Boldautomatic (talk | contribs) |
Malik Shabazz (talk | contribs) →Malcolm X's Sexuality: further comment and reply to personal attacks |
||
Line 305: | Line 305: | ||
:[http://www.marclamonthill.com/malcolm-x-was-gay-424 Malcolm X Was Gay?] Gives a reasonable overview of the issue. [[User_talk:Benjiboi| -- <u style="font-size:14px; font-family: cursive;color:#8000FF">Banj<font color="#FF4400">e</font></u><u style="font-size:14px;font-family: Zapfino, sans-serif;color:deeppink">b<font color="#AA0022">oi</font></u>]] 11:30, 21 October 2009 (UTC) |
:[http://www.marclamonthill.com/malcolm-x-was-gay-424 Malcolm X Was Gay?] Gives a reasonable overview of the issue. [[User_talk:Benjiboi| -- <u style="font-size:14px; font-family: cursive;color:#8000FF">Banj<font color="#FF4400">e</font></u><u style="font-size:14px;font-family: Zapfino, sans-serif;color:deeppink">b<font color="#AA0022">oi</font></u>]] 11:30, 21 October 2009 (UTC) |
||
::A few comments: |
|||
:::1) Nothing has been "removed" or "deleted" from the article. We're discussing whether to add it. |
|||
:::2) I haven't "censored" anything. I simply expressed my opinion that a discussion of Malcolm X's youthful sexual activities doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article. Anybody is free to agree or disagree. |
|||
:::3) Perry's biography is a [[WP:RS|reliable source]]. Perry interviewed more people who knew Malcolm X than any previous biographer. However, Perry often seems determined to paint Malcolm X as a psychological basket case. (This isn't just my opinion; reliable sources, including [[Michael Eric Dyson]], say that. [http://books.google.com/books?id=EERrU8KBmGcC&pg=PA277] [http://books.google.com/books?id=a7U9xrYAlNQC&pg=PA298]) In general, I rely on Perry for facts, but not for analysis. I wouldn't consider Peter Tatchell's newspaper opinion columns reliable sources, and Marc Lamont Hill's blog also isn't a reliable source. |
|||
:::4) I have no vested interest in hiding Malcolm X's youthful sexual activities. Contrary to 165.124.143.22's suggestion, there are no "religious purposes" in my viewpoint. I'm not a Muslim or an NoI member, and I don't really care what either of those religions have to say about homosexuality. |
|||
:::5) Finally, as Geofferic suggested, the purpose of an encyclopedia article isn't to "help" anybody's image. We're not here to build people's self-esteem. |
|||
::Just my opinion. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] {{toolbar|separator=dot|[[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] | [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]] }} 18:08, 21 October 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:08, 21 October 2009
Malcolm X is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 19, 2009. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
- Archive of Subjects dated 2005 and Earlier |
Use of prison photo
Why is there a picture of the Wisconsin State Prison in this article? He wasn't even there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.58.149.18 (talk) 21:17, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- The photo is just intended to illustrate a prison, not any particular prison. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 04:37, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Motif for assassination
The section on the Assassination is lacking an explanation on the motifs of those involved in the murder. Any expansion by knowledgeable people highly appreciated. 78.34.150.180 (talk) 08:22, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Arabic
Good luck on the FAC but I have to raise a query with regards to the following unverified sentence:
"His status as an authentic Muslim was questioned by Saudi authorities because of his United States passport and his inability to speak Arabic."
There are literally hundreds of millions of Muslims throughout the world that do not speak Arabic outside of reciting passages from their holy book. I seriously doubt that the Saudi authorities would question every pilgrim that does not speak Arabic since that would practically mean mistreating almost every pilgrim from such countries as Indonesia, Nigeria, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc. Someone should clarify, elaborate, qualify or eliminate the above sentence. --Bardin (talk) 15:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- The statement is sourced at the end of the paragraph. While I agree that many Muslims don't speak Arabic, I can't explain why Malcolm X was detained. Perhaps it was the combination of the American passport and the inability to speak Arabic that raised concerns. I verified the account in a second biography. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 03:00, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
why has what I put in yesterday been removed - this is not the main page but a discussion page nor could the remark be interpreted as defamatory: (1) cos hes dead; and (2) cos it was anyway true: the man committed major crimes and fomented racial hatred. I will revert this comment if it gets deleted again —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.84.240.98 (talk) 13:13, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- This is a discussion page about the article, not the subject. If you have suggestions for the article, please state so clearly. Your commentary appears to be about Malcolm X, not the contents of the article. --Moni3 (talk) 13:46, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
FAC changes
Well done so far on this article. I think there is room for improvement for the article to get to FA. Below are my suggestions:
- On the whole, the article reads like an extended timeline, giving bare facts and not shedding any light on what moved the man. There is much room to address Malcolm X's heart, his lifelong inspiration, and how both white and black Americans reacted to his spellbinding speeches for black power. You may be able to kill two birds here, by making the writing more complex and by addressing the more abstract heart of Malcolm X.
- I'm a big proponent of thematic writing in FAs. That's what I would like to see here. Continue to touch on themes throughout the article by reiterating the following:
- Malcolm X's views on race relations were seen as both drastic and long overdue.
- His early experiences colored his later life.
- Malcolm X saw Islam as the savior for black poverty and the way by which blacks could bootstrap themselves out of ignorance and shame. Simultaneously, he did not see integration as the ideal.
- He had significant philosophical differences with MLK Jr. Many whites became afraid of his "by any means necessary", and blacks were split on how to achieve equality.
- These are examples I get from reading what very little I have about Malcolm X. There may be others, or you may reword the above depending on what reliable sources say are the most significant themes of his life.
- The connection to Malcolm X's tenuous upbringing and his memories of pervasive injustice clearly colored his views about the disparate treatment black Americans endured, and affected his social outlook for the rest of his life. I'm looking for an opening sentence to say as much at the beginning of the Early years section. The "themes" I referenced previously should be revisited by sentences that introduce sections, followed by cited examples of his life, and cemented by statements by historians.
- Was Louise Little able to pass? Should that be linked in "she was so light-skinned that she looked like a white woman" to "she was so light-skinned that she was able to pass for white". I would assume she would be able to look like a woman, white or black.
- What was the appeal for Malcolm X from "Bimbi" on self-education? What was the spark that made him want to teach himself when he was previously uninterested in education?
- Malcolm X's introduction to Elijah Muhammed and the Nation of Islam should be more significant, I feel. What is not explained is why Islam resonated so deeply with Malcolm X while he was incarcerated. This was a life change for him, and I think it deserves some more detail. How did he go from jailed bum to proud black man? If you will bear the religious analogy, this was a "Come to Jesus" moment for him, and it affected everything he did for the rest of his life.
- I think you're referencing The Autobiography of Malcolm X too much, almost as if you're saying "Malcolm X said this, not me!" Consider changing these references to something similar to "Malcolm X later remembered," or "Malcolm X stated that..."
- He came to believe that Islam could transcend racial problems. Is this accurate, or would it be more accurate to say that "Islam could be the means by which racial problems could be overcome"?
- Because there is an effort at FAC to get reviewers to either Support or Oppose instead of just give comments or suggestions, I'm going to Oppose right now. But I wanted you to know that I think this is a worthy article for FA. If there's anything I can do to assist you let me know. --Moni3 (talk) 16:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for your suggestions. I will work on some of the low-hanging fruit now, and I'll take on some of the structural issues as a longer-term project. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 03:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Category:Americans of mixed Black African-European ethnicity
I suggest the following category be added to Malcolm X's Wikipedia entry:
Category:Americans of mixed Black African-European ethnicity
The aforementioned category has a meager amount of articles linked to it and X is one of the most well known Americans of mixed Black/African and European ancestry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehhviin (talk • contribs) 12:35, March 5, 2009 (UTC)
- Done. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 17:58, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Father's death
I have read in multiple sources that Malcolm's father had not only been run over by a trolley car but that he also had one side of his head beaten in, but the article did not contain anything about part of the head being beaten in.--76.17.227.240 (talk) 03:57, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- The cause of his father's death is disputed. According to one biography, Earl Little's arm and leg were partially severed from being run over by the streetcar, but he was conscious and spoke to police. According to Malcolm X, Earl Little was "bashed in the head". As the article says:
- In 1931, Earl Little was run over by a streetcar in Lansing. Authorities ruled his death an accident. The police reported that Earl Little was conscious when they arrived on the scene, and he told them he had slipped and fallen under the streetcar's wheels. Malcolm X later remembered that the black community disputed the cause of death; his family frequently found themselves the target of harassment by the Black Legion, a white supremacist group that his father accused of burning down their home in 1929. Some blacks believed the Black Legion killed Earl Little. They doubted that he could "bash himself in the head, then get down across the streetcar tracks to be run over".
- Hope that helps. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 04:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Reaction to death
This part:
"Guangming Daily, published in Beijing, stated that "Malcolm was murdered because he fought for freedom and equal rights."[163] In Cuba, El Mundo described the assassination as "another racist crime to eradicate by violence the struggle against discrimination".[5]"
I don't get. He was murdered by members of his own race and his old religious organization for speaking his mind and that's a "racist crime" ? What some government controlled mouthpieces have to say isn't relevant and should be removed. What next, add blog post about how Malcoms x death is part of the zionist/alien world domination conspiracy?
These newspaper quotes are nether notable or informative and should be removed. --85.220.69.85 (talk) 05:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC) I agree (for the most part). (Estoniankaiju (talk) 18:25, 16 April 2009 (UTC))
African American?
Malcolm X would have begun his life as a Colored man, before becoming a Negro. Dying in 1965, he would never have been an African American. --222.155.59.61 (talk) 07:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- In fact, Malcolm X used the phrase "African Americans" to refer to Black people in his 1964 speech "The Ballot or the Bullet". He had been using the phrase Afro-Americans prior to that. He rejected the word Negro, as did other members of the Nation of Islam.
- In any event, this page is intended to be used for comments on improving the article, not as a forum to discuss Malcolm X. Thank you. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 08:12, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Should we not just refer to them as Blacks? African-American sounds more like a nationality than a race or ethnicity. I'm speaking from New Zealand here, personally I've always known them as Negroes. That's just another word for Black. --222.155.59.61 (talk) 08:35, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Black is a more general term that includes people—Australian aborigines, for example—who are not of African descent. African American is a more precise term that is widely used in American English. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 16:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
african-american? (2)
why is Mr. Malcolm X primarly described as an african-american, while in other articles white americans are not described as such. nor even others african-americans e.g. jesse jackson —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.202.60.68 (talk) 10:06, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia's style guideline concerning biographies, "ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability". In the case of Malcolm X, I think race was one of the key factors that made him notable. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 16:42, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Malcolm X Blvd
This article and the cited NYT article say Lenox Avenue was renamed Malcolm X Blvd. But the Lenox Avenue article states, and the photo here implies, that the new name is in addition to the old, not a replacement of it. Other sources:
- Naming New York, p.156: "In 1987, Lenox Avenue was given an additional, commemorative title"
- Betty Shabazz p.443 'On May 4th, 1987, ... Mayor Koch ... signed into law a bill proclaiming Lenox Avenue from West 111th to West 145th "Malcolm X Boulevard"'
- NYT: WHAT'S IN A STREET RENAME? DISORDER "In Manhattan the sign bearing the new name is added to the original sign rather than replacing it altogether as is done in some of the boroughs."
- site:nyc.gov "Lenox Avenue" "malcolm x" 344
- site:nyc.gov "Lenox Avenue" 2,580
- site:nyc.gov "malcolm x boulevard" 581
- site:nyc.gov "malcolm x blvd" 236
The persistence of use of "Lenox Ave" is not proof of its continued official status, but a definitive source one way or the other would be more convincing that one newspaper citation. It's also just possible that Lenox Ave was originally deprecated in 1987 but later partially rehabilitated to co-official status. jnestorius(talk) 12:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'll have to look into this further. Many streets in New York have been renamed but are still referred to by their old names. Avenue of the Americas is the best example; no New Yorker would call it anything other than Sixth Avenue, so 20 years after it renamed the street, the city put back "Sixth Avenue" signs alongside the "Avenue of the Americas" signs. (Ironically, Sixth Avenue is named Lenox Avenue/Malcolm X Boulevard north of Central Park.) — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 16:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Bland style makes for a bland article
Hi- 1- Bland. none of the power of Malcolm X comes through in this article. Certainly few of his actual quotes.
For example, A) quote regarding the 'good news' that 200 whites were killed in a plane crash. multiple B) Malcolm X claimed his mother was raped and he was the product and he hated every drop of white blood in him. Playboy C) When asking for a cup of coffee Malcolm X asked for it 'integration style ... by that I mean weak'. WSJ (B) and (C) are especially important when read together. The article need not discuss the multiple contradictory statements, but I think they should be presented.
2- Limited details. The best example here is the Dr. King Playboy interview
is sourced, but the Malcolm X interview in Playboy is not mentioned. Both interviews were conducted by Alex Haley were widely read and referenced. Second, why no discussion of the verbal attacks on Dr. King’s policies? Third, why no mention/discussion of the on-going war of words with white supremacists? Malcolm X continually tried to explain the difference between being armed for self defense and being an advocate for armed rebellion. Its interesting to note here that the BPP was originally named the "Black Panther Party for Self Defense". Malcolm X's words lead to Newton & Seale and the Black Panther Party's Ten Point plan. Fourth, the 'chickens coming home to roost' quote has no context. Malcolm X had verbally attacked Kennedy for the policy regarding the Birmingham deploy of the national guard. (NYT) Malcolm X didn't just attack the dead President.
3- Leaving NOI. Malcolm X didn't leave NOI just because Elijah Muhammad had sexual affairs and out of wedlock
children (all true). Elijah Muhammad broke his pledge to not drink, gamble, dance, and be sexually promiscuous.
4- Please consider a reference to the Columbia University Malcolm X website and research project.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/ccbh/mxp/mlk.html
5- Afro/African American. I personally do not recollect him ever using this phrase. (But, who cares, right :) )
He is rarely quoted using this phrase. For example, in the Alex Haley interview for Playboy, Malcolm X did not use the phrase. He is quoted in NYT & WSJ using "Negro". I could not find an "afro" quote. But, this also gets back to (2) and (4) above. Malcolm X used the bully pulpit to great advantage. Although he was never elected to public office, he was frequently on TV and in many print articles published in the early '60s. None of his visibility in American '60s life or his impact is discussed.
Anyway, I realize that I lived thru the '60s in America and have a POV that considers this guy as pivotal and important. His words were loud, rude (esp to whites), and vehement. He changed the vocabulary. Let the man speak for himself. Regards, Charlie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.169.21.167 (talk) 23:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand the question as to usage of the term Afro-American. I lived through the time but I'm not familiar with his speeches. He used the term. After his home was firebombed, he gave a speech in Detroit for the Afro-American Broadcasting Company in which he used the term "Afro-American" 12 times when referring to people (not just referring to the company which sponsored the speech). He used the term "Black" 9 times in the same speech when referring to people, excluding the references to "Black Muslim." I believe there are other examples. Language was evolving, as were his beliefs. 24.193.78.219 (talk) 06:29, 16 October 2009 (UTC) legaleze 10/16/2009.
Pronunciation
Not to nit pick, but the pronunciation shown is how to pronounce the letter "X", not the name "Malcolm X". The pronunciation should be of the entire term. Michael.Urban (talk) 01:02, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Funeral
Article should (very briefly) explain: Why was his funeral in a Christian church? Tempshill (talk) 20:39, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- Because the church in which his funeral was held is a Negro church and it was large enough to fit alot of people into. --222.153.108.170 (talk) 09:52, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
"Black supremacist" in lede
First, the use of the phrase "Black supremacist" in the first sentence is unnecessary because the whole paragraph summarizes the different views people had/have of Malcolm X. Privileging one view by including it in the first sentence violates WP:NPOV.
Second, the "source" doesn't say that Malcolm X was a Black supremacist. It only says that Malcolm X is a Nation of Islam leader and ex-con (written, as it was, in 1959). — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 05:53, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- Funny how "black supremacist" shouldn't be used because it is "Privileging one view by including it in the first sentence violates WP:NPOV", but yet "human rights activist" shouldn't. That is hardly a neutral PoV. The cited article clearly ties Malcolm X as a black supremacist and a leader of black supremacist. No secrets being hid there. Rtr10 (talk) 06:20, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- "Black supremacist" is a critical description of Malcolm X. Human rights advocate is an accurate description of his life's work. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 03:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
A suggestion for discussion
In my reading, it is not unreasonable to read the TIME article as asserting that Malcolm was (in 1959) a leader of a group of "black supremacists", but this article was overtly opinionated, and if included it should be included as an example of criticism, not objective reporting. As for "human rights activist", Google searches show that this description is used in hundreds of articles and books about Malcolm. (My favorite, although it's not exactly a paradigm of WP:RS: a 1988 ad for the Thurgood Marshall Black Education Fund, funded by Miller Brewing Company, that appeared in magazines such as Ebony and Jet.[1]) For the purposes of the below draft I picked a couple of these sources at random, others could be substituted. Here is a suggested rewording, respectfully submitted for consideration and discussion:
Malcolm X (Template:Pron-en) (born Malcolm Little; May 19, 1925– February 21, 1965), also known as El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz[1] (Arabic: الحاجّ مالك الشباز), was an African-American Muslim minister and public speaker. To his admirers, he was a human rights activist,[2][3], a courageous advocate for the rights of African Americans, a man who indicted white America in the harshest terms for its crimes against black Americans.[4] His detractors accused him of preaching black supremacy,[5] racism and violence.[6][7][8] He has been described as one of the greatest and most influential African Americans in history.[9][10][11]
--Arxiloxos (talk) 06:11, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- I would be perfectly fine with that suggestion Arxiloxos and I think it is a good compromise to the dispute. Obviously both sides contain a certain amount of opinion. I just don't think one should predominate over the other and that is what was occurring, which is against Wiki policy. Rtr10 (talk) 06:20, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- The idea of moving "human rights advocate" into the admirers/detractors portion of the lede bothers me. We don't do that in the case of Martin Luther King, Jr., Jesse Jackson, or Al Sharpton, each of whose status as a civil rights activist has been questioned by their critics. This article was reviewed and promoted to featured article status, and nobody saw a problem with the description of Malcolm X as a human rights advocate. The article was featured on Wikipedia's front page with that in the first sentence. Rtr10 has an agenda: she/he removed the label "white supremacist" from one article and added "Black supremacist" to this article a few minutes later. Creating a false balance to appease Rtr10 isn't NPOV, it's surrendering to harassment. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 03:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- I think, once upon a time, the minister was referred to as a "Pan-Africanist" in the header for this article, as well. If no one objects, it would go far to describe his views in that direction. As far as the comment concerning "Black supremist," well, the views of the philosophy of the Nation of Islam ran in that direction, at least in part, and this is described in the autobiography. Anyways, its late, and this article is on my watchlist and I thought I'd throw in my two cents on one of the people who has most influenced my life. Pretty good article so far, huh! Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 04:14, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Malcolm X's father
In the movie, his dad was murdered by racist men. It has been said that his dad died in a car accident. Which is true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.166.213.74 (talk) 02:33, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
- Earl Little was run over by a streetcar. According to police, before he died he told them it was an accident. According to Malcolm X, he was killed by white supremacists and laid on the streetcar tracks. See Malcolm X#Early years for more information. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 02:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Malcolm's visit to Saudia Arabia - where Black slavery was allowed only two years before!
In 1964, Malcolm X made a pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia, and came back proclaiming that "Islam could be the means by which racial problems could be overcome". This is a remarkable statement, given that slavery (of predominantly Black people) was abolished in Saudia Arabia in 1962, only two years earlier, and about a century later than the emancipation of Black people in the USA. Several Moslem countries had at the time not abolished slavery at all. The references are all found in the post. Frankly, Malcolm X must have been speaking against better judgement when he promoted Islam as a cure against racism. Lawrence of Arabia, in his reports to the British Foreign Department, mentions how Black slaves still were abundant in Saudia Arabia in his days. For a single example, please look at the picture of Prince Faisal's party at Versailles (1919), with an unnamed Black slave [[2]]. Black slaves in the company of Moslem kings were also present at the coronation of Queen Elisabeth II in 1947, see earlier references. Sponsianus (talk) 14:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- Do you have a reliable source that makes the connection between Malcolm X and slavery in Saudi Arabia? Otherwise it's synthesis, a form of original research, and that's not allowed. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 17:40, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- This is a rather obvious conjecture, that has been pointed out a number of times, but you are right about the reliable source. I am looking for a book where it has been written. Sponsianus (talk) 23:51, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
press' "reaction" to Malcolm X
I would suggest considering a section about the press' "reaction" to Malcolm X.
I think it would be important, in seeing Malcolm X as he was, to also place him in the context of how the press chose to manipulate what the public was fed at that time. I don't know if I can post a link but this is not a singular opinioon. To understand the events surrounding Malcolm X and the assasination, I think one needs to understand how a large segment of the public could be influenced to close their mind by the press' manipulation of reporting on him. As a result, those misdirections become "fact." To be certain that a reader would know what was coming, the article would say: "[T]he embittered racist Malcolm X ..... anger...." There are dozens of these examples, from the selection of photos to the changing of terms or attributing expressions to him. When Malcolm said self-defense it was reported as "violence." I envision something which corrects the misuse of language.24.193.78.219 (talk) 03:48, 16 October 2009 (UTC)legaleze October 15, 2009
- That's a very interesting suggestion, but I wonder if it may be beyond the scope of this article. Maybe an article about Malcolm X and the media would be a good idea. It's a complex subject. Despite the distorted way they portrayed him, and despite the hateful things he said about white people, Malcolm enjoyed a cordial relationship with the white press. And whatever their intentions, they made him a star.
- The Hate That Hate Produced is a perfect example of media manipulation of Malcolm's image. That article cites modern media analysts concerning that bias; but NoI membership doubled within weeks of the broadcast, so obviously everybody didn't "buy the hype". :-) — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 05:02, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
I recall a different New York in 1963-1965. In interviews they seemed to be "baiting" him to say something controversial -- pushing, repeating his words for him. He was front-page news in the tabloid press (and it was tabloid press) and even was front-page in the more traditional newspaper in New York. He was in the papers every Sunday. I felt it that something was wrong with this overexposure and the way he was portrayed. As for making him a star, I don't think that was the stardom that he was looking for because I believe he really did want change and was beyond patient, but had not completely fixed on where he was and where he was going. And then the there was the difficulty with the NOI when they tried to rein him in.
My impression and recollections are that he was an honest man. A man who believed in a religion (of which I am not a member) was a devoted member, and who "outed" those who would present themselves as men of faith when they lived lives of deceit. A man who refused to be punished and told what to do by people who could not even follow the tenants of their faith -- and they stood over him and silenced him? It takes courage to go against your major system of support and take on the whole of NOI. I think he lived as he preached. It was a true vocation. Even after his home was firebombed, he did not stop.
I don't think he ended up hating white people, even with whatever unfortunate things he had said) because I don't think his plans on civil rights were fixed or complete. Afterall, he found Muslim brothers with blue eyes. I think he said some unfortunate things, some of which were offensive to whites and some of which were true and some of which was said to stir things up or said in haste. But in the end I think his views were changing, even if for the fact that he left the NOI to go out on his own. On his own, he could develop his own philosophy and strategy - not necessarily those causes that NOI told him to be involved.
I think the press wanted white people to fear him -- he, at least, sold papers and they kept it going and going and going -- even if it was just to fuel the controversy. And he was unlike MLK, Jr. The civil rights movement was in it's first decade. So, it was an uncertain time for white people who were content with the situation as it had been. Separate but equal. Maybe. As long as it's separate. And here comes Malcolm (who wants to speed things along) and what do we, white people, make of him? It was the press who tried to define him, his words, and the fuel the controversy over NOI. I don't recall him being portrayed as a rightous man who left an organization that was not what it seemed. I could be mistaken. I could have missed the less biased presentations of his career. This may not be the place for this discussion, but I feel strongly about how disingenously he was portrayed and even at the age of 15 I sensed that this would not end well for him. JMHO. Regards, 24.193.78.219 (talk) 07:42, 16 October 2009 (UTC) legaleze 10/16/2009.
Malcolm X's Sexuality
I assume it would be instantly deleted... but would it be allowed to include his bisexuality in the page? It seems to be an important part of who he was - but probably not fondly remembered by his followers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.70.122.132 (talk) 20:25, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- I second this and would appreciate some information on his sexuality. This is information on his character and important to our impression of him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.189.113.196 (talk) 00:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- I assume this is based off of this page? http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/oct/20/malcolm-x-bisexual-black-history —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.52.151 (talk) 01:13, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- This issue has been discussed before. (See the archives on the top right of this page.) Malcolm X's sexuality has nothing to do with what makes him notable. It wasn't "an important part of who he was". This is an encyclopedia article, not a tabloid newspaper, and I don't see any reason to add information that doesn't provide insight into Malcolm X's character or career. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 03:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- This goes far to explain his personality, much more than the excessive statements used to portray him as a "badass" do. The truth will also help the image of gays in the black community, something the Nation of Islam is against. You are advocating censoring the facts for your own religious purposes. Repressed homosexuality has more to do with someones character than a giant box with links to unrelated Nation of Islam pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.124.143.22 (talk) 04:46, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- This should be removed from the article until more than a single source exists. The article's purpose is not to advocate for homosexuals, blacks, or Islam. The article's purpose is to inform the public of actual facts which can be verified. The Guardian's articles (there are now 2) both reference the same book by an author who himself is not notable enough to warrant an article on Wikipedia, one Bruce Perry. The book, Malcolm: The Life of a Man Who Changed Black America, was widely panned upon release and has only been picked up due to the hint that Malcolm X was bisexual or gay. Since the book is not notable, its author is not notable, and the many other Malcolm X biographies (need I point out the man's life has been combed over a few times...) do not indicate the veracity of this claim, this should be removed from the article immediately until a better source is found. Geofferic (talk) 06:33, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- However if people find some reliable sources, they can add it without fear of removal as they would be against policy. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:53, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- Shabazz is not making sense, especially by deleting this again. A person's sexuality has a great deal to do with who they are and what they do; the fact that a number of black people refer to homosexuality as "the white man's disease" makes a mockery of deleting Malcolm X's sexuality from this page. --Boldautomatic (talk) 13:02, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- The Guardian piece, by Peter Tatchell who is rather well-known for researching subjects on all human rights issues, cites Bruce Perry's "acclaimed biography", Malcolm – The Life of a Man Who Changed Black America which is extensively cited in the article already. Tatchell writes:
“ | Perry is a great admirer and defender of Malcolm X, but not an uncritical one. He wrote the facts, based on interviews with over 420 people who knew Malcolm personally at various stages in his life, from childhood to his tragic assassination in 1965. His book is not a hatchet job, as some black critics claim, it is the exact opposite. Perry presents an honest, rounded story of Malcolm's life and achievements which, in my opinion, is far more moving and humane than the better known but somewhat hagiographic The Autobiography of Malcolm X: As Told To Alex Haley.
Based on interviews with Malcolm's closest boyhood and adult friends, Perry suggests the US black liberation leader was not as solidly heterosexual as his Nation of Islam colleagues and black nationalist acolytes have always claimed. While Perry did not make Malcolm's sexuality a big part of his biography – in fact, it is a very minor aspect – he did not shy away from writing about what he heard in his many interviews. He documents Malcolm's many same-sex relations and his activities as a male sex worker, which spanned at least a 10-year period, from his mid-teens to his 20s, as I described in some detail in a previous article for the Guardian. Although Malcolm later married and, as far as we know, abandoned sex with men, his earlier same-sex relations suggest that he was bisexual rather than heterosexual. |
” |
- Presently we note he solicited prostitutes among other criminal activity and that is the sum total. There seems to be nothing of these non-heteroseual experiences even hinted at. In his 2005 piece Tatchell notes that even Spike Lee's movie hinted there was more to it and that "As for his sporadic gay hustling, as Perry notes, "there were other ways he could have earned money". Dope-dealing, thieving and pimping were sources of income he had pursued with success. There was no imperative to sell his body. Why, then, did he prostitute himself? Misogyny and repressed homosexuality might be the answer. According to Perry: "His male-to-male encounters, which rendered it unnecessary for him to compete for women, afforded him an opportunity for sexual release without the attendant risk of dependence on women." I think there may be room for adding a few sentences and at least exploring the issue rather than dismiss someone's ten-year span of sexual activity out-of-hand. Did someone else re-interview all the people Perry did and they all insisted they were misunderstood and misquoted? At this point we could lean on what Perry researched and use that analysis to explain the relevance and tack on that Tatchell noted the longstanding cultural taboo in Black communities to acknowledge LGBT history may explain the omissions. -- Banjeboi 11:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- Malcolm X Was Gay? Gives a reasonable overview of the issue. -- Banjeboi 11:30, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- A few comments:
- 1) Nothing has been "removed" or "deleted" from the article. We're discussing whether to add it.
- 2) I haven't "censored" anything. I simply expressed my opinion that a discussion of Malcolm X's youthful sexual activities doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article. Anybody is free to agree or disagree.
- 3) Perry's biography is a reliable source. Perry interviewed more people who knew Malcolm X than any previous biographer. However, Perry often seems determined to paint Malcolm X as a psychological basket case. (This isn't just my opinion; reliable sources, including Michael Eric Dyson, say that. [3] [4]) In general, I rely on Perry for facts, but not for analysis. I wouldn't consider Peter Tatchell's newspaper opinion columns reliable sources, and Marc Lamont Hill's blog also isn't a reliable source.
- 4) I have no vested interest in hiding Malcolm X's youthful sexual activities. Contrary to 165.124.143.22's suggestion, there are no "religious purposes" in my viewpoint. I'm not a Muslim or an NoI member, and I don't really care what either of those religions have to say about homosexuality.
- 5) Finally, as Geofferic suggested, the purpose of an encyclopedia article isn't to "help" anybody's image. We're not here to build people's self-esteem.
- Just my opinion. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 18:08, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- A few comments:
- ^ This name includes the honorific El-Hajj, which is given to a Muslim who has completed the Hajj to Mecca. Malise Ruthven (1997). Islam: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press. p. 147. ISBN 978-0-19-285389-9.
- ^ Aaron Ogletree, "Malcolm X" in Carole Boyce Davies, ed., Encyclopedia of the African Diaspora (ABC-CLIO, 2008), ISBN 9781851097005, p. 647, excerpt available at Google Books.
- ^ Jerome E. Morris, "Malcolm X's critique of the education of Black people", Western Journal of Black Studies (Summer 2001).
- ^ Cone, pp. 99–100, 251–252, 310–311.
- ^ "RACES: The Black Supremacists". TIME Magazine. 1959-08-10. Retrieved 2009-07-28.
{{cite web}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=
(help) - ^ Cite error: The named reference
Times65-02-22
was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
Evanzz305
was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
Rickford248
was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
Greatest
was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
Freedom
was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
Black100
was invoked but never defined (see the help page).