In 1970 Psychology Today published a board game where players were divided into white and black, and had to make economic progress while competing with each other. Based on Monopoly, the idea was to demonstrate how the odds were stacked against black people in society by having different rules for each race in the game.
Whites started out with $1 million, blacks with $10,000 and each race had different opportunity decks. While whites could buy property in any part of the board, blacks were limited to certain areas until they had accumulated at least $100,000 and were outright banned from property in the ‘suburban zone’.
Needless to say, it turned out to be one of the most controversial board games of all time and even merited an article in Time magazine:
The game, produced by Psychology Today Games (an off shoot of the magazine) now on sale ($5.95) at major department stores, was developed at the University of California at Davis by Psychology Department Chairman Robert Sommer. It was conceived as a painless way for middle-class whites to experience—and understand—the frustrations of blacks. In Sommer’s version, however, the black player could not win; as a simulation of frustration, the game was too successful. Then David Popoff, a Psychology Today editor, redesigned the game, taking suggestions from militant black members of “US” in San Diego. The new rules give black players an opportunity to use—and even to beat—the System.
Although turning Monopoly into an attempt to draw people’s attention to social issues seems a little bit of a long shot, it’s worth noting that the original version of Monopoly itself, called ‘The Landlord’s Game‘, was designed to demonstrate how the current economic system led to inequality and bankruptcy.
Psychology Today’s board game division seems to have been short-lived but other titles included The Cities Game – that involved ‘urban tension, corruption and the undercurrents of city politics’; and Woman and Man where ‘Each woman must accumulate enough Status Quo points (100) to prove her equality to men. Each man must collect enough Status Quo points (100) to prove once and for all a woman’s place is beneath his’.
Fun for all the family.
Link to 1970 Time article on the ‘Blacks and Whites’ board game.
Link to game details and photos on BoardGameGeek.
I am a 16-year-old blond. Probably all I have to do is cry in front of the jury and they’re going to feel sorry for me.
Dylan Schumaker, 17, a convicted child murderer and Racist Suspect, made this statement while in custody for the murder of his girlfriend’s son. The statement was recorded by enforcement officials and used against Schumaker during sentencing. He was later convicted for the beating death and sentenced to 25 years to life.
Schumaker’s fate may have rested largely on his statement, bragging about his status and, indirectly, white domination. So his assumption was not illogical in the least given the monumental evidence that we live in a system of Racism (White Supremacy). After all, there are endless examples of lenient judgments for defendants who classify themselves as “white” such as the recent “affluenza” case. There is also evidence that enforcement officials illegally and systematically lower the chances that black people will become jurors.
African and Mexican people in America understand what (white welfare is)? its 5 white cops against one Mexican in front of his family white supremacy police enforcement dedicate their lives toward genocide against people of color 24 hours a day 7 days a weekps; you can hear the white refined racist police officer tell her he’s the victim he’s the one that is bleeding and she should feel sad for him and identify with him as a victim while her husband is dying brutally murdered in front of her and her daughters face (white people to the rescue) is the worst trick ever played on people color
When you, like Perez Hilton, equate being ‘fierce’ with black womanhood, you are not simply complimenting black women’s perceived awesome sassiness. You are saying that we are overtly strong, both emotionally and physically, which leads to us being denied the facets of femininity that white women are so easily given. This is dangerous in ways I cannot completely describe, but I’m going to try: Black women are raped more often than white women, because our ‘fierceness’ is linked to ideas of sexual promiscuity – rapists believe we ‘want it more’. When we are raped the police believes us less than white women, because our ‘fierceness’ makes them think we could have fought back if we really wanted to. When we are beaten by our partners, the same applies. When we argue with people, we are seen as immediately aggressive. If we raise our voices or get angry, it isn’t because you’ve done something stupid, it’s because we are black and we are female and our innate ‘fierceness’ makes us unreasonable and unworthy of being listened to. When we lose our children to violence, when we have to survive on food stamps and benefits, even when we go to prison, it’s all a-ok because black women are the fiercest of the fierce and so none of that is a problem and we can handle anything that’s thrown at us – and all of this has lead to a point where when we knock on a door to ask for help because our car has broken down, we are not given hugs and a cup of tea. We are shot in the face at point blank range because we are fierce, and therefore aggressive, unpredictable, and worthy of the mocking, fear and scorn that the world looks at us with.
Quote is from her good essay The ‘Fierce Black Woman’ Inside You Doesn’t Exist on Poejazzi, in response to Perez Hilton’s racist, misogynoiristic tweet “Inside every gay man is a fierce black woman!” Must read essay! Now, the very lazy response is for people to pretend like Perez is the only White gay man who has ever said this (as White privilege involves persistent attempts to individualize systemic issues as to deny accountability) or pretend that his specific awfulness (and yes, he’s awful) is the issue, not misogynoir itself which makes this is a common thing that many Black women hear every single day. I (that would be me, @thetrudz/@GradientLair) directly tweeted him too. His response to every Black woman was ignorance that got increasingly worse over time that day, including him eventually enacting Godwin’s Law.
If you notice carefully in this conversation, no one suggested that gay men do not experience homophobia or that when the conversation is about some Black women who treat gay men as “sidekicks” (which of course is wrong) is discussed, it should be discussed. So that derailment in the name of intersectionality (while of course ironically ignoring intersectionality origins) is not needed when it only happens as a gay man is being called out for misogynoir. As for the other predictable derailment, Perez having a Latina mother does not mean this is not about White supremacy, that he no longer has White-passing privilege, that his male privilege has evaporated nor means he is incapable of misogynoir and anti-Blackness. Finally, the derailment via male privilege and misogynoir—that Black women are empty and just “copying” and appropriating gay men—is not needed.
I know Perez thought this was an acceptable response to Pia’s video and she’s a Black woman but that is irrelevant. Privilege does not evaporate based on who you know that doesn’t have it.
Black women are not costumes to be worn or objects solely for consumption, period.