I have a nice, long post about a book called Liar and the horror and mayhem being caused by its cover.
However, I'm still waiting on permission from a couple blogs, to quote thier posts. If I don't get permission by Monday, I'll just edit the post to remove the quotes.
So, keep an eye on the blog Aug. 17!
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Ethnic Notions - the documentary
This week, I have about 25 pages of writing due for one of the classes I’m taking in Summer School, but I didn’t want to go without making at least some attempt at a post.
So, today, we here at MaMeMi would like to recommend a documentary for you to watch, about the experiences of African Americans and the way film has portrayed them throughout history. The documentary we think you should watch is called Ethnic Notions and it is a very in-depth look at the ways Black people have been portrayed in film since before the Civil War.
It is our opinion that, while the media has definitely moved past the state of outright and ostentatious racism depicted in the documentary, the media still has a long way to go.
See you next week!
(for a transcript of the film, go here: http://newsreel.org/transcripts/ethnicno.htm )
So, today, we here at MaMeMi would like to recommend a documentary for you to watch, about the experiences of African Americans and the way film has portrayed them throughout history. The documentary we think you should watch is called Ethnic Notions and it is a very in-depth look at the ways Black people have been portrayed in film since before the Civil War.
It is our opinion that, while the media has definitely moved past the state of outright and ostentatious racism depicted in the documentary, the media still has a long way to go.
See you next week!
(for a transcript of the film, go here: http://newsreel.org/transcripts/ethnicno.htm )
Monday, August 3, 2009
Sports Mascots and Ward Churchill
Sports! Finally! Somewhere that minorities can look and find themselves outnumbering the generally privileged majority, and being shown in a generally positive light! Right? Well, yeah, sure – unless you’re Native American. If you’re Native American, then when you look at sports you see stereotypes of your race abounding, whether it be the Atlanta Braves, the Cleveland Indians, or the Washington Redskins.
Ward Churchill is a writer who has managed to anger a lot of people over the course of his career (look up the phrase ‘Little Eichmanns’ if you don’t believe that statement), oftentimes by pointing out the hypocrisy and dastardly deeds of those in charge. In his article “Crimes Against Humanity” in Z Magazine, March 1993, Churchill turned his scorn towards the countless sports teams on the national, collegiate, high school, and local level that use and reinforce Native American stereotypes. Churchill argues, in the article which won’t be quoted here (because this is a public blog and the article is copyrighted material), that the disgusting amount of sports teams that take their names and logos from offensive caricatures of Native Americans should be considered as bad as having a team mascot based on any other minority, such as Jewish, African American, Hispanic, or Asian people. Why is it o.k., Churchill wonders, to treat Native Americans in this manner but people are shocked and appalled at the idea of exaggerating the stereotypes of any other minority for use as a sports team?
Churchill’s article is interesting and intriguing, and we here at MaMeMi can’t help but wonder the same things. Why is it that logos such as these
- Washington Redskins
- Atlanta Braves
- Cleveland Indians
are considered completely acceptable in today’s society? Why does the Mass Media allow such disgusting displays of stereotyping and racism?
Ward Churchill is a writer who has managed to anger a lot of people over the course of his career (look up the phrase ‘Little Eichmanns’ if you don’t believe that statement), oftentimes by pointing out the hypocrisy and dastardly deeds of those in charge. In his article “Crimes Against Humanity” in Z Magazine, March 1993, Churchill turned his scorn towards the countless sports teams on the national, collegiate, high school, and local level that use and reinforce Native American stereotypes. Churchill argues, in the article which won’t be quoted here (because this is a public blog and the article is copyrighted material), that the disgusting amount of sports teams that take their names and logos from offensive caricatures of Native Americans should be considered as bad as having a team mascot based on any other minority, such as Jewish, African American, Hispanic, or Asian people. Why is it o.k., Churchill wonders, to treat Native Americans in this manner but people are shocked and appalled at the idea of exaggerating the stereotypes of any other minority for use as a sports team?
Churchill’s article is interesting and intriguing, and we here at MaMeMi can’t help but wonder the same things. Why is it that logos such as these
- Washington Redskins
- Atlanta Braves
- Cleveland Indiansare considered completely acceptable in today’s society? Why does the Mass Media allow such disgusting displays of stereotyping and racism?
Friday, July 31, 2009
Where Have the Minorities Gone?
So I was watching a rerun of Friends last night while trying to think of what this week’s blog topic should be when I realized that the answer was staring me in the face – where are Manhattan’s minorities? I’ve been to New York City in general, and Manhattan in particular. And when I looked around, the view was not solely attractive 30-something white people. There were members of all different ethnic and racial minorities surrounding me as I walked the streets of Manhattan, a fact that you might not believe if your only knowledge of the population of New York City was from watching T.V. shows like Friends.
There are a lot of strange happenings in the cast of Friends. Six very attractive and witty people who all have jobs but manage to spend the majority of their time in a coffee shop, and live in spacious, well-lit, clean apartments that even a coffee-shop waitress and a mostly out-of-work actor can afford to rent. And not a single one of these people, in eight years, dates or even converses regularly with a person who isn’t White. In fact, it appears that none of these people even pass a person of color on the street or see a minority getting coffee.
How can this be? Where have all the minorities gone? It isn’t until the ninth season that we see a recurring character who also happens to be a minority – a girl who ends up dating two of the central characters (though thankfully not at the same time). Why is ‘Charlie’ the first black person that we ever see the ‘Friends’ talk to more than once? Are the Friends characters racist, or is it simply an unspoken belief in mainstream TV that diversity isn’t necessary in popular sitcoms?
In fact, flipping through the channels, it’s pretty difficult to find a sitcom wherein the majority of the cast is White and the city where it’s set actually has a minority population. There are no poor people, no ethnic or racial minorities, and no people with disabilities. In fact, the only sitcoms where one is likely to find a minority are shows like Family Matters, The Fresh Prince of Bel Air, or The Wayans Brothers – wherein the minorities are given top billing and there are virtually no White people to be found (and not many other minorities either).
So, No, it’s not just the Friends cast that apparently doesn’t consort with people outside their race and ethnicity, this lack of minorities on the show is just a reflection of mainstream T.V.’s reflection of Mass Media’s rejection of minorities.
The question then becomes – would it be better or worse to include minorities in these shows, but keep their portrayals stereotypical or negative?
Which is worse? Negative portrayals of minorities, or a glaring absence of minorities at all?
There are a lot of strange happenings in the cast of Friends. Six very attractive and witty people who all have jobs but manage to spend the majority of their time in a coffee shop, and live in spacious, well-lit, clean apartments that even a coffee-shop waitress and a mostly out-of-work actor can afford to rent. And not a single one of these people, in eight years, dates or even converses regularly with a person who isn’t White. In fact, it appears that none of these people even pass a person of color on the street or see a minority getting coffee.
How can this be? Where have all the minorities gone? It isn’t until the ninth season that we see a recurring character who also happens to be a minority – a girl who ends up dating two of the central characters (though thankfully not at the same time). Why is ‘Charlie’ the first black person that we ever see the ‘Friends’ talk to more than once? Are the Friends characters racist, or is it simply an unspoken belief in mainstream TV that diversity isn’t necessary in popular sitcoms?
In fact, flipping through the channels, it’s pretty difficult to find a sitcom wherein the majority of the cast is White and the city where it’s set actually has a minority population. There are no poor people, no ethnic or racial minorities, and no people with disabilities. In fact, the only sitcoms where one is likely to find a minority are shows like Family Matters, The Fresh Prince of Bel Air, or The Wayans Brothers – wherein the minorities are given top billing and there are virtually no White people to be found (and not many other minorities either).
So, No, it’s not just the Friends cast that apparently doesn’t consort with people outside their race and ethnicity, this lack of minorities on the show is just a reflection of mainstream T.V.’s reflection of Mass Media’s rejection of minorities.
The question then becomes – would it be better or worse to include minorities in these shows, but keep their portrayals stereotypical or negative?
Which is worse? Negative portrayals of minorities, or a glaring absence of minorities at all?
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Crash & Stereotypes
When I first saw the movie Crash, I thought it was a masterpiece, and my high esteem of the film remained through repeated viewings. The myriad plots were well written, the acting and characters were intriguing and well-rounded, and the aspect of interconnectedness weaving its way through the film was masterful. As a film-buff I was impressed. And then I sat down to watch it again, so that I could have a clear and undiluted memory of it, so I could post in this blog how proud I was of the filmmakers for creating a film about racism and intolerance that was a straightforward, honest look at our culture. Sadly, when looking at the film through the lens of MaMeMi I walked away with a different impression of the film – that it wasn’t all that different after all. Yes, I still believe that it was a great movie and I agree with my last impression of the film – that it takes a look at racism in our culture in a new and different way that really brings issues to the forefront of the viewers’ minds without shoving them down their throats. I still think that the movie’s portrayal of the spoken and unspoken prejudices that people of all races, ages, and dispositions feel and face in day-to-day life. But upon the most recent viewing, I’m forced to admit one thing – Crash, like a large part of mainstream Mass Media, portrays minorities in a negative and stereotypical light. And the fact that it does this while creating the positive effects I’ve already mentioned makes this sad fact all the more devastating.
Let’s take a look at the minority portrayals, shall we?
The two young Black men, one of whom sees – and complains (constantly) – about real and/or imagined racism, and then steal cars. (Stereotype – the complainer, the thugs)
The Black man who stands back and watches while a white man feels up his wife, allows racist stereotypes to be reinforced in his work, and then loses his mind and starts breaking laws and aiming a gun at cops. (Stereotype – the ‘Uncle Tom’, the Black man that’s one step away from being a thug). And his wife, who is mistrustful of white people and is constantly on her husband’s case. (Stereotype – the harpy)
The older Black woman who does drugs and can’t take care of herself, and is clueless about her surroundings and her family. (Stereotype – the dependent)
The Latina with a short temper, who is quick to judge and verbally attack. (Stereotype – the feisty Latin woman)
The Asian couple who are involved in human trafficking. (Stereotype – the heartless Asian)
The Hispanic man with all the tattoos who is just trying to make ends meet and keep his family out of a neighborhood where bullets come through the front window. (This one’s actually not too bad)
The Middle-Eastern man that is sick of being called a terrorist and therefore buys a gun for protection, and blames his troubles on anything other than his own refusal to properly learn the language or trust other races. (Stereotype – the foreigner)
Even the White people get a pretty bad rap, with each of them at some point showing overt racism and hatred of one minority or another.
With this cast of characters, the message the movie is trying to convey – that Racism and Stereotypes are Bad gets slightly lost in the overwhelming evidence that even a movie meant to reinforce equality and tolerance can’t help but fall back on ages-old stereotypes about minorities.
Let’s take a look at the minority portrayals, shall we?
The two young Black men, one of whom sees – and complains (constantly) – about real and/or imagined racism, and then steal cars. (Stereotype – the complainer, the thugs)
The Black man who stands back and watches while a white man feels up his wife, allows racist stereotypes to be reinforced in his work, and then loses his mind and starts breaking laws and aiming a gun at cops. (Stereotype – the ‘Uncle Tom’, the Black man that’s one step away from being a thug). And his wife, who is mistrustful of white people and is constantly on her husband’s case. (Stereotype – the harpy)
The older Black woman who does drugs and can’t take care of herself, and is clueless about her surroundings and her family. (Stereotype – the dependent)
The Latina with a short temper, who is quick to judge and verbally attack. (Stereotype – the feisty Latin woman)
The Asian couple who are involved in human trafficking. (Stereotype – the heartless Asian)
The Hispanic man with all the tattoos who is just trying to make ends meet and keep his family out of a neighborhood where bullets come through the front window. (This one’s actually not too bad)
The Middle-Eastern man that is sick of being called a terrorist and therefore buys a gun for protection, and blames his troubles on anything other than his own refusal to properly learn the language or trust other races. (Stereotype – the foreigner)
Even the White people get a pretty bad rap, with each of them at some point showing overt racism and hatred of one minority or another.
With this cast of characters, the message the movie is trying to convey – that Racism and Stereotypes are Bad gets slightly lost in the overwhelming evidence that even a movie meant to reinforce equality and tolerance can’t help but fall back on ages-old stereotypes about minorities.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
The 2002 Oscars - a step forward, or backward?
Last week, while arguing that inequality still exists, I mentioned the 2002 Academy Awards, when Denzel Washington and Halle Berry made history and America heaved a sigh of relief, that the Academy clearly couldn’t be racist, if they were willing to admit that it was two African American actors who gave the best performances of the year. Today, I would like to take a look at these wins and try to explain the claim that this is just a further instance of the Mass Media portraying minorities in a negative light.
Denzel Washington is the kind of man that women love and men want to be: he is cool, smooth, sexy, and smart. He plays characters with depth and intensity. He has starred in movies such as Malcolm X and The Hurricane: both of which confronted racism and the plight of African American men throughout history. But of the many roles which made him famous and brought him critical acclaim and the love of fans, it was the role of a ‘dirty cop’ which won him an Oscar. Washington won the Best Actor Academy Award for his role in Training Day, a role that consisted of him playing a street-wise cop that lies, cheats, steals, and kills. Rather than any of his acclaimed performances in roles that challenged the racist status-quo and provided a positive role-model for young black men, the Oscar went to Denzel Washington when he played to the many racist stereotypes and fears that permeate our media and culture.
Halle Berry was the first African American woman to win the Best Actress Academy Award. She was not the first Black woman to win an Oscar; that honor goes to Hattie McDaniel, who won Best Supporting Actress for her role as a slave in Gone With the Wind. Berry isn’t the first woman to win a Best Actress award for ‘uglying herself up’ – Charlize Theron won for playing a serial killer, and Julia Roberts traded in her romantic-comedy crown to win an Oscar for Erin Brockovich. However, Halle Berry is the only woman on the list of Best Actress winners whose character angered a large part of her community and reinforced racist stereotypes. Halle Berry’s character in Monster’s Ball was a poor Black widow who turned to a relationship with the racist man who, effectively, killed her husband. Berry’s character was uneducated and helpless, and the majority of the Black community was not only outraged by the film and her character, but also by the mainstream white media’s commendation of the film and its message.
(for more about the response to Washington and Berry’s Oscar wins, see http://www.seeingblack.com/x032802/post_oscars.shtml at SeeingBlack.com)
Is all of this a coincidence, or is it a symptom of a much larger illness that affects all areas of the mass media, wherein minorities are portrayed as bad, scary, corrupt, stupid, helpless, or any of the other stereotypes that lead to inequality and injustice worldwide?
We here at MaMeMi believe that it is the latter.
Denzel Washington is the kind of man that women love and men want to be: he is cool, smooth, sexy, and smart. He plays characters with depth and intensity. He has starred in movies such as Malcolm X and The Hurricane: both of which confronted racism and the plight of African American men throughout history. But of the many roles which made him famous and brought him critical acclaim and the love of fans, it was the role of a ‘dirty cop’ which won him an Oscar. Washington won the Best Actor Academy Award for his role in Training Day, a role that consisted of him playing a street-wise cop that lies, cheats, steals, and kills. Rather than any of his acclaimed performances in roles that challenged the racist status-quo and provided a positive role-model for young black men, the Oscar went to Denzel Washington when he played to the many racist stereotypes and fears that permeate our media and culture.
Halle Berry was the first African American woman to win the Best Actress Academy Award. She was not the first Black woman to win an Oscar; that honor goes to Hattie McDaniel, who won Best Supporting Actress for her role as a slave in Gone With the Wind. Berry isn’t the first woman to win a Best Actress award for ‘uglying herself up’ – Charlize Theron won for playing a serial killer, and Julia Roberts traded in her romantic-comedy crown to win an Oscar for Erin Brockovich. However, Halle Berry is the only woman on the list of Best Actress winners whose character angered a large part of her community and reinforced racist stereotypes. Halle Berry’s character in Monster’s Ball was a poor Black widow who turned to a relationship with the racist man who, effectively, killed her husband. Berry’s character was uneducated and helpless, and the majority of the Black community was not only outraged by the film and her character, but also by the mainstream white media’s commendation of the film and its message.
(for more about the response to Washington and Berry’s Oscar wins, see http://www.seeingblack.com/x032802/post_oscars.shtml at SeeingBlack.com)
Is all of this a coincidence, or is it a symptom of a much larger illness that affects all areas of the mass media, wherein minorities are portrayed as bad, scary, corrupt, stupid, helpless, or any of the other stereotypes that lead to inequality and injustice worldwide?
We here at MaMeMi believe that it is the latter.
Friday, July 10, 2009
Yes, it exists.
O.K., I know what you’re thinking. “Intolerance? Inequality? BAH! This is AMERICA, and it’s 2009! Those things don’t exist anymore! We abolished slavery, schools and public restrooms are no longer considered ‘separate but equal,’ Denzel Washington and Halle Berry won Oscars for Best Actor and Best Actress (respectively) in 2002, and we have a BLACK PRESIDENT! There’s no such thing as racism in America anymore!”
Ok, maybe you weren’t thinking that, but I can assure you that there are people out there who do believe that intolerance and inequality is no longer an issue in America. Well, I’m here to tell you these issues DO exist and they ARE a problem..
Sure, segregation isn’t legal anymore, but that doesn’t mean that white kids and black kids and Hispanic kids and Asian kids all get the same education.
Sure, we have a black President, but has any President before Obama been defined by his race?
Sure, Denzel Washington and Halle Berry both won Oscars, but have you looked at the roles that won them those Academy Awards?
We at MaMeMi, for one, have looked at these things and come to a conclusion: racism, sexism, inequality, and intolerance are still EVERYWHERE, and not only is the Mass Media not fighting against these problems, it’s promoting them. It seems like in every aspect of the media, the public is being told either that inequality and intolerance doesn’t exist, or that it exists but it’s ok.
Mass Media Minorities was created because of one simple belief: that the first step in changing the world is to convince people that there’s something that needs to be changed. That’s our mission statement: to bring attention to the ways in which the world, in general, and the media, in particular, needs to change. We want to bring your attention to the ways that inequality and intolerance are both permitted by and encouraged by the media, in the hopes that enough people will stand up and say “This isn’t OK!” and things will change for the better.
So here’s a question to our readers: what arguments have you heard claiming that these issues aren’t actually a problem?
And how do you counter these statements?
Ok, maybe you weren’t thinking that, but I can assure you that there are people out there who do believe that intolerance and inequality is no longer an issue in America. Well, I’m here to tell you these issues DO exist and they ARE a problem..
Sure, segregation isn’t legal anymore, but that doesn’t mean that white kids and black kids and Hispanic kids and Asian kids all get the same education.
Sure, we have a black President, but has any President before Obama been defined by his race?
Sure, Denzel Washington and Halle Berry both won Oscars, but have you looked at the roles that won them those Academy Awards?
We at MaMeMi, for one, have looked at these things and come to a conclusion: racism, sexism, inequality, and intolerance are still EVERYWHERE, and not only is the Mass Media not fighting against these problems, it’s promoting them. It seems like in every aspect of the media, the public is being told either that inequality and intolerance doesn’t exist, or that it exists but it’s ok.
Mass Media Minorities was created because of one simple belief: that the first step in changing the world is to convince people that there’s something that needs to be changed. That’s our mission statement: to bring attention to the ways in which the world, in general, and the media, in particular, needs to change. We want to bring your attention to the ways that inequality and intolerance are both permitted by and encouraged by the media, in the hopes that enough people will stand up and say “This isn’t OK!” and things will change for the better.
So here’s a question to our readers: what arguments have you heard claiming that these issues aren’t actually a problem?
And how do you counter these statements?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)