themediamademecrazy.com

this evening i decided to straighten my hair for the first time in 4 years. while working through the knots, i was struck by a very familiar moment…

“damn this girl’s hair.”

i heard my mother’s voice as i sprayed the ends with detangler and ensured that each strand had just the right amount of luster’s pink lotion. it made me think. does michelle obama brush sasha and malia’s hair in the mornings? if so, does that mean that michelle obama’s voice can be heard in the white house cursing their hair? awesome.

yet another reason to love the obamas: they’d make a great sitcom. bill cosby could produce.

“the one drop rule is a historical colloquial term in the United States that holds that a person with any trace of African ancestry is considered black.”

although this narrow definition is no longer truly applicable as individuals now have the ability to identify with a number of groups and the concept of multiracial is no longer taboo. however, due to the dearth of researchers of color, the one drop rule emerges again in the academic realm, wherein one drop of non-white ancestry can come to define an individual and their work, especially in the fields of humanities and social sciences, resulting in a variety of outcomes.

one of the most pressing is the implicit responsibility to bring the topic of race to the table in seminars or discussion groups. i believe that this emerges from an academic (and cultural) desire towards multiculturalism and diversity. there is a sense of accomplishment that comes from the ability to “address all sides of an issue,” regardless of its validity. my point is really that this voice may speak even when distanced from the culture at hand. being raised by a single (mostly) chinese-caribbean mother, i am distanced from the black (read: african american) perspective that dominates the binary discussions around american politics, culture, and psychology. however, my social upbringing and research gives me the relative background to present *a* voice, if not necessarily *the* voice, and the aforementioned lack of diverse voices at the table leads me to vocalize my opinions, albeit with feelings of hesitancy because of my distanced perspective.

which leads to my second effect: the illusion of expertise. although i often feel that the one drop rule in academia is negative both for the individual and the discussion at hand, it affords the speaker some expertise, a strange position given the aforementioned hesitancy. suddenly, there is a person of color in the discussion, therefore they must have something important to say. i don’t consider this a positive aspect, it perpetuates a lack of progress similar to *not* having a person of color in the room, but everyone feels better about the decisions made due to the simple mention of alternative perspectives.

and this defines my overall impression of the one drop rule: although it gives the illusion of diversity and multiculturalism, true progress and perspective will only come from incorporating other voices (not just faces) in the discussion. diversity does not simply come from the existence of different colors, but from the mixing of different ideologies and perspectives. furthermore, researchers and academics will never be able to speak to the population at large because of this lack of diversity, a lack so great so as to expect *any* representation to be *the* representation. i had a conversation with a girlfriend of mine who studies video games regarding whether or not the experience of video games can ever speak to “minority” audiences if there is no representation of these groups at the development level. much like video games for girls, the development industry is dominated by white middle class men who cannot conceive of what will sell to girls or consumers of color; until we can encourage children of all backgrounds to pursue degrees in electrical engineering, computer science, and other necessary academic fields, components of our culture (video games *and* academia) will remain foreign and beyond their reach.

it is important to note that being a minority in a given group describes an experience that may be similar across various identity groups (e.g., women in science, or a boy raised in the Bronx as the secretary of state in the white house); individuals in these positions feel an overwhelming urge to explain and represent their minority experiences, while simultaneously trying to blend into the larger group and subdue their personal differences.

however, the academic one drop rule is special insomuch that multiracial individuals straddle multiple identifications, that is to say, that despite your personal identity as mixed, your department may identify you as black, thus categorizing you regardless of your own identification. i found this issue quite prevalent in the USC process; the fellowship application that i completed asked to “check one box” and did not offer an “other” or “mixed” option. i was shocked, as this was the application for the “diversity fellowship” which only emphasized USC’s need for actual diversity, not just color representation.

I just finished reading an article in Time magazine entitled, “Liking What White People Like,” which is a commentary on the blog  “Stuff White People Like.” The author goes on to talk about the benefit of having White people critique/mock/endorse White culture. However, as an individual of mixed heritage (Black and Chinese), the author finds herself in a quandary; she likes things that White people like!

She comes to grips with this racial divide over the course of the article, but her final conclusions leave much lacking. I truly enjoyed her postulation of what Mixed people like (“Having people guess their background… Pulling rank during conversations… Having ‘such good features’… Filling out applications”), especially since she admits, “these are things that mixed people say they hate… but secretly like.”

My qualm comes with the creation of Stuff That Mixed People Like; I think that it denies exactly what makes Multiethnic individuals interesting: the fact that no two multi-ethnics are alike. Not only is the community comprised of mixed ethnicity members, regardless of blend, but also their upbringing creates drastic differences between individuals, making group descriptions even more difficult. For example, how different would Barak Obama (everyone’s current favorite multiethnic) if his parents were switched and he was raised by a single Kenyan mother? How different would his upbringing or chances have been then? There is no single definition of multi-ethnics, or what they like, just the fact that they are multi-ethnic.

PS: Barak Obama is not #1 on my Stuff That Mixed People Like, its Prince.

obama supporter, texas state senator kirk watson was unable to state ANY of obama’s accomplishments in the senate on ‘hardball with chris matthews.” it’s a remarkable piece of footage, right down to the studio laughter in the end. somewhat painful to watch, but necessary…

however, i would also like to post the question: when did “white voters” become a significant demographic? weren’t they always just referred to as “voters”? i love progress.

i’ve put a lot of thought into this one and i find it terribly frustrating that the term “urban” is equated with “black.” i understand the desperate need for political correctness in the white male dominated field of advertising, but this connection has since drifted into the black community and is used in self definitions. i keep getting invitations from the LA Urban League Young Professionals, where ‘urban’ is synonymous with black. unfortunately, i do not generally identify as black and i definitely do not need to put myself in a situation where i have to describe my ethnic background in order to achieve some level of acceptance. furthermore, i cannot bring friends of mine who i would define as ‘urban young professionals’ who are not black for fear of their discomfort.

it seems that ‘urban’ should be synonymous with a multiracial community as the most amazing component of city life (as i see it) is people from different backgrounds, cultures, and classes, living in such close proximity. this leads to knowledge, tolerance, and above all, diversity; but i suppose this perspective is inherently NY, while LA stands in direct opposition: people from different backgrounds, cultures, and classes, living distally and without any interaction, leading to ignorance, racism, and even greater disengagement from the larger community.

’saved by the bell’ (1989-1993) was one of the best integrations of race, class and gender that i’ve seen on television and decades ahead of its time. granted, children’s programs tend to integrate race effortlessly, because children will be children. however, after living in LA, i realize that it is not as simple as SBTB would lead one to believe. allow me to elaborate…

the main cast is multi ethnic: of the 6 main characters, half are white (zach, kelly, screech) while the other half are ‘of color’ (slater, jesse, lisa). although this may seem evident to the viewer, the narratives never highlighted their races or made that part of the discussion (despite living in southern california in the late 80s). the text tended to focus more on class and the trials and tribulations that come from teens dealing with these all-too-real differences: lisa is a shop-aholic, which clashes with her best friend kelly’s large family and spendthrift demands. for the other characters, class is less of an issue, although zach never sees his father because he is working and it takes a car accident to bring them together.

the characters are intended to be a slice of the american high school system (a classic tool of TV and film): the cool guy, the geek, the jock, the american sweetheart, the spoiled daddy’s girl, and the nerd/smart chick. this last category is also what draws me to the program. the smart chick, jesse spano, is both of questionable ethnicity (which is also never mentioned in the program) and remarkably attractive. she even lands the jock! it gives hope to all of us sexy smart chicks who question our own attractiveness. as for the gender reading, jesse was clearly a feminist, a label that many place on women who are too smart, too strong, or too driven. however, jesse was all of these things AND feminine. she was a feminine feminist, an elusive moniker that i try to advocate.

in short, i think that i am better off for watching ’saved by the bell’ at a key point in my development, as compared to other programs that were popular at the time, like baywatch, or melrose place.

should hilary run? obama? mccain?

all of these seem like very reasonable, educated choices. however, i find them all to be second to the one woman who could take, recuperate, and permenantly change the white house, our political system, and our culture.

oprah for president in 2008

although she has already claimed that she will not run, i am touched by the movement that is quickly gaining ground. check out one of the websites here:

Oprah for President - 2008
Michael Moore’s Draft Petition

and you can buy t-shirts here:

T-shirts by Patrick Crowe

for part 2, click here

i’ve been struck by some amazing epiphanies lately. the most recent came while reading TIME (october 23, 2006) which featured an analysis of america at 300 million. the graphs were amazing. here are my two favorites:

topographical population

race/ethnic demographics

the former made me want to move to a spot somewhere in the middle of the country where no one lives. it seems so simple and ripe for my own happy little community of one (maybe two [smile]). the image also gives a pictoral representation of the empty expanse of the land. i’ve never made it off the coasts (aside from a week in denver, phoenix, and vegas) and it makes me want to take a journey across the country…

but it was the latter that really changed the way i look at media. for some reason i was upset with the culture-via-TV that perpetuated the demographics that “i” did not exist. that is to say, i rarely see someone that looks like me on television, specifically multi-ethnic individuals. but looking at the demographic map, i realize that we are less than 2% of the population. of course you never see asians on television, they comprise 4.4% of the population. in fact, their presence on television is equivalent to the national average!

that’s when i realized that my problem was not with television or its statements on race and the ethnographic breakdown of the nation. but rather the collapse of local television. national networks must create programming for a nationwide audience. 80% of which is white. this simply never occurred to me as i have only lived in densely populated, diverse, urban areas (i.e. new york N>18m; boston N>5m, los angeles N>12m). the interactions i have are drastically different from the larger national body. worse yet, when an nationwide network attempts to recreate “my” lifestyle for a nationwide audience, it comes out strangely warped (e.g. friends).

i would like to see more local programming, not just news and commercials, but rather programs of all genres. unfortunately i do not have access to public access channels due to my building’s agreement with sbc. i think i need a set of rabbit ears.

a conversation that occured on wednesday night…

TJ: you know that black folks shouldn’t call other black folks ‘nigga’ right?
ME: well, unless they fuck you over…
TJ: true. niggas will fuck you over.

i was watching a home improvement show on TLC* and the head of the project was wearing a shirt that read:

“F is for FOSHIZZLE”

i was appaled. nevermind the fact that he was a late-thirties white dude desperate to be hip wearing a shirt that was too tight but showed off the muscles that he tried to maintain as his body slowly faded. rather i was appaled at the strange bastardization of black american lexicon. by including the actual “for” in the line, the inherent poor grammar of the term is somehow corrected, te slang becomes proper and standardized.

i don’t care if S is fo’Shizzle… F is Foshizzle.

i am currently in new zealand, a county rich in maori culture. maori means ‘of the same race’ that is to say that the polynesians who occupied the land centuries ago may have come from different nations and different cultures, but they are now of one culture in NZ. evidently, with the european settlers, NZ became one of the first major tourists spots, with maori opening their homes and the culture to travelers from distant lands.

200 years later, as globalization and capitalism have ransacked the world, the maori maintain a strong connection to their cultural heritage and continue performing for tourists. which then begs the question, what is the meaning of exploitation? if these people willingly open their homes for tourists, can it be considered exploitation?

the lets go guide warns the backpacker to avoid exploitative performances, but how do you know which is which? the first night in lake rotorua, we visited mitai, a cultural experience hosted by one of the tribes in the region. their land (12 acres, down from almost 200,000) features a sacred spring, a eating house and a hangi pit, where the food is cooked underground for hours before the feast. i was excited to visit this one as the guide said that this was one of the best cultural shows. while i sat there marveling at the haka and poi, i did not feel like i was exploiting the people. the tribe organized the show and were the only ones to profit from it. the performers were teenagers from the tribe and i really felt like i was simply watching an important part of the people, passing tradition from one generation to another. everyone looked like they were truly enjoying themselves, and it wasn’t work, just an opportunity to share what they knew with others.

the next night, we caught a “cultural show” at the hotel. the entire set was drastically different; while the mitai show featured (what i can only assume to be traditional) huts and weapons, the show at the hotel was performed in front of a poorly painted mural of the lake and a plexiglass hut that was half the size of the smallest performer. the performers seemed to go through the motions, rarely did they smile (save one young boy) or really seem to get into the affair. i felt bad watching from my comfortable seat drinking a glass of wine. i simply could not get into the experience. whereas we went to the tribal grounds to immerse ourselves in the mitai culture, the hotel simply pulled the maori out of their “natural environment” and dropped them into a hotel, demanding that they perform the same way that they would if they were at home.

in the end, i highly recommend the mitai show. at least i know that there isn’t some white man making a hefty profit off of my ticket.

I have recently been embroiled in a not-to-pleasant conversation about race. It has caused me to recognize at what point race became an issue in my life.

My family is of all different colors and race has never been an issue for me. I think my earliest recollection of recognizing my race was when I had to check the little boxes for college applications. I delighted in checking as many as possible. When I visited MIT, I was placed next door to Chocolate City, an independent living group. I had a blast and seriously considered living there. I moved into Senior House instead and never regretted it even though I did feel somewhat ostracized from the black community.

During my freshman year, things were difficult for me academically, and I began to think that the only reason I was accepted at MIT was my race. Although I blamed my inabilities solely on myself, I recognized the commodity of ethnicity. By getting into MIT, I became a ‘credit to my race.’

Even amidst this segregation, racism was never a talking point.

The day that I recognized, experienced, and emotionally suffered from racism took place years later, riding the train home from NYC. I sat on the commuter rail next to two white men; one was drinking a plastic wide mouth bottle of Budweiser and the other was working on two gin and tonics. The two men are discussing their sons…

BUD: My boy blah, blah, blah.

GIN: Yeah, my boy blah, blah, blah.

BUD: I was talking to Jim the other day and he was telling me about his son, how his son does blah, blah, blah, and I’m thinking to myself, ‘at least my son isn’t doing drugs and fucking niggers.’

I was shocked; I was appalled. I felt a soreness in my gut that wasn’t there before. I didn’t know what to say, I didn’t know what to do; all I could do was sit there, helpless. I was a fully conscious, intelligent, grown human being and that was the first time that I felt slapped in the face by racism.

Since then, it’s as if I travel in a completely different world. My reality has changed. Even though I saw racism (I daresay I am a product of it), it wasn’t until this moment that I understood.

I began to think about other moments in my life; they came back like a flood of unexplainable pain. My first boyfriend didn’t want to take me to thanksgiving dinner because he thought his family might make inappropriate comments. My next boyfriend didn’t introduce me to his extended family, and vocalized that it might be a problem that I wasn’t white. Alternatively, my grandfather owned a chicken farm in Guyana and the locals used to hollar at me on the street, asking for a piece of white meat.

I took the black pill and the world has never been the same.

i just caught the mos def envoy denali commercial as part of GMC’s new ‘diversity campaign’:

Forbes Article: GMC’s Diversity Campaign

does no one find this offensive but me? mos, once the pillar of anti establshment, is now commodifying his place as a hip-hop icon to sell trucks for GMC? i’m surprised they didn’t have him peddling cadillac escalades. he doesn’t need the money, the article in forbes goes on to talk about all of the projects that he is currently involved in. GMC has also establshed a hispanic campaign, although i haven’t seen any of those yet. i guess its time to tap markets that have no problem spending money on useless status symbols. fight the power my ass.

what happened to rising above the fray mos?

i went to a beautiful african art gallery last week, Dafco’s on mammaroneck ave in white plains, NY. i walked in to find beautiful african masks, artistic pieces labeled according to their origin, fantastic african art. the owner of the store walked out from the back office and offered the history of the work and their cultural significance. it was moving.

as i walked to the back of the store, i looked over the entrance to the office. there, just above eye level, but only visible to those exiting the office, was a massive painting of a beautiful naked white woman.

a naked white woman. pink nipples and all…

i was shocked. here i am, reveling in african beauty, entrenched in culture and black appreciation and the owner of the store gazes at a picture of a naked white woman every time he comes out to greet his customers. i didn’t know whether to laugh or be absolutely disgusted.

i believe it was blackstar who admitted…

“I like girls with that light complexion… i’m a victim of 400 years of conditioning”

So I went to this show at The Mint last night and, well I starting getting very angry and depressed. Now that I think back over it, I was PMS-ing, so that probably had a lot to do with my emotional overreaction.

There were so many beautiful white women there that I began to feel, well…

Imperfect.

Welcome to LA where image towers over substance and I began thinking, it really doesn’t matter how much substance you have or what you have to offer, if your image isn’t perfect, you don’t have a chance. And my image will never be perfect because I’m not white. I guess I’ve been doing too much work in the area of race lately, race and beauty:

Race Ethnicity and Beyond

I became consumed by this last night, and began having overly emotional intelligent discussions, which often degrade into me hating society’s expectations and my inability to meet them. I began to bandy about the term “pretty white girl.’ I guess I’m writing this because I feel slightly guilty about it. I didn’t realize that “pretty white girl” could be a derogatory statement, especially when that’s what I wanted for the longest time.

Or maybe subconsciously I recognized that it was a derogatory statement, and I used it inappropriately in a bully fashion to hype myself up. Either way, it was wrong.

I realize now that “pretty white girls” recognize their position as such and what that means in our culture. Yeah, postmodern self-reflexivity! Funny how most of the things we desire most, are the things that other people are desperate to be free of. I think maybe I was just intimidated by them.

It’s a shame too because I started to have a potentially amazing conversation with a smart, sexy woman, who happened to be white. I think I opened with a confrontational statement, but that was the Jagermeister talking [smile]. Hopefully she’ll forgive me because I’m terribly interested in the experience of the Other.

NOTE: The Other is a psychoanalytical term which states that the Other is not the Self, which can exist with respect to all aspects of identity including gender, race, sexuality, etc.

Definition of the Other