"Dave Chappelle - American Indians"

This YouTube video was found under a search for Native American comedy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrWtntXtLRg

This excerpt in from an episode of the Dave Chappelle Show, hosted by Dave Chappelle, a standup comedian. Chappelle tells the audience that he thought all Indians were dead, but that they really are not. He says he knows this because he found a “gathering of them” the other day, and that the gathering was at a Wal Mart store, in the hunting department. He states that they were all looking at bows and arrows with which to hunt. He went on to tell how he met one of them from the Navajo tribe and asked to have a “peace pot-smoking ritual” with him and his chief and other Indians. At this meeting, he tells that the Indians brought weed to the beat of drums, after which they gave him a teepee to sleep in for the night.

This racist episode of the Dave Chappelle Show relates to the ideas brought up in class about Native American Indians, and how we assume and make fun of their ways. Chappelle’s remarks remind me of the image we saw in class of the Cleveland Indians’ mascot and the misconceptions of the Native Americans that we often make. The Indians’ mascot is shown to be “happy-go-lucky” with feathers on his head dress and red skin. These assumptions, as well as those made my Dave Chappelle, are often made about Indians based on the thoughts of the English and those of the past. In addition, this related to our class material because as stated in A People’s History of the United States, “If you were a colonist, you knew that your technology was superior to the Indians.’ You knew that you were civilized, and they were savages…” Chapelle’s words mock this, especially when he says all the Indians were gathered at Wal Mart (saying they are not civilized enough to shop elsewhere), when he mocks the way they talk, and when he talks of how they smoke marijuana and worship spirits as savages would. By all of these comments, Chappelle is hinting to the fast that they are of a lower class and their ways of surviving and worshiping are weird compared to those of normal Americans. In addition, viewers of this show as well as Chappelle himself believe that these comments are not racist and merely out of good fun. They are clearly practicing the denial that is explained in “Getting Off the Hook: Denial and Resistance,” that racism does not occur in the first place, that it is all a matter of making light of a different ethnic group.

I find it difficult to believe that Dave Chappelle made those comments about Indians without any intent of them being racist comments. He was indirectly belittling Native Americans and any of them that were watching could very well be offended by his remarks. Just because the audience and himself believed the remarks to be funny does not mean that others did not take them to heart. It is sad to see so many examples of this in the media, of people making false claims of the Indian way of life as well as mocking the habits of Native Americans, without taking into account how it may affect them and the thoughts of their ancestors.

"When Sexism Claims are a Real Hoot"

I found this article under a search for sexism in the news, as Hooters is a hot target for sexism blames.

Stossel, John. "When Sexism Claims are a Real Hoot." Real Clear Politics 28 Jul 2006 29 Sep 2007 .

“When Sexism Claims are a Real Hoot” brings up one of the common debates on sexism in the work force. The article includes background information on the well-known restaurant Hooters, known for their wings, beer, and female waitresses wearing skimpy uniforms while serving the customers. The writer explains how most of the job opportunities at Hooters are for women and only a few open for men to occupy. While the company is beginning to open up more jobs such as for cleaning, bussing, and managing, the women still outnumber the men in the business. While many complain that there are not many jobs at Hooters for men, the writer has a point when he explains that not many people would like men replacing the Hooters job of women, as they would also be dressed in the skimpy outfits.

The obvious relation between this article and the class material is that of sexism and the unfair treatment of a particular sex. In this case, both genders are treated unfairly. On the female side of the situation, they have to deal with sexist men hitting on them and making crude comments while they are trying to do their job. However, not much can be said for the women in this situation because after all, they are the ones who applied for the job in the first place and should expect this kind of treatment. However, men on the other hand, are not allowed to occupy such a position at Hooters as it is. If they want to work there, they have to manage, bus, or cook, without the option of serving, which is clearly discrimination. The first example of sexism in “When Sexism Claims are a Real Hoot” relates to an article read for class, “Capitalism, Class, and the Matrix of Domination,” in that women are “culturally devalued” as they are often treated merely as sex objects, especially in situations like working at Hooters. On the other hand, the writer of this article almost disagrees with “What it All Has to Do with Us,” as it is stated that male managers are often quick to hire other men who are “more qualified” to get the job done. Clearly, it is the men being turned away at this occupation. This is an odd case, however, because of the fact that the women are expected to hold such a sexist position.

I think that this article brings up an interesting way of looking at sexism. We often are more likely to think of the oppression of women when someone mentions the word sexism. However, the article forces us to look at sexism from the other point of view. Women are not the only ones that are turned away from jobs; men are now beginning to feel the rejection as well as they cannot occupy particular positions either. Also, it brings up a good question of whether or not to look at women that are involved in a job like Hooters as being victims of crude sexism by the treatment from their customers, as they are putting themselves in the situation.

"CSI: Miami - Bloodline"

I saw this episode of CSI: Miami entitled “Bloodline,” in the Spring and noticed its racial cues. After looking it up online, I found this synopsis explaining the racial assumptions that the makers of the episode used.

http://www.bluecorncomics.com/stype743.htm

In “Bloodline,” authorities are suspicious that the death of a gaming official who has been scalped was involved in a plot dealing with the County Commissioner and casino money. Authorities DNA test all of the people involved in the case and find that only one of them has the blood to be considered for casino earnings, who ends up being the scalper. He is found to be 1/16 Kipayo Indian, which seems to connect well with the fact that he was the scalper of the gaming official. Many of the suspects happen to be Indian as well for this reason as well as being part of the Indian community in which the casino is located.

This episode of CSI: Miami, “Bloodline,” has many racial notions targeting Native American Indians. It just so happens that the three important “bad people” involved in the show (two murderers and an adulterer) all happen to be Indians. In addition, it is also stereotypical that the way the gaming official (Lansing) is scalped to death instead of being killed in any other manner. Therefore, since this was the way he was killed, authorities of course look to the Native Americans in the area to be the killer. This method of murdering someone depicts the way that Indians are perceived to be savage and barbaric, even in current times in a modern television series. Also, the producers of the show have one of the main characters using a deer antler knife. However, it explains that deer do not commonly exist in the Miami area and that it is hard to believe such a knife would be used, except to racialize one of the suspects to make them seem like a typical Indian. This episode is related to many of the articles that we have read in class, especially “The Tempest,” where Indians are described as “savage” and “barbaric” and treated unfairly by the English, as were the Irish of the time.

I think that this episode of CSI: Miami unfairly depicts Native American Indians. It is cruel how one of the characters was scalped to make it more interesting to the viewer and to have them automatically assume that the killer is an Indian. Also, it isn’t fair how all of the suspects and murders or adulterers in “Bloodline” are of Native American descent. This just goes to show that the racial assumption that have been made in the past are still evident today, and even displayed in a television series that is viewed by millions of people. Not only are the facts of the show not completely true, but they lead those who watch it to develop false accusations and pictures of Native Americans of the past and present.

"All This and Rabbit Stew"

I found this video on You Tube after seeing a list online of racially questionable cartoons from the website http://members.aol.com/wowvideo/rscartoons.htm.

This old cartoon depicts one of the many antics of Bugs Bunny. As this was from the earlier years of the cartoon, it has some racial referencing in it. The episode opens with a little black boy with a gun hunting for a rabbit, moving in a slow, lazy manner. He talks in a way that seems less civilized than the normal white person would talk. Also, the way the boy is depicted offers a crude picture of the African American race. He is shown to be extremely dark in color with large lips that are considerably lighter than the rest of his body. In addition, the boy is shown to not be highly educated. He is fooled numerous times by Bugs Bunny while he is trying to hunt him. I chose this item because it represents racial notions that people have in a simple, elementary manner.

This cartoon is a excellent example of how blacks were depicted in the past and in some ways even today. Not only were older African Americans racialized, but so were young children, as in this cartoon. The slow manner in which the boy walks and talks represents the laziness and carelessness that people of African American descent were thought to hold. Also, the large lips and incredibly dark skin show how the English thought of whites as so much different than themselves. The mere fact that the boy is hunting a rabbit shows the labor that the African American slaves were to exercise for many years. This cartoon brings up the idea that was mentioned in Capitalism, Class, and the Matrix of Domination by Allan G. Johnson, that whites developed the idea of whiteness to justify their treament of blacks and place themselves in a higher social category than those of different race. This cartoon depicts how blacks were placed in a lower social category than whites in the ways listed above. The boy is obviously not of high social standard by the way he walks, talks, and his general image. His image also reminds me of those we saw in our screening of Ethnic Notions, where the caricatures of blacks (typically the black sambo) were happy-go-lucky, extremely dark, had huge lips, and were clearly not as civilized as the whites.

I think that it is sad that a cartoon like All This and Rabbit Stew were ever aired on television. Even though cartoons were once aimed at being viewed by adults, children often watched them as well, and even moreso today. To put these ideas of racial prejudices in a cartoon viewed by so many people of various age groups, races, and genders is, in my opinion, sickening. The fact that these ideas were agreed upon by many and shown in such an elementary way is part of the reason that we still see racial prejudices in our world today. It was once so prevelant that it is hard for people to forget and not send these notions from generation to generation, as it is all they once knew.