I don't know that I really have enough material for another post on them, but a wrapping up feels necessary.
I feel like there should have been an instantaneous rejection of the name.
The Underground Railroad had a specific purpose. It was a conduit to help slaves escape to freedom, run by people who knew slavery was wrong but that the law was not enlightened enough and brave enough to say that. While slavery had seen many forms, the turn it had taken in the United States was that it had been tied specifically to race so that race would get in the way of class unity, and preserve wealth and power for those who already had it.
Yes, I get the analogy; but it is not the place of a white man to ignore racism and appropriate that name for his crusade.
That is gross.
It is grosser that Timothy Ballard has written a book alternating his experiences with a Harriet Jacobs -- yeah, a Harriet associated with runaway slaves, but not that one -- where part of the plot is her rebuffing the master's sexual advances.
So many women were not able to rebuff advances; they were just raped.
Based on things that come through about the group and Ballard, I can imagine his interest in a desirable woman staying pure and having to get away.
That would be an oversimplification of Jacobs' story anyway, and I am not going to read the book to find out whether he handles it well or not. Even if he does handle it well -- which I doubt -- there are reasons enough to not support Ballard further.
In a way, the most perfect illustration of what's wrong with Ballard and OUR is that they were featured in a Jon McNaughton painting:
Sadly, the people most likely to be devoted to OUR are also the most likely to appreciate McNaughton's work.
I understand the emotional appeal of rescuing children; but so many exploited children are experiencing it in their home, from family members. In so many cases when there is actual trafficking, it is because of poverty and marginalization that leaves some vulnerable and some capable of feeling good about the exploitation.
There are real issues. They will not be resolved by white male power fantasies.
Of course Ballard is also the guy that doesn't listen to sex workers and people who were trafficked about their actual needs.
It will take listening. It takes listening to Black people, certainly, and because there is more to US history there is also listening to people who came from Asia, and people who came up from the South, and people who were already here when the first explorers and colonists came. That means listening to contemporary accounts and listening to their descendants about the situation now.
It means listening to women and children. That includes teaching them that they have bodily autonomy, and do not need to accept abuse, which some shy away from because then what if they rebel againsts your benevolent attempts to control?
It means listening to gay people because a lot of them have untenable home situations when they are young, and running away or even staying at home with emotional abuse really increases the vulnerability to trafficking.
I am tempted to say no one elevates old white guys like we do, but I have not given up on those old white guys, and also it is not true; many organizations and traditions elevate old white guys. In that way, we are pretty "of the world", not merely in it.
But I still believe we can do better.
It will require a shift.
Regardless, for those interested in protecting children, there are other options.
No comments:
Post a Comment