The term “tar baby,” which landed Senator John McCain and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney in trouble in the past, refers to having your hand touch a sticky situation. But many African Americans also look at the word as racist — especially when you refer to the first Black president of this country in that manner.

Read more at Gawker

The Oxford English Dictionary (but not the print version of its American counterpart) says that tar baby is a derogatory term used for “a black or a Maori.”

Here is a little history on the word “tar baby” – Link

Do you think this congressman meant it in a racist way?

RELATED:

Top 10 racist Rush Limbaugh quotes

A new Summer’s Eve advertisement can be perceived as not just racist, but sexist and blatantly tasteless as well.

The “Summer’s Eve Hail to the V: Lady Wowza” commercial promotes a women’s cleansing product rather candidly. In the 55 second video, a Black woman’s hand can be seen, cupped in a shape of a vagina. The talking “V” named Lady Wowza begins a monologue, speaking to the person it is attached to.

“Girl I’ve seen how much time you spend stylin’ your hair,” Lady Wowza says.

The monologue continues, Wowza mentions going clubbing, and finishes the video saying “Hail to the V!”

These types of ads show you that there is a clear lack of minority representation in many of these companies. For an ad of this nature to be released by this company, shows that there aren’t any Black eyes or ears to tell them what they are producing is wrong.

What do you think? Is this ad racist or offensive?

A Texas man took advantage of a little-known provision in state law and now has a whole neighborhood mad at him.

Kenneth Robinson, who many are looking at as either a hero or squatter, recently landed an abandoned home worth $300,000 for $16.00.

From Real Estate AOL:

Robinson said that the abandoned house is his for the taking, since neither the original owner nor the bank is likely to go to the trouble or expense of kicking him out. If he can manage to stay in the property for three years, he says, the law grants him the right to petition the court for title to the house.

Do you think the neighbors would have a problem with this man if he was white?

RELATED: Weiner Declined Police Investigation In Photo Scandal

The following are samples of some hilarious Anthony Weiner jokes spreading on Twitter, the networking site where he has apparently tied himself up in inner wear fabric.

BorowitzReport: Bill Clinton Blasts Weiner: “In my day, we’d show it to ‘em in person.”

Again from the same tweeter: “Weiner ‘Totally Un-smooth with Women,’ Says Dominique Strauss-Kahn”

juliethuddy didn’t pull a punch before landing this one: “Congressman Weiner said he would use all his weight to get to bottom of twitter incident. Seeing photo it wont be much.” [...]

For ‘StephanieWDC’ Weiner has become hot property after his expose. “For my money, Rep Weiner can send me a pic of his junk every day of the week if he continues to legislate like he does,” the tweet says.

This is all very well and good. I am certainly not one to balk at massive expressions of humor at the expense of relatively pampered elected officials. But I have to ask: If Weiner was black, would all these people be guffawing?

I am trying to imagine, for example, if GOP presidential contender Herman Cain had gotten caught up in a similar peccadillo. Can you imagine the same level of sweetly sexy innuendo being tossed about in the Twitterverse? Would the man even have been given the chance to  try and find that “hacker” Weiner keeps babbling about?

I doubt it. If Weiner were black, this little fiasco would NOT have been so cute. The only laughter we would have heard would have been the sound of a black man being laughed out of politics.  But that’s just my opinion. What do you think?

We’re just curious!

RELATED: Clarence Thomas’ Wife Exposed As Anti-Obama Activist

RELATED: NASA’s Second-To-Last Space Shuttle Flight Returns To Earth

Does it matter if the president chooses to play golf on Memorial Day, and for the second time in his presidency (he did so as well in 2009)? I think it does, and it displays extraordinarily bad judgment, not only by Obama himself but also by his advisers. His chief of staff for example should have firmly cautioned against it. President Obama is not just any American but Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces. The United States is currently engaged in a major war in Afghanistan with over 100,000 troops on the ground, and more than 1,500 have already laid down their lives for their country.

The least the president can do on Memorial Day is spend the whole day with veterans and servicemen’s families while acknowledging their sacrifice.

Of course, while this story has been ignored by the mainstream press, right wing bloggers have snatched it up as yet another triffling excuse to attack an African-American leader. I can see how the symbolic role of the president needs to expressed seriously by the holder of that role, but President Obama did that by laying the wreath. The fact is, he is the president and not a priest. Obama did not take vows to denounce all pleasure in life when he was sworn in. And the leader of our armed forces can, by not working, show that he is respecting the meaning of Memorial Day. We are given this day to acknowledge our fallen, and use the time away from the grind to think more deeply about what matters in life, celebrating the goodness of all these soldiers sacrificed for.

But that’s just my opinion. What do you think? Are conservatives correct in lambasting Obama for playing golf on Memorial Day? Or is this just another silly accusation? If you have a fallen soldier in your family, how does this make you feel?

We’re just curious.

RELATED: Attorney General Holder Begs “The Wire” For More Shows

“Obama chugging 40′s in IRE while tornadoes ravage MO. Very intense show tonight.”

40s is slang for 40 oz bottles of beer, usually malt liquor, that was popular in hip hop in the 90s.

RELATED STORIES

Fox News Is The Lynchmob’s Ticket Agent [OPINION]

Fox News Calls Common A “Vile Rapper” After White House Invite

A new advertisement for Dove’s “Visible Care” body wash is facing criticism for what is seen as racist undertones in it’s depiction of women of different skin tones that apparently implies that the lighter woman was the ideal result.

An advertising blog first posted the ad under the title, “”Dove body wash turns Black Women into Latino Women into White Women.” Not long after, The Huffington Post and Jezebel posted the “unintentionally racist” ad, with Jezebel writing: “Bye-bye black skin, hello white skin! (Scrub hard!)”

Clutch Magazine reports:

The advertisement comes quite out of character for the brand, which is widely seen as an industry leader for its “Real Women, Real Beauty” campaign. For years, Dove has purposely sought to include non-traditional models in its advertising, featuring (faux gasp) women who didn’t fit into sample sizes. Given the brand’s history of celebrating women of all shapes and shades, it’s hard to believe that it would put together this ‘dark to light’ ad with ill intent.

READ MORE AT HUFFINGTONPOST.COM

What do you think of the Dove ‘Visible Care’ ad? Is the dark to light arrangement of the women show racism or are people simply reading too much into it?

RELATED:

Racist Univision Skit Mocks “Afro-Monkey”

Brazilian Web Site Posts Racist Obama Cartoon

As of late, it seems that the most offensive ads on the internet are coming out of Asia.

Whether you find this to be offensive or not, KFC in Hong Kong decided to use a President Obama lookalike in one of their ads to promote a fish filet sandwich.

Do you think this ad is racist or not?

RELATED:

Just Curious: Do rappers have a light-skinned preference?

Just Curious: Was this Duncan-Hines Hip-Hop commercial racist?

Links to articles on Lil Wayne’s and Kanye West’s preferences for light-skin women throughout their lyrics.

Earlier this week, we featured two stories from different sources on the admiration that both Lil Wayne and Kanye West have for light-skinned women. Both stories sparked plenty of discussion amongst our Black Planet members.

Throughout their careers, as have many rappers, Lil Wayne and Kanye West have professed their love for light-skin women through various tracks.

But these “preferences” never reached the boycott level. Earlier this week, Bossip.com wrote a story about a female model claiming that Wayne disrespected dark-skin women in his presence along with his Young Money mates.

Below are some of the tracks. Feel free to add any other tracks or videos where you noticed a preference for light-skin women on their part.

Lil Wayne lyric: “Beautiful Black woman I bet that b**ch look better red.”

Many people missed this line as they usually hear Lil Wayne mention red as he’s a blood. But when you look at the lyric and the word “red-bone” which refers to light-skinned women, it details his preference for Black women; worse, it shows that he thinks a Black woman is better looking if light-skin.

Kanye West lyric: “Rolling with some light-skin chicks and some Kelly Rowlands.”

Earlier this week, Ta-Nehisi Coates of The Atlantic wrote that despite the fact that he loves Kanye’s work, he felt that West was introducing “colorism into Hip-Hop again.”

What do you think? Do you feel it’s fine to have a preference as long as you don’t put down other women of color whether light or dark? Or do you feel Kanye and Wayne have the right to express their feelings about dark-skin women without any backlash?

RELATED:

Just Curious: Was this Duncan Hines hip-hop commercial racist?

New York – Last week, the President of the New York Federation of Livery Cab Drivers said that more cab drivers should racially profile as “99 percent” of people who harm or kill cabbies are Black or Hispanic. He then backtracked from his comments and said that anyone who looks “suspicious” shouldn’t be picked up; that meant anyone wearing hoodies or baggy jeans.

Is this man just telling the truth or is he promoting racism?

RELATED:

Just Curious: Was Victoria’s Secret racist for using Black models for their Wild Things segment?

Just Curious: Should more black newswomen go natural and break ranks

New York — You gotta give it to Victoria’s Secret for giving the $2 million bra to Brazilian model Adriana Lima for the most watched runway show on the planet. But for the rest of the show, they seemed to feature models of color in interesting situations, including ones that had them parading around performers engaged in what’s supposed to be indigenous dance.

The Victoria Secret Fashion Show, which aired last night on CBS, opened with a complete line up of light skinned models.

While dark skinned models were sprinkled throughout the show, they seemed to have lined them up so they could all be part of the “Wild Things” segment of the show.

Read more at Colorlines

RELATED:

Just Curious: Should more Black newswomen go natural?

Just Curious: Are ads in India perpetuating stereotypes about African-Americans

Share this post on Facebook! CLICK HERE:

Nation — I had been running away from scissors all of my life.

“Just skim my ends,” I’d tell every hair dresser who dared bring scissors near my shoulder length “Oprah hair.” It was my look, my broadcast reporter look — even before I was a broadcaster. So it seemed unbelievably surreal that one year ago I took scissors to my own beloved tresses and cut, cut, cut…until I had a 1/2 inch Afro. I was tired of the time and money that went into maintaining the look. In an impulsive instant I made the decision to “go natural,” and it continues to be one of the best decisions I’ve made in my life.

It takes guts to wear kinky hair in the television news biz, an industry that fawns over “the look.” So last week, I was overjoyed when I saw another fellow broadcaster take the plunge.

Read more at TheGrio

RELATED:

Is Black News really necessary?

With the Midterm Elections upon us, race is one of the factors that many African-Americans feel have led to the voting surge amongst Republicans and Tea Partiers. Recently, Alabama State Senator Hank Sanders, who is a Democrat, created a robo-call where he says if Alabaman’s don’t vote for Ron Sparks or Jim Folsom, the “Jim Crow south will return.”

Leave your comments and let us know whether you think this was a racist robo-call or not.

RELATED:

Just Curious: Are India ads perpetuating stereotypes about Africans

Just Curious: Should a White sorority have won the Sprite step-off

Share this post on Facebook! CLICK HERE:

Magary notes that P Diddy would bring some “pizazz” to the league but doesn’t seem to take the notion as  a real possibility– should we as Black people take offense to these statements about the would-be first Black NFL team owner? The National Football League is now over 60% African-American players, why is the ownership 100% white? Is Black ownership in the NFL a possibility?

Magary states:

On his own, he doesn’t possess anywhere near enough free capital to buy an NFL team, which costs about a billion dollars on average. There’s also the issue of NFL owners, the oldest and whitest of old white guy clubs, being wary of a young owner with a dubious legal past and considerable media notoriety.

But Diddy is dreaming big. So let us dream with him, America. What would an NFL team look like were it to be owned by the erstwhile Puff Daddy? I imagine the team would adapt the following features:

-Team relocated to East Hampton

-Fish eye camera used on stadium Jumbotron at all times

-No more cheerleaders. HONEYS. Lots of honeys.

-All offensive and defensive plays openly stolen from other teams, and from Sting

-No one in stadium allowed to make fun of Diddy’s underbite

-Admission price for Jennifer Lopez and family doubled

-Parking spaces widened to allow for customized Escalades

-All players forced to point skyward after scoring to acknowledge Biggie

Read entire article at NBCwashington.com

The app was first rejected by Apple on moral grounds, then approved. Thug Shotz ($0.99) is also available in a “Cell-ebrity” version ($1.99) where you can hook up the A-lister to the crime.

The shaudenfreude fest — in the same vein as controversial Busted! Real Mug shots app, but created by a different company called It’s Bailey Entertainment (IBE) — was first rejected by Apple on moral grounds, then approved. (Note: the screenshots are stock photos, but all photos in the game are real people.)

Cult of Mac talked to IBE Founder K. Patrick Whalen about how the app, which started as a lunch time diversion of “guess the perp,” made it into iTunes.

Apple initially rejected the game because it uses real mug shots which they felt was “immoral” and inconsistent with their long-standing, though unwritten, policy of not allowing applications which are “mean spirited” or “make fun” of people, IBE tells us.

Read more at Cult Of Mac

RELATED:

Just Curious: Do Black people actually like John Mayer?

Just Curious: Are ads in India perpetuating stereotypes about Africans

Share this post on Facebook! CLICK HERE:

From Time.com:

African-Indian bonhomie was all the rage in India’s media last week, amid celebratory coverage of homegrown telecom company Airtel’s $10.7 billion acquisition of Kuwaiti company Zain’s African operations and TV images of Indian visitors blowing vuvuzelas at soccer’s World Cup in South Africa. Amid all the backslapping, however, an African student in India who runs a news and current-affairs website from the city of Bhopal accused companies like Coca-Cola of airing racist commercials on Indian TV that portrayed Africans as primitive savages.

“Indian marketers have a field day in putting ‘blacks’ where they’ve always ‘belonged,’ at least in the average Indian mind-sets,” wrote S.K.Y. Banji, an Ugandan who has lived in India for more than four years and runs thereigntimes.com. His comments were endorsed by fellow Africans who posted on the site, sharing their own experiences of racism in India, and soon Banji’s concerns were being aired in segments of the mainstream media. Yet there was hardly any public outcry, and none of the companies have issued apologies. (See why racist attitudes are so ingrained.)

Text continues after gallery …

One of the commercials in question, for Coca-Cola’s Sprite — which a Coca-Cola spokesperson says was received “very positively” by a test audience in India — shows two young Indian men captured by savages in an African jungle. While one of them tries to win over the captors by doing a silly jig, the other simply offers them Sprite. “There is nothing offensive in this ad,” says Martha Wariithi, a Kenyan by birth who is the director of knowledge and insights for Coca-Cola’s India and South West Asia unit. “It’s lighthearted … It fits very well for the positioning for Sprite in the market.”

Click here to read more.

RELATED STORIES

JUST CURIOUS: What Do You Think About The New Old Navy Commercial?

JUST CURIOUS: Can Furniture Be Racist?

This needs very few words:

You heard & saw right. A middle-class white family rapping about their “Swagger Wagon.” I don’t really even know where to begin.

It’s freaking hilarious, to be perfectly honest. And I suppose in one sense it’s a sign of how ubiquitous hip-hop culture has become, which could be a good thing.

Isn’t hip-hop about creativity? making something from nothing? counter-culture? revolution?

I guess this is the fate of all artforms: one day, they’ll be reduced to a snappy jingle to sell a car or something equally pedestrian (no pun intended.)

It just breaks my mother-fathering heart.

What do YOU think? Tell us!

RELATED:

JUST CURIOUS: Is Motherhood A Valid Excuse To Ditch The Army?

JUST CURIOUS: Is Nike Exploiting Tiger Woods?

HOT POSTS:

Charlie Murphy’s First Mother’s Day Without His Wife

LisaRaye’s 3 Tips For Single Mothers

Opinion: Tea Party Members Should Be Rounded Up & Jailed

Round-Up: Oil Spill Spells Disaster For Tourism & Local Industry

Caption This: What Is Rick Ross Trying To Say In This Photo?

5 Reasons J Lo Is Going From GIANT To Medium

How To Be Fashionably Daring

Click here to view photos:

Not one to be left out of the comedy-fray, Stephen Colbert weighs in with his ideas about what other voiceovers could have been on Tiger’s now-infamous Nike ad.

WATCH THIS:

JUST CURIOUS: Is Tiger’s New Nike Ad Exploiting Him?

Could this new Tiger Woods Nike spot be making his misfortune even more of a spectacle than it already is? Isn’t it a little weird that it makes mention of Woods’ two biggest sore spots: his dead father and his very public fall from grace? Hmm..

WATCH THIS:

I know for the most part, Black people didn’t care about Tiger before the scandal broke and care even less about him now. But how appropriate is Nike’s approach here: to take one of the most tragically pathetic scandals and turn it into profit… FOR TIGER?!

Then again, can’t hate the player… literally.

There was even this other ad on New York’s West Side Highway that I found to be pretty damn hilarious. Both the Nike ad and the Le Tigre are so cleverly executed that I just can’t hate on it. This is truly spinning straw into gold and I gotta hand it to Tiger…

He’s on a serious comeback tour. All I’m gonna say is: TIGER, TIGER WOODS YA’LL!!

What are your thoughts on the slightly bizarre Nike spot?

This week, Spc. Alexis Hutchinson, an Army cook based in Savannah, Georgia, was discharged instead of court-martialed for a trespass she committed back in November.

Text continues after gallery…

Hutchinson was arrested for skipping her deployment flight due to what she described as “child care” related issues. She couldn’t find someone to take care of her son during her deployment. The situation created quite a controversy about the validity of motherhood as an excuse to abandon the duties of a soldier and it threw the Army into such a tizzy that eventually, after months of fighting her suit, they simply discharged her. A court-martial would have required too much effort.

But a lot of you have had mixed opinions about this. Some say she was let off the hook too easily, that she had taken an oath and she didn’t uphold it. Some say that her role as a mother comes before her duties to her nation.

There has always been some controversy about women in the military and the complicated issues surrounding their service,  pregnancy and motherhood being among the most prominent. Is it fair to allow women in the military more allowances than other service members? Shouldn’t we all be treated equally and held accountable for the same things? Is it okay for a mother to ditch her responsibilities to her unit and her country because she’s a single mother? Should there be more consideration for single mothers over mothers with partners and family support?

But most interestingly, would we let a single father slide if he did the same thing?

The shifting standards for different groups within the military has been a long-standing issue but this one seems to have struck a nerve among many of our readers and we are curious to know more about what you think.

Are you serving in the military? Are you a single parent? Do you think that the Army was too lenient or do you feel they responded appropriately by giving her a break?

Let us know in the comments!!

RELATED:

JUST CURIOUS: Do Black People Really Like John Mayer?

JUST CURIOUS: Is Relaxing Your Hair A Celebration Of Black History?

No? Ok, maybe it’s just me. Lucky for you, however, my aimless time-wastage caused me to stumble across a real gem today: John “David Duke” Mayer. Don’t get the reference? Read on:

Basically, John Mayer, famous singer/songwriter of the caucasian persuasion (rhyme!) and Tweeter-extraordinaire, gave an eye-opening interview to Playboy magazine, in which he describes his sex life and sexual preferences in gross detail.

That, in itself, is no big deal. I mean, it’s Playboy, for Christ’s sake. What is interesting, however, is how much dude talked about race, specifically Black people. Mayer describes in one part of the interview how he has never really “opened himself up” to dating/sexing Black women:

“My dick is sort of like a white supremacist. I’ve got a Benetton heart and a fuckin’ David Duke cock.”

If you dutifully followed that link, you would discover that David Duke is a well-known Klan member and famed white supremacist. Meaning, John Mayer’s nether-regions are partial to white women, Klan-style…

Ladies, how about we inundate his Twitter to let him know what he’s missin’ out on????

In addition, he goes on to point out his acquisition of a “hood pass,” and coolly drops the N-word bomb like that’s in or something. What exactly qualifies a person to be a card-carrying member of the “hood”? And who issues said passes?

I guess being on Chappelle’s Show and being friends with ?uestlove makes you…. Blackable**? Who knew.

REMEMBER THIS?:

Or maybe it’s because John jams with BB King all the time. Him being a legitimate talent in the “blues guitarist” world and all. Is that enough to give him the necessary cred?

Look, I’m a fan of John. In fact, I’m listening to “Your Body’s A Wonderland” as I write this post.

“One mile to every inch of your skin like porcelain. One pair of candy lips and your bubblegum tongue.” …….

ANYWAY, all I’m saying is, do Black people really like John Mayer as much as he thinks they do? If so, at what point does liking the guy turn into wholesale co-signing dude when he drops the N-word??

If not, perhaps we should issue homeboy a new membership: to The “Idiot white people who try to be down… Plus, Michael Steele” Club.

WELCOME!

What are your thoughts about this hullabaloo? Funny? Entertaining? Racist? SPEAK!

**Blackable = “likable by Black people”; this term will, henceforth, be used to describe all manner of human who pretends to be down for street cred purposes. This can and does include Michael Steele. (I just like clowning on the guy, gimme a break.) You heard it here first!

RELATED:

JUST CURIOUS: Is Relaxing Your Hair A Celebration Of Black History?

JUST CURIOUS: Does Mocking The First Lady Make You Racist?

WARNING: Reading between the lines can lead to severe bouts of white-hot anger – no pun intended.

Read below! What do you think of this ad? Is this an acceptable way to celebrate Black History Month? If not, what would be more appropriate? SOUND OFF!

From Context.org:

In honor of Black History Month I thought I’d post this Family Dollar ad from last February, sent in by Gloria K.:

As Gloria says, “I guess nothing honors African-American heritage quite like cream relaxer.” Indeed. If only they’d included some skin lighteners, we’d really be set.

Click here to read more.

Text continues after gallery…

RELATED:

JUST CURIOUS: Is It Racist To “Forget” Someone’s Race?

JUST CURIOUS: Does Mocking The First Lady Make You A Racist?

Chris Matthews made the “mistake” of saying that he forgot the President was Black after last night’s State of the Union address. This is coming from an Obama-lover, a fanboy, if you will. I somehow highly doubt that Matthews meant that statement in the way that most critics seem to have taken it but it does raise another interesting question among the millions of queries raised since Obama’s election and, thereby, since race and racial politics became a part of dialogue among the nouveau political.

WATCH:

Matthews’ full comments:

I was trying to think about who he was tonight. It’s interesting: he is post-racial, by all appearances. I forgot he was black tonight for an hour. You know, he’s gone a long way to become a leader of this country, and past so much history, in just a year or two. I mean, it’s something we don’t even think about. I was watching, I said, wait a minute, he’s an African American guy in front of a bunch of other white people. And here he is president of the United States and we’ve completely forgotten that tonight — completely forgotten it. I think it was in the scope of his discussion. It was so broad-ranging, so in tune with so many problems, of aspects, and aspects of American life that you don’t think in terms of the old tribalism, the old ethnicity. It was astounding in that regard. A very subtle fact. It’s so hard to talk about. Maybe I shouldn’t talk about it, but I am. I thought it was profound that way. [Source: Huffington Post]

This is a complicated and tricky question. Does “forgetting” someone’s Blackness make them inherently racist? Does it make them a white supremacist, a person who believes that the default racial setting for all intelligent and articulate human beings is white? That’s a bit harsh, isn’t it?

Text continues after gallery…

At what point does it suddenly become politically incorrect to invoke the race of the President as something to be lauded? I mean, wasn’t that what we were ALL celebrating when he was elected? Now, it seems, that anyone still marveling at the fact that a Black man stands before Congress to give a State of the Union is “hung up on race.”

Still, on the other hand, I can understand how a hyper-racially-aware public can become inflamed over Matthews’ comment. I get that his show is live and all, but why not just avoid the whole topic of race altogether? If the point Matthews was trying to make was that “we’re beyond race” what is the logic of bringing it up in that context?

America is a fascinating place. What are your thoughts on Chris Matthews comment? Just curious…

RELATED:

JUST CURIOUS: Is “African-American Really A Race?”

JUST CURIOUS: Does Mocking The First Lady Make You A Racist?

FIRST, some mood music:

The basic storyline is that Scott Baio, aka Charles In Charge, aka Washed-Up-Sitcom-Star-With-A-Sex-Addiction-And-Reality-Show-On-Resume, posted an unflattering image of the First Lady on his Twitter with a caption that read, “WOW He wakes up to this every morning.” Of course, the mass of activist Twitterers took to the streets with their torches & pitchforks to condemn Baio for his blatant racism.

Activist Twitterers are stupid. Doesn’t the name just give it away? Despite that, Baio’s stupidity probably trumps them all. His response to the outpouring of First Lady support and Baio-condemnation was THIS.

Quote of the Day: “Do I look like I’m racist? This is Renee’s BEST frd. STOP USING THE RACE CARD!!!” – Scott Baio, referring to his wife Renee’s “BEST frd.”

Dear Scott,

No, you are not a racist for posting a heinous pic of the First Lady’s mug. You’re also not a racist for making the pointless and unfunny remark you made beneath it. I understand what’s at work: you’re boring and uninteresting and so you make extremely pedestrian jokes about people to try to act like you’re snarky and hip and relevant. I get it. Can’t hate on you for that.

But the WORST defense in the face of an accusation of racism is to say “I have Black friends! I’m not a racist.” And you took it a step further: that broad ain’t even YOUR friend! She’s your WIFE’s friend!

I have to make an appropriate reference to the unfailing wisdom of Ed Lover: C’mon SON!

Stick to “taking good care of meeeeee, like you’re one of the familyyyyyyy.”

Kthnxbai.

Love,
Naz

From Newser.com:

Scott Baio probably hasn’t had this many people gunning for him since Bugsy Malone. The actor posted a picture of Michelle Obama looking a bit crazed on Twitter yesterday with the comment, “WOW He wakes up to this every morning!” He was soon hit by an avalanche of angry responses, including some from fellow Republicans, E! Online reports.

The former sitcom star—whose number of followers quickly exploded to nearly 5,000—posted screenshots of death threats he had received and warned that the FBI had been contacted. “I am NOT making fun of any1,” Baio tweeted, posting a picture of a black woman he said was his wife’s best friend to counter accusations that he was being racist.

Click here to read more.

Because of the above picture, my buddy The Black Snob is just now regaining feeling in the left side of her face.

As I look at it, all I can think is: Kanye’s not that swoll.

That’s about it.

Far be it from me to disavow allegiance to calling out f*ckery–I make a living of it frankly and will probably snap about something or other in ten to fifteen minutes–but this just doesn’t bother me. It’s not that I don’t like it or will spend time defending it; it’s that I don’t really care.

Maybe it’s just me, but I think 2009 is the Year of Submission. Not submission in that people agreed to whatever was going on–the year started with The March on Washington II, transitioned into people acting a donkey at town halls and will end with people getting lumped up in Copenhagen–but rather a year in which things topped each other to the degree that, after a certain point, you just sort of shrugged and say “OK.”

This was a year that had no ceiling and apparently isn’t winding down. Stuff will continue going down until 11:59 on the 31st. Count on it.

Michael Jackson, along with every celebrity ever died, a dude shot up a military base and a serial killer’s bodies stunk up a neighborhood. And a cop shot Oscar Grant in the back on the BART platform. And the president was compared to Hitler daily. Tiger had sex with one out of every three cocktail waitresses in the United States.

Perhaps this pic has been brought to my attention far too late. As of December 21st, I can’t muster the strength to even kind of speculate as to why Dave LaChapelle wanted to make this happen. Nor can I speculate as to why Kanye wanted to carry a naked Lady Gaga, doing her best airbrushed blonde bombshell,  out of the jungle looking like a zombie Indiana Jones who spends his free time doing crunches in the antiquities wings of Egyptian museums.

I just don’t know. And I care less than I know.

So to this photo I say: OK. #KanyeShrug

What do you guys think? Is this offensive? Is the whole jungle, black/white situation curious? Sound off!

RELATED:

JUST CURIOUS: Is The NY Times’ “Colored” Gift Guide Racist?

JUST CURIOUS: Are You Racist For Opposing Health Care?

For those of you who don’t know, Publishers’ Weekly is a weekly trade magazine for literary agents, book publishers and librarians. In recent years, its primary focus has been book reviews.

All good, so far. This week, the week of December 14, 2009, PW released an issue focused on book reviews and trends in African-American publishing. I mean, why not, right? There’s been a lot going on in the Black literary world recently. Still good.

But here is where things start to unravel. This is the cover that finally made it to print:

As I often feel when these sorts of questionable images end up on covers of magazines, I am bewildered. I mean, I’m a media person. I know how many meetings and discussions happen before anything is solidified in print. We hash things out, we argue about the relevancy, we discuss the appropriateness of any imagery we choose.

Sure, everyone makes mistakes. But sometimes, the mistake can be so obvious that it’s hard to let it slide. This PW cover happens to fall in that category.

To be honest, I’m not sure how I actually feel about it. At first glance, it seems completely offensive and negatively stereotypical. I mean, the only thing missing is Farrakhan in the background. But after polling a few co-workers, it seems some Black people don’t really see anything wrong with it.

So, enlighten me, here: Is a cover like this an example of bad editorial judgment? Or is it really not that big of a deal?

This snafu started one hell of a Twitter controversy, so there must be some weight to it all, no?

On a blog called NYT Pick, the author criticized the New York Times for their recent annual Holiday Gift Guide, called “Of Color/Stylish Gifts.” Here’s what they said.

We don’t like to throw around words like “racist” in the same sentence as the NYT’s name, but there’s no other word we can think of to describe this page in the NYT’s annual Holiday Gift Guide — called “Of Color/Stylish Gifts” and aimed exclusively at the paper’s non-white readers.

They go on to outline the details of the “Of Color” gift guide.

Can you imagine the NYT designating a section of its Holiday Gift Guide to presents made “for and by white people”? Or Jews? Or Chinese? Of course you can’t.

We welcome NYTPicker readers of any color to click here and see the page for themselves.

The gift suggestions include:

– “The Mocha Guide To Military Life,” a book for black women whose husbands or boyfriends serve in the armed forces.

–”Hair Rules,” a hair-care product for a hair-stylist “hero to Michelle Obama and Alicia Keys” that includes a travel kit for kinky hair.

RELATED:

JUST CURIOUS: Are You Racist For Opposing Healthcare?

JUST CURIOUS: Can Obama & Monkeys Ever Appear In The Same Ad?

WATCH:

Both were contentious issues argued about on the Senate floor; both were issues affecting Black people disproportionately; both freaked White people out enough to have them screaming bloody murder at the mere mention of “federal government.”

Seems like a sound enough argument to me! But wait… could there be a disconcerting undertone to all this? What’s race got to do with healthcare, anyway?

(A lot. You’d want to check this, this & this out to learn more.)

All this is to say that there seems to be a definite & palpable hypothesis the Democratic party is trying to advance: if you’re against healthcare, you’re a racist. And, with a Black president, you certainly don’t wanna be caught with that glove on. Do you?

Seemingly in response to this, there’s a great YouTube campaign going on called, “I Guess I’m A Racist.”

WATCH:

If I’m honest, I stopped caring about healthcare when I realized it’s the “Hope&Change” trojan horse. You know, except it’s filled with crazy-eyed lobbyists that are hell-bent on making sure D.C. continues on the “More Of The Same” bus we all thought we de-boarded on November 4, 2008.

SURPRISE! (?)

But my favorite part of this “I Guess I’m A Racist,” thing is how they cleverly get a couple Black people in there. Like, “Hey, see, it’s a Black person.. against healthcare.. I guess you think this BLACK PERSON is racist toooo, Harry Reid?! *scoff scoff scoff*.” The people behind this video really, truly understand race politics in this country. (GROAN)

What do you think? Is it racist to be against health care reform? Is there a real comparison to be drawn between slavery & health care? Does race even play a role here or is everyone just going nuts?

Share your thoughts in the comments!

From Think Progress

This latest national edition of the Washington Times features a full-page ad that claims that President Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States. The ad was purchased by the anti-Obama website ProtectOurLiberty.org. While the group has placed several birther ads in the Washington Times in recent months, the version that ran this morning contains far more inflammatory imagery — three monkeys, apparently intended to represent the U.S. Congress, courts, and the media:

Click Here For More

RELATED STORIES

BlackPlanet Speaks Out Against NY Post’s “Chimp” Cartoon!

UPDATE: NAACP Responds to Murdoch’s Apology

From HuffingtonPost.com:

Universal changed “Couples Retreat” marketing material for the film’s UK release, and removed the black actors from both the poster’s photo and the list of stars typed out.

The film, which features four couples who go on vacation together, costars Faizon Love as a divorced man who takes his new girlfriend along, played by Kali Hawk.

Below are the UK (left) and the US (right) poster.

The Mail on Sunday reports:

The studio said it regretted causing offence and has abandoned plans to use the revised poster in other countries… A Universal spokesman said the revised advert aimed ‘to simplify the poster to actors who are most recognisable in international markets’.

Click here to read more.

RELATED STORIES

JUST CURIOUS: Do All Black People Look Alike?

JUST CURIOUS: Is Blackface Always Racist?

From the NY Times:

Where’s my pancakes, read Rodney Bradford’s Facebook page, in a message typed on Saturday, Oct. 17, at 11:49 a.m., from a computer in his father’s apartment in Harlem.

At the time, the sentence, written in indecipherable street slang, was just another navel-gazing, cryptic Facebook status update — words that were gobbledygook to anyone besides Mr. Bradford.

But when Mr. Bradford, a skinny, short 19-year-old resident of the Farragut Houses, was arrested the next day as a suspect in a robbery, the words took on a level of importance that no one in their wildest dreams — least of all Mr. Bradford — could have imagined. They became his alibi.

His defense lawyer, Robert Reuland, told a Brooklyn assistant district attorney, Lindsay Gerdes, about the Facebook entry, which was made at the time of the robbery. The district attorney subpoenaed Facebook to verify that the status update had actually been typed from a computer located at 71 West 118th Street in Harlem, as Mr. Bradford said. When that was confirmed, the charges were dropped.

Click here to read more.

RELATED STORIES

Black Man Pleads Guilty Of Impersonating White Supremacist On Facebook

Another Racist GOP Facebook Blooper

Let me rewind and provide some context. Yesterday afternoon, I was casually scrolling through Twitter, checking out people’s tweets and what not, and I came across the Twitter trending topics. It’s a wonderful little nugget nestled on the right rail of the site – a place where you can get a quick glance at what the hottest topics  in the twitter-verse are.

And you know what the NUMBER ONE trending topic was? Guess.. *cue Jeopardy music*

Give up? It was “things darkies say.” Not a joke. People became so inflamed that by the time I refreshed my page to get all the newest tweets in this thread, the topic had been taken off the list. Power of the internet, people.

The thing that’s interesting about this is the vocabulary. Many of the people responding to this meme (which, by the way, you can still search for on twitter) were of 2 types: they were either outraged & offended by the word “darkie” or you were immune to its otherwise vitriolic implications because in South Africa, apparently, “darkie is the same thing as the n-word.” Faulty logic, I know.

But after seeing how much of a hot topic this became on a site accessible to people from around the world, how swiftly the topic was removed after hearing outraged members, and how the “thingsdarkiessay” meme bore an illegitimate child, “SouthAfricansarePissed,” it begs the question: how important are the words that we use to describe each other & others? Is it ok to re appropriate formerly oppressive language for our own benefit, or is that argument a bit passe?

And, perhaps more interestingly, all communities of color have internal vocabulary, things they only say to each other and never around white people: Should we just learn to keep that shit to ourselves?

Remember this, for example?:

Are you any of you on Twitter? Did you witness the #thingsdarkiessay meme? What are your thoughts?

But somehow, MSNBC reporter Contessa Brewer, mistook Rev. Jesse Jackson to be Rev. Al Sharpton. And the Rev didn’t seem to like that…

Woops! The two Rev’s don’t look alike AT ALL, but, let’s give Contessa the benefit of the doubt…..

I might have mistaken her for Campbell Brown.

WATCH the slip-up here:

What do you think about this? Funny? Honest mistake? Speak on it!

RELATED:

JUST CURIOUS: Is It Racist To Hate On The White Miss Hampton?

JUST CURIOUS: Is Blackface Always Racist?

This Miss Hampton controversy has gotten entirely out of hand. But, being a news-chaser myself, I’m hooked.

Here’s the question: What is the big deal about having a white girl win the Miss Hampton beauty contest? After all, there is precedent for this type of non-white representation of a historically Black institution. For example, take Joshua Packwood who in 2008 became the first white Valedictorian of Morehouse College, a well-known and well-respected HBCU.

No one made a stink about THAT. People let that slide. In fact, the event was lauded as an achievement in the long struggle for multi-culturalism and equality. Oh, how the tables had turned, they said! A white boy, a minority among his university peers, had earned the highest academic honor his alma mater had to offer. He rose above the fray. An Obama in reverse!

And yet, here we are, a full year later, reacting in the exact OPPOSITE fashion towards Nikole Churchill, the white girl from Hawaii who managed to be crowned Miss Hampton University in the school’s annual beauty pageant.

Putting my opinion of beauty pageants in general aside, why has there been such an intense visceral reaction, specifically from women, about this? Word on the street is, it’s a slap in the face of all of her Black pageant-mates, each of whom also exhibited beauty, poise and intelligence. Moreover, (and here’s the pesky seed of controversy) they’re all BLACK! At a BLACK institution! Go figure. It seems that in this gnarly world of HBCU amateur beauty pageantry, being Black is an ultimate pre-requisite to winning the … plastic tiara.

Sure, there are no real rules prohibiting Ms. Churchill from entering but the prevailing opinion seems to be that letting her run is just so the Pageant board can appear welcoming of their non-Black fellow students. As one observer who attended a different HBCU said, “They should have just picked the girl they believed to be #2. Because SHE was Black.”

Hmm. This seems chock full of nuts, don’t it?

The biggest difference between the victories of Joshua Packwood at Morehouse and Nikole Churchill at Hampton, the two “subjugated minorities” on their respective campuses, seems to be the fact that Packwood’s success was based on empirical, objective data. It was his GPA, purely, that earned him the honor of becoming valedictorian. For Churchill, it was the subjective opinion of a panel of judges, that apparently ultimately decided she was the “fairest of them all.” Pun TOTALLY intended.

So what do you think? Is it racist to feel a white girl shouldn’t win a beauty pageant at an HBCU simply because she isn’t Black? In that case, should HBCU’s be admitting non-Black students at all? Where do we draw the line here?

Also, why the hell are colleges and universities even HOSTING these events? This is high-school-grade one-upmanship at its finest. These HBCUs began as institutions meant to uplift and empower African-Americans with a quality education, as many of the most astute BP members pointed out. So why are events such as these so huge? How do they become so politically charged? Why don’t HBCUs feel empowered and PROUD that the quality of the education they provide has attracted people from every walk of life, every race? That somehow, over the course of time, these historically Black institutions are no longer relegated to the fringe of prestigious American education; that they are now counted among the most competitive institutions in our nation and that they produce some of the most sought-after talent. Shouldn’t they be cheering and jumping for joy that they have become the beacons of diversity and opportunity that they originally sought to be?

The race card, while often played brilliantly and with good reason, in this case seems to fall short. This whole Miss Hampton controversy really reverses the camera lens and focuses it right back onto the community of nay-sayers who have to confront their OWN racial biases.

Just because you have been historically subjugated and now attend a historically Black college or university that celebrates your particular history, does not entitle you to REPEAT said history.

Just sayin’.

So to answer the above posed question: Is it racist to hate on the white Miss Hampton? It sure as hell is.

I came into the office this morning and had this video sitting, innocently, in my inbox:

At first glance, there’s nothing particularly curious about it. It’s blatantly racist. 5 guys in blackface, dancing around minstrel-style to some Jackson Five lyrics. This isn’t anything new, but perhaps moreso than in cultures across the planet, the United States has implicitly outlawed such “buffoonery.” What can pass as cheaply humorous in Australia is downright unacceptable here in the U.S.A. We, as a society, have unanimously decided that when white men paint their faces black in order to “entertain,” it is always in poor taste and is never actually funny.

…Or is it? Even Harry Connick, Jr., a judge on the above show who voiced his offense at the end of the clip, had his very own blackface-moment on Mad TV:

Sure, his black-face isn’t that, well… Black. But, the inflection is on point. No surprise either since Connick, Jr. was brought up in New Orleans and leans heavy on jazz culture. So, is it acceptable for a white actor to successfully play a Black character? Is it only okay for a serious role and not for a comedic one that could be confused as being antagonistic?

How about when roles are reversed? Is it never entertaining when a Black actor plays a white person, a la Eddie Murphy on his Delirious comedy tape?:

You’re laughing, aren’t you? Stop lyin!

And what about all those Obama impersonators out there, the most famous of which isn’t even Black! (Fred Armisen on SNL.) He’s not Black but he plays a Black man – not just ANY Black man, but the Black President of the United States! And it’s totally not funny! YET, no one raises concerns about his blackface. Have you seen AlphaCat? Much much funnier:

So is the degree of offense taken based on the actual comedic quality of the blackface impersonation? Or is blackface just ALWAYS out of line? And if blackface is ALWAYS out of line, should Whiteface be outlawed as well? Where do we draw the line on this?

As you ponder these questions, I leave you with one of the most disturbing and, yet, most brilliantly executed blackface moments of contemporary film. HAHA!:

From HuffingtonPost.com:

The NRA is taking aim at Mayor Bloomberg, New Yorkers, and apparently the mafia (who one would think would be some of the gun rights group’s biggest supporters) in new television ads airing in Virginia.

In the commercial supporting GOP gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell, an actor whose “mob” accent sounds closer to Hugh Grant in Mickey Blue Eyes (if you haven’t seen the film, it’s about as good as you imagine) than a local wiseguy, explains to Virginia voters that it would be in their best interest not to vote for McDonnell if they “know what’s good” for them.

This whole re-evaluation got me thinking about these advertisements as art. I mean, art directors design them, right? And art & creativity is involved at all levels of executing a semi-offensive campaign of any kind, right? If it makes it to the airwaves, the magazines or the interwebs, chances are someone along the line thought it could pass, right?

That brought me to this very interesting question: Is it okay for art to be racist? When is something racist and when is it actually purposeful and subversive?

You see, I’m a design-nut and I troll the web’s endless array of design, art & craft blogs. During one of these forays, I came across a rather interesting wall-treatment company who does some very … strange things with wallpaper.

At first glance, this looks like regular wall-paper right? Vintage, a little like grandma’s house, totally innocuous, right?:

Look a little closer, however:

HMMMM. Well, isn’t that clever? Hiding a totally anachronistic image of misrepresented current realities in a wall-scape that, in general, evokes a very antithetical feeling: the comfort & security of grandma’s house. The thing is, this might be acceptable if it were an intelligent commentary on the state of race relations in this country and in this world. But I doubt it. I think it’s really meant to just be a “funny” conversation starter in some random person’s living room.
Just imagine yourself seated around a vintage cherry-wood dining table, nibbling away at your walnut & cranberry salad. A guest notices the hidden image and all of a sudden, you’re all laughing and joking about its irony and hilarity. Somehow, this would just make me weirdly uncomfortable.

Can it pass because it’s “art” and therefore belongs to a category of expression not really open to the type of criticism I apply to advertisements? Am I just crazy for thinking this is a really weird thing to have on your wall? Not to mention the fact that the image represents race in THE most stereotypical and negative way: “big scary Black guy” aiming a gun at a slight, scared white woman. Great.

Maybe if this art was more powerfully subversive the way Kara Walker’s work (see below) is, I’d feel a little more compelled to cut this artist slack:

What do you think?

Just curious..

I know, I know. My job is serious – seriously dangerous. I’m currently blogging from Afghanistan, in the war-torn ruins of ancient cities, trying as I might to find some peace in this, hell on earth. Lucky for me, I’ve come prepared: I’ve got the LAPTOP BURKA!!

…..Just kidding. But really, if I were, I’d definitely put this product on the company tab. After all, it’s only right that I am allowed to blog “in a glare-free, psychologically separate space.” Note the double entendre: “glare,” as in annoying & distracting reflection of light on a computer screen and “glare,” as in the pathological and psychologically troublesome, Freudian ‘glare’ of men towards women which consciously & unconsciously sexualizes females and contributes to all the social ills on this planet. Clever, no?

Anyway, while this “Laptop Burka” might have SOME (however obscure) redeemable usability, naming it the “Laptop Burka” probably means that the geeks responsible for this massive slip-up spend more time in their “portable private space” than out in the real-world.

Perhaps a better name would be the “Loser Cocoon.”

What do you think?

NB: Check out the comments in the link. The makers of said “Laptop Burka” have responded with a justification… groan.

Some people wonder where I get my material for this column. Frankly, it’s not that difficult.

This winner comes to us from Harlem, New York City. NEW YORK CITY!!! And what’s worse? This soda isn’t stocked in some obscure, back-alley corner shop. Oh no. It’s in… TARGET!

WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON, PEOPLE?!

Am I crazy for thinking THIS is crazy? Speak on it.

Have you heard the news? If you’ve got any plans to drive down Desolation Row, legendary singer-songwriter Bob Dylan might help guide your way. Dylan is set to voice a GPS system and companies are currently bidding to be his host.

Naturally, this got us thinking about similarly unmistakable black voices of yore, and what it might be like to have them telling you to turn left: voices like Nat King Cole, Ray Charles, James Earl Jones and….. DeLexus Hennessy.

Yes, you read right. In an inexplicable campaign by Garmin, leading manufacturer of in-car navigation systems, a custom character has been created to lead you to your destination. DeLexus is just your average “loveable ghetto fabulous street queen,” who promises you sass, street smarts and terrible enunciation, ie “Turn lef’”.

I can’t begin to imagine the amount of sheer, unbridled, astronomical stupidity it requires to come up with something quite this idiotic and distasteful. This, too, from an otherwise well-known, nearly household name, Garmin. But, alas… This is America, land of opportunity.

CLICK HERE to play the sample. Try to contain your rage as she opens with, “Wasssuuuppppp??!!! You clicked on me?!”

If you like this product, you’re in luck: it also comes in a spicy Latin flavor.

What do you think?