn-off and would be less likely to buy fiction from that writer. Unless, again, the writer works in the area, has researched it extensively, and has the stripes to prove it, or has personal experience. The writer's authority would have to be in that writer's bio. So, if the bio said "This author is a professor in Sociology at ..." or "This writer has spent years living in the area where this happened" I wouldn't have a problem with it, but if not, I'd see it as distasteful and money or attention-grabbing. If you removed the name from the title, it would be a lot less problematic.


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> *nods*
> 
> I am curious as to Hudson's credentials for speaking on this subject. It's one thing to post a blog post sharing thoughts about current events. It is quite another to sell for profit something that you have limited ground to speak on. Does the OP teach some course in college on the subject? Does the OP know the family and wants to help tell their side of the story? Has the OP been in a similar situation?
> 
> The beauty of America is that we can write what we want. But to paraphrase Dr. Malcolm, sometimes we get so caught up in if we CAN do something that we never stop to ask if we SHOULD. I think a lot of people are going to see an "old white man" talking down to them about race relations and trying to profit off of a teenager's death. Prepare for a sea of one stars.


This x1000. Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you Julie. Especially that last bit. Privilege is a powerful thing. It's important to be aware of it when trying to speak for others.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Hi, folks, 

I've had a report about this thread and need to read through to see what is going on.  

Thanks for understanding....

EDIT:  Reopening.  The discussion is fine as long as it stays within the scope of the OP's question.  And please respect our filters.  Thanks!

Betsy
KBoards Moderator


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

The cover's going to need some work. Personally, I would use an image like this:

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14423397-man-in-the-shadow.php?st=4f5eee7

If you really are wanting to ride the wave of interest in this story, then I think you'll have to have something glossy and polished to compete with the flood of other materials. Right now, the cover just looks too homegrown.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

Focusing on the OP's original question...

Yea, the image is way too grainy and the font looks amateurish. Seems a bit excessive to make a cover for an essay. Perhaps you should do a book or a collection of essays if the topic moves you to so.

A suggestion... I went on Amazon and typed in phrases like "OJ Simpson, Glenn Beck, Race in America, etc to get a look at the book covers that came up. The fonts I saw were more professional looking, the images were very clear and crisp and on many there were uses of lines and contrasting color schemes that highlighted the titles. Perhaps you should do a search to get a feel for the books that fit the audience you are trying to reach.

Here goes a stock image from Dreamtime that probably would work better. I'm sure the title would get enough attention...

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photos-dark-hoodie-sweater-man-image14805418


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Patty Jansen said:


> Where is the "I love Julie" thread?
> 
> I'd even go as far as saying that as writers, trying to reach out to a general audience, we should probably try to mute our political and religious opinions on blogs etc., unless we have specific authority to speak about the subject or unless raising s***storms is part of your sales tactic (which I'm not sure works).
> 
> I would find dissertations from a writer of fiction on political subjects a turn-off and would be less likely to buy fiction from that writer. Unless, again, the writer works in the area, has researched it extensively, and has the stripes to prove it, or has personal experience. The writer's authority would have to be in that writer's bio. So, if the bio said "This author is a professor in Sociology at ..." or "This writer has spent years living in the area where this happened" I wouldn't have a problem with it, but if not, I'd see it as distasteful and money or attention-grabbing. If you removed the name from the title, it would be a lot less problematic.


Some do try to mute their opinions. A lot don't. Barry Eisler for instance is darn loud about his political stance. Heinlein was loud about his opinion too. So is Orson Scott Card. None of them are some kind of "experts" on politics and I hear they sell pretty good. I don't think you have to have a degree in Sociology to have an opinion. There is no rule that we have to pretend to be someone we're not in order to be successful fiction authors.

ETA: Might you lose a few sales? Sure. You might, but I rather suspect most people won't care one way or the other.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> The cover's going to need some work. Personally, I would use an image like this:
> 
> http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14423397-man-in-the-shadow.php?st=4f5eee7
> 
> If you really are wanting to ride the wave of interest in this story, then I think you'll have to have something glossy and polished to compete with the flood of other materials. Right now, the cover just looks too homegrown.


I like that image. I think with a more polished looking font it would work well.


----------



## Al Dente (Sep 3, 2012)

My design skills are quite far from being taken seriously, but using one of the suggested stock images from a few posts ago, I came up with a quick 5-minute mock up of what might work for what you're trying to accomplish. I hope that's okay.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

JRTomlin said:


> Some do try to mute their opinions. A lot don't. Barry Eisler for instance is darn loud about his political stance. Heinlein was loud about his opinion too. So is Orson Scott Card. None of them are some kind of "experts" on politics and I hear they sell pretty good. I don't think you have to have a degree in Sociology to have an opinion. There is no rule that we have to pretend to be someone we're not in order to be successful fiction authors.
> 
> ETA: Might you lose a few sales? Sure. You might, but I rather suspect most people won't care one way or the other.


Agreed. When I read the comment about needing a degree in Sociology or something I shrugged. If someone wants to write a provocative book fine. It's America. Like any other book, some will love it and others will hate it. Just with a topic like this, there will be less of a gray area on where folks stand.

But as it stands, the cover turns me off more than anything. (Still not sure where this essay falls on the political spectrum but I recognize it is not relevant to this particular thread.)


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

David Scroggins said:


> My design skills are quite far from being taken seriously, but using one of the suggested stock images from a few posts ago, I came up with a quick 5-minute mock up of what might work for what you're trying to accomplish. I hope that's okay.


That's a pretty darn attractive cover. I would very possibly buy it.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

David Scroggins said:


> My design skills are quite far from being taken seriously, but using one of the suggested stock images from a few posts ago, I came up with a quick 5-minute mock up of what might work for what you're trying to accomplish. I hope that's okay.


Yea, this is what I envisioned. The professional font, the line and the image that didn't take away from the title.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

Rex Jameson said:


> The cover's going to need some work. Personally, I would use an image like this:
> 
> http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14423397-man-in-the-shadow.php?st=4f5eee7
> 
> If you really are wanting to ride the wave of interest in this story, then I think you'll have to have something glossy and polished to compete with the flood of other materials. Right now, the cover just looks too homegrown.


I found that image on fotolia, which tells you how many persons have downloaded that image, and the "empty hood" had been downloaded 70+ times, a bit much for my likes. Don't underestimate the power of a simple image. I don't want a cover that looks glossy/slick. Certainly I can do better than what I have now.



GavinFletcher said:


> Focusing on the OP's original question...
> 
> Yea, the image is way too grainy and the font looks amateurish. Seems a bit excessive to make a cover for an essay. Perhaps you should do a book or a collection of essays if the topic moves you to so.
> 
> ...


Gavin, every book gets a cover now matter how long or short it is. I sometimes use the half tone filter in Photoshop for news-related covers. Not everyone like that. The hood has been overused. It certainly doesn't hurt to research different covers in the general area of your topic. I'm already working on a different image--that no one has downloaded...yet.


----------



## EthanRussellErway (Nov 17, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> My feeling (and God knows I am NO cover designer) is that since the illustration doesn't pop, that you want the font to pop. To do that, I think you need strong contrast, so a rather stark font that works well in reverse print would probably be best for the purpose. To me, that font isn't very dramatic.


Says the person with some of the coolest covers around.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

David Scroggins said:


> My design skills are quite far from being taken seriously, but using one of the suggested stock images from a few posts ago, I came up with a quick 5-minute mock up of what might work for what you're trying to accomplish. I hope that's okay.


Thanks, David. No, I don't mind. I would say that there are too many words in your proposed cover. I'm keeping the title. The blurb will explain things, give the length and so on, just where this book fits in our ongoing national conversation about race.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

EthanRussellErway said:


> Says the person with some of the coolest covers around.


Thanks, Ethan! But I never, ever design my own covers. LOL

ETA: Not to say that some people can't.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> *nods*
> 
> I am curious as to Hudson's credentials for speaking on this subject. It's one thing to post a blog post sharing thoughts about current events. It is quite another to sell for profit something that you have limited ground to speak on. Does the OP teach some course in college on the subject? Does the OP know the family and wants to help tell their side of the story? Has the OP been in a similar situation?
> 
> The beauty of America is that we can write what we want. But to paraphrase Dr. Malcolm, sometimes we get so caught up in if we CAN do something that we never stop to ask if we SHOULD. I think a lot of people are going to see an "old white man" talking down to them about race relations and trying to profit off of a teenager's death. Prepare for a sea of one stars.


Caveat emptor.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

JRTomlin said:


> Thanks, Ethan! But I never, ever design my own covers. LOL
> 
> ETA: Not to say that some people can't.


You have impressive, complex covers that look like they required original artwork, quite expensive, I would guess. I have paid for some covers. With my intermediate PS skills, I do some of my own. I tend to like strong central images (also complex layered images), which helps me out. The trick is getting all those simple design elements just right. Heh Heh.


----------



## Al Dente (Sep 3, 2012)

EthanRussellErway said:


> Says the person with some of the coolest covers around.


She's definitely got epic covers.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Caveat emptor.


Yes, let the buyer beware. This is true of any book you consider purchasing. Maybe the reviews are misleading; maybe there are no reviews. Maybe the book hasn't been published yet (!).

I'm an old hand at publishing essays. If you are curious, you might check out Yearning In The Age Of The Nightmare, and most recently, Essays Of Concern, on Amazon.


----------



## David Adams (Jan 2, 2012)

Edit: Holy crap David Scroggins read my mind!

The graphics designer in me says to use this picture instead:

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14423397-man-in-the-shadow.php?st=b00d5c7










... and to use Trajan Pro as your font.

The person in me says that I find this kind of unauthorised opinion piece about someone whose name is still in the media machine and who's only been dead a matter of months, without any kind of insider knowledge or experience or insight beyond that gleamed from mass media, to be a bit tacky. :/

I would suggest that simply using the title "Race in America" and using the hoodie picture is enough. Everyone knows who you're talking about.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

GavinFletcher said:


> (Still not sure where this essay falls on the political spectrum but I recognize it is not relevant to this particular thread.)


I think it is relevant. Because the cover will have to reflect the stance of the piece to avoid misperception. Ironic, considering the entire incident occurred due to misperception.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

David Adams said:


> The person in me says that I find this kind of unauthorised opinion piece about someone whose name is still in the media machine and who's only been dead a matter of months, without any kind of insider knowledge or experience or insight beyond that gleamed from mass media, to be a bit tacky. :/
> 
> I would suggest that simply using the title "Race in America" and using the hoodie picture is enough. Everyone knows who you're talking about.


T.M. has been deceased for just over a year, actually, David.

I agree with your assessment, though. It's tacky. And people are way too divided right now on it.

The left-of-center opinions are freely available on MSNBC, CNN, the NYT, and just about everywhere.

The right-of-center commentary is also freely available on Fox News and talk radio.

Nearly all of them are better-known and more-practiced hands at political commentary than the O.P.

And frankly, regardless of left, right, or center, I'm personally more interested... if I were to buy an essay on the topic (and it would take a really top-name author/commentator to draw my interest)... in hearing from commentators of color... both black and Hispanic... on an issue like this.

Rev. Jackson? Maybe. Sen. Ted Cruz? Possibly. Trayvon's friend, Rachel Jeantel? Now we're talking... she at least had some personal involvement. George himself? Ehh, maybe... but he's TOO involved.

Those might draw my interest for a $0.99 essay through Kindle Singles. But not this.

But that's all I'll say on the topic. It's clear that the OP is committed to doing this no matter how many folks are waving red flags in his general direction on how badly it could backfire. Even though we're only waving those flags out of genuine concern for him and the good of his career.

In which case, I will only say that, considering the completely unsettled nature of the cover, I'd hardly call this a "Cover Reveal" thread. The cover is still too up in the air for that.


----------



## Sapphire (Apr 24, 2012)

In an ideal world we would have a number of essays exploring this topic in a broader sense. The problem is that all we hear are the far left views, the far right views, and the rants of those too close to the case and its issues. Calmer heads and thoughtful insights get lost in the rhetoric. We need to consider humanity, how we OUGHT to live, the old-fashioned but never outdated lesson of the Golden Rule. Respect for one another and tolerance for other lifestyles and beliefs would prevent many confrontations and heal a lot of wounds. So would making judgments on facts rather then perceptions, or misperceptions as happened in this particular instance. However, we live in a world focused on being politically correct rather than honest. I doubt calmer heads with thoughtful insights can be heard above the din. That doesn't mean we give up and don't strive for the ideal world.


----------



## RedTash (Aug 14, 2011)

When I wrote my syndicated column, I wrote on all kinds of topics from the news. I didn't have any particular expertise on the Octomom or Britney Spears or the Duggars, but if I realized I was drifting into opinion *about* any one person in particular, then I'd at least contact him/her for a comment. Had some fascinating conversations via telephone that way, and to be honest, the columns never turned into interviews. Just better informed essays on my part. In the end it was still _my_ essay.

What I'm saying is that even though I don't know Trayvon or anyone related to Trayvon, you can be sure I'd have written about his killing and this verdict in terms of what it means to me as a parent. That was what the theme of my column was about.

I had no special qualifications as a writer--not even a journalism degree. I was syndicated in hundreds of papers across the country because my local editor gave me a chance and then decided to make my work available to other editors in his network of newspapers.

If the OP wants to publish essays on topics du jour then I actually think this is a terrific idea. If people disagree with his work they will comment accordingly and certainly he must realize that is inevitable for any of us when we publish online, sanctioned by self or otherwise. I have found people are becoming more and more trigger-happy with the "return" button on their Kindles even when they like a book, so as long as he's willing to deal with all of the above, then why discourage him?

Is it less risky to do a piece like this on a blog? Absolutely! Will the piece be better read through a newspaper? Of course! These are the common channels for opinion pieces.

But I don't think any lack of a platform on the topic of race should stop anyone from writing. There is always going to be someone who thinks what you sell is tacky, whether you write romance or sparkly vampires or historical fiction--there is a never-ending sea of potentially disgusted folks ready to be turned off by our opportunism when dishing out fiction for sale. On the other hand, I find the efforts of those who earnestly want to begin compassionate discourse in the wake of a tragedy to be all too few.

I *will* make the suggestion that if you truly are interested in writing essays of this nature in an ongoing fashion, that before you publish to Amazon, you query the editor of your local newspaper. See if he/she will run your piece. He/she probably will, sans payment. If it generates letters to the editor you could be invited to write a column on the regular and wouldn't that be fun?

Just my $.02. Good luck with your book. If you do publish it via Amazon I do recommend you follow the wise advice of all who pushed you toward the hoodie pic and the polished cover. Having a popular image can work in your favor and I believe this would be one of those times.


----------



## AshMP (Dec 30, 2009)

I much prefer the images other have found for you over the image you posted your website.  

The original font used makes the cover look a little...homespun.  

Good luck on your essay.


----------



## Guest (Jul 22, 2013)

GavinFletcher said:


> Agreed. When I read the comment about needing a degree in Sociology or something I shrugged. If someone wants to write a provocative book fine.


That was one example that I gave. With non-fiction (and essays are non-fiction), it is important for the author to come from a place of authority on a subject. Authority is earned in a number of ways. A degree is the most obvious form of authority on a subject. But there are other ways to earn that authority. Life experiences provide authority. But is there anything in Hudson's life experiences that give him authority to speak on the issue? We don't know. There is nothing on his website or blog to indicate any form of life experience that offers a unique insight on the topic. Involvement in an event, even similar, provides authority on a subject. But there is no indication Hudson has been involved in anything similar. Activism can provide authority. A person who has worked for a civil rights organization as a volunteer, even if that person has never personally experiences prejudice, can gain authority through closely working with others who have.

We all have opinions on all sorts of things that happen. And I'd never discourage someone from blogging about their opinions on anything or shooting off letters to the editor at your local newspaper. Ye gods know I run my mouth enough.  But when you decide to place a _price tag on your opinion_, particularly when that opinion is on a topic with a lot of open wounds, you are dealing with a whole different thing. And readers will generally expect some level of authority on a topic before they open their wallet.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> T.M. has been deceased for just over a year, actually, David.
> 
> I agree with your assessment, though. It's tacky. And people are way too divided right now on it.
> 
> ...


You, like anyone else, are entitled to your opinion but when I read/hear anyone say they'd rather get a perspective from "commentators of color" I just cringe. Especially since, in my opinion, race is not a one-sided issue. Trust me when I say people of color, even the likes of Henry Louis Gates or Cornel West, have no monopoly on topics of race relations in America. I like to get all perspectives personally. I've read essays, books and the discussion boards on ALL those CNN articles surrounding the Zimmerman case. There have been a number of talking heads who have given opinions, personally I enjoyed Tim Wise when he appeared on the CNN special: "The N-Word."

But hey, you were speaking for yourself and what would make you want to purchase the essay.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> That was one example that I gave. With non-fiction (and essays are non-fiction), it is important for the author to come from a place of authority on a subject. Authority is earned in a number of ways. A degree is the most obvious form of authority on a subject. But there are other ways to earn that authority. Life experiences provide authority. But is there anything in Hudson's life experiences that give him authority to speak on the issue? We don't know. There is nothing on his website or blog to indicate any form of life experience that offers a unique insight on the topic. Involvement in an event, even similar, provides authority on a subject. But there is no indication Hudson has been involved in anything similar. Activism can provide authority. A person who has worked for a civil rights organization as a volunteer, even if that person has never personally experiences prejudice, can gain authority through closely working with others who have.
> 
> We all have opinions on all sorts of things that happen. And I'd never discourage someone from blogging about their opinions on anything or shooting off letters to the editor at your local newspaper. Ye gods know I run my mouth enough.  But when you decide to place a _price tag on your opinion_, particularly when that opinion is on a topic with a lot of open wounds, you are dealing with a whole different thing. And readers will generally expect some level of authority on a topic before they open their wallet.


Hmm, now this is a good point that only yields more questions... I was curious as to who you meant when you said "them" when you posted that the OP's essay might come across as an "old white man" talking down to them. In my mind it implied that you had made up in your mind as to the bend of the OP's perspective.

In my mind, and this is just my opinion, I have an authority to speak on any social issue. That authority is inherent since I have the right to vote and therefore affect social policy. Now, whether others take me seriously is another issue. Personally, I just disagree with the requirements your feel are necessary to speak with authority on a subject. We can agree to disagree on that. For me, presenting a sound argument on a subject is enough for me to consider a topic. Heck, that's why we wrote so many papers in college, to learn how to write and craft a sound argument. So, if the OP has a sound argument with whatever perspective he takes, good for him.

And just to play devil's advocate, I'm not a woman but that does that mean I couldn't write an essay (and charge) on abortion? I'm not Native American but does that mean I can't write an essay (and charge) about Native lands and Sovereignty Law?

Not trying to be annoying but unless someone is peddling child porn I say go for it. It just lets me know where someone REALLY stands on an issue.


----------



## Guest (Jul 22, 2013)

GavinFletcher said:


> And just to play devil's advocate, I'm not a woman but that does that mean I couldn't write an essay (and charge) on abortion?


So long as you don't engage in mansplaining. 

You can write any essay you want. But if you want me to PAY for it, then I would want to know on what authority you were speaking. Are you involved as an activist on one side or the other? Do you have female family members who have struggled with the decision? Since you yourself have never been faced with the decision, in fact since you are physically incapable of ever becoming pregnant and therefore cannot be faced with the decision, if you expect people to pay for your opinion it would be beneficial to provide context in regards to where your authority on the subject comes from.

Opinions are like...um...noses.


Spoiler



(I'm being good, Betsy).


 Everyone has one. Whether or not YOUR opinion is worth me as a consumer spending money on is a matter of whether or not I have a reason to care about your opinion. Again, at no point have I said people shouldn't write on what they want to write. I am talking in terms of the BUSINESS of selling. This is strictly a marketing discussion for me.

If you don't come at a project with some level of authority, you risk the market blasting you as an opportunist or worse. This is a business reality. I could write a book on how to be a good Christian, but I think once people realized I was a practicing witch and pagan they would question my credibility on the subject. That doesn't mean I don't write on the subject (I do on occasion). It just means I don't charge people for reading my opinions.

There is also a strategic risk. If the goal of publishing is to get the message out, is selling the message the best strategy? Or will the message get drowned out by accusations of being opportunistic? Would the message be more successful if presented in a more neutral media? Would this be better suited for a blog, or a letter to the editor, or even submitted to something like the Yahoo Contributor's network or similar citizen reporter site? If the goal is to share a thoughtful message, is placing a price tag on the message the best strategy?


----------



## Quiss (Aug 21, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> You can write any essay you want. But if you want me to PAY for it, then I would want to know on what authority you were speaking.


That was my point at the top of this thread. Like you said, everyone has an opinion, so to pay for an essay would have to return some value beyond that. I don't even read blogs unless the author has some credential that I appreciate. We're inundated by opinions all day (I work at a college - opinions galore!) and so I have to be choosy how much time I spend on collecting more in my spare time.
And if I then pay for such a thing I want some real bang for my dollar.

All that said, we don't know at this point how much work and thought and background has gone into the OP's essay. The blurb for it should definitely include some reasons WHY I should read it. The title makes clear what it is.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

It has been an interesting thread, hasn't it.

More of you have written about the presumed contents of the book rather than the cover.  I did not solicit those comments.  Thanks to those who made helpful remarks about the cover.  I'm on it.

Thank you, RedTash.  Finally someone who writes non-fiction has spoken.

Thank you, Gavin, for your comments.  When the essay comes out in two weeks or so, I hope you will check it out and see if I have embarrassed myself or not.  Judge it by the content of its character rather than the color of its skin.


----------



## Guest (Jul 22, 2013)

Hudson Owen said:


> More of you have written about the presumed contents of the book rather than the cover. I did not solicit those comments.


But at least we didn't charge you for our opinions.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> But at least we didn't charge you for our opinions.


lol, this... Yet, lets bear in mind that all "consultations" are not free...lol


----------



## Sapphire (Apr 24, 2012)

For those of you who are concerned about paying for an opinion: There is a simple solution. Don't buy it.

Regarding the OP's first post: You asked for replies about your cover. Yet, you seemed to reject the helpful remarks you requested. I don't remember you stirring up controversy for the sake of controversy in the past and I don't remember you using a post here to stir up potential buyers for your work. So, what are you doing with that spoon? Am I missing something?


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> So long as you don't engage in mansplaining.
> 
> You can write any essay you want. But if you want me to PAY for it, then I would want to know on what authority you were speaking. Are you involved as an activist on one side or the other? Do you have female family members who have struggled with the decision? Since you yourself have never been faced with the decision, in fact since you are physically incapable of ever becoming pregnant and therefore cannot be faced with the decision, if you expect people to pay for your opinion it would be beneficial to provide context in regards to where your authority on the subject comes from.
> 
> ...


Perhaps we simply are looking at the issue differently. Where you require authority I simply need a clear context and a well thought out opinion. Personally, I believe in Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose and have that dialogue with her doctor and who ever she feels is worthy of that conversation. But, as someone who learned a long time ago attending a southern university with a history of "issues," all viewpoints, if presented soundly, deserve an ear. I've heard the argument that since it takes two, a man and a woman, to conceive a child then an abortion should be decided between the two parties, not just a unilateral choice by the woman. There have been moves by groups that escape my memory that have pressed for legislation using this argument. Agree or not, it is a provocative argument and really could be made by any man who has an interest in having children. And, following that argument, you really can't say that a man hasn't faced the decision of having an abortion. The child may not grow in the man's body but that child is still his, it is still part of him. Remember, couples get pregnant. I've heard many of my friends announce on Facebook, "WE'RE PREGNANT!"

You're absolutely right about whether a person should care about another person's opinion when deciding to pay. For me this is a chicken/egg issue. The OP may publish this essay and get media that pick it up and thrust him in the public spotlight. Does he then become an authoritative voice since he has the ear of the media and is getting calls to come on tv/radio shows? Before we had institutions of higher education where did our intellectuals get their authority? Are we now limited by the constraints of civil institutions to have authoritative voices?

Your argument about the "good Christian" seems a mismatch for this particular issue. It seems to imply that since the OP is "an old white man" that he has no authority to speak on race issues in America. And on a side note, I attended Vanderbilt where they have a divinity school. They had many students who identified as agnostic or atheist and yet they still wrote essays an issues concerning religion and faith.

Lastly, shouldn't an essayist get paid for his work? I'm a big fan of Esquire and I'm quite sure the writers of the op-ed pieces in that magazine get paid for their opinions. I've looked some of them up and usually their only credential is that they are essayist. I think the OP would do himself and paid readers justice if he does more than simply espouse an opinion and backs up his thoughts with research.

Food for thought... Glenn Beck, I use him because I hate watching him, has penned six bestselling books. Someone please tell me where his "authority" came from... Please, try.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "Yes, let the buyer beware. This is true of any book you consider purchasing. Maybe the reviews are misleading; maybe there are no reviews. Maybe the book hasn't been published yet (!)."


Agree 100%. The notion that we should refrain from writing on social issues because we lack some credential is discredited by the miserable job done to date by those with credentials.

The buyer can beware, and he also can evaluate the book without the help.



> "And readers will generally expect some level of authority on a topic before they open their wallet."


And they are smart enough to keep their wallets closed if they don't like the credentials presented.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

GavinFletcher said:


> Perhaps we simply are looking at the issue differently. Where you require authority I simply need a clear context and a well thought out opinion. Personally, I believe in Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose and have that dialogue with her doctor and who ever she feels is worthy of that conversation. But, as someone who learned a long time ago attending a southern university with a history of "issues," all viewpoints, if presented soundly, deserve an ear. I've heard the argument that since it takes two, a man and a woman, to conceive a child then an abortion should be decided between the two parties, not just a unilateral choice by the woman. There have been moves by groups that escape my memory that have pressed for legislation using this argument. Agree or not, it is a provocative argument and really could be made by any man who has an interest in having children. And, following that argument, you really can't say that a man hasn't faced the decision of having an abortion. The child may not grow in the man's body but that child is still his, it is still part of him. Remember, couples get pregnant. I've heard many of my friends announce on Facebook, "WE'RE PREGNANT!"


I think you've made Julie's point for her here. If a writer is to write an essay on a topic (any topic) then they should have some ability (Authority? Expertise? Experience?). As a man you might be able to write an essay on "Abortion: A Man's Involvement Among Consenting Adults". That essay would be about how "you" think that the man involved in the act of conception should involved in the decision making process. And that essay might be of interest to people interested in that facet of the topic. If "you" had experience (academic: a degree in a related field? life: either were involved or not involved in the decision making process previously) it lends weight to your opinions, on *that specific facet*. I don't know that "you" would be able to write a relevant (or contextually clear or well thought out) piece that would be of value to someone looking for essays about "Abortion: The Legal Case For Termination After Rape" if your only qualification is that you are "a man."

With that said, being an "old white man" (if those are his only qualifications) in and of itself does give Hudson Owen a particular insight to one facet of the complex issue of "Race in America". If he writes about that facet and markets his book to people interested in that facet then mission accomplished. If he writes from a perspective that he might know nothing about (i.e. "Trayvon Martin: Being Young and Black In America") then he had better do some valid research. (disclaimer: I don't know what his qualifications are, I'm just using that as an example in terms of this discussion. He could be the nation's #1 expert on Race in America for all I know. For all any of us know)



GavinFletcher said:


> Food for thought... Glenn Beck, I use him because I hate watching him, has penned six bestselling books. Someone please tell me where his "authority" came from... Please, try.


An excellent point.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

NathanWrann said:


> I think you've made Julie's point for her here. If a writer is to write an essay on a topic (any topic) then they should have some ability (Authority? Expertise? Experience?). As a man you might be able to write an essay on "Abortion: A Man's Involvement Among Consenting Adults". That essay would be about how "you" think that the man involved in the act of conception should involved in the decision making process. And that essay might be of interest to people interested in that facet of the topic. If "you" had experience (academic: a degree in a related field? life: either were involved or not involved in the decision making process previously) it lends weight to your opinions, on *that specific facet*. I don't know that "you" would be able to write a relevant (or contextually clear or well thought out) piece that would be of value to someone looking for essays about "Abortion: The Legal Case For Termination After Rape" if your only qualification is that you are "a man."
> 
> An excellent point.


I understand where you are going but I have to disagree. Now, Julie prefaced what she meant by "a position of authority" by saying that a degree was the most obvious but that life experiences, involvement with an issue or activism would meet the merit required to write on an issue. I'm disagreeing with her on that point. If anything, I am saying that a person can speak from a position of authority if their argument is sound and arguably persuasive, insightful, etc. This is true, in my opinion, even when measured against her marketability point. Hence, me bringing up Glenn Beck. And I'm sure there are examples on both sides of the aisle and inbetween.

Now, you pigeon holed me by creating the title for an essay I could write. Sure, I could take the view of being a man looking at Abortion. Or I could take the view as a Christian looking at abortion. Or I could take the stance that as a human being who values life I have an opinion on abortion. In my mind any of those starting points are valid when taking up the issue. AND, I don't have to preface said opinion with anything regarding my identity or beliefs.

And as far as an essay titled: "Abortion: The Legal Case for Termination After Rape." We only need to look at what is going on in state legislatures like Texas. We have politicians "arguably" biting back at Roe v. Wade who don't know the different between a rape kit and an abortion. These are folks who are making policy... not just profiting off an essay. So yea, anyone could write that essay. The measure of its relevancy would be the arguments and research put forth and not so much the background of the author. For some folks, that type of authority matters. But as Glenn Beck's six bestsellers stand to show, for many it doesn't.

As far as something lending weight... You're talking to a gay black man in America who loves this country and the promise that it has.. Yet I also recognize that "learned" individuals use degrees and religious texts to "lend weight" to positions I disagree with. People spoke from positions of authority to justify slavery, Apartheid, not giving women the right to vote, the Holocaust, etc. I'd sooner purchase a collection of essays by drag queens who present sound arguments regarding U.S. monetary policies than a book on the constitution by Ann Coulter, who has a BA in History and a law degree.

And as far as you knowing whether or not I or anyone else would be able to write a relevant piece on any topic... You'd have to read it to see...


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "If anything, I am saying that a person can speak from a position of authority if their argument is sound and arguably persuasive, insightful, etc."


A well reasoned and cogent argument can stand regardless of who is presenting it, and is stronger than the argument from authority.



> " I'd sooner purchase a collection of essays by drag queens who present sound arguments regarding U.S. monetary policies than a book on the constitution by Ann Coulter, who has a BA in History and a law degree."


I'd evaluate each of the arguments to determine if they are sound.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

Hudson Owen said:


> It has been an interesting thread, hasn't it.
> 
> More of you have written about the presumed contents of the book rather than the cover. I did not solicit those comments. Thanks to those who made helpful remarks about the cover. I'm on it.
> 
> ...


Not a problem Hudson. As long as you are honest and insightful with you perspective I'm sure it will be great whether I agree with your position or not. I just hope you are careful with the quotes... Since that that oft quoted line from MLK's speech was said in the context of a march meant for Jobs and Justice. Many conservatives have used that line to say that King would be against "quotas" and "affirmative action" when his position was quite the contrary.

Food for thought:

In a Playboy article in 1968, MLK stated: "If a city has a 30% ***** population, then it is logical to assume that ******* should have at least 30% of the jobs in any particular company, and jobs in all categories rather than only in menial areas."

In his book, Why We Can't Wait, MLK stated:

"No amount of gold could provide an adequate compensation for the exploitation and humiliation of the ***** in America down through
the centuries&#8230;Yet a price can be placed on unpaid wages. The ancient common law has always provided a remedy for the appropriation
of a the labor of one human being by another. This law should be made to apply for American *******. The payment should be in the form of a massive program by the government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement in accordance with the accepted practice of common law."

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0451527534/lewrockwell/

I deduce that he was a proponent of reparations...

So, once again, and this is just a general statement. If anyone wants to approach a topic, go for it. Just be sure to back it up with research and a sound argument backed with critical thought.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> Since that that oft quoted line from MLK's speech was said in the context of a march meant for Jobs and Justice. Many conservatives have used that line to say that King would be against "quotas" and "affirmative action" when his position was quite the contrary


In that context was he against quotas and affirmative action in jobs?



> Food for thought:
> 
> In a Playboy article in 1968, MLK stated: "If a city has a 30% ***** population, then it is logical to assume that ******* should have at least 30% of the jobs in any particular company, and jobs in all categories rather than only in menial areas."


It's only logical if the population exhibitsis uniform distribution among races and genders of talent, skills, experience, education, and qualifications in all job categories. If that is not the case in a city, then it's not logical. Thomas Sowell has an interesting book that deals with specialization among various ethnic groups. I think it is _Race and Culture_ published in the 1990s. He documents specialization of different groups. For example, he notes almost all the US medical schools up to a certain period were founded by lowland Scots. Italians dominated US architecture. Irish went after big city police and firemen jobs. I forget many of the others. However, we have to note such specializations depends on the freedom to pursue such things.



> In his book, Why We Can't Wait, MLK stated:
> 
> "No amount of gold could provide an adequate compensation for the exploitation and humiliation of the ***** in America down through the centuries&#8230;Yet a price can be placed on unpaid wages. The ancient common law has always provided a remedy for the appropriation of a the labor of one human being by another. This law should be made to apply for American *******. The payment should be in the form of a massive program by the government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement in accordance with the accepted practice of common law.
> 
> I deduce that he was a proponent of reparations"


Common law did recognize individual claims to compensation, but it did not recognize group general claims for treatment of ancestors. For example English common law does not recognize a general claim by the Irish against the English. I don't know what King thought, but I don't see this argument as sound. Reparations would need more.



> So, once again, and this is just a general statement. If anyone wants to approach a topic, go for it. Just be sure to back it up with research and a sound argument backed with critical thought.


Agree 100%.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

GavinFletcher said:


> ...when I read/hear anyone say they'd rather get a perspective from "commentators of color" I just cringe....


I can understand that, but I do think it's at least somewhat relevant to the event.

Please know that by what I say next, I intend to offend no one, but: regardless of political alignment, I've heard way too many "white" opinions on this issue, when it really is almost a bit beside the point. (Not completely, but just hear me out a second...)

T.M. was a young black teen.

G.Z. was an older Hispanic male.

Yet with how all those howling voices (on both sides) have handled this story since last February 2012, an interesting shift has taken place.

In order to further villain-ize G.Z., a new category has been created out of thin air: the "white Hispanic."

I think anyone who has seen Spike Lee's Do The Right Thing realizes that race relations in America are more complex than JUST black and white; that there are conflicts and tensions between people of different backgrounds where those who are white don't even figure into the picture.

And this shift to "re-categorize" G.Z. as "white" or "a white Hispanic" is something I haven't really heard prior to these events.

An essay that delved into that issue would be of interest, mainly because of its novelty. Opinions on this from commentators both black and Hispanic, if approached without the emotional firestorm of the killing of T.M., might make for a compelling essay.

I mean... if one judges G.Z.'s actions to be evil, why is "recategorizing" him as "white" or "white Hispanic" necessary? If G.Z. had been the victim and the person with the gun had been a person traditionally considered "White (Non-Hispanic)" (as the government forms say), would the label of "White" or "White Hispanic" still be applied to G.Z, or would racial bias be charged against his killer because under those circumstances, G.Z. would be considered "brown" or "of color"?

I don't know the answers. I'm not particularly qualified to comment on the answers.

But I do know there's plenty of white opinion out there, from every facet and angle and spectrum on this issue... and nearly all of them are available for free. So I personally would not pay even $0.99 for an extra essay like that.

But maybe that's just me.



GavinFletcher said:


> Especially since, in my opinion, race is not a one-sided issue. Trust me when I say people of color, even the likes of Henry Louis Gates or Cornel West, have no monopoly on topics of race relations in America.


Never suggested it was, or that they do. I just suggested that there's plenty of "white opinion" on this issue that I can access for free. But that there's not as much from commentators of color, so that I might pay for.



GavinFletcher said:


> But hey, you were speaking for yourself and what would make you want to purchase the essay.


Yup. And I intended nothing more by it. Still don't intend anything more than that by it.  But I know it's a sensitive topic, and an easy way to insert foot in mouth... so I try to mostly not post about such things.

Is that egg on my face yet?


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

"In the 2010 United States Census, 50.5 million Americans (16.3% of the total population) listed themselves as ethnically Hispanic or Latino. Of those, 53.0% (26.7 million) self-identified as racially white."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Latin_American
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans

The more you know.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> I can understand that, but I do think it's at least somewhat relevant to the event.
> 
> Please know that by what I say next, I intend to offend no one, but: regardless of political alignment, I've heard way too many "white" opinions on this issue, when it really is almost a bit beside the point. (Not completely, but just hear me out a second...)
> 
> ...


White Hispanic was not created out of "thin air". Hispanic is an ethnic not a racial identification, and there have always been Hispanics who were European and thus racially white. Europe is where Spain is located, after all. I have a friend from Castilla-La Mancha who is as blonde as any Norse you'd ever hope to see. According to the census bureau, 53.0% of US Hispanics self-identified as racially white. (Yep, looked it up  )

It is a sensitive topic, but I don't think that means that people like Hudson shouldn't try to make intelligent and well thought out contributions to the discussion.

ETA: I disagree that most opinions are free. There are hundreds of thousands of books and articles for pay that are nothing but opinion on this and similar topics on Amazon and elsewhere. In fact, a substantial portion of "non-fiction" is really just opinion.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

Terrence OBrien said:


> In that context was he against quotas and affirmative action in jobs?
> 
> It's only logical if the population exhibitsis uniform distribution among races and genders of talent, skills, experience, education, and qualifications in all job categories. If that is not the case in a city, then it's not logical. Thomas Sowell has an interesting book that deals with specialization among various ethnic groups. I think it is _Race and Culture_ published in the 1990s. He documents specialization of different groups. For example, he notes almost all the US medical schools up to a certain period were founded by lowland Scots. Italians dominated US architecture. Irish went after big city police and firemen jobs. I forget many of the others. However, we have to note such specializations depends on the freedom to pursue such things.
> 
> ...


Arguably, when you take that quote from the context of the speech it implies that King believed in a supposed "color blind" society that ignored race/ethnicity. That not only should a man not be judge by color by his color should be a non-factor. It has become, in my opinion, a way for conservatives and supposed progressives to say race shouldn't matter. And following that train of logic, things like the Voting Rights Act and Affirmative Action should not exist. If you continue with that logic, many come to the conclusion that any policy that addresses inequality that delineates on the lines of race is in fact reverse-racism. This is a train of thought I don't subscribe to.

As far as the uniform distribution... I guess that where affirmative action comes in. Now, I'm not going to get in the particulars about AA policy but I will say this... The argument is that since blacks make up about 14% of the national population than that should be the percentage of blacks in a wide array of fields. This begins with education. When I went to Vanderbilt in 2003 the black student population was 6%. When I left, the incoming freshman class was 11%. They had an affirmative action policy and fyi, they are a private institution. So, by having enough of a particular group to train we could "make those quotas." But there are other factors such as personal choice in majors that would affect what industry a person ended up in. All in all I will say that I do find it problematic that the vast majority of positions of authority, from the business sector to politics is dominated by white men. Half the country are women... Just saying.

And anyone who says that the "most qualified" should get the job I wonder how many of you or your friends were passed up for a job because you were "over qualified." Qualifications are a funny thing. From my experience, most hiring manager have a pool of people that are qualified for a job. Once they cross that "qualification" threshold, other factors come into play for hiring purposes such as likability or image. This is my opinion and I don't mean to offend anyone, but if a company is overwhelmingly white and male and new position is open and a non-white woman "qualifies," she should get the position.

On reparations, that argument goes back to the 40 acres and a mule issue and is one I'm just not going to debate. If reparations was an issue for MLK let it be defended by his works.

All and all this has been a lively discussion. I feel like should have been paid...at least 4 cents a word...lol


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> I can understand that, but I do think it's at least somewhat relevant to the event.
> 
> Please know that by what I say next, I intend to offend no one, but: regardless of political alignment, I've heard way too many "white" opinions on this issue, when it really is almost a bit beside the point. (Not completely, but just hear me out a second...)
> 
> ...


No offense taken here. I love that anyone can be open and honest about an opinion.

As others have said, the term "white-Hispanic" isn't new. This is an issue of race and ethnicity. Latinos are a multi-racial ethnic group of people. Yea, wrap your mind around that one. A person can be white, black, mulato, etc. and still be considered Latino. Blacks from the Dominican Republic are considered Hispanic or Black Hispanic... Remember, race is not rooted in science. It is a social construct. Heck, my grandmother has a much lighter complexion than Zimmerman and she's considered black.

But I think focusing on this particular issue misses the problem in some folks minds. I'd argue that the larger issue for many is the fact that a "black body" is considered dangerous. For African Americans, criminalization of black men has been an issue for centuries. So, while some would argue that this case shouldn't have been about race or that the facts of the case supported what Zimmerman said, many blacks and others can't get beyond the fact (or belief, depending on who you ask) that Zimmerman followed Trayvon. That in and of itself forces many African Americans, including myself, to reflect and consider all the times I was followed and looked as a criminal. That mindset comes from somewhere.


----------



## ccasey (Feb 7, 2013)

Since the name and hot topic are the selling points, I'd put the name center and bigger but not overlapping the hood. Race in America all one line and centered underneath the name, across the hood. Spell the word "and", tiny size squeezed in between the name and the subtitle. Just try it and see if you like it better. Optimus Princeps is a good "take this seriously" font.

I like the granular name and the image though the face is too pale for the portrayal.

If you have a minute, read Designing a Book Cover With the Rule of Thirds here: http://www.mamasgotachainsaw.com/2013/02/designing-book-cover.html

That's mainly to say that your title would "please the eye" in the upper third, for this particular cover, rather than scattered.


----------



## Greg Banks (May 2, 2009)

GavinFletcher said:


> Arguably, when you take that quote from the context of the speech it implies that King believed in a supposed "color blind" society that ignored race/ethnicity. That not only should a man not be judge by color by his color should be a non-factor. It has become, in my opinion, a way for conservatives and supposed progressives to say race shouldn't matter. And following that train of logic, things like the Voting Rights Act and Affirmative Action should not exist. If you continue with that logic, many come to the conclusion that any policy that addresses inequality that delineates on the lines of race is in fact reverse-racism. This is a train of thought I don't subscribe to...


A poem I wrote a long time ago:

*Colorblinds*
by Gregory B. Banks

We live in a world of many colors,
That is rich in its vast diversity,
But many choose to hate for no reason,
Believing our differences to be ugly.
Oh, why must we judge one another,
By an insignificant thing such as race?
Don't we know we are all God's children,
And in His world we each have a place.
How I long for the day when all people,
Will be accepted for just who they are,
When we learn that appearances have no meaning,
The world will be a better place by far!
Many wish for a world that's unseeing,
That is oblivious to the subject of race,
They would rather pretend we all look the same,
Avoiding the issues that they don't want to face.
But we live in a multicultural society,
Where our differences can be truly profound,
Yet we each are a piece in a great puzzle,
And when united, the power of God is found!
So I cry out to my brothers and sisters,
Of all races, all creeds, and all kinds,
Let's rejoice in the rainbow of humanity,
And not obscure it behind colorblinds!​


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> Arguably, when you take that quote from the context of the speech it implies that King believed in a supposed "color blind" society that ignored race/ethnicity. That not only should a man not be judge by color by his color should be a non-factor. It has become, in my opinion, a way for conservatives and supposed progressives to say race shouldn't matter. And following that train of logic, things like the Voting Rights Act and Affirmative Action should not exist. If you continue with that logic, many come to the conclusion that any policy that addresses inequality that delineates on the lines of race is in fact reverse-racism. This is a train of thought I don't subscribe to.


The color blind society is normative, and I see little disagreement with that goal. The method for achieving it is where folks diverge. Affirmative action has come to cover many things, from tutoring kids in reading to giving them an extra 200 points on the SAT. So we can cherry pick a tactic, and make a good argument for or against AA. I actually think the term is meaningless at this point. It makes much more sense to just state what is being proposed, how it will work, what it will achieve, and how it will be monitored for success or failure.



> As far as the uniform distribution... I guess that where affirmative action comes in. Now, I'm not going to get in the particulars about AA policy but I will say this... The argument is that since blacks make up about 14% of the national population than that should be the percentage of blacks in a wide array of fields. This begins with education. When I went to Vanderbilt in 2003 the black student population was 6%. When I left, the incoming freshman class was 11%. They had an affirmative action policy and fyi, they are a private institution. So, by having enough of a particular group to train we could "make those quotas." But there are other factors such as personal choice in majors that would affect what industry a person ended up in. All in all I will say that I do find it problematic that the vast majority of positions of authority, from the business sector to politics is dominated by white men. Half the country are women... Just saying.


Sure. But the first thing I would ask is the graduation rates and majors rather than the acceptance rates. That's the measure of success.

A few years back Jesse jackson mounted a pressure campaign against one of the second tier chip makers. I forget which one, but it wasn't Intel. He was complaining about the lack of black engineers at the company and wanted more hiring. The president of the company said (paraphrasing), "Fine. Bring me the resumes of these guys so I can hire them. Bring me a black digital engineer, electrical engineer, mathematician, and I'll hire him right now. Show me where they are, because the ones I find have dozens of offers from all the tech firms who want to hire them. I can't get them."

So Vanderbilt may be helping fix that problem, but the problem is far upstream from the hiring profiles of the firms.

I read an article in one of the national mags last night dealing with the lack of women at the top. They documented that men and women were paid the same in the same jobs with the same experience. But they also noted that the vast majority of women who make it high up the ladder have no children. Many are dropping off the track because they have chosen priorities other than the job. we can note all kinds of disparities in society, and when we do, it's instructive to look for answers. Too often these things are attributed to a degree of discrimination that no longer exists. That's often way too easy and misses the real dynamics in play. I'm sure we can find other articles that give different reasons, but it's good to take a look at all the perspectives.



> And anyone who says that the "most qualified" should get the job I wonder how many of you or your friends were passed up for a job because you were "over qualified." Qualifications are a funny thing. From my experience, most hiring manager have a pool of people that are qualified for a job. Once they cross that "qualification" threshold, other factors come into play for hiring purposes such as likability or image. This is my opinion and I don't mean to offend anyone, but if a company is overwhelmingly white and male and new position is open and a non-white woman "qualifies," she should get the position.


I have been rejected for being over qualified, and I have rejected people for the same reason. It's very practical. The guy will simply find a better job for which he is qualified, and then I'm stuck trying to fill the slot again. Being qualified means being the best fit for the job. I'll pay the woman the respect of subjecting her to the same standards as a man. And I also disagree about that pool of candidates. It depends on the job.



> On reparations, that argument goes back to the 40 acres and a mule issue and is one I'm just not going to debate. If reparations was an issue for MLK let it be defended by his works.


OK. I agree. King was a great man and most of us will never come close to accomplishing what he did. But I will pay him the respect of subjecting his ideas to the same critical analysis as anyone's. The argument from authority is weak, no matter who the authority is.



> All and all this has been a lively discussion. I feel like should have been paid...at least 4 cents a word...lol


I think our brilliance merits at least a dime.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

Terrence OBrien said:


> The color blind society is normative, and I see little disagreement with that goal. The method for achieving it is where folks diverge. Affirmative action has come to cover many things, from tutoring kids in reading to giving them an extra 200 points on the SAT. So we can cherry pick a tactic, and make a good argument for or against AA. I actually think the term is meaningless at this point. It makes much more sense to just state what is being proposed, how it will work, what it will achieve, and how it will be monitored for success or failure.
> 
> Sure. But the first thing I would ask is the graduation rates and majors rather than the acceptance rates. That's the measure of success.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure if we are delving into inappropriate territory for kboards, Terrance but the dialogue is riveting...

With that said, I'd argue that the idea of a post-racial color blind society is a fallacy. It implies that one should not see race and if a person does it is a bad thing. I reject this idea. I'd rather folks saw a rich legacy of African American culture that contributed to this nation's realization of the promise of equality and Democracy as opposed to not seeing my race at all or God forbid see something as inferior. The idea of being color blind, in my opinion, trivializes the fact of racism in our country. It ignores the facts of high incarceration rate of African Americans and Latinos for non-violent drug offenses by way of the War on Drugs. It ignores the stop and frisk law in NYC in which data has shown that blacks and Hispanics are overwhelmingly stopped but that whites, the few that are stopped, are twice as likely to be carrying weapons illegally. A color blind society may sound ideal especially to someone that has the privilege of being the norm and not the "wrong color."

I'm not a fan of Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. I don't like the idea of "black leaders" anymore than I give credence to the idea of "white leaders." But you are right as far as the lack of blacks in certain fields. But it is not surprising when half the prison population in this country are black males and that the education system essentially acts as a funnel to the jails. As an educator I see this first hand.

You're right as far as the issue of women in the workforce, to a degree. Mark Twain said it best; there are lies, there are damn lies and then there are statistics. I've heard the figure that women make 70 cents on the dollar to a man. I wonder if that is still true for women who don't choose other priorities. I suspect that even when those factors are accounted for, their income is not on par. But that's just an opinion with stats.

"Being qualified means being the best fit for the job."

Now this is an interesting point. How do we qualify "best fit for the job"? If we have 10 candidates who all have the appropriate degree, experience and background, how do we then pick who to hire? This is the point I'm trying to make when I say folks misunderstand what it means to be qualified. In said scenario, I think quotas and AA would be appropriate.

I'm a military brat. Both my parents are retired Army and once I graduated from college we'd get into heated discussions about these very same issues. They'd always bolster the military as the great equalizer but I'd always point out the lack of blacks in officer and command positions and how the military had to make concerted efforts to get more blacks in leadership roles.

If Betsy shuts us down feel free to PM me. I won't promise this much attention since I slacked on writing today and only got 2,500 words in but I do like a good, thought provoking conversation every now and again.


----------



## Scarlett_R (Sep 30, 2011)

Specific to the design:

First round: I actually like it. I hate the typography, I do, but I love the image. To me it speaks about the situation as a whole, through a digital age, where everyone gets a say on what's happening. The digitalized effect of the image shows that, and conveys how we can all have an opinion on things we watch, things we see or don't see.

The type definitely needs improvement and I'd stick with sans-serifs for this one. Maybe something condensed, definitely something clean and bold. I hope it's okay with you Hudson that I worked with your original image, I put together this:


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> I'm not sure if we are delving into inappropriate territory for kboards, Terrance but the dialogue is riveting...
> 
> With that said, I'd argue that the idea of a post-racial color blind society is a fallacy. It implies that one should not see race and if a person does it is a bad thing. I reject this idea. I'd rather folks saw a rich legacy of African American culture that contributed to this nation's realization of the promise of equality and Democracy as opposed to not seeing my race at all or God forbid see something as inferior. The idea of being color blind, in my opinion, trivializes the fact of racism in our country. It ignores the facts of high incarceration rate of African Americans and Latinos for non-violent drug offenses by way of the War on Drugs. It ignores the stop and frisk law in NYC in which data has shown that blacks and Hispanics are overwhelmingly stopped but that whites, the few that are stopped, are twice as likely to be carrying weapons illegally. A color blind society may sound ideal especially to someone that has the privilege of being the norm and not the "wrong color."


I said the color blind society is normative. The mistake comes from trying to force a norm on a reality that isn't in compliance with the norm.

The notion of color blind can be taken to an extreme and one pretends we can't recognize race. I don't think that merits much attention. The term usually indicates a set of social transactions in which race is not a factor. An example is the different national heritage of many whites. I don't have to forget about Irish heritage, and I don't expect the guy next door to forget about his Swedish roots. But nobody bothers with that when hiring, selling houses, or choosing a plumber.

There are behaviors suitable for a color blind society, but they may not fit in a reality that has not yet reached it. So behavior suitable for a desired future state may not be appropriate for the current situation. Likewise, insisting on behavior patterns from the past, and insisting those situations exist today, is just as futile.

_Black and White on Wall Street_ is an interesting memoir by a black bond trader who worked for Kidder in the Nineties. He got into a bunch of trouble, got caught up in GE's debacle in the securities business, and it can't really be discussed without getting into all kinds of arcane securities math. I side with the guy. He's right on the math and the bond strips. But a more interesting aspect of the book was how he insisted on sending applications for college, jobs, etc and disguising his race. People were surprised when this black guy turned up since they all thought he was white. But he insisted on competing without considering race. Excellent book. He's ahead of his times in a society that isn't.



> I'm not a fan of Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. I don't like the idea of "black leaders" anymore than I give credence to the idea of "white leaders." But you are right as far as the lack of blacks in certain fields. But it is not surprising when half the prison population in this country are black males and that the education system essentially acts as a funnel to the jails. As an educator I see this first hand.


That deserves its own thread. I'll take a rain check.



> You're right as far as the issue of women in the workforce, to a degree. Mark Twain said it best; there are lies, there are d*mn lies and then there are statistics. I've heard the figure that women make 70 cents on the dollar to a man. I wonder if that is still true for women who don't choose other priorities. I suspect that even when those factors are accounted for, their income is not on par. But that's just an opinion with stats.


I'm not dealing with averages. I'm talking about grade 16 reservoir engineers with a major oil company. Or IRS civil service employees. We have to look on a job by job basis. Averages will always be skewed by the mix of jobs.



> "Being qualified means being the best fit for the job."
> 
> Now this is an interesting point. How do we qualify "best fit for the job"? If we have 10 candidates who all have the appropriate degree, experience and background, how do we then pick who to hire? This is the point I'm trying to make when I say folks misunderstand what it means to be qualified. In said scenario, I think quotas and AA would be appropriate.


Misunderstand what it means to be qualified? That implies an objective standard somewhere. There isn't one. Companies make them up to remain in compliance with various laws. They used to give tests. The results didn't fit desired social goals. Now they can't so they pretend to use a bunch of quantifiable standards. None of it makes any sense. So within a broad spectrum of quantifiable standards, the guy doing the hiring picks the one he thinks will work best in his organization.

I had a certain management attitude. Another manager had a different one. We would both pick different people because we ran things differently. We both did just fine, but his people were more suited for his type of management style, and mine were suited for mine. Our objective wasn't hiring. Our objective was completing our missions.



> I'm a military brat. Both my parents are retired Army and once I graduated from college we'd get into heated discussions about these very same issues. They'd always bolster the military as the great equalizer but I'd always point out the lack of blacks in officer and command positions and how the military had to make concerted efforts to get more blacks in leadership roles.


In boot camp, we took a zillion tests, and people were sent off to various schools based on the results. This was during Viet Nam, and about half our platoon were high school dropouts. It was very different from how things work today. But school assignments were all based on those tests. HS dropouts got high tech schools while college grads who did't score as high in aptitude got lower level stuff. That first week of boot camp set the career trajectories for people who retired twenty and thirty years later.



> If Betsy shuts us down feel free to PM me. I won't promise this much attention since I slacked on writing today and only got 2,500 words in but I do like a good, thought provoking conversation every now and again.


Looks like you're 2,500 words up on me for the day.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Thought for the day. KDP is about as color blind as it gets.


----------



## Richardcrasta (Jul 29, 2010)

GavinFletcher said:


> As far as something lending weight... You're talking to a gay black man in America who loves this country and the promise that it has.. Yet I also recognize that "learned" individuals use degrees and religious texts to "lend weight" to positions I disagree with. People spoke from positions of authority to justify slavery, Apartheid, not giving women the right to vote, the Holocaust, etc. I'd sooner purchase a collection of essays by drag queens who present sound arguments regarding U.S. monetary policies than a book on the constitution by Ann Coulter, who has a BA in History and a law degree.
> 
> And as far as you knowing whether or not I or anyone else would be able to write a relevant piece on any topic... You'd have to read it to see...


Compelling. Thanks for this, and for this very interesting discussion, Gavin.


----------



## sunnycoast (Sep 10, 2010)

Great comments, Gavin. 

Unfortunately you're gay and black ... and probably even a democrat, so you must be wrong.

I'm joking, of course. I'd PAY to read any essay written by you. Not much, mind you. But I would pay!


----------



## Richardcrasta (Jul 29, 2010)

GavinFletcher said:


> I'm not sure if we are delving into inappropriate territory for kboards, Terrance but the dialogue is riveting...
> 
> With that said, I'd argue that the idea of a post-racial color blind society is a fallacy. It implies that one should not see race and if a person does it is a bad thing. I reject this idea. I'd rather folks saw a rich legacy of African American culture that contributed to this nation's realization of the promise of equality and Democracy as opposed to not seeing my race at all or God forbid see something as inferior. The idea of being color blind, in my opinion, trivializes the fact of racism in our country. It ignores the facts of high incarceration rate of African Americans and Latinos for non-violent drug offenses by way of the War on Drugs. It ignores the stop and frisk law in NYC in which data has shown that blacks and Hispanics are overwhelmingly stopped but that whites, the few that are stopped, are twice as likely to be carrying weapons illegally. A color blind society may sound ideal especially to someone that has the privilege of being the norm and not the "wrong color."


As someone who has written about race from a different perspective, I am tempted to join in this very interesting discussion, but will confine myself to saying how eloquent I think this is and hoping you do indeed share your thoughts with a larger audience.

Hudson: Sorry, since this was your cover thread: I liked the David Scroggin idea and the ScarlettR cover even better, and wish you well with your essay.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

x2far said:


> Great comments, Gavin.
> 
> Unfortunately you're gay and black ... and probably even a democrat, so you must be wrong.
> 
> I'm joking, of course. I'd PAY to read any essay written by you. Not much, mind you. But I would pay!


   

Love Kboard!


----------



## Sapphire (Apr 24, 2012)

Greg, great poem! I like its message. I have my own personal definition of color-blind. It's not pretending everyone looks alike and pretending there are no differences. Instead, it's recognizing all the differences but that having no effect on how I feel about the individual person who resides inside the body.

Gavin, I don't see why the thread would be shut down. It may have had a few rocky spots early on, but it has been a very civil and thoughtful conversation. Does it belong on K-boards? Are most of us not writing in America today? Our characters live in the world being discussed here. The better we understand various points of view, the better we can write about real people.


----------



## brendajcarlton (Sep 29, 2012)

> But I think focusing on this particular issue misses the problem in some folks minds. I'd argue that the larger issue for many is the fact that a "black body" is considered dangerous. For African Americans, criminalization of black men has been an issue for centuries. So, while some would argue that this case shouldn't have been about race or that the facts of the case supported what Zimmerman said, many blacks and others can't get beyond the fact (or belief, depending on who you ask) that Zimmerman followed Trayvon. That in and of itself forces many African Americans, including myself, to reflect and consider all the times I was followed and looked as a criminal. That mindset comes from somewhere.


If we are ever going to have an honest "conversation about race in America," by definition, white people's experiences have to be included too, don't they? I was born in 1954 and we have been having this conversation my whole life. I grew up in the country in an area with a pronounced Amish influence. (Amish are American too I believe) I was on the outskirts of a school district centered around a northeastern steel town with a sizable black population and was sent downtown to high school at the height of the black power movement. I went with a genuinely open mind and quickly learned that I had to become street-wise quickly to survive. Due to many, many shall we say unpleasant encounters with gangs of black kids who basically got a kick out of keeping the country bumpkins terrorized I went through two of my high school years without ever using the bathroom, quite a feat for a young girl, with regards to feminine hygiene. Later I narrowly escaped an attempted rape by a young black linebacker type who was easily three times my small weight. At least I assume that was his intent when he pushed me into a supply closet in a hospital and closed the door behind us, although a pair of nurses came to my rescue before I found out.
All of that background is my preamble to the points I want to make. Am I the older white lady who clutches her purse closer when a young black guy gets in the elevator? No. I've also had good interactions with black people and I really do understand that everyone is an individual. But I also want to point out that if we are all ever going to understand where each other is coming from, you have to understand the old white lady in the elevator too. White people also have life histories that we are not allowed to talk about. Not everyone is capable of overcoming their residual fears.
My biggest question is this. If it is beholden on white people to overcome these basic emotional responses and be fair to everyone, why does the "black community" (A term I find ridiculous - A black surgeon has no more in common with a kid from the projects than I do. But I digress.) Why does the black community get to pin George Zimmerman's actions on all white people, but I have to make fine distinctions? Aren't black people also supposed to understand that not all white people are the same?


----------



## Amanda Brice (Feb 16, 2011)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> a new category has been created out of thin air: the "white Hispanic."


Actually...my mom's family is exactly that -- "white Hispanic." She's half Ukrainian (mom's side) and half Spanish (her family are pure Castilian-Spaniards who spent one generation in Puerto Rico before immigrating to NYC). She grew up with a Hispanic name, but to all appearances they're "white." (My mom has dark hair, but pale skin and eyes. One of her sisters is blonde-haired, blue-eyed.)

Spain is in Europe, after all...


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2013)

brendajcarlton said:


> If it is beholden on white people to overcome these basic emotional responses and be fair to everyone, why does the "black community" (A term I find ridiculous - *A black surgeon has no more in common with a kid from the projects than I do.* But I digress.) Why does the black community get to pin George Zimmerman's actions on all white people, but I have to make fine distinctions? Aren't black people also supposed to understand that not all white people are the same?


The burden is on the white population because whites still have a position of privileged in this country, whether people want to accept that or not. If Zimmerman was a black man and Trayvon was white, and all other circumstances were the same, is there really a question as to what the result of the trial would have been? Does anyone rationally think an adult black man could have been found not guilty of shooting a white teenage boy in those circumstances? THIS is the root problem.



> Fewer than 3 percent of black-on-white homicides taking place in circumstances similar to the George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin case are ruled to be justified. When the races are reversed, the percentage of cases that are ruled to be justified climbs to more than 29 percent in non-stand-your-ground states and almost 36 percent in stand-your-ground states, according to an analysis of FBI data by John Roman, a senior fellow in the Urban Institute's Justice Policy Center and a member of the American Bar Association's National Task Force on Stand Your Ground Laws.


 Source.

There have been a variety of studies over the years that have documented the chasm in the assumption of guilt between black suspects and white suspects.

I highlighted a sentence in the quote above. There is an assumption there that a black surgeon never experienced discrimination based on his race. The fact that someone is a surgeon doesn't negate the prejudices they experience and the shared experience of being a minority. Unfortunately, education and success wouldn't keep a white man from thinking that surgeon "looks suspicious" if he say him walking down the street at night in a pair of blue jeans and a t-shirt. I'm been out to lunch with black co-workers dressed in business attire and watched people cross the street to avoid them. I've been on store checks with black co-workers and watch them get followed around the store like they were potential shoplifters. And they weren't dressed "suspiciously". They were in normal business attire just like me.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> If Zimmerman was a black man and Trayvon was white, and all other circumstances were the same, is there really a question as to what the result of the trial would have been? Does anyone rationally think an adult black man could have been found not guilty of shooting a white teenage boy in those circumstances? THIS is the root problem.


Despite the race-baiters' claims to the contrary, this trial was decided upon the evidence, not the color of the participants' skin. If the races were reversed, it would still be an open and shut case based on self-defense, and no prosecutor without an outside agenda would bring it to trial, because they'd have no hope of winning.

Please don't overlay your own prejudices on those who can see the evidence clearly, and attempt to imply we're the ones being racist.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Stepping in...

Folks, it's been going very well, but if this thread becomes a discussion of the merits of the Trevor Martin case instead of a discussion of writing about the case and of the cover that the OP suggested, it IS going to end up locked....

Thanks!

Betsy
KBoards Moderator


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2013)

swolf said:


> Despite the race-baiters' claims to the contrary, this trial was decided upon the evidence, not the color of the participants' skin. If the races were reversed, it would still be an open and shut case based on self-defense, and no prosecutor without an outside agenda would bring it to trial, because they'd have no hope of winning.


The decades of research disagree with you. FBI statistics disagree with you. Claiming that I am "race-baiting" is a sad attempt to start a flame war and shout me down and/or get the thread locked. I'm looking at the decades of data on the subject. Not at one case with blinders on.

I have stood in a video store and watched mobs of white kids walk in and the cashier not even look up, but when a black kid walks in he follows him with his eyes throughout the store even though the kid is doing nothing other than being a kid looking at video games. I'm been in supermarkets where a white toddler starts to have a tantrum and people say "Oh, poor mom" and try to help calm the kid. But when a black toddler has a tantrum they mutter "Little F*ing animals." When people scream about "race baiting" they are very often pretending these things don't happen, or worse, don't consider them a problem. Accusations of "race baiting" allow people to pretend this is all someone else's problem and that it is no big deal.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

brendajcarlton said:


> If we are ever going to have an honest "conversation about race in America," by definition, white people's experiences have to be included too, don't they? I was born in 1954 and we have been having this conversation my whole life. I grew up in the country in an area with a pronounced Amish influence. (Amish are American too I believe) I was on the outskirts of a school district centered around a northeastern steel town with a sizable black population and was sent downtown to high school at the height of the black power movement. I went with a genuinely open mind and quickly learned that I had to become street-wise quickly to survive. Due to many, many shall we say unpleasant encounters with gangs of black kids who basically got a kick out of keeping the country bumpkins terrorized I went through two of my high school years without ever using the bathroom, quite a feat for a young girl, with regards to feminine hygiene. Later I narrowly escaped an attempted rape by a young black linebacker type who was easily three times my small weight. At least I assume that was his intent when he pushed me into a supply closet in a hospital and closed the door behind us, although a pair of nurses came to my rescue before I found out.
> All of that background is my preamble to the points I want to make. Am I the older white lady who clutches her purse closer when a young black guy gets in the elevator? No. I've also had good interactions with black people and I really do understand that everyone is an individual. But I also want to point out that if we are all ever going to understand where each other is coming from, you have to understand the old white lady in the elevator too. White people also have life histories that we are not allowed to talk about. Not everyone is capable of overcoming their residual fears.
> My biggest question is this. If it is beholden on white people to overcome these basic emotional responses and be fair to everyone, why does the "black community" (A term I find ridiculous - A black surgeon has no more in common with a kid from the projects than I do. But I digress.) Why does the black community get to pin George Zimmerman's actions on all white people, but I have to make fine distinctions? Aren't black people also supposed to understand that not all white people are the same?


I totally agree that all experiences have to be considered and appreciated in this dialogue. And I will also say that no woman should ever have to feel threatened sexually. As a feminist I feel it is the responsibility of every man to make sure that they don't do anything that would even make a woman question if his actions are inappropriate. And I am sorry for your experience.

I think the issue here is how you reflect and react to what happened to you. The question that comes to my mind would be; do you look back at that experience and have a general distrust of big black men or big men? A general distrust of cocky athletic black men or cocky athletic men? And with that there is no "right" answer. I wouldn't label you as racist if you answered those questions in a particular way and I wouldn't necessarily say you were not a racist if you answered in the other way.

Sometimes when we deal with a person who is different than us we ascribe characteristics from experiences with that person on to others that look like them. That's human nature. It's a survival instinct. And while I don't know your particular situation, when I went to a couple of RAD defense classes with a friend of mine who was sexually assaulted I learned first hand about women being assault. One of the main things I learned was that women were usually assaulted or got unwanted touches numerous times while in college. Now, I don't discredit what these women went through, but from my experiences, I asked myself, if those experiences somehow worked differently in their minds when the perpetrator was a different race than them. Kind of like Paula Deen... When asked if she used the n-word she said maybe when a black man had a gun at her head when she worked at a bank. I shrugged at that but I did wonder if that incident would have affected her differently if the same thing happened but the guy had been white.

As to your question... There's no easy answer. White people are not a monolithic group. Black people are not a monolithic group. Sure, we speak in generalizations to make points but people are individuals and tend to buck the "norm" of said group. I think it might be a leap to say pin on all white people... It sounds like you are referring to a mindset that blacks (generalizations right?) are afraid of. It is a mindset that says it is okay to shoot and kill an unarmed black man because you are afraid for whatever reason. Sure, every individual deserves to have their unique case looked at, which is why the verdict in the Zimmerman trial didn't surprise. I personally thought they were reaching with the 2nd degree murder charge but I digress. The issue is that from city to city, state to state there are so many examples of black men being harassed, intimidated and killed simply because they look suspicious.

Now, there are some that say, oh, well shouldn't you all be worried about black on black crime like what's going on in Chicago. Well, there are folks who have been working tirelessly to deal with that issue. But white on white crime doesn't make the Casey Anthony case less tragic now does it? Also, there are those that point to black on white crime and cry foul. In fact, the number of hate crimes charged on black offenders has been going up. Now, crime is crime, I get that, murder is murder, I get that too, and not to sound so detached, but there is something uniquely perverse when it appears that a perpetrators disregard for a victim's life is partly based on the victim's race. Yes, a dead relative is a dead relative. But someone who kills a person because a robbery went wrong... it ends with that dead person. But when someone kills a person and it appears that they disregarded their life because of their race... it not only affects that victim but it is an affront to that community as well. Much like a man who rapes a woman is a threat to women and a pedophile is a threat to children.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Setting aside race baiting, my read of swolf's comment was not that he was saying bigotry doesn't exist (he didn't address that one way or another), but that he was responding to your comment, Julie, that if the roles had been reversed, the outcome would have been different.  It was a very specific response to one line in your post.

Folks, let's move on.  

Betsy


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

swolf said:


> Despite the race-baiters' claims to the contrary, this trial was decided upon the evidence, not the color of the participants' skin. If the races were reversed, it would still be an open and shut case based on self-defense, and no prosecutor without an outside agenda would bring it to trial, because they'd have no hope of winning.
> 
> Please don't overlay your own prejudices on those who can see the evidence clearly, and attempt to imply we're the ones being racist.


At the end of the day the trial is over. I personally have more issue with the fact that a person can follow someone after being told by a dispatcher to stop doing so, confront or be confronted, feel threatened enough to use deadly force and still be within the law.

Personally, I have an issue with the law in this case. Especially when a black woman who shot a warning shot at an abusive husband gets time in jail and she didn't kill anyone...

We'll all just have to disagree, but I too think that the outcome would have been different if the races were reversed. At the end, we can all dredge up some cases, examples and stats but we'll never know. All we have are our own experiences and opinions.

Oh, and it would have come to trial... Remember the detective thought 2nd degree manslaughter was appropriate... And jumping to the race baiter claim... eh, the parents pushed hard for the story of their child being killed to hit the public stage... I don't think they should be called race baiters... They were parents who sought justice as they defined it. Now, the media? Certain public figures? Sure, even though I hate that particular term, media picks up stories they know will get more viewers...


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The decades of research disagree with you. FBI statistics disagree with you. Claiming that I am "race-baiting" is a sad attempt to start a flame war and shout me down and/or get the thread locked. I'm looking at the decades of data on the subject. Not at one case with blinders on.
> 
> I have stood in a video store and watched mobs of white kids walk in and the cashier not even look up, but when a black kid walks in he follows him with his eyes throughout the store even though the kid is doing nothing other than being a kid looking at video games. I'm been in supermarkets where a white toddler starts to have a tantrum and people say "Oh, poor mom" and try to help calm the kid. But when a black toddler has a tantrum they mutter "Little F*ing animals."


All that has nothing to do with this case, unless you can present evidence that Zimmerman acted in that manner. From the evidence presented at trail, the only one of the two to use a racial slur was Martin. The evidence showed that Martin attacked Zimmerman and was continuing to attack him, causing Zimmerman to believe his life was in danger.

That is the evidence the jury heard, and they had no choice but to conclude it was self defense. The race-baiters want us to ignore all that, in an attempt to blame this on race. If the shoe fits...


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

GavinFletcher said:


> I personally have more issue with the fact that a person can follow someone after being told by a dispatcher to stop doing so, confront or be confronted, feel threatened enough to use deadly force and still be within the law.


Please, at least be honest and say what it was. Martin didn't 'confront' Zimmerman. He punched him in the face and jumped on top of him, slamming his head repeatedly into the ground.

I have an issue with anyone who claims that's justified behavior for being 'followed.'


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

GavinFletcher said:


> _At the end of the day the trial is over. I personally have more issue with the fact that a person can follow someone after being told by a dispatcher to stop doing so, confront or be confronted, feel threatened enough to use deadly force and still be within the law._
> 
> Personally, I have an issue with the law in this case. Especially when a black woman who shot a warning shot at an abusive husband gets time in jail and she didn't kill anyone...
> 
> ...


Very true. And I think you're right that in analyzing this, you have to look at the entirety, not just one case. We can't prove what would have happened had the races been reversed, but there is a very good chance that you are correct based on other cases. Zimmerman following, stalking and then confronting someone who was doing nothing worse than walking down the street and then not being held to account follows a very disturbing pattern.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

swolf said:


> Please, at least be honest and say what it was. Martin didn't 'confront' Zimmerman. He punched him in the face and jumped on top of him, slamming his head repeatedly into the ground.
> 
> I have an issue with anyone who claims that's justified behavior for being 'followed.'


Amazing how Zimmerman had no serious injuries after having his head "slammed repeatedly into the ground."


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

JRTomlin said:


> Amazing how Zimmerman had no serious injuries after having his head "slammed repeatedly into the ground."


Maybe his wounds were self-inflicted.


----------



## Catchy (Mar 3, 2012)

GavinFletcher said:


> Food for thought... Glenn Beck, I use him because I hate watching him, has penned six bestselling books. Someone please tell me where his "authority" came from... Please, try.


If you asked him, I bet he'd say God.


----------



## Catchy (Mar 3, 2012)

swolf said:


> Maybe his wounds were self-inflicted.


The scalp is very rich in blood vessels, so even a minor scrape can bleed profusely. ERs regularly see very minor wounds that require no more than a small butterfly bandage to close, but from the blood and blood-saturated clothes that accompany the injured person, you'd expect at least a gun shot.

Repeated slamming of your skull against concrete would most likely result in a fracture and actual chunks of missing flesh.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Catchy said:


> Repeated slamming of your skull against concrete would most likely result in a fracture and actual chunks of missing flesh.


And you know this how?


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2013)

swolf said:


> And you know this how?


Because unless Trayvon was holding him by the ankles and slamming the top of his head ala Hulk versus Loki, the blood should have been on the BACK center of the skull, not dripping like syrup from the top and side. The blood pattern is not consistent with being on your back and having your head banged onto the ground.

And I know this because I am a writer and have dozens of books on injuries, weapons, and others stuff that is related to hurting people.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Because unless Trayvon was holding him by the ankles and slamming the top of his head ala Hulk versus Loki, the blood should have been on the BACK center of the skull, not dripping like syrup from the top and side. The blood pattern is not consistent with being on your back and having your head banged onto the ground.
> 
> And I know this because I am a writer and have dozens of books on injuries, weapons, and others stuff that is related to hurting people.


   

Now that's funny. You should have been a witness at the trial with all that 'expertise.'


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

This article from the Tampa Bay Times is a bit disjointed, but it provides data on some of the conflicting claims presented here. Beware of that stuff we all know that just ain't so.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/criminal/race-plays-complex-role-in-floridas-stand-your-ground-law/1233152


----------



## brendajcarlton (Sep 29, 2012)

> The question that comes to my mind would be; do you look back at that experience and have a general distrust of big black men or big men? A general distrust of cocky athletic black men or cocky athletic men? And with that there is no "right" answer.


On a lighter note, not big cocky athletic men that I happened to give birth to. They are not nearly so intimidating when you've changed their diapers.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

No one seems to be discussing Mr Owen's cover any more. . . and posts are becoming less and less cordial.


----------

