"View" Askew

In the past, I have always admired and appreciated the quirkiness that is Whoopi Goldberg. She was "hanging" with the all-male Comic Relief and was just as funny as they were; she proved she could tackle drama as well in The Color Purple (she won a Golden Globe for the performance); she has never bowed to conventions for African-American nor women - she defies the trends with her ever-present dreadlocks and designer-free clothes; she also has freely admitted her dyslexia and former drugs habit, without all the "oh poor me" attention getting of the Lohans, Spears, and Hiltons.

Because of this, I was glad that Whoopi was joining The View after the debacle that is known as Rosie O'Donnell left. Even though I haven't watched the show since its first year, I thought I may Tivo an episode to see how good ol' Whoopi, who is a strong female role model, was doing.

OMG! She didn't even make it out of the gate when she imploded on camera giving her opinion about the Micheal Vick case.

What is this crap that Vick's action are justified because "This is part of his cultural upbringing"?!?!?!? Hey, Whoopi... I love your work, you have been a great role model on so many levels, but holy shit! Are you even listening to yourself?!?! Isn't you defense of Vick the same damn defense that the Southerners used when they were justifying the slavery of African-Americans? Isn't that the same defense the ancestors of those pre-Civil War Southerners used when the government said that the South needed to desegregate?

For you to say that people can use their past and culture to excuse their actions would give anyone the reason to get away with horrendous atrocities. Possible scenario: "Hey, I am like sorry Your Honor, I didn't mean to beat my kid until he was in a coma. My dad beat me all the time growing up. It is part of my culture. I thought it was OK because my dad never got punished for it." Woman, PLEASE! Wake up and smell the 21st century!

Whoopi - would you have said this if Vick was a white Southerner? That is the $64,000 question here. Don Imus rightfully got raked across the coals for his "nappy-headed hos" remarked aimed at the predominately African-American Rutgers women's basketball team. Can you even see how you are helping to perpetuate the negative stereotype of African-American males?

Do the "View"ers a favor - be your brilliant, funny self. We like when you push the envelope. However, by pushing, I mean pushing people to see past their fears, comfort zone, etc., not back into the 1800's. Daytime television does NOT need another Rosie O'Donnell. Be yourself.

WORKING OUT THE CONVENIENCE OF IGNORING

WORKING OUT THE CONVENIENCE OF IGNORING

Maureen, Maureen, MAUREEN. In a week in which America endured the Virginia Tech. tragedy—and continues to endure other on-going tragedies, like, oh, Iraq, the Bush administration’s dictorial-freak yearnings for a unitarian executive, and the eroding rights of women and of countless others thanks to the Judicial Branch & Fredo’s [In]Justice Department, Maureen Dowd focuses on what?: the hair cut of John Edwards. That-a-girl!

OD-ing on Bravo TV—not that there’s anything wrong with that—love Work Out, Mo—who seems to like Blow Out—uses today’s column to focus on the Edwards’ hairdo misstep as a platform to criticize the exorbitant spending and fundraising of the 2008 presidential contenders. Mo is right: John, you sexy beast, get with us working class folk: economize and spend less on the hair.

Mo is also wrong: After taking a pass of convenience on the Imus story probably for fear of being called a sissy or worse by a**holes like Bernard McGuirk or the I-man’s replacement, Mr. Cleanly Tolerant, Michael Smerconish, who foolishly banged on his chest at the huffingpost with his—I’m-in-touch-with-my-white,-male-know-it-all-self-so-that-allows-me-to-displace-my-white-male-fear-and-hurl-insults-like-sissy-at-everyone, Mo and her MSM friends seem to be running scared. Conveniently ignoring and not effectively questioning major domestic and foreign crises exploding all over home and abroad that deserve more attention, more scrutiny, and for Pat Roberts’s sake, more satire, the mainstream media shifts its focus to what it prefers best: fake news.

Perhaps Dowd and her ilk were hypnotized by McCain, the crooner, and his rendition of “bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran,” which might explain why they’ve been lured away from real news to the who-gives-a-poop news of blaming rap music for everything, Baldwin versus Basinger, and, yes, Edwards’ hair. But even bad singing has lost its appeal; alas, Sanjaya was voted off American Idol, and, interestingly, McCain’s performance was taken off YouTube. Are we turning a corner? Probably not. So instead of taking cues from Bravo TV’s reality shows on hair, Mo, you and your friends may want to check out Work Out, a show about a likeable, fearless woman, who fearlessly started her own fitness business, who fearlessly and thankfully shares with us her “alternative” lifestyle, and who shows that sometimes “cleanly tolerant,” sissy-calling wo/men are simply not necessary.

Outrage of the Week

The Stench They Call the I-Man

The execs at CBS and MSNBC must be feeling really good about themselves today. At the start of a fresh work week, they can be relieved that they washed the I-Man out of their hair, finally ridding themselves of the show that was sometimes racist, sometimes sexist, and most of the time obnoxious. They probably are proud to wear their “I’m not a racist” merit badges on their sleeves, having pacified the many people that were calling for Don Imus to get fired. Now that the Shrek-like ogre hunt is over, can we honestly say that we have rid ourselves of the stain of racism that plagues this country? Of course not. The whole Imus thing, from start to finish, just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

First and foremost is the comment that Imus made. When I heard what happened, I was reminded of why I chose to no longer tune in to “Imus in the Morning” a few years ago. Why some people think it was remotely okay for Imus to say this is beyond me.

Why some people use his stupidity to begin a finger-pointing party at hip-hop music makes no sense to me. These are two totally different contexts and while a new dialogue on hip-hop could be inspired by this, it is wrong to shift responsibility from one thing to another.

The fact that Imus was fired from both corporations only after they lost some heavy-hitting sponsors sickens me. Offering some self-righteous comments denouncing Imus, these execs claimed to “do the right thing” by dropping the show only when retaining it seemed to threaten their ability to retain the almighty advertising dollar.

Then you have the comments of some of his friends and former guests. It’s like this: You have a friend with bad gas. He farts all the time in public; it stinks, but no one calls him on it. Instead, you laugh and giggle (maybe uncomfortably), but you continue to encourage and support the fart problem. Finally, one day, the fart stinks so badly that lots of people notice it. You no longer have a choice. You jump on the bandwagon and try to distance yourself as much as possible from your friend and his fart, fearing that its stench will somehow affect your life. While many people have made convenient statements to offer a sort of obligatory disassociation concerning a personal or professional relationship with Imus, how can we ignore the fact that he just became another cog in the 24/7 news wheel?

Last week was a week of outrage. Imus’s comment was deplorable, but I question the motives of the people that fired him. I question the sincerity of the many friends and former guests that ran away from his last bad stinky fart. I question the commitment of so many of these publicly outraged people to get real and do tangible things to rid America from institutionalized racism.

And I’ll be honest here- I think it’s too bad that Imus is no longer on the air to right his wrong. Imagine if he were given his suspension followed by a sort of probationary period, a set amount of time when he was compelled to take up the cause of American racism with a fervor similar to his efforts for kids with cancer and kids with autism. The corporate execs may have silenced the public outcry, but they also silenced a loud voice in the fight to keep kids in this country healthy. I encourage you to read David Kirby's entry in today's Huffington Post because as much as I think Imus should kick his farting habit and ban his farting friends from his show, I do fear some children and their families just lost their biggest advocate.

CAN'T OR WON'T?

CAN’T OR WON’T?

I’ve been mesmerized by white Americans’ responses to the Imus incident that’s unfolded these past two weeks. For the record and as I’ve indicated in the comments section of the previous entry, I think it’s good for Americans to talk about racism because it still metastasizes our country, like it or not. And albeit Imus’s comments were both racist and sexist, it’s important to note that the national debate about the remarks centers more on racist language and what it means; but I don’t want to suggest in any way that his comments weren’t also sexist.

There’s no need to rehash in detail Imus’s long-standing history of being a shock-jock, of using defamatory language, or of him being a good man because he does great things for charity. Suffice it to say, it’s unfortunate that he said what he said. I’m more interested, though, in the patterns of white peoples’ responses to this incident, which range from the truly sympathetic to the truly inquisitive to those truly in denial to those who are truly insane. I’ve found that white people—and I’m considered white myself— fall into one or more of these categories. My non-scientific, anecdotal analyses come from what I’ve read, what I’ve seen in the media, and what discussions I’ve had with friends, family, colleagues, and students.

The truly sympathetic include those folks who express—to one degree or another—a sense of perspective thinking about the targets of Imus’s remarks and about the redemption that Imus seeks. Put simply, we’ve all made mistakes, sometimes big mistakes, and many of us have been truly sorry for what we’ve done and whom we’ve hurt. Those that seem to recognize this engage in some sort of perspective thinking, demonstrating the ability to think or see things, as Atticus Finch suggests, from someone else’s shoes. It seems that more of us need to revisit the lessons of To Kill a Mockingbird.

The truly inquisitive include those folks who are raising legitimate, non-racially charged questions, like why Imus? Why now? What’s corporate America’s involvement in all this? What about the other hate-mongers out there? Why is it important to determine what’s appropriate and when? The good news for America, at least, is that it seems many folks have raised similar questions that beg a consideration of not just Imus and his misstep, but moreover, what it all represents. Questioning is good for America, it’s good for this incident, and it’s good for racism.

The truly in denial group, which seems to be overwhelmingly populated, include those folks that solely rely on shifting the focus form the incident itself to blaming rap music, popular culture, and black folks themselves. I’ve heard everything from blaming Russell Simmons to conflating the Imus incident with Nelly’s lewd videos to the inane charge that if black people address each other with certain terms that unequivocally permits everyone else outside of their racial context to use those terms AGAINST them. A BROAD, open discussion on decency in all facets of American culture is something most people, I believe, would welcome. But let’s not deny Imus’s serial bad behavior by shifting and blaming all over the place in an effort to avoid the obvious: racism is alive and well in America—just ask black folks, and the Imus incident is but a minor representation of it. Let’s be honest.

Last but not least is the truly insane group. These folks include the lunatics, supremacists, and hate mongers who unabashedly take such actions as, oh, sending the Rutgers female basketball players hate letters. Nice. These folks just don’t get it, and maybe they never will. Three cheers for Deirdre Imus who was particularly courageous and effective in her charge to these folks to send the letters to Imus rather than terrorizing these young women. Clearly, looking at the response of Mrs. Imus further indicates the seriousness of Mr. Imus’s misstep and the importance of talking about race to avoid something like this from happening again.

All this observing, pondering, and analyzing about the Imus incident has forced me to consider the following major question, for which I don’t have an answer: is it that most Americans can’t or won’t be honest—with themselves and others—when we talk about racism?