If you don’t read anything else today, please do check out this post on my cousin’s blog, ClutterMuseum.com (“Into the heart of whiteness and gun violence“).
Leslie Madsen-Brooks is a fine writer and an astute cultural observer (and her other half is no slouch at the keyboard, either). Here’s part of what Leslie says about herself.
To my great surprise, I live in Idaho, where I am an assistant professor of history. I specialize in U.S., gender, and public history, with extra-special emphases on women in science, the democratization of public history practice, and the history of museums, zoos, botanical gardens, and the like.
We’ve never met, at least not as adults. Her mother and I are first cousins, so I guess that makes us 2nd cousins. I highly recommend her Clutter Museum blog, and several others she maintains, as well.
Her post on whiteness brings her own analysis together with a review of some of the best being written by others in response to the Newtown, CT shootings.
Her selection of sources is enlightening, for me at least.
Michael Kimmel and Cliff Leek, writing in the Huffington Post:
In the last 30 years 90% of shootings at elementary and high schools in the U.S. have been perpetrated by young white men. And, 80% of the 13 mass murders perpetrated by individuals aged 20 or under in the last 30 years have also been committed by white men. There is clearly something happening here that is not only tied to gender, but also to race.
Leslie calls it “the white elephant in the room.”
She also quotes an article by Richard Florida in The Atlantic reporting on surprising findings from a statistical study of gun violence. This finding is a shocker.
It’s hard to quantify political rhetoric, but we can distinguish blue from red states. Taking the voting patterns from the 2008 presidential election, we found a striking pattern: Firearm-related deaths were positively associated with states that voted for McCain (.66) and negatively associated with states that voted for Obama (-.66). Though this association is likely to infuriate many people, the statistics are unmistakable. Partisan affiliations alone cannot explain them; most likely they stem from two broader, underlying factors—the economic and employment makeup of the states and their policies toward guns and gun ownership.
In a state where using the term “haole” can generate waves of hostile reactions, the idea that whiteness and white culture may have its darker side is challenging indeed.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thanks for the shout-out, Ian.
I still cringe at the sound of a southern white accent. Vision of segregation lynchings readily come to mind. The Native American can share many stories of the white cultures dark side. It is still happening in America.
If you and her mother are first cousins, then you aren’t her second cousin. If you had any kids, she’d be second cousins with your kids.
You are she are first cousins, once (or one generation) removed
zzzzzz, thanks for that clear explanation of cousinhood. I always get it confused!
Just read Fang’s article. He’s a good writer — reminded me of Richard Brautigan, Gary Snyder — and sharp strategist with compassion.
@Patty – I sincerely hope you never meet me in person because I’d seriously hate to see your reaction to my voice. I’ve never lynched anyone in my life and I really rather doubt that you were there, so enough of the stereotyping, mmmkay?
This comment is for “Patty” who cringes at the accent of white Southerners.
Do you make a lot of similar ‘broad brush stroke’ condemnations, Ma’am? I ask because you might want to think about my ultra liberal white Southern relatives, none of whom would ever be caught dead making such a statement about you, whoever you are.
“White” identity, long privileged in the US, has some parallels to other identities. Ian Smith’s Rhodesians; the Afrikaners of South Africa; it’s not a stretch to consider the Protestants of the north of Ireland. but one needn’t go that far from the Hawaiians Islands. The traitors to the Kingdom of 1893, once entrenched began a project to use state power to erase “Hawaiian Islander” identity. What had been a democracy had voter suppression based upon the US white southern states constitutions and voting laws of the time; political show trials; and cultural practice suppression including language suppression. All in defense of ‘white’ a/k/a Anglo-Saxon identity.
Full disclosure, I am a white male although no longer young. I think that statistical correlation of young white males to mass murder is very dangerous because it is too simplistic. I doubt if anyone out there can explain how lack of skin pigmentation would increase propensity toward mass murder. We need to look deeper than these superficial characteristics to get at the real underlying reasons.
While this may not be a totally appropriate comparison, it is like saying that statically, rich people drive more expensive cars. The easy answer is that they can afford to. Yes, but they can also afford not to. So, there has to be a deeper reason for the purchase of expensive cars.
The urban planner Richard Florida is not just correlating mass murder to young white men, but correlating gun violence to rural white conservatives. He has an agenda.
It might have some validity. This is from the first website I found when I googled “family annihilators”. The website is by the journal Law Enforcement Today, largely written by and for police and criminologists.
One might expect the kind of person who intensely glorifies domestic family life to be a small-town conservative, and so this type of crime would coincide (if only accidentally) with Florida’s schema of violent red states versus enlightened and tolerant blue states.
Pointing out how not just mass murderers, but also serial killers and family annihilators are almost all white men has long been a staple of stand-up comedy by African-American comedians. In fact, comparing white men and black men is a comedy cliche.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU_w_twAr7w
But in the blog, Leslie Madsen-Brooks and her source material (de Vega) are not primarily talking about causality, that is, why certain sorts of white crime would be committed by white men. They are addressing the topic of the INVISIBILITY of violence by white men. They point out that 70% of the violent crime in the US is carried out by white men, even though white men only make up 30% of the population. If some other group of people comprised only 30% of the population yet committed 70% of the violent crime, white men would freak out. In fact, EVERYONE would freak out, because “white” people (whatever that is…) are the standard by which all things are measured.
And that’s why it takes black comedians to point out how it’s the white people who are the unusual ones. Here’s the comedian Dave Chappelle.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=SB8AozV1TD0&NR=1
More pertinent to ‘whiteness’ in Hawaii, check out Elvi Whittaker’s 1986 ethnography, “The mainland haole: The white experience in Hawaii”. The title does not refer to the historical experience of whites in Hawaii, but the experience of contemporary white Americans moving to Hawaii and, for the first time in their lives, becoming the “marked category”, that is, the minority that stands out and does not conform to the invisible, unspoken standard of the majority.
I am sure Richard Florida’s statistics are immaculate, but I am intrigued that the two tests relating violence to votes for candidates were .66 and -.66. If each data set is the inverse of the other (i.e. together they have to sum to 100%) , would the relationships not be inverted, showing the same correlation (r)?
Also while his other strongest correlation was .59 between death by gun and poverty at the state level, this roughly explains only 36% (.59 squared) of the variance. Other factors (combined) are twice as likely to explain the relationship. (explain is not to imply causation, just the strength of the relationship .) Of course at N = 50 states, you only need the relation to be r = .243 to have a 95% chance that the relation is significant. I suspect yogurt eating would correlate just as well as some other factors he lists, but at r = .243 you are explaining all of 6% of the variance. “Though this association is likely to infuriate many people, the statistics are unmistakable”? I’d defer judgement until seeing the data and having some quiet time to play with them before concluding they reflect reality in a non Fox News universe.
As to 80% of 13 mass murders being committed by white males, that’s ten out of 13. That sounds impressive but at low sample sizes, random events play a more major role than for larger sizes. Here each sample of the 13 = 8%, so if the sample switched to 7 out of 13 (i.e. switch of just 3), that’s 56% of the total which is basically a 50/50 sex ratio. But if we had a larger sample of 50, each one contributes only 2% so it can’t swing the balance so greatly. But we don’t, so best to proceed with caution, even if our preconceptions don’t agree.
And while we are at it, Franklin’s rates are per 100,000 and they would be absolutely useless at predicting the actions of individuals or for assigning some general group guilt or tendency, whether to white southerners, Muslims or whomever. It’s sort of like bombing an entire village that has only a single house harboring terrorists.
With statistics, caveat emptor.
it’s not the color; it’s the depth of the underlying culture.
thinking otherwise is skin-deep philosophy.
My point exactly, it’s not the color and may not even be the culture. Many of the perpetrators of mass murder events are found to be troubled loners with poor social skills. It could be that some ethnicities are predisposed to certain types of mental aberrations. Maybe young because by the time they are older they have either developed coping skills or have been diagnosed and treated. My problem with this kind of statistical analysis is that it does not give us any actionable intelligence. What are you going to do, lock up all young white males? We need to find the underlying cause before we can do anything about it. What makes these young white males different from other young white males or females or blacks or middle aged people who don’t commit mass murder?
Based on the mathematical mumbo jumbo in that post, I’m sure the Xerox, and the Sand Island situations were cases of white men gone postal then? The obvious answer to that is why there is an obvious answer to the question of the mainland shootings.
I’m not sure what you are referring to as “mathematical mumbo jumbo.” And it’s hard to tell whether you actually read or are responding to anything in the Florida article, which seemed quite straight forward. The article compiled various state-by-state statistics, and then calculated correlations with gun deaths. That’s not “mumbo jumbo,” and instead is pretty straight forward. The authors make clear that the methodology doesn’t measure cause and effect. It seems to me that you’re simply being argumentative to avoid dealing with the actual information presented.
Ian, I think Ulu raised some very interesting questions regarding the value of stats presented. It is sophomoric, mathematically based “junk social science” at best. I do not think it is argumentative to question it. I think we all should strive to be critical thinkers to the best of our abilities. I am not intending to be argumentative. This is subject serious. It has broken the hearts of many families. Literally. It deserves something beyond your treatment of it.
As of 2010, my understanding is that whites made up about 72% of the population. Blacks were at about 12% and Latinos around 15%. I would expect, given absolutely no other information to go on, that a large number of mass murderers would be white.
I do not know why blacks are 7 times more likely to be victims of homicide and 6 times more likely to be a homicide offender, but as of 2005, that was the case. What I would not do, however, is attempt a study of political opinions, gun ownership or whether or not Obama was president to explain the anger that goes into the act of killing. In fact, in all likelihood, I would be laughed at or ridiculed.
I would not hazard a guess at why 94% of white people killed are killed by white people and I do not know why over 80% of black victims are killed by blacks. I know that US mass murderers are exclusively white. I just do not believe we know why, aside from the expectation that, statistically most offenders should be. I also do not claim to know why most serial killers are white males. By the way, check the stats on serial killers in Japan. Most – if not all – are Japanese. Among Brazilian killers, most are, who’d of thunk it?- are Brazilian.
The point here is that this is all an attempt to politicize and activate racial themes for a subject that is much more complicated. It might have to do with effects on some personalities growing up single parent households, it might have to do video games, it might have to do with organic shizophrenia and other mental illness. In short it might be appropriate to look for variables beyond President Obama, political party, gun ownership and “whiteness.”
This is a subject that has created so much human misery for so many people to coyly use it as an excuse to get into the local use of the word Haole as if it will make all Haoles mad. That is, in my opinion, irresponsible. The Haoles I know don’t even pay attention, unless the word is preceded with another word which I think you can guess.
I have supported your opinions in the past very strongly and I have just as strongly disagreed. I think you are fascinated with a rather shallow treatment of a miserable subject for all of us to deal with, regardless of race, just distracted yourself for a little toot on the local vs. haole stuff. And, Ian, if Haoles are so angry, how come our hostage- taking murderers (Sand Island and Xerox) and those who most frequently run amok are not squeezed into this “angry whiteness syndrome”you are supporting. Let’s see if it gets printed.
I wouldn’t have said it is argumentative to question the methodology.
I do believe it was argumentative to simply dismiss it.
I’m trying to encourage people to argue these issues, not simply dismiss those they disagree with or engage in ad hominem attacks.
Arguments, though, always welcome.
-Ian
Mass murderers aren’t exclusively white. The current record holder is Seung- Hui Cho, a Korean.
Racialist theories that are self-abasing are no less stupid than racialist theories that are self-aggrandizing.
Has the murder rate among African Americans in the US grown so large that it is now invisible? Let me remind you of the actual numbers, broken down by race:
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm
When I worked in Detroit we had a teenager being shot at a rate of one per day, and one killed at a rate of one per week. The overwhelming majority were black. And this has continued in the 20 years since I left.
These mass murders are horrifying, but sometimes I wish we had the same horror, and the same national dialogues, regarding the daily non-white death toll from guns.
I lived in Texas, Virginia, and Alabama in the 60’s as a white person.The segregation and racism was quite apparent and undeniable!
The classic rationalization of the bigot – “You don’t know those people like I do!”
1960’s? That was a half century and a civil rights movement ago.My mother almost got us kicked out of our apartment in NY (liberal upper west side) when she provided places for some of Reverend King’s folks, sometime before the Washington March.
As for the south, southerners actually knew black people. To northerners they were largely theoretical and often remain so to this day.
Interesting, Patty, that you’re basing your biases on the fact that you lived in three different states 60 years ago.
Racism and biases exist everywhere. If you don’t believe that, I humbly suggest you go look in the mirror.