AFTA 2001 People of Color Network

Reflections on the Network's Fifth Anniversary

By Roxana Llerena-Quinn

"Hay tantisimas fronteras que dividen a la gente, "There are many borders that divide people,

pero por cada frontera existe también un puente." But for each border a bridge also exists."

Gina Valdéz. Puentes y fronteras: Coplas Chicanas Pat Romney's translation and quote gift.

This year marked the People of Color Network fifth anniversary since it was founded at AFTA in 1997. The Network was created to provide a space where people of color could break isolation, honor and recognize each other, and share struggles and solutions. Its main goals were to build connection, increase people of color comfort and participation at AFTA, to build a network of support for each other's professional development and to learn more about issues of race and ethnicity.

For me, the Network was the major draw in joining AFTA when I first attended in 1998. Despite my 32 years in this country, every time I have entered a new environment, joined a new organization, or started a new job, it feels like a recapitulation of my immigration experience. As a seventeen year-old adolescent alone in this country, I remember the confusion and terror that arose as a result of seeing myself in the eyes of others in ways that I did not feel were accurate reflections of me. At this early age, having lost my mother, a major life line who could bring back memories of me or our peoples, I set out to figure out the rules of new environments alone, filled with uncertainty, scanning the territory for potential friends, kindred souls who could recognize me. The People of Color Network and other places like this one, have not only provided that relational space but the safety to discover other friends outside that circle.

This year, as the Network grew in longevity, the very safety it provided to us to be who we are and to speak our own truths started us on a path for deeper exploration of inter- and intra-group differences. Most of us are well aware of the heterogeneity that exists within each major group that comprises this network. We questioned whether we were ready for an exploration of our own internal differences. Should we start with a more general discussion of what community means to each of us (African American, Latino, Asian and Asian American, or the often invisible Native American communities)? What are some of the conflicting discourses within these communities? Do they threaten group membership? How do we stay connected in those differences? Do we all feel equally seen, known? Somehow, this act of knowing and seeing each other seemed key to our ongoing connection.

This year's dialogue focused on exploring the people of color designation. For some, the People of Color name felt less than inclusive of White Latinos. Another participant had questioned last year: "Isn't white a color? '' It was clear that we needed a conversation about our understandings of the term "people of color" around the name People of Color Network.

With little experience apart from my own history as a Latina mestiza and an intense desire to understand and be understood in these new evolving contexts, I embarked, with the lead of my colleagues Pat Romney and MaryAnna Ham in a discussion of the meaning of the term "people of color." Participants talked with their communities in circles until all the rounds were completed: 1) What does the term people of color mean in your community? 2) What concepts/realities does the term foreground? 3) What does it obscure or render invisible?

The African American group joined in a circle for the first round. I felt empowered by the revolutionary connotation they attributed to the term. The term was described as a response to the threat posed by being "not white." I experienced this response as coming from a position of power and strength that stood up to the gaze of the dominant other. It was noted that within the African American community, terms like Black, African American, people of color or colored people carry with them different meanings and identities. These meanings reflect historical and generational contexts, differing levels of comfort with political ideology, what the world looked like while one was growing up in the United States, or they may even suggest an affiliation with academic circles. The term people of color was deemed to be more inclusive of others who share a history of oppression due to race and ethnicity: Blacks, Latinos, Native American, Asian and Asian Americans.

In a previous Newsletter article, Pat Romney described the origins of the name, People of Color Network, as inspired by George Fraser's discussion of networking in his book, Success Runs in Our Race. Fraser, speaking to the African American community, described networking as a modern version of the Underground Railroad that will deliver us to a destination called "success." This success, personal or professional, is marked by compassion and strives for the enrichment of all people, including ourselves. I felt grateful to my African American colleagues who have led the way in challenging and transforming oppressive discourses in this country, founding groups like this one, making room for the rest of us to follow. I felt deep worry and sorrow about the potential impact of the Network's discussion on all of us.

Some in the Latino group associated the term people of color primarily with race and racism and, to a lesser extent, with ethnicity. Others felt the term omits social class concerns. The intersection of class and race was noted to be a complex one. On the one hand, for African Americans, social class does not provide protection against racism, while on the other, for Latinos, it is a complex issue that includes race and colonization and other contextual factors of how the other and economies are constructed. There were those for whom the idea of people of color was close to their hearts as people from mixed racial heritage. The impact of color in their lives was understood as much as from a US perspective as from a within-group experience. Others were less familiar with the term but loved it. And yet, others perceived it as a violation of their identity: "something I am not." As we were cautioned about how the term people of color might reproduce colonizing identities that came from outside forces, the need to spell out our multiple identities was noted. The need to look at racism and racismo, the experience of colonization, sexism, classism, and homophobia in our communities was emphasized as well as the need to look at issues of immigration, language, religion, minority status, political and social oppression.

A common denominator was the experience of marginalization and oppression in society by different groups. What is our community? Are we certain that we are part of the same community? Many questions were raised in my mind in response to this one. What context are we talking about, here or in our country of origin? How are the contexts in our country of origin different from one another, from the US? How are they the same? Who lives in them, who doesn't, and why? Are there regional differences and what do they mean? What does it mean that this heterogeneous group in the United States is also in search for a name here (Comaz Diaz, 2001)? What political, social, cultural, developmental realities do the names we call ourselves reflect? Do we share a common understanding of our histories? In what contexts are we at the center or at the margins? Who is the other in our multiple contexts? How do we empower ourselves when we have less power or " nos acompanamos" (accompany each other, walk side by side, take a stand) with those with less power than us (Comas-Diaz, Lykes and Alarcon, 1998)? As we understand our differences and build bridges inside our family, how do we make meaning of the relationship between families in our new adopted country and our countries of origin?

There were only two people to take part in the Asian American round. Note was made was of their small representation. Why are so few of us here? Most Asian mental health professionals, it was reported, seem to concentrate in the area of quantitative research instead of family therapy. The name people of color was described as a way of connecting marginalized communities, including color and phenotype. The experience of marginalization is complicated, with multiple identities that result in many inter and intra ethnic divides, to which one can add a historical context, as well as internalized oppression. Our Asian American colleagues raised the questions: Why are Asians as a group still fighting oppression? Some Asians are seen as "whiter than white," the model minority. What realities does this image obscure? A minority, although they represent 60% of the world's population! What about intermarriage? What is the meaning of being Chinese American versus being multiracial in the Asian community? From what contexts do these meanings arise? What are the inter/intra group differences among various Asian groups and how do they fare in the hierarchical arrangement? Context was noted as key to the understanding of oppression, racism. Attention must be paid to how oppression is constructed, in reference to whom and for what purpose? Who is being constructed? Who does the constructing? What are the racial and ethnic continuums and how do they influence the level of group coherence? The targeted groups are usually associated with the "isms."

After the large group discussion that followed the rounds, it was clear that more dialogue was needed before a decision on the name could be reached. The name of the group had lesser significance than the dialogue that needs to happen among participants. It was recommended that we need a future dialogue about power and powerlessness and a deeper look at the inclusivity and exclusivity? Can the pain of oppression include and go beyond "black"? It seemed that for some non-blacks, the term "color" meant only "black" not Browns, mestizos, Asians, Native Americans. We need to take a look at history and the biological continuum. As the dialogue moves towards greater complexity, conversation about color, racism, bigotry, marginalization and powerlessness needs to continue to take place. I thought of Elaine Pinderhugues' (1989) work and posed the question, "How do we understand race, ethnicity and power?" What has been our groups' experience with intolerance? Can ethnicity alone lead us to assume that there is similarity of experience within groups? Can race alone determine similarity of experience across groups (i.e. Jamaicans, Haitians, African Americans)? In what contexts? What about biracial people? Multiracial people?

As we continue the dialogue, we must remain watchful about competition among groups and we must remain conscious that we need to continue working on how "we" can have a voice fully aware of the voices of one another.

References

Comas-Diaz L, Brinton Lykes M, Alarcon R. (1998) Ethnic conflict and psychology of liberation in Guatemala, Peru and Puerto Rico. American Psychologist 53, 778—792.

Comas-Diaz L (2001) Hispanics, Latinos or Americanos: The Evolution of Identity. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. Vol. 7 No.2 115-120

Pinderhughes, E. (1989) Understanding Race, Ethnicity, & Power: The key to

 efficacy in clinical practice. NY: Free Press.

Roxana Llerena-Quinn is a psychologist in the Latino Program at Children's Hospital in Boston. She facilitates with others, a cultural self-awareness course for first and second year medical students at Harvard Medical School.