I don’t have the time or the inclination to read the drivel on “stuff white people like”, mostly because I tire of people trying to define others in terms of the colour of their skin.

I am not here to engage you in a conversation about the colour of my skin. Or yours, for that matter.

I’m here, practically anonymous, to discuss the images Mr. Wasabi use.

Why would you feel the need to make assumptions about the colour of my skin?

Do you think skin-colour correlates with personality traits?

How about IQ scores?

I don’t even know why you thought your race was relevant. What is this? Race-wars?

I don’t see how anyone could think race one-up-manship is a constructive response to discussions about racism.

I am almost amused.

If you don’t think that racist images contribute to oppression, then fine. But many disagree, as does the data.

I liked the line about “arguing with the outer wall of a Whole Foods in Connecticut.” I’ll remember it.

Ahhhhh yes, that’s exactly the cliche I was waiting for. It really completes the compendium of crass moral-superiority cliches masquerading as social awareness.

Clearly I know nothing about the oppression of ethnic minorities, so I guess I better plop my black ass down in the corner and do some soul-searching alone. Because you’re like arguing with the outer wall of a Whole Foods in Connecticut.

I don’t have access to a lot of journal articles, but a quick search on google scholar of “impact harmful images race” pulls up plenty. I took it as a given that studies wouldn’t be needed to point out the obvious that racist images hurt people and contribute to their oppression. Obviously I should have rethought that assumption about 5 comments ago.

Just because you can’t pinpoint the exact quantity of harm an image does doesn’t mean it’s not harmful.

And of course almost all my favorite books, shows, etc. also contribute to the oppression of people. This stuff is pervasive. If it wasn’t, this blog wouldn’t have many posts.

My solution is try to improve things. I know I make mistakes and say and do offensive things, but that doesn’t mean I throw my hands up and give up (after all, I have to right to be a jerk!). I try to get better. And that’s what we should be doing as a society. As you said, we write letters, we boycott, we protest. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t do those things or that offensive images should be banned. What I’m saying is that attitudes like yours are part of the problem. Refusing to acknowledge that words can hurt is part of problem and denying that images can oppress is part of the problem.

If I seem to be “obtuse” about the kind of damage these images cause, it is because I can’t honestly presume to know exactly what this damage is.

I know firsthand the damage done by the ingredients of some snack foods – we have stats out the wazoo for the health impact of saturated fats, diets high in sodium and simple carbohydrates, and so forth. And that’s why all kid-friendly cartoon characters on junk foods concerns me. But I can’t quantitatively measure the human impact of one potentially offensive image compared to another. I don’t have hard data to prove that humans have been harmed so deeply by this image that it overwhelms their right and capacity to fight against it or mitigate its alleged damage.

And neither do you. Which is why you haven’t presented any, but rather regurgitated the same obtuse line about how an image might possibly contribute to oppression. Well fine, sure, you can have that for what it’s worth. And by the same token, nearly all of your favorite books, paintings, films, plays, and TV shows can do the same – any fragment can be an offensive misrepresentation of a whole to someone (just reading the mixed reviews of “Precious” was a good reminder of how an image that pleases and uplifts some appears deeply troubling, exploitative, and egregiously stereotypical to others).

So what’s your solution to that? We already have the right to debate and challenge images in the public forum and to boycott products that use them for profit. Would it be better to make the images disappear so that we didn’t have to have that debate at all?

Is that somehow less oppressive?

I don’t want to speak for Martha, but her comments expressed what I was thinking better than I was able to. I haven’t read anything in Martha’s comments that imply she thinks you love this product and the advertising and would buy a million cans of their product if you were able. My complaint (at least) is not that you must think that the racist caricatures are OMG great, but that you are being willfully obtuse when it comes to the damage these sorts of advertisements can cause.

There’s no human right to not be offended, so offensive images can’t contribute to oppression? Please.

Where is my endorsement of the Mr Wasabi caricature? Where have I said that dumb meta-racist caricatures get my golden seal of approval as a consumer? Where is the jar of these nasty-looking peanuts in my pantry? Do you simply get the privilege of being smug and self-satisfied because you’ve gone to the trouble to whine about it on a blog, but need an antagonist on hand to make you feel like you’ve done something?

I wish I could say I was “shocked” (faux outrage being so trendy and all) but it’s all pretty predictable. http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/05/28/101-being-offended/

I fully respect Kirsti’s direct, self-empowering action over temper tantrums about power and oppression, and I think it’s an appropriate way to open the debate that deserves to be had. But you know that, because I basically said that twice before. If you’re still angry, write to Mr Wasabi, not to me.

Mr. Wasabi has the power to offend anyone Mr. Wasabi wants. Yes, we all have free speech. We all have the power to offend anyone we want. And yes, the majority definitely has the power to alienate and discriminate against minorities in a multitude of ways.

That doesn’t make it OK. Nobody is disputing the mechanics of free speech. But this is definitely a place to dispute the entitlement of those who feel they can use their privilege (being a majority) to harm or derogate others within the same society.

The might have the power to do it, but it doesn’t make it right.