Trackbacks & Pings

1. Mixed Media Watch - tracking media representations of mixed people on 22 Apr 2006 at 6:34 am

   […] Mixed Media Watch - tracking media representations of mixed people « Black women lie about rape but white women don’t? […]

Comments

1. brad wrote:

   Yep, there’s not much to add but the same old same old keeps going on. A couple of Right wing blogs have said that the Duke rape case is an attempt to stick it to “whitey.” Just the use of the word “whitey” helps me to know that the writer is a 50-something-year old. Who uses that word anymore? “Whitey” has gone the way of “honky” or “ofay.” Frankly, the hatred being generated by this case is twisted. People are making judgement calls without waiting to hear the evidence. From the beginning, all of the Right wing blogs kept bring up Tawana Brawley, as if a Caucasian man had never really raped a black woman.

   I wonder if the rape victim had been an upper class African-American woman who was attacked while shoping if the same vicious attitudes would prevail.

   Posted 20 Apr 2006 at 5:16 pm ¶

2. Unlisted wrote:

   The Right Wing Machine is all over this story in defense of these guys without knowing any of the facts.

   I obviously don’t know the facts here, but IF this woman IS lying, this would be a serious setback for black American women as yet another Tawana Brawley will have come on the scene.

   Many know this, and that is why I think that many are HOPING that these guys are guilty. Too much at stake

   Posted 20 Apr 2006 at 6:13 pm ¶

3. bertie wrote:

   The reality is black folks are and always will be lumped together. Somethimes this is by choice, as we rally behind the success of others (ie, Denzel, Halle or Jamie winning the oscar, or Barak Obama being elected senator).

   But most of the time its forced upon us and very much unwanted. This is why we cringe and hope (and pray) that folks who committ a heinous crime or who’ve messed up in a very public way aren’t black. And this is why Tawana’s baggage is now being hoisted upon this young women.

   Posted 20 Apr 2006 at 6:29 pm ¶

4. Alec wrote:

   brad:

   I think issues with class are undoubtedly a part of the reason we are hearing the types of responses we are hearing. Rush Limbaugh called the alleged victim a “ho.” Rush and his kind have this very limited view of black women, heavily influenced by the media (and the images from the media they choose to focus on for their idoelogical reasons). It’s the urban/”ghetto” stereotype we all know. THAT type of woman doesn’t deserve respect. She sleeps around and probably is going to end up a single mother on welfare. It’s one of the right-wing’s Boogeymen.

   Posted 20 Apr 2006 at 7:52 pm ¶

5. merq wrote:

   What I love is how black women are just a hop, skip, and a jump away from being branded as “ghetto.”

   Cynthia McKinney’s oh-so-controversial new hairdo led some racist talk-radio bastard (I’m beginning to wonder if that’s a requirement these days) to compare her to a “ghetto slut” and “an explosion at a brillo factory.”

   I swear, it makes you want to hurt someone.

   Posted 20 Apr 2006 at 10:34 pm ¶

6. brad wrote:

   Merq,

   I agree. McKinney is just sporting an afro! God forbid an African-American/mixed woman doesn’t straighten her hair because that of course would mean that she’s a lowly prostitute. That’s sick.

   Neal Boortz is the racist, sexist pig who made the “ghetto slut” comment.

   Why should anyone have to alter their natural ethnic appearance not to be considered a prostitute? It’s crap like this that enforces negative stereotypes and self-hatred. People wonder why Michael Jackson mutilated himself, it’s comments like Boortz’s that tells people of color that there is something flawed about their non-white features.

   I was watching MTV’s “Yo Momma” show yesterday. Two African-American kids were facing off. The end of the contest requires the contestants to attack each other personally. What happens? Colorist, racist crap. The medium brown skinned contestant called his opponent, who was dark skinned, so black that he can’t see him in the darkened space. He then goes on to tell the darker fellow that he looks like grape because he is so black.

   I was so shocked that MTV would air such blatantly racist material. What did MTV teach kids at home? It’s okay to rip someone apart because of his skin color!

   Posted 20 Apr 2006 at 11:20 pm ¶

7. Ben wrote:

   skin-color hierarchy exists in many racial groups - definitely blacks and asians - and has since way before MTV. whether it’s the hegemonic imposition of european aesthetic ideals or just a perpetuation of the class division between those who worked out in the sun and those who didn’t, i don’t think intraracial skin-color hierarchy racist. there’s much more to being black than just being dark.

   Posted 21 Apr 2006 at 8:37 am ¶

8. Unlisted wrote:

   I wasn’t convinced at first, but this is more evidence that we are heading toward a black/non-black dichotomy

   Posted 21 Apr 2006 at 8:48 am ¶

9. mtevc wrote:

   i think it was brad who brought it up, but the mtv dozens type show…i was equally offended by the “yo momma is so black,…” jokes…stupid, ignorant humor…my peeps need to stop the shucking and jiving

   oh and if rush calls someone a ho, can we call in and call him a street addict???

   Posted 21 Apr 2006 at 9:13 am ¶

10. merq wrote:

    mtevc:
    if you do, just make sure you share the digital audio with us.

    Posted 21 Apr 2006 at 12:50 pm ¶

11. John wrote:

    The only thing you’re going to get is digital audio of that dope head hanging up the phone.

    Posted 21 Apr 2006 at 9:13 pm ¶

12. merq wrote:

    that’ll suffice.

    Posted 21 Apr 2006 at 9:43 pm ¶

13. site admin wrote:

    the other thing that all of this brings up is the age old assumption about black women that they are lascivious, insatiable beasts — definitely a stereotype that was created and solidified during the era of slavery. this basically forgave any rapes that were acted out by slave masters on their slaves. “you can’t blame these white men! the women were asking for it!” seems like that same sentiment exists here… you can’t blame the guys…these “ho’s” were asking for it. it’s truly sickening how hypocritical our society is…valuing the claims of some over others. it’s not really surprising, but that doesn’t make it easier to stomach.

    JC

    Posted 22 Apr 2006 at 6:09 am ¶

14. Jeremy Pierce wrote:

    I’ve only seen one person referring to Tawana Brawley with respect to this case, so maybe I just don’t have the breadth of exposure to it that you or blac(k)ademic does, but it seems to me that there’s a perfectly reasonable way to bring her name in. If it turns out that this woman is lying, then she is another example of what Tawana Brawley did. If so, then it’s an extremely harmful act of hers. It’s harmful for women. It’s harmful for blacks. It’s especially harmful for black women. The victimology mindset that might have been motivating her (if she indeed was lying, which I’m not saying is the case) is pretty dangerous. If she is lying, then it’s probably at least partly motivated by racial slurs being sent her way by some of these guys. But pretending racial slurs justify calling someone a rapist really does make light of real rape and the much more serious harms black people endured that most blacks today probably can only imagine (in this country anyway). If she is lying, then she and Tawana Brawley are both examples of something that all black people and all women (not to mention white men and anyone else) should oppose very seriously. I think that’s an important enough issue that I see no problem at all bringing in Brawley’s name, as long as it’s clear that you’re not going beyond the evidence to assume that the woman is indeed lying. Some have done that, and shame on them. But I don’t see how the potential of furthering a myth is bad enough that you’ll avoid fighting against a real distortion of the severity of a moral offense that minimizes the kinds of serious suffering that too many people have had to face. So I have great difficulty endorsing your criticism of those who mention Brawleys’s name in this context, unless they explicitly make the kind of connection that I don’t see anyone making (but then I haven’t seen these instance of people talking about her, so maybe they are doing that).

    Posted 22 Apr 2006 at 7:07 pm ¶

15. merq wrote:

    “…and the much more serious harms black people endured that most blacks today probably can only imagine (in this country anyway).”

    Jeremy Price:

    While I agree with much of what you’re saying, I’m a little wary when I hear comments like these, because it seems fairly close to popular contemporary American rhetoric, in the vein of

    “ok, we’re sorry about the whole slavery/segregation/racism thing. but all that’s over now, so move on.”

    While it’s true that “blacks today can only imagine” certain ills borne of slavery and Jim Crow segregation, there are still numerous very serious ills that are only too real for black people.

    Posted 23 Apr 2006 at 4:59 pm ¶

16. Daniel wrote:

    I don’t have any opinion so far about this case because the facts keep changing. It is my hope that the truth will supercede all of the other discussions. So far, everybody’s story keeps changing. Somebody is lying. I think it is the media (by the way vastly left wing, not right wing) that has injected this case with all of the racial layers, stereotypes, etc. Unfortunately, this is the kind of racial case that the media loves to portray because it boosts ratings, sells papers and increases ad revenue. The biggest problem with this entire debacle (I can’t believe nobody mentioned it here) is that it was the prosecutor who went on interview after interview (about 60) insisting that the rape took place and it was the prosecution that has really played the race card here (Yeah, tell Ice that the DA got his race card) The DA is up for re-election very soon, hmmm. We should never assume that any women is lying when she makes rape allegations. Conversely, we should never assume that an accused rapist is guilty until all of the facts are in. We should all take a deep breath and try to ignore idiots like Rush who spout off nonsense on a daily basis because they get paid to do so. The jury is still way out on this before we start making a case either way.

    Posted 24 Apr 2006 at 3:53 pm ¶

17. mr guy wrote:

    The thing that upset me the most is that the only reason this is such big new is because it involves race.Same race rape happens all the time, yet it’s not that big of a deal in the media.One last thing, just wanted to say, the mainstream media is neither left wing or right wing at least to me.

    Posted 24 Apr 2006 at 11:24 pm ¶

18. merq wrote:

    The mainstream media is interestingly close to “right-wing”

    Posted 25 Apr 2006 at 8:22 am ¶

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.