Tyler Perry and Drag, Steve Harvey and Black Church Culture Reflections

I attended the lunch on Wednesday about Tyler Perry and similar comedians like Steve Harvey and the ways in which their comedy discusses race and gender. I thought it was an  interesting discussion. Rachel talked about how her research led her to explore the ways in which women are portrayed through these depictions of black church culture. A big issue she found is that although these films can do important work in terms of bringing black church culture to the mainstream, it's problematic in that it puts women in traditional roles and demonizes them and portrays them as promiscuous when they try to change their roles.
She also discussed how these movies could potentially be harmful, because they are sending different messages to different audiences, namely white and black audiences. She discussed how Black audiences could appreciate some of the references about church culture found within these films, but that white people could possibly form damaging opinions based upon the fact that they don't understand this culture. I found this very interesting, because I have definitely heard white relatives derisively talk about such movies, wondering why black people would wish to be portrayed in this way, but once again that sort of statement assumes that these movies and the black producers and actors represent all black, which is patently untrue.
I think it's hard to determine whether these texts like "Act Like a Lady, Think Like a Man" and Tyler Perry movies are more beneficial in terms of race or more harmful in terms of gender. As we've discussed in class and I've heard time and again in my sociology courses, when we try to challenge one set of power relations, we can inadvertently reinforce another set of power relations. So although it is good that black women are getting mainstream recognition through Steve Harvey's book, his suggestions require adherence to traditional and problematic gender roles. And this leaves black women in that "double bind" where they are oppressed both for their race and their gender. Rachel says she would like to see black women like her who are pursuing academia or a career. Knowing how Tyler Perry tends to portray women and punish them sexually, it is difficult for me to not take issue with his movies, but as we acknowledged at the lunch, we are still allowed to like problematic things. We must recognize why we like it and think about it critically and discuss its issues with friends and family, but we are still allowed to engage with it, so long as that engagement is mindful and thorough. I guess what I'm wondering is, where do you draw the line between liking something, but thinking about it critically, and dismissing a cultural artifact entirely for the ideologies behind it?

White Like Me Chs. 3-5

It was interesting when Tim Wise was talking about the idea of overindulgence and privilege going hand in hand. It reminded me of  Ursinus, particularly the way in which my fellow students trash Reimert on the weekends, as well as damage the residence halls when they are drunk. The sense of entitlement that  comes with this behavior is absurd. To think that we are allowed to act in this way simply because we are college students and this how we let off steam, knowing that we will probably not have to clean it up or will have to pay shared fines, is disgusting. What's more, we know that the consequences of drinking and drugs are far less severe for us in this mostly white bubble, as well as outside of it, by virtue of our skin and status as college students. The idea of belonging, of not questioning our right to be here, to essentially destroy school property is extremely prevalent. In fact, Reimert has been at its cleanest this year simply because we have the new pilot program which allows us to have open containers in the courtyard. If it weren't for this new privilege, the courtyard would remain just as trashed as it has in years past.  On the contrary, the mostly Hispanic cleaning staff is left to clean up the mess, while students complain about them "intruding" in their suites and bathrooms and "blasting music," but without them we'd be living in filth generated by our overblown privilege. The lack of respect some students show towards them definitely seems racialized to me.
Another important thing Wise point out was that "privilege sometimes costs us clarity of vision" (124). Rather than working on the apartheid and racism in New Orleans, his group was far more focused on South Africa and never made the connection between where he lived and the issue he chose to advocate about, which is yet another benefit of white privilege: selecting what issues we want to get active about, rather than becoming  active out of necessity. This reminded me of high school, where we had groups like "Save Darfur," but failed to connect these issues to or acknowledge the poor, mostly black community 15 minutes down the road and the very real violence and food insecurity there. The fact that we were able to raise all this money for those in Darfur without once questioning how this could possibly connect to the nearby city of Chester shows just how strong white privilege is. We never talked about the racial separation in our school either. I never thought about it, because I never had to, since I never felt like the "other" in the classroom.

White Like Me Chs. 1-2

I keep thinking about my own responsibility for my white privilege  and the idea of treating it as an asset: "if you get to use an asset, you have to pay the debt accumulated, which allowed the asset to exist in the first place" (24-25).  If we truly wanted to move on and forget what happened, call the past the past, that would imply that whites have to give up the benefits incurred by virtue of their white skin, which would never happen. I keep thinking about just how inundated I am by white supremacy and "white reality." It's startling to look back upon past experiences with a critical eye and realize just how racialized daily life is. And the only reason I've been able to overlook this reality is because I'm white. When I look back at my passive participation in this racist system, it's upsetting to think about how I was able to overlook subtle and systemic racism, while overt racism always incited anger in me. I can remember getting into heated fights with classmates over race and prejudice, but never really digging deeper into why the black kids tended to hang out with the black kids and the Asians hung out with the Asians, never questioning my own circle of mostly white friends and just how racialized my own life was/is. Even though I lived for eight years in Chester and had black neighbors and black friends, I went to mostly white private school, and this "social separation" only increased as time went on. By high school, in a mostly white neighborhood and school district, the most interaction with minorities came through the "A Better Chance" program, which brought  Hispanic and black students from inner cities to attend our high school. There were GPA requirements and they lived in houses with strict rules and were assigned mostly white host families. The bus I took home every day also stopped at the ABC houses, and  a lot of  verbal and/or physical fights often broke out on the bus.  I also remember hearing some of the complaints about how some of the ABC students "took advantage" of their white host families' generosity, demanding material items or money, accepting gifts without gratitude. As if they were expected to be grateful for misplaced liberal guilt. I remember how outraged I felt originally upon hearing all of this, but now I've come to realize just how much my white privilege blinded me to the vulnerable and racialized position the ABC students were placed in. This whole situation reminds me of the scenario Wise talked about when his friends called him "my nigger": "a cat and mouse routine where the white boy doesn't realize he's being used... in the same way some folks had long been used, and were still being used everyday" (37). These students were scrutinized both in their behavior and in their academic performance, with the threat of begin kicked out of the ABC house if they violated any of the rules hanging over their heads, and the unspoken expectation that they be grateful of this chance this white community had so generously given them. As I reflect on the true power dynamics of the program, it's quite clear to me that once again  whites have the upper hand and dictate the rules. The program is flawed, not because the students abuse it, but because of its white savior complex. I think this book is really good for us to read, particularly for the white students in the class, because it can help us realize just how much our skin color benefits us on a daily basis and forces us to reexamine experiences from a racial perspective.

Ch. 6

Taylor discussed the "racial fantasyland" we've created in America and the racialized stock characters we fill it with, explaining that this invented reality obscures the true reality. This is why we are able to push forward public policy based on inaccurate statistics and assertions. He talked specifically about immigration and the way policy is focused on enforcement rather than administrative services within the broader context of a society that deals with social problems punitively.  This reminded me of a book we read in one of my Sociology courses called Righteous Dopefiend, which detailed the lives of homeless heroin addicts in Los Angeles. Their campsites and drug use were criminalized and funding was funneled into the police force rather than shelters and clean needle facilities. The police would periodically seize their needles and trash their sites, effectively forcing them to relocate and share needles rather than getting them off the streets and dealing with their addictions. There was also explicit racism within the homeless community, with white users at the top and blacks at the bottom. The black users were stereotyped in specific ways and their practices were looked down upon by their fellow users. They also had fewer resources and less stable families. Even in extreme environments where these people are fighting for survival and rely on each other to a certain extent, race still plays a significant role in their individual interactions and creates divides and animosity. As Taylor pointed out, "The point has not been that these phenomena are always and only about race. It has been that race is relevant" (202). Going back to immigration, Taylor talks about how those who emigrate to the US, particularly those who are Latino/Latina, are seen as   "...inassimilable, perpetual foreigners--even if they happen to have been born in their 'new' home" (189).  If you are not white, you are your race or ethnicity first, American second. We classify their food, traditions, behaviors, etc. in negative, abject terms that classify them as 'others' and assume our Western, white way of life is right and normal. This ideology helps to justify exploitative policies and overlook the issues faced by immigrants in their home countries. If we see them as problem people who caused their own issues by virtue of being a particular race and having a certain of traits, then we don't have to think about our own role within these injustices and don't need to offer assistance. Instead, we can discuss them in dehumanizing terms, accuse them of undermining our economy and job market, and police them with policies that are essentially forms of racial-profiling.