
In the rising progressiveness of acceptance and tolerance for human beings; no matter the race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation; it’s heartwarming to see that today we, as a united many, have demonstrated embrace towards others who are inherently different from us. Stemming from landmark cases like Loving v. Virginia (1967) legally allowing biracial relationships or Roe v. Wade (1973) that allowed a woman more reasonable freedom to have an abortion, these historical breakthroughs reflected the social movements that reach for equality. Due to a recent, but steadfast trend, this movement for equality might take a longer time to reach. Minority activists as well as its advocates are hypocritical in their goal for equality. Unlike Martin Luther King Jr. who dreamed of a day where, “Little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.” (King) we have become witness to a time where it is encouraged to hate a “white old man” because white people don’t deserve a time to speak. White people don’t deserve a choice to stand and support for equal rights. As much as it is presumed that a white person is going to be indifferent to black lives and only be self-centered towards his or her own daily struggle, we shouldn’t alienate and discriminate towards any person of any race that wishes to support equality. In today’s time, it becomes prevalent in politics, in the news, in social media, and from personal account that discriminating against a majority in order to further minority rights is an excuse that mocks equality. It creates a belief that the majority groups are an enemy and all of its members are against the social cause for equal rights. The social trend to discriminate our own peers in order to further the goals of the minority is a dangerous tactic. One that can turn us into the monsters that actually oppressed our ancestors instead of finding new light towards greater acceptance and change. 

After Loving v. Virginia, the American population gradually came to accept and also practice interracial dating. (Loving v. Virginia) As interracial couples experience external criticism from peers, a distinct criticism would be how he or she should specifically date a race to either gain a higher social status or keep a social status above his or her partner. A racial hierarchy had formed the basis for which races should be dating which in order to keep social approval from their friends and family. (Yancey) When I chose to date outside my race, it became easy to see that black males were most of the time at the bottom of this social hierarchy. I had been predetermined to struggle in finding a partner who finds me attractive, but not be brainwashed by the racial mantra many Grindr profiles use writing, “No blacks, no femmes, no fatties, no Asians.” (Lim) it seemed less possible in my mind that I could be handed a choice to be in an interracial couple. I never sought out to be in an interracial couple because that would imply, that as a black man, it would be hypocritical to dislike a social racial hierarchy, but also practice it. I merely wanted to find a partner who I had certain things in common with, but the plumbing of the person mattered more than his skin color. When I was eighteen, I met my future boyfriend at my youth group’s prom. He was very introverted and mainly socialized with his friends, but more importantly, he socialized with me. By this time, I have dated a number of different races, including white, but it hadn’t seemed like this person was only experimenting with a black guy and checking it off of his bucket list. For the next year, him and I create memories, and demonstrate the benefits about an interracial relationship. We share and reflect on our social and political views, we don’t criticize each other’s dialect, rather, we appreciate the aspects our partner possesses. Physically, we love our partner’s skin tone, as well as our own. Mentally, we are eager to understand more of the cultural differences him and I bring in this relationship. Even though society can’t be as intimate as a couple can be, I believe it is necessary to encourage a progressive movement where the majority groups as well as the minority groups can engage in conversation and support equal rights in an equitable force. It’s not because I am in an interracial relationship that I can guide the path toward greater equality. I am as much equipped with the acceptance and tolerance any person can be today. However, I choose to use my journey in an interracial relationship to promote an ideal equality movement that doesn’t practice alienating the majority. 

A main contender that pushes for alienation rather than equality would be the controversial Black Lives Matter movement. The movement’s initial goal to validate the lives of all black people on the basis of age, sexual orientation, gender, and immigration status (Cullors) becomes vague with its strategy to bully and bombard its way to people’s ears. The ironic argument around #BlackLivesMatter versus #AllLivesMatter is that both sides propose the same argument. Black lives matter as much as all lives do; however, when Black Lives Matter protesters choose to interrupt a presidential candidate’s speech for the 2016 election by saying, “I [Marissa Johnson] was going to tell Bernie how racist this city is, even with all of these progressives, but you’ve already done that for me. Thank you.” (Everett) the overall message becomes blurred. When Sanders spoke to criticize the interruption at his own event, he said, “On criminal justice reform and the need to fight racism, there is no other candidate for president who will fight harder than me.” For both Johnson and Sanders, they have a similar message to fight against racism. Still, what good can come of it when Marissa Johnson chooses to believe that she has more agency to talk about racism first because a Jewish politician like Bernie Sanders couldn’t possibly know a single hardship about racial discrimination. A movement for equality is damaged when activists believe that only one their own group can be truly educated on a social issue and be the only ones to initiate and indulge in such a topic. 

When my boyfriend starts a discussion about feminism, marriage equality, or civil rights we share our insight about these topics. We don’t have to be women to talk about feminism because feminism calls for the social, economic, and political equality of the sexes. We don’t have to be gay to talk about marriage equality because marriage equality calls for the legal recognition of a union between more than just a man to a woman. We don’t have to be People of Color to talk about civil rights because civil rights call for the social and political freedom for equality. These terms themselves invite more than just one group to speak about progressiveness. We educate each other about social issues because we favor equality. Him being white does not invalidate him to talk about racial issues. Me being black does automatically give me the knowledge on police brutality and the civil rights movement. Nonetheless, educated men like Bernie Sanders should be given the option to educate fellow Americans in the ways to fight racism. He validates himself to become an activist for equality because he possesses the knowledge and empathy for black lives. As a presidential candidate, Sanders would need to be educated and aware of all American lives equally. 

A disconcerting trend that undoubtedly surprises me is the premeditated white bashing on either white individuals or white people as a group. Many news sources including Time, New York Daily News, NBC, and the Chicago Tribune post a gruesome story about a disabled white teenager being kidnapped and assaulted by 4 other black teenagers. Chicago Superintendent Eddie Johnson also states in the story, “There was never a question whether or not this incident qualified to be investigated as a hate crime.” (Chan) This heinous act can be easily defined as atrocious and horrendous, but how can we as progressives not predict that this would happen? I’m not stating that hate crimes are inevitable nor do I overlook the crime committed. I’m stating that this hate crime is a result of a trend to surrounding the bashing towards white people. An infamous YouTube video created by MTV highlights the workings of this trend as well. Titled “Dear White Guys” the video generalizes the actions and beliefs and implies that white males are the majority to negatively impact the year 2016. It attempts to mask this trope with a lighthearted tone and diverse cast, however, its message becomes awfully malicious in the act to downright tell the audience that white people are selfish and indifferent for another person’s livelihood. For example, the video states, “…don’t prioritize the well-being of an Ivy League Athlete over the women he assaulted.” (MTV 0:37-0:41) In referencing to the sexual assault case, People of the State of California v. Brock Allen Turner, the MTV video shows good intent to disapprove of the unethical ruling, but backfires when this specific topic aimed towards a federal judge is depicted as a generalized taboo of white males. Interracial couples deal with harsh generalizations as well. Due to the aforementioned social hierarchy in the dating world, races as well receive stereotypical remarks how a certain racial group acts in a relationship. My boyfriend and I are less asked who the top, dominant male partner, and who the bottom, submissive male partner, is in the relationship. Rather, it is assumed in our peers’ view that as a black man, I am obviously the top and my white boyfriend would have to be the bottom. Even though it isn’t anyone’s business on which partners in a relationship are more masculine or feminine, it’s also disappointing to generalize people in such a way. It’s quite demoralizing to a person that he or she is presumed to act in such a way just because of the race, gender, or sexual orientation one displays. It’s again very negative to promote equality among all races, but then decide to condemn an entire racial group because of a few white people who oppose equality. 

Opposing viewpoints this view my claim to be idealistic. That promoting an equality movement because the human race is so diverse in differing ideologies, economic status, and faith that it seems impossible for there to be true equality among the human race. Also my call to end white discrimination can seem far-fetched when today there is extreme for change that offers People of Color rights that were oppressed and locked away from them for so long. Even at the expense of white people being comfortable with social change, it is nonetheless for the benefit of minorities including me. I do value an entire movement to spark discussion and show the realities of police brutality into the media like the Black Lives Matter movement. I do appreciate MTV in their attempt to address a political statement in which the privileged few receive an unethically less sentence for heinous crimes rather than the large sum of black people who seem to be given a much harsher prison sentence. (Schanzenbach) Mikala Everett’s article titled “Black People Cannot Be Racist, and Here’s Why” promotes the argument that racism runs rampant today. For example, she states, “We must remember when faced with adversity that institutional racism is very much alive, but that does not mean that it cannot be overcome.” Institutional racism is very much alive when black men like Travon Martin are racially profiled, murdered, and set to become martyrs against police brutality. Institutional racism is still alive when Beyoncé reminds indifferent halftime show onlookers that “Formation” is a battle cry for Black feminism. (Everett) Institutional racism is still alive today when you choose to deny a person to speak at his own event because he’s not black. (Basu) Institutional racism is still alive today when teenagers are likely to kidnap and torture another teen because of his skin color and spew words at him like "F*** Donald Trump! F*** white people!"(Chan) It’s not easy to promote an idea of equality as it can seem to be unrealistic compared to specific equal rights movements like the Black Lives Matter movement. I don’t lift white people on a high pedestal where they shouldn’t be called out on their unjust actions. I propose that for a movement like Black Lives Matter to encourage greater equality, it should invite, learn, and listen to other races who support the movement. For white progressives, those are the kind of white people who shouldn’t be disallowed a voice in the movement. In fact, race entirely shouldn’t keep a person from hoping for a more equal union with our peers. An equal union where neither black people nor white people are alienated in the goal for acceptance and tolerance. 

I’ve come to realize that this was my goal when my boyfriend and I discuss topics about equal rights. He indulges me on the praise and criticism he has for social movements like the Feminist movement and Black Lives Matter. Namely I distinctly remember his disdain about how some black advocacy meetings I attended did not allow white people. I had concluded in my perspective that those groups had only meant to bring black people in a space where they were only influenced and allowed to speak with their own people. That reason started to seem more as an excuse when I no longer learned the insight and engaged in conversation with any other type of person besides black in that group. This discussion felt homogenized often when we’d have short and simple discussions. The meetings were soothing and reassuring that I was apart of a community who shared my struggle, but I wasn’t there for group therapy. I would want to invite my boyfriend to these group meetings for him to learn more about issues pertaining to People of Color, or him give his own insight and personal experience of race and class. However, the only thing that prevented me from doing that was his skin color. I started to question the groups myself on whether or not the exclusivity of the group mattered more than the potential knowledge I would gain from more viewpoints had the group not artificially enforced ‘Black People Only’. I understand that these many progressive movements today have good intention and promote equality for their respected minority groups. I do propose a better approach for appealing to a wider audience when we become less biased against inviting all persons into the conversation. Especially if that person is in support of the movement, it is our duty as human beings to show open arms. 

 