Media Moment...Key & Peele: Gay Marriage legalized

This past week I came across an episode of Comedy Central's new show Key & Peele. Similar to the Chapelle show format, Key & Peele star in their own sketches typically rooted in satirizing stereotypes, social normatives, and political issues. I was initially intrigued by the show after watching one of its early commercials (which can be viewed here) noticing that the were directly challenging and commenting on cultural and social schemas as it relates to the people of color as well as the white community (the majority of their sketches can be viewed on youtube).

In this particular skit the two actors play two gay men in front of what appears to be a city hall building celebrating the legalizing of gay marriage. 

Key's character is more reserved while his partner is much more flamboyant and outgoing. It's interesting to note how in their dialogue, Key's character constantly brings up the fact that the idea of marriage is something that he is not necessarily convinced of quite yet as opposed to his partner who fantasizes about their future. This back and forth between the two challenges certain schemas and hegemonic structures. Those being: B) Marriage is bliss or equates to happiness and that B) the legalizing of marriage constitutes or represents the desire of every LGBT individual. The skit supports the idea that marriage requires just as much consideration for the homosexual individual as do heterosexual couples, offering a different take on the subject then what is normally displayed in mainstream media. While this is a comedic sketch, its subtext is one of a much more serious and necessary discussion in both homosexual and heterosexual circles as to what are the implications of marriage beyond simply a government passed privileged. These types of conversations are typically not raised in mainstream media or in a 20/20 segment for instance yet Key & Peele are using comedy as a medium to offer smart and funny takes on these issues. By doing this they are in some sense unifying the personal and individual struggles of people and not just heterosexuals as it relates to marriage. The idea of marriage is not simply a debate between couples in heterosexual couples but rather one that is equally important in both sectors, and Key & Peele continue to use their sketches to tackle the notions of marriage. 

Question: Why do you feel that these kinds of discussions are not presented in mainstream media? In your opinion can the comedic structure allow the issues to be taken more seriously or do these issues need to be presented in a different context? Are we in a post-gay society where these issues are diminishing or have we simply neglected these kinds of conversations and why? 

Discussion Points for Homa Hoodfar's "The Veil in Their Minds and On Our Heads"

Information About The Article:

Homa Hoodfar illuminates the reader with the origins of the various veils worn by Muslim women and explains the ways in which the veil has been used by both Westerners and Muslims alike to facilitate their own person goals for either continued oppression or liberation. As Hoodfar states “veiling is a lived experience full of contradictions and multiple meanings” (Pg. 5).  Some women wear it because it is so socially ingrained that a proper women wears it and that to do otherwise makes them feel naked.  Some women wear it to fight the oppressive colonial influence in the Middle East and North Africa.  Some women wear it as a symbol of feminine empowerment.  Hoodfar points out that the veil is not directly forced by Islam, and instead has been adopted through interpretations of religious text.  The misconceptions and misinterpretations of the veil and it’s actual place in Islam and Muslim culture illustrates the underlying ignorance and racism of Western culture towards Muslims.  The Western patriarchy uses the veil as a way to show how good women in the west have it, and they should be grateful they aren’t oppressed in such a way, thus reinforcing the patriarchy.  This is mentality then permeates Western feminists and they in turn try to implement their feminist belief structures on Third World Women, with no care for these women’s actual desires for equality, thus perpetuating the oppression and ignorance. As Homa Hoodfar explains this forces Muslim women  to choose between fighting racism and fighting sexism, and in her opinion they shouldn't have to choose at all.

Questions For The Class:

Before reading this article did you know the history of veiling, or the realities of the practice?

How far have we come since the 90’s in regards to understanding veiling and the various ways in which it is used considering how veiling has since been outlawed in some countries in the West? 

Do you believe countries have a right to ban veiling?

Do you believe veiling to be oppressive and a reinforcement of a patriarchal system?

Lucy Liu to play Watson on new Sherlock Holmes Adaptation

Actress Lucy Liu

Veteran television and film actress Lucy Liu has been cast to play Sherlock Holmes' loyal sidekick, Watson, in a pilot episode of a new CBS adaptation of the popular detective stories.  The show, "Elementary" is being marketed as a modern, updated retelling of the Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's beloved short stories.  It comes at a time when the BBC's "Sherlock" - also a modernized version - has been a critical and commercial success in spite of its somewhat radical approach.  Liu's character, Jane Watson, is a former surgeon and NYPD consultant who platonically assists Sherlock Homes in solving mysterious crimes. 

Although this is not the first time that a woman has filled the role of Watson on the small screen, Liu's status as an Asian American woman has sparked more than a little controversy across the web following the breaking of this news.  The Guardian's TV & Radio blog scoffed at the idea, writing,

Now, the easiest thing to do when presented with this news would be to slap your head in despair. Watson? A woman? What madness is this? Won't this cancel out the asexual ambiguity of Sherlock's character? Why stop there? Why not make Watson a child, or a alien, or a rapping cartoon animal?

 Comparing, even equating, a woman in the role of Watson to an alien or a "rapping cartoon animal" playing the character is, at least to me, extremely offensive.   Even more so is the author's absurd claim that Holmes' sexual ambiguity will certainly be comprised by the addition of a female Watson.  In his opinion, apparently, men and women cannot work together productively without a relationship or sexual intrigue developing.

The shock and resistance to a female, Asian Watson is clearly quite fierce.  A meme even appeared on Buzzfeed which illustrates more blowback to the idea of Liu as Watson:

It bears mentioning that the Sherlock Holmes series of short stories was written by a Scottish author, and first appeared in 1887.  At that time in Europe, more than a century ago, most detectives and their assistants (and, moreover, most publishers of literature) were privileged white men.  Since then, these stories have been enjoyed by many people from all walks of life and society itself has changed dramatically.  That the characters in our modern myths, such as Sherlock Holmes, could or should reflect this shifting social structure, seems to me an incontrovertible matter.  That is not to say that "Elementary" as a television program will be good or bad - just that its quality should not be assessed even before it has been released, solely on the casting director's choice of an actor of a certain gender or race. 

How do my classmates feel about this casting decision? What are the potential positive and negative effects that such a casting could have on this program? Do you think (or even, hope) that this could be part of a trend in more-inclusive casting of women/minorities into "traditional" characters?

Expedia Commercial Endorses Asian Male Inferiority

 

Our last week's analysis in desexualization of the Asian male brought forward my attention to the new Expedia commercial, released in January of 2012. The above clip shows Michael Ian vacationing around the world, filling the role of the dominant, white, heterosexual male. Towards the end of the clip, Ian is seen to be pursuing a woman, when he is interrupted by an Asian man wearing the same sweater. The man is portrayed as clumsy, stumpy, foreign, and stripped of all forms of  masculinity. Ian's initial reaction to noticing their matching attire is a form of embarrassment and shame. By wearing the same sweater as the Asian man, Ian is symbolically castrated. Such a portrayal depicts the oppression and inferiority induced by the media on Asian men. The commercial projects the dominant ideology of the white, male dominance and once again creates a social hierarchy, where the minorities are placed at the bottom of the ladder. 

Question:How would the commercial differ if Ian and another white male were wearing the same attire? 

Black Perspective in Hollywood

After taking this class and watching this video, I was very engaged in what Viola Davis was saying and how she as a working actress of color has dealt with the pressures of Hollywood's stereotypes. We are consistently bombarded with stereotypes in media, which in actuality alters such amazing and talented actors and actress due to the pure fact that they don't fit Hollywood's standard in appearance. I found it very interesting what George Clooney was saying about how studio heads view the public. After watching this video I did further research on this and came across an amazing article, to elaborate further on this issue.

Article

After watching the video and reading the article what are you thoughts on Charlize Theron's reaction to what Viola Davis was saying? Why do you think her response was so simple and what where your reactions to what the other actors where saying? How did you feel after watching the video and reading the article?

Ling Woo in Historical Context: The New Face of Asian American Stereotypes on Television

Sun explains what historical stereotypes have existed for Asian women and how they have hyper sexualized the Asian women in order to maintain the myth of white male virility and superiority. Traditionally these stereotypes have consisted of the Lotus Blossom Baby, ultra feminine and submissive and the Dragon Lady, cunning and dangerous. Both of course are subject to hyper sexualization; the Lotus Blossom being geisha like and submissive while the dragon lady often takes a femme fatale like role.

Finally moving onto Ling Woo, Sun presents the ambiguity of her role in the media. She can be viewed both as a strong woman taking control of her sexuality, unafraid to speak her mind but it can also be argued (with ease) that she is simply another way to hyper sexualize Asian women, ultimately feeding the white male myth of Asian women existing for His sexual pleasure.

This hyper sexualization is not unique to Asian women. Latin women are assumed to be Caliente at all times while Black women have been seen as exotic and sexually charged since they were first forcefully brought to America. Why do you think white America continues to push these stereotypes today? Do you think the novelty and perception of Non white women as exotic will wear off ?

Communist Sterotypes in Penguins of Madagascar

     While most cartoons in the 1950's and 1960's victimized and oppressed certain cultural groups, primarily minorities, I found it fascinating that these stereotypes are still openly swimming in today's cartoon industry. As a nanny, I usually shift the children's leisure time away from television programs and any materials associated with the mainstream industry. However, during my shift this week I softened my standards and got pushed over into letting one of the girls to watch an airing of her favorite cartoon "Penguins of Madagascar". During the viewing of the episode, I encountered  yet another alarming element in the media.One of the characters in the show, a plumber,  Gus portrays a clumsy, Russian meat-head, who owns a business entitled Babushka Plumbing.
 As comical and innocently funny as his character might be, this depiction provokes the already existent negative connotations of the Russian community. Gus's broken English, his Lenin-based work ethic, and immense physical strength all translate into the endorsement of the Cold War tension that hurricaned through United States from the late 40's til the early 90's. As an immigrant, I found this episode to be extremely detrimental and offensive to the Russian demographic.It's immensely disappointing to see these constructions being fed to the youngest generation, due to the fact that such negative portrayal formulates a vicious cycle of oppression. Despite the fact that Cold War ended in 1991, American television still holds the division ground between  United States and  the "Soviets".

Question: 
     Do you find that the depiction of  the above stereotype is directly correlated to the previous historic and political events? What do you think is the primary driving force for its release?