Tell Me Who You Are: Sharing Our Stories of Race, Culture, & Identity

“Looking around at both ourselves and others, we realized that, as much as we all like to believe we are open-minded and progressive, many of us have not truly broken out of our racially divided bubbles. We have not learned from and formed friendships across the true diversity of our nation. We have remained too aloof from the pursuit of justice.”

The authors argue that many people believe themselves to be open-minded while actually living in “bubbles,” separated from people of other races. This leads to lack of understanding of people of other races and even to ignorance of one’s own ignorance, which in turn contributes to social injustice. By acknowledging their own preconceptions, the writers encourage readers to do the same.

“Thus, Whiteness and Blackness were born: ‘twins birthed from the same womb, that of slavery.’ The White race began to be formed ‘out of a heterogenous and motley collection of Europeans who had never before perceived that they had anything in common.’ Whiteness remains the dominant category today—other races are compared and contrasted relative to it. Whiteness positions itself against ideas of, among others, Blackness, Indigenousness, Asianness, and Hispanic-ness. This is why people of color, rather than White people, will frequently be identified by their race. Whiteness has become the norm.”

This quote is part of “A Brief History of Whiteness,” an introductory section just before Chapter 1. The authors quote Racial Domination, Racial Progress by Matthew Desmond and Mustafa Emirbayer to describe how the concept of Blackness came from slavery. African people were targeted for enslavement due to their unfamiliarity with the US, their immunity to diseases from Europe, and their inability to blend in; racist ideology about their supposed inferiority then emerged to “justify” the practice. Whiteness simultaneously became the norm to which other races have been compared, resulting in the sense of alienation felt by many people of color. The discussion frames race as at once artificial and deeply intertwined with people’s lived realities.

“The truth of the world—that race is inextricable with everyday life—is heavy. But, if we all cared and dared to share the weight of that truth, perhaps we can hold it high enough and long enough for things to change. Perhaps if we started by simply recognizing that race impacts everything, that everything is impacted by race, our vision would begin to clear.”

Chapter 1 focuses on the idea that race impacts all areas of life and vice versa. Its pervasiveness, the authors imply, means that everyone should not only be aware of racism but work to address it. The authors argue that shared awareness of the impact of race is the first step toward change, introducing the book’s theme of Combating Racism and Discrimination as Revolution.

“White students need to know about the experiences of students of color, but the people who aren’t gonna listen are the ones who need to be changed. Only a White person, I’ve learned, can talk to another White person and get farther than I can get. Because either they’re gonna stop listening to me, I’m gonna get angry, or both. Sometimes, it’s easy just to think about giving up, telling them to fuck themselves and to stay away from you. But you can’t do that because they run the world. So you just gotta keep telling them and keep waking them up. It’s all baby steps, you know? The oppressed shouldn’t have to do it all. The oppressor needs to help out. White people need to talk to other White people about what is what. Y’all gotta teach each other—like, right now.”

Justin explains white people’s responsibility for learning about people of color but notes that many won’t listen—namely, those who should listen the most. He argues that white people will listen to other white people, placing the responsibility for conversations about race in their hands. This connects with the theme of Stories, Language, and Conversations About Race and Identity.

“I struggle a little bit with calling my journey one of racial literacy, because that limits people to thinking either you’re literate or you’re not literate, and once you’re literate you’re done learning. I really want to challenge myself and others to think about all of this work as a journey with no feasible destination.”

Melina mirrors the authors’ statement that they are on a journey of racial literacy that requires continuous learning. Racial literacy is not a goal to meet but a path toward continued understanding. Melina recognizes that people are also continually teaching each other about race and racism.

“The way I describe it to my partner is, Conversations around gender are my gift. Conversations around White supremacy are my responsibility.”

Melina addresses her positionality as a white woman and how it impacts her conversations about race and gender. In both cases, she is addressing inequality, but whereas her marginalized status as a woman makes talking about sexism natural for her, her privileged position as a white person makes talking about racism something she feels a “responsibility” to do. Intersectionality impacts her conversations about these topics.

“We think about how, when we first joined a local anti-racist organization, every single person in the room was Black or White. The unspoken question was, ‘Why, as an Asian American, do you even care about race?’ We think about how we feel like intermediaries closely acquainted with both oppression and privilege, how both White people and people of color we interview will end their storytelling with ‘you know what I mean?’ as though we could somehow understand both their experiences. We think about how perhaps we wouldn’t be so readily trusted if we were Black or Latinx or White.”

The authors’ experiences as Asian American individuals illustrate the complexity of racial dynamics. For example, the fact that they are seen as simultaneously oppressed and privileged seems to give them unique access to their interviewees, as everyone assumes they can relate to their experiences. However, the authors recognize that this trust is unearned and question the limits of their own perspective with the conditional phase, “as though we could somehow understand.”

“I fear that young people, because they don’t know their history, won’t realize or recognize racism as racism, or other injustices, when they are confronted with them.”

Butler’s concern parallels the authors’ discussion of their own lack of education about race. Because racial awareness is not taught in schools, the authors had to educate themselves about it, a project that many young people may not take up. Butler emphasizes the importance of learning about race to be able to see injustices when they occur—part of the authors’ own motivation. Butler is particularly well situated to discuss the importance of learning the history of race, as his mother, Aurelia Browder, was a key leader in the Civil Rights Movement. He stresses the need to learn not only history but also correct history, as his mother was erased from the traditional narrative surrounding the movement.

“It’s similar with my White friends. Because I very much focus on issues of racial inequity, police brutality, and so many other things in my work, some have told me, ‘You don’t love White people.’ I’m like, ‘If I didn’t love you, I wouldn’t call you out on these issues. But because I love you, I believe in us, I believe that there are things you don’t see, and I believe that you could even be different or better, I will absolutely call stuff out.’”

Shelley addresses the pushback she receives from white people due to her work on issues of race, inequity, and police brutality. She implies that this defensiveness is common among white people, stemming from an assumption that people of color see all white people as racist. Shelley argues that she brings up these issues precisely because she thinks white people can be antiracist and that her position as a Black woman gives her the ability to draw these issues to their attention. Her work aims to improve the world, and she sees that work as a collective fight.

“There are two conditions that I think permeate the development of people, particularly White people and Black people, in this country: superiority and suspicion. To this day, there’s often a lingering feeling of superiority among White folk. It’s just almost grown into them, reinforced and retold. On the other hand, people of color are told to be suspicious of all White people. These things have a psychological hold, and it’s so damaging to the human spirit. One way to divest oneself of those is through association.”

William addresses white supremacy as it manifests in a sense of superiority that societal institutions reinforce. Meanwhile, people of color have learned to be suspicious of those who are white. This creates a division between the two groups, but he emphasizes how interracial friendships and racial amity can create connection.

“Living with my partner, who doesn’t share my Korean roots, I’ve realized that we all—all of us in America—don’t actually know how to be in community together, how to communicate, how to love each other. My question to you is: How can we have more shared understandings of how to provide care for each other, when we come from a place where we don’t even have a shared culture?”

Sandra expresses her frustration at coming from a different culture than her partner—a situation that she suggests exemplifies the divisions between different racial groups and communities in the US. She argues that people who don’t have a shared culture struggle to connect and communicate, which prevents them from being in community.

“I have a responsibility to make sure my partner is safe, and to teach those White people in my life that their narrative is damaging. It is not necessarily about acknowledging privilege. That’s become such a popular thing to say. Really, you are saying nothing at all. I am well aware of White privilege. We know. What are you doing about it? What self-reflection have you actually done?”

As a white person, Cara sees it as her responsibility to do something about white privilege, not just recognize it. She emphasizes the role of action in creating change, though that action includes teaching other white people about white privilege. The authors note that “many White people can go their whole lives not truly recognizing that they are White. They have the luxury of living as an individual” (144). That privilege means that in practical terms they don’t have to discuss race, but Cara argues that it is their moral responsibility to do so.

“Across the nation, we felt a gap between those with the ‘right’ language to talk about race, and those without. We wondered whether it not only got in the way of talking about race, but our progress toward systematic equity itself [...] bring your consciousness into your words. The words we use matter. Words can show malice or ignorance. Words can make manifest dangerous ideologies and actions. Words—your words—hold tremendous power.”

The authors consider the importance of language when discussing race. They argue that language can inhibit progress toward equity; when people lack the language to discuss race, or use incorrect or damaging words, they lack the ability to move toward change. The authors encountered this problem with people across the US, many of whom were unaware they were using improper terms.

“Just because you’re a person of color absolutely does not mean you understand the experiences, or agree with the opinions, of other people of color. But that doesn’t mean we cannot acknowledge our larger, collective struggle, and show solidarity against the destruction of our communities and our earth. We can be united not only within our cultures and races, but also as peoples fighting against all our oppressions, and as a humanity working toward more just communities for everyone, no matter what your race, ethnicity, or color.”

The authors acknowledge that people of color don’t always agree with other people of color, but that everyone, including white people, shares a collective fight against discrimination of all kinds. They argue that everyone ought to unite against white supremacy.

“‘I noticed that kids on reservations don’t come to school because they’re embarrassed that they don’t have shoes to wear. And I notice that some kids have really bad shoes, but at least they have shoes. Equality is a truck showing up and giving out only size 8 Nikes. Equity is a truck that shows up and has a size shoe that fits everybody. That way, everyone can walk around.’ In other words, equity acknowledges inequalities. Equity focuses on the just and fair distribution of resources and access to opportunities.”

Kyle offers a succinct analogy that illustrates the concept of equity. He shows how equity differs from equality: People may broadly share a common need (e.g., shoes), but meeting that need means acknowledging its particularities (e.g., different sizes). Equity is about access to resources and opportunities and their (currently uneven) distribution across society.

“I usually say this, ‘Bloom where you were planted.’ You can’t bloom as a flower if your soil is toxic. You have to find your own sunlight, your own sources of water, your own sources of happiness, because at the end of the day, what really matters is you. If you are not happy, you can’t spread joy to the community. If you follow your parents’ dreams, I don’t think you are going to be effective as a community member. Your boundaries are your quest. Just think of your limitations as a challenge, as your lifelong quest to overcome—because even though Asian Americans are part of the model minority group, ‘success’ is not a finish line we are supposed to cross. You should not be talking about the end game, but instead the process.”

Aubrey offers an analogy about success based on her experiences as an Asian American individual—a group stereotyped as particularly “successful.” She highlights the importance of pursuing individual happiness rather than following parental goals, as she suggests many Asian American children feel pressured to do. In line with the book’s focus on communal struggle and ongoing improvement, she emphasizes that personal fulfillment can make one a better member of the community and defines success as a process rather than a goal.

“We each have agency, a relative power to effect change in our community. You can think of it in concentric circles: your personhood; the next ring is family, friends, and partners; and then outside your acquaintances, your colleagues, your community at large; then your region, your country, et cetera. But then there’s the structural part of it: economic policies, justice policies, housing policies, race, your own skin, the resources we have access to. These barriers made me step out.”

Hermon outlines the expanding spheres of influence that people have in their communities. He emphasizes the agency, or individual power, that people have to create change through these spheres of influence, but he doesn’t downplay the impact that specific policies and access to resources have on people, often creating barriers to change. These barriers caused him to leave politics due to his limited agency in that arena.

“When I was growing up, I was constantly reminded that all of us needed to do something, to do my part in the struggle. You have to understand the context of what it was like for parents to train their children to not go to a bathroom that is not for the colored, to not drink from water fountains because you could cause problems, to not look White people in the eye, because, if you’re an African-American boy and you look at White women, you could be lynched. My parents raised me as a hydra-headed monster, to be aware of the present, living in a segregated society, but also to keep hopes and dreams alive.”

Sybil explains her childhood struggles in Arkansas during the Jim Crow Era, dealing with segregation and racism and the fear it caused. The need to anticipate white people’s perspectives harkens to W. E. B. Du Bois’s concept of double consciousness, or simultaneously maintaining the perspective of both the oppressor and the oppressed. She implies that the psychological toll of this consciousness was among the reasons she was continually reminded of the importance of combatting racism.

You could tell there was a huge divide in the school, Whites against Blacks. People were mad at us and said, ‘No, there’s other ways to protest!’ What other ways could create such a large conversation?”

Tiara explains the backlash she faced after taking a knee at a high school football game. She highlights the division this created between white and Black students and the demands that she to protest in another way. However, she implies that the controversy was the point: These kinds of visible and provocative protests create important conversations.

“Hegemony is real, and sadly, many people of color are joining the project of Whiteness by rejecting and silencing other people of color, including Indian Americans.”

Protim addresses the problem of people of color excluding other people of color from the struggle against racism. He identifies the impact of the hegemony, or dominance, of whiteness in the lives of such people.

“I’ve started to realize that people don’t know what they don’t know, so you have to show them through your stories how you’ve lived your life. I wish people wouldn’t be so afraid to have those conversations, and wouldn’t be so afraid of offending each other. These conversations might not be the most pleasant experience, but I would rather have you ask me than have you not know, and for that to manifest into fear or resentment…If people understand me, they’ll understand my culture, and that will make things easier in the long run for everyone.”

Danya’s quote exemplifies the book’s project of racial literacy: sharing stories to increase understanding of racism and discrimination. She adds that fear impedes often these conversations, but that silence breeds more assumptions, fears, and resentments. Ultimately, conversations create more understanding and connection between people.

“But I think that until we can really tell our stories from where we are positioned, until we can really back each other up with all of our fullness, we aren’t really fighting on the same team [...] I am one of the first published writers telling the stories of Hmong, whether or not I want to, I work in the field of representation. I have to be aware of the dangers of this representation. We are continually in the process of writing ourselves into being.”

Kao Kalia highlights the importance of racial representation but also the dangers of an individual presenting their experiences to the world as representative of an entire racial group. For this reason, she stresses the importance of positionality—of explicitly telling one’s stories from one’s individual perspective. She adds that telling these kinds of stories generates a fuller, more collective understanding that allows people to fight together.

“Remember you can better understand but not fully understand a person’s experience, because you haven’t lived it. Be humble and vigilant about what you don’t know!”

The authors caution that people cannot fully understand someone else’s experience because everyone’s lived experience is different. People can learn about another person’s experience but must always be aware of the limitations of their knowledge.