This is outside my typical area of commentary, and I confess to being less inspired by Holy Spirit than by the seeming irrationality of the situation. A judge once told me that I had a gift for the obvious, so bear with me if I pause to exercise that gift.
The world is unraveling and we are watching long-held beliefs be challenged and, often, disavowed. We are told again that there is systemic racism. Somehow, though, this alleged systemic racism exists without regard to the racial composition of the leadership of the organization or system, and further that this racism targets and disadvantages only one race, blacks. We are given the tragic deaths of George Floyd and Rayshard Brooks as exemplars of this systemic racism. I do not know the black experience, because I am not black. There are those who would disqualify any observation I might make or opinion I might hold outright based on that admission. However, the converse is also true insofar as those who are not white do not know the white experience. I am aware enough, however, to understand that the experience and treatment of any group, whether ethnic, racial, gender, etc. is predicated on the geographic and cultural milieu in which that group exists. What defines us as part of that or any other group? The preconceptions, or stereotypes if you will, that others use as a mental shorthand when first encountering us. I had an experience, not that long ago, of going into an auto parts store. I had been working on a car that morning and found myself in sudden and urgent need of a particular component. To set the scene, I am a white male in my early sixties. I was attired in well-worn jeans and a t-shirt that both bore the grime and stains of my morning’s activities. Typically, I present myself showered, shaved and neatly dressed, but not on this occasion.
The customer service I received at this store on this day was, I thought, atrocious. Particularly when viewed in contrast with another gentleman being assisted. Though similar to me in the basics, he was neatly dressed, well-groomed, and had arrived at the store in a fully-restored classic car which he had parked in a clearly visible location in the parking lot. I left that store offended, believing that I had been treated shabbily and disrespectfully. Of course, although I didn’t realize it in the moment, my treatment was based on having been mis-stereotyped. Rather than having been treated as the stereotypical white person, I had been stripped of the benefits of that white privilege (more accurately stated as white stereotype) and been instead treated according to a more negative stereotype. In the community where I live there is an enduring drug abuse epidemic resulting in a stereotype of dirty, unkempt, people who are motivated by addiction and are willing to violate laws in pursuit of satisfying that addiction. I suspect that I was initially categorized into this group.
How do you address this stereotyping? In that instance, it would have been simple for me to shower, shave, and change clothes before going out, and thus avoid mischaracterization. However, what if my appearance that day had been my norm, and what if I lacked the ability to change my appearance? There then would be only two options – change the stereotype or convince those who held it to stop applying it. The first option, to change the stereotype, would involve convincing the drug-abusing community to start modeling different behaviors so that people would think better of them upon initial encounter. Sadly, that is not a possibility since the drug-abusing community does not think of themselves as a community and, if they possessed the discipline to model different behaviors, would likely no longer be drug abusers. The second option, to convince those who held the stereotype to disregard it, is similarly doomed. As a clerk in a store, one’s focus must be on loss prevention and ensuring a pleasant shopping experience. If your experience and training suggest that drug addicts tend to steal to support their habits and frequently due to the influence of mind-altering substances may appear intimidating to other customers, then you will be more alert to those who appear to be possible drug abusers and may view them with a more suspicious eye. As a clerk, you don’t have the time on the job to interact and form an accurate assessment of each customer, so you use a mental shorthand predicated on your experience. Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck – forgive me for supposing that you may indeed be a duck; and don’t be shocked to be treated like a duck, despite your loud quacks in protest. Insisting that the clerk not act based on stereotypes means the business would sustain greater losses and less income. It would mean insisting that he/she act contrary to self-interest and the interests of their employer. Starbucks instructed all of its locations to allow the homeless to use their bathrooms and tables, regardless of whether a purchase was made. That awareness has caused me to avoid locations where there is a large homeless problem – I have no desire to spend time in a homeless encampment, even if they do serve irresistible frappuccinos. It’s only logical and predicated on survival and self-interest.
Now, imagine that the stereotype is based solely on the color of your skin. Suppose further that a negative stereotype has been established by others of the same skin color. You’re a successful, Christian businessman with a law degree, a six-figure income, and a home in the suburbs. However, you share the same skin color and gender as the majority of persons arrested and incarcerated in your community. You may find that any encounter with police starts with a jaundiced eye from the officer, because you do not fit into the norm of his or her encounters. This is regardless of the race of the police officer. Their programming, through experience, initially sees you as a potential arrest, a potential criminal, a potential threat. This speaks to how we react in situations. The old adage that when all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail plays out here, and the police officer is a member of the local “hammer department”. It takes a moment to realize that there is no problem, there is no nail, and no hammer is needed; however, in that brief moment of that initial encounter, so very many things can go wrong. This is why black parents brief their children as they come of age as to how to react when encountering a police officer. I suspect that these briefings are more general than imagined though, as I recall my dad giving me a talk on the same subject.
I recall one time when my car wouldn’t start when I was ready to leave for work. I called the auto club and was told to expect a tow driver in about 15 minutes. About 15 minutes later, my roommate appeared at the front door and, for a brief moment, it didn’t register to me that he was my roommate. Instead I momentarily concluded that he was the tow driver! Due to stress and having programmed my expectations, it took a moment to register that it was indeed my roommate. Note though that I would have been completely unaware of my subconscious self-programming had the tow driver appeared at the door instead of my roommate. Similarly, life experience tends to cause us to subconsciously self-program and react accordingly. This is true of all people regardless of race. Remember that President Obama once characterized his grandmother as “a typical white person” for having once expressed to him her fear of black men who passed by her on the street. Just as she possessed a stereotype regarding black men, President Obama revealed himself in that moment as possessing a stereotype regarding white people. Which one is less wrong? Which one is more right? Neither. The innate programming of each individual’s experience formed both stereotypes and illustrates how little difference there is between us.
Is education the answer? Is greater screening of police recruits the answer? Sadly, no. Those would be easy fixes, but the problem is hard-wired into each of us. Police departments are purposed to enforce the law. Without police departments, there would be no law enforcement. Most of us support the police because we lack the individual strength and resolve to stand up for ourselves. Are there problems? Of course. No one should be murdered like George Floyd. But his death was at the hands of one rogue cop who had no business being behind a badge. Was it racially motivated? Only God knows his heart. It doesn’t help the case of those who protest on behalf of social justice and against social order that their martyrs to the cause, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, George Floyd, Rayshard Brooks, were each individuals who were engaged in criminal behavior and who were resisting arrest at the time of their deaths. If racial stereotypes did not exist, what would have been the outcome? All would still likely be dead, as the predicate for each encounter had been the commission of a crime. The only clearly racially influenced death of an innocent man recently has been Ahmaud Arbery, who was killed not by police, but rather by armed vigilantes. Note, too, that the image of the police officer as racist and wishing to harm innocent blacks is itself a stereotype – a stereotype being reinforced by a media emphasis on police encounters that may (often through inaccurate or incomplete reporting) fit the pattern.
What is appalling to many is the concept of racial profiling – acting on the basis of stereotypes, to justify initial encounters. Racial profiling is no longer acceptable. The problem is, though, that it was, in fact, effective. The Transportation Security Administration is forbidden to use racial profiling. This does not mean that if you appear to be a middle-eastern male in his early twenties travelling alone or with similar peers that you will not be selected for closer screening, it merely means that they will also have to closely screen one or two 90 year old grannies to offset your screening and to make it appear statistically random. Racial profiling has been embedded in supposed random sampling and the sample has been adjusted accordingly to perpetuate the illusion. Stereotypes are changed through experience, not through edict.
The harms or benefits of stereotypes are predicated on your geographic or cultural location. In Cambodia, “intellectuals” were once stereotyped as those who wore eyeglasses. When the ruling Khmer Rouge decided to exterminate the intellectual class, they had only to look for the “four-eyed” among them. Whereas the white stereotype may be a net positive in the U.S. for those in that group, it lacks any benefit in many foreign lands such as the Middle East. Similarly, the Christian stereotype convinces non-believers that we are passive and non-confrontational, that very stereotype convinces them that they may safely and without consequence blaspheme our Lord, mock our faith, and deface our churches. In contrast the Muslim stereotype convinces non-believers that their faith is not to be trifled with or even commented upon.
So how do we overcome our hard-wiring? If you believe in evolution, you can conclude that anyone who lacked this hard-wiring was culled from the population eons ago. Being slow to draw conclusions and assess dangers is not a biologically successful trait. If you believe in God (here I am Lord!), then the answer lies in a closer relationship with Him and a willingness to turn the other cheek. We won’t be changed until we are all changed after His return. In the meantime, my prayer is that we can look at one another with a measure of grace. I don’t understand your burden, and you don’t understand mine. Gratefully, though, we are able to shelter under the wings of a loving God who understands both of us and has provided the Holy Spirit to guide us into a fuller understanding.
In a dry and thirsty land 