Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Movies

Journal Em Emalb's Journal: Before you read this... 32

Journal by Em Emalb

...make sure you stop by here and post a reply. Doing a little matrix thingy.

Anyhow.

here is today's perplexing situation:

Have you seen the Smirnoff Ice commercial with the rappers cutting a video? If not, let me educate you on the matter.

The rappers, all black, are sitting around a house or something, and the main artist is listening/watching his their latest video. No big deal. Soon, however, he notices something "wrong" with the video, and calls his friends over to have a look. Video zooms in, two white dudes dancing with the female dancers. Rappers frantically try to explain to each other they "thought they were with you".

Now, the non-cynic in me says no big deal, they are just making fun of the way the two dudes (who just happen to be white) are dancing. Right? Well, therein lies the rub.

I don't think so. I think it's a thinly veiled reverse-discrimination angle being played by our "friends" at Smirnoff. The way I look at it is like this.

Say the commercial opened up with a group of white guys sitting around watching a video. White guy 1 says to the other white guys, hey, zoom in on this: Camera zooms in to show two black men dancing. I can see the outrage already. Racism would be the cry all across the land. So, I ask you, is this commercial thinly veiled racism, or do I need to quit being so sensitive?

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Before you read this... More

Before you read this...

Comments Filter:
  • Yes, it is racism. In this instance, it is 'thinly veiled'. Were the tables turned, it would no longer be 'thinly veiled', it would be accompanied by boycotts, lawsuits, etc.

    Welcome to being a white male.

    Look at the sexist commercials that imply men can't cook, watch over the baby, etc.

    Anorexics and bulemics have eating disorders. They make disease-of-the-week movies about them. Obese people are just fat lazy blimps who need to get off their dead ass.

    Poor people are the salt of the earth and at the mercy of their situation. Rich people are living large on the sweat of others.

    I still think it's a funny commercial.

    • They make disease-of-the-week movies about them.

      And then glamorize them on magazine covers.

      Bleh.

      My solution to anorexia;

      If a person see's themselves as being fat, err;

      so what?

      It is a perceptual problem. If they stopped caring that they 'looked' fat, then they would not be starving themselves to look thinner.

      Oh, and while I have not seen disease (or, in this case, disorder) of the week /movies/ about being overweight, I have seen disorder of the week reports on the news and through other media outlets about the various potential causes for overeating and such.

      Having a slow ass metabolism myself (It takes my body ~24 hours to process food that goes in me. How in the world do the rest of you get by having to go to the bathroom multiple times a day? :-D ^_^ ) I do my best to get lots and lots of exercise. I will likely blimp up in my later years though, heh, depressing thought, but, aah, oh well.
      • is often more about control than weight. People might start off starving themselves because they think they look fat, but one reason that it can spiral out of control is because they like the feeling of being in control of at least one part of their life. They learn to crave hunger because hunger means that they have succeeded in depriving themselves of food, not because it means that they will lose another 15 pounds this week.
        • Saying giving condoms to kids makes them have sex is like saying turning on your headlights causes the sun to go down

          No, but it creates a situation of social acceptance of the children having sex.

          The issue should be scandalized for both parties and the male should be turned into a social pariah.

          If having premarital sex meant that a person was completely barred off from society, well, that would be one heck of a deterrent.

          is often more about control than weight.

          Now that I did not know, thanks for the heads up. :)
          • "No, but it creates a situation of social acceptance of the children having sex."

            Uhm, I disagree here. As evident in your own journal, young people think about sex enough/act on it enough that sex is going to occur whether a condom is passed out or not.

            "The issue should be scandalized for both parties and the male should be turned into a social pariah."

            Your logic is faulty. It's not strictly the males fault for having sex with the female. Hmm, last I checked, it takes two to tango, and women (by God they better!) have a direct say in what occurs to their body. Why do so many people think it's the sole responsibility of the male when it comes to sex? It's two people doing what people do.
            • Why do so many people think it's the sole responsibility of the male when it comes to sex? It's two people doing what people do.

              BAH WHAT THE HOLY HELL ARE YOU DOOOOOOOOOIIIIIIIINNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGG??????????aaaa aaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

              I am trying to fight against the OPPOSITE stereotype the one that says it is the WOMAN'S FAULT and ONLY the woman's fault for having sex!

              Yee gads, what planet are you living on where MEN are held responsible??? Please give me the coordinates and travel instructions, I want to see how the social dynamics there work!!!

              There is not even a WORD in the English language that is a masculine semantic equivalent to "slut" or "whore". Bleck. Once a word for that is come up with and put into wide acceptance THEN may society start to reach some level of equivalence in views on gender roles.

              Uhm, I disagree here. As evident in your own journal, young people think about sex enough/act on it enough that sex is going to occur whether a condom is passed out or not.

              Uh. The condom is besides the point

              it is the underlying social conditions which create for a situational allowance of sex between unmarried couples.

              Compare the standards of two high schoolers fucking in the back of a car to the situation of Rosia and I;

              If Rosia and I had sex then she would likely be beaten to near death by Her family and I would be forced to commit suicide[*1] out of shame.

              (and nO I am not exaggerating in either case).

              Now, seriously, what do you think the chances of Rosia and I having sex are?

              oooh, lets see. About, uh, nil. Duuuh. Proper social conditions can setup a situation where improper action cannot occur.

              [*1] actually it would be slightly delayed since there is noooooooo way I am cutting my wrists and a proper guaranteed one shot no pain poison would take awhile to get the ingredients together for. (There is a difference between shamed to death and "feeling need to submit self to lots of pain." I am a wises, I do not like pain. ;) )
              • Hmm messed up that one, hit preview, obviously should of hit it one more time. . . .

                Why do so many people think it's the sole responsibility of the male when it comes to sex? It's two people doing what people do.

                BAH WHAT THE HOLY HELL ARE YOU DOOOOOOOOOIIIIIIIINNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGG??????????aaaa aaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

                I am trying to fight against the OPPOSITE stereotype the one that says it is the WOMAN'S FAULT and ONLY the woman's fault for having sex!

                Yee gads, what planet are you living on where MEN are held responsible??? Please give me the coordinates and travel instructions, I want to see how the social dynamics there work!!!

                There is not even a WORD in the English language that is a masculine semantic equivalent to "slut" or "whore". Bleck. Once a word for that is come up with and put into wide acceptance THEN may society start to reach some level of equivalence in views on gender roles.

                Uhm, I disagree here. As evident in your own journal, young people think about sex enough/act on it enough that sex is going to occur whether a condom is passed out or not.

                Uh. The condom is besides the point

                it is the underlying social conditions which create for a situational allowance of sex between unmarried couples.

                Compare the standards of two high schoolers fucking in the back of a car to the situation of Rosia and I;

                If Rosia and I had sex then she would likely be beaten to near death by Her family and I would be forced to commit suicide[*1] out of shame.

                (and no I am not exaggerating in either case).

                Now, seriously, what do you think the chances of Rosia and I having sex are?

                oooh, lets see. About, uh, nil. Duuuh. Proper social conditions can setup a situation where improper action cannot occur.

                [*1] actually it would be slightly delayed since there is noooooooo way I am cutting my wrists and a proper guaranteed one shot no pain poison would take awhile to get the ingredients together for. (There is a difference between shamed to death and "feeling need to submit self to lots of pain." I am a wises, I do not like pain. ;) )
  • Lots of racism jokes going both ways on Saturday Night Live. Not that the jokes are funny anymore, but, hey, whatever.

    I think that the joke in this case is more about making fun of white dudes trying to act black, but hey, whatever.

    That and turning around the entire "Black dudes going after white gals" thing into a "white dudes going after black gals" thing. Just playing around with social stereotypes.

    (being both part African American and Caucasian, I can make fun of aaaaall you mofos out there. :) )
  • Reverse racism is very much alive in America today. Unfortunately, everyone is afraid to take it up as an issue. I'm glad you are, but obviously you aren't a much read news source.
    • Dude, you need to let your anonymous freak blogspot poster dude know that he posted BEFORE you did this time. He's slipping. He better not let it happen again, I'll be disappointed.

      I don't know which is worse, racism or reverse-racism. Both teach hate, which is never good.
      • heh. I love that guy. He guarantees at least one reply to my comments. I think he'll leave eventually...
        I would post all my private information on the web so I can prove I am not Kristian/bloghit guy, but I'd be an idiot.

        Why people think I run bloghit
        A troll named joe was rooting through all the links in a google cut n' paste operation by a one Tyler_Durdin. He saw one of the Google links had a referral through bloghit.

        Then: klerck decided Chainrust == pumpernickel/tyler_durdin. He has shut up about it now, because he knows he's wrong (different IP's). But joe still thinks I'm pumpernickel/td, and he goes around following my posts. Kinda fun, because it always guarantees one reply.
      • I don't know which is worse, racism or reverse-racism. Both teach hate, which is never good.

        Em, there's no such thing as "reverse racism." Racism is racism is racism; there's no default "good/bad" stance.

        Calling black people disliking white people "reverse-racism" implies that it's different than whites who don't like blacks, and so it allows it to continue without a stigma.

        "I am very proud of my Black Jewish heritage."
  • Why does it have to be about black or white at all? Why couldn't they use an Asian guy and a Hipanic? Then there's no bias. Right?

    Do you really want "American Culture" to be one bland brand of Gerber strained peas, just so everyone can get along? (Oops, too late; looks like it already is a bland brand [msnbc.com]. Sorry.)

    • "Why does it have to be about black or white at all?"

      I don't know. That's my point. Why does it have to be about black and white? Asian guy and Hispanic guy is still racism.

      As far as wanting American culture to be bland, no, I don't want that. I want people to judge me on my actions and thoughts, not my f-ing skin color. That would be nice.

      • I don't know. That's my point. Why does it have to be about black and white? Asian guy and Hispanic guy is still racism.

        Well, something to think about -- does the joke make sense if you change the races around? Not really -- the commercial is making fun of the 'white frat-boy dance', which, like it or not, really *does* exist. If you don't believe me, head to any northeastern small-town tier 1 college frat party, wait 'till it's good and going, and tell me you don't see almost *exactly* what you see on the commercial.

        I don't really see this as racism, because racism infers that there is some harm being done. White guys who can't dance aren't denied anything because of the fact -- there's nothing really negative about it. It doesn't seem to me that there's an insult, just a socio-political commentary. Yup, it's making fun of the white boy - but it's not questioning the value of said white boy. It's like making fun of women who go to the bathroom in herds. It's not an insult, it's quite true, and it's funny.

        As Com2Kid pointed out, put the commercial in the context of SNL. It fits perfectly -- SNL is very willing to make fun of the racial sterotypes that are both mildly true and mildly funny.

        • head to any northeastern small-town tier 1 college frat party, wait 'till it's good and going, and tell me you don't see
          Wuh? Sorry, I was distracted. Yes, by the twins over there in the corner, next to the guy on the floor with the cheetos and fruit loops all over him.
        • I am glad you can see the humor in the commercial, I see it as well. However, and to reiterate in my original post, if you had reversed the situation, you would have had quite the outcry. That was my point.

          Yes, poking fun at people is ok, but you know as well as I do that it wasn't just about 2 white dudes that can't dance. In the same vein, why not pick two hispanic guys, or a couple of native americans? Oh, that would be racism!
          • why not pick two hispanic guys, or a couple of native americans?

            If you picked two guys from a different race, there's no joke. The joke is: White Guys Can't Dance. It's not Hispanic guys, or Native American Guys, or any other guys for that matter. It's not that picking another race makes it racism -- picking another race loses the joke.

            In the same vein, the original Iron Chef is hilarious. It *doesn't* work when you make everyone white. The joke is the Japanese stlye of TV, the bad voiceovers, and everything that comes with the change in culture. It's not racism, but when you change the race, you lose the joke.

            • "If you picked two guys from a different race, there's no joke. The joke is: White Guys Can't Dance."

              Well, I think our definitions of racism differ, and that's ok. So, to get the semi-official definition of racism, i went out to everybody's favorite, dictionary.com here is what they had to say:

              The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

              So, who's right and wrong? Maybe both of us, maybe neither. I just think the commercial is going about it the wrong way.
  • See, the reason why I love the soprano's is that they are very cognizant that the Italian anti defamation league is totally against them. They also realize that they produce such a quality product that real italians (especially those like myself from the NY/NJ area) don't care.

    But they do their duty to slip in some pro-italian commentary. and last nights (in re: Columbus day) was super-duper. I mean, totally first rate. Right down to where Hesh nearly bites the head off that cuban guy for throwing around (what's ubiquitous around here) a "hitler" reference...

    Watch the episode on HBO. Its some good isht.
  • I hate jokes about white people and dumb men. It's funny sometimes, because we should all laugh at ourselves. However, when they do it repeatedly, it gets tiresome. If I can help it, I'd never buy a product from a company that put men down.

    In all fairness, though, there is a commercial about a how a woman saw a "70% off Sale" sign when the camera zipped right by a store window in a flash, during a bike race. That plays on the stereo type that women love shopping. Funny sometimes, but not if it is the punchline of every commercial. I get the impression that commercial makers are wising up a little, and starting to lay off of these stereo-typical man jokes. They'd be wise to lay off completely, and then bring back an even spread after the new year, when we've all forgotten that there ever was an issue.

    It's really not to their advantage either. I noticed that a lot of these cleaning commercials show beautiful women who wear nice clothes, as opposed to oppressed house wives that are barefoot, pregnant and wearing rags.

    If we really want respect, though, we should speak down on shows that play up that type of a stereo-type, like the "Man Show".

Slashdot Top Deals

Algol-60 surely must be regarded as the most important programming language yet developed. -- T. Cheatham

Close