Yesterday I introduced quite a ticklish question and premise to the forum, that of the curious riddle of Black Male un and/or underemployment in the United States historically. I made the case-based on the book Two Nations, by Andrew Hacker-that contrary to the mantra that “education” is the key to success, that when it came to Black Men in aggregate, such a notion was at best tenuous-unless you mean it to mean that an “educated” Black Man can make more money than an “uneducated” one. On this singular note, there is little to dispute. Beyond that however, the stats clearly show, that “education” has not proven to move Black Men to be on par with White Men, White Women or even Black Women in terms of comparable incomes. Indeed, if anything, Black Women have done very well in this regard, often on a par with and sometimes even exceeding White Women.
Moreover, it has been shown that “educated” Black Men are still either un or underemployed at a rate of 2 to 1 to their White counterparts. Indeed, even a *lesser* formally educated White Man-who may even have a criminal record-can still be more gainfully employed than an “Educated” Brotha with no such criminal history.
We’ve noted that the only time in American history where there was virtually 100% “employment” for Black Men, was Chattel Slavery. Moreover, American history records that in times of national crisis-and by that is meant when the country was at war, in this case, meaning specifically WW1, WW2, and Korea-the “employment” rate-by which is meant, the draft-of Black Men went up substantially. Other than that though, and again American history bears this out, Black Male employment rates, to say nothing of earning power, has continually lagged behind other groups, particularly White Men.
I have asked my readers WHY they think this is-and I’ve been careful to restrict the discussion to Hacker’s book. I’ve done this for a very specific purpose, actually several. One was because I want to challenge some deeply embedded Dangerous Assumptions far too many of us cling to in our time. Assumptions that have at best, tangential relevance to the issues at hand, if not out and out fallacious when examined critically. Another reason why I have structured the discussion in the way I have is because I wanted to know just how much people have read and studied-when it comes to racial issues, Two Nations is not only a critically acclaimed work, its also a fairly old one, having first been published in the mid 1990s, and updated in the immediate aftermath of the hotly contested Bush/Gore Presidential elections of 2000. I liken the book to The Bell Curve insofar as its cultural importance and impact-whether you agree o disagree with the authors, the point is that these books have done much to inform our understanding of these issues in our time.
Sadly, I was not surprised to see that some of the most vociferous commenters-those who have far and away MORE formal “education” and a higher job profile than myself-had not in fact read the book. Some had not even heard of it. Others attempted to act as if it didn’t matter, because they had information which explained what we were examining, even when said “info” either spoke exactly to what Hacker was talking about-they’d have known that if they had actually read the book to begin with-or, had little if anything to do with the actual topic. So, we see just how deeply entrenched Dangerous Assumptions can truly be.
Hmm.
So, with all that said, I am now going to reveal exactly WHY, Black Men-even and particularly those who are “educated”-still lag behind other groups in terms of employment:
You ready?
Its because Black Men don’t have the patronage networks that actually makes things happen.
That’s why.
Recently, I relayed the story of how I tested for the Philadelphia Fire Department, many years ago. Despite my very high test score, I wasn’t accepted into the academy. Why?
Because I didn’t know the right people in order to make things happen. That’s why.
Many people like to think, that “merit”, or the lack thereof, is the deciding factor in whether people get hired or not, get into school or not, get promoted or not, and so on. My own personal observation has borne this out down through the years.
Black Men, taken as a group, simply don’t know the right people in order to make things happen. They don’t have the social networks that can help them navigate the buffers *designed to keep folks out* of jobs and the like. In a nutshell, this is the reason why Black Men on a whole, regardless of their rate of “assimilation” continues to fare worse than other groups-even Black Women.
Which brings up another very powerful dynamic-and shoots down a lot of other theories, to use the term loosely. Black Women come from the same place as Black Men, yet no one can argue that “education” has paidoff, literally and otherwise for them. Why?
Well, there are several reasons. One is Affirmative Action-as a few others have already alluded to, when companies and agencies are pressured to meet quotas, hiring a Black Woman essentially kills two birds with one stone. While there has been much handwringing on the part of Angry White Males over Affirmative Action, very little is said about WHO actually benefits from it the most. Depending on the studies one reads, White Women have benefitted the most overall, from AA. But it is undeniable to dismiss this very crucial factor for Black Women as well. Nor am I attaching a value judgment one way or another-just applying a commonsensical, Parsimonious observation and analysis to the matter.
But there’s another reason, too. As Hacker observes in his book Two Nations, it is not at all unusual to see Black and White Women eating lunch together and engaging in related activities on the job. Nor should this be seen as surprising, as we who study Game for example, know well that the Female is always more highly socially attuned, than the Male, all other things being equal. Women intuitively understand the importance of social networks, and, as Hacker has noted in his other book Mismatch, are more amenable to do the things those in power want, which also explains why Black Women fare better in school than Black Men. Roissy recently wrote about the “fake” natures of Women and Gay Men, and he’s largely correct. We’ve all seen this-Women are quick to affect the “correct” posture when the need arises. Men-and particularly for our discussion Black Men-not so much.
Here comes another very, very important aspect of the discussion that cannot be overlooked. Hacker notes that it is much less likely to see Black and White Men going out to lunch together-they’ll either go alone, or at best, they’ll go in racially homogenous groups-all the White guys will eat together, and all the Black guys will eat together, and so on. Rarely do you find Black and White guys socializing much on the gig in a manner comparable to Black and White Women. This is important because these, what some would call “soft skills” matter a great deal when it comes to the job market. One that, while changing ever so slowly, is still one that is controlled in the main, by White Men. They still decide who gets hired and fired, for the most part-and the higher one ascends in society, particularly the private sector, the more likely one will see this borne out.
This explains in part why the University of Chicago “Black Name Resume” study was so very instructive. Actually, they should have taken it a step further, to breakout the Black sounding MALE names, from the Black sounding Female ones. I have no way of proving this, but my gut tells me that the Black sounding Male named resumes got a lower rate of callbacks than the Black sounding Female named resumes. If I’m right, it only validates all that I’m saying here.
Of course, Race plays a role. To attempt to suggest otherwise, is to deny the reality of American history and life. However, there is an important distinction to be made here.
Moves have been made to eliminate discriminatory, or to put it more bluntly, racist actions when it comes to hiring and the like, and one must say, that these moves have been broadly effective. Yet, they cannot account for what we are discussing here, because they cannot address the simple fact that there is a *racial* dimension at work here as well. By racial, I mean that there are subtle psychological differences at play and at work that have to do with why, for example, Black Women can ascend faster and farther than Black Men in the open job market. For one thing, the old saw, at least in the Black community, about Black Women being seen as less “threatening” than Black Men has a tremendous amount of truth to it-Black Men have always been seen as more “manly” than other types of Men, hence the huge concern White Men have with “assimilation” when this topic comes up. Moreover, studies have shown that people-Men and Women alike-respond more favorable to feminine sounding voices and the like, over more masculine sounding ones. We Black folk know well the idea of “code switching”, and if we’re honest, also know well, that Sistas know how to “turn it on” when they have to. Well, Black Men-even those who have matriculated-aren’t as apt to do this-and here I must make a very, very important distinction. I’m not talking about speech patterns, so much as I am *voice inflection*-basically taking the “bass” out of one’s voice, so as to not “sound” “too” Black, and in this case, masculine. When objectively assessed, none of this really makes sense-just like the “proxy for IQ” stuff that college degrees really represent, doesn’t make much sense when put out in the light of day-but so much of what we do, flies under our conscious radar. These and other “little” things, accounts for why we see what we see and have seen, on the job front for Black Men, since Reconstruction.
I’ve seen this dynamic at work right here in the blogosphere-and so have you. White guys like Planet Grok, take extreme issue with me, yet rollout the red carpet for other blogging voices like Jamila. And while he and others will protest that my premise is ridiculous, when you really sitdown and think about it from the perspective of this discussion, it really isn’t as far fetched as it may sound. Simply put, if Women are as a rule more socially attuned and by extension more consensus oriented, Men are inherently more competitive. Which is another reason why Black Men have a tougher time getting work and/or pay comparable to White Men out on the open job market-because they’re seen as competitors in a way that Black Women simply are not.
Again, this is why so much emphasis is laid on “assimilation” on the part of White Men when they opine on topics like these. Of course, African Americans are thoroughly “assimilated”-we speak English, are largely Christian, wear American clothes, have American names, and so on. But that’s not what White Men-and remember, they still control the patronage networks that makes things happen-are talking about when they say the word “assimilation”. What they mean is, when it comes to Black Men, “don’t be a competitor”. Which means, among other things, taking the bass outta your voice.
Look at Barack Obama for example-despite his getting virtually 100% of the Black Vote-even Black Conservatives like Colin Powell and Armstrong Williams openly supported him-still, he has to be very, very careful not to appear, sound or act “too Black”by which is meant for this discussion, “Black Male”. Notice his speech patterns, and voice inflection-only rarely, does he allow it to go into “Black Male Mode”, if you will. His entire candidacy and to date, Presidency, has been built on this very notion, of not appearing, sounding or acting too “Black Male”, because Whites-particularly White Males-are extremely sensitive to such things, and could threaten to derail his political objectives. This explains why, despite the overwhelming support Obama received from African Americans enmasse, and the devastating Black Male un and underemployment rates before and during the Great Mancession, he cannot and will not directly address this issue because it will upset White Males too much. Think about this for a moment. It is some powerful stuff.
Of course, in the White Collar professions, such nakedly raw truths cannot be directly implemented or addressed, for a major feature of being solidly Middle Class and above is to be oblique, implied, inferred. Things are more difficult to suss out, which is precisely the point.
In the Blue Collar world-and this includes the police and fire departments, though-such themes and issues are vivid in their starkness. White Men in such backgrounds historically and to a large extent today have no compunctions about making it clear and known that they regard such patronage networks for them and theirs-Black Men gotta get in where they fit in, if they fit in at all. This explains why, in Philly for example, the major Trade Unions remain largely White, even when the city is numerically majority Black and is currently under its third Black Mayor, the second such mayor in a row.
A frequent commenter to this forum, Reader, asked me a very good question: I had taught at university and had been employed in a number of other jobs. How did my personal experience jibe with what I was saying yesterday and today?
Simple: all of those jobs I got for one reason and one reason alone:
Because someone who was in a position to make things happen, happened to be Black-and more importantly for this discussion, Male. And that, as much as I may feel ambivalent about the matter, is the pink elephant in the middle of the room when writ large over Black America.
One final point before I turn it loose.
There has been much made of the Rise of the Black Middle Class, exemplified in the media by the 1980s hit tv sitcom The Cosby Show. Today, there are actually more Black middle classes than there are working and underclasses, in fact. Yet, Black Male employment rates lag behind. We now know why this is true in broader, “Whiter” America. But why is this true, despite the explosion of the Black middle class?
The reason is because of the way said class is structured. In the main, the Black middle class rests on careers and positions in the public sector or quasi-public sector jobs. Moreover, most of those in the Black middle class, are middle management, or “VPs in Name Only”, because they’re really not in a position to hire and fire, to sign/write checks and so on. The proof of this is easily seen again, in comparing them to their White counterparts, not only in the professions but also in the Trades:
We all know and know well, White Men who weren’t particularly bright, motivated or even qualified, who nevertheless got jobs, often very nice ones, because they knew someone who could put them on.
Period.
The dirty little secret here, is that the Black middle class are fundamentally unable to help Black Men enmasse, because one, of the very nature of their jobs (public sector) and two, because they aren’t the HNICs.
Of course, we won’t ever hear Marc Morial say that.
The Riddle of the Un and/or Underemployed Black Male-a riddle that has been around since Reconstruction, mind you-is now answered. It reveals just how the Realworld, really works. The reason why Black Men can’t get on isn’t due as much to racism, though a big part of the issues are indeed racial. And to be sure, Jim Crow and the like has prevented Black Men from developing the patronage networks that Jewish, Italian, Irish-even Hispanic and Asian Men-have developed over the past century. But when you really get down to it, the biggest reason why Black Men have lagged behind the employment curve of everyone else, is because it ain’t about what you know, but who.
On that note, Black Men, taken as group, are an island unto themselves.
Now adjourn your non-thinking outside the box asses…
The Obsidian
