You tried, Kanye. You tried.

Before continuing, I suggest watching the music video for Black Skinhead by Kanye West: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q604eed4ad0

I first encountered Black Skinhead by Kanye West while watching the trailer for The Wolf of Wall Street on YouTube. Later that summer, Kanye West’s VEVO account released the song’s accompanying music video – the combined number of views on the leaked and the official versions currently totals to over 12 million. Needless to say, Black Skinhead (often stylized to BLKKK SKKKN HEAD) was a summer hit, peaking at 15 and 21 on the US Billboard Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs and Hot Rap Songs charts, respectively (1). As intended by Kanye and his PR team, I was intrigued by Black Skinhead and the Yeezus album – the songs and their lyrics were certainly intentionally provocative, and I sometimes wondered about the message behind it all. Direction for my introspection came to me in the form of a blurb on the popular rap lyric site, http://www.rapgenius.com:

“Making its debut on SNL, Black Skinhead is a dark, rebellious and near-tribal record that threads between both Ye’s traditional braggadocio and anti-establishment, anti-racism themes.” (2) *

This blog post aims to analyze and assess the effectiveness of the racialized messages in Kanye West’s 2013 hit, Black Skinhead.

The video commences with the image of three black individuals wearing conical hoods, meant to emulate the uniform of the Ku Klux Klan, an American white supremacist hate group famous for their violent opposition to the 1960’s Civil Rights Movement. Framed by the jagged shape of the three hoods, the visuals switch to snippets of agitated dogs and bald black men (perhaps intending to look like slaves and/or literal black skinheads). The majority of the video consists of a computer-generated Kanye rapping and dancing in multiple forms, as shown in the image below. The final clip is of Kanye lying down in a pose reminiscent of Jesus on the cross, the camera zooming towards his face as the word “God!” is repeatedly chanted in the background.

Black Rappers and the Goal of Holy Autonomy

In this music video and many aspects of his current public image, it can be observed that Kanye has appropriated aspects of Christianity to serve as a parodic reflection of his positionality as a black man in popular culture. Although Christian privilege serves as a form of dominant group privilege in countless regions around the world, this does not exclude the religion from being appropriated** – in the case of Kanye West, he has reduced the historically admired moral figure of Jesus Christ to his personal costume. This is evidenced by his new nickname “Yeezus” (meant to emulate Jesus), his recurring self-referral as “God” (see: I am a God, from the Yeezus album), and his repeated positioning as a holy figure in his music videos (pictured below). Although it is certainly a possibility that his self-perception as equivalent to Jesus is simply the manifestation of grandiose delusions, I have speculated that it also serves as a tool for drawing attention to the role of black rappers in the music industry.

Known for his comments regarding the perception of the American black population since the “Bush doesn’t care about black people” incident following Hurricane Katrina, West is no stranger to discussing racism. Despite their initial appearance as simply another display of Kanye’s arrogance, the lyrics to Black Skinhead make a heavy reference to race in the rap industry. The popular rap genre is heavily dominated by black men, as evidenced by the current best-selling rap albums on Billboard.com – between YG, Jay-Z, and Drake, Eminem is the only non-black rapper listed.  However, the greater music industry that encompasses the management and production of these black artists is predominantly run by white men (3). The tones of “anti-establishment and anti-racism” in Black Skinhead are rooted in this fact. In the following lines from the second verse, Kanye directly addresses the exploitation of black rappers:

“Black out the room, bitch
Stop all that coon shit
These niggas ain’t doin’ shit
Them niggas ain’t doin’ shit”

In this context, the slur “coon” likely refers to the popular blackface minstrel act “Zip Coon” from the 1800’s (4). Provoked by the imagery of black men as slaves in the Black Skinhead video, I am led to believe that Kanye sees the exploitation of black rappers as something to be realized and protested against by the artists themselves, in order for them to transcend to Kanye’s level of god-like independence and fame.

By equating himself to a holy figure, Kanye is exaggerating his power and influence as a character in popular culture. Through this, he addresses the contradictory nature of black rappers who speak of oppression against blacks, ultimately for the profit of white executives. Presenting himself as autonomous and unrestricted by discrimination in the music industry, Black Skinhead is meant to describe Kanye’s empowerment as a black rapper who has remained true to his personal cultural roots.

Black in White Clothing

Within the stylized song title (BLKKK SKKKN HEAD) and imagery in the music video, Black Skinhead presents two groups of people publicly perceived for their racist, white-supremacist values: Skinheads and the KKK. Although this is pure speculation, within the context of the lyrics, I believe that the portrayal of black individuals in KKK-like hoods is meant to indicate a message of internalized racism and self-degradation. For as long as black rappers are treated as the metaphorical puppets of higher-ups who engage in and perpetuate the institutionalized racism of the music industry (the same racism that benefits rappers like Macklemore and Iggy Azalea), these artists will only contribute to their own oppression. Although this message is perhaps separatist in nature, this sort of reasoning is what contributed to the rise of the black-owned and operated independent labels that are positioned at the historical roots of hip-hop music distribution (5).

In regards to the skinhead references, it is likely that Kanye knows that despite skinhead culture being commonly associated with neo-Nazi stereotypes, the original skinhead movement was heavily inspired by the West Indian rude boy subculture (6). In the United States, many skinhead groups also identified as anti-racist, partially in response to the negative stereotypes. This leads me to believe that the imagery of black skinheads in the music video is likely intended as an empowering form of cultural reclamation, rather than a form of parody.

Where Kanye Fails

Despite my gracious analysis of the racial messages in Black Skinhead, I am hesitant to praise Kanye West for his commentary on race in the music industry. In fact, I find it hard to classify this song as a “space of resistance” or a “productive dialogue across difference” (with regards to the topic of the white-run yet black-dominant popular rap scene) when Kanye’s dialogue demeans the actions and efforts of other black rappers, all in order to feed his own personal ego. Clearly salient of his own fame and influence, Black Skinhead may simply be another vehicle by which Kanye expresses his greatness to the world, failing to positively impact the black men he criticizes.

Something that stood out to me in Black Skinhead is the lack of any mention of women in a way that portrays them as anything but sexual conquests. In this particular song, female mention is restricted to “300 bitches, where the Trojans?” and “They see a black man with a white woman / At the top floor they gone come to kill King Kong”. In a dialogue pertaining to racism in the popular music industry, Kanye fails to include female rappers, a group predominantly composed by women of colour. This complete disregard for female rap artists further perpetuates male dominance in the rap industry, which is perhaps okay with Kanye, considering the misogynistic and objectifying aspects of his other songs and music videos.

Assuming that Kanye was inspired by the events of the American Civil Rights Movement (this assumption is based off of his lyrical references to racial inequality, Malcolm X, the KKK, and skinhead subculture), his deprecation of women is incongruent with his “empowering” message. Especially coupled to his appropriation of Christianity, Kanye fails to credit the fact that black women were the backbone of the civil rights movement, and were spiritually and practically empowered by teachings of the Christian church (although it is important to mention that they were equally disempowered since they were prohibited from taking a role of public leadership). As discussed in Chapter 12 of Gendered Worlds, the black church produced iconic leaders like Martin Luther King Jr., and acted as training grounds and meeting locations for oppressed black communities (7). Even Malcolm X was affiliated with a religion (Islam), so it seems inappropriate for Kanye to downplay the significance of historically relevant religious figures in order to feed his public image.

Kanye’s messages of masculinity may also be seen as problematic – throughout Black Skinhead he constantly frames himself, lyrically and visually, as animalistic, monstrous, and ultimately dangerous:

“Pardon, I’m getting my scream on / Enter the kingdom”
“They say I’m possessed, it’s an omen”
“I’m aware I’m a wolf / Soon as the moon hit”
“I’ve been a menace for the longest”

This aggressive demeanour is prevalent in mainstream hip-hop culture, as discussed in Week 10’s lecture (8). Portrayals of black masculinity, especially in the rap industry, are generally restricted to hyper-masculine representations centered on “toughness as emotional self-control, violence as manly, danger as exciting, and calloused attitudes toward women and sex” (Zaitchik & Mosher 1993) (9). Unfortunately, this portrayal is consistent with other popular stereotypes that are used to dehumanize black men, such as the ideas that they are dangerous and unpredictable. By buying into and further perpetuating these stereotypical representations of black masculinity – stereotypes that are in turn used to oppress everyday people – I wonder if Kanye is really in the place to criticize and denounce the actions of other black rappers.

All things considered, I believe that despite the assertive racial content of his lyrics in Black Skinhead, Kanye West fails to produce a constructive viewpoint on race in the music industry. By simply commenting on the racial problems at hand and using his disapproval of the other black rappers’ actions in order to uplift his own character, Kanye is also engaging in the exploitation of his fellow black artists. With complete disregard to women of colour in the rap industry, and the appropriation of a religion that was in fact a major unifying force in the empowerment of black Americans (the same empowerment that he claims to have over other black rappers), the message behind Kanye West’s Black Skinhead is ultimately arrogant and self-serving.

Let’s face it, I didn’t really have to write an essay in order to prove that.

Works Cited

(1) “Kanye West.” – Chart History. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Apr. 2014. <http://www.billboard.com/artist/276709/kanye-west/chart&gt;.

(2) “Kanye West – Black Skinhead.” Rap Genius. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Apr. 2014. <http://rapgenius.com/Kanye-west-black-skinhead-lyrics&gt;.

(3) Barnes, Tom. “How Music Executives Created ‘Black’ Hip Hop For White Suburban Kids.” PolicyMic. N.p., 9 Jan. 2014. Web. 18 Apr. 2014.

(4) Harper, Douglas. “Online Etymology Dictionary.” Online Etymology Dictionary. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Apr. 2014.

(5) Powell, Catherine Tabb. “Rap Music: An Education with a Beat from the Street.” The Journal of Negro Education 60.3 (1991): 245-59. Print.

(6) Brown, T. S. “Subcultures, Pop Music and Politics: Skinheads and “Nazi Rock” in England and Germany.” Journal of Social History 38.1 (2004): 157-78. Print.

(7) Aulette, Judy Root., Judith G. Wittner, and Kristin Blakely. Gendered Worlds. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2009. Print.

(8) Tolmie, Jane. “Hyper Masculinity, Violence and Guns, ‘Bling’” [pdf slide 16] Retrieved from GNDS125 lecture 10 notes online from web site <https://moodle.queensu.ca/2013-14/course/view.php?id=1145&gt&gt&gt;

(9) Zaitchik, M. C., and D. L. Mosher. “Criminal Justice Implications of the Macho Personality Constellation.” Criminal Justice and Behavior 20.3 (1993): 227-39. Print.

---

Notes

* The language in this blurb certainly requires commentary of its own: for both my mother and I, http://www.rapgenius.com shows up as the top result on Google when the phrases “rap lyrics”, “rap song meanings”, and “Black Skinhead lyrics” are entered into the search engine. A popular site, http://www.rapgenius.com is surely one of the first places an individual will encounter when seeking lyrical analyses to popular rap songs. Considering this level of power and influence, I found the page regarding Black Skinhead by Kanye West to be an appropriate place to gain information for developing a frame for my deconstruction of the song. Unfortunately, I was met with a blurb describing the beat as “near-tribal”, likely due to the tone of aggression produced by the driving drumbeat in the introduction and occasional droning of a synthesizer. Especially on a page with 1.3 million views, it is disturbing to see the word “tribal” as an adjective, calling on stereotypical ideas of savage hostility in indigenous groups of people. Rarely does the use of the word “tribal” mean “rich in culture” or “old”. By tying the word “tribal” to the powerful beat of Black Skinhead, the folks running http://www.rapgenius.com are perpetuating the stereotyping of indigenous groups as relentlessly aggressive and violent.

** It is important to clarify that although Christianity is being appropriated in this context, appropriating the culture of the oppressor does not have the same negative effects as the appropriation of non-dominant cultures. Albeit disrespectful, Kanye West is not necessarily engaging in the oppression of Christians, since Christianity in America typically presents as a hegemonic power, being highly influential and oppressive in itself.

“If I don’t get ran out by Catholics
Here come some conservative Baptists
Claiming I’m overreactin’
Like them black kids in Chiraq bitch”

In the preceding lyrics from Black Skinhead, Kanye addresses how, after his infamous Hurricane Katrina comment, he was demonized by the media and multiple religious and racist communities. He couples this disdain to the systematic violence in Chicago’s black community to further emphasize the persecution he has experienced as an outspoken black public figure. It would seem that Kanye’s appropriation of Christianity is nonrandom – there is the possibility that he is making an assertive racial statement by costuming himself (a black man of outrageous character) in a culture embraced by many oppressive white Americans.

“Let Me Blow Ya Mind”

White people are privileged because of their presumed ‘higher’ status in society. It doesn’t seem to matter if they’re educated, wealthy, or employed; white people always appear to be given a higher status in society, or a higher degree of flexibility in their behaviours which appear to be more easily sanctioned than misbehaviour from an individual of a racialized minority. Gwen Stefani seems to resist her presumed white privilege by acting similarly to her racialized friend Eve; showing more similarities than differences between women of colour and women who are white. The video portrays the majority of upper class citizens as white, wealthy, and well-dressed, but does so in such a way as to overplay the white privilege concept as a ridiculous reality. This may hint at Stefani’s recognition of her own positionality as a white person and the arbitrary privilege associated with it. However, I also believe that Stefani has greater freedom in both her attitude and behaviour than Eve and the ‘gang’ of largely black men and women that seem to be associated with her.

Crashing the ‘high-class’ party and engaging in seemingly ‘indecent’ behaviour wouldn’t be judged as an effect of Stefani’s race, but rather as her own individualistic action which may be taken more seriously as a ‘cause’ rather than as a stereotyped behaviour. Could Eve be using Stefani’s white status to get her song out to a wider audience so that her lyrics may be taken more seriously? If Stefani was not featured in this music video, would Eve’s message of resistance to both class and racial difference be taken as seriously, or would it simply be attributed to stereotyped violent, ‘black’ behaviour? In an article written by Peggy McIntosh, she addresses her own white privilege as allowing her to “swear, or dress in second hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty or the illiteracy of [her] race” (1). Additionally, she goes on to say that if she addresses a racial issue, her race will give her more credibility than a person of colour would have (1). Stefani blends into the presumed lower class culture of Eve’s group; wearing clothes and behaving indecently by upper class standards, yet her action against arbitrary class distinction is more shocking than Eve’s will ever be. This seems to drive the ultimate acceptance of Eve’s group by the upper class white people at the party, where blending of culture is evident and suddenly appreciated as Stefani takes a stand against her higher class counterparts.

This video is also challenging the gender roles of women by de-emphasizing femininity in women. As a viewer, and as someone who has been exposed to racialized stereotypes all my life through media portrayals of people of colour, I was acutely aware that both Eve and Stefani were ‘acting out’ in opposition to their gender roles as women, yet was more shocked by Stefani’s aggressive behavior than of Eve’s. It comes right back to race and puts the ‘rebel with a cause’ attitude on Stefani alone, as Eve’s behaviour is ‘expected’ based on her racial background. However, both women are harbouring a body of empowerment throughout the video; leading a motorcycle/four-wheeler gang dangerously through the streets, baring skin, but both wearing pants and leather jackets, and crashing a ‘high-end’ party. Instead of being ‘lady-like’ they are being forceful and direct while taking on leadership roles to break down class divisions, especially when they have been formed upon race. They each are resisting their gender stereotypes by blurring the erroneous dichotomy of male and female gender roles and instead are landing somewhere within a gender spectrum. They both seem to be very comfortable and confident in their bodies and in the way they each choose to dress, act, and sing. Eve and Stefani are more flexible and comfortable in themselves because they’re free to choose their own gender identity, so that even if they may be ‘straight’ they can take on whatever gender roles they want by moving along this gender spectrum. Although Eve and Stefani still take on heterosexual-seeming roles, they are showing that fluidity in gender is not weird, or taboo, but rather a celebration of one’s true self (2).

Social status has long been associated with race. Social status itself can act to change the way we see a person’s race. The few, wealthy-seeming black and Asian women being represented in the video as ‘upper class’ are adopted by the largely white, high-class citizens. Wealth, not race, seems to dictate their social standing. Wealth is inextricably tied to white culture and is used in this video to categorize class status, where low culture is perceived to be poor and largely made up of black communities. It appears that assimilation into the white culture is powerful enough to supersede any stereotype that is associated with race. Research conducted by sociologist Aliya Saperstein found that decreases in social standing such as becoming unemployed, impoverished or living in the inner city made it more likely for individuals to be perceived as black and less likely to be viewed as white (3). This is what the video seems to make of Stefani, a white girl of lower status who is perceived to fit more into the ‘black’ stereotype than into her own white culture because of her economic status. Both her and Eve are initially rejected by the ‘higher-class’ patrons at the party, but eventually some of the patrons accept and begin to appreciate the new ‘low’ culture of music and dance. Despite this seemingly constructive blending of social class and racial status, the video brings back a deeply rooted racial stereotype of criminal, black men. While both upper and lower class people of varying racial backgrounds are detained by police, it takes the bribery of a ‘low-class’ black man with a bag of cash to try to free everyone from jail. This criminal act reaffirms the pervasive stereotype of black men being prone to violence and criminal behaviour, especially if they are of a lower socio-economic status. It does not let the audience see people of colour as anything apart from their stereotypes; except if they strongly adhere to, or pass as people of white culture.

Overall, I thought that this music video was a medium by which Eve and Stefani could resist stereotypical gender and racial class norms that are so frequently portrayed in rap videos. However, GNDS125 has equipped me with the ability to observe media through a more critical lens; being able to see areas where racial stereotypes are still present and where white privilege continues to dominate social class. I am more aware of how media is perpetuating seemingly ‘out-dated’ stereotypes of both gender and race as a sadly effective way of marketing brands and products to a society still deeply rooted in misconceptions of gender and race.

Citations:

1. Tolmie, Jane. 2014. “Whiteness” [pdf slide 8 – directed me to online article]. Retrieved from GNDS125 lecture 2 notes from web site. <https://moodle.queensu.ca/201314/course/view.php?id=1145&gt;

McIntosh, Peggy. 1988. “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack”. Online essay excerpt from Working Paper 189, “White Privilege and Male Privilege: A Personal Account of Coming to See Correspondences through Work in Women’s Studies”.<http://amptoons.com/blog/files/mcintosh.html&gt;

2. Tolmie, Jane. 2014. “Gender Stereotyping” [sdf slide 2 – directed me to online video]. Retrieved from GNDS125 lecture 4 notes from web site. <https://moodle.queensu.ca/2013-14/course/view.php?id=114&gt;

Vlogbrothers. “Human Sexuality is Complicated…”. Online video clip. YouTube, 12 Oct. 2012. Web. 11 April. 2014. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXAoG8vAyzI&gt;

3. Munsch, Christin L. 2013. “Social status can change the way we ‘see’ a person’s race, according to research by Aliya Saperstein”. Gender News. Stanford University. <http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2013/social-status-can-change-how-we-see-race&gt;
4. EveVEVO. “Eve – Let Me Blow Ya Mind ft. Gwen Stefani”. Online video clip. YouTube, 16 Jun. 2009. 11 April. 2014. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wt88GMJmVk0&gt;

The Dark Knight Trilogy

Comics and comic-based movies have made a huge comeback in the last few years, and I believe a huge contributor to this has been Christopher Nolan’s ‘Batman’ trilogy, featuring Christian Bale. As much as people love them, it must be said that there are some fundamental racial and gendered issues about this particular trilogy. I will be focusing on the effects that the Cultural hegemony of North America has had on these films. Cultural hegemony refers to how the population will allow a ‘dominant’ group to impose their singular beliefs, values, and directions on a diverse society. The result is that the entirety of this diverse group will begin to abide by the beliefs, values and rules of this one, particular group. In North America, I believe that Western, Caucasian culture has begun to dominate us, homogenizing our culture into one with particular values, and particular beliefs about gender and race (Lears, 586).

I believe the first place to begin is with gendered issues – particularly with the under, and misrepresentation of women in the Nolan trilogy. It is no secret that the cultural hegemony in our Western world where these films were created, heavily overplays male involvement in superhero stories. This may be due to either over-valuing males, or due to the image of docile females, and strong, aggressive men. With these images, of course it would be men who are the super villains or superheroes, constantly in combat and battle. We see initial underrepresentation in the fact that in this trilogy, there are only 3 main characters who are females, and one of them is not even a villain or a heroine, but just a love interest (Rachel). The other two females are both strong, cunning women, however despite their abilities, Catwoman and Talia al Ghul both resort to using their sexuality in their ploys – whether it be seducing a congressman (Catwoman), or sleeping with Bruce Wayne to gain his trust (Talia). It seems unnecessary that they resort to these methods when they have so many other abilities, but makes sense when you consider that perhaps the writers are counting their sexuality as an ability. This shows how the dominating culture in our society trivializes women’s sexuality as an asset to their character, rather than a personal factor, used for actual intimacy. When we create this idea in movies, that women use sex to gain power over men, then we are doing two things: showing girls that to get ahead they should use their sexuality, and telling boys that they should believe that sex is meaningless to women, and used as a tool rather than an intimate act. In response, boys may act defensively, pre-emptively detaching emotion from sex as a protection against being ‘tricked’ by women.

The poor representation of Rachel, Talia and Catwoman is frustrating, but it becomes worse when you realize that these were the ‘main character’ women, who are shown stronger than background character women. The other representations of women in the Batman trilogy are mostly ‘attractive’ (by the dominating Culture’s standards), young women, used by Bruce Wayne as accessories to help his image as a billionaire playboy. Bruce Wayne is constantly arriving to parties and dinners with multiple, nameless, lineless women on his arms, or going on vacations with harems of beautiful women. This shows society that women are accessories, you can have multiple and not even know their name. Their value is in their beauty, and how they help your image. This also perpetuates the idea that success means a group of beautiful, nameless women. Bruce does not show success with a smart, loving wife, but with this alternative. Once again, we see the dominating Culture’s value here: if you are successful, you will get many, sexualized women who will respond to your beck and call. Perhaps these women are meant to contrast Rachel, who would be the smart, independent loving wife (if she reciprocated Bruce’s feelings), however this is similarly harmful, as we should not be showing the value of women by comparing them to others, and saying she is great because ‘she’s not like other women’. Setting women apart from others as a way to say that they are good is devaluing to all the other women you are stepping on to show your worth. We are not competing among women for status, and should be praised on individual merit, not in comparison.

            We move onto the representations of race in the films. In line with the Cultural hegemony, almost all the main characters in the movie are white, as this is how the dominating people see society – mostly Caucasian. Ignoring other ethnicities leads to underrepresentation’s in media, which causes others to believe that our society is predominantly white, and further perpetuates this belief. It is cyclical in nature. The only non-Caucasian in the film series is Mr. Fox, played by Morgan Freeman. It is at least pleasing to see that this character is extremely creative and intelligent, as representation matters. We see elements of pigmentorcracy, which refers to the hierarchy created based on skin tone, in which the lighter your skin is, the higher up you fall (Harris, “Pigmentocracy”). Though we see this mostly in the lightening of skin in models, or in fashion photoshop, we can also see elements of pigmentorcracy when we choose ‘white’ people to play characters who are not white, just because we feel as though these actors are more pleasant. We see this in both as Ghuls: Talia and Ra’s. Ra’s al Ghul’s father is from Hong Kong, and he is born in an Arabic country, however he is played by the white Liam Neeson. Similarly, Talia is by extension, also Arabic with Asian heritage, however is played by the French, Caucasian actress Marion Cotillard. Neither actor is aligned with the ethnicity of their characters, but there is no uproar. It is only when a white character is replaced by an incorrectly ethnic actor that people complain about ‘inaccuracy’. This is because the dominant culture favours lighter skin, seen in pigmentocracy. When ethnic characters are played by a white actor, it is fine, but a white character played by an ethnic actor is an injustice.

In a series as wonderful as Batman, it is sad to see the values of one culture being so supersaturated in the works due to Cultural hegemony. The series is not fully diverse between races and genders, however the influences of cultural hegemony stamps out what diversity there is. I believe that a diverse range in comics creates a more interesting world. As comic-based movies are on the rise, I hope that future directors decide to embrace the diversity within the series.

Works Cited

Lears, Jackson. “The Concept of Cultural Hegemony: Problems and Possibilities .” The American Historical Review 90 (): 586. Web. <http://xroads.virginia.edu/~DRBR2/lears.pdf&gt;

Harris , Trudier . “Pigmentocracy .” TeacherServe . National Humanities Center, n.d. Web. 14 Apr. 2014. <http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/tserve/freedom/1865-1917/essays/pigmentocracy.htm&gt;.

Modern Family ?

Modern Family is a relatively new show, with the pilot airing in 2009 and currently on its fifth season ending in May. During this time the show has won six Emmys, including outstanding comedy series and is one of the highest rated comedies in television. This brings me to question what does “Modern Family” say about modern families and what does this say about the way gender and race is portrayed in television?

It is clear that modern family Is meant to be made as a “muckumentary” toward the many stereotypes that tend to be present in western culture today; in the ‘modern’ age. The show center around three families. The Pritchett’s which consists of Jay; a patriarchal capitalist, his trophy wife Gloria; a Columbian beauty, and her son Manny; an adolescent hopeless romantic with Latin roots. Jay has two children; Claire and Mitchell. Claire is the high strung housewife, and her husband Phil; a tech-y goofball, and there three suburban children Haley; the popular one, Alex; the smart one, and Luke; the A.D.D., goofball, kid brother. And lastly there is Mitchell; an environmental lawyer whom is also a high-strung ‘neat-freak’, his partner Cam; who is seen as a ‘drama-queen’ from farm-state Missouri, and their adopted Vietnamese daughter Lilly who has grown to inherent their sassy attitudes.

[i]

[ii]

Although modern family is trying to push a progressive neoliberal image, it fails to do so and further emphasizes issues of racism, gender roles, homonormativity and a patriarchal structure. The longstanding ideological concept of the traditional American family, or rather ‘the American dream’, is transferred into modern day families with hyperbolized stereotypes to make in comedic. Modern Family ends up being a constant reinforcement of gender roles, patriarchy, racism and homornormativity, however these concepts a more deeply embedded than the simple play-on stereotypes that were primarily enforced, thus enforcing a cultural hegemony throughout the West.

First I want to concentrate on Gloria and the role that her character plays in perpetuating issues around race and gender to enforce a cultural hegemony. Gloria’s character fulfills many stereotypes Americans have while regarding Latin American women. Some of these stereotypes that Gloria fits involves passive, dependent on men, hot tempered and sexy. Gloria is constantly portrayed as scheming and tricking people into doing things for her, or making subtle references to a criminal past that is ‘normalized’ In Columbia. When Gloria makes references to her extended family whom are still “stuck” in Central America, while she is ‘lucky’ and embraces the riches of North America, as thieves and criminals coming from an archaic country, Columbia. No educational background is provided for Gloria (like it is with the rest of the cast) so it makes the audience wonder why she wanted to marry Jay. Is she really a ‘gold-digger’ attempting to achieve ‘the American Dream’ This idea not only denotes Central America, but uses it as a contrast to uphold North America enforcing Western Elitism. Gloria also can be seen as enforcing the ideas of orientalism portrayed by Edward Said. She is sexually available, as seen in her clothing choices, body language, and constant sexual references, and she is also dangerous to the white man, as she may be a ‘gold-digger’.

Gloria and Claire also represent gender role stereotypes in a modern family. The roles that Gloria and Claire play as the two constant adult women in the show are an important reflection of women in modern families today. The characters have been written in to seem strong, independent and controlling, but as you scratch beneath the surface it is clear that rather being independent women, they are actually upholding a patriarchal structure. Clare and Gloria share similar identities of domesticity, motherhood and family orientation. Neither of the women is employed and both rely on their husbands for financial support. Also when showing husbands in the work place the only other gender we see in work places are males. For example, Phil Dunfey often talks about a rival in his workforce who is constantly winning all the awards and is at the top of the real-estate game, his rival is Gil Thorpe, another male.

The show also perpetuates two type women that adolescents and grown up women can be. They can either the sexy, unintelligent, but scheming women such as Gloria, or the intellectual, high strong, non-sexual women like Claire. These two stereotypes are not just enforced in the two adult women but can be seen in Claires daughters Alex and Haley. Alex perpetuates similar images of that of Claire and Haley does the same for Gloria. Gloria’s character reinforced that women should take their outer image as a main priority. In the characters bio’s on the abc website Jay is described as “married the much younger, much hotter, more Columbian Gloria”. [iii] Where as her counterpart, Claire, is the stay-at-home mom whos purpose is to dedicate her life to the domestic realm, her children, her house, her community and her husband.

The show is able to enforce the image of a ‘modern family’ by including gay marriage with Mitchel, Cameron and their daughter Lilly. As previously mentioned Cameron and Mitchel are the embodiment of gay stereotypes. The writers, producers and directors have also made sure to include an aspect of homonormativity to ensure to comfort of watching two gay men is available for the audience. Sexual references, kissing and intimate moments are shown more often than not wit Claire and her husband Phil and with Jay and his wife Gloria, however Cam and Mitchell did not have an on camera kiss until the public started to notice the lack of sexuality between the two men, as compared with the rest of the cast. Mitchel Is seen enforcing homonormativity the most in order to gain acceptance with his father and in the work place. He is always worried as appearing “too gay” and does all he can to seem straight in these two spheres. While it is still a “mockumentary” of stereotypes, this message is still powerful because Mitchel has a strong presence in the workforce, where as Cam, who does not enforce homonormativity, does not.

By deviating from the ‘norm’ or rather the 60’s style family of wife, husband, children and white picket fence. The writers have decided that they have created a modern day family by changing the structure of the families but not the gender, and racial stereotypes. Although this is done a ‘comedic’ way, it is still harmful to the public and further promotes a cultural hegemony. As Dorthy Smith said “The danger is not in enjoying [television series] but in mistaking [these images] for something more than the selective, partial images that they are”[iv].

[i] http://abc.go.com/shows/modern-family/photos

[ii] http://abc.go.com/shows/modern-family/photos

[iii] http://abc.go.com/shows/modern-family/cast/character-jay

[iv] Dorthey , Smith. “Standard North American Family.”Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. (1993): n. page. Web. 13 Apr. 2014. <http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/14/1/50.full.pdf html>.

Pink-toned Perfection

When considering the societal significance of skin colour, it is important to recognize that skin colour categorization in various ethnic and cultural groups extends beyond what we may commonly describe as “fair”, “tan”, “dark”, “olive”, “black”, “white”, etc. Historically, especially through the lens of colonialism, people with relatively fair skin tones have received preferential treatment by colonizers, and the effects of this “light-skinned privilege” continue to show to this day. In some cultures, prejudice and discrimination towards people with darker skin tones are deeply rooted in centuries of culturally bound traditions, tales, and standards of beauty. This blog post analyzes an Indian advertisement for the skin-lightening cream, White Beauty, by Ponds (a beauty product company, under the same ownership as Axe and Dove), in which messages about certain cultural values regarding fair skin can be observed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tRasuTtMJo

This advertisement, the first in a series of five, features Bollywood stars Saif Ali Khan, Priyanka Chopra, and Neha Dhupia, all caught in a messy love triangle governed by Chopra and Dhupia’s contrasting skin tones. As the story goes, Saif Ali Khan and Priyanka Chopra separate when Khan decides to travel abroad to pursue his acting career. Three years later, Khan is engaged to the narcissistic yet light-skinned Neha Dhupia, and Chopra, heartbroken yet still very much in love, decides to begin whitening her skin in an attempt to win back her old love. Four advertisements later, Khan ditches his conceited fiancée for Chopra, who is now radiant and equally light-skinned. The two rekindle their love in the airport in which Khan originally left Chopra.

Although the actors are literally speechless throughout the commercial saga, and there is never any explicit claim to Chopra’s rekindled relationship being due to her lightened skin, the placement of the romantic victory next to Chopra’s skin whitening activities is meant the correlate the two. The message here is that having lighter skin will make you more desirable, benefiting your personal life. This idea is commonly seen in commercials for skin whitening creams – in fact, lighter skin is not only presented as corresponding to romantic success, but also to career success and overall self-confidence, as seen in the following examples:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kqd9zaI698 (as seen in week 11’s lecture)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWls3U7ZZ1E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZneY_dKHY4

Sometimes people of a particular race or ethnicity are branded as a single colour, such as “brown” or “black”. However, even if these categorizations may be technically or statistically legitimate, it is important to recognize that slight differences in darker pigments can still speak volumes about a person’s experiences, and that those with lighter skin often remain in a position of privilege, even in the absence of “white” people (this is also known as “pigmentocracy”). This concept is encapsulated in the term “colorism”: discrimination based on skin colour. Although there are shared ideas in both forms of discrimination, colorism differs from racism in the sense that colorism is defined as independent of racial connotations. Discrimination due to colorism is based on values associated with skin colour, rather than race (which involves ethnic, genetic, linguistic, and religious components).

Pond’s advertisements for White Beauty perpetuate prejudiced ideas favoring fair skin through the storyline’s events. Notice how Khan and Dhupia’s characters are both light-skinned celebrities, whereas Chopra’s is relatively dark-skinned and working class.  This reflects on how in multiple Asian cultures, dark skin has historically been tied to being working class, whereas light skin, unaffected by the sun’s rays, has been associated with leisure and wealth. In her article, The Persistent Problem of Colorism: Skin Tone, Status, and Inequality, Margaret Hunter discusses how, especially in countries with a history of European colonialism such as India and Vietnam, European standards of beauty have had a lasting impact due to the correlation of western features to high status and preferential treatment. White supremacy has tied the possession of fair skin to positive traits such as civility and superiority, whereas the possession of dark skin is representative of savagery and inferiority. This effect can also be witnessed here in North America, especially in the African-American community.

Just to make a note on how gender is presented in the White Beauty advertisements, it is clear that Chopra’s character is entirely valued for her romantic success. Although a series of 45-second advertisements is hardly the place to search for developed or realistic characters, the representation of women as heterosexual romantic interests in competition with each other is both shallow and stereotypical, and communicates that a woman’s greatest virtue is her appearance. Although skin lighteners are marketed towards both men and women, similarly to other products “for men”, the lightener is sold alongside ideas of masculinity and not just beauty. For example, in the videos linked above, the male stars are propped with motorcycles and beautiful women. Considering the connections between skin colour and social status/wealth, the desire to be light skinned may transcend the association of skincare to femininity.

As a person of colour who is a descendant of both Caribbean and South Asian heritage, I have certainly witnessed messages of colorism that specifically disapprove of being dark. I can recall being young and playing in the yard with my cousins (on the Filipino side) and hearing my Ninang and various Titas discouraging us from becoming too tanned from playing in the sun – I find it interesting how this message was generally gendered, usually coming from our female relatives and directed towards my primary group of female cousins. Perhaps it was more acceptable for my male cousins to tan due to Filipino and Canadian ideas of masculinity – my mother recalls how in grade school, the girls were taught to sew in classrooms while the boys were out in the fields learning to grow plants. Growing up around friends of mostly east Asian heritages, I learned that Filipinos are notorious for being dark-skinned in a way that some categorize as uncharacteristic of “actually being Asian”. On my Jamaican side, my father insists that my light-skinned grandfather had a preference for his light-skinned children, and would shame my grandmother for being a dark-skinned woman. As a mixed-race child, I must admit to possessing a position of privilege that shields me from experiencing colorism in the same way as either of my parents, who are both seen as relatively dark-skinned in their respective cultures. As a black person, my mixed-race status sometimes qualifies me as light-skinned, which is seen as more attractive than being dark-skinned (although I wouldn’t personally categorize myself as either). On the other hand, when it comes to my Asian heritage, I am usually perceived as “not being Asian”, either due to my Filipino roots or simply due to the fact that despite looking like my mother, I don’t look “Asian”. This protects me from colorist discrimination by simply not falling under that category, although I remain susceptible to racial discrimination.

As discussed in Week 11’s lecture, cultural standards of beauty are closely tied to the intersection of race and class privilege. In an article that analyzes correlations between skin colour and wages among new lawful immigrants to the United States, it was found that light-skinned immigrants earn averagely 17% more than comparable dark-skinned immigrants (Hersch, 2008). Colorism, like racism, is not only something that affects an individual’s self-confidence, it is a reality that influences how that individual is perceived and treated by others, thus affecting their accessibility to resources, jobs, and romantic partners. Pond’s White Beauty takes advantage of this cultural colorism, further perpetuating discriminatory ideas based in skin color to sell a product disguised as happiness.

 

Works Cited

Alden, Joddi. “Racialization of Bodies” [pdf slide 9]. Retrieved from GNDS125 lecture 11 notes online from web site <https://moodle.queensu.ca/2013-14/course/view.php?id=1145&gt&gt;

Hersch, Joni. “Profiling the New Immigrant Worker: The Effects of Skin Color and Height.” Journal of Labor Economics 26.2 (2008): 345-86. Print.

Hunter, Margaret. “The Persistent Problem of Colorism: Skin Tone, Status, and     Inequality.” Sociology Compass 1.1 (2007): 237-54. Print.