The Visible Man: Insidious Trauma & The Rich And Famous

"What do you call a credentialed, highly educated and accomplished black person?

Dear Visible Man,

One of the things that troubles me about the coverage of the recent Oprah story by African American pundits and media is that the coverage focused more on what Oprah can do with the $38,000.00 that she was planning to spend on the handbag rather than the incident itself.  Why do we, as African Americans diminish the impact of racism on people like her just because she has made it into the top 1%? Is Oprah not supposed to be hurt over a racist encounter because the incident involved her desire to purchase an expensive handbag?

Please excuse my language but consider the old cruel riddle: “what do you call a credentialed, highly educated and accomplished black person . . . a nigger.” This “joke” is something that my middle class family members always used to remind each other that despite our achievements, we will never get away from the perceptions that some have about us despite our accomplishments.  

The Oprah incident illustrates this point.  Additionally, the response to the Oprah controversy by our own community and media outlets tells me that it's fine for less wealthy black people to acknowledge and display frustration with  this reality but those of us who have means and are on public display must be forgiving, understanding and graceful in these circumstances and never acknowledge or mention the injustice of it all.  And I think that's wrong.

Patti, Bellevue, WA

------------------------------------------------

Dear Patti,

You have raised some very interesting points.  (For those who may be unaware of the situation Patti is referring to, the Associated Press on August 10, 2013, reported that “Oprah Winfrey the billionaire media mogul was denied the opportunity to view a purse she was interested in purchasing while visiting a boutique in Geneva, Switzerland.”  The Associated Press reported that the sales clerk refused to show Oprah a $38,000.00 handbag, telling her that she could not afford it.)

The article goes on to state that apologies were quickly offered and that the incident was a “huge misunderstanding and a communication problem.”  It appears based on the following social media buzz that there are some who feel that Oprah should have been graceful and without complaint, should have smiled and thought nothing about the incident.  The reasoning being the due to her billionaire status she should have nothing to complain about.  She isn’t one of the little people who deal with such blatant racism (oops, my mistake, “huge misunderstandings and a communication problems”) on a daily basis.

Why should Oprah complain?  When the common African-American gets psychologically stabbed as a result of such outrageous behavior, he/she has the right to be traumatized but not Oprah, because of her wealth, she must rise above this minor infraction.

WRONG.  Oprah is no different than the rest of us who get up every day, go to work, pay our taxes and take care of our families.   She was doing what many of us do from time to time . . . she was shopping.  She saw a handbag that she no doubt felt would go well with an outfit or two and asked the sales clerk to remove it from its glass casing so she could see it just like you or I or any other customer would have done.

This is where everything went wrong.  This is where Oprah the billionaire media mogul became invisible.  The sales clerk refused.  Oprah became someone unworthy, someone who could not afford it, someone with poor credit, someone to fear, someone who is a threat and someone who may commit grand theft and run out of the store with a stolen $38,000.00 handbag in tow.

This sad story made international headlines because this racist and psychologically impactful event happened to the world’s wealthiest African-American woman.  The truer and saddest part of the story remains untold, that being that this tragic incident is being repeated thousands of times a day to African-Americans throughout the United States.  Yet there are no international or even national headlines about those incidents.  Why?  Because we have learned to “accept” and normalize this traumatizing and impactful behavior. 

So Oprah is to “model” for us the desired behavior that we should display in response to this type of “huge misunderstanding and communication problem.”  Oprah is not supposed to verbalize her outrage or emotional pain that results from this form of psychological trauma.  If Oprah can show that she, indeed is the better person by ignoring such a minor incident, then who are we, the little people to complain when such incidents occur in our lives on a daily basis?

The specific psychological trauma that impacted Oprah that day is the same trauma that impacts thousands of African-Americans every day and is called “insidious trauma”.  It refers to the indirect exposure between stigmatized groups (ethnic minorities) and societal institutions.  Insidious trauma arises when there is a culmination of negative experiences affecting members of a stigmatized group that are directly traumatic.

Racism operates as a form of insidious trauma by constantly denigrating the value and lives of those of African descent without regard for their intelligence, skills and capacities. An example of this insidious trauma manifests itself through “racial profiling.”  Racial profiling can be defined as the identification of suspicious behavior attributed to a specific racial group.

Racial profiling has resulted in numerous African-Americans being held to a “different” or more intense standard of scrutiny. This would include:

·       Being viewed with negative assumptions

·       Being followed or under undue suspicion in places of commerce

·       Having to show identification while making purchases with a credit card while others are not

·       Being inexplicably questioned while engaging in simple everyday acts

All of the above examples of increased scrutiny can and do result in psychological trauma.  The emotional distress can be insurmountable due to the energies required for the maintenance of vigilance by the individual as to not knowing when to expect the next incident when he/she will have to endure the indignation of such unwarranted scrutiny. 

Oprah’s detractors suggest that in stating her indignation of such treatment she failed to provide the “proper model” of how to react to such undeserved scrutiny.   For others who understand her plight, it is a clear indication if not confirmation that regardless of the skills, education or success of the individual, there will always be stereotypes that will trump the individual’s accomplishments.  Those such as the sales clerk in Oprah’s situation and the apologists who can more identify with the sales clerk’s mistake can easily opine and readily believe that it was simply a “huge misunderstanding and a communication problem.” This is because this perspective is encased within their internalized fears.

On the other hand, those who are on the receiving end of these incidents have experienced this repeatedly and therefore see the trend as it is applied to them and cannot excuse it away so simply.  For example, the referenced riddle asking "what do you call a [whatever credentialed], highly educated and accomplished black person” is merely an attempt by African-American parents to create safeguards for their children to ward off the emotional distress and psychological abuse created by the insidious trauma of racism that based on their own experience, the parents know their children will certainly face the same.   It is the old adage that if one is able to laugh at the trauma, either it won’t hurt or if so, not as much.  Yet this adage does not hold true.

Pain, be it psychological or physical is PAIN.  Racism hurts. Insidious trauma has lasting effects on the individual’s psyche.  It strikes without mercy.  It impacts the young, the old, the wealthy, the middle class and the educated.  One can run and yet one cannot hide.

The psychological self remembers what the mind seeks desperately to forget. 

The Visible Man

The Visible Man: Remembering the Forgotten: The Men of the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment

This writing reflects those individuals who were deemed to be unworthy or sacrificial for the “good and progression of science.”   In 1932, these men were literally transformed from men to representational “guinea pigs” for the purpose of human experimentation.  

So why is this an issue today?  Why is the “Visible Man” bringing this up for discussion now? It has been 81 years since the inception of the study and 31 years since the study was terminated.  What has happened?  What has changed?

Answer: NOTHING.  

To review, the intent of this writing is to provide a safe place and/or voice to those who may be responding to conflicts as they deal with the concept of invisibility in a society or community in which they may not feel valued, validated, appreciated or wanted.  

What has happened to the African-American men involved in the infamous United States Public Health Service (PHS) Tuskegee Syphilis Survey?  The study lasted 40 years, beginning in 1932 and was terminated due to public outcry and outrage in 1972. 

 

The study focused on 600 men, observing the natural progression of untreated syphilis in rural African-American men who were of the understanding that they were receiving free health care from the United States government.

Why were physicians and other healthcare professionals, many who had taken the Hippocratic oath swearing to practice medicine honestly and uphold professional ethical standards, able to create and maintain a human experimental program lasting 40 years?  The Hippocratic oath contains two verses that are germane for this writing:

·      I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.

·      If I keep this oath faithfully, may I enjoy my life and practice my art, respected by all humanity and in all times; but if I swerve from it or violate it, may the reverse be my life.

During the course of the Tuskegee Syphilis Survey human experimental program, the Nuremberg Trials following WWII revealed the horrors of Nazi experimental on Jewish people.  The individuals involved in conducting the Tuskegee Syphilis experiment verbalized indignation and were horrified as to what was done by their colleagues in Nazi Germany.  However they were unable to reach the same conclusions regarding the experimentation on African-American men.

The question becomes why?  Why were these men of medicine and science unable to see the harm they were doing?  Did they conceptualize that they were violating the “do no harm” oath that they had sworn to uphold?

We can only theorize why these educated men and women of medicine and science were able to ignore their responsibility regarding providing care for patients and their oath to do no harm.

·      First, the men being used for experimental purposes were identified as “research participants” instead of patients.  In doing so despite their obvious physical human appearance, the men and women of medicine and science intellectually transformed them into guinea pigs thereby shielding themselves from the responsibilities of patient care as demanded by the Hippocratic oath.

·      Second, the overt racism of that era and lack of interactions between educated, upper class white physicians/scientists and the uneducated poor, black rural men, mostly sharecroppers made it appear that the oath was not applicable in this situation.

·      Third, unlike the horrifying experimental programs identified in Nazi Germany, the Tuskegee Syphilis Survey focused on the natural progression of untreated syphilis.

So if one considers the third point, one could understand the indignation of physicians and scientists such as Dr. John H. Heller who served as the director of PHS Division of Venereal Diseases for the US Public Health Service (PHS) from 1943-48 who made the following declaration:

“There was nothing in the experiment that was unethical or unscientific.”

Yet there were those outside of medicine and science who observed the issue differently.  The national commenter for ABC News, Harry Reasoner expressed bewilderment that that the government:

“ used human beings as laboratory animals in a long and inefficient study of how long it takes syphilis to kill someone.”

So what became of the 600 African-American men of the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment? 

  

·      In 1969, as many as 100 had died as a direct result of complications caused by syphilis.

·      Others developed serious syphilis-related heart conditions that may have contributed to their deaths

·      In 1974 there were a fewer than 120 known survivors.  

Jones (1981) in his publication “Bad Blood” states:

“The Tuskegee Study had nothing to do with treatment.  No new drugs were tested; neither was any effort made to establish the efficacy of old forms of treatment.  It was a non-therapeutic experiment, aimed at compiling data on the effects of the spontaneous evolution of syphilis on black males.”

Gratitude is due to Peter Buxtun and James H. Jones.  It was Peter Buxtun, a Caucasian public health social worker, who originally exposed the study.  He openly questioned the ethics and morality of the Tuskegee Syphilis Survey and tirelessly and continuing kept the issue alive until the story broke into the press in 1972, triggering numerous and ongoing congressional investigations.

James H. Jones is the author of the publication “Bad Blood: the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment- a tragedy of race and medicine (1981).  The book is balanced, well written research examining American medicine, race relations and public policy.

And yet the most gratitude is due to the 600 men of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study.  The inhumanity they endured and the sacrifices that they and their loved ones made did not go did not go unnoticed.  The revelation of the existence of the 40-year study led to congressional investigations and a complete revamping of federal regulations on human experimentation.  

The new guidelines created specific criteria for research projects involving human subjects.  It was a direct consequence of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study that regulations exist today for the protection of human subjects.  

Today, as with the passing of time the 600 African-American men of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study have long since died.  However it is for us to remember the occurrence of the study.  It is said that those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it.  

Billy Carter, an attorney for the survivors of the study, echoes this.  He states referring to the descendants:

“The sad thing is that it could happen all over again.  These people could just as easily be conned as their fathers and grandfathers in the syphilis study.”

The Visible Man

The Visible Man: Knocking At The Door: Bisexuality Within The African-American Community

Silence… Pretend… Ignore… Avoid… Deny…

The Seattle Times recently published an article regarding the lack of acceptance of bisexuality by both straight and gay/lesbian communities. (“Study: Most bisexuals still haven’t come out” 7/22/13)

The article highlighted a photograph of an African-American woman, her male Caucasian spouse and their handsome biracial child.  However there was a discrepancy between the article and the photograph in the failure of the article to provide any information regarding the status or African-American bisexuals  “coming out” or responding to rejection from either their community or the majority population.

 

The article brought forth attitudes held by both members of gay/lesbians and straight communities as well as startling statistics regarding the impact of rejection upon bisexuals.  The article suggests that both communities are distrustful of bisexuals, holding onto stereotypes that bisexuals are indecisive or incapable of monogamous relationships. 

 

It was found in a Pew Research study that as a result of rejection by both communities that a time in which many gay and lesbians are “coming out” asserting their civil rights, most bisexuals have chosen to remain closeted or hidden from public view.  Furthermore the research study developed the following findings:

·      Only 28% of bisexuals said that most or all of the important people in their lives knew about their sexual orientation, compared to 71% of lesbians and 78% of gay men.

·      Only 11% of bisexual people said most of their closest co-workers knew of their sexual orientation, compared to 48% of gay men and 50% of lesbians.

·      Bisexuals were less likely than gay men and lesbians to say their workplaces were accepting of them.

The article goes on to state that as a result bisexuals suffer from isolation. Studies have found that

·      Bisexual people are at greater risk of emotional distress than gay/lesbian or straight people.

·      Bisexual women are more likely to binge drink and suffer depression.

·      Bisexual people are more likely than gays/lesbians and straight people to harm themselves or endure suicidal thoughts

Although I find the research to be startling as it provides proof that due to rejection, bisexuals are forced to reside in two separate closets: a straight one and a gay one.  The research also indicates that bisexuals are responding to the absence of a clearly defined community and the psychological stress of having to hide their sexual orientation.

However what I find most interesting is the photograph featuring of a African-American woman, her male Caucasian spouse and their handsome biracial child yet the article fails to provide any research or documentation regarding the impact of rejection being dealt with by bisexuals of ethnic minority communities. 

In essence the photograph appears to serve as a prop adding “color” to an article that focusing on the psychological impact on bisexuals belonging to the “majority.”  Historically ethnic minorities have been cited in such articles as an “afterthought.” In this situation, the article does not even bother to attempt to hide its use or rather misuse of ethnic minority bisexual people.  Clearly this is one of those situations in which “they are seen, yet they remain invisible.” 

In the article the biracial family “exists” for the enjoyment of the reader.  The reader attains internal satisfaction, observing the ethnic diversity of the mother and father as they are beaming with smiles as they hold their child.  However their “story” is not being told. 

As the article clearly points out the rejection that Caucasian bisexuals are facing in both gay/lesbian and straight communities, it fails to provide information which is widely known that bisexuals of color and bisexual ethnic minorities are often responding to rejections from three communities: gays/lesbians, straight people and their own ethnic minority community. 

Furthermore, where Caucasian bisexuals are responding to rejection due to sexual orientation, ethnic minority bisexuals are responding not only to the same rejection by the gay/lesbian and straight communities as a result of their sexual orientation, but to the rejection by their ethnic community, which denies them a source of protection and a safe harbor from the racism, oppression and discriminatory treatment that they face day to day due to the color of their skin or ethnic origin.

Whether the photograph serves its purpose in “selling” the article” is not of concern. The real issues are those of invisibility, manipulation and the failure of the article to tell the story of the people in the photograph.”  The article used this family in a manner that is a disservice and in doing so reinforces the perception of “invisibility” for ethnic minority bisexuals.

There is interesting research that has been developed among the topic of bisexuality within the African American community

·      Due to homophobia within the African-American community, African-American bisexual youth are often reluctant to disclose their sexuality

·      In a large sample of behaviorally bisexual men, it was found that African-Americans were much less likely to disclose their sexual orientation to their female partners than whites

·      Two major predictors for disclosure among African-American men were current age and age at initial engagement in sexual behavior, with older and more experienced men being more willing to disclose their sexuality.

There continues to be a wall of silence and ignorance (lack of knowledge) within the African-American community regarding bisexuality.  To provide clarification, the use of the word bisexual as a label and identity varies from group to group and from bisexual individual to bisexual individual. To provide some understanding to the question of what is bisexuality here are a few of the more popular definitions currently in use:

·       Someone who is capable of feeling romantic, spiritual, and/or sexual attraction for either male or female gender.

·       A person who loves despite gender.

·       One who loves individuals first and genders second.

·       An individual open to sexual or emotional exploration with two genders.

This African-American bisexual individual does not merely exist.  He/she is not invisible.  They are alive.  They live vibrant and meaningful lives.  Their presence brings a picture of diversity of the human tapestry that is among us.  They have a story that deserves to be told. 

Members of the ethnic minority bisexual community are knocking at the door.   The public, viewing and listening have a right to hear their story.

The Visible Man