Mar 23, 2011
Kanye: Contradicting Misogynist or Misunderstood Esotericism?
Mar 6, 2011
Soldiers Without Swords
The Black Press: Soldiers Without Swords is a documentary about the virtual invisibility of African American media and their struggle to get their voices heard. When slavery was abolished, blacks in American had to viciously fight to maintain in society. Life was arguably more grueling as a freedman, especially in the South; there were no means to employment, no wealth distribution, nobody teaching them how to survive, and blitzkriegs for frivolous lawbreaking to remove them from society (the law was essentially a tool for exclusion and expulsion). It was kind of like legally permitting 10-year-olds to drive, discontinuing driver’s education, and then arresting them for turning right on red. With such strong oppression, the black population fought a tough battle to keep their culture alive.
The sheer wonder that media possesses is beyond underrated, but The Black Press is really mind opening. Using a newspaper as a tool to transport ideas, dignity, hope, inspiration is beyond extraordinary and marvelous. It told people how to get jobs, how to get housing, how to manage in the jungle, that no one should stand for the heinous treatment from white people. There was a chance to comeback to the obscenely offensive cartoons and articles in the white papers and a chance to leave a legacy worthy of their respect.
The revolutionized means of communication gave a voice to the profound intellect that was formerly oppressed in the black community. Knowledge otherwise ignored of black history (like how the entire genealogy of the human race has black origins) was surfaced; new scholars now had a medium to talk and teach. The diversity of opinion was a substantial advancement for the growth of not only blacks, but also America as a whole. Without the new range of opinions, Americans were smothered with only one (delusional and senseless) vantage point.
One of the surprising things of The Black Press was the origin of the “Double V” movement. I had recognized it as a Dick Nixon trademark, but had no idea it started in the black media during World War II. As WWII surfaced, America scrambled to recruit as many soldiers as possible, and they didn’t see a chance of winning without the involvement of African-Americans. Under this sudden desperation for compliance, the Double V campaign emerged and exposed the extreme injustice being called for. The Double V’s represented the fight for domestic victory at home, not just overseas- calling for a victory against racism. Why should one risk their life for a country that doesn’t acknowledge their human rights and maintains a conviction of hypocrisy? Why would one fight to better a country that has no intention on bettering their living conditions? This movement encompassed every valid reason for blacks to fight for citizenship at home if they were expected to give their lives for America’s victory.
Even with every valid reason, every logical rebuttal, white America will refute motives that appear undermining. The black media had to proceed with caution, otherwise risk claims of sedition, or behavior deemed with the intent to overthrow established order. The lines of sedition are blurry, akin to the Espionage Act, but the purpose was to outlaw statements during war that were "disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive … about the form of government of the United States." Being cautious wasn’t enough for the black media, as their papers got banned from military circulation because the army felt it was dangerous.
The story behind the black press of America is one of heroism and inspiration. In conditions that were dominated by whites and egregious prejudice, the black press persevered with exceeding courage, honor, valor and distinction, fighting a battle that diligently persists today. We can acknowledge this history and regard it as admirable, but to continue as though it doesn’t apply to today is neglecting the bigger principle, and therefore rendering it useless.
Mar 5, 2011
Lara Logan and Media Sexism
A few weeks ago, there was an explosive conversation (debate) in my Race, Gender and the Media class. It started with somebody mentioning Lara Logan, the CBS news correspondent who was sexually assaulted while covering the Egyptian protests. Logan, according to an official CBS announcement, was attacked by a group of about 200 Egyptians and “suffered a brutal and sustained sexual assault and beating before being saved by a group of women and an estimated 20 Egyptian soldiers.” Unfortunately, the reaction to Logan’s tragedy was not of sympathy or respect, rather an intense media debate about women’s place in danger zones. Instead of criticism being focused on the mob who attacked Logan, it was placed directly on Logan herself. This woman was actually assaulted, then blamed for it because she’s attractive, has blonde hair and should have known what she was getting herself into.
Of course, this is disgusting. I have trouble glorifying these comments by acknowledging them. Funny enough, someone in class had the audacity to agree. Basically, this person asked how anyone can really be surprised? Elaborating that this is pretty much expected when you put an attractive female in a barbaric place like Egypt. My (correct) professor went off. Rightfully so! Here’s the problem with this: This woman gets the one of the biggest career opportunities to cover this protest, she’s fiercely competing with men to get this chance, she’s already mustering more courage than most people could think of, and then suddenly she’s supposed to say, “Oh, wait, ya know guys, I’m a woman, this is probably not such a good idea, I mean, I might get raped or something right? Please give me more protection.” Why would she think this? Her job is implicitly dangerous. Suggesting that women need more protection is condemning women as a burden, more expensive to employ and more demanding to protect. Anything could happen at any time, to any human. The fact women are more likely to get raped doesn’t discount that we’re less likely to be a target of murder. There’s possible danger for everybody; saying women need extra protection is vocalizing a difference between men and women and, by definition, is sexist.
The second half to this problem is the assumption, or stereotype, of Egypt as an uncivilized, barbaric country, expected to behave like this. Life in Cairo is actually very progressive and Westernized. Women appear unveiled and have rights and are not, in fact, public raping tools. The combination of this erroneous stereotype and sexism as justification for Lara Logan’s sexual assault is severely flawed.
There is no consolation for a woman that was forced to endure such brutal attacks, but there is seriously no right to blame the victim. The people in my class weren’t malicious for thinking such things, but even the most unconscious sexism is socially toxic.