I thought long and hard before I decided to write about this topic. It's been sitting on me for quite some time now, and just like the tides of the sea, it comes and goes with a slight surge, and I then relive the feelings all over again. Now admittedly, the tide surges comes far and few between. Most of the time, I'm trying to live life on my own terms and make a place for myself in this world. I get so engrossed in figuring out what my next move will be to promote myself and my work that I forget how I wound up here. That is, until I have a conversation with someone who politely reminds me of how things are.
I wanted to write this because I think that it's important for people to know two things:
1. Not all black men are angry.
2. The ones that are have a reason to be.
I say these two things because I want people to understand that the mythology of the "angry black man" can be dismissed as someone who simply didn't get ahead because he chose not to claim what is his. To someone on the outside, the "angry black man" is only reaping the benefits of his work...or lack there of. The "angry black man" has been typecast as someone that wants a handout...someone that wants the free ride that he thinks his social counterparts have received already and he simply wants his fair share. That may be correct for some, but not for all.
You see, I realize that all I wanted in my life was to not be denied the opportunity to make the best of myself and be all that I can be; and to reap the rewards of my hard work. I thought that if I simply worked hard...perhaps harder than I ever did in my life, my efforts would be rewarded...but who would be rewarding me?
I understand now that my error was repeating the same mistakes over and over yet expecting a different result. Each time I started an entry level position, I began it with the hopes that if I worked hard, I would be rewarded with the recognition for my hard work and loyalty. But as the years passed me by, I realized that the recognition wouldn't come in the form that I thought it would...which is the outcome that was the norm some thirty years ago when hard work and loyalty were rewarded with promotions and raises.
Today, most companies look for a reason not to give you your just due while simultaneously looking for reasons for you to work twice as hard for the same wage. And this is not limited to black men...its to all men. Maybe this is the new norm...but it burns you out, and at some point, you're going to have to look at yourself in the mirror and decide what you want to do with yourself. Hopefully, you make the best decision that works for you.
But the one thing that I want people to understand is that the "angry black man" doesn't want a hand out. He doesn't want things to simply be given to him. That would be too easy. Instead, a man of substance wants to earn his way fairly. He just doesn't want his path blocked or made more difficult than it already has to be.
That had been my logic at one point in time. I don't want you to hand me the gold key...let me reach it on my own; just don't block my way if I get too close to it. Don't tell me that the sky is the limit as long as I should be content to look at it from the basement. That's not right or fair...and fairness is the key because that's all we've ever wanted.
No one wants to spend their entire adulthood in anger...not when there are so many other things that we can and should be doing to enrich the quality of our lives. So as the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, here's the thought that I will leave you with: If I were able to live comfortably and take care of the people that I love in the means that they should be cared for...would that in any way take away from you?
Just a thought.
Comment from a friend in China:
ReplyDeleteI sure wish I could reply on the blog itself, but so be it - that's life in China. Anyway, I found your "Angry Black Man" entry very interesting. I used to laugh, no, "snicker" would be more like it, when white people would so easily dismiss the "angry black man" perspective as anything but real, saying rather it's just an excuse to 'x', where 'x' would be something like "be lazy", "or not work like 'us'" and so forth. Anyway, they would list reasons that covered both ends of the spectrum and everything in-between when attempting to explain their position (many with a racist tint of course, while others were just ignorant) ranging from: "they're lazy, just looking for excuses not to work" to "blaming the man" and many others. Of course, I'd snicker and say something along the lines of "wow, given what you just said, how could you not think those reasons alone, which you believe, would not make someone, anyone, angry if "they" knew that's what you thought?" i.e., I believe that much of what they gave as reasons against the "angry black man" position did in fact support its existence instead but they were just too blind to see it. My father once told me if you wanted to see why a black person gets angry, watch what happens when they walk into a department store vs. when a white person walks in: the black man gets watched, even followed (back in the day when stores still had 'security' people walking the floor) while the white person gets ignored (this lesson went back to the late 60's early 70's). He'd say something like "every black person's a suspect, every white person suspects" - that's not quite it, but it rang true back then. That's one I didn't write down, unfortunately. I thought back on that lesson when I read your post. My perspective on the subject changed quite a bit upon hearing this podcast. Now, do me a favor, don't research the speaker until after you listen, and then I'll tell you why I gave you this stipulation, later.