understandign race

Our towns college, the University of Michigan, recently dedicated a semester to "Understanding Race" part of the semester program was an exhibit at the university's Natural History Museum  about "Understanding Race." This exhibit and the theme semester it is a part of are both commendable.  We need more conversations about race,  I recently saw the exhibit as part of a group I am involved with.  I was not able to make the follow up discussion so I put some of my thoughts in writing and  to make those thoughts public I am sharing  them here. If you haven't seen the exhibit these comments may be less relevant.

I would like to share my honest impression of the exhibit.

It was a nice exhibit covering a variety of relevant issues.  However I felt that it had some limitations. I wont claim that I read and watched everything in the exhibit, but I was there for an hour and a half and the subject is engaging to me so I was trying to take in as much as I could.

For me little of the information presented was novel or new, I know race is a biologically inaccurate construct.  I am familiar with the disgraceful history of discrimination and the bulk of the historical specifics were familiar. I appreciate that race identity issues get complex.

Beyond the lack of  new information or perspectives I felt that the exhibit really fell short on the politics of racism.  I did not see any portrale of the very real and ongoing racist attitudes that can span from out right race hatred to the almost universal race bias (for an experience of you own level of bias check out https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/). Neither did I see much on institutional racism. I did not see the wall of statistics that should have been there about the discrimination of the criminal justice system.

Racism as I understand it is not just discrimination , but discrimination plus power. unless we can talk about racism we can't understand race, and racism is about power. There was a display about the 2008 elections, but no mention of how elements of the Tea Party were a backlash to a "bi-racial" president.

Education is good but it is best when it can inform action. Two displays that I felt were important to [our group] . . . . were: 1) the stacks of money representing assets of different racial groups. I want to point out it was assets, not income.  .  .  . and 2) the local exhibit pointed out that our neighbor Ypsilanti is a food desert.  I don't know what we can do about this but I think it is relevant to [us].

Morning-after pill rules are good for big pharma and rich kids.

Under court order the FDA is allowing and over the counter version of the morning-after pill. According to the public health science of the FDA it is clear that making emergency contraception available over-the-counter will help to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and the health risks associated with the morning-after pill are dwarfed in comparison to the health risks associated with unwanted pregnancies.

Unfortunately the Obama administration and Kathleen Sebelius rejected the FDA science and tried to prevent the morning-after pill from becoming over-the-counter. The courts disagreed and mandated the FDA to allow an over-the-counter version. The policymakers had one more trick up their sleeves. Instead of releasing all varieties of emergency contraception to over-the-counter sales, the FDA is only allowing the brand Plan B One Step to be over-the-counter. There is a generic version of the same medication available for half the price, but the generic is required to be kept behind the counter and customers must prove their age to purchase it.

Teva pharmaceuticals the Israeli based company that owns Plan B One Step is able to maintain its monopoly pricing as the only over-the-counter emergency contraception option. What this means is that the over-the-counter morning-after pill continues to be inaccessible to girls who can't afford it. If unwanted teen pregnancies contribute to the cycle of poverty then this FDA granted monopoly only contributes to an increasingly rigid class structure. Rich kids won't be turned away by Plan B One Step's $60 cost. 

Since a generic version exists, why couldn't that be allowed for over-the-counter sales? Apparently there is an idea that the increased price will prevent very young girls from inappropriately using the morning-after pill. While it's true that the younger you are the less money you are likely to have access to it's also true that the poorer you are the less money you are likely to have access to. What's particularly interesting is that this monopoly privilege is only given for three years. Now you really have to ask why?