No.
No, no, NO.
It is NEVER acceptable to refer to a child in this manner. That goes double when it's a child of color, and especially when it's a Black girl.
No, I don't want to hear it. No false equivalencies about how it's the same for anyone of any color. The fact of the matter is that this country has a very long and very ugly and very violent history with regard to Black people, and with specific reference to this situation, with regard to Black girls. Proprietary attitudes. Overt [and covert] sexualization. And those two combined into a toxic cesspool that regards Black girls' genitals as something simultaneously to be owned and feared, dominated and decimated.
Yeah, I've heard all the excuses that Quvenzané Wallis was not the "target" to the tweet; that the actual "target" was the sexism of the Oscars, and more broadly, of Hollywood generally. Right. Tell that to the nine-year-old girl who has done less than nothing to deserve to be labeled thusly. Perhaps the subtext was supposed to be a sarcastic attempt at criticizing the film industry, but the surface text did indeed target an innocent nine-year-old child. Besides, if it takes that much
Good for The Onion for recognizing that this was nothing but full-bore racism and misogyny, however tarted up by its defenders - and for apologizing unequivocally. But there needs to be a come-to-Jesus meeting at HQ, discussing what is and is not acceptable behavior by those who tweet under its byline. Now, maybe the industry and the Oscars - and swinish "comedians" like Seth McFarlane, who thought it was appropriate to link Miss Wallis to George Clooney as a future, albeit very young, sexual partner - could also follow suit.
Something else that needs to happen? The men and especially the white men) who are so vigorously defending this piece of filth need to sit down and shut up for a while. There's nothing to defend here. time to close your mouths and your keyboards and open your eyes and ears for a while - who knows? you might actually learn something that breaks through that ridiculously thick bubble of privilege that's been protecting you your whole life. People like David Freedlander, who are sufficiently unaware (or sufficiently bigoted) to wonder aloud, ad nauseum, why The Onion would apologize - and sufficiently cowardly to couch their real objections behind weasel words. Freedlander cites several uses by The Onion of the word in question, trying to draw yet another false equivalence, then asks:
Was it that the insult was directed at child [sic], including one who was among the feel-good stories of otherwise dismal season [sic]?Here's a tip, Freedlander: You're not fooling anybody. So why not just come right out and say what you so clearly wanted to say - i.e., "Was it because she's Black?" Does that bother you? If so, maybe you should think about why. Because I would hope that anyone would be outraged at such a tweet directed at any young girl - but, yes, it does matter that this was directed at a Black girl, because the history is so much more weighted with murderous baggage.
Oh, and while we're on the subject of your piece: A lot of us don't find that movie, made by well-off white New Yorkers who give every impression of engaging in both cultural appropriation and "slumming," to be a "feel-good stor[y]." Perhaps you need to expand your pool of sources before reaching for blanket characterizations that offer your opinion as fact.
I think, though, that the greatest criticism here has to be reserved for the women who defended this bit of racist misogyny. There's a good or perhaps more accurately, especially bad) example of that here. And then to wallow in whiny faux-victimhood when called on it? Talk about whitesplaining.
Shameful.
Ad yet another example why, Black History Month or no, Black President or no, there's no such thing as post-racial in this country. Or post-sexist, either - even from women who should know better.
I'm disgusted.
Was it
that the insult was directed at child, including one who was among the
feel-good stories of otherwise dismal season? - See more at:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/25/the-onion-has-never-shied-from-insult-or-the-c-word-so-why-say-sorry-now.html#sthash.IbIrV3Ul.dpuf
Was it
that the insult was directed at child, including one who was among the
feel-good stories of otherwise dismal season? - See more at:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/25/the-onion-has-never-shied-from-insult-or-the-c-word-so-why-say-sorry-now.html#sthash.IbIrV3Ul.dpuf
No comments :
Post a Comment