Friday, February 21, 2014

Working Towards Mutual Understanding (Response to "Roles of Actors" Post)

As I was reading the post “Roles of Actors”, it occurred to me that further exploring the sentiments highlighted in the post could be beneficial to the entire class. Based off of our discussions this week, uncomfortable as they were, I felt that this serves as a valuable opportunity for all of us to learn.

 

This entire post presents a plethora of issues that need to be addressed, especially in a class in which power and privilege are embedded in every discussion that we have. That being said, please don't take anything I'm about to say as a personal attack against any one individual. I'm not sharing my perspective in the sense that it is "right", but in the name of moving towards mutual understanding.

 

1. The claims of racism in Hollywood are rooted in systematic discrimination:

 

This may come as a surprise to some, but as Hollywood was founded during a discriminatory time in American history, there were many practices that actively discriminated against minority groups by not allowing them roles in films, plays, or other methods of entertainment. We briefly mentioned "black face" in class, which was a method used to liken white actors to black people. The paint that was used was disrespectfully dark, and their personification of black people was based on stereotypes that would undoubtedly dehumanize them to anyone watching (e.g. “Birth of a Nation“). In the case of Native Americans, there were often westerns that would depict them in similar stereotypical racist ways. Fast forward to 2014, and the memories of these practices still exist. When something is distinctively used as a method to keep people in a place of subjugation, it is completely different than Morgan Freeman playing a guy that was supposed to be Irish. People of color have never systematically portrayed roles that were meant for white actors as a way to perpetuate racism, so it is not the same thing.

 

2. The entire argument is predicated on the notion that all races are on equal ground in America:

 

Racial equity has never, nor does it currently exist in America. Most Americans cling to the belief that "all men are created equal" and think that it somehow means that everyone in this country is treated equally. This has never been true, as the statement itself isn't even inclusive to women (and at the same time there were things like slavery and manifest destiny which were systematically wreaking havoc on people of other races). A country that has so much racial inequity embedded in its history, culture, and way of life is extremely unlikely to produce a society that flourishes with racial equity. While public displays of blatant racism (e.g. KKK) are easy for most people to recognize and deem  morally wrong, institutionalized racism and white privilege are much more difficult to detect because they don’t originate from one distinct source. I know we would all like to believe that all races are on the same level, because that would be awesome, but they're not.

 

3. In order to be discriminated against, you have to be made powerless:

 

Racism, sexism, heterosexism, subjugation, and marginalization, are all things that require one group to have power in which they use to systematically, intellectually, and recreationally oppress another group. Therefore, a group that has no power cannot be racist, sexist etc. towards the group that has power. In the case of race, minority groups cannot be racist or systematically discriminate against whites in America. They can be prejudiced and treat them as such, but largely, they don't have the power to systematically oppress whites as they are the dominant race in the country (in terms of political power, wealth, cultural capital etc.). Similarly, I can never claim that a woman is sexist against men, as I am a male that benefits from patriarchy every day. A woman may be biased towards me, but that's as far as it goes because systematically I belong to the dominant group (men). Most of us have identities that give us privilege, and if that is the case, they simultaneously oppress other groups. Not that this is our fault, but recognizing our privilege and not using it to demean the oppressed group is the first step in reducing its effects. If we choose to ignore our privilege (i.e. saying racism doesn't exist, or goes both ways), we perpetuate it by using it to classify claims of oppressed groups as invalid (note that it's very convenient when the dominant group has the choice to determine if the claims of subjugated groups are even valid, but that's a whole other issue right there.).

 

4. “Why is all of this such a big deal?”

 

As I hope might be realized by this point in my response, race matters, gender matters, sexuality matters etc. These are the foundations of how many people see the world, and their perspectives and experiences matter. For all of us, it might be uncomfortable and difficult sometimes to see the world from a perspective different from our own, but we need to recognize that people are different, and that it is a good thing. We may have similar biological makeups on the inside, but our social contexts and experiences are very different­—that, matters a great deal. If we fail to recognize that everyone's experience is valid, then we enter dangerous terrain where only the experiences of the dominant groups get recognized. There is a reason that history as we are taught in America is largely derived from the perspective of white males, ignoring or leaving out the copious amounts of women and people of color that have made valuable contributions as well. Adopting this view is central for seeing humanity as it is (both good and bad) rather than seeing it as what we think it should be, which is all too often the convenient way out.

 

"Them that's got shall get, and them that's not shall lose"

Even though many people do not discriminate intentionally, it still occurs in many of our daily interactions. The wealth gap between white and black has nearly quadrupled over the last generation. Racial discrimination is implemented in our society not on purpose, but due to the past. White families coming from money have enough money to send their children to college and continue their wealth and success. Many black and latino families are stuck in the true trap of poverty, a poverty unlike the "mythical poverty" which many of us like to imagine. Daria Roithmayer wrote in her article "The Numbers Dont Lie" that we are stuck in a time of "lock-in". The lock-in model focuses on the way that competitive advantage can begin to automatically reproduce itself over time until the advantage eventually becomes insurmountable or, in a phrase, locked in. The lock-in model can help us to understand how it is that racial gaps may well persist indefinitely, even if all intentional discrimination were to end tomorrow" 
People unintentionally refer friends or family of theirs who are the same race for jobs, thus taking opportunities away from those of other races. The cycle is continuous and we should work to eliminate the "white privilege" effect from whites being able to build themselves off of wealth from previous generations and diversify society. 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daria-roithmayr/the-numbers-dont-lie_b_4633715.html

The Casting Games...?

Is it possible that some American audiences aren’t ready to accept diversity in films?  While we have made many social advances since the 1950s in regards to racial rights, it is clear that there is still a great deal of prejudice present in our society towards people depending on the color of their skin.  It could be argued that this prejudice exists because of a white privilege that is embedded in our society.  In “Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack,” McIntosh identifies white privilege as “an invisible package of unearned assets” that are taken advantage of each day (1).  In the article, she later provides a list of forty-six unearned privileges that exist in western culture.  I would like to add one to the list:

47.  I can go to a movie theater, watch a film, and see that the majority of the actors and actresses have the same color skin as I do.

In 2012 when The Hunger Games film was released, some fans complained about the casting and a year later with the release of Catching Fire, the second film in the trilogy, the same racial disputes remain.  Twitter and other media outlets have become a place of venting and disputing, and it is clear that the conflict is because people are upset about the race of the actors playing Rue (in Hunger Games) and Beetee (in Catching Fire).  I had my own problems with the casting of the film; however, I was more angered that the casting of Katniss, Gale, and the characters of District 12 were inaccurate because in the skin they were depicted as having a darker skin tone.  However, many viewers of the film were dismayed at the fact that the casting directors chose people of color to play feature roles in the film, thus indicating how deeply white privilege is embedded in our society.  People have assumptions (because of their white privilege) of what the characters will look like so much so that they misread the book and misinterpret character appearances.     


Despite this casting conflict, I highly recommend that anyone who has not already read the books and seen the movies do so.  They present such wonderful commentary on western culture and are a must read. 

Thursday, February 20, 2014

Roles of Actors

If white actors play the role of different races they get criticized for it. However, if black actors play the role of different races what happens? Nothing. There aren't complaints about it. They are expressing freedom. Then why do white actors suffer for accepting a role they are getting paid millions of dollars to play? Who would say no to that? Absolutely no one. They take the role as a challenge, as do the black or other races do when they take roles of different races other than themselves. Do they donate their money to organizations against discrimination? No. So why is it that white people are forced into this corner because they don't drop everything for other races? Other races don't drop everything for white people. Why is that not a problem? I feel white people are discriminated for these things. White people have just as much right to things as other races. I am against the discrimination around the world. However, I do not think the place to try to change things is with movies and actors. Their jobs are literally to take on different roles other than who they are. All the time. The link at the bottom tells about how black people take on roles of other races and there are no complaints about it. It connects with our discussion in class about the difference between identifying ethnicity and race. That race is more the physical appearance and ethnicity is who you are specifically. Race is just how you look on the outside. On the inside we are all basically the same. Just originate from different places around the same Earth. Why is all of this such a big deal?




http://www.creators.com/health/ethnically-speaking-larry-meeks/actors-playing-different-races.html

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Cheerios Biracial Family

As a Strategic Communication major, I like to keep updated on the recent advertisements and the campaigns that corporations come up with and implement every few months. One advertising campaign that I thought went well with the discussion in class over the past few class periods were the idea of race/ethnicity. We talked about how some people can pick and choice what race they want to claim, as written by Waters, because sometimes they are less apparent while some are more obvious than others (Waters 138.) This topic got me thinking of all the variations of families we see as normal here today in the U.S. that maybe wasn't as accepted a few decades ago. One commercial that caught my eye that goes hand in hand with the many definitions of "American" is the Cheerios biracial happy family that was portrayed in their recent campaign. The commercial was cute and innocent enough to melt millions of people's hearts but also fueled the criticism by thousands. My thought is if this is something so normal today why are people still angered by this portrayal of an american family. General Mills described that they had no ill intentions when creating this ad and that many other variations of families are seen on television today including same sex, divorced, single, spanish speaking, and families with disabilities just to name a few.

From my understanding of the reading and based off the discussion we had in class I would think people would be thrilled to have more accurate representation of "American" families displayed throughout the media. Although we have to credit the millions of people who loved the ad, I wonder about the people who were angered. Cheerios has always been known as a 
wholesome, all-American, classic brand," it only makes sense to me that it continues to evolve just as our culture and society evolves. These are just some of my thought on the issue and encourage differing opinions. Why do you think others were angered and do you have differing opinions on the issue? 

Here is the ad that explains why they went ahead and continued with this campaign and for the first time paid for an ad placement during the most recent SuperBowl for maximized exposure. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/29/business/media/an-american-family-returns-to-the-table.html?_r=0

Your identity = Your choice





      I came across this photo on Pinterest and it immediately made me think of our class discussion on identity and how we form our identity.  Is your identity formed by others or simply how you see yourself? We have been told that your identity is a variety of characteristics and life events that makes up who you are. Where you live, your economic status, your physical appearance, etc.  Is this really true? I got to thinking that no matter where you live or what you look like, isn't it up to you to choose your identity?


   My personal belief is that one's identity is made up of many different aspects, but how you feel about yourself and who you are is the most important part of your identity.  Our book says it best on the chapter regarding identities and social locations when it states, "Identity formation is the result of a complex interplay among a range of factors," (WLMP pg 101). While this is true, I still stand firm in my belief that an individual can choose what aspects of their lives make them who they are.  If you grew up in a impoverished and violent neighborhood, isn't it up to you to make that a part of who you are or ignore that fact and try and pursue a different life?  At the end of the day, you are the only person who is responsible for making yourself happy and if an individual sees their identity in a certain way that makes them happy, I believe it is their right to pursue that identity no matter what anyone else thinks.

  

  




http://www.pinterest.com/pin/262968065713611515/

Tuesday, February 18, 2014

Sexual Preferences Influence NFL Drafting Chances


I stumbled across this article while on Facebook. Recently, a football player named Michael Sam came out as being gay, which makes him the first NFL player that has been openly gay. Sam was named “best defensive player” in the Southeastern Conference and made the decision to announce his sexuality before draft picks. You would think that this wouldn’t affect his chances of being drafted because the game of football is about athletic abilities and not sexual preferences, right? Unfortunately this article highlights other male athletes that have come out. NBA player, Jason Collins came out as a homosexual man and was never drafted back into the NBA. The sad truth is that our society still holds on to racial stereotypes. When an athlete defies the norm of the stereotype, society rejects them.

            This article reminded me of the article we read in class by Dixon. Dixon was a homosexual black male that faced more than one stereotype. Dixon says that sorrow is linked to being a gay professional guy in today’s society.  We will have to wait and see the fate of Michael Sam but we should hold onto the fundamental restated idea that “all men are created equal” (Dixon 3).