I’ve actually seen this in person. I can’t control my laughter when I see it.lol
I’ve actually seen this in person. I can’t control my laughter when I see it.lol
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.
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.
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.
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
It seems that comedian George Lopez has caused quite an uproar recently. Earlier this week he was doing a comedy show in Phoenix,Arizona and offended a woman in the audience. The controversy started when Lopez was telling a joke. During the routine Lopez said :
“There are only two rules in a Latino family. Don’t marry somebody black and don’t park in front of our house.”
Apparently there was a biracial woman in the audience that got upset. From what I hear she was black/Mexican. And gave Lopez the middle finger. Then Lopez began to insult her using profanity. Lopez told her:
Sit your f—king a— down! Sit your f—king a— down! I’m talking b—h,” said Lopez, while the audience cheered. “You paid to see a show, sit you’re a– down. You can’t take a joke, then you’re in the wrong motherf—king place. Sit your a— down or get the f—k out of here.”
Why is this shocking to black people? Don’t we already know many Hispanics don’t like black people? This goes for many Mexicans,Cubans,Dominicans and Puerto Ricans. Yeah I know there are blacks in many Latin countries. But you know who I’m talking about. I’m talking about those European latinos. These people worship whiteness. They will work with you in the workplace but most don’t like their children marrying black people. Most of them have a strong anti-black sentiment. That’s why the mostly Hispanic audience laughed at the joke. Lopez didn’t say don’t marry a white person. Why not?? It’s because most the Mexican audience love white people. If you look at Mexicans they look closer to white than black for sure. But see I have a different take on it. I’m not upset at him because he only told the truth. None of these Hispanic groups want their sons or daughters marrying black people. I think most of them hate our dark skin and African(nappy) textured hair. They see blacks as inferior and don’t want to mix with us. Some Mexicans even disown their sons and daughters for marrying blacks. It’s only you brain dead negroes who hate yourself that are offended. Why do we want to be accepted by those that hate us? Why can’t we love ourselves? I’m not offended because I already knew this. I knew black guys in high school that dated Mexican girls. Some of the guys told me they weren’t allowed in their girlfriend’s house. Either the Mexican father didn’t approve or the mother. Sometimes it was both. Black people need some self love and black pride. Then you wouldn’t be offended by the jokes from some ugly pizza-faced washed up comedian. I don’t want mixed babies so I don’t gave a damn if he wants me in his family. I remember when he had his talk show a few years ago. He did a DNA test and found out he was 55 % European,41% Native American and 4% African. I don’t trust most of those DNA tests anyway. But even if it’s true it shows he is more European than anything else. So maybe that’s why many of these so-called Latinos hate black people. They are mostly European so what would you expect? Being white and anti-black goes hand in hand. I keep trying to tell black people that these “people of color” are extremely anti-black. Everyone that has some melanin is not your friend. Don’t be fooled because someone has brown skin. This goes for Hispanics and brown-skinned Indians as well.. As a side note,I actually met Lopez about fifteen years ago at a mall. He was there promoting a radio show he used to host. He really is an ugly looking mestizo in person.
Look at this pic(above) of Lopez. Dressing in drag??? Not only does he have a problem with black people but I guess he’s an undercover homosexual as well. These latinos are funny to me. Lopez says he hates Donald Trump because Trump is a racist towards Mexicans. Yet Lopez has the same racist attitude towards blacks. Blacks haven’t done anything to Mexicans. We never had a war with them. We never had them as slaves or colonized their land. So why do they hate us? Why do all these racial groups hate on black people? Sounds kind of hypocritical to me. Maybe it’s just racial pride. Some people want to preserve their race and culture. I can respect that since I’m the same way. I love being black and I love my African culture. I don’t want to mix with them anyway. But I just don’t like the fact that all these races use black people as a punching bag. Everyone likes to shit on us! And I’m really getting tired of it. Trump wants to build a wall to keep the Mexicans out. I used to be against this idea. Now it’s starting to sound like a good idea. The only problem I have with the wall is I keep asking myself…is it to keep the Mexicans out? Or to keep us in? Anyway let me know your thoughts on Lopez. Was he right? Were you offended? Or was racism expressed by Hispanics something you already knew?
The woman on the current cover of Rolling Stone is Paris Jackson. She is the daughter of the late music icon Michael Jackson. In the cover story Paris says that she knows for sure her father was killed. That may or may not be true but that’s a story for another time. This post is about the fact that Paris says in the interview that she considers herself a black woman. Of course social media went crazy over this story. In the interview she says:
“He is my father. He will always be my father,” she said. “He never wasn’t, and he never will not be. People that knew him really … say they see him in me, that it’s almost scary.”
She even expounded a bit more, saying that because of the “Smooth Criminal” singer’s instilling words, she considers herself a Black woman.
“I consider myself Black. [Dad] would look me in the eyes and he’d point his finger at me and he’d be like, ‘You’re Black. Be proud of your roots,'” she said. “And I’d be like, ‘OK, he’s my dad. Why would he lie to me?’ So I just believe what he told me. ‘Cause, to my knowledge, he’s never lied to me.”
Despite what her father told her, she said the outside world still sees her as white: “Most people that don’t know me call me white,” she said. “I’ve got light skin and, especially since I’ve had my hair blond, I look like I was born in Finland or something.”
Let me be clear,Paris is NOT a black woman. Anyone with eyesight can see that. I don’t give a damn what her father told her. She looks purely European to me. From a biological standpoint,she is more European than anything else. I personally believe that Paris and her two siblings are not biologically related to Michael Jackson. I think Michael used the sperm from a white man to impregnate Debbie Rowe because he didn’t want his children to look even half black. I went to school with plenty biracial kids and most don’t look like this woman. Let’s be honest here,Michael Jackson was a very gifted singer/dancer. I can’t take that away from him. But he had serious self-hate issues. I think Jackson hated himself so much he didn’t want to see a reflection of his blackness. I still can’t believe he married that ugly white woman Debbie Rowe. That woman is hideous! But that shows his self hatred(anti-blackness) was really deep. I saw black people on YouTube arguing in defense of Paris saying she was at least “culturally black”. I have heard this term many times before. I knew a white girl in high school that was adopted by a black couple. She listen to rap music and dressed in hip hop clothing. She told me she liked soul food,dated only black boys and spoke in a certain “black vernacular”. So many would say she is culturally black. So some may put Paris Jackson in that category. But Paris and the white girl I knew in high school are still not black women.
Some like to say that being black is a mindset. But I disagree. You either have African genes are you do not. You have melanin or you don’t. It’s that simple. This type of mentality diminishes the black experience and insults our ancestors. We are blessed to have African DNA in us. And we have to get away from worshipping whiteness and being ashamed of blackness. This is the mental illness many of us suffer from. Many of us can’t appreciate our blackness unless it’s close to whiteness. That’s why some us have interracial sex so we can have mixed babies. And then say “Isn’t this a beautiful black child?” This is why you have black fools saying “Paris should be allowed to call herself black.” This is an insult to authentic black people. It’s an insult to dark brown,dark skinned blacks with African textured hair. Paris has none of the physical traits of a black person. If she does have any African genes she must be about 0.000001 % black.
This picture(above) is Paris with her brothers Michael Jackson Jr and Prince. They are pictured with their grandmother Katherine Jackson. These children may have been raised around black people but that doesn’t make them black people. And we as black people have to stop giving everyone a pass. We must stop making blackness all inclusive. It makes us look stupid. They are making a mockery of our beautiful blackness. It’s because many of us don’t have the courage to create a definition of what is an African person. By allowing people like Paris to be considered is black is an insult to our intelligence. Paris or anyone that looks like her is not black. Michael Jackson told her to “be proud of your roots”. He must’ve meant her European roots.
Great interview with author Paul Ifayomi Grant. This interview he touches on the subject of the “trophy white woman”. And why many black men with success choose to marry them. It’s a subject I’ve covered before but can’t be brought up enough. Interracial promotion and the gay agenda big issues being pushed on us heavily. He also brings up a great argument on why interracial relationships are not good for black people. A touchy subject for some but it’s a topic we must address. Mainly because many black people see it as a way to escape their blackness.
“It is not about any particular individual or designed to hurt people’s feelings. It is about the politics, psychology and sociology of miscegenation with a particular emphasis on the politics. It is about understanding how a group of people with POWER, who call themselves ‘White’, use that POWER to control the sexual relationships of another less-POWERFUL group of people, who they call ‘Black’. It is about POWER and the wielding of POWER in aid of White Supremacy.”
Music producer Quincy Jones married white actress Peggy Lipton way back in the seventies. I guess once he got rich he needed his trophy by his side.
Of course we can’t forget football legend OJ Simpson. OJ’s first wife was black but they got divorced and he eventually got his trophy. He didn’t work out too well for him. I wonder what he thinks of that decision now.
Film legend Sidney Poitier was an inspiration to black people in the sixties and seventies. He was a real film icon. He is another one that had a black wife in the beginning…but once again dumped her and married a white women. What is it about this trophy complex? It’s almost like some of these guys don’t feel complete without the love of a white woman.
And we can’t leave out NBA legend(self hating Coon)Charles Barkley. You know you must have a serious case of self-hatred if you can walk around with this creature and call it a “trophy”. Come on Chuck! Wake the hell up fool!
Come on Eddie Murphy! This is so wrong! LOL!
Here’s a related post I did a few years ago. You may find it of interest.