The Shocking SAE Chant

While watching a Daily Show clip regarding the recent SAE University of Oklahoma fraternity chant scandal, I was in awe when I saw some of the media's reactions. A video was recently leaked of a chant that SAE fraternity members at University of Oklahoma were singing. The chant describes their rush policy, and goes, "You can hang them from a tree, but they will never sign with me. There will never be a n***** SAE."

The chant was so shocking to me; it brings into question just how far we really have come from the racism that existed about 100 years ago. The chanters refer to the atrocious, primitive times of racial terror lynchings that went on, saying you "can hang them from a tree." I found this word "can" to be a particularly unpleasant. The chant is implying that you (as a white male SAE member) are not only capable, but are being permitted to hang a black person. This chant is unbelievably backwards.

While some media coverage has called the video "racist" and "disgusting," there are a lot of commenters who think otherwise. USA Today broadcasters blamed the situation on "hip-hop," since the listeners hear this word over and over, will obviously start repeating it. Not true. This is one of the most naive and ignorant conclusions to draw, that racism today is a product of the music we listen to... Here's a clip of John Stewart's reaction to this.



There is just no excuse for the racism that is going on here. When the leader of the chant finally apologized for the incident, he said that "alcohol" had something to do with his decision-making that night, which I still feel is an entirely unreasonable excuse. The chant wasn't made up on the spot. So whether or not alcohol was hindering the chanter's judgement, these racist words existed before the incident, but this was the first time it was brought to the public's attention.

This whole situation is also relating to what we've been talking about regarding who is "allowed" to say the "N" word, and I think it was certainly inappropriate in this case because not only are the chanters saying this word, but the actual intent and message they're getting across is that they will never allow black people to join SAE, and that they condone the atrocities that occurred during the racial terror lynchings. And the media making excuses for this indisputable racism is only furthering the problem. This is the kind of backwards thinking that is pushing America in the opposite direction it needs to be going.

Disney Princess's Impossible Proportions

While scrolling through Buzzfeed, I found a picture that made stop and take a second glance. The article was entitled "Pop Princesses Photoshopped To Have Disney Princess Proportions." This is what singer Taylor Swift would look like if she had the same body proportions as a Disney animated princess.

As you can see, a real-life person looks laughable with these proportions. Her waist is basically the same size as her neck and her eyes look about the size of tennis balls. After I got over how ridiculous she looked, I started to think about the implication this has. These animated princesses are drawn so unrealistically and it's sending the wrong message. I thought Barbie proportions were bad, but these princesses are on a whole different level.

What young, impressionable kids are seeing on screen really does impact them later on. It has an influence on beauty stereotypes they'll grow up thinking, because their favorite Disney princess has an impossibly thin waist, toothpick legs and arms, and gigantic eyes. Parents are feeding their children these beauty standards without even realizing it.

And we don't really see the same thing with men. The Guardian had an interesting article about this topic regarding male love interests in Disney animated films, saying they "may have puffed-up chests and broad shoulders, but their proportions are at least feasible. Half the male Olympic swimmers could pass for Disney princes." It might be a little more understandable if characters were all being drawn so exaggerated, but it's only the women! It seems like men's bodies are being exaggerated with the large muscles and broader shoulders, while women characters are exaggerated by being made extra meager and small.

Why are these princesses being drawn like this? Is Disney afraid if they put a princess on screen who has a normal woman's body proportions that the kids won't enjoy the movie? It seems like a terribly easy fix. Disney has the power to influence kids, and they could use this power in a really good way (like drawing princesses who have a healthy person's waistline), but they're using it to do the opposite. They're enforcing these impossible beauty standards when it seems so easy to just draw a princess with a waist a few inches thicker.

73 Years of Lynchings

          The Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery, Alabama recently released a report that uncovered the astonishing number of victims of "racial terror lynchings" from 1877 to 1950 in 12 Southern States. The number: 3,959. 
          
          It’s such an astounding number and seems even more appalling to me once I learned there are only a few markers acknowledging lynching sites in the U.S. We need to make more of an effort to acknowledge and attempt to make reparations for the horrors that took place in this country at that time. I think learning the actual number of victims will push us in the right direction.

          The timing of the release is also interesting. The report being released in February (Black History Month) I’m guessing was no coincidence. Maybe this report was released at the time when most people would be in the right mindset to hear it, and perhaps take action to do something.

          Bryan Stevenson, founder of the Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery, Alabama, says that the lynchings “were not about administering popular justice, but terrorizing a community." I believe what he is saying has a lot of truth to it, not just relating to the lynchings, but a larger theme: using fear (terror) to show who is in control in a society. Stevenson says these lynchings were really about “executing people for violating the racial hierarchy.” Speaking to someone the wrong way could mean life or death for African Americans at this time. It wasn't about whether they really committed a crime or not; it was about white supremacy. 

This is so similar to Arthur Miller's The Crucible, with people being lynched if they were suspected of going against authority. In times of fear and change, a lot of people felt they needed power and this was their way of showing which race was in control. 

I hope more actions are taken in an attempt to make people more aware of these tragic times. They can serve as a reminder of what we need to work on as a nation.

The Measles Vaccine: Personal Beliefs versus Science

A recent outbreak of measles has many worried. We thought the disease was essentially gone; but it is making a fast comeback, with over 600 cases in the U.S. in the last year. So why are so many choosing not to vaccinate their children? People are led to be afraid of vaccines. In a video on the New York Times website, they beg the question: how did we get to a point where personal beliefs can triumph over science?

Some believe that vaccines cause autism, a claim that actress Jenny McCarthy has been a part of making popular. She claims her son became autistic as a result of the vaccination. Her proof, her “science” as she says in an interview with Oprah, is her son. But we can’t take these stories and accept them as scientific proof. And we tend to do this a lot when we’re talking about celebrities. 

There is also the issue of the way the science community is communicating. Seth Mnookin, teacher at MIT and author of “The Panic Virus,” says,“there’s the language of science, and then there’s English.” In the language of science, phrases like “to the best of our knowledge” must be used when presenting their conclusions, but people have trouble accepting these phrases, since they are not definite. We need to become better at listening to the science community and not taking everything they say and spinning it off as a news story. 

About 94% of the population must be vaccinated in order to keep measles from spreading. We need to keep in mind the affects disease has when it spreads. Though some think it is a personal choice not to vaccinate their child, they really are in danger of harming the larger population by allowing it to be spread.

A New James Bond

A Sony email was recently leaked suggesting that Idris Elba, a black actor, was up for the role of James Bond. 

This sparked some controversy. Rush Limbaugh went on a rant against the idea of a non-white Bond, saying, "James Bond is a total concept put together by Ian Fleming. He was white and Scottish. Period. That is who James Bond is."  He later says, in frustration, "We have 50 years of white Bonds because Bond is white!" And while the actors in the past who have played Bond have all been white, not all have been of Scottish decent, so it why does it matter if the actor has a different color skin?

Limbaugh also went on to say that Elba playing the role of James Bond would be like if George Clooney and Kate Hudson were cast as President Obama and Michelle Obama. This is an absurd thing to say; James Bond is a fictional character. Actors cast for these fictional characters can be anyone; it's a creative decision made by the director.  

Private Eye, a satirical magazine (sort of like a U.K. version of The Onion), published this spoof letter about the suggestion that Elba may play James Bond. Viewers can sit and watch all of Bond’s crazy endeavors (like defeating an army while only being armed with a pencil), and find them believable. But if a man with a different color skin were to play the role of Bond, it would be ludicrous?

This would be a great step if Idris Elba was cast as James Bond because it would show that you can replace a cast member with one of different ethnicity and it would still be the same story. It’s the same concept as the remake of Annie, with two African-American actors cast as Annie and Will Stacks (main characters in the movie). Minorities should be given more of these lead roles. We need to see more diversity on the screen.

The “Token” Black in Sitcoms

When I told my brother about what we were learning about in class (TV Tokenism), he immediately thought of this character on South Park. He is an African-American character named “Token Black,” with a big “T” on his shirt reminding viewers he’s there to be the token black. While I don’t watch the show, many high schoolers watch or have heard of the show South Park,  an animated adult sitcom. I have only seen about an episode's worth my entire life, but I do remember one scene specifically where Token Black is made fun of for having expensive clothes, or being the "best dressed minority" as we discussed in class.

 We saw a clip in class of the show 30 Rock, which had this same idea of the making it clear the black character “Toofer” was there to be a token black character.  Sitcoms often use stereotypes that we are familiar with to make us laugh. One of the sitcoms I do watch, Modern Family, has made quite a few of these exaggerated stereotype jokes about Asians specifically, for example being bad at driving. I was laughing when I watched that scene, but my little sister wasn't, and asked me to explain it to her. She hasn't been as exposed to stereotypes, so the joke went over her head. 

I wonder if by using this as material for comedy it shows progression or not. We find them funny because they’re so exaggerated, but is it just further enforcing these stereotypes? If we’re laughing at them does that make them okay?

Where Are All the Female Directors?

On Sunday, many of us sat down and watched the Golden Globes. The nominees for best director had me thinking a little bit. Here were the nominees:

Boyhood- Richard Linklater (winner)

Birdman- Alejandro González Iñárritu

Gone Girl- David Fincher

The Grand Budapest Hotel- Wes Anderson

Selma- Ava DuVernay

Last year, the nominees were the following movies:

Gravity- Alfonso Cuarón (winner)

12 Years a Slave- Steve McQueen 

American Hustle- David O. Russell 

Captain Phillips- Paul Greengrass

Nebraska- Alexander Payne 

I noticed a trend (almost all men). I never really noticed before that I scarcely ever saw a woman in this category. It seemed normal to me that a man was a director. Though Ava DuVernay did not win best director, it certainly sparked my attention when she was nominated. Why don’t we see more women directing these critically-acclaimed films just as much as men?

I started doing some research, and found an interesting article about women in the directing business. The researcher Martha M. Lauzen, executive director of the Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film, found that in 2013, female characters made up just 15 percent of protagonists and 30 percent of all speaking characters in the top 100 grossing movies. Female directors generally direct more movies about women than male directors do, but they need the means to do so. It becomes a vicious cycle where a woman can’t get hired because of her lacking credentials, and then as a result is unable to build her resumé, meaning less women in this field. Women can’t prove they are equally qualified for the job if they aren’t given the opportunity in the first place. We need to diversify the voice that tells us stories in America. If the people making decisions about movies continues to be all male, we’re only getting one angle. Something has to be done about diversifying the directing industry.