Posts

,

Respectability politics in Bahamian schools

In The Bahamas, the commitment to and practice of respectability politics continues to outweigh common sense, human decency, and care for one another. It shows up in so many spaces and has been accepted as “normal” and “proper” for so long that it is rarely questioned, even when it causes obvious harm.

Respectability politics, at one time, was a survival tactic. People in situations of vulnerability, who were marginalised, and who were at risk of violence and discrimination did all they could to blend in by conforming to mainstream “standards” that were, ultimately, those set by white and wealthy people. Black people tried to match their appearance and behaviour with that of white people in the attempt to either go unnoticed or be seen as exceptional, thereby escaping, to some extent, discrimination.

Racism is still rampant today. Classism is still a part of our reality. The survival tactics of one generation are passed down and imposed upon the next. It can be difficult to see the historical context of our practices when they are not discussed, but carried out as a matter of duty, fulfilling expectations, and become norms. For this reason, respectability politics can, in its current practice, appear to be about morals or manners rather than a tactic that was useful (to a limited extent) and is now counterproductive, harmful, and anti-black.

It was not long ago that black women who kept their hair natural, meaning it was not chemically straightened, were strongly discouraged, told that it was unprofessional. People insisted that it did not look neat when, really, it simply was not straight and did not have the properties of straight hair. At a certain point, it was fine to have natural hair if it could be made to look like it was not. This was not about neatness. It was racism. It was the oppression that accompanies the idea that blackness is shameful and that black people aspire to be as close to whiteness as possible. We have seen and heard new stories about people being dismissed from work and school for having afros or locs. Those days, evidently, are not over.

“They came to school looking like hoodlums,” a social media post by RM Bailey said. The school, dissatisfied with their length of hair, decided to take a set of boys to a barber for haircuts. They declared them “beautiful” after the haircuts were provided. The school, mandated to provide education to all enrolled children, removed these children from their classes, took and posted photographs of them, likely without the consent of their parents/guardians, and made a disgusting, disparaging comment about them.

“Hoodlum” is a term that refers to a violent criminal. This is a completely inappropriate term to use to describe any child, especially based on the length of the hair or style of their haircuts. Removing the post is not enough. The boys are owed an apology, both for denigration in the social media post and the violation of their bodily autonomy. RM Bailey, unfortunately, is not alone in this anti-Black racism that has been internalised and unleashed on children in the form of certain rules and they ways they are enforced.

CC Sweeting reportedly kept out of classes when their haircuts were deemed unacceptable. The involved adults, and likely all administrators and educators, need specialised training to give them culturally relevant information on anti-black racism, stereotyping, implicit bias, and microaggressions and support them in developing appropriate rules, regulations, and application principles.

Schools have rules and regulations. Of course. Schools have uniforms. Yes. Schools attempt to set a standard through their rules and regulations. This does not mean the rules and regulations should remain as they have been for years, and it does not mean they are being applied and enforced in appropriate ways, particularly for the education, growth, and full development of this generation.

White boys are not made to keep their hair as short as black boys. For this, there is no reason. There is a root, and it is anti-black racism. It is due to the normalisation and continuation of respectability politics that people continue to practice. From the chemical straightening of black hair and the amount of gel used to manipulate the texture and volume of black hair to achieve a ponytail that looks slick and flat from the front, these practices can be stylistic and personal choices, yet should be considered by those who engage in them. These practices absolutely should not be expected or required of anyone.

Recently, there was lively conversation about a social media post by a business that is refusing service to people wearing bonnets. It is reasonable that a person may wear a bonnet, whether protect their hair, to preserve a hairstyle, to cover hair that is not styled to their liking, or as an accessory one simply likes. It does not need to suit anyone else. No one else needs to applaud the act. It is okay to dislike someone else’s appearance. It is not okay, however, to police the bodies of other people.

It is one thing for a business to refuse service to customers and forgo the related revenue from them and the people who decide not to spend money there as a matter of principle, and it is an entirely different thing to deny or interrupt the education of a child. It is especially egregious just weeks after the handwringing over the national examination results. It is especially foolish when there are children who do not make it to school every day for various reasons, and educators complain about the absences. It is especially irresponsible when so many express concern about boys, fearing that they are or will be “lost”.

We have to be clear about what is important to us and why. Do we want the children in this country to have access to education? Do we want them to have positive experiences at school? Do we want them to fear and be insulted by teachers and administrators, or do we want them be respected and to have respect for others? Do we want them to hate themselves and feel inferior to others, or do we want them to understand their history, know that racism still exists today, and learn to embrace their blackness?

It may be easier to teach children to conform, especially for the adults who only ever conform. It is more difficult to respect children, to allow them them to have opinions, to welcome their questions, to encourage their development of personal style, and to see and treat them as whole human beings.

It is easy to dominate children and control them with fear. It is more difficult to develop relationships with them, have conversations with them, develop codes of conduct in collaboration with them, and ensure that they feel and are safe with you, and can even express a difference of opinion or offer proposals for change.

If schools—the places children spend most of their waking hours—are not environments for children to develop, grow, and learn navigate the world with dignity and respect, how do we expect them to become adults who can effectively communicate, resolve conflict, and contribute to the creation of a better world?

The Ministry of Education and Technical and Vocational Training needs to understand that its mission must extend beyond the provision of curricula and administration of exams. It is also responsible for creating environments for children to know and love themselves, to develop care and empathy for the people around them, and to navigate complex situations with dignity and respect for themselves and others.

Published in The Tribune on September 17, 2025

/0 Comments/by
,

Culture Clash: Black Lives Matter in The Bahamas Too

It’s open season, but don’t worry. They’ll only kill the people they recognize, and only if they’re afraid. The Royal Bahamas Police Force is on a mission, and no one cares to intervene.

Many in The Bahamas have looked on and formed strong opinions of the Black Lives Matter movement and the actions it has taken in response to state-sanctioned killings by police officers. We often feel far-removed from events in the U.S., especially where issues of race are concerned. Black Lives Matter is necessary because black people were — and continue to be — specifically targeted by police.

Ava DuVernay’s documentary 13th gave context to the issues of race, policing, and prisons experienced today, linking them to the historical oppression of black people from slavery to the prison industrial complex. Again, we have mentally distanced ourselves from what we read as a U.S.-issue. For most of us, the majority of the people we encounter on a daily basis are black. Our police officers are black. Surely that means we cannot experience racism. That has to mean black people will be treated fairly, and we are free of the oppression African-Americans suffer. Right?

If you hold those opinions, you are definitely wrong. There are two things we need to be aware of — internalized racism and institutional racism.

Internalized racism is learned. As we experience racism, we begin to develop ideas and behaviors that uphold racism. It is systemic, structural, and cross-cultural, so it can pit members of oppressed communities against each other. Think, for example, of how women can internalize misogyny, and begin to support the idea that we would all be better off if we dress and behave in particular ways, finding it easy to look down on a woman of different socioeconomic status, age, or marital status. Internalized racism functions in a similar way. He wouldn’t be pulled over if he would just cut his hair. Stop driving that Honda. Move with less people in his crew. Stay out of that area. We find excuses for people to be violated by those who hold power.

Institutional racism is enforced. It is a pattern of treating a group of people poorly because of their race. Examples include students being sent home from school because their natural hair does not meet the Eurocentric beauty standards. As in this example, the action seems to fit a rule or standard of the institution; not because it is valid, but because the institution was built for the benefit and service of white people. We don’t have to know it is happening to participate in it. Just two years ago, I heard police officers brag about chasing young black men out of the downtown area, sending them “back Ova Da Hill.” Hearing this, I asked them who The Bahamas is for, and why they think they can restrict people’s movement based on race, age, and gender. They could not respond, and were forced to acknowledge, among other issues, institutional bias coupled with internalized racism.

The rhetoric around police killing civilians is ludicrous. People would more readily excuse homicide than interrogate the practices of police officers on the street. The assumption is always that the person must have done something wrong for the police to be engaged, and if they have done something wrong — whatever it is — they deserve death. The entire justice system goes out of the window because we find it more expedient for the police to operate like vigilantes. We do not believe people are innocent until proven guilty. Location, appearance, association, and proximity to a weapon are all valid reasons to meet your demise. Did we believe that Trayvon Martin should have been shot for walking through a neighborhood with a bag of Skittles?

The Royal Bahamas Police Force’s press team has learned to use “in fear for their lives” to convince us that there was a good reason to shoot and kill a citizen. There is a popular opinion that fear is a reasonable excuse for firing a weapon to kill another person. In a social media post, Erin Greene said, “the constant response of ‘in fear’ suggests an emotional response, and not a determination made with critical reasoning skills.” This should terrify rather than assuage us. Are police officers not taught to think critically and consider all options? Even if the decision is to shoot, why shoot to kill rather than incapacitate?

Sure, police officers need to make quick decisions. It is also a reasonable expectation that they are sufficiently trained and able to police themselves. Police officers are not the judge or the jury. They should not be the executioner, especially given the ruling of the Privy Council on the death penalty. Wait.

Perhaps this is the RBPF’s way of carrying out the death penalty. It is entirely possibly that they, as has been rumored, are fed up with the justice system. They are tired of making arrests, putting their lives in danger, and waiting for verdicts. Maybe they are tired of seeing the people they arrested out on bail for extended periods of time, or being found innocent. Is this an informal strategy?

Do not be tricked into believing in a false dichotomy. A commenter on social media said, “We are at a junction in our development where we have to decide on whose side we are on; the police or the heartless criminal.” We must first understand that every person police officers encounter is not a criminal. Even if they are suspects, they have the right to a fair trial. Fighting on the side of criminals is not the same as demanding due process for all. It is not the same as acknowledging the value of a life. A text message to a radio talk show read (in part), “police have to get royal,” meaning they need to take extreme action to send a clear message. This is how the people around us are thinking.

There have been five killings by police in 2018, and 10 since November 2017. Minister of National Security Marvin Dames said, “the focus on counts shouldn’t be the issue.” Just last month, he reminded the PLP that there were 33 homicides in the first two months of 2017, and in September 2017, he noted that crime was down 19 per cent along with other statistics. Numbers are obviously important, and we need to pay attention to trends.

Dames, less than one year into the job, is shirking responsibility. He said of police officers, “[if] he or she feels threatened, I can’t make that decision for them. They have to make that for themselves.” So much for accountability. Zero tolerance only applies to civilians, and police officers can do as they please, so long as they feel fearful or threatened. What a license to have. Is any one else scared out there?

Dames would also have us believe it is excusable that most people killed by police this year were “known to police.” We all know people in this category, for various reasons, who do not have a criminal record. They may wear their pants low or have dreadlocks, and may have spent nights in the police station, but they are not criminals. That’s just too bad. They are known to the police, and it’s open season. What number must we reach, who must be killed, or which scripture do we need to read and understand to intervene in state violence and affirm the humanity of the black Bahamian people we know, do not know, and are “known” to the police?

Published by The Tribune on February 14, 2018.

/0 Comments/by