African American Portrayal in the Media

Race refers to a group of people of common ancestry, distinguished from others by physical characteristics, such as hair type, color of eyes and skin, or stature. A group of these individuals is considered to be an ethnic group. To concentrate on the media, and how its representation of race and ethnicity, we need to look at the history of movies and compare it to films nowadays. Over the last years, we have been cultivated to believe in equality for each race as your ethnic background has no impact on your education or ability to work. Each racial group has a stereotype when it comes to media; for example, African American males are often portrayed as drug dealers. The media has often only focused on negative aspects of the actors race in the movies or TV series. Over the years, it has continued to portray a self-serving negative stereotype of the African-American community. The societal and economic factors of racism have become more than just a bias since the media has a huge industry in which the privileged will continue to suppress the lower class in order to enlarge profits. According to Harvard professor Cornell West, 1 percent of the elite holds some 48 percent of America’s wealth. This means that media, racism, and stereotypes will continue to be to be used to depict these topics so that the elite can be sure of their continuing economic stability.

A study from Yale University shows us that the oppression of African Americans portrayed in the media has played a key role in the showing us the effects. In the 1980’s, Michael Reich developed the Segmentation Theory or the Divide and Rule, which attempted to explain racism from an economic point of view. In this theory, Reich proposes that the ultimate goal in society is to amplify the income from the TV shows and films. It was stated that as a result, the exploiters will attempt to use any means to:

“(1) suppress higher wages among the exploited class, (2) weaken the bargaining power of the working class, often by attempting to split it along racial lines, (3) promote prejudices, (4) segregate the black community, (5) ensure that the elite benefit from the creation of stereotypes and racial prejudices against the black community. “

A lot of races are falsely represented in the media, which then turns the whole society to look at this ethnic group in the exact way which the media showed us to view them. A big motive for the insufficient attention of the core causes of racial stereotypes in the U.S. happens in because of the circumstances the white majority puts the African Americans into as the whites are of higher matter. A big interest within the black American community lies within fear and crime, as it is then portrayed in films. Events like boycotts, pickets, civil rights demonstrations, and particularly racial violence mark the point at which black activity impinges on white concerns. It is not surprising that the white-oriented media seek to satisfy the needs of their white audience and reflect this pattern of attention to these selected events.

The African American sitcom, which has been aired since the 1990s, can be considered a counter stereotype of the African American race. The first season of this series lets the audience observe a teenage son, who played the main role, interact with his wealthy step family. As the son comes from a lower class part of the United States, the big clash is what makes this TV show so interesting. The Fresh Prince of Bel Air is considered among one of the most interesting TV shows when it comes to depicting African American races as it goes against all of the stereotypes. This TV revolves around an African American family with a hard working mother and father who even have an African American butler who plays a very important role to complete the image of the upper-middle class family. The purpose is to represent a many-sided black family, which lets the audience gain more respect for families like these. The movements we are supposed to recognize is the representation of the everlasting clash between the main character, who comes from a lower class family, and the relatives, which makes us question the traditional role of black characters in the production on television in the twentieth century. The second, showing us how difficult it is to live in a rich white neighborhood while being part of the black community.

Master of None-Self-Representing and Token character reversal

Despite what may seem as the most progressive and proactive era that we have recently been issued into, in terms of ethnicity and representation there is still huge faults and lack of diversity. In terms of visual culture and representation of people of color in the media there are often times quite a limited selection. Additionally, the little representation that is available to consume is through the eyes of a white audience. This creates a gap in the reality of representation concerning POC’s and the inevitable stereotyping that occurs.

So what happens when a person of color takes it upon themself to create content that accurately depicts their ethnicity and the daily struggle that occurs from that. This is when the Netflix original series Master of None comes into play. Aziz Ansari, the co-creator and writer of the show, plays Dev a 30 year old actor who goes about his daily life in New York City trying to make sense of what life serves him. The trope of a young individual trying to make something of themselves in New York is a common television narrative and has repeatedly been done. Master of None, however, takes this hackneyed story line and introduces the element of race, and more specifically why race matters in trying to make something for yourself. The idea of self-representing your race is beautifully woven in the very heart of the show, with each episode demonstrating how race is simultaneously everything and nothing.

To highlight on a certain point, one must look at the diversity of the casting of the actors. In reality the core friend group consist of three POC and one white guy. Each character is fleshed out and has a developing story arc and a unique personality and feel. Oddly enough the tables are reversed, and the token character is Brian, the one white male of the group. He is the comedic relief, the sidekick to the people of color, the stereotyped image. He is the oddball that gets the laughs from the audience and is the punchline of the jokes, but never negatively. As Aziz Ansari said “We gave him a stereotypical white role, he’s a fully rounded character.” Brian is the eccentric character and the token member of the group because he is the only white person, something that is rarely seen in shows. In the “western” world, the collective sense that we have regarding ethnicity in media is “White v. the other” (O’Shaughnessy and Stadler, 2012). Yet, Master of None demonstrated that humor can arise from the differences between races but not out of spite or derogatory stereotypical characters but mainly due to the way in which the world reacts to them.

 

In the episode “Indians on TV” it immediately begins with a damning montage of the ever present stereotype of the Indian caricatures and brown face that plagues television and film. When Dev enters the room to audition he rejects the demand to fake a thick accent, confused on the fact that they think an Indian is only defined by their stereotypical accent and media portrayal.

.

The entirety of the episode has Dev continually fighting against the system, having to deal with fake representation, racism, and the continued fear of POC being seen. And in the moment that he potentially has the chance to be in the television show he is once more rejected because they already hired another Indian actor and were afraid that hiring another Indian actor would make it into an “Indian show”. He isn’t hurt that he can’t be in the show, he’s hurt that there can’t be two Indians in the show stating “isn’t that messed up?”

.

Dev is plagued with constant realization that his race and how it is seen affects his daily life. He even has to show other people that are Indian of the injustice they experience in terms of representation  and the harmful stereotypes.

Here is a clip of Dev showing his friend Ravi films that had actors do brown face stating “they got a real robot but a fake Indian.”

 

He faces racism and jokes of which Indian actor can “curry their favor.” To which Dev who attempts to fix the issue answers “Look, I’m happy to meet with you. But lets not kid ourselves these apologies are always phony, you wrote that email, you made that shitty joke the only thing that’s changed is that I’ve caught you.” The truth of the matter is that as Dev says he has to face a minor racial trauma to even be acknowledged and even then he doesn’t end up equal or at the top.

In Master of None race is not something to overcome or to ignore but it is something that can complicate, in both good and bad ways, everyday living. Dev faces situations where race is everything, from going for acting jobs, being the first generation immigrant, and trying to be a positive image. From when race doesn’t matter, from trying to find the best taco shop, to finding someone to go to a concert with. In all of that however, it is all real to him and to People of color.

Master of None is groundbreaking because it encompasses the reality of people of color and their relationship with race. It is a show written by people of color and stars people of color, with many of the story lines being based of off personal experiences the actors have facds due to their race. It is told by the eyes of the underrepresented and celebrates the diversity that is seen in our daily lives.

Is this Gap Advert Racist?

Read the full story from yesterday on the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-35968787

 

Week 11: Ethicity, Orientalism and Representaing Race

This class considers issues surrounding identity, difference and self-representation through the lens of visual representations of the lives and cultures of transnational immigrant communities in London. Using print advertisements, television programmes and film, this seminar explores how media representations define and undermine a sense of national belonging.

Required Reading:

• Textbook Part 5: 22 “Ethnicity, Ideology, and the Media”
• Stuart Hall, “Contesting a Racialized Regime of Representation,” Representation. London: Sage, 1997: 269-277.
• Cherien Dabis’ Amreeka (2009) – watch before class.

#womennotobjects

This was on the news this afternoon(!)

Hegemony and counter hegemony

Hegemony refers to the idea that the whole of society is ruled by one elite class, who imposese their own ideologies about the way a culture should exist, upon all the subordinate classes. We see it every day in politics, where those who rule us, all come from well off elitist backgrounds and every class below is destined to follow rules which benefit the beliefs of the elite. This idea is proven when we look at the media and how the message it tries to send, reflects well on certain groups and appallingly on others. The Daily Mail for example, is a newspaper famous for being very right wing, sticking up for the rich and essentially condemning the poor. When it comes to articles about people who claim benefits, hundreds of articles appear using aggressive, degrading language in an attempt to demonise the poor ‘underclass’. However, when looking for articles on the same newspaper about tax avoidance of the rich and elite less than a handful of articles show up.

The sad reality of this, is that newspapers are there to educate and inform and because of this what they represent it going to be believed by masses. The information they include is going to become believable, encouraging (in this case) the hegemonic ideology that people on benefits are all scroungers. Number 1; in many cases this isn’t true and people are not taking advantage of the system and thus is factually incorrect and number 2, those rich and powerful will constantly be perceived in the best light possible as their scandals are never released; allowing them to maintain control of the system. Certain TV programs perpetuate this idea of ‘scroungers’ and the underclass. The first of this is called Shameless and it follows the lives of a fictional family living on a council estate in Manchester. The series make you feel repulsed and annoyed at the family; headed by Frank, as he is a single dad who is depicted to spend all his money on alcohol and neglecting his kids. This program was incredibly popular in the UK which may be dangerous as it is a perfect example of the hegemonic wealthy white class using visual culture and popular outlets to portray their ideas and make society as a whole look down upon certain people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyqgdkQWKOI this advert for the show, shows Frank; the alcoholic father comparing himself to the elite class. It is made comical, yet still makes the viewer feel like ‘what is he one about, he is clearly nothing like the queen’; again enforcing the idea that there is a top class everybody should aspire to.

This is also the case in the channel 4 ‘documentary’ program Benefits Street. This show follows the lives of various families who live on a street; this time in Birmingham, who are all on benefits. Each person who appears in the show was told they were going to be portrayed a certain way, when in fact Channel 4; a supposedly respectable, truthful channel portrayed the individuals to be the underclass who claimed benefits because they were lazy. The assumed idea was to make tax payers question what their taxes were spent on and feel disgusted and betrayed by a group of people who the hegemon believed t1o be ‘scum’ essentially.

It isn’t just in the UK however. Take documentaries made by Trevor McDonald and Louis Theroux, who visit prisons in the United States. The situation there is that the vast majority of inmates are black and a lot of the guards; specially the ones interviewed by the film makers are white men. Whether this is a representation of society or whether it is an intentional manipulation of footage, it still represents an idea of black people; who are still the poorest even in a ‘free’ country such as the United States being controlled by white people and constantly being the brunt of poverty and inequality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYLepQQNQCU This video shows Louis Theroux investigating crime in Philadelphia and perfectly depicts the idea of hegemony. The black people are completely segregated and ‘put into’ their own area where they commit crime etc. The video shows them discussing the fact that no police (the ruling institution in this case) would look for their murderer as nobody cares.

When we look at less serious programmes and films; Super heroes spring out as being a predominant film genre. However, what did all the super heroes have in common? they were all from what we believe to be the rulers of society. The perfect race, the perfect family, the perfect wealth. Batman was a white man from an incredibly wealthy, powerful family. This portrays one message; if you look closely. Heroes, people who save us, people who we look up to should be white, rich and powerful; the exact status of those in charge today. Not one famous super hero is black or even poor. Superman, yes although he was from a different planet was still white and rich. Spiderman; white and incredibly intelligent. None of them, apart from all being orphans come from particularly disadvantaged, underprivileged backgrounds.

Counter hegemony therefore refers to the fight against hegemonic stereotypes and views situation through the eyes of someone whose voice perhaps doesn’t get heard enough and who are certainly under-represented in popular culture. An American TV show called Suits follows the lives of some incredibly wealthy, glamorous civil lawyers in New York. Although the two main characters are white men, the program fights hegemony by putting a black woman as the most powerful character of the show. Not only is she black and female, she also goes against the female stereotype usually cast in television and film. She is ruthless and ambitious, unemotional and not easily distracted. It is hard to find another program where stereotypes are fought quite so much. Scandal follows a mixed race woman who advises the president on every single decision he makes and is essentially a very powerful character. However, she is in love with the president, which puts her in an incredibly vulnerable position and works with the general opinion of emotional distracted women.

It is hard to find any other pieces of modern culture that represent counter hegemony and as much as it is tried, talked about and thought, proper counter hegemonic work doesn’t exist. However much we try to make changes, the elite will come out on top and still control the ‘norm’, making it become unquestioned.

 

Really Queen: An analysis of gender representation as demonstrated in RuPaul’s Drag Race

Unfortunately, proper LGBTQ+ representation in the media and films has always been an issue. This can range from usage of derogatory words in any context to improper casting in films and television shows. Unfortunately, LGBTQ+ acceptance and representation was not always practiced and preached and is still a battle being fought with individuals to this day. Gender identity and the representation of individuals identifying as Trangender or Gender Fluid, for example, has become a topic for discussion amongst many individuals as well. This reinforces the idea that gender is in fact non binary and fluid, and essentially evolves on a scale rather than in a vacuum, free of institutional influence, visual culture being one. The following image was created to help individuals better understand those concepts.

Gay representation in the media has been quite limited to the GBF (Gay Best Friend) Factor, side roles, or very minor one liners (often sassy) in films. These roles are often cast as straight men playing gay roles, leaving little to no room for identification with characters, actors, or individuals. These roles often place these characters into a minor side role, every time the leading role being a heterosexual character. This marketing scheme is received well by heterosexual audiences, but this allows for stereotypes to form, as there is so little representation in the media.

As a form of LGBTQ+ and gender representation in visual culture, the reality style American Television programme RuPaul’s Drag Race (2009-present) has become an integral part of this, as this programme is viewed by numerous audiences and has been well received.

 

RuPaul’s Drag Race (2009-Present) is essentially an America’s Next Top Model (2003-2015) flipped on it’s head. This show features 14 contestants, who compete to be “America’s Next Drag Superstar”. The contestants can be of any sexual orientation with the only rule being they MUST be of 21 years of age or older by the time of taping. There have been a handful of transgender contestants, but the majority of the contestants who have competed have been gay men. The premise of the show is that the contestants must create their own designs using materials provided to fit the theme of each episode, whilst competing in mini challenges, in the end facing either elimination or safety that week.

This programme, is a representation of both masculinity and femininity, in singular individuals, as RuPaul appears in and out of drag throughout the episodes, along with the competing queens. Featured top image: Season 6 winner Bianca Del Rio, featured bottom image: RuPaul.

RuPaul’s Runway Looks:

Best Runway Looks of Season 6:

 

This TV programme is unlike no other, essentially a first of it’s kind, breaking down many barriers. But, despite the successful nature of the programme, there have been multiple criticisms about the language used in the episodes. The nicknames, words, etc. used by the queens in a casual manner though out the episodes raise the question to many viewers: is it okay to use this kind of language? Much of the language used in the programme as been considered offensive, and can cause a negative light to be shed on the programme. Another criticism is an accusation of favouring glamorous queens over others, often for entertainment purposes.

Despite these criticisms, this show continues to be heavily influential, marking one of many representation milestones passed by the LGBTQ+ community. This programme has provided a platform for many queens to launch their careers or establish themselves, often becoming quite successful. This programme has also been quite successful outside of the LGBTQ+ community, breaking down gender norms on its way.

Sex, Gender, and Reactions against Feminism

Before considering and evaluating the behavior, characteristics, and roles of women in society, it is first imperative to acknowledge the difference between one’s sex and one’s gender. Sex is the biological distinction based on male and female hormones, chromosomes, and genitalia. Gender is the term used to identify personality traits, behavior, and cultural roles deemed appropriate for men and women.

There is debate on how a person’s gender is determined. The term biological essentialist describes a person’s sex as the way to define gender identity. However, there exists the idea that gender is constructed through society, called the social constructionist position. This stance argues that the way a child is raised not only creates their gender identity, but can also impact their sexual preferences.

The concept of postfeminism includes reactions against feminism. Feminist author Susan Faludi argues that this phenomenon comes from the patriarchy noticing a shift in women’s rights and reacting to counteract the progress being made. This includes the demonizing of feminists. Even such derogatory terms like feminazi  have been directed toward feminists to allude to aggression and to undermine their beliefs. Such demonizing, Faludi believes, is being used to weaken feminist ideas limit progress.

This can be seen with the newest fad of “Meninism”.  Various social media accounts have cropped up mocking feminists and mimicking well-known feminists issues and flipping it to favor the men.

As seen from the above photo, the account has taken the issue of female body image and have made it about men. Faludi stresses this is in response to the patriarchy reacting against positive feminism progress

Popular mockumentary-comedy Parks and Recreation addressed men’s rights groups in their last running season. The following clip shows protagonist Leslie Knope’s reaction to the group, revealing comedienne and show writer Amy Poehler’s true feelings toward meninism.

With absurd lines such as, “Can we have one conversation about feminism where men get to be in charge?” and “Men have had a very rough go of it…just recently,” Poehler comments on the ludicrousness of the recent popular trend of meninism.

Superheroes and Contortionists

Superheroes and Contortionists: Or Why Every Superheroine Has a Secret Passion for Yoga.

O’Shaughnessey describes 2nd wave feminism as combatting the representation of women’s bodies and appearances as sexual objects, and issues of control regarding the female body. This article will explore how gender is represented through action poses in superhero films (and their comics) with emphasis on dominance and control over female bodies and the use of culture jams to subvert the intended meaning.

A great place to start when looking at representations of the female in the superhero-verse is a cultural phenomenon known as the “booty pose”. Having existed in the comic-book universe since the first ever female superheroes of the 1940s, the booty pose refers to the contortionist positions used to present female bodies, especially in comparison to their male counterparts.

[Sheena, one of the first superheroines – circa 1941]

With a male audience in mind, female characters, even the most kick-ass of superheroines are [almost entirely] portrayed through this narrow field of fantasy. This contortionist approach often uses images of passivity and submissiveness through images of dominance and violence. A Spiderwoman cover in 2015 was one of the most controversial image in recent years as the heroine is portrayed in an overtly sexual pose, akin to a pornographic advert, or just Nicki Minaj in Anaconda.

And whilst it was argued that she is supposed to be “spider-like” the difference between the female Spiderwoman and her male counterpart is clear. Which also raises a secondary issue with this image, that Spiderwoman has a counterpart. Female superheros have often been created as “brand-extensions” to existing male superheroes, with writer Sean Howe describing it as an “Adam’s rib effect”. With the exception of Wonder Woman and classic X Men characters, many well known superheroines are these feminised versions of male heroes. They’re the She-ra and She-hulk to the He-man and (He!)Hulk or the Supergirl/Batgirl to their Superman/Batman.

Translating these depictions across into cinema, although poses are less explicit, superheroines are still (especially in movie posters) somewhat objectified, with the half turn pose demonstrated here by Jessica Garner (Daredevil poster) a staple in action movie advertisements.

Various  culture jam movements have been influential in enrouaging dialogue as to why the booty pose is ‘a thing’. Websites such as The Hawkeye Initiative (NSFW) recreate comic designs with the male characters taking on the more sexually overt positions usually attempted by the superheroine.

One of the most memorable within filmic representations is an artist who reimagined the Avengers Assemble movie poster, to ensure all the male characters were pulling the same pose as Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow. (And is also the image that inspired this post)

 

These culture jams are significant in bringing a sense of reality into such portrayals. What is portrayed as an appropriate mid-fight stance seems all the more ridiculous when compared to real action shots. Although for full disclosure, whilst researching, I discovered that such poses are possible…

Portraying the sexual side of these female superheroes can definitely be a positive in some aspects (with a whole book dedicated to early Wonder Woman’s sexuality, and the comparitive “damsel-in-distress” that is her love interest Steve Trevor). However, as Lucia Peters states, “In fictional worlds, the sexualization of women is often substituted for personality and all the other qualities that make up a human being.”

The Evolution and Regression of Female Representation in Today’s Film Productions

The representation of women in film productions involves both progressive and regressive potential because today feminism is a contested topic: people take for granted women’s right and do not regard themselves as supporters of the movement. The complexity of feminism is due to the contemporary paradox that a woman should both fulfil the role expected by the patriarchal society but also push the boundaries of how a female can and should be understood.

Firstly, in recent years films have started to represent women as warriors, as the heroines of their stories. Characters such as Hit-Girl from “Kick-Ass” (2010), Hanna (2011), Katniss from “Hunger Games” (2012), Tris from “Divergent” (2014), and Lucy (2014) fight not only for their personal survival and dignity, but also for social justice. They challenge the corrupted authority, becoming killers and war machines, roles before attributed to men. Women are not more represented deadly for their beauty, like the femme fatale of the genre noir, but for their intelligence and fighting skills. This type of character challenges the biological essential position, supporter of the following idea:“physical body defines the essence of identity and determines personality characteristics, behavior and abilities” (O’Shaunghnessy and Stadler, 2012). In contrast, the warrior characters are an exemplification of the social constructionist theory that “sees identity as constructed by external social forces such as the media, family, education, religion, and expectations of community members” (O’Shaunghnessy and Stadler, 2012).

Secondly, recently there are more female protagonists of films focused on spiritual and physical journeys. The stereotype of the Ulysses man, who travels around the world fighting extreme environmental conditions while his wife Penelope waits for him, is completely overturned. Examples of this cultural and visual turn are provided by films such as “True grift” (2010), “Winter’s Bone” (2011), “Beasts of the Southern Wild” (2013), and “Tracks” (2013). Women with purposes and goals are the main protagonists of these escapades from the domestic exploits. These changes in film representation of gender prove Judith Butler’s queer theory that “all gender behavior is performative: men and women learn to embody gender roles through the structure of impersonation by which any gender is assumes” (Butler, 1998). The overturning of gender stereotypes in films symbolises the fact that we are all doing a gender rather than being a gender.

Thirdly, women have been also represented in film productions as “rebels”. In mainstream cinema the figure of the rebel is usually associated to the male characters such as the ones played by James Dean. Girls’ rebellion is represented through objection and liberal expression of their sexuality, in response to the limitations of the second wave of feminism. An example is provided by the figure of the four girls in “Spring Breakers” (2012), whose main desire is not the one to meet the boy of their dreams but to challenge world’s expectation pursing fun, freedom and economical benefits. However, it seems that female rebellion is rejected and punished by society, in effect, rebel women usually are trapped under men’s influence, like in “Palo Alto” (2013), or they end in jail and disgrace like in “The Bling Ring” (2013). These films prove Cameron’s (2007) argument that “we live in a society and time in Western cultures where differences between men and women have actually become less and less marked over the past forty to fifty years.” Consequently, society is afraid of the absence of a real difference between the two sexes and relies more and more on the myth of sex difference. It seems that women could be not more identified in that categories of sensuality and elegance promoted by the two main icons of ’50 and ’60: Marylin Monroe and Audrey Hepburn.

Moreover, there has been an evolution of the female characters also in animation films. In 2012 Disney Pixar launched its first female driven movie “Brave”, in which the main character for the first time does not meet and marry the prince charming at the end of the storyline. “Brave” is a film that celebrates the importance of family, maternity and female complicity. These themes are also explored by the Disney animation film “Frozen” (2013) and by the Disney live-action film “Maleficent” (2014). These visual representations challenge the patriarchy, “a social structure in which masculine power and authority dominate social, political, and economic institutions, thereby oppressing women” (O’Shaunghnessy and Stadler, 2012).

On the other hand, women continue to be victims of the patriarchal gaze in film such as “Carrie” (2013) and “Life After Beth” (2014), where the main characters are represented as scream queens dominated by violent passions in a form of mixed misogyny, defined as “hatred of women and femininity”
(O’Shaunghnessy and Stadler, 2012). Another example is provided by the main female character in “Twilight” (2008) stuck and destroyed by the romantic longing. The regression of these characters represents the effects of post-feminism on our society, because it suggests that “feminism is in the past and outdated” (O’Shaunghnessy and Stadler, 2012), when data and daily life prove the contrary. Another failure of the mainstream cinema in evolving its representation of the female characters is the absence of the portrayal of strong non-white and non-thin women.

Overall, it’s not a surprise that many popular films do not pass the Bechdel Test, a series of rules that first appeared in 1985 in Alison Bechdel’s comic strip Dykes To Watch Out For, incorporated in the Swedish system of ratings in 2013.

 

Finally, in recent years we have been witnesses of a series of contradictions related to the representation of female characters in films due to the audience’s complex and confused perception of what is feminism today.