Racialicious posted on the Essence magazine controversy regarding interracial dating and Reggie Bush as cover model. Coming out characteristically unscathed is Kim Kardashian, Bush’s white girlfriend, the socetial prism of race and the places people occupy in the context of institutional racism.
What is worth examining in the piece is how Kardashian’s whiteness individually as well as in relation to collective perception is obscured. Thus, people cite Kim Kardashian as having some Armenian ancestry, without really exploring how socially she’s simply white.
How often do people hear the random inconsistency in the racial narrative as a means of defending a relationship to power? No one likely ever honestly classifies Kim Kardashian as a person of color or a minority of any sort — or frankly anything other than white. Last I checked, what one considers oneself in the lens of race is far less relevant to the discussion than the place one actually occupies in the world in terms of race. Thus a biracial man such as Barack Obama may embrace his diverse heritage all he wants, but in the popular consciousness, he’s Black. To people of color as well as whites, Obama’s status is incredibly important for different reasons. Similarly, a white person may date Black people, embrace cultural norms or manner associated as Black, et al., but they’re still white, largely as a function of societal white supremacy. And they can always choose to date different people, change manner, etc. and still have access to the world in ways people of color often rarely do.
Clearly, my interest isn’t celebrity gossip or who either of them are dating — does anyone honestly give a rat’s ass about Reggie Bush or Kim Kardashian? — but rather the tendency to individualize questions of privilege, instead of taking a deeper look at systemic issues. Racialicious laudably tries to take on some of this, though its credibility is vastly undercut by the Kardashian spin.
Avatar continues to start discussions about racism, imperialism and white privilege. Gathering Forces offers a solid film review that addresses theories the film is racist as well as glamorizing Avatar‘s rebellious themes. “[P]erhaps Jake Sully has what W.E.B. DuBois described as ‘double consciousness’: his mind and body are split and there is a war going on between the oppressor and the oppressed for the fate of his body,” the review reads. “In this sense, Jake Sully starts out as the Navi’i equivalent of an Uncle Tom who is trained in the colonizer’s schools and goes back to use the master’s tools to dominate his people. He is a “blueberry”: blue on the outside, white on the inside. Over time, he needs to exorcise and transform the white part of his mind, which means switching sides and joining the revolt of his people against colonialism. In this sense, the movie could actually be read as a parable for the psychological transformation of colonized peoples.”
Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson have generated much controversy for their recent comments on Haiti. Limbaugh and Robertson got this response from Keith Olbermann [h/t Black Fire, White Fire]
Three Way Fight links to one of the many organizations doing relief support in Haiti.
3 Responses to Race and Popular Culture This Week
jafabrit
January 15th, 2010 at 7:53 am
What really saddens me is that robertson and limbaugh have huge audiences. To have these comments made at a time when people are dying and suffereing tragically is more than just appalling. I am horrified!
“does anyone honestly give a rat’s ass about Reggie Bush or Kim Kardashian?”
No I barely know who they are. Besides that though I don’t really give a rat’s arse about the who people date. I haven’t read the article but wouldn’t her ethnic heritage, Armenian, be a part of explaining who she is as a person, not some effort to make an excuse or something? Frankly I am not seeing the relationship between that and her choice of a boyfriend? Is their supposed to be some connection?
Ernesto Aguilar
January 15th, 2010 at 7:56 am
Hey there… I thought it was pretty random as well. The article makes a reference to her choice of past relationships, but I’m not exactly clear myself why it is relevant.
jafabrit
January 15th, 2010 at 9:12 am
I had a look at your link and yes, I can see why there is umbrage at the choice of the man on the cover considering who the mag markets too. Not sure I agree with it. Doesn’t it suggest insecurity or some level of bigotry to take it personally as if it is a rejection because a man (or a woman) chooses to date someone outside of their race?
On a side note you said:”Last I checked, what one considers oneself in the lens of race is far less relevant to the discussion than the place one actually occupies in the world in terms of race.”
Kardashian has the same colouring as my daughter. How do you know Kardashian is treated socially as white? Or is she more accepted into the white community because she isn’t so dark.. My daughter hasn’t been treated socially as white, and has faced some very unpleasant racist comments/incidents as a result.