Comments on: The New York Times Gift Guide for People “Of Color”

By: Heina

Heina — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 04:18:29 +0000

As a kid, non-Indian people used to make fun of me when I had henna on my hands. They would ask me if I was diseased, hurt, etc. and tell me it looked weird. Of course, as soon as Madonna (read: a white girl) did it, it was trendy and no longer weird.

By: Retro Beauty for ‘Deeper Shades’ « Uplift Magazine

Retro Beauty for ‘Deeper Shades’ « Uplift Magazine — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:37:12 +0000

[…] piece on The New York Times Gift Guide for People of Colour over at Sociological Images illustrates that ‘the fact that there “needs” to be a guide […]

By: Links of Great Interest 12/25/09 | The Hathor Legacy

Links of Great Interest 12/25/09 | The Hathor Legacy — Fri, 25 Dec 2009 08:06:42 +0000

[…] Contexts breaks down the NYT gift guide for POC. They also talk about gender and gift guides for liddle kiddles. […]

By: Robin

Robin — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 22:36:05 +0000

Quijotesca’s got a good suggestion re: interviewing auties. You could try doing a search for blogs written by autistic adults, for finding someone to interview; just Google for “autistic blog”, and I’m sure some of them would be amenable to an interview. Of course not all of them are going to be as polarized about it as I am, but obviously these are people who are already describing themselves as “autistic adults”. So unless they just chose that term by default, they’re going to have a reason for choosing “autistic X” rather than “X with autism”.

I’m not sure if Jim Sinclair does interviews (if you’ve never read his essay “Don’t Mourn For Us”, I highly recommend it: http://www.autreat.com/dont_mourn.html ), but I know he’s another autie who deliberately chooses the “autistic X” format.

By: Sarah

Sarah — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 18:02:34 +0000

Holy cow, Q, I would LOVE to – but it’s hard to find (a) autistic people / people with autism who will submit to an interview, or (b) ap/pwa whose guardians will submit to them giving an interview (depending upon the severity of the autism, natch). If you know/are someone who fits into one of those categories, I would love that interview. I don’t want to *just* take a quote from a representative association because I find that oftentimes representatives go to one extreme or the other – just like I don’t want to take the democratic party line as representative of how Democrats personally feel. That being said, I intend to include those perspectives in the article – but the perspectives of (a)the parents of autistic kids/kwa, who often have to speak for them and (b)ap/pwa who I can ask directly how they feel – are more along the lines of what I’m looking for.

By: Quijotesca

Quijotesca — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 16:49:19 +0000

Sarah — Might I suggest quoting autistic people instead of parents of autistic kids? Not that parents aren’t important, but autistic people have said a lot about the topic.

By: Robin

Robin — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 05:24:40 +0000

Certainly – if you want a more extensive take on it, I could forward you the original discussion. :) But if this was sufficient, by all means, go ahead. :) You can attribute to Robin Wolfe, if you’re using last names in the article.

By: Sarah

Sarah — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 05:22:02 +0000

Thanks for your unique perspective! Do you mind if I cite you in an article on the dilemma of labels?

By: Robin

Robin — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 05:08:07 +0000

I got into a debate recently about a similar topic – I have an autistic son and choose to use the language I’ve read a lot of adult autistics using, which is that they refer to themselves as “autistic people” or “auties” or “Aspies” or other similar descriptions. The rationale is that autism can’t be separated from the person; it is pervasive, it colors everything they experience and the way they respond and the very way they *think* and *feel*, and so it is a fundamental identity rather than a secondary. Somebody (who works with children with disabilities) got very offended by me referring to my son (during a discussion of neurological issues) as “my autistic son”, and we went back and forth about it for awhile.

Ultimately, I respect anyone’s right to determine what they want to be called; if they consider themselves a disabled person, I’ll use that term, and if they consider themselves a person with a disability, I’ll use that term instead. It’s their right to choose their own description. But when somebody refers to my own son as “a child with autism” rather than “an autistic child”, I correct them. Even though that’s how I personally feel, though, I do recognize that the current trend is to use “people with autism” as the preferred term.

By: Wednesday Link Love: Holiday Edition « The Feminist Texican

Wednesday Link Love: Holiday Edition « The Feminist Texican — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 08:40:24 +0000

[…] Sociological Images: The New York Times Gift Guide for People “Of Color” […]

By: Luai_lashire

Luai_lashire — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:17:07 +0000

I have a friend who spent a year in India recently, as an exchange student, and she came back with all sorts of traditional indian clothing that her host family had given to her. So yes, I’d say you’re right about the Indian attitude of “it’s all good” re: clothes. That said, it WOULD be a bad idea to start wearing bindi. Religiously, many Hindus believe that only people born Hindu can be Hindu and use Hindu religious symbols and practices. Most bindi have religious meaning, and their appropriation by people of whiteness (I like this term too, heh) is considered offensive.
Just FYI. :)

I definitely agree with you that it’s very dependent on the culture you’re talking about and exactly what it is that you are borrowing from them. Native Americans, for example, are a group for whom the appropriation of their clothing and symbols has long been part of their oppression, so using any of that has to be done with great care if one aims not to offend.

By: Evan

Evan — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 20:02:20 +0000

I agree that it is frustrating to have to separate gift guides as “colored” and “non-colored”; but many of these products would not get seen in mainstream media without that distinction.

This is like Michelle Obama’s skin toned dress – without a guide like this,dark skinned women (like my wife) never knew these products were available to her.

Some of these don’t belong, for sure. And why only 2 categories?

By: Shana

Shana — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 18:24:57 +0000

“Ultimately, this reinforces the idea that people of color are always outsiders in a white world.”
~OR~ that all white people are uncultured, ethnocentric, isolationists; which I find equally repugnant and unfair. I agree that white people are guilty for the vast majority of inequities; however, statements such as this do not illuminate the fact that a lot of white people are being painted with a rather broad and unsavory brush. I had the same amount of input on my skin color as everyone else and I would appreciate not being lumped under the “white devil” label solely based on my complexion.

By: Jillian C. York

Jillian C. York — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:31:13 +0000

I think the marketing on this is very wrong, and I do have a lot of issues with it, BUT…I was struck more by the “BY people of color” label than anything else, which you didn’t much touch on.

I’m not saying, by any means, that this is a good idea AS IS, but seeing a list of products entirely made by people of color in the US is kind of nice. I don’t think people realize most of the time who’s designing their products, but just in the same way that I go out of my way to purchase from local- and minority-owned shops in my neighborhood rather than chain stores, there’s room for this to have a similar concept, rather than the one presented.

How to go about that without coming off like this, though? I don’t know…

By: Ginsu Shark

Ginsu Shark — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 02:05:58 +0000

“The guide lumps together all non-white groups”
Isn’t that what the term “people of color” also does?