N*ggerizing the Contemporary Black Body,Bill Maher uses the N word

Bill Maher1...

It happened for the first time when I was seventeen.

I was interning for a local politician in Fresh Meadows, Queens. The environment was a predominately white office perched in an affluent neighborhood. My parents were over-protective and would not let me go onto the street and hand out literature, so most of my time was spent handling office duties—and as I would learn, engaging office politics.

One day while inserting data, a young white man rehashed an event that happened at Howard Beach. Rather than give an overview of the event, he decided to recite a racially charged graffiti act verbatim. The epithet read “f*ck all you n*ggers.” After reciting these words, he looked straight into my face, seemingly searching for something that I refused to acknowledge by returning his piercing gaze.

A similar event would occur years later in an interaction with a racial psychopath I mistook for a friend. Similar to my first experience, my pseudo friend expressed outrage in the use of a racial epithet, yet took it upon herself to repeat her uncle’s use of the word n*gger.  Like the previous incident, she too stared in my face as she uttered the term, a gaze I saw in my peripheral because I had refused her longing gaze. This same friend would go on to show me her white boyfriend dressed in blackface for Halloween. We have since lost touch, her face dissipated into a grudging appreciation for presenting a necessary evil to awaken my consciousness.

These particular incidents illustrate the antiracist efforts implemented by whites uncomfortable with black presence, working to transfer their discomfort onto the oppressed black body. This transfer is never painless. Rather it reflects the evil deemed necessary to maintain a fictive whiteness. The black body has historically been used a canvass for western anxiety, making the n word a common painting drawn on the black body to appease the demands of a white supremacist hierarchy.

Despite having the opposite effect, these incidents overtly functioned to distance the individual white body from their racist collective– an impossible, and disingenuous feat given the racial climate that defines America. It is this racial climate that predisposes any antiracist effort to inevitably help not hinder white supremacy.

Flash forward to this past semester. The setting is a writing course at a private university in New York City. To introduce a unit on critical queries I play Jadakiss’s “Why?” I am sure to play the clean version because as a black female on a journey to conscious, I have no place for expletives in my life let alone my classroom. Yet despite my efforts, when prompted to respond to a question in the song, a white female student stated “Why N*ggas can’t get no job?” despite the version played in class that stated “Why brothers can’t get no job?”

To which I responded “what did you say?”
She then proceeded to repeat the sentence and epithet. Every student in the class looked down. But, the worst is yet to come. When confronted about her word use she became combative and argumentative. This is the issue with the n word.

Is it an issue that white people use the n word? Yes. But this is not racism. It seems an essential component of oppression to preoccupy the oppressed with branches of racism and not the roots. Take for example the often unpleasant white and foreign businessmen that dominate black communities throughout America. Is it a problem that they are often unpleasant? Yes. Is this racist? No.

It is racist that the white and non-black foreigner monopolizes black economy—taking our money out of our communities. It is racist that the American system is designed to prevent black business ownership. Racism is the systemic action and language seen in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. It is the societal hierarchy white people observe in every aspect of western culture. Using the n word is yet another means for white people to assume their acquired hierarchy over black bodies. This student used the n word in the classroom of a black female instructor and fought for the right to use a racially offensive term–that’s racism. Bill Maher illustrated a similar dynamic in his use of the n-word Friday evening.

Bill Maher welcomed guest Senator Ben Sasse on his HBO show “Real Time” in which the pair joked about the fields of Nebraska. When invited to “work the fields” by Sasse, Maher responded “I’m a house n*gger” to a reserved laughter from his audience, to which he expressed his gratitude.

Was Maher wrong for using the n word? Yes. But this was far from the first racist comment Maher has made and won’t be the last. It seems his sexual fetish for black Women serves as a means to validate his racial insensitivity to those foolish enough to believe that having sex with blacks makes forgives their racist tendencies. The very house slaves that he references were both products and victims of the white slave masters, and it is this ignored context that composes the core issue here.

The historical trajectory of black bodies in this country is not funny. The means for initial western wealth, who received cyclical disenfranchisement in exchange for centuries of labor, is hardly a laughing matter, at least for those robbed. In using the n word, the white person induces a collective amnesia that when retrieved portrays the retriever as “living in the past” or “playing the race card.”

Blacks have yet to receive reparations or even inclusion into canonical history for providing the greatest sacrifice for this country, so it seems a fractional effort for the western world to retire an epithet used to verbally subjugate the black body.

So why can’t the word be laid to rest?

The answer is simple, it bears too much power.

Many will say that “n*gger” is “just a word” and blacks put “too much emphasis” on this word. But it was never blacks who put too much emphasis on a term foreign to their indigenous tongue. This was never our word, rather the word is conjured from white creation solely to conceptualize black denigration. Yes, it’s an issue that blacks use the word. But until the black collective maintains power in economics, media, employment and housing , they lack the ability to be racist. Furthermore, it is not the black collective who have issues getting over themselves, it is the white collective that expresses difficulty “getting over” their fictive placement on a stolen land.

The abducted African remains the foundation for western wealth, and their significance much like the emaciated and overworked bodies have dissolved into the stolen American soil. Yet instead of sprouting seeds of progress, this soil breeds a continued oppression of black bodies. This oppression is perhaps most evident in the western words implication that colloquial or comedic use of the term “n*gger” symbolizes racial progress.

Thus, in waiting for the term’s retirement, the black collective anticipates the impossible–for the white world to take a small step to relinquish their systemic power. The term was implemented as a means to maintain a position above the black body, and whites continue to use the term publicly for the same reasons. Maher, could have easily, and I’m sure he and the majority of whites do, used the n word off camera. The decision to do so publicly was because he could. Similarly, in my provided examples, each white individual used this racial epithet in a public place, drunk off a systemic white power that conceives every public space as subject to white domination.

The sadistic white mind— historically inebriated off power—assumes the height of racial psychopathy in staring into the black collective and calling them what every stolen opportunity, every stolen dollar, and every drowned, whipped, lynched, burned and raped ancestor symbolizes in past and present America.

Interestingly, this gaze into the black eye, is a central component of my two earlier examples. Notably, both acts seemed centered on not just saying the word to a black person, but staring them in the eye as they did so. I align said behavior with the traditional racial psychopath who looked blacks in the eye as they raped them, who looked as black flesh was chewed by dogs, who watched the life leave a black body during public lynchings. Namely, my mind thinks of the late Claude Neal and the white eyes that watched his flesh be torn from his body and jammed down his throat in a torture murder that lasted several hours. Let us not forget the white gazes that purchased the mutilated portraits of black bodies, and those who purchased black limbs ripped from their bodies in mob attacks.

White desire to induce and see pain illustrates white assemblage as contingent on black dismemberment—substantiating the white collective as what Dr. Bobby Wright labeled a racial psychopath who performs evil with no conscious.

Maher does a similar act in staring down the contemporary pain of the black collective, and mocking the very institution that proved a platform for his lucrative whiteness and conventional success. His ability to stare into the collective gaze of the black collective and use a term that  jests the narrative of the abducted African violates the black body in the same manner as a lynching or rape.

Using the n-word is a socially accepted means to verbally assault the black body. The word does not function with the simplicity of an article, or the certainty of a noun. For the “n*gger” is no person, place or thing, it is an action. In a 2007 essay for The Atlantic entitle N*ggerization, Cornel West defines “n*ggerization” as the following:

N*ggerization is neither simply the dishonoring and devaluing of black people nor solely the economic exploitation and political disenfranchisement of them. It is also the wholesale attempt to impede democratization—to turn potential citizens into intimidated, fearful, and helpless subjects.

To use the word “nIgger” is an attempt to “n*ggerize,” to subject the black body to a verbal bludgeoning that ties the contemporary black body to a tree beside the ghosts of their ancestors, bare-backed and anticipating the physical wrath of white supremacy designed to force the black mind to mentally acquiesce to inferiority.

Therefore, it goes without saying that Maher’s apology is as insufficient as it is insincere. It also goes without saying that Maher should lose his job. Although it is doubtful that he was every deserving of such visibility anyhow.  Nevertheless, whether fired or not, Maher’s fate will not stop racism. Who knows, Maher may have a clause in his contract that promises a huge payout if fired. He is also at the end of his career, and in addition to being a white man in America, it is guaranteed that Maher will not suffer, because earth is not hell for whites. Thus, it is not his job that the conscious community desires Maher to lose, it is his privilege.

Will the heat of hell change the setting? No, just as firing Maher will not end black suffering. If Maher does get fired the firing will function to imply that the world has “come a long way,” despite occurring in a world where Bill O’Reilly can get fired for “sexual misconduct” but cops are not fired for murdering black men, women or children.

It will also serve as the foregrounds for firing blacks who saying things like “white people,” “pass the crackers” or even “white privilege.” As an oppressed group, we must be sure not to misconstrue what appears to be an opportunity for progress for what it is—an opportunity. Nothing in America has been said or done for the sole purpose of helping blacks, and America proceeds cyclically not linear.

Welfare, affirmative action, diversity initiatives, financial aid, etc all function to aid whites, despite seeming to provide opportunities to the disenfranchised. Moreover, in accordance with the historical trajectory of a country established on the spilled blood of those labeled “other,” the white world will find a way to turn n-word, a source of collective black pain, into a gain for whites.

Article by CC Saunders

Barack & Biracial Men- Black Genetics(Part 3 of 4)

Barack Obama...

I remember when I saw this cover(above) of Ebony magazine back in 2008.  It was when Barack Obama was running for President.  I remember hearing people say Obama looked so cool in his sunglasses. And I noticed that over the past eight years that there were more biracial men in the media.  There has always  been biracial men in the spotlight. But there seems to be more right now. I have also seen many more biracial women in the media over the last few years.  I will cover biracial women in part three. That is a an even bigger issue in my opinion.  But I did want to cover some of the biracial men that seemed to be getting a lot more press in recent years.  And what does it mean for black men?  Are they the new and improved black men? Or do they represent a “new white man’? I think Obama helped to bring interracial unions and biracial people more acceptance in American culture.  And worldwide for that matter.  I have seen more biracial men in sports,television and films.

Lenny Kravitz....

Back in the early 90’s Lenny Kravitz was one of the biggest rock stars.  His mother is black,father is Jewish.

Vin Diesel....

Actor Vin Diesel is biracial as well. Although he mostly plays racially ambiguous roles. He never really plays a “black” man though.

Shemar Moore....

Actor Shemar Moore has become a sex symbol among many black women. The picture(above) is of him and his white mother. He first gained fame on the soap opera The Young and The Restless. I remember ten years ago he was seen at a gay beach in Hawaii.  I’ll let you draw your own conclusions about his sexuality.

Boris Kodjoe...

This is biracial actor Boris Kodjoe.  His mother is a German white woman. I know many black women who have told me is their ideal man.  Although this is not a good picture. It leaves him looking very “suspect”.

The Rock....

Actor Dwayne Johnson has become a huge star over the last eight years.  He first became famous as a WWE wrestler known as The Rock.  And has become a sex symbol in his transition from wrestler to actor.  Although he is not a mulatto since he has a black father and Samoan mother. Much like actor Vin Diesel he plays racially ambiguous roles.  And is rarely paired with black women in films. But he still remains popular among many black women.

Jesse Willaims.....

Biracial actor Jesse Williams caused quite a stir last year at the BET Awards. The Grey’s Anatomy star gave a passionate speech about police brutality last year.  And many black people quickly gave the mixed race man his “black card”.

Trevor Noah....

The picture(above) is of Trevor Noah.  The comedian/actor is the host of The Daily Show on Comedy Central.  he is pictured with his girlfriend,model Jordyn Taylor.  She is racially mixed  so I guess the paring his fitting.  Noah is a media darling because of his left-leaning liberal views. Although I don’t find him that funny.

Jussie Smollett...

This is actor Jussie Smollett. Most people know him from the hit drama Empire.   He plays a homosexual on the show.  Which is fitting since he’s a homosexual in real life as well. He’s pictured her with his sister actress Jurnee.  They have a black mother and white father.  This picture is quite interesting.  What’s with the “black power” fist? What message are they sending?  Is that you can be conscious,biracial,pro-black and gay all at the same time?  Good lord….what world am I living in?  God help us.

Drake....

Of course we can’t discuss biracial people without mentioning Canadian rapper Drake.  Drake has become one of rap music’s biggest stars in the last eight years or so. He started as a child actor and late did underground mixtapes as a rapper. His mother(pictured above) is Jewish and his father is black.  I can’t help but to think that having those Jewish connections helped him in the industry. Also according to Halakha(Jewish law) a Jew must be born to a Jewish mother. Accepting the principles and practices of  Judaism doesn’t make a person a Jew. So even with a black father technically…. Drake is a Jew.

J Cole....

Rapper J. Cole(with mother) has seen his popularity rise in recent years.  He has gotten praise from many rap fans because of his socially conscious lyrics.

Miguel...

The picture(above) is of r&b/pop singer Miguel and his Mexican father. Miguel became popular when his debut cd came out in 2010.  His music style is a mix of funk,r&b and elements of rock. Many music critics have compared him to the late pop icon Prince.

Derek Jeter.....

Retired baseball player Derek Jeter was one of the most well know athletes while playing for the New York Yankees.  Here is Jeter pictured with his parents and sister Sharlee.

TONY PARKER OF THE SAN ANTONIO SPURS

NBA veteran Tony Parker has played for the San Antonio Spurs for over fifteen years.  And he has won four NBA championships. He has a black father and white mother. He has been one of the most well known biracial athletes over the last ten years.

San Francisco 49ers 2011 Headshots

Of course what list would be complete with biracial NFL star Colin Kaepernick.  I recently heard that he will now stand for the pledge of allegiance. Why the change of heart? I guess all the hype is over now.  It helped to cause some more racial tension and get people talking.  But I guess that time has passed…so it’s back to football! That is if any team picks him up.

Lewis Hamilton...

This is racecar driver Lewis Hamilton pictured with his white mother.  He was born and raised in the United Kingdom.  His first racecar win was the Canadian Grand prix in 2007.  His popularity has really grown over the last ten years.

 

Joakim Noah.....

Chicago Bulls basketball player Joakim Noah has a white mother and black father.  He’s very popular with the Chicago fans.  This pic(above) he is with his mother and sister Yelena.

Aaron Gordon...Zach Lavine...

This picture(above) is of NBA players Aaron Gordon and Zach Lavine. Gordon plays for the Orlando Magic and Lavine plays for the Minnesota Timberwolves.  Last year during the 2016 NBA All Star weekend these two were the finalists in the Slam Dunk contest.  It was close but Lavine ending up winning the contest.  I just thought it was interesting that the last two finalists were both biracial men.  I thought it was odd. Are they going to be the face of the NBA?  Much like Drake is the face of rap music?  Or how Obama was the face of the nation.  Hmmmm…something to think about.

Matt Barnes...

NBA star Matt Barnes(with mother) has always been a headache for the NBA. He has a really bad temper and needs to seek anger management. He has played for the LA Clippers,New York Knicks,Orlando Magic,LA Lakers and Golden State Warriors. He gets moved around a lot because of his temper tantrums and bad attitude.

Lavar Ball...

The black man in the pic(above) is Lavar Ball.  Ball is a retired football player. He was a practice squad member for the New York Jets and Carolina Panthers. He and his white wife Tina have three sons,Lonzo,LiAngelo and LaMelo.  They have become a huge media sensation in the basketball world. They have all appeared on ESPN.  They all played for Chino Hills high school.  The oldest son Lonzo played one year at UCLA.  He is already said he is entering the NBA draft. He has groomed his mulatto sons from birth to be basketball players.

Prescott1.....

NFL rookie Dak Prescott(with mother) has made quite an impression lately.  The Dallas Cowboys quarterback seems to be fitting in well as the new face of the team. I know there are a lot racist rednecks in Dallas.  I know because I’ve been to Texas before. But I’m sure they’ll accept him with open arms.  Just as long as their biracial quarterback is winning games for them.

Blake Griffin...

NBA star Blake Griffin(with father and mother) has been a big asset for the Los Angeles Clippers. He has been playing with the Clippers since 2009.  His skills have improved over the last few years. I remember when he was in the Slam Dunk contest back in 2011. I saw some video of the dunk contest on YouTube.  There were some white guys making comments on the video.  Some were saying that Griffin should be considered a white man.  I guess they wanted to see a non-black person win so bad they were willing to accept a biracial man as white.  But this got me thinking.  Do they want biracial men to be the “new blacks”?  Do they want to replace African men with biracial men? Is it easier for whites to accept those that have a white parent? After all,biracials are in closer proximity to whiteness than someone with two black parents.  I personally believe this is psychological warfare. And many of us don’t understand this tactic very much.  There are many ways to attack a person.  It doesn’t always have to be physical.   Attacking a persons  mind can be just as effective. Psychological warfare is a form of propaganda or a threat.  It’s a psychological technique to mislead,demoralize,intimidate or influence the thinking or the behavior of an enemy.  This is what is being done to black people. This is all being done on purpose.  The white/jewish controlled media is purposely putting more biracial men to the forefront.   They are doing this to confuse the minds of black people. This all goes against the collective best interest of black people.  It also promotes the idea that interracial sex is a good thing.  They are giving us the false belief that being half-black is better than having two black parents.  This is just another way to promote black inferiority and degrade black genetics.  This all helps to reinforce the idea that being dark skinned and having African features is ugly and unwanted.

Shaun King....

We better have a clear definition on who is black and who is NOT.  Otherwise we’ll keep getting melanin recessive imposters like Shaun King(pic above).  This white activist is going around telling people he’s a black man when he has already been exposed as a white man by his white mother and father. This is insulting to all black people.  But this is what happens when you let everyone claim blackness.  We got to put an end to this.  This has really gotten out of hand. So what do you think?  Am I on to something?  I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Is Mixed Race better?- Black Genetics(Part 2 of 4)

My last post was about who is black/African. But for part two I wanted to address the idea of race mixing.  It has been an issue for hundreds of years.  And for black people at this moment in time it’s a serious issue.  Black people have been taught by this racist society that looking African is a bad thing.  We are taught that being black means being ugly and inferior.  So I ask the question…is being mixed race better? is being less black-looking better?  In this racist culture many people would say it does.  many black people that are full of self hatred would agree for sure.  This video(above) is very disturbing for many reasons.  This black women has obviously lost her damn mind.  This braindead fool thinks a “super race” will be created by race mixing. She doesn’t believe in black power or black unity.  She talks about the greatness of having melanin and seeing the greatness in yourself.  Which is no a bad thing.  But she’s talking only about the greatness of black women and how they will birth the new “super race”.  She talking about giving the black womb to other races of men other than black men. Is this black greatness?  is making mix raced babies the answer to racism? She sounds very intelligent and articulate.  But I’m not falling for her nonsense.  It sounds like just an excuse to hate black men and promote swirling. This woman is clearly delusional.

Biracial mixed....

One Drop rule.....

Light Bright...

Then of course there is the issue of the “one drop rule”.  This is the belief that a if a person is even partially black they must be considered a black/African person.  The video above is very good.  The narrator explains in a very analytical way how the one drop rule is destructive for black people. The definition give for the one drop rule is the following:

“The one-drop rule is a social and legal principle of racial classification that was historically prominent in the United States asserting that any person with even one ancestor of Saharan-African ancestry (“one drop” of black blood) is considered black (Negro in historical terms). This concept evolved over the course of the 19th century and became codified into law in the 20th century. It was associated with the principle of “invisible blackness” and is an example of hypodescent, the automatic assignment of children of a mixed union between different socioeconomic or ethnic groups to the group with the lower status.

We can no longer fall for this propaganda.  This is an obvious attack on melanin and black genetics. I would love to hear your thoughts.

Black Storytellers: Should they have a Black spouse?

I saw this trailer about a month ago.   It’s for a six-part mini-series called Guerrilla on Showtime.  It’s about an interracial couple who are activists in London during the 1970’s.  It kind of  reminds me of the Black Panthers or Black Liberation Army movements.  It stars actor Babou Ceesay and actress Freida Pinto. Actor Idris Elba also is in the series. But I thought it was strange that the film had Indian actress Freida Pinto has the lead actress.  And I saw virtually no black women in the trailer.  Black women have been fighting against racism and sexism since forever.  Is this the erasure of black women? And even if there are some black women in it…why is the lead female an Indian?  I guess some will say that it’s to show that Indian people struggle with racism as well.  But why can’t we ever show black men and women working together against their oppression?  Why can’t we see many more films of black men and women loving each other? What are we  supposed to take from films like this?  That it’s better to fight racism and oppression if you’re having sex with a  non-black person.  This is utter nonsense! And we can no longer fall for this trap. Black unity and black love  is the answer.

Freida Pinto...

Who needs Assata Shakur? Yaa Asantewaa is not needed either.  Freida Pinto will lead black people to freedom!  She is the savior for black people! This would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.

John Ridley....

So after seeing the trailer I wanted to see who was the creator of this series.  I found out that the executive producer is John Ridley. Ridley is a screenwriter,novelist and director. He won an Academy award for his screenplay of 12 Years a Slave. He also is the producer of the show American Crime.  The picture(above) is of Ridley and his Asian wife Gayle.  His wife isn’t black so is this why he didn’t cast a black woman as the lead in his new series?  And why are all these men without black wives telling black stories?  And he’s not the only one. I have noticed black actors,directors and producers telling black stories without black wives.

Steve McQueen.....

This is director Steve McQueen.  McQueen grew up in London. He’s good friends with John Ridley because he directed 12 Years a Slave.  This picture(above) is McQueen and his Dutch wife Bianca.

David Oyelowo...

Actor David Oyelowo is another black British man.  He has been in films like The Butler,The Help,A United Kingdom and Jack Reacher. He even played Martin Luther King in the film Selma. Should this man be playing black historical figures?  This is a picture of him and his white wife Jessica.

Get Out poster....

Jordan Peele....

Actor/filmmaker Jordan Peele got a lot of praise for his horror film Get Out.  It broke box office records making over $160 million.  Some say it was a great horror film.  Some say it was a film that had a much more deep psychological meaning to it.  It definitely had a lot of subliminal messages regarding racsim,occultism and organ harvesting.  But some may not know that he’s biracial.  Peele has a white mother.  And his wife Chelsea is a Zionist Jew.  So even though he told some truths in the film Get Out..will expose it all? Will he tell black people everything that racists whites are doing in Hollywood?  Is wife is a Jew so I know he has some insider information.  But the question is…who is he loyal to?

Underground...

John Legend...

The television drama Underground takes place during slavery.  It has been getting good reviews from critics.  One of the executive producers is singer/songwriter John Legend. He will even play Frederick Douglass in an upcoming episode. His wife is model Chrissy  Teigen.  Her mother is Thai and father is white.  That makes her a hapa. If you don’t know what that is go look it up.

Nate Parker....

Of course we can’t forget actor/director Nate Parker. Parker directed the controversial slave rebellion film The Birth of a Nation.  The film had some good elements and some truth in it.  But it was mostly controversial because back when he was in college Parker was accused of raping a white woman. He claims he was innocent and that people should support the film.  I’ve seen him in interviews and he seems intelligent and articulate. But he can’t be too smart because if that white woman caused him so much grief why did he go and marry a white woman.  What sense does that make??? Some negroes never learn. Anyway this is a picture of him and his ugly ass wife Sarah.Sunken Place....

I bring up this issue because I wonder can they be trusted. Can they accurately tell the black experience?  Can they express our pain and struggle?  Can they express the truth about our oppressors if they’re married to them?  Can they be about black love but not married to black women?  These are the questions that come to my mind. But I think they hire these type of men because they know they’re not about black empowerment. They will always be intellectually dishonest about the black experience.  They know that since they have non-black wives they have already been compromised. The interracial element just adds more confusion to the black psyche. We must be careful watching anything by these men. These films have a way of  distorting black consciousness. And keeping us stuck in the “sunken place”.

Plantation Retreats- Black Degradation and White Depravity

Flag1..

Retreat1..

Those who have loved and dated across the color line have to negotiate the realities of race in our society, and by extension, its impact on their relationships. For many, this is done through explicit conversations. For others, these dialogues come implicitly, through gestures, and taken for granted shared assumptions.

But how many folks actually talk about how race impacts their own sexuality, attraction, physicality, or notions of the erotic?
We live in a society that is structured around many different hierarchies of power, authority, and difference. As Foucault brilliantly observed, Power is not sitting out there in the ether, an abstraction that we just talk about in philosophy classes. Power acts through and upon bodies. Certain people are racialized in American society for example. Their bodies are locations of power–and yes resistance. Likewise, certain types of bodies are marked as “normal,” while others are deemed “different” or “abnormal.”
The “popular” imagination holds many assumptions about particular types of bodies. The black male body is something to be policed, controlled, and feared. It is both envied and despised. The Asian female body is “erotic” and “submissive.” The black female body alternates between being fecund, always available, and out of control, while simultaneously being marked as “masculine,” asexual, and unattractive. Latinas are “hot” and “sexy.” White bodies of a certain type are taken as the baseline for what is considered “beautiful” or “normal.”
Mandingo2..
Ironically, the bodies of black and brown people which are considered beautiful or attractive by the white gaze are judged as such either by how “different” they are from white norms (the exotic or savage) or how close these racialized bodies–almost like impostors or stand-ins–are to the normalized white body.
The very language we use to discuss race, the physical, and the sexual, is a quotidian example of Power in action. But, how are matters complicated when a significant part of a given person’s sexuality, and sense of the erotic, is centered on playing around with the dynamics surrounding dominance and submission?
Consider the following passage from the Colorlines article “Playing with Race”:
Bed wench...

Contrary to popular notions, BDSM is not about abuse. It’s consensual and trusting and people refer to it as “play” (as in “I want to play with you”). The point of BDSM is not sexual intercourse. In fact, when Williams recalls her first experience as a masochist seven years ago, she says she met her partner, a white man, at a bar and “fell in love at first sight.” They made their way back to his hotel. “For the first time I felt someone could see who I really was.” And that was someone who found it erotic to be a submissive to her partner.

In recent years, Williams has added another element to her repertoire as a masochist. She’s begun to engage in what is called “race play” or “racial play”—that is getting aroused by intentionally using racial epithets like the word “nigger” or racist scenarios like a slave auction.

Race play is being enjoyed in the privacy of bedrooms and publicly at BDSM parties, and it’s far from just black and white. It also includes “playing out” Nazi interrogations of Jews or Latino-on-black racism, and the players can be of any racial background and paired up in a number of ways (including a black man calling his black girlfriend a “nigger bitch”). White master seeking black slave, however, seems the more popular of the combinations.

I could not engage is such types of role-playing. My personal politics would not allow it; my libido would not respond.

That is my choice. I do not deny others their pleasure.

Mandingo3..

However, as someone interested in the relationship between race, politics, and racial ideologies, I am fascinated by how individuals negotiate white supremacy and Power.

Are people like Williams or Mollena more “evolved” and “progressive” than those of us who cannot decouple the realities and burdens of race from their bodies and psyches in the present? Alternatively, could this deep sense of both owning and living in a racialized body, be turned into a location for pleasure and catharsis:

Vi Johnson, the black matriarch of BDSM, has presented on race play at kinky conferences and she believes the appeal is different for each person. “When you’re being sexually stimulated, you’re not thinking that what’s stimulating you is a racist image, ” she says. “You’re just getting turned on.”

So, for some, she says, race play is about playing with authority and for others, it might be humiliation.

Well-known sexuality and SM educator Midori, who is Japanese and German, often presents her theory that humiliation in BDSM is linked to self-esteem. Take the woman who likes it when her boyfriend calls her a “slut,” Midori says. Perhaps the woman internalized the idea that “good girls don’t,” but she enjoys her sexuality. Because the boyfriend sees her in all her complexity, Midori says, when he calls her a slut, “he is freeing her of the social expectations of having to be modest.”

That’s different than having some stranger (and jerk) calling you a slut. The stranger doesn’t see the full woman. It’s similar with race play, Midori says. By focusing, for example, on a black man’s body, while he’s bound as a slave, she’s bolstering his own perception of himself as strong and powerful…

Her workshop demonstrations have included full auction scenes mimicking those of the Old South. In them, she is the plantation mistress inspecting a black man for “purchase.” He’s in shackles and “I slap him on his face and push him down on the ground, make him lick my shoes,” she says, emphasizing that she only does the demonstration after the “psychological” talk.

In the interest of transparency, I am a sex positive person (at least according to the survey on yourmorals.org). In many ways, I am also a bit of a libertine and a hedonist who is comfortable in both exclusive and open relationships. I also have certain predilections and tastes that more “vanilla” folks could find “kinky” or “different.” Ultimately, I am just myself, and do not know how to pretend to be anyone else.
I am also full of contradictions and complications as sexuality and the erotic are not neatly bounded constructs (for example, I do not like watching interracial porn where white men have aggressive sex with black women as chattel slavery looms too large in my mind; however, I have no problems watching black men have aggressive sex with white women). I have also dated many women from a range of racial backgrounds: I love women; I love variety.
I share those details not to titillate; rather, because while I am rendering a judgement of sorts, I would not want to sound “judgmental.” The difference is a subtle, but nonetheless, an important one.
One of the questions I will be asking Viola Johnson from the Carter Johnson Leather Library when I interview her in the next few weeks (fingers crossed) is how do we separate more “healthy” types of race play from those encounters that are rooted in disdain for the Other and white supremacy. Are these just inter-personal contracts or do these types of sexual relationships gain power (and are made erotic) precisely because of how they signal to larger societal taboos?
If the website Fetlife is any indication, there is apparently a not insubstantial number of people who engage in sexual roleplaying and BDSM using the motif of chattel slavery in the antebellum South. A cursory review of the member profiles suggests that many of these people are white supremacists. This is apparently not a deterrent to the black men and women who want to “serve” these white masters.
Race play...

Here a white “slave owning” master offers some insight on race play and “plantation retreats”:

My major kink-interest is in chattel slave-ownership in today’s world but following the historical models of 8,000 years of historical slave-ownership tradition (from Greek-Roman through modern day)…along with everything that might relate to it (which sometimes can go pretty far into the realm of BDSM activities, depending on the partner). I’m very knowlegble in the field of historical slavery.

Some of my other non-kink interests include history and philosophy, classic cars, music, science, singing and writing lyrics, architecture, comparative culture, language, reading and counseling..

I get a lot of questions about “Plantation Retreat”…so here are some basic facts:

My goal in creating and hosting Plantation Retreat is to provide a safe and welcoming, private place (and opportunity) for White Masters and plantation slaves/niggers to meet and explore their mutual fantasies. I get a lot of questions and answer many individual questions. To simplify things…here is some general basic information:

The gathering lasts for up to 2 weeks this year, with the main gathering around the 4th of July…folks can stay as long or as short a time as they want (some stay even longer). Masters can stay at the compound here or in a hotel if they want to (as can any personal slaves that they bring with them or any other slave that is ordered to do so).

Slaves arriving on their own stay here and are considered (and protected) as property of the plantation or my personal property.

Slaves sign up for a specific length of service. Slaves can specify what their limits are or that they will serve in any way the Master/guests desire. Sex is not required, but depends on individual choice (as do other activities). Most Masters desire to use slaves sexually in addition to normal domestic services. Some slaves are used only for hard labor. A slave’s assignments and duties are based on its experience and ability-level (some require whipping or punishment). Masters have their own king or queen bed (up to 5 available); slaves sleep where they are told to sleep (unless they are ordered into a Master’s bed and allowed to sleep there). Normally a slave sleeps at the foot of a Master’s bed, but some can be chained or caged elsewhere.

The minimum requirement for slaves is that they be obedient and respectful of all Masters and work to give the Masters and enjoyable time. This can be anything from preparing and serving drinks and meals, doing housework or yard work, to providing sexual relief on demand, to hard labor in the compound (depending on the slave’s previously-stated limitations). Slaves should expect Masters to be totally comfortable and free in using humiliating or degrading racist speech in referring to or speaking to mud-slaves. It’s not all punishment and misery for slaves…there is plenty of time for camaraderie and playful fun also. Some slaves even form a brotherly bond with the other slaves that serve with them. Masters also form lasting bonds and friendships based on their mutual interests and sharing slaves.

It’s just a small friendly gathering of White Masters at my house/compound….being served by mud-slaves as might have been in a modern version of slave-days. one might call it a situation of consensual non-consent/slavery. Slaves can set their limits and the time they will be in service as slaves in advance…. and also what they expect to learn and experience from the experience. The more that a slave lets me know about itself in advance, the better I can guide its growth from the experience.

Backstage racism mates with BDSM, the eroticization of the black body, and finds a place online through a variant of cyber-racism. Amazing. We do in fact live in interesting times.

White supremacy is a mental illness. Western (and global) society is sick with it. All of us, across the color line, have been impacted by white supremacy and white racism. But who are we to judge how adults in a consensual relationship decide to work through its pain and ugliness?
As is per our tradition at WARN, here are some concluding questions.
Have any of you engaged in race play? For those of you in inter-racial relationships, how do you negotiate these bigger questions of race and the erotic? If our kinks and sexual predilections are in some way a function of life experience, trauma, early childhood experiences, etc. what happened in the life of a black person who is willing to play a slave for the pleasures of white racists?
Article by chaunceydevega

Get Out- Interracial/Horror Film(Hidden truths)

get-out-poster

Jordan Peele’s directorial debut Get Out proves a fascinating engagement with the racial truths of the contemporary world. The film centers on interracial couple Chris and Rose who are traveling to meet Rose’s parents in a New York City Suburb.

Prior to their visit, Chris asks Rose if she told her parents that he is black. Rose makes a mockery of this query, a query that encompasses the film’s many acts of foreshadow and dramatic irony. Get Out proceeds to illustrate that it is Chris’ blackness that makes him Rose’s prey. The couple’s visit to meet Rose’s parents proves a sick and calculated effort to abduct black bodies and re-appropriate them as a means to enhance the lives of a white counterpart. In short, the film’s resonance lies not in the images themselves but what lies beneath.

1.White Liberal

One of the most demonstrative illustrations in the film is its portrayal of the “white liberal.” Rose, Chris’s girlfriend not only dates a black man but defends him in the face of overt discrimination. Chris is racially profiled by a police officer on the way to meet Rose’s parents. The policeman asks Chris for his identification, to which they receive Rose’s wrath. After the incident, she states that she won’t let anyone “F%ck with her man.” But little does Chris know, Rose is merely protecting Chris the object and not Chris the person. This objectification becomes clear in the silent auction that takes place in Rose’s parent’s garden. What they disguise as “Bingo” is an auction where interested white buyers place bids for the black body Rose brings home. So questions like “Is it better?” referencing black male sexual performance, is the query of a prospective buyer desiring a worthy investment.

Rose portrays a physical embodiment to the phrase “every shut eye ain’t sleep and every goodbye ain’t gone.” An assumed ally can very well bear oppressive feelings towards a marginalized body. Assumed allies often veil self-interest in seemingly supportive gestures. Namely, Rose does not verbalize her prejudices yet is not any different or better than her parents or their “garden party” guests.

2. The Poisonous Apple

Get Out depicts Chris, a black man,  as an Eve-like figure and Rose, a white woman, as the poisonous apple that exploits his vulnerabilities and renders a series of irreversible consequences. The film intertwines physical hypnosis to induce black acquiescence to a  new identity. Rose acts as a form of hypnosis in her pursuit and pseudo-love for the black male. In seeking to consummate white acceptance and assimilation in his romantic relations with white women,  the black male body enters a vulnerable state exploited by his “prize.” Thus, Rose uses her external appeal to sink her thorns deep into the black male psyche. Just as their love seems to bloom, it is not Rose who dies, but her black lover–illustrating the measure of a rose’s beauty is the ability to distract admirers from its thorns sinking into their flesh.

get-out3

3. Science and black experimentation

The Armitage family abducts blacks, hypnotizes them, and uses the black body to improve white quality of life. The procedure leaves a small portion of the black brain but replaces the majority with a white brain. Thus, the black person becomes “a passenger” in his own body. This procedure seems synonymous to the abduction of African bodies and displacing them onto indigenous soil. This displacement renders the black body a passenger in the western experience as each generation proves more distant relationship to their African origins. While the African brain may not be physically extracted, it becomes westernized so that descendants of abducted Africans feel more American than African–making the black body a commuter in their own oppression.

Interestingly, upon first meeting, Chris and Rose disclose that they hit a deer on their way up. In response, Rose’s father remarks that they “did a service” by hitting and ultimately killing the deer. It is this same ideology that prompts the white conservative to seek out black bodies to dismember for their own personal benefit. In their minds, the Armitage family does a service to blacks abducted for their procedure, as their procedure affords the black body a purpose believed to not exist outside of serving whites. Prior to preparing Chris for the procedure, Mr. Armitage asks him “What is your purpose, Chris?” To pose this question prior to their intended procedure suggests that their use of his body incites a purpose otherwise non-existent.

It is this same ideology that prompted white doctors and scientists to use black bodies to test out medical procedures. Henrietta Lacks’ doctor felt entitled to the contents of her vagina, so much so that he did not even consult her next of kin prior to abducting her cells. The pearl-like substances that killed her would acquire purpose in the lives Lacks would come to save following her death. Thus, just as the Armitage family deems the black body purposeful in servicing whites,  Henrietta Lacks’ story similarly illustrates the black body as purposeful solely when appropriated for western motives.

Slavery and the contemporary world implement a similar ideology as the most celebrated black figures: athletes, entertainers, and actresses all serve whites. Thus, the television, radio and even the education system all act as an informal hypnosis implemented as a means to control black bodies and place them on a dead end path to white servitude.

Film Review Get Out

4. The unassumed intellect

Get Out channels Charles Chestnut’s “The Goophered Grapevine” and “Dave’s Neckliss” in illustrating the unassumed intellect in Chris’ TSA friend, Rod Williams. For those unfamiliar with Chestnut or these stories, a prevalent style of Chestnut is to implement a character who due to their vernacular speech prompts most to assume that he is intellectually deficient. The unassumed intellect uses these preconceived notions to his advantage and deceives his “intelligent” counterparts by the story’s conclusion.

Similarly, Williams provides comedic relief to audiences in his delivery. Yet the dramatic irony evokes laughter from some and frustration from others as audiences know that Williams is the sole party in the film that knows the truth. This depiction functions positively, as it evokes a caricatured black image as a means to exploit presumed western conceptualizing of black intellect. In a perfect world, caricatured imaging of blacks would disappear completely. However, it is an act of advancement to include stereotypes in a way that prompts contemplation, or that performs in a way to challenge western predilection for the compartmentalized black body.

The Final Verdict

The most resounding part of the film for me is when the black male body reappropriated as the Artimage grandfather, snaps out of his hypnosis and not only shoots Rose but shoots himself. This depiction illustrates black detachment from a controlled identity as a necessary component to disabling mental enslavement. Furthermore,  blacks not only have to rid themselves from physical obstacles but the part of ourselves that encompasses these harmful ideologies.

My least favorite component of the film was the means in which the hypnotized black body reverts back to semi-consciousness. Although the black body is held hostage by a white brain, it a flash or white light that snaps them back into consciousness. Thus, although it is a black man who physically saves himself from his pending imprisonment–it is a stroke of white light that enables his escape.

Thus, while seemingly a cautionary tale to interracial dating, or to the black body trusting whites in any capacity–the film evokes a white savior in representation rather than form. At surface level, the film seems to evoke the separatist ideology implemented by civil rights leaders like the late Malcolm X. However, the authorship of said movie makes this close reading impossible to take seriously. For this reason, Get Out reminds me a lot of Birth of Nation.

After viewing both Birth of a Nation and Get Out, I left the theater somewhat content. These feelings faded almost instantaneously as I realized that these movies while depicting the complexities of the historical and contemporary black experience can only resonate but so deeply. Namely, both Peele and Parker write and produce movies that should be revolutionary, but are not.

Jordan Peele and Nate Parker both conclude their films in the same manner. Specifically,   Birth of a Nation and Get Out end with all central white characters are murdered by blacks. While fatalities at the hands of blacks substantiate black bestiality, it also functions to depict white bodies as factors that must be eliminated to free blacks from an oppressive state. Like Birth of a Nation, Get Out is authored and directed by a black male married to a white woman. This dynamic casts said black authors as significantly less harmful and least likely to actually eliminate the white demographic because to do so would be to not only murder their wives but the mother of their children. Furthermore, with their interracial unions, the black male writer and director assumes a non-threatening stance in which the murder of fictive white characters seems an artistic choice rather than a means to uplift the black collective.

While the western world attaches a taboo labeling to interracial unions, these unions function favorably to foment white supremacy. The strongest black leaders are strong not because of what they say but because of what they do. Thus, these films are noteworthy, not revolutionary, as it is not enough to implement images that suggest an ideology disconnected from the thought and action of the author.

Writer and producer Jordan Peele also complicates the ability to take Get Out seriously with his comedic background. Thus, his depiction of a white family who abducts blacks and uses their bodies for their own benefit—becomes a well-executed joke rather than reflective of a past and present horror not limited to a New York City suburb.

Article by C.C. Saunders