Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think you'll fit right in here. People from other "cooler" regions of the United States tend to have certain preconceived notions about Midwesterners, but the truth of the matter is that St. Louis is quite diverse. I've found my neighborhood to contain all walks to life--every race, every social status, every age group, every background. Every type of cuisine is within walking distance--burgers, Mexican, Lebanese, Spanish tapas, Chinese, Russian, Italian, Afghan, and more. It's "true" diversity with no tensions here in the Grove, and I think that you'll find the people to be extremely friendly in STL. I work out in Chesterfield (a far west suburb), and I really wouldn't say the same about diversity there, though. It's pretty typical suburban--white, affluent, families with children. I see you were raised in Miami; I lived there for awhile and thought it was quite hostile! Good luck, and let us know if you have any questions about the move. I'd be happy to help! I get really bored at work sometimes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenwbc
I'm a 31 African American female moving to STL because of my husbands job and this post makes me feel a little better. Coming from ATL and being raised in Miami, I've never been openly discriminated against so I'm hoping that things won't change after moving there.
I have to think some of it is just pure chance too. I've experienced more than my fair share of 'backyard bbq racism' -- the stuff people say when they feel they're in a "safe" space and that everyone around them is racist too -- (I did grow up in St. Charles afterall) and I definitely experienced it as well in Chicago.
We had a work friend who lived in Oak Lawn with her husband and another who lived in Palos Heights and at one point in our conversation they were talking about a house that had recently sold down the block and the husband from Palos Heights unabashedly hollered "Oh Christ, what color are they?"
I've come to accept that's still a part of living in (the vast majority of) America. I've experienced racism of that variety in St. Louis, KC, Chicago, DC, Atlanta. It's very damaging stuff.
I think what you're seeing is the last thing I mentioned--white and black tend to live closer together here than in Chicago, so racist rants are more common as a result. People in Oak Lawn and Palos tend to be the kids and grandkids of those who went through white flight in the 50s-80s from the south side of Chicago. AA suburbs are becoming much more common further from the city center on the S, SW, and W sides of Chicago. Some might perceive that to be a "threat", so racism rises to the surface. South City, north county, and the inner part of west county are similar here.
Even though white and black live fairly close together in some parts of the city, you'd never hear someone say, "Well, there goes the neighborhood" in Greektown, Wicker Park, etc. when an African American family/individual moves next door. It's just not an economic possibility for those areas to be subject to massive flight. Just like you'd never hear someone living in Palatine, Highland Park, Glenview or Lincoln Park or Lakeview to say the same. Highland Park isn't turning into Harvey, IL in the next 20 years.
Because it's brought up here in my experience doesn't make the city more racist. There are just market forces at play here that lead to enough concern that the silent types express their views.
I think what you're seeing is the last thing I mentioned--white and black tend to live closer together here than in Chicago, so racist rants are more common as a result. People in Oak Lawn and Palos tend to be the kids and grandkids of those who went through white flight in the 50s-80s from the south side of Chicago. AA suburbs are becoming much more common further from the city center on the S, SW, and W sides of Chicago. Some might perceive that to be a "threat", so racism rises to the surface. South City, north county, and the inner part of west county are similar here.
Even though white and black live fairly close together in some parts of the city, you'd never hear someone say, "Well, there goes the neighborhood" in Greektown, Wicker Park, etc. when an African American family/individual moves next door. It's just not an economic possibility for those areas to be subject to massive flight. Just like you'd never hear someone living in Palatine, Highland Park, Glenview or Lincoln Park or Lakeview to say the same. Highland Park isn't turning into Harvey, IL in the next 20 years.
Because it's brought up here in my experience doesn't make the city more racist. There are just market forces at play here that lead to enough concern that the silent types express their views.
Wasn't going to chime in but this has continued. Some of the most racist people I have ever met in my life, and outwardly, not closet style, are white people from Chicago's South side, Beverly, Evergreen Park, Oak Lawn....and also in the city on the NW side.
I once got into quite the predicament going to a black restaurant on the wrong side of 95th. I'm white. The people who owned the restaurant were great, great experience. The wrath from others, not so great.
We've got another thread here on knockouts. Let's stop right there. Chicago has had tons of problems with this in recent years. Black gang kids going to Lincoln Park, Lakeview, Michigan Ave and targeting white males walking alone for attack.
Chicago is a great city and place with lots of great things and people. But they have all types of people that I listed in the other post above. So does St. Louis.
There are aggressive outspoken racists, there are backyard bbq style, all kinds.
I think you'll fit right in here. People from other "cooler" regions of the United States tend to have certain preconceived notions about Midwesterners, but the truth of the matter is that St. Louis is quite diverse. I've found my neighborhood to contain all walks to life--every race, every social status, every age group, every background. Every type of cuisine is within walking distance--burgers, Mexican, Lebanese, Spanish tapas, Chinese, Russian, Italian, Afghan, and more. It's "true" diversity with no tensions here in the Grove, and I think that you'll find the people to be extremely friendly in STL. I work out in Chesterfield (a far west suburb), and I really wouldn't say the same about diversity there, though. It's pretty typical suburban--white, affluent, families with children. I see you were raised in Miami; I lived there for awhile and thought it was quite hostile! Good luck, and let us know if you have any questions about the move. I'd be happy to help! I get really bored at work sometimes.
This. You have to go out of your way and put yourself in a position to succeed, and you will. Have a good attitude and put yourself around others with the same.
Wasn't going to chime in but this has continued. Some of the most racist people I have ever met in my life, and outwardly, not closet style, are white people from Chicago's South side, Beverly, Evergreen Park, Oak Lawn....and also in the city on the NW side.
I once got into quite the predicament going to a black restaurant on the wrong side of 95th. I'm white. The people who owned the restaurant were great, great experience. The wrath from others, not so great.
We've got another thread here on knockouts. Let's stop right there. Chicago has had tons of problems with this in recent years. Black gang kids going to Lincoln Park, Lakeview, Michigan Ave and targeting white males walking alone for attack.
Chicago is a great city and place with lots of great things and people. But they have all types of people that I listed in the other post above. So does St. Louis.
There are aggressive outspoken racists, there are backyard bbq style, all kinds.
Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers. Sorry. I totally understand how racism in Chicago is particularly bad in Beverley, Oak Lawn, etc. There is a perceived threat based upon history/proximity/white flight from adjoining neighborhoods and racist tendencies (and outright racism) rear its ugly head. And it works both ways (racism against whites in African American areas). It's the same type of thing you'd get from a long time white resident of Gravois Park 15 years ago. Or Spanish Lake.
I guess what I was trying to say is that in the most urban neighborhoods where a lot of young professionals hang out in a city like Chicago, things are actually fairly homogenous within neighborhoods. It's easy to live in a socioeconomic/racial bubble. People there are as unracist/racist as they are anywhere. But people live in their little neighborhood bubbles, so it doesn't come up as often. You can live in a large neighborhood of 30,000 people with everything you need and live among a largely college-educated (or more) population that is basically white and asian.
In STL, the most urban neighborhoods where young professionals live tend to be much more integrated both economically and racially. That bubble doesn't exist as much in Benton Park, Soulard, Shaw, TGS, the Central Corridor, U-City, etc. Those bubbles of homogeneity exist to some degree, don't get me wrong, but they are really, really tiny bubbles. There are significant numbers of African Americans living among a group of people I would have liked to have thought wouldn't be racist: white (and black), professional, urban dwellers.
Basically, the geography of those urban neighborhoods "outs" the racism of someone you'd like to think more of. There is nothing inherently more or less racist about the citizenry though. I've chatted abt this with one of my closest friends who happens to be African American from Queens. We went to school together in STL. He feels less scrutinized as an African American male walking into a store in a nearly all-white affluent area or an all-African American community than he does in areas that are integrated where there is an economic divide between both groups. If he walks into Frontenac, the attitude is almost like, "he must have money and be okay because he's shopping here." In U-City and the CWE, he felt a bit watched in the stores. He always felt that tension. In Brooklyn Heights, the racially nervous nelly's internal monologue was probably, "Oh, he can afford to drop 2K in rent here are month, so you're okay." Or in Wicker Park it's, "he can afford to drop 1200 or 1400 a month in rent, so he's okay". Here it's, "oh my God, is that guy selling drugs out of his Section 8 apartment? Do I need to call my block captain?"
And you're right, the Lakeview folks were up in arms about mobs of black youth beating a couple guys up. God help you if you were a normal African American male walking down the street on the way to meet some friends. Like I said, it's not that one area is inherently worse than the other. The dynamics just out people.
This. You have to go out of your way and put yourself in a position to succeed, and you will. Have a good attitude and put yourself around others with the same.
I couldn't agree more. I think it goes for everybody too, no matter where you go in the world
I came to St. Louis with a positive attitude, open mind and open heart... and definitely wasn't disappointed. St. Louisans were wonderful to me, no matter where I went in the city!
Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers. Sorry. I totally understand how racism in Chicago is particularly bad in Beverley, Oak Lawn, etc. There is a perceived threat based upon history/proximity/white flight from adjoining neighborhoods and racist tendencies (and outright racism) rear its ugly head. And it works both ways (racism against whites in African American areas). It's the same type of thing you'd get from a long time white resident of Gravois Park 15 years ago. Or Spanish Lake.
I guess what I was trying to say is that in the most urban neighborhoods where a lot of young professionals hang out in a city like Chicago, things are actually fairly homogenous within neighborhoods. It's easy to live in a socioeconomic/racial bubble. People there are as unracist/racist as they are anywhere. But people live in their little neighborhood bubbles, so it doesn't come up as often. You can live in a large neighborhood of 30,000 people with everything you need and live among a largely college-educated (or more) population that is basically white and asian.
In STL, the most urban neighborhoods where young professionals live tend to be much more integrated both economically and racially. That bubble doesn't exist as much in Benton Park, Soulard, Shaw, TGS, the Central Corridor, U-City, etc. Those bubbles of homogeneity exist to some degree, don't get me wrong, but they are really, really tiny bubbles. There are significant numbers of African Americans living among a group of people I would have liked to have thought wouldn't be racist: white (and black), professional, urban dwellers.
Basically, the geography of those urban neighborhoods "outs" the racism of someone you'd like to think more of. There is nothing inherently more or less racist about the citizenry though. I've chatted abt this with one of my closest friends who happens to be African American from Queens. We went to school together in STL. He feels less scrutinized as an African American male walking into a store in a nearly all-white affluent area or an all-African American community than he does in areas that are integrated where there is an economic divide between both groups. If he walks into Frontenac, the attitude is almost like, "he must have money and be okay because he's shopping here." In U-City and the CWE, he felt a bit watched in the stores. He always felt that tension. In Brooklyn Heights, the racially nervous nelly's internal monologue was probably, "Oh, he can afford to drop 2K in rent here are month, so you're okay." Or in Wicker Park it's, "he can afford to drop 1200 or 1400 a month in rent, so he's okay". Here it's, "oh my God, is that guy selling drugs out of his Section 8 apartment? Do I need to call my block captain?"
And you're right, the Lakeview folks were up in arms about mobs of black youth beating a couple guys up. God help you if you were a normal African American male walking down the street on the way to meet some friends. Like I said, it's not that one area is inherently worse than the other. The dynamics just out people.
I appreciate the discussion.
That's why I was hesitant to use examples. Don't get caught up on the minutia of specific examples. I can pick any part of many cities to insert examples of all kinds, including the cities and metros mentioned.
The one thing will consistently disagree with is that somehow young professionals, or more academically educated people are less likely to be racist. I absolutely do not agree with that. Racism is about social and emotional intelligence and education. It doesn't have anything to do with being an academically educated professional. We all know many academically educated people of all races who are racist, as well as those who aren't.
I also don't agree with some of the broad areas mentioned as being this or that, because my experiences have been very mixed and different in all of those areas as well as others.
That's why I was hesitant to use examples. Don't get caught up on the minutia of specific examples. I can pick any part of many cities to insert examples of all kinds, including the cities and metros mentioned.
The one thing will consistently disagree with is that somehow young professionals, or more academically educated people are less likely to be racist. I absolutely do not agree with that. Racism is about social and emotional intelligence and education. It doesn't have anything to do with being an academically educated professional. We all know many academically educated people of all races who are racist, as well as those who aren't.
I also don't agree with some of the broad areas mentioned as being this or that, because my experiences have been very mixed and different in all of those areas as well as others.
I don't think I explained my thoughts very well, because the primary point I'm trying to make isn't one where people of a certain class or educational attainment level are inherently less racist. My view is more that based upon a mixture of geography, demographics, and local economics, racist rants/attitudes/etc can be expressed to a greater/lesser degree...even with the exact same people.
Where we disagree: social/emotional intelligence and academic achivement aren't entirely independent. We get social/emotional intelligence through experience and there are a million ways to get experience in dealing with things, but college can be one of the best ways to get this experience early in life...assuming you attend a school with diversity and where differing opinions are embraced. It's one of the best ways to get a crash course on living w/, understanding, and accepting different types of people. I think other factors are probably more important, but experience like this is certainly helpful. There are racists and non-racists in highly educated and lower educated groups. It's the experience (no matter where you get it) that matters.
Similarly, which group do you suppose will have a higher incidence of racisim.
-100 random professionals (who presumably have the financial means to choose a wide variety of housing locations) who choose to live in an integrated neighborhood.
-100 random working class residents who have lived in an all-white neighborhood for 30 years but now see the neighborhood becoming more diverse. Many of these people can not afford to find housing elsewhere.
There will be racists and tolerant types in both groups, but one group (the professionals who moved in) have pre-qualified themselves for living in an integrated area. Their more racist peers have likely screened themselves out of the neighborhood. The long time residents have not.
The bigger point I was trying to make was that neighborhood health, geography, etc IMO make the big difference. Not to make this a city v city thing, but I think the comparison is instructive in this case and people here know both cities well: Chicago and STL. In general, where a lot of ugly racism occurs is in transitioning neighborhoods. Working and middle class whites who have lived in an area for decades see incoming African Americans and take that as a sign that the neighborhood is going to hell. This may or may not be the case. Maybe the incoming African American families are solid middle class families. Maybe its the white meth head down the street they should really be worried about. The point is, people have a visual indication (skin color), use the data point that the AA community has higher levels of poverty and communities with higher levels of poverty generally have higher levels of crime, and they've jumped to conclusions before even saying hello to their new neighbors. The resulting fear of the neighborhood going to hell then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy when people sell and move out. Spanish Lake, other parts of North County, Beverley, Morgan Park, Oak Lawn...it happens in STL, Chicago, and everywhere else.
What's different between STL and Chicago is the level of integration at the community area/neighborhood level. In Chi 7 out of 77 communities at less than 15% of the city's population. On a more granular level (census block groups), the segregation is even more stark. Whites largely live on one side and blacks on the other, with pretty clear lines of demarcation (Rogers Park, Uptown, Near N, W, and S Sides). And because the city is more dense, people on one side of the neighborhood likely don't interact as much with those on the other side. There are a 20 corner stores and they go to the one closest to their house, etc, so while two groups might be ten blocks away, they live worlds apart. Two good exceptions are Beverly and Morgan Park. The city of STL is not like that, despite its reputation of segregation. Outside of the N side and the more suburban parts of S city, the urban areas in the central corridor and S city are very integrated. 2x to 3x more of the population live in areas with at least 20% black and white habitation and there are fewer clear lines of demarcation. I think that's a good thing, but it contributes to expression of knee jerk racism when compounded with the next component.
The second issue is the overall health of the neighborhoods. As an example, the Near West Side of Chicago is racially integrated as a whole but whites live primarily E of Ashland and black West of Ashland. The median home price east of E of Ashland is $400,000. The median household income is over $110,000. The area has high rents, and nothing affordable w/ the exception of a flop house on Jackson/Halsted. It's safe to say that concern about an influx of poverty/crime due to a housing slump and the knee jerk racism that comes with that is not a major concern. Actually, if anything is changing, it's the fact that condos will continue to be built further west. The area is smuggly confident in its secure little bubble. This doesn't mean that people are less racist...just that they feel less need to express their views based upon fear.
Compared to the near W side of Chicago, an integrated neighborhood in S. City has 25-50% of the avg household income. Rents are cheaper. There is more mixed income housing interspersed in the area. Crime rates are higher. The average housing price is about 40% of the near W side. The state and future of the neighborhood is at least relatively more fragile. There is more palpable concern for neighborhood conditions.
It's not necessarily that a more educated/wealthier person has some sort of moral superiority. It's that their neighborhood does not hang in a delicate balance where things like, "They're taking over the neighborhood" get brought up. The anxiety isn't there. That's what I was trying to convey when I brought up my buddy's experience living in both Chicago and STL. Based upon 1000s of data points of his experience as a black man living in both cities: if he were to walk into a boutique on Fulton Market in Chicago vs. say a boutique on Jefferson/Cherokee, he is more likely to be treated with suspicion at Cherokee/Jefferson...even if the salesperson was the exact same. In one case its, "He must be 'one of us'", while in the other its, "is he one of them?". He's had good and bad experiences in both places, but to him the relative probability of having a bad experience in STL is higher, and he can pretty much tell you where that is most likely to occur for him.
This whole idea/concept is why the backlash in Lakeview last summer w/ the "mobs" was interesting. Wipe away the illusion of that security and you see the reaction isn't much different.
Is that a broad comparison? Kind of I guess. But I think it generally holds true--whether you're talking about neighborhoods, a city, or even a state like Arizona and laws they have on the books targeting Hispanics. It's not the minutae I'm interested in, because like you said, you can find examples/counterexamples anywhere. It's the patterns you can generally find in the minutae that can provide insight.
Like I said in my first post, I think it's really complicated (which is why I ended up writing a short term paper in this one).
Chicago76, i don't think we are going to agree on this one. If you want to privately discuss something more away from the thread, that's fine.
LoveStl you have a good attitude and approach, and you'll do just fine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
