Perhaps the aggregators at memeorandum were trolling me this morning, linking me to a Medium post that no one else seems yet to be discussing. Regardless, the headline “The Unintentional Racism Found in Traffic Signals” was too much to ignore.
Indeed, not being familiar with David Kaufman’s oeuvre, I’m honestly not sure whether this is supposed to be serious or a clever satire of the moment:
A few months back, before Covid-19 kept us in our homes and George Floyd made us take to the streets, I was walking with a friend, her daughter, and my twin sons. My friend is White and I’m not — something I’d never given a second thought until we reached a crosswalk. “Remember, honey,” she said to her daughter as we waited for the light to turn green, “we need to wait for the little White man to appear before we can cross the street.”
I realize that White people like to exert control over nearly everything everyone does, I thought, but since when did this literally include trying to cross the street?
Part of my surprise here was a function of age. My boys are a few months younger than her daughter and we hadn’t yet tackled the “crossing the street” component of basic toddler training. But as a Black dad, I was struck by the language at play. How is it possible that well into the 21st century, parents all over Manhattan — well-meaning, #BLM-marching parents — are teaching their children to ask “little White men” for permission to cross the street? And why doesn’t this seem to bother them?
Because it’s a race-neutral traffic signal? But, apparently, it actually did bother Kaufman:
It certainly bothered me — so much so that I began to dig deep into my fortysomething consciousness to try and remember if I was raised asking a little White guy to let me cross the street. Were these the words my progressive White mother used to teach her little Brown children the fundamentals of pedestrian safety? Turns out, I wasn’t raised this way — and neither, most likely, were you.
He recalls that, in the beforetimes, traffic signals had words on them. He did some research and found out that we’ve slowly been taking words off of signs to make them universal, replacing them with symbols. (I’ve known this for decades, but probably paid more attention having spent some of my childhood and young adulthood overseas and thus being more tuned in to international signage. Indeed, I had to learn them to get licensed to drive in Germany 31 years ago.)
In fact, the Walking Person’s first major move actually took place in 1971 when it became enshrined in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices — the FHWA bible — as an alternative to the words “WALK” and “DON’T WALK.” For the next four decades or so, our little friend slowly, informally replaced its outdated predecessors until 2009; that’s when the Walking Person finally became the FHWA standard and, as the spokesperson says, “the option to use words is no longer permitted in newly installed signals.” One day soon, every traffic signal will contain the Walking Person, along with its counterpart: the bright red hand telling folks not to walk.
So the “little man” is actually a little person, but that little person is still white. Right?
Close. It’s “lunar white,” according to the [Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)]: a shade of white with yellow and grey accents that mimics the color of the moon. Lunar white wasn’t chosen because it sounds cool. According to FHWA research, the agency spokesperson says, moonlight offers “the peak sensitivity for the rod cells in the human retina.” In other words, our vision is predisposed to favoring the clarity and intensity of moonlight.
In the end, it’s not that the Walking Man is so super-duper white. Rather, his true competitive edge is that he’s super-duper bright. “The use of bright colors… offers the greatest contrast against a dark background,” the FHWA spokesperson says. “They do not lend themselves to confusion with other colors [and] are thought to provide the greatest level of comprehension and safety.”
And there you have it: The government-approved origins of the “little White men” telling us to cross the street at corners across New York. Thanks to help from the FHWA, I am now convinced that technology and necessity, rather than some anti-Black conspiracy, propelled the shift from verbal crosswalk cues to a lunar-white Walking Person. But my heart still sinks at the specter of teaching my sons to ask a White man for permission to do — well, anything. Because so much of the world already insists that we do.
Granting that the very nature of systemic racism is that it’s often so incredibly subtle as to be easily unnoticed, looking for it in traffic signals seems a stretch. (Indeed, when I saw the headline I was expecting some argument about the subtle racism of the green-amber-red hierarchy.)
Still, given the extent race does play an outsized role in American life, I’m fine with this:
At a time when the totems of systemic anti-Blackness are being dismantled at a surprising pace, there comes a moment when you have to consider the endgame. And traffic lights are one of those moments. Because while this highly politicized period does demand a racial rethink, overhauling the stoplight industrial complex is probably not the best use of our resources. A White man isn’t really telling us when to cross the street, even if we hear a friend blithely expressing it in those terms.
Nonetheless, that little White man woke me up to the ways that language imparts power and privilege even upon the most banal necessities. And so, as I begin teaching my boys survival basics like riding a bike, waiting in line, and… yes… crossing the street, I’ll work hard to avoid phrases like “little White man.” Obviously “bright light person” rolls off the tongue far less mellifluously, but a bit of extra verbal labor is worth the price of not conceding our power to even one more little White man.
Honestly, I don’t think I ever used the phrase “little White man” when teaching my girls how to cross the street.
