Beyond Forty Acres and a Mule: African American Landowning Families since Reconstruction

9. “Justifiable Pride”: Negotiation and Collaboration in Florida African American Extension

9 “Justifiable Pride” Negotiation and Collaboration in Florida African American Extension Kelly A. Minor Amanda Parrish, Leon County’s African American home demonstration agent, recalled “Community Problems Handled” in her 1920 annual report. “The people wanted to know at first what was the use of joining the clubs,” she explained. That question was common where home extension was new. But the women also wondered “what would become of the goods after they had canned them and how is it that the government would send an agent to them if it did not expect some pay in return.”1 In Florida during the height of legalized segregation it is not surprising that rural African Americans were cautious about, even suspicious of, outsiders sent into their county by the state and national government claiming they wanted to help local families without compensation or condition. But Parrish was genuine; extension agents offered free, voluntary programs to aid rural communities, the benefits theirs to keep. Parrish knew that, but until she could prove it to local families, they had little reason to accept or trust her. At first glance, Parrish and other black extension agents fit right into the local communities to which they were assigned. All were African American women, most were from rural backgrounds, and many were middle aged. But they also were university trained and government appointed. Armed with scientific expertise and enthusiasm for improved living, they nevertheless were strangers explaining to grown women how to run their homes and raise their children. Local women, however, came to accept home demonstration agents because the agents let the women choose what the service would become in their communities. 206 · Kelly A. Minor Together, agents and families negotiated a program of reform and then collaborated to carry it out. They were not, however, unfettered in their negotiations. African American home demonstration work faced endemic obstacles to success. On a regional scale, the southern extension apparatus was segregated and inequitable. In Florida, as elsewhere, the extension reflected race and gender bias. This segregation created a hierarchy that facilitated close scrutiny of black programs. Until the 1960s, Agricultural Extension for white men was headquartered at University of Florida (UF) in Gainesville, while its black counterpart, both Agricultural and Home Extension, operated from Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University (FAMU) in Tallahassee. White female extension was based at Florida State College for Women (FSCW) in Tallahassee.2 Male authority over female reform likewise existed early in Florida Extension. Until 1925, African American agricultural agent A. A. Turner directly supervised all black extension workers in Florida, and male agricultural agents taught rural women basic Home Extension practices. As extension work expanded, however, it became clear that a female district agent, akin to the white district agents who coordinated county agents and answered to the state home demonstration supervisor, would be an asset. Though county agents were scattered across the panhandle, the creation of the “Negro” District Home Demonstration position unified their work into a more comprehensive system that reached more families, put women directly in charge of the work, and tailored the programs more closely to women’s needs.3 Once black women gained home demonstration positions at the county level they organized clubs for farm women and picked local club leaders, clubwomen who demonstrated a clear grasp of program principles and who could successfully teach others. These adult positions were replicated for girls, who staffed a Junior Home Demonstration Council and served as 4-H club leaders. Club leaders served as linchpins in local home demonstration, acting as liaisons between farm families and agents.4 The “Negro” division in Florida and other Jim Crow states employed fewer agents in the field, controlled fewer resources for education, and reported to white supervisors who exercised varying degrees of influence on local programs. Certainly racism and sexism shaped and frequently hindered extension work among black farm families. But bias did not totally define the services that “Negro” division home demonstration agents delivered. Overcoming racism and sexism did not dominate agents’ and farm families’ objectives, nor did racism and sexism undermine the goals that agents and rural families pursued. In fact, fifty years of segregation Negotiation and Collaboration in Florida African American Extension · 207 caused black agents and clubwomen to turn extension’s shortcomings to their advantage. By selectively adapting the standard home demonstration agenda, clubwomen could reinforce their farm communities’ autonomy , consequently heightening their influence within those same...