Race, celebrity, gender, and rape culture: What we refuse to see

carnivaloftherandom:

Last year, this incident occurred, we’ve recently heard of Alec Baldwin being stalked by a woman, and most people are familiar with Rebecca Schaeffer’s murder by a stalker-fan, or Paula Abdul’s stalker committing suicide. 

Last week, Wil Smith was physically accosted by a journalist while promoting MiBIII, and he pushed the reporter away and objected vehemently to the fact that the reporter tried to kiss him on the mouth. 

Some people are painting this as an incident of violent homophobia. They’re full of it. 

The reporter (who allegedly does this as part of his schtick with people he interviews)  committed sexual assault. 

Yes, you heard me correctly. If you touch someone without their permission, as Wil Wheaton experienced last year, that’s assault. If you touch someone in a sexual manner without their permission, that’s sexual assault. It could be misdemeanor level, but it is still assault. 

Celebrity is possibly the closest analogue that blurs the lines of race and gender, and approximates the level of entitlement society feels about women’s choices, bodies, and sexuality, all the time. The invasive glare of the spotlight and the way people demand access to those who are famous, is comparable to the objectification women are subjected to on a daily basis. 

A few years back, Adrian Brody won the Oscar for The Pianist. Before he made his speech, he sexually assaulted Halle Berry, who was present the award, by grabbing her and aggressively kissing her. I do not think this was intentional, but I objectively speaking: it’s what happened. Google it and watch the video. Look at HER face, listen to what he said directly after. There is a further entitlement when it comes to race. So that incident was brushed off, (and no, I don’t think Brody is necessarily a horrible person, just displaying behavior symptomatic of our cultural problems) and when the same type of thing happens to Will Smith, he’s made out to be the villain. 

If Denzel Washington did that to, say… Julia Roberts, or if Zachary Quinto did it to Bruce Willis… can you imagine the way all hell would break loose? 

But because these two particular incidents were against actors of color, they are not being described as what they are: assault. 

If someone grabbed someone on the street and kissed them, no preamble, we would clearly understand the events as assault, but when you bring fame into it, there is a sense of entitlement. Bring race and gender into it for extra helpings of cultural entitlement, and when someone reacts in a perfectly normal way, i.e., objecting loudly, calling out the person on their behavior, and physically moving them perpetrator out of their physical space, well: Will Smith is suddenly a violent homophobe. 

Nobody has the right to touch another person without their permission, kiss another person without their permission (implicit or explicit) have sex with them without their permission, or to invade their privacy. 

We have to stop acting like anyone’s body is public property, regardless of gender, race, orientation, color, or fame. 

We are entitled to nothing from another person, except what they choose to give. Just because someone is gracious enough not to press charges, doesn’t mean an assault didn’t happen.

Here endeth the lesson. 

dearjimmoriarty:

esmeweatherwax:

africanbeats:

Article: I Didn’t Know There Were Cities in Africa!

greenactivista:

Please substitue the word “children” for “99 percent of the idiots using the #peace tag on tumblr.”

I always get too angry to articulate why images of malnourished African children bothers me. Why it is racist. Why it’s wrong.

This article above helps.

The way you think about Africa is wrong.

The way you think about the entire world beyond you is probably wrong.

But let’s start with Africa. Because chances are you paid the 30 dollars for that stupid fucking Invisible Children starter kit. That at one point in time you participated in a 30 Hour Famine at church. Or you “adopted” a starving child with a few friends after you saw a 5 minute infomercial. Possibly you really like Bono. Or Blood Diamond made you feel really bad. Hotel Rwanda made you cry. Maybe you have one of those shirts with the heart in the middle of the continent. Or that you really want to internationally adopt an “orphan.”

The way you think about Africa is wrong.

Did you know that the UNICEF definition of orphanhood as the loss of one or both parents. Did you know that children are adopted by white parents all the time when their biological parents are still alive. Did you know that foreign adoptions happen all the time because parents see themselves as too impoverished or incapable to raise their children on their own. Did you know that Madonna, the supposed savior of Malawi, abducted her child because international adoptions aren’t even legal in that country. 

Did you know that the never-ending stream of donations you send to Africa is destroying local economies and small businesses. Did it ever occur to you that your donations are putting people out of business. Did you consider that you might be creating poverty just for participating in a capitalist system that steals from the poor and then throws them whatever is left over and calls it “charity.” Did it never occur to you, while you were donating money and feeling good about it, why it is that your dollar is needed in the first place.

Did you know that organizations like World Vision (the asshats who brought you the 30 Hour Famine) have set up camps for survivors of war and violence in Uganda, where they regularly impose Christian teachings and values through a process called “sensitization,” in order to get survivors to think more like they do. Did it ever occur to you that there are thousands of languages, cultures, and lives that are being homogenized by “charitable” organizations, and that it’s on your dime.

Did you know that money you donate comes with strings, and sometimes it doesn’t even come at all. Did it occur to you that organizations don’t spend their money unless they want to, and that frequently comes with stipulations. Did you consider that maybe there are places in Africa and elsewhere that really need your money or economic support, but don’t give a fuck about your hegemonic religious values. Did you have any clue that organizations like Invisible Children take in millions of dollars annually, but don’t even spend a third of it in Uganda.

Did you have any idea that countless charities, hospitals, adoption agencies, etc., set up in Africa are illegal, and done without credence to national or local government. Have you heard of volunteer tourism? Did you have any idea that completely untrained and uneducated people are hauling ass to Africa, and building charities that board, educate, and treat young children illegally with absolutely zero recognition of the law of the land in which they are in.

Did it ever occur to you that maybe some people in Africa are doing just fucking fine. They have a house. They own shoes. They have parents and siblings and food and an education and a favorite restaurant and hobbies and ambitions and a happy life. Did you consider that maybe your stupid generalizations and conceptualizations bother and insult them, and make it more difficult to be them.

Did you ever consider that Africa is a living, breathing continent of millions of people who are different. Economically, socially, religiously, lingually, culturally, ethnically different. And that your stupid fucking pictures of malnourished kids, your idolization of Angelina Jolie and Madonna, your ridiculous Invisible Children bracelet, your idiotic KONY 2012 posters are racist. They’re simplifying a place that is not simple. They’re portraying an enormous continent as singular, backward place. Instead of more complicated than you have ever bothered to understand.

You operate autonomously, offering your “help” where it has not been asked for. Blindly donating your dollars and your time without having any idea how it is being spent. 

There are people there. Governments. Cities. There are people living their lives in a continent that you do not understand, but you claim to help.

This rant was long-winded but I’ll conclude.

Just please if you take nothing else away from this. Be critical of the shit you are fed. Africa is a continent. And at least take the time to learn about it before you even consider throwing money or used books or Toms sneakers at it.

I am now officially in love with whoever wrote this!

Imma need almost everyone on my facebook to read this.

I’d like to print out 50,000 copies of this and paste it over any Kony 2012 propaganda I see

House VAWA Bill is Racist, Elitist, Homophobic, and Anti-Victim

stfuconservatives:

rhrealitycheck:

Written by Sharon Stapel for RH Reality Check. This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.

See all our coverage of the 2012 VAWA Reauthorization here.

There’s a big secret about the bill to address the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, introduced by Representative Sandy Adams (R-FL), that’s no longer so secret: it’s racist, elitist, homophobic and anti-victim. The bill, which purports to support “true victims” of domestic and sexual violence while excluding lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) survivors, forcing immigrants to tell their abusive partners where they are and gutting protections for Native women. So, using my secret decoder ring, I have to assume that “true victims” equals heterosexual, non-transgender, non-immigrant, non Tribal, non-people of color victims. Or, to remove the negatives, “true victims” equals straight, white women. 

The Adams bill (H.R. 4970) is in sharp contrast to the recently passed Senate bill (S. 1925) which had 68 bipartisan votes last Thursday. Senate Bill 1925 covers all victims of violence, including LGBT survivors; maintains confidentiality protections for immigrants; and provides protection for Native women in Tribal courts. That bill, championed by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) reached across the aisle and focused on what survivors of domestic and sexual violence need to stay safe instead of partisan politics. We are in an extraordinary political climate when fights over the passage of VAWA in Congress is news: prior to this year, VAWA had sailed through both the Senate and House with bipartisan support that addressed the real needs of victims of violence. That we can no longer assume that our legislators would support protections for victims of violence is shocking. That we have to decode their messaging to figure out which victims they will support is offensive.

In case it needs to be stated explicitly, all victims and survivors of violence need support.  Those in the margins, such as LGBT, immigrant and Native survivors, need more support than most because of the specific obstacles they face in seeking safety. VAWA has fundamentally shifted the way this country responds to domestic and sexual violence. In its evolution, at each reauthorization, VAWA has been refined to protect those most vulnerable. Never has VAWA distinguished between “worthy” and “unworthy” victims for good reason: Choosing between victims is not only offensive, it’s lethal. 

So here’s my question for every representative in the House: can you support a bill that would not just roll back protections for all survivors of violence in this country but that would specifically and explicitly say to some victims:  we will not protect you.  We do not care about you. You are not worth it.

Can you do it?  If you can, then we know who you are and what you stand for.  You can feel free to openly promote a racist, elitist, homophobic and anti-victim agenda. Because House members who support a bill like the Adams VAWA bill will no longer need to speak in code - we can hear you loud and clear.

I was excited that they had reauthorized VAWA, but this… this is no good. We need a bill that will protect ALL women and domestic abuse victims. -Jess

Oddities of Life: queer canon

zumie-monster:

There’s something really screwed up about the way we talk about queer representation in children’s media.

In the U.S. culture at least, there’s this instantaneous association of queer people with sex. Queer people are automatically highly sexual individuals—ergo, not ‘appropriate’ for the eyes of little kids, all of whom MUST BE STRAIGHT, RIGHT, whose heads we think would probably just explode when confronted with the oh-so-incomprehensible suggestion of gender and sexual orientation diversity existing on this planet.

Deeply ironic since—oh let’s look at Avatar the Last Airbender, the show. It features kids at ages 12-16 kissing (always het, of course)—and even strongly implies that two characters are engaging or planning to engage in some heavy petting at night. No one screams for the sexual neurosis of the child fans.

But it’s impossible for, eh, a ten year old on the sequel show to be queer, maybe have a crush on someone of the same gender. That would just make straight adults kids uncomfortable, obviously!

People who would like to see the queer community represented (aka most of us queer people) are forced to preface any sort of headcanon or fan theory about a character being gay or trans* with, “I know this would never happen in a kid’s show/I know this isn’t true,” because… the idea of an ACTUAL CANONICAL QUEER CHARACTER IN A KID’S SHOW IS—just not possible, right?

Because if we don’t acknowledge the absurdity of actual representation while saying, “hey, I read this character as a lesbian,” people will hammer us with “THAT’S NOT POSSIBLE, IT’S NOT TRUE, THIS IS A KID’S SHOW, STOP TALKING ABOUT KIDS THAT WAY, YOU’RE MAKING ME UNCOMFORTABLE, KIDS SHOULDN’T THINK ABOUT THINGS LIKE THAT.”

As if we aren’t aware of the impossibility of ever seeing people like ourselves in children’s entertainment.

As if we need to be told that we will only ever be seen as perverse deviants.

As if we need to be told that no one wants to see us.

But I have to ask you, person concerned with the frailty of our children’s minds:

What do you think that tells queer kids?

I’ll tell you, from my own experience as a child who knew they were queer:

• It tells us that we’re gross, that we’re not appropriate to be seen by other children, or even anyone.
• It tells us that we are perversely sexual.

• It tells us that we’re not normal.

• It tells us that we’re not as important as straight, NORMAL children.

• It tells us that we deserve to be neglected and ignored.

• It tells us that we’re alone, that queer children like us don’t exist.

A phrase I see around fandom a lot is, “People just aren’t ready for a kid’s show with/about a gay character (much less a trans* kid).”

So I’m just going to throw it out there—

When do you think people will be ready?

If you heard a tv show about a gay kid was going to premiere next year, would you be okay with it at that time?

How about in five years?

When are queer kids going to be able to pick up a book or turn on the tv and see someone like them, a queer character, to let them know that they’re not alone; that it’s fine to be whoever and whatever they are; that they’re not abnormal; to realize hey, I think I am like this person; to have a way to talk to their family about their identity; so that they maybe won’t have to learn self-loathing at such a young age?

What exactly do you think needs to change this to happen?

Perhaps a better question: When are YOU going to be okay with it?

And why aren’t you okay with it now?