In the interest of my complicated confusion, I will try to be brief.

In response to the question “What is your ethnicity?” Justin Hicks responded “I identify as American”. Here are my thoughts

The US American ideal is equality; equality in the eyes of the law, the documents ordaining this nation and in any other remotely complicated venue that needs clarification of treatment, the ideal is EQUAL. However, the practice is anything but.

I choose to engage this statement as one of hope. A claim to what the future could be if indeed we were a society who lived through our ideals. Hicks explained that his race – he’s African-American – has never played a factor in his life and that “this racial language only serves to further divide us”. I hear the dream. The dream that you, Justin, as a Black man are not judged by your pigment but instead by the immaculate assimilation you have undergone to accept the values and customs that have oppressed so many others who share your hue. I hear the cry of someone who wants to ignore the pain, guilt and shame of carrying a darker skin in a society where “white is right”. I hear the conditioning of someone who never had to question their place because they were accepted by others seem to think that the race was a factor in that acceptance.

Hicks’ statements echo that of others who have not had the lived experiences or introspection of being Black in the States. The ignorance is truly his own blissful detriment, because it eliminates the capability of understanding an incredibly rich amount information that SHOULD be used to inform decisions. I reckon the responsibility of one who claims public service is to be a vocal representation of the folks unable (or unwilling but not incapable) to use their own voice, time and intellect to advocate for their best interests. In this noble venture, how could one really have the audacity to claim to be or not to be anything? The task does not hinge on what YOU are but on who you represent. It is my understanding that Hicks is but a mouthpiece for the constituency of which he represents, inclusive of all folks, not just those who share conservative values. If this cavalier dismissal of responsibility is what it means to be ethnically US American, then I will eagerly accept that he is in a category all his own.

A little historical perspective

The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was a tangible legislative tension over the issue of slavery and its expansion. To claim that US America is a society of meritocracy and not of racial subjugation erases the history of this nation and sects of people (who were murdered/erased, enslaved, dehumanized in ways unimaginable). This nation is one that bleeds with fractured logic of personhood and worthiness. The timing of this statement “I identify as American” only affirms the ruthlessness through which this nation has been able to claim success. The argument is not on the basis of the ideal but on the heels of timing. The US is not yet a united front who have figured out how to deliver life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to all, the US has fallen short of the spirit of freedom under which the founding documents were written, because the documents were short sighted and exclusive of the reconciliation of the crimes being committed in the name of “FREEDOM”. The language and fortitude for fight were not yet born, but the selfishness that enveloped the authors birthed a loophole. And it is through that hole that the light shines. Hope lives in the light.

The call to action

I enjoy believing that folks are trying to do the best they can with the information they have at the time. Sometimes they fall short and in that humbling moment there are an avalanche of options. My hope is that folks try to choose the option that brings humanity closer to the people we want to be.

I realize, as I am writing, that the statement is riddled with flaws and assumptions that who “you” want to be is someone who is both respected and whose ideals benefit others. I understand the division of ideal includes success for some and oppression for others, but it doesn’t actually have to function from a deficit lens, there is enough. A politics of ubuntu elevates this theory.

I am saddened by the language in which we choose engage each other, the desperation for attention (read: acceptance or community) has turned our most powerful tool into weaponry without much consideration or thoughtfulness… but there is time to choose a detour this road and walk another.

Black man, yet again here we stand, mourning your loss and puzzled by the circumstance. Angry and frustrated, heartbroken and scared, we fight in your absence for your execution to not be commonplace.

We have failed you – as humans in community alongside you. It never should have been acceptable to subdue you. Six other people stood in unity to remove you, hardened hearts and calloused minds, the blind betrayed their own to mirror their kind.

I am sorry you will not get the chance to father your young. I am sorry that you lived through a global pandemic to have your life stolen so young. I am sorry your fate paralleled that of others before you that I am sure you’ve seen and never thought would be you.

You will not be forgotten we will rise up in your honor. May your soul rest.

[an invitation for LOVE – a missing link… written final assignment for an independent study on the texts referenced: A Theory of African-American Offending & Building a Black Criminology]

bell hooks’ scholarship (2000 & 2001), understanding love as the foundation of human interaction, is a hard pill for most to swallow; because the US-popularized definition of love rests on romantic affection, eros. However, we know the multiple types of love besides romantic love: love for humanity (agape), self-love (philautia), love that lasts (pragma), all-consuming love (mania), love between friends (philia), familial love (storge), and playful love (ludus). Because love can be an intense and therefore intimidating topic, it seems not to have a valid (read: mainstream) place in the study of criminal behavior. A pedagogy of love or a love ethic in criminology is regulated to feminist or queer spaces (Panfil, V.R., et al, 2022) and deemed radical even in social work (Godden, N.J., 2017). This contradiction is vast considering that most people’s motivation in life circles around the acquisition of love or processing their lack of it which creates an environment of constantly searching, avoiding, manipulating, and compensating for love or its void. As criminologists, we are intrigued by the ‘why’ of behavior, as we attempt to understand why some African Americans offend we have to dig deeper into the root causes of foundational assumptions. In A Theory of African-American Offending, the authors create a model that specifically outlines the unique ways in which Blacks have been and continue to be oppressed which digs below the surface of classical criminological theory explanations of behavior. Unnever & Gabbidon, contend that traditional theory is not incorrect about the triggers of criminal behavior, it is an incomplete picture of the ecological conditions under which some African-Americans offend (2011). 

When considering why someone offends, the basis of the action hinges on being in an environment where they believe options are slim and the most fruitful option is to break the law. This logic presumes the environment to be full of lack, but what is lacking and why? 

African-American Offending. This race-centric model of offending is built on pillars unique to African-American descendants of enslaved Africans, in the United States. A core foundation of Unnever and Gabbidon’s theory is that offending is associated with the degree to which African Americans encounter racial injustices which they have insufficient or no skills to navigate (2011). There are a few foundational assumptions baked into this theoretical framing: a worldview that most Blacks have in common is at the base of this theory, alongside the understanding that all Blacks in the US acknowledge that racism is homegrown and they will no doubt encounter this invisible and detrimental system throughout their lives (Unnever & Gabbidon, 2011). Due to the shared worldview, Blacks in the US have specific perceptions of the criminal justice system that guide their behavior, interactions with, and speech about whites. This is caused by a systemic indoctrination of respectability politics which is passed down and reinforced through institutions and socialization. This moderated behavior is a product of racial socialization and racial discrimination. Out of these core assumptions, Unnever and Gabbidon’s (2011) theoretical model of African-American Offending was created:

“Our model indicates that the African Americans who are most likely to offend are those that intensely perceive or experience criminal justice injustices, racial discrimination, and being derogatorily stereotyped, and experience racial socialization practices over time that increase their likelihood of developing weak bonds with institutions such as with their schools and places of employment and are socialized to react to injustices with negative emotions (ie., anger-hostility-defiance-aggression-depression-impulsivity)” (p.189).

The field of criminology is beginning to acknowledge the need for a specific emphasis on race-based foundational assumptions of criminality. One of the founding criminological scholars, W.E.B. DuBois (1899) set the academic stage in The Philadelphia Negro for an in-depth interrogation of the race-specific conditions that premediate criminal behavior. Few scholars have since taken up the task of building a literary cornerstone that focuses on race. 

Building a Black Criminology. The foundation of the United States criminal justice system was built under the foundational assumption of Blacks as uncontrollable violent beasts, unworthy of equal treatment who are second-class citizens devoid of morals and incapable of love. Blacks were enslaved in this country for centuries (1619 – 1865). After being legally ‘freed’, Blacks were subject to other oppressive legal operations (ie. Jim Crow laws, Black codes, etc) that limited their freedom and increased nationwide surveillance of all facets of attempted progress to curb any attempts of equal treatment advancement. The laws created during this time to curb the enthusiasm of newly freed men were in place specifically for the elimination of hope for Blacks (DuBois, 1899). Now, in the 21st century, there are remnants of legal constraints, standard practices, and inherited thinking that encourage the restriction of the Black community more than other populations; because we know this to be true, there should be a genre of criminology that explores how “the past and current racial subjugation causes a minority of African-Americans to commit crimes” (Unnever & Owusu-Bempah, 2019, p. 6). 

As mentioned, Black Criminology does not override the general theories of crime but gives way to a deeper and angular interrogation of the unique attributes of the African-American existence that have been previously overlooked ingredients of criminal activity. Unnever and Owusu-Bempah (2019) share the disciplines’ three foundational tenets: 

1. A Black Criminology assumes that Whites purposefully constructed a racially stratified society that oppresses African Americans. 
2. A Black Criminology assumes that because the United States has been and is a racialized society, the history of African Americans is incomparable to the histories shared by Whites (and other minorities). 
3. A Black Criminology assumes that a minority of African Americans commit crimes because of their inimitable past and current racial subordination. (p. 6)

Building a Black Criminology is a text outlining the benefits of focusing on race to understand why the skew of punishment leans heavily on Black individuals when the opportunity of criminality is equally distributed. The text consists of a series of convincing arguments as to why this subfield should exist and be respected. Far too often Blacks need to convince mainstream audiences of the value of their centering. Interest convergence, a tenet of critical race theory, adds language to this phenomenon of having to solicit buy-in before being able to take liberatory actions. The edited volume acts as a playbook of how to integrate a race-centric focus into the field of criminology beginning with the foundational arguments of why it is necessary then building on how the field would benefit from a race-centric approach to explaining crime and ending with an engagement of some of the popular social control conversations in the field (Unnever et. al, 2019). The scholarship discussed provides little interrogation of what these pillars mean in relationship to love or lack of love. I will offer my thoughts in subsequent sections.

Knowing what we as academics know about the reasons that some folks offend; the lack that comes with being poor living in disadvantaged neighborhoods, lacking self-control or the resources to gain that skill, suffering from low education because the assigned school is not equally funded, and lacks resources necessary to provide a foundational education; suffering from mental health issues without recourse or affordable access to psychiatrists and psychologists; being fed a self-image that encourages unhealthy behavior reinforcing a self-fulfilling prophecy of criminality, or any combination of these. 

Building a love ethic in criminology 

We understand the variety of issues that can lead someone to choose a criminal activity and when referencing the criminality of some Black people we add endured racial oppression as another layer to overcome. The system of racial oppression in the US strives to maintain the status quo of racial hierarchy which intimidates any innovative approach to addressing the root causes of oppression. Building a love ethic in criminology would first require an acknowledgment of the systemic oppression some are subjected to more than others. The layers of integrity necessary to shift the dynamic are beyond any collective consensus I have seen in the US political landscape. However, there are ways to operationalize love that continue the work of chipping away at the old ways of thinking and ushering in the new and accepted norms. 

Since the civil rights era, Black leaders and allies have been fighting for equality in all realms of US American existence, their victories have laid some foundations for the continued torment of a system initially created with some in mind. By conceptualizing love in various ways it is possible to generate knowledge of how to operate in manners that heal, uplift, and educate instead of leaning on a punitive response to unfavorable behavior. Bell hooks (2000) makes it plain when she stated “to truly love we must learn to mix various ingredients – care, affection, recognition, respect, commitment, and trust, as well as honest and open communication” (p.5). In policing, procedural justice does the job of operationalizing respect, trust, and to a lesser extent commitment. Our limited understanding of how police officer training impacts their behavior leaves much to be desired when trying to measure how much care, affection, recognition, and communication happen during exchanges. 

Policing with a love lens

To reach our societal desires of having an equitable public safety institution, it is imperative that we understand the needs of the community beyond the immediate action event where police intervention is necessary. Abolitionists envision a utopia of shared community responsibilities that would eliminate the need for police intervention making the vocation unnecessary in modern times. We have yet to reach a consensus on the vision of how the utopian society will operate. In current policing contexts, specific training pieces are situated to expand the overall consciousness of police officers to serve their communities better. 

ABLE, active bystander in law enforcement, training has been around for a little while but has grown in popularity after George Floyd was publicly killed without peer intervention. The ABLE training is specifically focused on internal methods of disrupting the chain of command in moments of doubt. The training objectives are to create institutional shifts in who holds knowledge and who can interfere in moments that are confusing or riddled with questions but are hierarchical which creates communication dynamics that are hard to disrupt. This training focuses on internal dynamics and the external equivalent is commonly associated with procedural justice training.

Procedural justice training is a method of operationalizing police legitimacy through the tenets of trustworthiness, respect, voice, and neutrality. Officers seek to embody these four tenets to increase police legitimacy. In reality, “love and abuse cannot coexist” (hooks, 2000, p.6) and in policing, society has not demanded an ethic of love when managing horrific events. As previously mentioned love is a term that the US society regulates for romantic endeavors, but calls for defunding the police have rested on the inequitable distribution of care in dealing with incidence. As hooks has presented “when we see love as a combination of trust, commitment, care, respect, knowledge, and responsibility, we can work on developing these qualities…” (hooks, 2000, p.54). 

Specifically, in policing, we could train towards these components of love in a way that has not yet soothed the desires of the citizenry. If we were able to situate the knowledge and history of the community served by the local police department and go beyond the band-aid repairs of police intervention to galvanize resources while exercising a bit of care in how we handle issues we would be steps closer to the equity we desire.

Lingering thoughts

After reading these texts I want to think through how could a growing body of literature, Black Criminology, create tangible solutions or diversions of African-American offending. How can a body of literature on Black Criminology introduce new methodologies and new ideas that lean towards the specific needs of explaining the offending of some African-Americans? 

How can we respond to the systemic conditions that could increase one’s chance of offending? There are local experiments with funding that are testing and tracking this question. 

What would police training that taught the conditions and reasons for criminal behavior, look like? How would we measure their applied knowledge of criminal offending? What other governmental resources are available to complement police officer diversion initiatives? What would a complementary institution (to public safety) entail to meet the vast needs of the citizenry?

Works Cited 

Du Bois, W. E. B. (1899). The Philadelphia Negro: a Social Study (No. 14). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania.

Godden, N.J., (2017) The Love Ethic: A Radical Theory for Social Work Practice, Australian Social Work, 70:4, 405-416, DOI: 10.1080/0312407X.2017.1301506

hooks, b. (2000). All about love: New Visions. HarperCollins.

hooks, b. (2001). Salvation: Black people and Love. HarperCollins.

Panfil, V.R., Petersen, A.M., Walker, A., Wodda, A. (2022) Similar Past, Different Future? How Feminist and Queer Criminological Pedagogy and Qualitative Methods Intersect and Diverge, Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 33:2, 193-211, DOI: 10.1080/10511253.2022.2027478 

Unnever, J.D., & Gabbidon, S.L. (2011). A Theory of African American Offending: Race, Racism, and Crime. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203828564

Unnever, J.D., Gabbidon, S.L., Chouhy, C. (2019). Building a Black Criminology: Race, Theory, and Crime (Eds). Routledge. 

Unnever, J.D., Owusu-Bempah, A. (2019). A Black Criminology Matters. In Unnever, J.D., Gabbidon, S.L., Chouhy, C. (Eds.) Building a Black Criminology: Race, Theory, and Crime (pp 3-28). Routledge.

The following set of ideas is presented to help Black students prepare their minds, protect their bodies, and guard their spirits while navigating criminology & criminal justice doctoral life.

Mind: getting through the literature

The first few years are all about learning the foundational information of the field. This process of indoctrination can be traumatic for Black students who may be unprepared for the interrogation of concepts like biological theories of crime or labeling theory that can hit closer to home than for other students. We are taught to be objective, to shelve our personal selves in exchange for the academic exploration of human behavior. For Black people, this concept may be easier in theory than in practice, as academia has continued to essentialize and “other” our presence.

So, what do you do about it? One strategy I recommend is to unburden yourself from the expectation that it is your sole job to contribute to the perception of Black people in the field of criminology. You are not obligated to add to the scholarship of race and crime simply because you are Black. You deserve the freedom to contribute to any realm of criminological study; and if you choose to do it for the culture, fantastic. Any avenue you pursue will directly contribute to the cadre of information shaping the field (see Cooper & Henderson, 2021). Reading the literature as an educational endeavor and not as an explanation of the behavior of people who share your racial identity will lighten the burden of learning. In other words, try not to personalize the literature. It can weigh heavy on the hearts and minds of Black people. You may feel the need to defend or explain gaps in the scholarly explanations that seem to miss the mark according to your lived experience. But don’t feel obligated to speak out on behalf of your entire race; you can honor your insights that challenge the canon in your writing.

Remember, you did not enter this field to be a spokesperson. You chose it with the ambition to share your unique point of view, to add your brick to the growing landscape. And you are worthy of the privilege and prestige of learning how to consume and eventually create knowledge without any additional expectations of your intellect.

Body: navigating hypervisibility

Generally, being Black in higher education is fraught with pros and cons. It is an outward nod to your hard work and accomplishments to be sitting where you are today. Congratulations! However, the reality of being Black in the U.S. is not mitigated because you are pursuing a doctorate. You may experience hardship managing a class of undergraduate students who do not see you as a person carrying authority, or you may be unjustly hassled by your campus police who view you as out of place on your campus (Cooper et. al, 2019). No matter the instance of aggression you endure, racially motivated or otherwise, it is vital to know the resources available at your institution to act if and when you want to. Identify the appropriate channels to guide you through a strategy that you can customize to suit your style of conflict resolution. To cope with hypervisibility, I suggest finding a community of people who are willing to help you through the ambiguity of doctoral life. It is helpful to have a social outlet outside of the university body, folks that have zero connection to your Ph.D. life but make you feel seen in ways that may not feel possible in school. Join a sports club, a religious group, a meetup, or a social club with folks who can hold space for your pure, unadulterated self, and where you can exist without explaining certain aspects of your being. Your social wellness is integral to your academic success. You may not have a lot of time to spend socializing and that’s ok; it’s the quality rather than the quantity of engagement that will feed your soul.

Spirit: using your voice

Academia is about meaning making and the doctoral process is a crossing of the burning sands into a career of knowledge creation. This “pledging” process can make you question the impact or value of your contribution. Resist the urge to recoil instead find a little more freedom to speak and be heard. Make sure to get a lay of the land academically and socially and seek out the truth-tellers. Search for the scholarly voices that support your ideas and nestle your work alongside theirs. Attend conferences, reach out to academics whose work resonates with you, find kindred spirits in fellow thinkers, and use your voice for good trouble.

Closing thoughts

Your voice is necessary, and if you choose to engage criminology with a lens on the culture, do it unapologetically. Fully embrace and share your boundaries with others. Only accept the extra labor that you want to do if it serves your needs and goals and if it is fulfilling to your personally crafted legacy. We are not an unlimited resource, and doctoral programs are an unmatched test of time management skills, so be stingy with your “yes” and nimble with your “no thank you”. Develop a recipe that makes sense for your scholarly goals and adhere to the rubric you have outlined for how you choose to spend your time. And remember, although it may often feel like it, you are not alone in your academic venture. Find and maintain your community.

Referenced

Cooper, M.N., Henderson, H. (2021). Where is the Black Criminologist? The Criminologist. 46(4). 1-6.

Cooper M.N., Updegrove, A.H., Bouffard, J.A. (2019) Predictors of Criminal Justice Undergraduates’ Intentions to Pursue Graduate Education in Criminology or Criminal Justice, Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 30:1, 46-70, DOI: 10.1080/10511253.2018.1448096

I identify as an intercultural criminologist which is not a formal term (yet) but more of a configuration of my skillsets. As a graduate of intercultural communication, I have learned and continue to explore how we as individuals with all of our unique traits and abilities, find and use language to communicate across all of those lines of difference.

In my work, I am able to leverage the nuances of understanding people to be individuals who come into spaces with all of their experiences in tow. When attempting to understand causation in research it is paramount to address context, history and individuality. Oftentimes in policing, folks are trying to understand the failures of a system but result to analyzing the aggregated behaviors of individuals.

I believe the work begins and ends with the people. For the people make up the system and should have the power to alter its trajectory. As an intercultural criminologist I use a social ecological approach to understand the environment in combination with other data points to propose transformative solutions.