BOOK REVIEW: Heaven, My Home (Highway 59, #2) by Attica Locke

Heaven, My Home is the second in a series of police procedural books about a Black Texas Ranger written by Attica Locke (who is also well-known for her trenchant writing on television shows such as Little Fires Everywhereand Empire). The main character in the books is Darren Matthews, and the central tension of the books come from the conflicts and circumstances that arise when one of the very few Black man in a predominantly white prestigious crime-fighting organization like the Texas Rangers has to interact with rednecks in rural sections of the state.

In Bluebird, Bluebird, Darren was involved in trying to solve a pair of murders with racial overtones (the bodies of a black man and a white woman are found dumped separately in a nearby river a few days apart) in a very small town up Highway 59 from Dallas. In the sequel, Heaven, My Home, Darren is asked to drive up Highway 59 to the Southern gothic tourist destination of Jefferson to find a missing 10-year-old kid, Levi King. Levi just happens to be the son of jailed notorious white supremacist Bill King and was last seen alive by Leroy Page, an elderly Black man who happens to own most of the property near Lake Caddo in an area called Hopetown where Native Americans, African Americans and poor Whites have been squatting for years. The child’s grandmother Rosemary King is the richest person in the nearby town of Jefferson but doesn’t seem that worried about her kin’s well-being, but Rosemary does seem fixated on getting her greedy hands on the Leroy’s deed to Hopetown.

If the story in Heaven, My Home doesn’t seem complicated enough there are still several unresolved issues from the first book. Because of this, Darren is currently being blackmailed by his own ne’er-do-well mother to keep quiet that she has a piece of evidence that if it were revealed Darren knew existed and were given to authorities might not only lead to him losing his job, but potential indictment and prosecution. Additionally, while Darren’s marriage started off in an “it’s complicated” phase in the first book, it morphs into the slow-motion train wreck stage when he starts noticing oddly charged interactions between his best friend and wife and this leads him to reach out to the widow he was powerfully (and chastely) attracted to in the first book.

The writing is delightful in both books and the mysteries are compelling, if somewhat implausibly racially charged, in both cases. One would think these features would make these books resonate with he but, surprisingly, they don’t. Primarily, I just don’t sympathize (or empathize) with Darren. He makes (and made) some bad choices in this book and the previous one. He’s clearly a (barely) functional alcoholic. Of course, there’s a long history of detectives being alcoholic, addicted messes (looking at you, John Rebus!) but here the setting of backwoods Texas repels instead of propelling me.

I hope Ms. Locke writes more books in the Highway 59 series, and I think I will probably get around to reading them, although I won’t feel an urgent need to do so.

Title: Heaven, My Home.
Author: Attica Locke.
Format: Kindle.
Length: 336 pages.
Publisher: Mullholland Books.
Date Published: September 17, 2019.
Date Read: February 20, 2021.

GOODREADS RATING: ★★★½☆  (3.5/5.0).

OVERALL GRADE: A-/B+ (3.5/4.0).

PLOT: B+.
IMAGERY: A-.
IMPACT: A-.
WRITING: A-.

BOOK REVIEW: White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo

White Fragility is a short but affecting read; it is revelatory, informative and inspirational. The author provides insight into the myriad ways that white people respond to discussions about race and white supremacy. This excerpt (from page 2) basically encapsulates the primary thesis of the book: Socialized into a deeply internalized sense of superiority that we are unaware of or can never admit to ourselves, we become highly fragile in conversations about race. We consider a challenge to our racial worldviews as a challenge to our very identities as good, moral people. Thus, we perceive any attempt to connect us to the system of racism as unsettling and unfair moral offense. The smallest amount of racial stress is intolerable--the mere suggestion that being white has meaning often triggers a range of defensive responses. These include emotions such as anger, fear, and guilt and behaviors such as withdrawal from the stress-inducing situation. These responses work to reinstate white equilibrium as they repel the challenge, return our racial comfort, and maintain our dominance within the racial hierarchy. I conceptualize this process as white fragility. The author Robin Diangelo uses the words "we" and "ours" in this quote and throughout the book to be explicit and forthright about her positionality as a white woman discussing racism. I imagine White Fragility would be very difficult for white people to read this book without experiencing some of the reactions that the author describes above. In fact, the author recognizes this and spends a significant amount of time in the book speaking directly to white readers of the text, to attempt to modulate and potentially forestall these reactions. I have to imagine how white readers will respond to reading about the ubiquity and resilience of white supremacy because I am not a white person.  Despite this fact, the experience of reading White Fragility as a non-white person is an exciting experience. My primary feeling was one of admiration (at the thoughtfulness and precision of the language of the book and the cogent and contemporaneous nature of the ideas included) and amazement (at the sheer number of "secrets" revealed and taboos broken about discussing race, anti-blackness and white supremacy). While it is well under 200 pages, White Fragility provides numerous resources for facilitating the process of getting white people to talk about racism, such as the pages of footnotes at the end of the book providing evidence for claims made in the text, as well as "Books, Articles and Blogs" for the reader to continue their education on the subject(s) of race, racism and white supremacy. Additionally, there are very useful lists included in the book which distill and highlight some of the key concepts. An example is this list of the functions of white fragility (found on page 122): Maintain white solidarity Close off self-reflection Trivialize the reality of racism Make white people the victims Hijack the conversation Protect a limited worldview Take race off the table Focus on the messenger, not the message Rally more resources to white people Another strong aspect of the book are the particular chapters devoted to "White Women's Tears," "Anti-Blackness," and "The Good/Bad Binary." Overall, White Fragility is a tour de force explication of why it is so difficult to have conversations about racism and (therefore begin) the process of dismantling white supremacy. In the end, I found the book somewhat depressing because it makes the prospect for improved race relations in the United States appear to be unlikely by analyzing and enumerating what would be entailed in producing such a future. With that said, the problem is not with the book, which does a great service to us all by illuminating and elucidating ideas and actions about race and white supremacy, but with us, the reader(s). RATING: FIVE STARS.

Title: White Fragility: Why It's So Hard For White People To Talk About Racism.
Author: Robin Diangelo.
Paperback: 462 pages.
Publisher: Tor Books.
Date Published: March 26, 2019.
Date Read: July 27, 2019.

GOODREADS RATING: ★★★★½☆  (4.5/5.0).

OVERALL GRADE: A- (3.67/4.0).

PLOT: A-.
IMAGERY: A-.
IMPACT: B+.
WRITING: A.

Washington State Supreme Court Abolishes Death Penalty!

There are now twenty states that do not have the death penalty! Last week, the Washington State Supreme Court declared that state's death penalty unconstitutional in State v. Gregory, saying:

The death penalty is invalid because it is imposed in an arbitrary and raciallybiased manner. While this particular case provides an opportunity to specificallyaddress racial disproportionality, the underlying issues that underpin our holding are rooted in the arbitrary manner in which the death penalty is generally administered. As noted by appellant, the use of the death penalty is unequally applied—sometimes by where the crime took place, or the county of residence, or the available budgetary resources at any given point in time, or the race of the defendant. The death penalty, as administered in our state, fails to serve any legitimate penological goal; thus, it violates article I, section 14 of our state constitution.

The ruling is based entirely on the State constitution so it is not appealable to, or dependent on, the United States Supreme Court.

Hat/tip to ACLU

UPDATE: Michael Johnson Accepts 10-Year Plea Deal In HIV Transmission Case

There is an update in the infamous Michael Johnson case: where a 23-year-old Black gay man was sentenced to 30 years in prison under Missouri's discriminatory HIV criminalization statute after a trial influenced by homophobia and racism. Happily, the 30-year sentence was overturned last year.
The news comes that Johnson has agreed to a plea deal where he gets a 10-year prison sentence (including the 4 years he has already served). He is entering an "Alford plea" which says that he agrees that the state has enough evidence to convict him of a crime.

The Center for HIV Law and Public Policy issued a press release on the Johnson case:

New York, NY, September 21, 2017 – Today, in conclusion to a prosecution short on fairness and riddled with questions about racism and homophobia, Michael Johnson entered a plea in the St. Charles County Circuit Court in Missouri. Earlier this year, a state appeals court vacated his original conviction due to prosecutorial misconduct that, according to the court, made Johnson’s first trial “fundamentally unfair.” 

However, because Missouri’s HIV criminal law hinges liability on whether or not the defendant can prove he disclosed his HIV status prior to sex – a virtual impossibility in most instances – Johnson decided to accept a plea deal that credits him with time served. Under Missouri’s law, one of the harshest in the country, Johnson could have faced up to 96 years in prison if found guilty. 

“It is disturbing that Michael is not yet a free man and was not exonerated after his years-long struggle for justice, but we respect and support his decision not to risk a life behind bars,” said Mayo Schreiber, Deputy Director of the Center for HIV Law and Policy (CHLP). “It likely is the end of his case, but our work to bring an end to HIV criminal laws like Missouri’s continues.” 

Johnson, who was 21-years-old at the beginning of this case, entered a no-contest plea to charges that he had sex with partners without first advising them of his HIV status. In exchange, he has accepted a sentence of 10 years in state prison, which will include time already served since his arrest nearly four years ago.  He previously had been sentenced to 30 years in prison before the appeals court threw out the original conviction. 

Prior to his arrest in 2013, Johnson was a promising young college student and star athlete. His prosecution has drawn condemnation from state and national organizations and individuals uniformly outraged by his conviction and opposed to these fundamentally unfair laws being used to prosecute people living with HIV and, disproportionately, like all other criminal laws in the United States, people of color.

In related news, this week the California state legislature passed SB 239, which modernizes the state's laws around HIV transmission so that HIV is treated like other communicable diseases.

Hat tip to TowleRoad

SATURDAY POLITICS: Republicans View Things Very Differently Than Democrats and Independents

Of course, for the last week the political world has been buzzing over the march by white supremacists and Nazis in Charlottesville, Virginia and President Trump's widely panned response. However, it should be noted that this negative response to Trump's assigning equal responsibility to white supremacists and those who oppose them for the violence that occurred in Charlottesville (despite the fact that it was an avowed racist who has been arrested and charged with driving the car that killed one of the people protesting the white supremacists) is not universal. 64% of Republicans  agree (with Trump's statements that "both [sides are] equally [to blame]" while 66% of Democrats assign responsibility to the neo-Nazis, anti-semites and white supremacists who marched in Charlottesville.

However, as I have blogged about previously on Saturday Politics Republicans have views about things that are very different from others, such as viewing discrimination against groups differently based on partisan differences as well as which groups suffer more discrimination than others.

Today's blog post is about how Republicans view many institutions (colleges and universities, labor unions, national news media and churches) very differently than others.

Today Is #LovingDay: 50th Anniversary of Nationwide Interracial Marriage Legalization

As someone in an interracial same-sex marriage who has taught students the details of the landmark 1967 U.S. Supreme Court case Loving v. Virginia  several times I can't let today go by without acknowledging that it is the 50th anniversary of the release of that unanimous ruling striking down laws banning interracial marriages (because such statutes seek to maintain "White Supremacy").

Happy #LovngDay!

BOOK REVIEW: Mississippi Blood by Greg Iles

This is the 6th book in the Penn Cage series and the 3rd book in Greg Iles' Natchez Burning trilogy. Although I loved this series overall I was somewhat disappointed by the concluding entry in the series.

The books are incredibly complex, almost gothic tales of intrigue and suspense, set in the southern city of Natchez, Mississippi in "present day" and in the 1960s. The primary character is Penn Cage, a former criminal prosecutor turned best-selling author who is the son of Dr. Tom Cage, a white doctor who has lived in Natchez all his life and is respected by the white and black citizens of the town alike.

The book (and entire Natchez Burning trilogy) is animated by the secrets Penn's dad is keeping (and has kept) in the context of the explosive (and violent) racial politics of his hometown.

In Mississippi Blood  the primary plot is about the trial of Dr. Cage for the murder of Viola Turner, the beautiful black woman who was Tom's nurse in the 1960s and who was assaulted and raped and eventually exiled from her hometown by an extremely racist group called the Double Eagles (they separated from the Ku Klux Klan because that group wasn't hardcore enough on racial issues!) Viola was dying of cancer and the two had an assisted suicide pact.

My primary issues I had with this book was that the story just became a bit too operatic and unbelievable over time, with plot developments and shocking revelations occurring in the context of an extremely dramatic trial. To be honest, this was probably a weakness of the earlier books as well, but I looked past it because I was so invested in what was happening to the characters in those earlier books. (And all 6 books in the Penn Cage  series are action-packed, emotionally resonant thrillers also.) Because Mississippi Blood  is almost certainly the final book in the Penn Cage series, several bridges have been burned (and primary characters dispatched  in the earlier entries in the trilogy) so that somehow my connection to and interest in these remaining characters seemed less intense.

Overall, Mississippi Blood is a very suspenseful, action-packed, mystery-thriller with thought-provoking and complex racial politics woven throughout and an extremely compelling read.

Title: Mississippi Blood.
Author: Greg Iles.
Paperback: 704 pages.
Publisher: William Morrow.
Date Published: March 21, 2017.
Date Read: May 10, 2017.

GOODREADS RATING: ★★★★ (4.0/5.0).

OVERALL GRADE: A (3.83/4.0).

PLOT: A.
IMAGERY: A-.
IMPACT: A-.
WRITING: A.

SATURDAY POLITICS: Partisan Difference In Views On Discrimination Prevalence

I previously blogged about the difference in attitudes towards LGBT discrimination by various religious denominationt, as reported by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI).

Today I want to discuss how perceptions of the prevalence of discrimination against various groups changes with partisan identification. The PRRI summarizes their findings by discussing how Republicans and Democrats view discro,omayopmthis way:

Discrimination Against Gay and Lesbian, Transgender People
More than six in ten Americans say gay and lesbian people (61%) and transgender people (64%) face a lot of discrimination in the U.S. today. 

However, there are sharp partisan differences on this question. Democrats are roughly twice as likely as Republicans to say gay and lesbian people face a lot of discrimination in the country today (79% vs. 40%, respectively). Notably, a majority (57%) of Republicans do not believe gay and lesbian people face a lot of discrimination. Independents largely reflect the views of the public overall. An identical number (79%) of Democrats believe transgender people face a lot of discrimination, while fewer than half (48%) of Republicans agree. Again, the views of independents generally align with Americans overall. 

Discrimination Against Whites vs. Blacks
Nearly six in ten (58%) Americans say blacks face a lot of discrimination in American society today, while only three in ten (30%) say the same of whites. More Americans now say blacks face a considerable degree of discrimination in U.S. society than in 2013 when slightly more than half (52%) of the public expressed this view.² 

Notably, Republicans are significantly more likely to say that whites, rather than blacks, experience a lot of discrimination in the U.S. today (43% vs. 27%, respectively). Democrats and independents are far more likely to say blacks experience a lot of discrimination than to say the same about whites (82% vs. 19% and 59% vs. 30%, respectively). The partisan gap in perceptions of discrimination against blacks has increased substantially over the last four years, driven primarily by shifts among Democrats. In 2013, about two-thirds (66%) of Democrats compared to roughly one-third (32%) of Republicans expressed the view that discrimination against blacks in the U.S. is common. Notably, white and nonwhite Democrats recorded nearly identical changes in opinion. 

Discrimination Against Christians vs. MuslimsA similar pattern emerges in views of the relative amount of discrimination faced by Muslims and Christians in American society. Americans are twice as likely to say Muslims face a lot of discrimination as to say the same of Christians (66% vs. 33%, respectively). Again, there are sizable differences by party affiliation, religious background, and generation. 

Democrats are more than four times as likely to say Muslims (85%) face a lot of discrimination as to say the same of Christians (21%). Republicans, in contrast, are about equally as likely to say both Christians (48%) and Muslims (45%) experience a lot of discrimination in the US today. Independents’ attitudes mirror those of Americans overall. 

Discrimination Against Immigrants
Nearly two-thirds (64%) of Americans say immigrants face a lot of discrimination in the U.S. today, while one-third (33%) believe they do not. Americans are sharply divided by party and generation. 

Democrats are twice as likely as Republicans to say immigrants face a substantial degree of discrimination in society (82% vs. 41%, respectively). Roughly two-thirds (65%) of independents also believe immigrants confront a great deal of discrimination.

There's a lot more information at the PRRI website. I encourage you to check it out!

QUEER QUOTE: Draconian 30-Year Sentence Overturned In HIV Criminalization Case

The case of Michael Johnson has been a cause celebre for years, an emblematic of a toxic stew of race, (homo)sexuality, homophobia, AIDSphobia and criminal justice that produces (and is produced by) HIV criminalization statutes. Johnson is a Black gay man who at age 23 was sentenced to 30 years in a Missouri court in summer 2015 because the former college wrestler did not disclose to his male partners that he  knew he was HIV-positive before they engaged in unprotected sexual activity (some of which was recorded on cellphones). This week comes the news that an appellate court has overturned that draconian sentence (conviction for 2nd degree murder would have received less jail time) and ordered a new trial.

The Washington Post reports:

During the trial, Johnson remained adamant that he informed his partners of the positive HIV test. He pleaded not guilty. The prosecution, however, impeached his testimony using three clips of cellphone conversations, recorded while Johnson was jailed. In one snippet of phone conversation, Johnson admitted he was just “pretty sure” he had informed his partners he was HIV positive. 

After slightly more than two hours of deliberation, a jury declared Johnson guilty of three crimes, all felonies under Missouri law: one count of recklessly infecting a sexual partner with HIV, one count of recklessly exposing a partner to HIV and three counts of attempting to recklessly infect a partner with HIV. In July 2015, Judge Jon A. Cunningham of the Circuit Court for St. Charles County sentenced Johnson to 30 years in prison. 

[...] 

Presiding Missouri Court of Appeals’ Eastern District Judge James M. Dowd wrote Tuesday that Johnson’s trial was rendered “fundamentally unfair” by the prosecutors; they tarried too long handing over the cellphone calls recorded while Johnson was in the county jail. “The State’s blatant discovery violation here is inexcusable,” the judges concluded.

Johnson's lawyer Lawrence Lustberg, the ACLU of Missouri and Lambda Legal celebrated this week's result. Lustberg's comment is today's Queer Quote:

"Statutes like the one used to prosecute Mr. Johnson are inherently problematic, as they promote stigma and animus towards people living with HIV in violation of their legal and constitutional rights."

The ACLU notes that the new trial is being ordered due to prosecutorial misconduct and not the underlying constitutional frailty of the criminal statute Johnson was charged and sentenced under.
MadProfessah will continue to follow this case closely and urge readers to contribute to organizations like Lambda Legal, ACLU and the Center for HIV Law and Policy.

Hat/tip to Washington Blade and Washington Post.

QUEER QUOTE: Nation's Largest LGBT Group Rescinds Kirk Endorsement Over Racist Remark

Well, well! The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest LGBT political advocacy organization, has rescinded its endorsement of incumbent U.S. Senator Mark Kirk (R-Illinois)  over a shocking racist remark Kirk made in a debate with his opponent U.S. Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth last week.

An excerpt from the open letter HRC head Chad Griffin released explaining the organization's action is today's Queer Quote:

“After careful consideration, HRC’s Public Policy Committee of the Board of Directors has taken the unprecedented step -- a first in our 36-year history -- of revoking an endorsement. We are a bipartisan organization and our staff and board make endorsement decisions based on a proven record of LGBTQ equality and a candidate’s ability to drive legislative change. We will not continue to make progress and pass the Equality Act without Republican support. It’s vitally important that we continue to build bipartisan coalitions so that we may continue to move equality forward. We endorsed the sitting senator, Mark Kirk, because he has been a strong supporter of our cause time and again, scoring a 100 percent on HRC’s most recent Congressional Scorecard. But events this week have gone beyond the pale for our standards of leadership.

“Leadership is about more than the legislation one sponsors and the votes one casts. On Thursday night, Senator Kirk's comments about his opponent's heritage were deeply offensive and racist. His attempt to use Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth’s race as a means to undermine her family’s American heritage and patriotism is beyond reprehensible. Yesterday, Senator Kirk tweeted an apology that failed to adequately address the real harm and magnitude of his words. So today, following a vote by our board’s committee, the Human Rights Campaign withdrew our support of Senator Kirk.

“Attacking someone because of her race and ethnicity is inexcusable for anyone, but especially for a sitting U.S. Senator. The diversity of our movement is our greatest strength, and Senator Kirk’s remarks were an affront to our most fundamental values. We have therefore voted to endorse Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth, who has been a strong LGBTQ ally in the House of Representatives, and HRC has contributed the maximum amount to her campaign. We look forward to working with her in the Senate to secure full federal equality for all LGBTQ Americans."

I have refused to donate money to HRC ever since they endorsed the odious Alfonse D'Amato over Charles Schumer in the 1998 U.S. Senate race from New York. The fact that they finally did the right thing by rescinding the endorsement when their chosen candidate made an explicitly racist remark is a sign that things may be changing at HRC.

GRAPHIC: Crime Rate versus Stop-and-Frisk in NYC

Kevin Drum has an excellent post today describing the facts about stop-and-frisk in New York City which graphically shows the relationship between the crime rate and stop-and-frisk policy (which stopped doing in 2014 after a federal district court judge ruled the NYPD's policy was illegal racially profiling Black and Latino men).

Since a picture is worth a  thousand words, I'll let the graphic speak for itself! But you can also read Kevin Drum's piece yourself.

UPDATE: Black Gay Man, 23, Sentenced To 30 YEARS Under Missouri's HIV Criminalization Law

The sentence for Michael Johnson, the former college wrestler who had unprotected sex with numerous guys that he met on the Internet and mobile hook-up apps, and was subsequently charged with (and found guility of) violating Missouri's draconian HIV criminalization statute has been released: 30 years in prison. Johnson actually received multiple sentences of 30 years but the judge said he could serve them concurrently (at the same time).

St. Charles County Circuit Judge Jon Cunningham, who issued the sentence, told Johnson he had committed "very severe" crimes. Prosecutors said he didn't tell the partners he had HIV."The main thing is the profound effect your actions have had on the victims and their families," the judge said.Johnson was given 30 years on the most serious allegation and a total of 30.5 years on the four lesser charges.  Those were the amounts of prison time recommended by the jury. Cunningham decided to have the terms on the lesser charges run concurrently with the 30-year sentence.

It should be noted that if Michael Johnson had been found guilty of second-degree murder the sentence would be between 10 and 30 years!

Had Michael Johnson been convicted of second-degree murder in Missouri, the sentence would have been between 10 and 30 years.  Forcible rape: no less than 5 years; Forcible rape if a weapon is used or serious physical injury results, it could be as little as 15 years.  Forcible rape of a child under the age of 12 has a mandatory 30 years, the same sentence Michael Johnson got today.  First degree statutory rape of a child under the age of 12 could get as little as 10 years.

The primary organization I know that is doing something about such unfair actions is the Center for HIV Law and Policy.

#MUSTREAD: Vox Report On Mass Incarceration In USA

Over at Vox today there is a must-read feature analyzing the United States public policy of mass incarceration, despite drops in crime rates. The feature puts the issue in perspective by using 28 charts to illustrate the devastating human toll of the  relentless increase in the prison-industrial complex in America.

America is number one — in incarceration. Over the past several decades, the country has built the largest prison population in the entire world, with the second-highest prison population per capita behind the tiny African country of Seychelles. But how did it get this way? Although it may be easy to blame one specific event, the US's path to incarceration was decades in the making — involving politicians as varied as Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton.

Go read it yourself, right now!

CELEBRITY FRIDAY (BONUS): Is Rachel Dolezal Black Simply Because She Says She Is?

Social and popular media have been going buck wild about the story of Rachel Dolezal, the  apparently white woman who has been posing publicly as a Black woman for at least the last 10 years.

NPR's Code Switch blog has a useful roundup of online coverage:

In a bizarre turn of events, a prominent civil rights leader and Africana studies professor in Spokane, Wash., has been accused of pretending to be black for personal gain. 

Rachel Dolezal, 37, heads up the local chapter of the NAACP in Spokane and has apparently identified as black for several years. Dolezal's story came to light after she was accused of falsifying reports of multiple hate crimes. Local reporters contacted her parents, who made a startling claim backed up by a birth certificate and old pictures. They say their daughter's heritage is Swedish, German, Czech and a little bit Native American. But definitely not black. 

Predictably, this story has blown up all over the Internet as people try to make sense of it all: Why did she do it? Didn't anyone suspect? What's up with that hair?

As many experts have pointed out, people have been "passing" as a different race for hundreds of years. It's just that almost always this has meant that it was people who would generally be characterized as "Black" (or African-American) passing as something else, usually a racial identity which is less marginalized. What makes the Dolezal situation so unusual is that it is an example of someone voluntarily adopting a subaltern identity, presumably to garner some kind of advantage that they otherwise wouldn't have had access to if they maintained their original identity.

Some people are trying to compare the Dolezal story to the Caitlin Jenner story but that is clearly just stupid.

Dolezal engaged in such actions in order to be perceived as black, in a racialized American environment where that matters. Trans people transition in order to be the gender we feel inside and, while there may come a time when posers will appropriate trendy trans culture for profit, right now, there's no advantage to transitioning when you're not trans.

In some sense this Dolezal situation shows that there has been progress of race relations in America where it is possible for some people to actually believe that their social circumstances would improve if they were perceived as Black or African-American.

Hat/tip to Wonder Man

23-Year-Old Black Gay HIV+ Man Faces 60 Years In Prison After Being Found Guilty In Missouri

Michael Johnson is a 23-year-old Black gay man who was known on social media as "Tiger Mandingo" and was a champion college wrestler who allegedly had sex with multiple partners in Missouri without disclosing his HIV-positive status (which he knew about). Atleast one of those partners later tested positive for HIV and Johnson was found guilty of under Missouri's HIV criminalization statue this week of "recklessly infecting" a partner with HIV as well as "recklessly exposing a partner to HIV" and is subject to a punishment that could extend to life in prison.

The case, despite being a case of "he said, he said" was complicated by the fact that Johnson made as many as 30 videos of himself having unprotected oral and anal sex with partners, which since he was diagnosed by the state of Missouri as being HIV-positive on January 8, 2013 are evidence of illegal activity.

Buzzfeed notes:

Johnson was specifically charged on six counts: transmitting HIV to Lemons and to Charles Pfoutz through anal sex (both Class A felonies); one Class B felony for attempting to expose HIV to Montell Moore through anal sex without transmission; and three additional Class B felonies for exposing Christian Green, Filip Cukovic, and Andrew Tryon to HIV. Johnson was convicted on all counts, except the one involving Pfoutz, which was added by the prosecution just last month.  

All six of Johnson’s accusers testified that Johnson did not disclose his HIV status. Multiple medical professionals testified that they had informed Johnson of his status and advised him it was a felony to fail to disclose.

Johnson for his part testified that he had disclosed his HIV status to all six of his sexual partners before they had sex.

The case has become a cause celebre in Black gay circles, with a public letter to Johnson signed by 89 prominent Black gay men being circulated in response to the trial. Here's an excerpt:

HIV should be treated as a public health issue not as a criminal one. Legally requiring disclosure privileges the lives of White people not living with HIV over Black people who are living with HIV.
These laws feed into stereotypes that assume Black gay men are irresponsible and hypersexual. For you, your accusers saw your Black and masculine body as a site of ultimate sexual pleasure, until they had to deal with you as a whole person. At that moment you became a problem and were disposable to them.
HIV criminalization laws burden people living with HIV to take on the sole responsibility of sexual encounters. Regardless of intention or disclosure, there is a shared responsibility among sexual partners. Opening up about your HIV status is a personal decision that should not be mandated or enforced. Disclosing your HIV-status should be about self-reflection and speaking your truth. Disclosure should not be about protecting people who are not living with HIV from transmission. And disclosure should not be about punishing people living with HIV who do not disclose.
We do not care about whether or not you disclosed, or any intention you may or may not have had. We care about you—your life matters. HIV is not a crime and you should not be in prison.

What do you think?

Hat/tip to Fusion

SHOCK! Serena Agrees To Play At 2015 Indian Wells; Ends 12-Year Boycott

Serena Williams has published an article in Time magazine today to explain why she is ending her boycott of Indian Wells, the second most prestigious (and lucrative) tennis tournament held in her home country.

Thirteen years and a lifetime in tennis later, things feel different. A few months ago, when Russian official Shamil Tarpischev made racist and sexist remarks about Venus and me, the WTA and USTA immediately condemned him. It reminded me how far the sport has come, and how far I’ve come too. 

I have thought about going back to Indian Wells many times over my career. I said a few times that I would never play there again. And believe me, I meant it. I admit it scared me. What if I walked onto the court and the entire crowd booed me? The nightmare would start all over. 

It has been difficult for me to forget spending hours crying in the Indian Wells locker room after winning in 2001, driving back to Los Angeles feeling as if I had lost the biggest game ever—not a mere tennis game but a bigger fight for equality. Emotionally it seemed easier to stay away. There are some who say I should never go back. There are others who say I should’ve returned years ago. I understand both perspectives very well and wrestled with them for a long time. I’m just following my heart on this one. 

I’m fortunate to be at a point in my career where I have nothing to prove. I’m still as driven as ever, but the ride is a little easier. I play for the love of the game. And it is with that love in mind, and a new understanding of the true meaning of forgiveness, that I will proudly return to Indian Wells in 2015. 

I was raised by my mom to love and forgive freely. “When you stand praying, forgive whatever you have against anyone, so that your Father who is in the heavens may also forgive you” (Mark 11:25). I have faith that fans at Indian Wells have grown with the game and know me better than they did in 2001. 

Indian Wells was a pivotal moment of my story, and I am a part of the tournament’s story as well. Together we have a chance to write a different ­ending.

Wow. I was going to go to Indian Wells this year  (like last year) anyway but this makes it 2-3x more likely I will go, and maybe for multiple days. It's only a 2 hour drive from Los Angeles, and near Palm Springs!

The only question now is, is Venus going also?

Long-Delayed Autopsy Report Shows LAPD Shot Unarmed Black Man In Back At Very Close Range

As Mayor Eric Garcetti promised, the official autopsy report on the August 11 Ezell Ford shooting shows that LAPD officers shot the unarmed, mentally-ill 25-year-old Black male three times including once in the back, with that fatal shot occurring so close that there was a muzzle imprint on his skin.

KTLA reports:

The report was made public more than four months after the Aug. 11 fatal shooting, which caused an outcry from family members and supporters who said Ford was complying with officers’ demands and was on the ground when he was shot several times in the back. 

The county Department of Coroner document showed Ford was shot three times: once in the right side, once in the right back and once in the right arm. The first two shots were fatal, the coroner’s report stated. 

In the area of the gunshot wound to Ford’s back, the surrounding skin had a “muzzle imprint,” the report stated. The cause of death, described as a homicide, was listed as multiple gunshot wounds.

Mayor Garcetti released a statement saying that a "full" and "impartial" investigation is underway.

Hat/tip to KPCC

Killer Cop Darren Wilson Resigns From #Ferguson Police Department

Darren Wilson, the police officer whose fatal shooting of an unarmed 18-year-old African-American man named Michael Brown  in Ferguson, MO in August 2014 has been the subject of protests around the country, has released a public letter of resignation less than a week after a grand jury refused to indict him on any criminal charges relating to his actions that resulted in the death of Brown.

"I, Darren Wilson, hereby resign my commission as a police officer with the City of Ferguson effective immediately. I have been told that my continued employment may put the residents and police officers of the City of Ferguson at risk, which is a circumstance that I cannot allow. For obvious reasons, I wanted to wait until the grand jury made their decision before I officially made my decision to resign. It was my hope to continue in police work, but the safety of other police officers and the community are of paramount importance to me. It is my hope that my resignation will allow the community to heal. I would like to thank all of my supporters and fellow officers throughout this process."

Wilson's actions and words have raised the profile of racial differences in the country, in particular as they relate to police relations with minority communities.

Hat/tip to Wonder Man

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Mississippi Heritage Amendment Proposed To Declare Christianity "Principal Religion"

Whoa! Mississippi may be considering a state constitutional amendment in 2016 that would, among other things, declare "Christianity" the "principal" religion of the state, and insert the words "Holy Bible" into the founding document of the Magnolia State. The Magnolia State Heritage Amendment reads, in part:

The State of Mississippi hereby acknowledges the fact of her identity as a principally Christian and quintessentially Southern state, in terms of the majority of her population, character, culture, history, and heritage, from 1817 to the present; accordingly, the Holy Bible is acknowledged as a foremost source of her founding principles, inspiration, and virtues; and, accordingly, prayer is acknowledged as a respected, meaningful, and valuable custom of her citizens. The acknowledgments hereby secured shall not be construed to transgress either the national or the state Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

In case you think  I am making this up, here is the official summary of the amendment from the Mississippi Secretary of State's office:

Initiative #46 would amend the Constitution to restrict or define Mississippi’s heritage in the following areas: religion, official language, state flag, nickname, song, motto and state university mascots. Further, the initiative would prevent the consolidation of Alcorn State University, Delta State University, Jackson State University, Mississippi University for Women, and Mississippi Valley State University, designate the month of April “Confederate Heritage Month,” and reinstate Mississippi’s Constitutional boundaries.

I guess Mississippi does not have the legal requirement that ballot measures restrict themselves to dealing with one topic! Oh, and it also insists that the state government can not offer government services in any other language than English. Is "y'all" English? I guess well find out if the measure qualifies for the ballot and voters get to see the measure in November 2016.

Saturday Politics: SCOTUS Allows Texas' Unabashedly Racist Voter Suppression Law To Go Into Effect

As I discussed last Saturday, the politics of who will vote is becoming increasingly salient as Election Day 2014 approaches. Today, the bad guys won a big one when the Supreme Court in a 6-3 vote (boys against girls) decided to allow Texas's new voter suppression identification law go into effect for the 2014 election while the federal courts consider the law on its merits, even though a federal judge has already declared that the 2011 law intentionally has a disparate impact on minorities.

A divided Supreme Court handed a big defeat to the Obama administration and numerous civil rights groups early Saturday morning when it ruled that Texas can enforce its 2011 voter ID law in November that some have called the strictest in the country. Three justices dissented from the ruling that rejected an emergency request that had been filed by the Justice Department and civil rights groups. 

The decision appears to mark “the first time since 1982 that the Court has allowed a law restricting voters’ rights to be enforced after a federal court had ruled it to be unconstitutional,” notes Scotus Blog’s Lyle Denniston. A federal judge had struck down the law last week, saying that some 600,000 voters—mostly black or Latino—would face difficulties at the polls due to a lack of proper identification. The law, which was approved in 2011 but only came in effect in 2013 lays out seven approved forms of identification—a list many have questioned for including concealed handgun licenses but not college IDs, notes the Associated Press. 

This marked the fourth time over the last few weeks that the Supreme Court has been forced to decide whether voter ID laws passed by Republican state legislatures can be used in November. The justices voted to allow changes in Ohio and North Carolina and stopped a new law in Wisconsin. 

An article in Slate magazine by Jamelle Bouie questions whether voter identification laws are based in partisanship or racism and comes out in favor of partisanship. Regardless, the effect and impact of the enactment of voter "identification" laws is negatively impact the voting power of racial minorities.