Search results for racism

Members of PIKE fraternity at the University of California, San Diego came under fire this month for hosting a party, called” The Compton Cookout,” designed to mock black Americans and Black history month (less than 2% of UCSD students are black).  People are shocked and horrified, and rightly so, though it’s just one in what seems to be a constant stream of such parties.  Becca C. asked us to post about it.

Its Facebook page shown below (which, interestingly, is part of what made the party visible enough to protest) explicitly describes how people are to dress and act (trigger warning; it’s quite upsetting):

February marks a very important month in American society. No, i’m not referring to Valentines day or Presidents day. I’m talking about Black History month. As a time to celebrate and in hopes of showing respect, the Regents community cordially invites you to its very first Compton Cookout.

For guys: I expect all males to be rockin Jersey’s, stuntin’ up in ya White T (XXXL smallest size acceptable), anything FUBU, Ecko, Rockawear, High/low top Jordans or Dunks, Chains, Jorts, stunner shades, 59 50 hats, Tats, etc.

For girls: For those of you who are unfamiliar with ghetto chicks-Ghetto chicks usually have gold teeth, start fights and drama, and wear cheap clothes – they consider Baby Phat to be high class and expensive couture. They also have short, nappy hair, and usually wear cheap weave, usually in bad colors, such as purple or bright red. They look and act similar to Shenaynay, and speak very loudly, while rolling their neck, and waving their finger in your face. Ghetto chicks have a very limited vocabulary, and attempt to make up for it, by forming new words, such as “constipulated”, or simply cursing persistently, or using other types of vulgarities, and making noises, such as “hmmg!”, or smacking their lips, and making other angry noises, grunts, and faces. The objective is for all you lovely ladies to look, act, and essentially take on these “respectable” qualities throughout the day (transcription borrowed from Threadbared).

The page:

When the first Facebook page was taken down, a student put up a second page in objection (Compton Cookout Part Deux: First Amendment Pride):

A diverse group of students, with the support of many faculty, protested the administration’s slow response to the event (chronicled at Stop Racism UCSD). But the vocal resistance to the overt prejudice and hateful stereotyping created a counter-resistance.  A student-run TV station defended the party with racial epithets and, then, a student hung a noose in the library:

UPDATE (Mar. ’10): This was followed by a KKK hood, made from a pillow case, found on a campus statue’s head (hap tip to Becca).

This is sociologically interesting because it illustrates the backlash phenomenon.  Backlash is a common response to any effort to point out or undermine prejudice, discrimination, and inequality.  We’ve posted about it in response to racist products (Mr. Wasabi, the Black “Lil’ Monkey” doll, and the Obama sock monkey) as well as anti-rape campaigns.  As I wrote in a previous post:

…resistance to oppression is met with counter-resistance.  Until inequality is challenged, things often seem to be just fine; when groups stand up and demand equality, we suddenly see how fiercely people will defend their privilege.

Remember, the Klu Klux Klan emerged only after slaves had been emancipated; whites didn’t need to put black people in their place when they were in their place.  Those who are protesting the Compton Cookout, by not standing by and letting the (largely white) administration address (or fail to address) the party as it pleases, are refusing to stay in their place.  The backlash is proof that they are actually perceived to be a threat.

NOTE: A commenter claims that the party was organized by the PIKE, SIGMA CHI and SIGMA NU fraternities, not just the PIKE fraternity.  I read in a news report that it was PIKE, but it could be wrong.

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.

I borrowed these two ads from Jim Crow History.  According to the site, Bull Durham tobacco was among the most recognizable trademarks in the world circa 1900.  These two ads include caricatures of “foolish looking or silly acting blacks to draw attention to its product”:

NEW (Dec. ’09)! Pete W. scanned in and sent along a third ad in the series:

For more historical U.S. representations of blacks, see these posts: one, twp, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, and eighteen.

And for examples of modern reproductions of these stereotypes (literally), see these: one, two, three, four, and five.

Interested in the decision to remove the iconic bull’s scrotum in advertisements? Go here.

—————————

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

We recently posted about a baby doll pulled from Costco shelves after concerns that it was racist.  Early news stories reported on a black doll called “Lil’ Monkey” and a white doll called “Pretty Panda.”  As the story developed, it became clear that both dolls came in white, black, and Hispanic versions.  It made for an interesting discussion:  (1) Given the history of associating black people with primates, would it have been racist had the doll only came in black monkey and white panda versions?  And (2) given the history of associating black people with primates, was it racist, regardless, to make a black “Lil’ Monkey” doll that potentially triggered and/or effectively ignored this history?

The CBS affiliate in Denver linked to our post and discussion in their story about the controversy…

…which was published under “weird news.”

Screenshot:

I am trying to keep my cool here.

Justification for African slavery was built on an association of black people with primates designed to deny black humanity.  Institutional, social psychological, and symbolic racism is ongoing in the U.S. and profoundly inhibits the life chances of black and brown people.

And yet when people say “hey, this makes me uncomfortable,” they are ridiculed and slotted into “weird news.”

It doesn’t even matter whether the intent or effect of the doll is racist.  Let me say that again: For this discussion, it doesn’t matter whether the intent or effect of the doll is racist.

Concerns about racism are trivialized when raising the question is defined as simply “weird.”  Even more, it is yet another way to deny the humanity of people of color.  When they and their allies raise their voices to weigh in on what representations of blackness are acceptable, they are dismissed like petty children or lunatics.  It is nothing less than a stunning lack of empathy.

If you needed evidence that we are not post-racial… well, there you have it.

—————————

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

Here are some great World War II-era comic book (graphic novels! Whatever!) covers and/or posters (all found at Superdickery’s Propaganda Extravaganza page, thanks to Krystal-lynn M.). They all combine patriotism, pro-war sentiment, and racist images:

The Black kid on this next cover is named Whitewash:

Thanks, Krystal-lynn!

When a member of a regularly-excluded group gains entry into what was previously a homogeneous club–say, a Black man is elected President of the United States–that person is sometimes used as “proof” that there are, in fact, no barriers to entry after all. Thus, some of us worry that Obama’s election will be used against those fighting for racial justice. Well, it began before it began. In this clip on CNN, aired before Obama was confirmed the winner, former Secretary of Education Bill Bennet, when asked what his election would mean, remarks:

Well, I’ll tell you one thing it means… You don’t take any excuses anymore from anybody who says, ‘The deck is stacked, I can’t do anything, there’s so much in-built this and that.’

Yes, there’s no more “this and that” and Bill doesn’t want to hear about it anymore.

Scroll forward to about 45 seconds:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvpB-MnM8I8[/youtube]

Clip via Macon D. at Stuff White People Do, who has a nice analysis.

Ben O. sent us these three images. This image (found here) is of a sticker on the window of a car (presumably a Mustang?) that says “Built with tools, not chopsticks.” The car is, ironically, parked in front of a sushi bar (see the reflection in the window).

These next two images (found here and here) illustrate how this particular public library requires an ID to look at both Jet and Essence (magazines aimed at Black Americans), but not other magazines.  Presumably, someone thinks that magazines consumed by Black Americans are more likely to be stolen than other magazines.  Ben asks:

Is this racism? Is this censorship? What do you think about it?

Thanks Ben!

NOTE: In the comments, several readers questions whether the last image is an example of everyday racism. Yes, magazines are sometimes kept at the circulation desk because they are perceived to be at high risk of being defaced or stolen, but they’re also sometimes kept behind the desk if they’re highly popular, to prevent patrons from monopolozing them for very long periods of time. By forcing patrons to check them out rather than have them freely available on the shelves, patrons can keep them for only a cetain length of time, guaranteeing that other patrons who might wish to read them also have an opportunity. So it’s possible that Jet and Essence are kept behind the counter because they are very popular titles and the library is trying to be sure as many patrons as possible get access to them. So this image might be better used to talk about the difficulties that can arise interpreting situations where race appears that it might be playing a part, but it isn’t clear whether it is or in what way.

Speaking of the “angry black man” stereotype and the idea that being angry about racism is out-of-line (see point three after the block quote), a statue of Martin Luther King, Jr. commissioned by the U.S. government was considered too angry looking by the U.S. Commission On Fine Arts (see news stories here and here). Its sculptor was required to make him seem less “confrontational” before it was allowed to be installed on the National Mall in Washington D.C.

Via Gawker.

While we’re on the topic of the current presidential campaign…

I’ve noticed something interesting about the images and phrases used to criticize Clinton and Obama. Why does the majority of anti-Clinton rhetoric use sexist images and language? And how prevelant is the (expected?) matching racism in the anti-Obama rhetoric and images? Why, instead, does Obama’s national allegiance and patriotism come into question? I think this would make for a great class discussion on intersectionality, an what prejudices are perceived to be “socially acceptable.”

Some possible questions for discussion:

• Is it more socially acceptable to be overtly sexist than overtly racist? Why?
• Why might it seem to be more okay to question someone’s patriotism/nationalism than to be overtly racist? What is the difference?
• What is really racist that doesn’t immediately appear racist?

And the images– again these come from Facebook groups with tens of thousands of members. See also previous images of Hillary Clinton here and here.

“I found my voice”:

“Stop mad cow”:

“Fly, my pretties, fly!  Bring me the presidency”:

And now for Obama…

And here are some attacking Barack Obama’s nationality and patriotism:

And the infamous image (more info from snopes.com):