Redskins

Mascots have become a sore spot for many Americans. Some claim that they are a battleground for race relations, while other think everyone should lighten up about it and “take it with a grain of salt” (King 72). Schools across the nation, from Los Angeles to New York, to Dallas, have banned the use of mascots that stem from racial identities--Native Americans to be specific.

Personally, I think this whole debate comes down to intention and interpretation. Let’s talk about intention first. The questions that need to be asked are some of the following: Was the mascot created out of respect and admiration for the culture? Are desirable qualities (honor, courage, strength) the ones being highlighted in the portrayal of the mascot? Is it in any way damaging or offensive to the group of people from which it was derived? If the answer to any of these questions creates suspicions of the intentions behind the mascot, it should be done away with.

This is a sticky subject because even if the intentions of the creators of this mascot were pure, it could still offend people of that race depending upon how it is interpreted. The example that comes to mind for me is the Redskins. I have always perceived it to be a mascot that embodies the positive qualities of the Native American culture. The small picture of a Native American on the logo is not one (from my point of view, that is) that mocks the rich cultural heritage. But, the name “Redskins” doesn’t exactly sound respectful in my book. How would a Native American feel about the mascot and the name “Redskins”? I think that is where the answer has to come from on whether or not it is appropriate.

I believe that the minority opinion is always marginalized. Some people might think detractors need to “lighten up,’ ‘to get over it,’ ‘to grow up,’ ‘to get a life,’ ‘to get a grip,’” (King 72). But this is a perfect example of the status quo being questioned. Those who are bringing the issue of mascots into the forefront of the struggle for equality are possibly representing an opinion that has been silenced in the past.

Stealing or Sharing?

"...Hip-hop is a Black thing and whites have historically stolen Black culture..." (Kitwana, 3-4). This is what a Black girl insinuated in one of my classes a few weeks ago. I was pissed. We were watching an advertisement on youtube that had been on TV for awhile. It's called the "Slap Chop Rap." As lame as it is, the advertisement caught people's attention. After the clip had finished playing she raised her hand and said, "The only thing I noticed was that it is a whole rap/hip-hop commercial without one single Black person. Everyone in this advertisement is White. Hip-hop was originally a Black thing, created by Black people, and part of Black culture...." I remember walking out of class trying to get my head around what she was saying. To me, it was no big deal. There's tons of all Black music videos, why can't there be one that's all White?

After reading Kitwana's article, I think I understand where she's coming from. Kitwana argues that the reason White kids were drawn to hip-hop is because it captures the frustration of the youth without a voice and the struggles they face in life. And because the lyrics are so explicate, rife with themes of the street life, crime, drugs dealing, and so on, hip-hop is often made the scapegoat for the decline in American values and society as a whole. So although it's endorsed by the White youth of America, and is a huge presence in our media (MTV, BET, countless magazines, and even newspapers covering the hip-hop scene) it has this double-edged sword effect. The White youth want to embrace it and their parents want to blame it.

If I were a Black person, this would frustrate me. It takes White people's endorsement to make it popular, but then they want to put all the blame for societal problems on it, and then turn around and steal it? Although I do agree that the lyrics are not anything close to positive (the majority of the time), I don't think it's fair to put all the blame on hip-hop. Kitwana addresses this by saying, "Our country stands at a crucial crossroads...//...We're not placing great enough emphasis on educating or listening to the voices of American youth. Our public schools and quality of life for a significant number of our young are in serious decline" (Kitwana 9). Hip-hop is something they can relate to, not what got them in these situations to begin with. And although White kids have really latched on and embraced this Black culture, "no matter now mainstream hip-hop gets, it will never duplicate rock and roll's metamorphosis--becoming more strongly associated with white Americans than Blacks" (Kitwana 2).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st3nmjTJmVk

Exotic, Erotic, and Expendable

Hook's article was shocking, yet informative. At first I thought she was over-analyzing things and took takes a stretch of the imagination to validate the connections she was pointing out between media representations of women and the themes of racism she discusses. However, she backed every point she made so solidly with historical evidence that the truth of her accusations become undeniable, unavoidable. I felt so uneducated about racism reading this article. She did a great job of giving LOTS of examples of simultaneous racist and sexist media representations from various sources, present and past: movies, music (Tina Turner), modeling (Iman), slavery auctions and it's effects, and simple material items on display (chocolate boobs).

Her main premise about black female sexuality is that since slavery, their image has been one of expendability and eroticism that can be taken advantage of whenever and however. She writes, "Just as 19th-centry representations of black female bodies were constructed to emphasize that these bodies were expendable, contemporary images (even those created in black cultural production) give a similar message...//....the Tina Turner story reveals that she was anything but a wild woman; she was fearful of sexuality, abused, humiliated, fucked, and fucked over." (64/67).

I think the genre of media today that most strongly conveys this image of black female sexuality is the music industry. In almost every single rap/hip-hop song that is released today, there is a negative reference to the female body. Even though the women are aware their images are being sexualized, they are unable to break free of this cycle that has suppressed them for over one hundred years! One might argue that there are white women (or Hispanic, in the case of Shakira and Christina Aguilera) who are sexualized in the same way, but it is a much stronger, more prevalent theme in the images of black female musicians.

I think Jennifer Hudson and Jordin Sparks are two of the few popular black female artists that came to mind when thinking of exceptions to this rule. But cultural icons? Chart-topping artists? Beyonce, Rihanna, Mary J. Blige, Ciara, Mariah Carey, Eve, Blu Cantrell, Lil Mama, Kelis, and LeToya....just to name a few. Sadly, the list of women who embody this image of balck female sexuality is much, much longer than the former.

"This poem speaks to the desire of black women to construct a sexuality apart from that imposed upon us by a racist/sexist culture, calling attention to the ways we are trapped by conventional notions of sexuality and desirability: ....it's a sex object if you're pretty and no lover or love and no sex if you're fat get back fat black woman be a mother grandmother strong thing but not a woman gameswoman romantic woman love needer man seeker dick eater sweat getter fuck needing love seeking woman" (65). This poem makes my heart hurt because I'm a white woman who has not experienced any type of suppression to this degree. This is the image black women are trying to break free from, the cycle they are struggling to break.

No Control, Censorship, or Limitations

Acham's basic premise in the conclusion of Televised Revolution: Prime Time and the Struggle for Black Power is basically that there needs to be more representation of black people on television. She calls for more diverse representations as well, along with more criticism of the Black community from within the Black community itself. I would have to agree with this. The problem with TV is that in order to get on the air and stay on, ratings and the number of people tuning in to view the show as an audience have to be really high. And if it only appeals to the Black audience, it's most likely to get canceled and taken off the air. However, as Acham argues, that's where cable television presents itself as a hopeful scene for Blacks to gain some ground in the struggle for representation.

The majority of the article sites Chris Rock as an example of....well, a lot of different things. My younger brother loves listening to Chris Rock's comedy sketches, and so I have listened to a few as well. Before reading this article, I was not crazy about him. I thought he 1.) used too much profanity, 2.) said a lot of offensive things, and 3.) had an annoying voice. But after reading this article, I've gained a lot of respect for him as a comedian and as a person. I realized he doesn't just write comedy because he's a funny guy (he actually studies comedy and is extremely well-educated). He has social issues he wants to address. He has aspirations of positive change for our society.

He is a Black man who confronts racism and issues within the Black community head-on, without apologies or worrying about offending other racial groups (White people, Asians, Indians, etc.). Through his humor, he is talking directly to the African American community. As a White person listening to his comedy, I felt offended and unsure of how to take the things he says. I felt afraid to laugh because there's not really anyone else in the media who confronts racism quite like Chris Rock: head on, calls his own community out for their mistakes, and makes people laugh while doing it.

There are TONS of White comedians who can say whatever they want about White people, and it's totally fine. So why am I, as a White person, trying to criticize a Black person for doing the same? Blue Collar Comedy Tour was a huge hit a few years ago. It featured four White, male comedians who said a lot of controversial things about White people and White sub-cultures (hillbillies, for example) but people loved it, and no one questioned what they were saying. As a White person, I think we need to stop trying to control what the Black community wants to put out there, and stop worrying that their depictions may being taken out of context. That's when true equality for representation will be achieved: when there are a multitude of Black representations, without control, censorship, or limitations from the White community.

The Cosby Show & Sister, Sister

Coleman has a very calm, reasonable approach to her research and analysis of the way Blacks are portrayed in comedic television shows. I really liked her style of writing and careful, yet direct, approach to the subject. I found it interesting that her "favorite" or what she considers to be the "most accurate" portrayal of Blacks in a comedic TV sitcom was The Cosby Show. A few years ago, we debated this TV show in class: two white kids, two black kids. I argued that it was finally an accurate portrayal of a lot of Black families that up until this point had absolutely ZERO media representation. I watched the show and loved it! The two Black kids I was discussing this topic with, however, were not from families like the Huckstables. They felt that The Cosby Show set that bar TOO high for (not themselves, but other young adults from their home neighborhoods) other Black people to reach. They felt that when they or one of their friends was unable to reach that standard, they backlash they would receive after from society because of this show being aired would be so much worse. To say the very least, they were not appreciative or receptive of this.

Even after hearing their point of view, my stance on The Cosby Show stands firm. It's a solid family, with good morals and values that are really irrelevant to the viewers race or ethnic background--but the color of skin of the character is so very important because the only roles they were given on television before this were degrading, demeaning, and reinforcing of so many stereotypes.

Another show Coleman did not discuss that I think comes close (not all the way, but close) to what The Cosby Show did for Blacks is the comedic TV sitcom, Sister, Sister. It's a show about a pair of identical twins who are separated at birth, one raised by a single male, Ray, and one raised by a single female, Tina. The two sisters meet up, and for the sake of the girls, Tina and Ray move the two families under one house, creating a new "family" (there is no romantic interest between Ray and Tina). The humor is clean, the girls are driven and active members of their school/neighborhood, and the "parents" are both working professionals. For me, it doesn't match up to The Cosby Show because there is no marriage between the "parents," and the girls are adopted. However, this may be the reality for many people out there (race aside), and so in that way, it is an accurate portrayal of the lives of those individuals.

The one critique I have of the Black sitcoms (and of the White sitcoms--Friends, my personal fav : )) is that it's either 100% Black representation, or 100% white representation. WHY??? In my life, if there were a sitcom about my family, it would be full of all different kinds of races and cultures interacting. The world we live in is not so divided and separate. I think it becomes so much harder to create a show with equal representation and positive interactions between races that writers would much rather stick to and all-Black or all-White storyline. Once this changes, and representation (no just among Black and Whites, but Latinos, Asians, Indians, etc.) becomes more diversified and equal in screen time (I don't know the specific term, haha, but the amount of time an individual is actually portrayed on the screen), THEN I will say we've made another step forward in the fight for racial equality.

Can I have your number?

Attitudes on racial discrimination are varying. Some think racial discrimination is at an all time high--worse than ever! Others, however, hold the opinion that we have made leaps and bounds toward a just society over the past 40 years. The media reflects the diversity of people's perceptions of racial tension through the huge array of depictions of racial minorities. For the sake of a more in-depth analysis (and because it was the focus of today's reading selections), I am going to concentrate on the discrimination of African Americans, and the attitudes of White people on racism today.

The Culture, Media, and the White Mind: The Character of Their Content article pointed out the fact that although Whites say their attitudes have become more tolerant toward Blacks, but their actions show little proof to follow. The Racial Chameleon comments on this paradox of racial progress saying, "We believe the majority of White Americans experience ambivalent thoughts and feelings about African Americans, a complex mixture of animosity and yearning for racial harmony...//...the current culture rejects the most overt claims of Black inferiority--and this ironically cultivates White impatience and hostility."

Let's look at the popular MAD TV clip that's become a hit on YouTube, "Can I get your number?" (The reason I found out about this clip is because my sister was dating a Black guy at the time, and he showed it to her, who then showed it to me--just saying.) To me, it's humorous because the guy has no idea how to take a hint: SHE'S NOT INTO YOU!!! It would be funny regardless of the guy's race. But the clip if jam-packed with racial prejudices and uses the major stereotypes of Black men as a central source of humor. That's where things get tricky. Yes--it is humorous because it would not matter if the guy was White, Black, Asian or Latino. However, it completely blurs the lines between the funny, innocent humor of the situation (the guy) and the racial stereotypes that become inseparably intertwined in what you're watching and laughing at.

One question I am left with after watching (and enjoying) something like this is if he guy that showed this clip to my sister laughed at it, does that make it okay for me to laugh too? I don't think so. I think this is part of the lack of change in our actions: we say we're all for racial equality, but our actions (for Whites and Black alike) say something completely contradictory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRbkkqZikx4

Hybrid Humanity

In Ethnicity, Race and Nation, Barker talks about different forms of racism, ethnicity and power, national pride, and so on. Basically, this chapter creates a solid foundation for our discussion of race and culture to be built upon.

Although it was broad and covered a lot of information, one concept that caught my attention was that of “hybridity.” Before reading this chapter I had never heard the word “hybridity” used in the context of race. When I hear the word “hybrid,” I think of cars. But that’s not quite what Barker was talking about. He says that cultures are not homogeneous, but that “each category is always already a a hybrid form that is also divided along the lines of religion, class, gender, age, nationality and so forth. Thus, hybridization is the mixing of that which is already a hybrid.”

The people who are able to function in more than one culture successfully are not so much faced with this huge process of culture shock. I mean sure, after having lived in Spain for nine months, I can personally attest that culture shock is very real and can be painful to go through. But just as I did, there comes a point when a person is able to function just fine in more than one culture; or as Barker puts it, “it is more valid to see these young people as skilled operators of cultural code switching.”

In many mediums I think this message is still a new concept; it’s not an easy message to find. Let’s look at the travel channel. There’s tons of shows on other cultures (Samantha Brown’s Great Weekends, Anthony Bourdain’s No Reservations, etc.), but I think TV tries to really highlight the differences between cultures and portray them as homogeneous set of beliefs/unspoken rules, customs, a language, and a race that can only be understood by people of that culture. However, cultures themselves are a hybrid, and many people can function within two (or even more) cultures comfortably.

There many not be much representation on TV (like TV shows, I mean) for the “bicultural” lifestyle that is a reality for many of us, but one outlet of the media that has a decent amount of depictions of this is in film. Movies like "Sisterhood of the traveling Pants," "Spanglish," and "Bend It Like Beckham" are just three examples of many films with characters who function in two culture spheres with equal success. I think this is an important concept to highlight because humanity is constantly intermixing and changing. Race and culture lines are being crossed more and more, and I would argue that this is becoming more of a norm than an oddity.