"Enough of Weinergate," Says Field Negro, to a Metaphorical Round of Deafening Applause

A photograph of Atty. Francis L. Holland's pubic area, in which his sexual organs would be entirely exposed, in a public fountain, no less, but for his use of his skimpy $20.00 swimming trunks.

Francis 90% naked in a Brazilian Fountain.

I have exposed one photograph of me ninety percent nude and another in which my sexual organs are covered only by a little black and white swim suit.  Should I be stoned in public, or in the halls of the US Congress?

Gratuitous photograph of anonymous woman's glutinous maximus (buttocks), covered only by a shoe-string bathing suit.

I also confess that I have posted a photograph of an anonymous woman's remarkably full buttocks at my blog, for no other reason than to show that people sometimes engage in this behavior and it is not inherently evil, although entire blogs ought not be devoted to objectifying women's body parts.

I have not hidden the series of twenty (20) photographs of this woman (all of her behind) from my wife, but I have explained that they were taken by a close friend using my camera and, although I find the photographs amusing, but I wouldn't have taken these pictures, (unless the woman also had brown skin and long natural Braids or Rasta locks). 

Times are changing and we are acknowledging the images that we entertain sometimes and even sharing illustrative photographs.  Some of us are learning that women don't want to receive these photos by e-mail and that public revelation of them can be embarrassing.

If Congressman Anthony Weiner used his elected official position to compel women to submit to sexual harassment, then he should be expelled from the Congress if he broke a law.  The reality seems to be that he used a personal Twitter account for some playful sex-related foolishness, and now everyone wants to hang him as if none of us has done the same thing at some point.

Weiner's adolescent children already understand perfectly well what he did, and it's up to Weiner to apologize to his wife and promise not to get caught doing it again, even as millions of other people continue to do what he did every single day.

Field Negro addressed the Weiner weenie "issue" so I might as well do so as well, even though I could immerse myself in news about Brazil, where I am resident, and never hear about this  petty and pathetic entirely personal faux pax at all.

Yahoo News says:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Pursed lips. Frosty glares. Polite demurrals. Icy silence. Women in politics are grappling with the distinctly unfunny choice of restraining themselves or letting rip what they really think about Rep. Anthony Weiner's X-rated online conduct and whether he belongs in Congress.

Field Negro says, and I agree whole-heartedly:

. . . I wish these phony dumbocrats would stop calling for Weiner's head. Unless he broke a law he should stay right where he is. His constituents like him, and from the looks of the latest polls they want him back. So Mr. Weiner, screw those phonies in Washington and focus on the people who sent you there.

They previously supported law breakers and Bubba when the chubby brunette was wetting his whistle, they should support you.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi says there should be a House Ethics Committee investigation to determine whether any laws or House rules were broken. 

Rep. Anthony Weiner should not look to fellow Democrats to be understanding about his widening Twitter scandal.


Shortly after Weiner fessed up during an emotional New York City press conference that he lied about sending one lewd photo to a Seattle college student, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called for the House Ethics Committee to immediately launch an investigation into Weiner's conduct.

"I am deeply disappointed and saddened about this situation; for Anthony's wife, Huma, his family, his staff and his constituents," Pelosi said in a written statement. "I am calling for an Ethics Committee investigation to determine whether any official resources were used or any other violation of House rules occurred."

Congressman Weiner shouldn't have lied about this, but lies about things that are irrelevant to the case at hand don't usually constitute perjury, even in a court of law.  The case at hand is whether sending photographs of his groin makes Weiner unfit for Congress.  I think that's something his constituents should decide, since obscenity is a subjective matter to be decided according to a local community's standards.

While Pelosi's call is a call for public embarrassment, which is inevitable and is already occurring, these House investigations almost never proceed to a decision by the House to unseat the miscreant.  Only convictions for violating laws lead to that result, and it seems like a stretch at this point to say that Tweeting a picture of a clothed groin is a criminal act.

I think President Bill Clinton realized after his Lewinsky ordeal that he had made a big mistake by appointing a special prosecutor to examine the semen stains under his desk.  When Democrats call for investigations, the whole Party sometimes gets wound up in nonsense while the business of law-making is put off, or proceeds with a Republican public image advantage.

No one American should get a letter or e-mail from a Congressional e-mail account that is filthy or illegal.  Anyone who does receive such a letter can out the Congressperson involved and let the process of evaluating the behavior and our attitudes toward the behavior take its embarrassing but sometimes elucidating course.

For example, we learned through Newt Gingrich's Lewinsky prosecution that nobody really gave a damn, but America was angry that valuable time and money had been wasted on the non-issue.

People can call for Weiner to step down if they want to, but I think he should ignore them, unless he sees an overwhelming outrage erupt against him in his own district.  And even then, he can wait until a recall movement starts or he is thrown out in next year's Congressional election.

Sylvia Harris: "My Bipolar Life, and the Horses Who Saved Me"

Can Blacks have mental illnesses?

I am certain that my older brother, Danny, died of bipolar/manic-depressive illness and the psychosis that so often accompanies the illness. I, too, have been diagnosed as manic-depressive or "hypo-manic" (kind of manic but not all the way out there).

"Danny" was last seen alive in 1989.  When I think of him, I wish I had learned earlier what I see mirrored in the book I review today.

Sylvia Harris, with an amazing autobiography just out, is a Black woman who achieved her dream of riding a winning horse in a nationally famous derby, in spite of (and perhaps partially because of) her bipolar/manic depression.  She outlines her struggle in the two preface pages below, but her entire autobiography holds details and experiences that can help all Americans better understand bipolar/manic-depressive illness.

I've been diagnosed with bipolar illness, but I've learned (as Sylvia Harris did) to be suspicious of my flights of fancy, my whims and grandiosity, and to be sure that I do not outrageously exaggerate my abilities to myself and others.

Like Harris, I've also learned to have a healthy doubt of the voices in my head that tell me that I'm worse than not worth anything at all, and that I would be less unhappy if I were dead. 

The author and I have both learned that the appropriate medication can be as crucial as the steering wheel in your car:  It's no guarantee against accidents, but your a lot safer having it than not.







Sylvia Harris autobiography is a road map of bipolar illness, but it signals the way clearly so that other bipolars, their families and friends need not spend Sylvia's forty years learning what they could learn by reading her autobiography in a couple of afternoons.

Some people are so fortunate as to learn by reading of others' experiences, and thereby avoid some of the hurt and pain that they would otherwise cause to themselves and others. If you are one of those who can learn from others, then this book is for you and for the bipolar people you love.

Palin's Big Lies Strike Big Targets While Her Assurances are Reminiscent of (Election-Winning) "Compassionate Conservatism"

Sarah Palin is the kind of Republican candidate who drives the press insane, because she keeps making statements that are barely true or completely false, but her supporters eat it up and there's nothing the press can do about it.  They try to juxtapose her with assertions with their realities, but she has become smart enough not to lie and exaggerate about things that are easily fact checked.

She goes for the high-profile issues about which neither the public nor the politicians are sure and honest, and she makes signature statements that defame the opposition while crystalizing her in the minds of her supporters as someone who tells the truths that the politicians refuse to hear.

For example, The Root says that:

The Republican mischief maker is at it again, and this time her target is the Treasury secretary.

 

Earlier this week, Sarah Palin demonstrated why certain stars should never dabble in politics when she said the Republican Party platform is "best for America" because "[i]t's all about respecting equality." Never mind the document calls for etching discrimination into the Constitution with an amendment banning same-sex marriage. Well, yesterday, Palin was at it again.

This is precisely how Ronald Reagan won the presidency:  by conjuring Black welfare queens who were at the heart of all of America's problems, while promising that America (not the Republican Party) was a land of liberty and freedom.  Likewise, Sarah Palin knows how to tell the big lies with a straight and even enthusiastic face, insisting that the Republican platform is about "respecting equality" even though it specifically singles out gays for unequal treatment.

Likewise, presidential candidate Ronald Reagan said America had equality for all, while winking to his color-aroused antagonist supporters that, if necessary, he would send US troops to South Africa to maintain the "normalcy" (of apartheid).  When Reagan refused to acknowledge the contradictions inherent in his pro-American but anti-Black nonsense, there was nothing the press or Black politicians could do to turn the truth against him.  Americans wanted to believe his nonsense, and they weren't going to let mere human beings from the media spoil their party.

More substantively and truthfully, Sarah Palin (let's start calling her Governor Palin, lest we underestimate her) points out that Treasury Secretary Geithner has issued deadline after deadline on the debt ceiling, without any obvious proof that missing his deadlines had any clear effect on anything in the nation.  She has a point when she asks why we should be hurried into something like the bank bailouts that were far more expensive than necessary and haven't proved to fix the mortgage crisis or high unemployment.

The Root continues:

This time sputtering nonsense about Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's warnings about the danger of not raising the national debt limit.

Palin took time out from stomping all over Mitt Romney's announcement in New Hampshire that he is running for president to cast aspersions on Geithner while she was at a clambake in New Hampshire.

"If the debt ceiling were to be increased based on what I believe to be Timothy Geithner's false statements to the American public -- that a catastrophe would befall us all if the debt ceiling isn't raised -- a failure of leadership in the House would be if we were to cave and believe that."

And what did Palin mean by "false statements"? The half-term governor of Alaska and 2008 Republican vice-presidential nominee explained that Geithner has "given us now four different due dates where catastrophe would befall us if the debt ceiling is not raised. ... Well, once bitten, twice shy. How many more times are we going to have to hear this date change?"

I've always been against Obama's white guy economists and bankers; they showed no concern for Blacks and homeowners or the lower and middle class when they were raking in the dough as bankers, so why should we believe that they have our best interests at heart now.   Nothing they have done has benefited much of anyone but themselves and their collegial banking cronies.

This is a serious weakness for the Obama Administration and Palin can't be faulted for pointing it out.  There are billions of dollars left in program coffers to help the people losing their homes, and Geithner can't be bothered to work out a populist program to spend the money that has already been approved by Congress.

Obama's upper-crust banking friends are a liability for him today and in the future, just as they were when they came on board.  The tone was set publicly when Obama chose Lawrence H. Summers as his chief economic adviser, even though as President of Harvard University Summers had very publicly, in a speech to a women's forum, doubted the relative intelligence of women and Blacks.

I'd hate to see the Republicans win in 2012, but the Summers/Geithner axis is as good a reason for change as any.  I wish I could argue that Palin's advisers would be even worse, but with extensions for tax cuts for the richest and a full-on Government refusal to help those whose mortgages are under water, it's harder to imagine (at the moment) how the Republicans will be considerably worse.

Palin might be the Republican nominee.  I'm saying so again today, and I said it on July 30, 2009, as Palin resigned the Alaska Governor's Office: 

Some blogs are saying her resignation speech was terrible and will exclude her from contention for the Republican nomination in 2012, but I think they're probably wrong.

In spite of the fact that I don't like Sarah Palin anymore than I would have wanted McCain for president (see my Truth About McCain Blog), I think Sarah Palin's speech was actually pretty good.

She mentioned the troops and the military several times. She described the state of Alaska in glowing and engaging terms that would make people less resistant to having a president from Alaska.

Palin talked about her commitment to all of the issues are seen as most important by the extreme right voters who decide the Republican presidential nominee: small government, low taxes, helping and respecting small businesses, opposition to abortion, commitment to family (she said that was part of the reason she was resigning).

I actually think that, for what she was trying to accomplish, which was to announce her candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012, the speech was very effective. Remember: She's not trying to convince liberals, leftists or the media. She's trying to create a coalition of right-wing hate groups who will support her candidacy in 2012, and I think she's doing that. At least, I think her speech was a successful run at it.

Don't count Palin out. The very fact that she is known all over the Internet for disparaging Blacks and Native Americans will HELP HER with the Republicans who vote in Republican primaries.

She's got an entire dead bear in her office in Alaska, which gives her the 100% support of the NRA going in.

The press ridiculed Ronald Reagan because he got his facts wrong.  The Republican right-wing extremists adored Reagan because he was willing to tell such big lies in the defense of right-wing interests.  In Massachusetts, Palin invented gunfire and ringing bells to go along with her comments about the Ride of Paul Revere.

Listen closely to the last phrase of her comments, to the effect that, "the Revolution was fought with guns and we're not giving up our guns".  In other words, 'Revolt against the present Government (led by President Obama) and Sarah Palin supports your right to keep and bear arms.'  If that wrong-facts sound-bite gets her the support of the gun rights lobbies, then it was worth it no matter how badly she garbled the facts of Paul Revere.

Pay attention!  Paul Revere is more "American" with guns blaring and bells ringing than without them, even if these details are more Star Wars than reality.

Palin has never taken an official action that was manifestly liberal or non-conservative.  She showed the appropriate Republican disrespect for Native Americans as Governor of Alaska and she was as ruthless as Karl Rove when dealing with those who crossed her, even accidentally.

The only reason for Republicans not to nominate Palin is that she's a woman, but then they nominated her once in spite of that, and the sitting President is a Black man.  If Republicans come to feel that Palin is the heir to Reagan's legacy of telling big lies and making the media and liberals apoplectic, then Republicans will nominate Sarah Palin.

The only question is whether she can stick to Republican generalities (support for guns; robust imperialism; anti-abortion; love for the middle class combined with opposition to policies that would help the middle and lower-class), then Sarah Palin could be a formidable candidate for the presidency.  "Morning in American" platitudes will get you everywhere with 51% of America, in the middle of a recession.

What is the Future of Black Journalism and Blacks in Journalism in the Electronic Media Internet Age?

African American Political Pundit is concerned about the effect that large corporate-owned Black sections of white newspapers (like The Root) and also Black-owned big-box blogs could have on

(a)  Black readership migrating to white-owned outlets and leaving Black independent blogs behind, and

(b)  Blacks leaving the white-news news rooms that they fought so hard to get into and migrating to Black blogs where they can finally write in their own voices about issues of unique interest to Black people.

He asks,

Are Corporate Black Blogs Destroying Black Employment In Mainstream Media?

Earlier this month I wondered out loud about Corporate black blogs like The Root (WAPO) and The Grio (NBC) Working To Control Black political and social opinion. 

Ok, Now I'm wondering: Are Corporate Black Blogs Destroying Black Employment In Mainstream Media?  Danielle Wright over at BET.com is making me wonder out loud based on the article "Black Reporters are Leaving Mainstream Media for Black News Outlets."

The article cited, "Black Reporters are Leaving . . .", says

Between 2001 and 2011, the number of African-Americans in the newsrooms of mainstream newspapers dropped 34 percent, according to a 2010 survey by the American Society of News Editors. In 2010, 4.68 percent of US mainstream print-newsroom-jobs were held by African-Americans, a drop from 5.5 percent in 2006.

( . . . )

Kathy Times, president of the National Association of Black Journalists, calls the drop in minorities at major outlets “devastating.” During a visit to the Houston Chronicle, which caters to a city proper that is almost 63 percent African-American, she saw zero Blacks among the sixteen editors in a news meeting she attended.

Though the increase in Black news outlets is great, let’s hope that it’s not at the cost of sharing diverse issues with the general public through a mainstream platform.

While I think this is horrible for Black America and Black journalists, I don't think it's entirely due to Black journalists' preferences.  Some white newspapers have shut down and others have drastically reduced their staffs in recent years, and Blacks are typically "last-hired and first-fired."  That, alone, explains some of the dramatic loss of Blacks at white-news papers.

I suspect that, knowing that they could lose their jobs at any moment anyway, as the corporate media amalgamates and downsizes, Blacks might even feel more professionally and financially secure at Black media outlets.  In any case, Black reporters, writers and journalists background and identity as Black people is more likely to be a key asset at a Black blog.  I am never surprised that Blacks are lacking in any field of US corporate or public sector endeavor.  Aggrieved, yes.  Surprised, no.

On the one hand, it seems like Blacks are just as likely to be lawyers and doctors as they are to write for white-news papers.  This is a fact that has angered me since childhood, particularly when I read white-skinned reporters' reviews of Black movies and these reports were almost always negative.  I remember reading in a white paper that "The Color Purple" was 'preachy, too long and not very funny.'

"Preachy" means that white journalists are challenged to look at their role as whites and they hadn't expected or wanted to have that experience at the theatre.  "Long" means it focuses too much and too profoundly on Black characters' lives; and "not funny" means there were jokes that only Black people would understand and find ironic and funny.  Even if white journalists understand the joke they are angry rather than amused, because the joke is at their whiteist expense.

So, it makes perfect sense to me that Black journalists who aren't forced out of the white-news media by downsizing are choosing to move to Black-focused outlets where they don't feel like the only Black person at a Klan meeting. They can write pieces to people like themselves, based on their sense of what is interesting to Blacks and what Blacks need to know. That's never been the forte or purpose of white-news outlets, so it's encouraging to me that new Internet ventures have created an opportunity for Blacks to write to and about Blacks.

I sense African American Pundits concern about where all of this will leave Black America and Black journalists, but we have to remember where we came from.  In the 1980's Blacks were rare in newsrooms and being progressively down-sized out of their professions, with no ready alternatives.  The acknowledgment  that Blacks are a big audience with significant buying power and we want content written and for us, at the big white-news papers and by entrepreneurial Black outlets, has only helped Black America, in my opinion.

Each day I get an e-mail of the Black-related stories from the Washington Post, which are now collected together at a separate entity called, "The Root," but with the backing of the Washington Post.  I honestly could never have imagined in 1970 that that could happen using white capital at a white-news paper.

And now with the entrepreneurial talents of Blacks creating organs for Black thought and community, I've never felt better as a Black consumer of Black news and opinion.  Where this will go is anyone's bet, but for the moment I see Blacks earning salaries or equity in the media and I see Black audiences better served.

Let us also not forget that there are issues involving Black people that can never be adequately addressed in the white-news corporate media, and perhaps not even in Black online outlets with a profit motive.  Each day brings more Black bloggers who refuse to accept advertisements at their blogs, so that they can write the whole truth unencumbered by white money and white sensibilities or the fear of losing advertisers and access to capital.

This last category of bloggers--the independent self-financed bloggers with day-jobs--are serving the purpose that the Black Panther Paper once served in the Black community: telling us the raw news as it is, and making us doubt our role in America while redoubling our efforts to keep one step ahead of white America's (in)justice system.  Until whites change their attitudes radically toward Blacks, there will always be a place for independent Black bloggers because the police will never stop profiling, targeting, harassing, arresting, prosecuting and imprisoning Blacks at rates "inexplicably" higher that those of whites.

These are the bloggers who are developing and engaging in action plans to confront white-news, white-politics, and white-justice.  Whatever the range of white print on the Web, we should expect that and more of Black Internet communication, which means that we will all have a role as time progresses.

Are White Women with Naturally Straight Hair as Attractive as Black Women With Natural Braids and Rasta Locks?

My Wife, Teresa Francisco Holland, 
Does Not Straighten, Iron or Otherwise Mutilate Her African Hair, 
Letting Her Dreads Swing Naturally.

Cross-posted at the Francis L. Holland Blog.

We need to study our own culture, including traditional African hairstyles throughout the Diaspora, and prefer our own hair culture to that of whites. This is about esteeming ourselves, but it also has some very practical advantages.

Failing at Whiteness

I told my Afro-Brazilian wife about the hairstyle/culture/self-esteem concerns expressed by Bronze Trinity and in the video: that although whites constantly wave their hair about like horses wave their manes, natural Black hair does not wave about in the wind like white hair can. An afro stays put. In response to this, my wife tossed her head to and fro and her beautiful long dreadlocks flew in the wind around her, just like white hair does, but better for us, because my wife's hair is not the product of harmful chemicals, hot irons or money spent at white-people stores, making white people wealthy and us poorer.

Braids are ideal hair styling options for all-year round action like swimming, camping, or sports. Opting to braid your hair is a perfect choice when transitioning from chemically straightened tresses to au natural tresses. They give your hair a rest from styling aids like chemicals and hot irons while protecting your natural tresses. Bivi.Net

There are so many stunningly beautiful ways for us to wear our hair in Braids. Long, flowing, beautifully organized and maintained braids and dreadlocks, on the other hand, are an ancient African cultural art form that highlights our beauty, history and culture all at once, without making an new industry for "the man". One Black man said, "If God had wanted us to have straight hair, we would have been born that way. I accept me as I am."

When we braid our hair, all of the money generated stays within the Black community because whites don't care to learn to braid and because no fancy chemicals, machines or treatments are needed for beautiful braids. Just as African women braided their hair before the invention of electricity, during the time of the construction of the Pyramids we can do so today, with great beauty and tremendous longevity.

A Black person with straightened hair is like Cinderella, who is out of her element and waiting for her horse and carriage to turn into a pumpkin at midnight. If our hair has been straightened and then gets wet, there is no fairy prince who is going to save us from the embarrassment that comes when the forces of nature denounce us as cheap immitations of traditional whiteness. Unless our hair is Braided, it returns to its natural curls when wet, like nature telling us to "just be ourselves" and refusing to play along with our attempts at white identity appropriation.


Although they complement our straightened hair to our faces, whites secretly laugh at us for spending so much of our time and money trying to look like them.
When I was single, I couldn't let a woman with Braids walk by without at least learning her name and complimenting her hairstyle. Braids are THAT compelling.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
Girl, those Braids are sexy!

I once went out with a woman who had long, beautiful braids when I met her. I found her irresistable and I told her so, because she had the uniquely beautiful curves of an African woman and long flowing braids that reminded me of our culture and our ancestors.

But, then she straightened her hair. She became afraid to come with me to the beach or get near ocean-spray, because the forces of nature would make her chemically-treated hair would revert to its natural curls. She no longer wanted to learn to swim or take long walks on rainy days. We broke up, because she was no longer the woman I had met.

Book Review: Sylvia Harris' Autobiography of Bipolar Disorser and Salvation at the Horse Tracks

The new book, "Long Shot: My Bipolar Life and the Horses Who Saved Me," is a must-read for those like me who struggle with bipolar illness, as well as for professionals caregivers and family members who want to understand Bipolar patients and have a sincere desire to help. As someone who has seen this process from the inside, I can and do vouch for the anguish it causes in the patient, family and career.

The author, Sylvia Harris, describes exactly what it was like to be somewhat manic, floridly manic, psychotically manic and depressed. She recalls a time when she cycled through these stages with no idea of what has happening to her, clueless as to the exit from the perpetual emotional roller coaster.

Through her painfully honest autobiography, she gives readers an inside view of her manic-depressive problem and how she overcame its worst aspects by striving for meaning and healthy excitement. Desiring to become a horse trainer and eventually a jockey, she demonstrates that we need not achieve all that we want in order to benefit from the pursuit of our dreams.

Without specifically saying so, she demonstrates the similarities between Bipolar illness, alcoholism and drug addiction, in which many sufferers, their families, circle of friends and employers must often acknowledge the illness and their personal powerlessness over it, before they can find relief and redemption.

Harris courageously describes learning to realize when an attack of mania was beginning and what--for her--triggered those attacks.

Not all readers (including myself) will identify with Harris' love for horses and the essential role they came to have in Harris' rehabilitation. But, everyone perceives that having a personally meaningful goal toward which we strive helps us to find meaning in life when our lives would otherwise seem to us to be meaningless.

Essentially, Bipolars often have a necessity for a goal and aspiration larger than life, lest we be overcome by depression and the conviction that our lives are meaningless.

As in any worthwhile autobiography, Sylvia Harris brings the reader along on the trail to overcoming the worst her difficulties, while acknowledging that some "wreckage of the past" is inevitable but not utterly insoluble.

I personally do not read prefaces or introductions to autobiographies, because of their tendency to remove the mystery and discovery process from the narrative itself. Sylvia Harris's "Long Shot: My Bipolar Life and the Horses Who Saved Me" ends realistically, in a manner with which we may all be able to identify.

If you enjoy the thrill of discovering what happens at the end of Sylvia Harris' autobiography, then don't read the introduction and preface at the beginning.

Read the whole autobiography and learn what happens just as Sylvia Harris did: one day and one experience at a time.

You can't be of help to a Bipolar person or patient unless you understand their world from their perspective, as well as from your own (probably) vastly different perspective on the patient and the illness. This is maddeningly frustrating, but true nonetheless.

This book provides a heartfelt, and searingly honest account of life for those like me who struggle with bipolar illness, as well as for professionals, caregivers and family members who want to understand
Bipolar patients and who have a sincere desire to help.

"Race" and Blood Types, Superstition and Science

Would you rather have a blood transfusion from someone who shares your skin color or from someone who shares your blood type?  It is my belief that transfusing blood from one person to another based on skin color would be a extraordinarily dangerous practice.  The American Red Cross, which maintains blood banks, says:

Although all blood is made of the same basic elements, not all blood is alike. In fact, there are eight different common blood types, which are determined by the presence or absence of certain antigens – substances that can trigger an immune response if they are foreign to the body. Since some antigens can trigger a patient's immune system to attack the transfused blood, safe blood transfusions depend on careful blood typing and cross-matching.

The blood table below, broken out by "race," shows that blood types do not obey superstitious sociological and cultural notions of "race".  The following chart from the American Red Cross shows that if all Caucasians received O+ blood transfusions on the logic that O+ is most common among Caucasians, then sixty-three percent of white people would receive the WRONG blood type during transfusions.

Most white people would have a higher chance of receiving the proper blood type from an Hispanic person (53%O+) than they would from another white person, since the most common blood type among whites is (O+ 37%) and is also most common among Hispanics (O+53%) of Hispanics have that blood type. 

If a white person with type O+ blood needs a battle-field transfusion and medics don't know the blood types of another white person available and an Hispanic person available, the best bet (53% O+) would be to give the white person a transfusion from a Hispanic person--NOT another white person.

All white people have a lesser chance of having O+ blood than do Hispanics (O+53).

	Caucasians	African American	Hispanic	Asian
O +	37%	47%	53%	39%
O -	8%	4%	4%	1%
A +	33%	24%	29%	27%
A -	7%	2%	2%	0.5%
B +	9%	18%	9%	25%
B -	2%	1%	1%	0.4%
AB +	3%	4%	2%	7%
AB -	1%	0.3%	0.2%	0.1%

Dr. Dennis O'Neil Behavioral Sciences Department, Palomar College, San Marcos, California writes:

. . . patterns of ABO, Rh, and Diego blood type distributions are not similar to those for skin color or other so-called "racial" traits.  The implication is that the specific causes responsible for the distribution of human blood types have been different than those for other traits that have been commonly employed to categorize people into "races."  Since it would be possible to divide up humanity into radically different groupings using blood typing instead of other genetically inherited traits such as skin color, we have more conclusive evidence that the commonly used typological model for understanding human variation is scientifically unsound.

As a matter of science, Dr. Dennis O'Neil concludes that the belief in "race" has less basis in science than other more medically useful groupings.  He concludes that:

The more we study the precise details of human variation, the more we understand how complex are the patterns.  They cannot be easily summarized or understood.  Yet, this hard-earned scientific knowledge is generally ignored in most countries because of more demanding social and political concerns.  As a result, discrimination based on presumed "racial" groups still continues.  It is important to keep in mind that this "racial" classification often has more to do with cultural and historical distinctions than it does with biology.  In a very real sense, "race" is a distinction that is created by culture not biology.