“Dead Latinos” by José R. Sánchez (January 2, 2010)

When does one dead Hollywood actor trump another? When does one fierce dead organizer against social injustices trump another? In fact, when does a dead chimp responsible for a hideous attack catapult himself above the life of a dead Mexican anthropologist with over 150 books and articles filled with archaeological and cultural studies about Mayan civilization? For The New York Times the answer seems to be whenever the second option is a Latino.

Travis the chimp was one of the few fortunate deceased to get star billing in the New York Times 2009 annual issue devoted to the passing of important people. Travis, you may remember, was the Connecticut chimpanzee, raised by a woman in Stamford, who was killed after he mauled the face off of his caretaker’s friend. This annual Times compilation included twenty-three essays on this year’s deceased. Like in past years, not one single Latino made it onto this lamentable list of the departed, famous and not-so-famous.

Many Latinos died this year, arguably many of them having led interesting and notable lives. But they apparently were not interesting enough for The New York Times. This newspaper highlighted the death of Karl Malden but not Ricardo Montalbán. The latter was the debonair path-breaking Mexican movie and television star, best known for his roles in the Star Trek series and movie and his commercials for promoting the “soft, Corinthian leather” in Chrysler Motors car seats.

The Times also wrote about the death of Crystal Lee Sutton, a fierce labor organizer in the South. But it ignored the death of Esther Chavez, a Mexican accountant who was one of the first to discover a pattern of murders in the 1990s against Mexican women working in U.S.-owned factories in border cities. Chavez helped to draw public attention and government prosecution against men who kidnapped young Mexican women off the streets, and raped and killed them with impunity. Her advocacy led the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to rule that Mexico had violated the human rights of women.

The Times also wrote about Robert Rines, an MIT scientist who spent most of his life pursuing evidence to prove the existence of the Loch Ness Monster. It ignored Dennis deLeon, a former New York City human rights commissioner, who created the premiere Latino advocacy group against AIDS. A Mexican American, deLeon created the Latino Commission on AIDS in 1994 and made it into a very effective tool against the spread of AIDS in the Latino community.

Why should we care that the Times ignored so many of Latinos in death? Some say this slight is one more example of the invisibility Latinos experience in life in the U.S. Death, apparently, does not redeem the living. Some Latinos, like Montalbán and deLeon, did get obituaries in the Times’ daily paper at the time of their death.

These annual compilations are done for many, often valid, editorial reasons. Some of the people the Times chose to celebrate led unusual lives, enough to have books or movies done about them. The Times also specifically selected each author to write these obit articles. Some were Times writers while others came from outside the paper. Who they chose to write about sprung from their individual “passions, quirks and curiosities” as writers and editors. The Times, in that sense, did not attempt to provide a comprehensive listing. All of this, however, simply underscores an even more troubling reality for Latinos. It’s one thing to be invisible, to not be seen; it is quite another to be in plain sight and yet not spark much interest or curiosity from others.

Public recognition of the dead provides a rough indication of the difference that person made in life, how much they were able to change the way others thought, behaved, or felt. Rines, the scientist who spent a large part of his life chasing the Loch Ness monster never found her, at least not conclusively. He inspired others by his quixotic efforts, however. He pushed the limits of how much we know and how much faith is warranted in the myth of her existence.

Omitting Latinos from this kind of recognition carries a message — that Latino lives do not really matter and did not have an impact. Is this a legitimate conclusion? The Times also omitted any recognition of Canadians, Jamaicans, Muslims and many others. But they did include two African Americans, Naomi Sims the model, and Reverend Ike, the irrepressible minister who built a church based on greed and hope. They also included a Trinidadian, the chili restaurant owner Ben Ali. Are these choices the product of simple editorial decisions, the play of curiosity, or pure whimsy? Are these news sources simply responding to audiences who have little interest in Latinos?

Latinos, obviously, did make a difference in this world before they passed on. We don’t need the Times to tell us so. But do we need the Times to tell others? How much do other Americans know about Latinos, the “fastest growing minority group” in the country? The Times treatment of Latino deaths is symptomatic of a wider neglect of Latinos in the media. Most mainstream newspapers and magazines also systematically ignored Latino accomplishments in their end-of-year appraisals.

The Chicago Tribune’s list of notable deaths in 2009 contained two Latinos out of 104. This included Mercedes Sosa, the Grammy Award winning Argentinean singer, and Alex Arguello, the Nicaraguan boxer. If we wanted to be generous, we could give them a third in Gidget, the Taco Bell dog featured in their commercials. The Los Angeles Times, meanwhile, listed about 120 notable deaths, only 3 of which were Latinos. This included Arguello, Montalbán and Ismael Valenzuela, the Mexican horse jockey. One last example is the Baltimore Sun. It listed only Montalbán, Rafael Antonio Caldera, the two-time Venezuelan president, as well as the baseball manager Preston Gomez, among the 134 notable deaths in 2009.

The wide reach of this neglect is probably driven by the current media structure. Most newspapers in the U.S. are part of a handful of media monopolies that share the same sources of information or rely on syndicated sources like the Associated Press. In this vein, the AP listed only Montalbán among the 91 notable deaths it chose to feature in 2009. Five or six media conglomerates control the majority of newspapers in the United States. Editorial decisions, thus, tend to accumulate and spread with this kind of centralization. Most of the end-of-year reviews of the deceased were simply replicated by each newspaper in the chain. Recent research confirms this disturbing reality.

The Project for Excellence in Journalism and the Pew Hispanic Center reported recently that in one six-month sample period only “2.9% of the news content studied contained substantial references to Hispanics.” Most of that coverage was focused on the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. Otherwise, the media attention focused on Latinos only in the context of discussing issues like immigration and the recession. Clearly, a population that is now almost 16 percent of the population deserves more widespread and direct media attention focused on Latino lives and accomplishments.

The complaint here is not just about recognition and publicity. It is, to a great extent, also about power. Nothing happens simply because any one group or person has taken action. The world does not function so linearly. The success of health care reform or the results of the 2008 elections have many contributors. A group that is either not seen or that draws little interest will find its contributions minimized or dismissed. But this is about power in an even more important way.

I believe that any success at influencing or changing how others think, behave or feel depends directly on our ability to offer something that others value. Those who attribute power to objects like money or weapons can’t easily explain why these things sometimes fail to deliver power. The rich don’t always get what they want and, historically, much poorer-equipped opponents have often defeated the largest and best-equipped armies. Vietnam for the U.S. and Afghanistan for the U.S.S.R. are the best examples of the latter. The “War against Terrorism” may, eventually, prove to be another.

Power is a transaction, an exchange between parties in which each side has input. This is true no matter the situation. A mugger can get me to turn over my valuables only because my health and life mean so much more to me than my watch and money. The key here is that the threat of assault gets victims to move only because I, like the vast majority of us, fear getting hurt or killed. When that is not the case, when I am reckless or suicidal, for instance, the mugger’s threat often falls flat. The mugger’s attempt to extract valuables from me then gets stalled, jeopardized, and, possibly, defeated. I may get killed but the mugger will have failed to influence my behavior.

I cannot teach my students or change the way they think unless they want knowledge or grades or something else from me. I cannot influence how an elected official decides policy issues unless I can provide the votes, money or information they need. The ability to influence becomes extremely difficult, however, if the others around me do not see me or have no interest in me when they do. The exclusion of Latinos from the list of notable deaths reflects a community whose life remains lived apart from the main cultural, economic, and political currents of this society.

Latinos lag behind other groups in voting rates, average age, high school graduation, college attendance, employment rates, corporate and professional employment, income, housing conditions, two parent families, and residential integration. These conditions not only produce deprivations and obstacles to individual mobility. They also produce a community that still lives, despite all the progress, largely apart from the rest of society. This life apart results in very limited opportunities for Latinos to develop power with and influence other sectors U.S. society.

The neglect of Latinos in death is, thus, a reflection not just of how much Latinos are neglected in life but also of how few opportunities they have for power while alive. The Times is, thus, justified to omit any Latinos from its annual “How They Lived” magazine compilation. After all, it would be hypocritical to pay attention in death to a group that they and society have mostly ignored, overlooked, dismissed, and brushed off in life.

José Ramon Sánchez is Associate Professor of Politics and Chair of Urban Studies at Long Island University – Brooklyn; he is also Chair of the Board of the National Institute for Latino Policy, Inc. He is the author of “Boricua Power: A Political History of Puerto Ricans in the U.S.” (2007) and co-author of “The Iraq Papers” (2010). He can be reached at jose.sanchez@liu.edu.

As a prosecutor, litigator, and trial and appellate judge, Judge Sotomayor brings more federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice in 100 years, and more overall judicial experience than anyone confirmed for the Court in the past 70 years.

We applaud President Obama on his successful nomination and laud this momentous step forward for the Court and our country.

Share with us your thoughts about our newest Justice at ConfirmSotomayor.org.

Judge Sotomayor’s nomination and confirmation will be among our discussion topics at a Netroots Nation panel next week at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center in Pittsburgh, Pa.

EJS is coordinating a session on “The Myth of Post-Racial America” on Thursday, August 13, from 9 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.

Panelists include Rinku Sen, President and Executive Director of the Applied Research Center (ARC); Rich Benjamin, Senior Fellow at DEMOS; Annabel Park, director/producer of the upcoming documentary film “9500 Liberty” and moderated by Keith Kamisugi, EJS Director of Communications.

Save the session date and info on Facebook.

“Empathy for one party is always prejudice against another.”

Sen. Jeff Sessions, fervid critic of Judge Sonia Sotomayor and President Barack Obama, uttered these startling words in the first hour of the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings for Sotomayor’s elevation to the U.S. Supreme Court.

As professors who strive to teach students that the understanding of texts and of life is deeply enriched by ethical principles of empathy, conscience and compassion, we were left aghast by the empathy-bashing on national television.

What is empathy, and why are Sessions and other conservative Senators saying such terrible things about it?

Empathy is commonly defined as the ability to imagine, identify with, and potentially share another’s experiences, perspectives and feelings. It is about process, rather than result, and about intellect as well as emotion.

Given that all of us are both shaped and limited by our lived experiences, how can we engage in effective dialogue, debate and analysis unless we try to comprehend how others think and feel?

Empathy is not a trendy or new-fangled invention of Obama, Sotomayor or even contemporary American culture.

Its rich intellectual tradition includes giants of Western political thought like John Stuart Mill, who argued in “On Liberty” that we must understand others’ points of view, right or wrong, to understand, clarify, and, if need be, correct our own positions.

The 19th century British poet Percy Shelley argued that a person, “to be greatly good, must imagine intensely and comprehensively” and must “put himself [or herself] in the place of another and of many others.”

Simplistic equations of empathy with bias woefully misinterpret the nature of both concepts. Genuine empathy requires crossing boundaries of identity and circumstance to find common overarching truths.

Bias stems from the refusal to acknowledge that our world-view is in part limited by our own experiences. Education is one way to eliminate such bias and limitation, and empathy is another. In literature, law and life, the exercise of empathy enlarges our capacity to appreciate and understand the narratives and perspectives of others unlike ourselves.

For judges — especially those who serve on the highest court in the land — the quality of empathy can be an antidote to prejudice, rather than evidence of it. Diversity of backgrounds and life experiences among the nine members of the Supreme Court will increase the likelihood that doctrinally and ethically rigorous exchanges will occur.

The noted legal thinker and Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, “The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience. “… [L]aw cannot be dealt with as if it contained only the axioms and corollaries of a book of mathematics.”

Even before he nominated Judge Sotomayor, President Obama created controversy by stating that he considered “the quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people’s hopes and struggles as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes.”

Yet, he was not advocating this so-called empathy standard as the sole or primary criterion for appointment of Supreme Court justices.

Clearly, serving on the highest court in the land requires an exceptional legal mind and record, but also the wisdom to know that empathy is a strength rather than a weakness.

Margaret Russell, an Oakland resident, is a professor of Constitutional Law at Santa Clara University, and board member of the Equal Justice Society and the ACLU. Marilyn Edelstein is an associate professor of English at Santa Clara University.

It depicts Judge Sotomayor strung up by a rope, likening itself to lynching images or a piñata, with President Barack Obama wearing a sombrero, holding a stick and asking a crowd of elephants (Republicans) “Now, who wants to be first?”

The cartoon is captioned “Fiesta time at the confirmation hearing.” See the cartoon here on our ConfirmSotomayor.org blog.

Piñatas are actually of Mexican tradition and Judge Sotomayor is of Puerto Rican descent. Clearly, either the artist confused his stereotypes or sees the Latino community as one homogenous race without distinction.

Too much damage has been done to our communities under the guise of “satire” and this recent publication marches to the same drum as did the cartoon of the chimp in the New York Post and the Danish cartoon depicting Mohammed as a terrorist.

We’ve re-posted below a statement from Jean Warner, chair of the Oklahoma Women’s Coalition, in response to the vicious editorial cartoon.

Please read Ms. Warner’s post and write to the publisher of the newspaper (see end of the post).”

Regarding today’s political cartoon in the OKC paper: What was The Oklahoman thinking?

Oklahoma ranks as the 3rd worst state in the nation for women.

Much of what holds Oklahoma women and girls back is linked to our state’s culture of violence and disresepct for women. Oklahoma ranks #4 in women murdered by men, #1 in child abuse and our domestic violence shelters are full of women escaping violence.

So The Oklahoman today runs a cartoon showing Sonia Sotomayor – a brilliant Hispanic woman scholar, lawyer and judge – strung up by a rope while men with clubs prepare to have at her for believing she’s qualified to serve on the US. Supreme Court.

Sotomayor graduated summa cum laude from Princeton, received a JD from Yale Law School where she was an editor at the Yale Law Journal (but she grew up in the projects; obviously “that girl doesn’t know her place” – right? wink, wink). President George H.W. Bush nominated her to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York where she served with distinction (but she’s a woman and, worst yet, ambitious – right? wink, wink). She’s served on the US Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit for 10 years, heard over 3,000 cases and written over 380 opinions (but she’s of Puerto Rican descent ~~ ergo the piñata image – right? wink, wink).

Not funny; actually stupid and damaging. A picture speaks louder than words and that cartoon sends a message to women of all ages: “Back off. Know your place. Or we’ll take a stick to you and teach you a lesson.”

Shame on The Oklahoman and its publisher, David Thompson!

Write to publisher David Thompson, let him know this kind of journalism is irresponsible and demand a retraction

]]> http://www.equaljusticesociety.org/2009/06/editorial-cartoon-on-judge-sotomayor-has-subtext-of-lynching-stereotypes-latinos/feed/ 1 http://www.equaljusticesociety.org/2009/06/bittersweet-week-judge-sotomayor-prop-8-upheld-ron-takaki-passes-launching-confirmsotomayororg/ http://www.equaljusticesociety.org/2009/06/bittersweet-week-judge-sotomayor-prop-8-upheld-ron-takaki-passes-launching-confirmsotomayororg/#comments Tue, 02 Jun 2009 00:40:02 +0000 Keith Kamisugi http://www.equaljusticesociety.org/?p=752 We experienced last week several gut-wrenching and rejoiceful moments.

On Tuesday, May 26, President Barack Obama announced his historic nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. On the same morning, the California Supreme Court ruled against marriage equality by upholding Prop. 8. The following day brought news that a preeminent scholar on our nation’s diversity, UC Berkeley professor Ronald Takaki, passed away.

SUPREME COURT NOMINEE JUDGE SONIA SOTOMAYOR

In nominating Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, President Obama fulfilled a promise to the American people to appoint judges who are well-qualified, grounded in the rule of law and the Constitution, fair-minded and committed to equal justice for all. Judge Sotomayor embodies all these traits.

In the course of a life that began in a housing project in the South Bronx and brought her to the pinnacle of her profession, Judge Sotomayor accumulated more experience on the federal bench than any incoming Supreme Court Justice in the past 100 years, touching nearly every aspect of our legal system.

But Judge Sotomayor’s ethnicity has proven too much of a temptation for the voices of hate and extremism, who instead of looking at her judicial record have launched a vocal rampage that has reached new heights of absurdity, including calling her a “reverse racist” and calling the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) “the Latino KKK without the hoods and nooses.”

Condemn these unacceptable attacks on Latinos and Judge Sotomayor now. Join NLCR and send a message to Chairman Michael Steele of the RNC, House Minority Leader John Boehner, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell asking them to denounce these statements and restore the nomination process for Judge Sotomayor to a more appropriate and civil discourse.

EJS has also launched a blog and Facebook page in support for Judge Sotomayor. Visit http://ConfirmSotomayor.org and join the Facebook page as a fan. The blog includes a page with information on how you can support Judge Sotomayor.

And if you’re in California, please support our Californians for Fair and Independent Judges coalition so that organizations and individuals here can work together to support Judge Sotomayor’s confirmation. Email Keith Kamisugi at kkamisugi@equaljusticesociety.org for information about joining the coalition.

CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT RULING ON PROP. 8

The California Supreme Court last Tuesday in a 6-1 vote upheld Prop. 8, the ballot measure discriminating against marriage by same-sex couples.

EJS is relieved the Court protected couples who married before November 5. The presence of thousands of married same-sex couples across California will show that marriage strengthens families and communities and threatens no one.

But by upholding Prop 8, the Court has diminished its legacy as a champion of equality. No minority group should have to defend its right to equality at the ballot. The Court’s decision jeopardizes every minority group in California.

As a racial justice organization, the Equal Justice Society opposes Prop. 8 – not only because it’s the right thing to do, but also because EJS strongly believes in working with others to ensure that the rights of all are expanded, rather than diminished, in our society.

We cannot just pigeonhole Prop. 8 as a ‘gay’ issue. By rolling back the fundamental rights of one group, the Supreme Court’s decision on Prop. 8 casts a threat that now looms over the civil rights of all.

Since the vote on Prop 8, there has been a tidal wave of momentum in favor of full equality. Five states now embrace marriage equality for same-sex couples, and several more are on the brink. We believe that California voters will reverse this injustice at the ballot. California has been a leader in standing up for equality, and it will be again.

Banning same-sex couples from marriage is unfair. Same-sex couples have the same hopes, dreams and concerns for their families as everyone else. They should be allowed the dignity, recognition, and responsibility that come with marriage, just like everyone else.

The fight is not over. Join our friends at the National Center for Lesbian Rights (led by EJS board member Kate Kendall) to receive updates on next steps in this battle for justice.

PROF. RON TAKAKI PASSES AWAY

Ronald Takaki, professor emeritus of ethnic studies at the University of California, Berkeley, and a preeminent scholar of U.S. race relations who taught the University of California’s first black history course, died at his home in Berkeley on Tuesday, May 26, at age 70. He had struggled for years with multiple sclerosis, an autoimmune condition that attacks the central nervous system.

During his more than 40 years at UC Berkeley, Takaki established the nation’s first ethnic studies Ph.D. program as well as UC Berkeley’s American Cultures requirement for graduation, and advised President Clinton in 1997 on his major speech on race.

“Ron Takaki elevated and popularized the study of America’s multiracial past and present like no other scholar, and in doing so had an indelible impact on a generation of students and researchers across the nation and world,” said Don Nakanishi, director of and professor at UCLA’s Asian American Studies Center and a longtime friend of Takaki’s.

Takaki’s 1989 book, “Strangers from a Different Shore: A History of Asian Americans,” was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize.

A descendent of Japanese field workers in Hawai’i, Takaki was acutely attuned to the inequities in Hawai’i's tough and ethnically divided plantation system.

In 1966, he was hired to teach UCLA’s first black history course in the wake of the explosive Watts riots. “I can still remember the smoke rising from Los Angeles and the sound of gunfire – it was a war zone,” he told the San Francisco Chronicle in that same interview.

When a student in the black history class asked him which revolutionary tools he could teach them, Takaki replied: “We’re going to study the history of the U.S. as it relates to African Americans. We’re going to strengthen our critical thinking skills and our writing skills. These can be revolutionary tools if we make them so.”

After five years at UCLA, Takaki returned in 1971 to UC Berkeley as the Department of Ethnic Studies’ first full-time teacher. He became wildly popular, filling auditoriums with hundreds of students hungry for perspectives on the struggles of America’s minority groups, and went on to win the campus’s Distinguished Teaching Award in 1981.

Takaki is survived by his wife, Carol; his three children, Todd of El Cerrito, Calif., Troy of Los Angeles and Dana of Chester, Conn.; and several grandchildren.

Takaki has donated his research and published papers to the Ethnic Studies Library at UC Berkeley. His family asks that, in lieu of flowers, donations be made in Takaki’s name to the Asian Law Caucus in San Francisco. Plans for a campus memorial service are pending.

All of us at the Equal Justice Society mourn Prof. Takaki’s passing and we express our deepest condolences to Ron’s family and friends.

Join a Facebook page launched in tribute to Prof. Takaki.

]]> http://www.equaljusticesociety.org/2009/06/bittersweet-week-judge-sotomayor-prop-8-upheld-ron-takaki-passes-launching-confirmsotomayororg/feed/ 0