As the furor up in Cambridge has died down somewhat, I've continued to reflect on the larger cultural currents at work in the situation.  As I've both posted and commented throughout this dicussion, I'm a preppy white person who's been pretty much left alone by the police to this point in my life.  So I'm really at a loss to explain why every time I so much as see a police cruiser parked somewhere I become enraged and fearful (and then flip the bird in their general direction, always hidden well below view from the window of my car, of course).  

Then I started thinking also about the Duke lacrosse case, and how many of us (and I was among them, I admit), were quick to believe that overprivileged white male drunk collegiate athletes had done wrong to a black woman from a less privileged background. 

Many people have likened the two cases in terms of the public's quickness to form opinions about them; I have come to see them in terms of the  source of both problem: men who were paid by the taxpayers to uphold the law.

The DA in Durham didn't wait for the facts; he made some (regrettably, given the Durham-Duke relationship) reasonable but ultimately wrong guesses rather than pursuing a proper investigation, and very nearly succeeded in ruining three kids' lives just to make his own name.

The "sergeant" up in Cambridge, instead of following (a) his professional training and (b) what I hope his mama taught him and walking away no matter what Dr. Gates was shouting, because he knew by then that there was no burglary, acted like a high-school bully instead of a grown man, hung around, and baited Dr. Gates into getting himself arrested.  If I were a Massachusetts taxpayer, I wouldn't want my money spent on turning Cambridge into the high-school locker room.  

While I am concerned about the gender issues at play, at the same time I don't want to slide over into sexism; however, am I the only person in the country who notices that it wasn't a female DA character-assassinating women athletes in Durham and that it wasn't a female officer deliberately baiting an older woman who walked with a cane up in Cambridge?

The issue then becomes--though abstractly--personal for me on two counts.  One, I--like the "lawyer" in Durham and the "officer" in Cambridge--am an employee of my state.  I am not perfect, but I strive to remember that my job is a public trust, not my own little ego trip.  Two, I'm a woman, and I'm very verbal, and I'm very opinionated, and I'm very committed to doing things and doing them well.  

The latter does not make me popular with a lot of men, both personally and professionally.  I'll be 30 in less than a year, and there's no man in sight, and both men I've truly been in love with were very supportive of my being a Woman Who Thinks and Does Stuff . . . until they ultimately decamped for smaller, quieter female companionship.

Given that, my life is now basically about the Phillies, the Red Sox, the occasional swim, and my work, but there are still way too many men in my professional life who, it is clear, wish I would just stop Thinking and Doing Stuff.  I'm sure there are more such than I know of; I long ago became at least somewhat inured to the "stutter-step" look of shock I get from men when I evince knowledgeable opinions on my own academic field, higher ed in general, power tools, and sports . . . all while wearing a skirt and makeup.  It's not always ill-intentioned, but it's always annoying.

Earlier this year, I attended a professional seminar of the type where pre-seminar assignments are required and extensive "student" participation is expected.  Accordingly, I participated, and offered actual ideas, thoughts, and information.  On the third of four days, one of the leaders, a man (of course a man) I'd never met before and will never see again and who is about a gazillion steps above me on the academic ladder, cornered me on a break and said I was talking too much and distracting other participants.  Really?  Talking too much?  During a seminar?  At which discussion with fellow participants is a major requirement? That's kind of like singing too much during a Christmas caroling outing.

Thanks to my own impatience with years of the "little girl" treatment (I have gray hair for gosh sakes!) and to the tough-love influence of a friend who's reading this (you know who you are), I managed to avoid doing the Default Female Apology When I'm Not In The Wrong, and I said, "Excuse me.  I don't appreciate being singled out, and I have not done anything differently from anyone else here, and I don't understand why you're saying this to me."  Mr. Gazillion Steps Above Me started in with the "Perhaps you weren't aware of others' perceptions . . ." bullshit.  Sorry buddy; I'm twenty years too old to be fooled by that line.  I said, "I appreciate your concerns, but we're not going to agree on this."  Then I turned and walked away.  I did my touchdown dance (in my head, of course).  That was the first time in my life I'd ever stood up for myself without caving and apologizing halfway through.  

 Now of course at work, when my superiors screw up, I do the Default Female Apology When I'm Not In The Wrong and gush about how great the person who's actually in the wrong is, smiling sweetly.  Then I go straight back to my office and write down the time, date, and details of the screw-up, keeping another copy at home.  Anybody who ever really screws with me will learn the true meaning of "iron fist in velvet glove."

Anyway, the problem with Mr. Gazillion Steps Above Me was not that I had done anything wrong, and I knew it and I'm sure somewhere inside himself he knew it too.   The problem was that I was Knowing and Doing and Thinking while Being Female, and I disagreed--respectfully of course--with some of his theoretical opinions based on my actual professional experience.  Anyone who teaches at any level knows how silly most "pedagogy" and "educational theory" stuff is, and you can't be honest with colleagues you see every day about that, so at conferences I let loose.  Thinking and Knowing and Doing . . . let's appeal to female social embarrassment and see if she'll stop Thinking and Knowing and Doing . . . nice try, buddy.  

Somebody--maybe in a comment on FLW's or Don Rich's posts on the Dr. Gates case?--made the point that maybe, given his expertise, Dr. Gates realized somewhere within himself that by going along with the situation he might be shining a public spotlight on how black men without his cultural capital are mistreated by the police their tax dollars pay to protect and serve them every day in this country. 

Whatever you were thinking, Dr. Gates, you've taught me a lot about race, class, gender, and law and order in these United States.  I hope I can do something, however small, to make things better.  

And I still wish everyone who's ever been profiled by cops for their age, race, gender, whatever could have the president stick up for them on national TV.