This week in class, we talked about the colorblind universalism that seems to be infiltrating the politics of our nation. Tim Wise critiques politicians, with a focus on Barack Obama, for downplaying the racial tensions of the past, almost suggesting that we ignore them, to move onto a society that is "racially transcendent." It seems problematic, though, that the success of these race-neutral politicians depends heavily, as Wise tells us, on the support of white voters. Furthermore, upon an examination of Barack Obama's re-election website, there is an entire page devoted to "Groups For Obama" including racial ones (African-Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, and Pacific Islanders) as well as non-racial ones like Nurses, Young Americans, and LGBTs. If we are racially transcendent, then why can't that portion of the website be called "One America for Obama?" Obviously, Obama (or maybe just his campaign managers) does understand that the racial tensions and experiences of the past do contribute to the outlook of his voters, and in order to solidify their vote, he must appeal to diverse groups. This is all good and well, but in campaigning and speeches, he downplays the importance of race.
There is something wrong with this picture.
If we really were a racially transcendent society, there wouldn't be issues like the Trayvon Martin case, there wouldn't be racially-centered hate crimes, and there wouldn't be a segregated Greek system. With race relations so obviously an issue in our society, why are the leaders of our country insist we shy away from it? It is clear that smaller-scale issues are reflections of what our country should be concerning itself with. Consider the article below:
The Bachelor: Not Racially Inclusive?
What does this article tell you about the current state of race relations in our country? Do you think shows like these are not racially inclusive? Is it only dating shows? If so, what does this reveal about the values of our culture? Finally, how does this relate back to colorblind universalism, "racial transcendence," and the catering of most things, not just political policies, to the white population?
While our country has done some improvement with the issues of race, there are still some things that are fully integrated. To tell you the truth I don’t really watch the Bachelor all that much. But when I do see it, there are nothing but white girls for consideration of the girlfriend of the bachelor. There are some shows that are racially inclusive. For example, shows like Basketball wives and Flavor of Love only cater to black audiences. Yes, the shows have diversity when it came to race but each show has a racial stereotype that black people see everyday. Someone is fighting, cursing, drunk, passed out, or thrown in jail. I’m not saying that the bachelor is greater than these shows, but is what is catered to a certain audience.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the “racial transcendence” goes, this country has lot of work even consider the word universalism. Yes, we have a Black President, but why is it we cant even let the man do something and it is turned negative. Obama knows that America is not as diverse as it should be. Therefore, he must cater to the minorities, and the superior to find a common ground. So like before it is not that we cant have a colorblind universalism, but with things like Trayvon Martin, separate Greek systems how can we be consider colorblind if we cant realize that color still plays a factor in our society. So no matter if it’s the bachelor or President Obama, race still plays a matter in our lives.
The issues Tim Wise brings up about President Obama made me pause and think about the way the President has advocated colorblind, universally-beneficial policies. If he hadn't used this line of thinking to deal with race, would he have been elected at all? I don't think he would have been, and that's really disturbing to me. If we truly were "beyond race" and were ready to view everyone the same regardless of race, then we wouldn't have politicians like President Obama using special strategies to appeal to white voters.
ReplyDeleteI saw the Bachelor article when it came out a couple weeks ago and I wasn't surprised to see that they were under fire for having a white-only show. I've watched the show (and The Bachelorette) on and off (but less than regularly) since it came out long ago, and I've always said when they introduce the new person, "Oh shocker! Another rich, white heir to their father's fortune is the Bachelor." (A bit dramatic, I know.) The weird thing about this ABC reality show is that it is on a major network, unlike the shows Casey mentioned. So, one would think that because the show is being directed to literally all people with a television, it would at least be somewhat representative of the audience watching the show. I also think it's quite stupid, to be frank, that The Bachelor/Bachelorette shows haven't cast many African-Americans in the two shows' histories. They could appeal to a larger audience and the shows would grow in popularity and make more money. This is a simple concept, so I wonder what the real reason is behind the all whiteness of the show. We're used to seeing heteronormativity as a pretty common basis for "reality" shows and other sitcoms and movies. However, it seems like we're still dealing with issues of racial inclusivity and diversity in some really popular programming. How can we ever address other issues relating to diversity if people are still discriminating and excluding based on race? Just something to think about.
This is the correct link:(this is Bre typing) Apparently I did not check the link after I pasted it
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cnn.com/2012/04/20/showbiz/tv/bachelor-lawsuit-diversity/index.html?iref=allsearch
I think that this is very interesting topic. As I expressed in class, I think that President Obama had to be colorblind in order to be elected. I agree with Sarah, already many white people felt 'threatened' by a black man running for office. If he had been blatantly open about race relations he would have been constantly 'reminding' the white Americans of their fear of threat. He had to be race neutral. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton threaten white privilege and superiority and because of that they could never be elected to such a high position. As you stated in the intro of this blog post, the president does recognize different groups of people. As a registered supporter I get e-mails that are directed at Latinos, young people, and women. I think that the President is highly aware of more than (we) and the critics in these articles/books that we have read realize. The President is an incredibly smart man, who has overcome a lot and achieved more in his lifetime. He knew that to be a credible contender in a presidential election he could not be 'openly' black. He had to play down his 'African-Americanness' and play up his 'Americanness'. This ties into what we have talked about with the story of Americanness and the invistible African-Americanness as part of the Americanness. But I think that he truly understands this dynamic, and in order to get into office and fight for what he believes in as the leader of the free world, he would have to put aside race. Yet at the same time he has made great strides for oppressed groups. He has stood up for women's rights and Planned Parenthood, he has refused to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, has supported the Respect for Marriage Act and Don't Ask Don't Tell was repealed, he also enacted the Health care bill, and much more.
ReplyDeleteI think that race is taken into account when they are casting shows of this type. Earlier in the semester I posted a blog about interracial relationships and I think that to some extent in certain areas of the country, unfortunately in 2012, it is still seen as taboo. I think that television shows take this into account to some extent. But I do not want to lay all of the blame on ABC. I watch Grey's Anatomy and there are a wide variety of individuals, black, white, asian, latino, and they are all in relationships with one another, there is also a loving same-sex married couple. Another example of this is Modern Family, which has a variety of people. Even on ABC family, the tv show Secret Life, has interracial teenage couples. Perhaps they are more critical in reality shows? Or perhaps it has more to do with the producers of the shows? But I would like to point out that ABC does have some shows that are less discriminating. At the same time, it is quite obvious that these dating shows are exclusionary and I think that that is a problem that we have to deal with, but I think that it is less of a program problem and more of a societal issue. Are there still racial tensions in this country and I think that ignoring them will only push the betterment of society off until a later date when it is even more pressing.