Trackbacks & Pings

1. In case you missed it… at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture on 12 Jan 2007 at 5:35 pm

   […] A progressive struggles with racist sexual fantasy: Is there a role for anti-racist values when it comes to sex? It’s an interesting question addressed in the latest Savage Love sex column. Share and Enjoy:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. […]

2. In case you missed it… at Anti-Racist Parent - for parents committed to raising children with an anti-racist outlook on 12 Jan 2007 at 6:11 pm

   […] A progressive struggles with racist sexual fantasy: Is there a role for anti-racist values when it comes to sex? It’s an interesting question addressed in the latest Savage Love sex column. Share and Enjoy:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. […]

Comments

1. kim wrote:

   >But guess what? When given a choice between being lynched and being offered a white man’s woman, CUCK, 10 out of 10 black men surveyed prefer the latter.

   Kim: Because Savage (and this cat is crazy and completely a figment of his own imagination and intuitive genius) goes where he did above, and then furthers with his asinine ‘donate to the UNCF,’ one has to write him off without giving any thought to the whole objectification/consent/fantasy fulfillment aspect of his response.

   As to the racist aspect, Savage falls short, again due to the response excerpted.

   The fantasies , and therefore the options (of Black Men), were never as Savage defines them, but more firmly the fantasies of White men. Holding the latter (as Savage describes) to be a dangerous carrot held out before the Big Buck (forcible sexual contact of -hell, any contact with- a white woman), the former would almost certainly be a social consequence (hanging), is a sinister transposing of who-desired-what all along.

   This line of thinking insinuates that for as irrepressible his need for the taste of a white woman and wood splinters on his back, Buck was willing to risk the former (lynching), and wood at his back - his final hang-out and resting place (coffin).

   I think his response says the fantasy is a gift which relieves Buck of the fear of Michael Richards and friends, while at the same time subdues Buck’s bestial fanstasy while constraining it within the acceptable parameters of consensual sex: so, you’d better do it more to make sure he can get what he’s going to take ANYWAY, and also find that you get what you want.

   White man’s burden re-ordered, and fulfilled. Ain’t God Great.

   Posted 12 Jan 2007 at 1:25 pm ¶

2. kim wrote:

   Strange, and interesting post, Carmen.

   Disturbing.

   Brings to mind an old article (talking twenty years here) from Essence magazine (can’t even look at the mag now, sigh) where interracial couples were interviewed, and the White men spoke of the disturbing little differences that crept into their consciousness while they lay beside their lover: pubic hair texture, dryness of skin (ashy skin), sunlight racing across a very dark brown leg early in the morning, etc.

   While many had entered the relationship, admittedly, as an adventure to another land, and stayed a while, some of them struggled with the ‘little differences’ that jarred, between the Black woman and what the men had known being with White women.

   Fantasy turned loose must demystify, certainly.

   Posted 12 Jan 2007 at 1:32 pm ¶

3. Y. Carrington wrote:

   My opinion? Dan Savage revealed more about his own racism than he intended, under the pretext of helping the other man.

   And it’s none of Mr. Savage’s business what Black men’s sexual fantasies are. Talk about invasion.

   Posted 12 Jan 2007 at 10:01 pm ¶

4. Lyonside wrote:

   >Talk about invasion.

   The thing is, the racist angle of interracial porn and erotica has been discussed but not dissected.

   My question, were I the advice columnist, would be, Where did this guy GET the fantasy from? It didn’t spring up full-cloth, and if it something that you feel unsure/guilty enough to ask an advice columnist about, then you should be brave enough to ask yourself when/how this fantasy took root. That might be more helpful than blithe “advice” from a columnist who’s more humorist than anything else.

   That said, I like Dan Savage (I’m a liberal Pennsylvanian who gives Savage just a little credit for the recent ousting of a certain Senator), but I think readers are going to skewer him on this one. I’ll be disappointed if they don’t.

   Posted 12 Jan 2007 at 10:49 pm ¶

5. Jay wrote:

   I’ve actually heard about the “flipping” of that too (White husband and white wife go to Thailand for trip and order a Thai girl), but what’s important to note is that in both cases the fantasy is revolving around the man (what he desires), not the woman’s desires. There was an article talking about women sex tourism in Thailand, and a case where the man didn’t want his wife to get a guy, while the man still got a girl. I know sex tourism is kind of different (monetary circumstances), but there could be a comparison made.

   So yeah, that’s all kinds of messed up.

   Posted 12 Jan 2007 at 11:26 pm ¶

6. Dan C. Roberts wrote:

   I believe “Jump In” has a great story line, however I feel (being an African American). The movie did not authentically portray the way an African American pronounces, their hip phrases or correctly displayed our signature sassy, yet pleasant attitudes. I feel the actors especially Corbin, were completely off, in a sense of he did not display much soul, like an average African American would.
   The small phrases stated daily, not only by African Americans, but any urban kid in touch with their generation’s lingo; were horrifically off key. Don’t get me wrong, the actors did a great job; as dancers and role models. I even encourage you to view the movie, if not already. The film just, could have been so much more authentic; maybe even better, if the director focused on the way the actors spoke as much as he did on the great dance and jump rope routines.
   I imagine the movie would be absolutely perfect in every aspect. If the African American actors had thoroughly conferred with average young African American teens to discover, how to honestly portray the characters, the way many great A-List celebrity actors and actresses do.

   -Daniel C. Roberts
   If you would like to respond to my opinion please do so. My e-mail address is DanCRoberts@Aol.Com and MySpace URL is: http://www.myspace.com/dancroberts

   Posted 13 Jan 2007 at 12:07 am ¶

7. merq wrote:

   uhh… WHAT?

   Posted 13 Jan 2007 at 1:34 am ¶

8. Sylvia wrote:

   Holy white supremacist patriarchy!

   1. There’s two people being objectified in this here fantasy. Black man and White woman.

   2. The fact that this fantasy is still taboo and still sitting in white men’s minds depresses me.

   3. How is “as long as you don’t lynch anybody!!!” good advice?

   Now, I may not be reading this gratuitously, but cotdamn that’s messed up.

   Posted 13 Jan 2007 at 1:40 am ¶

9. April wrote:

   The problem is not racism alone, but sexual objectification of both his future wife and of the black male(s), i.e. sexism.

   I would not encourage sexual objectification of his future wife. Not only is it sexist, but it would deteriorate a marriage because of the fact that in time, she would only feel as a “sex object” — hence the term “sexual objectification”.

   A woman is a human being, and is entitled to all the rights a man has. If he is truly progressive, then he will acknowledge and accept this as reality. I would recommend going to a psychiatrist, psychologist, or a social worker and receive group therapy or one-on-one therapy about these fantasies. These fantasies are like a drug, like an addiction, and it is best to seek therapy and to avoid all contact with images, etc., that would trigger that response. Reading enlightening feminist books help as well.

   Posted 13 Jan 2007 at 12:43 pm ¶

10. Lyonside wrote:

    April, you’re right, but I’m.. I dunno, used to sexual objectification when it comes to prevalent sexual fantasies.. that’s the obvious part to me, so it’s the racial aspect that is more controversial.

    I doubt therapy would do anything, since too many professionals would write it off as “common” and “harmless,” I’m sure. But for a self-professed “liberal-minded” person to really claim to NOT KNOW where it comes from is offensive. Please, how hard is a little history reading and self-examination?

    Posted 13 Jan 2007 at 2:36 pm ¶

11. James wrote:

    Carmen, that was a racist advice column. The question posited to Mr. Savage was racist, and Mr. Savage’s response was racist. A person cannot consider themselves anything but sick and inhuman if their sexual gratification derives from the debased objectification of other people, regardless of anyone’s consent.

    Mr. Savage’s entire argument would have one believe that a person’s sexuality should operate under situational ethics. I disagree. There’s never a good time to derive sexual pleasure from Black male dehumanization — not because of a question of consent, but because such treatment disavows the very concept of Black male humanity no matter what. It’s just wrong. So if a woman wants to tie up a Black man with chains and beat him with a cat o’ nine tails during doggystyle coitus while calling him Toby, if a White man wants to dress up in homespun and a ten-gallon hat and simulate rape on his Black girlfriend while screaming about his ‘ownership rights’, and if a White man wants to watch his White fiancee engage in athletic, rambunctious, Vivid Video intercourse with an glistening supermasculine Black Schwarzenegger Stomp the Yard extra, regardless of who ‘consents’, that’s irredeemably racist!

    Frankly, I don’t know how anyone can consent to their own degradation, but a person can’t consider their fantasy objectifying another person and still perform said act because the soon-to-be-objectified person ‘consented’. Consent is not a tax loophole or a get-out-of-jail free card in Morality Monopoly.

    That being said, it never ceases to amaze me how obvious examples of bizarre racial prejudice are remixed by some to discuss feminism. For everyone concerned: Mandingo cuckold fantasies are racist! With all due respect to April, a White man who fantasizes about his White wife engaged in sweaty, mind-blowing pornographic intercourse with a muscular, dark-skinned, massively endowed Black man is a racist, and no “enlightening feminist texts” or “group therapy” or other liberal re-socialization efforts will affect him.

    Of course these nauseating racist fantasies have sexist components where women are receptacles of male control and exist solely to fulfill male lusts, but in all honesty, that’s just not the major screw-up here. Anytime a man in a heterosexual relationship desires unfaithfulness in his partner for his own sexual fulfillment, sexism exists.

    But this guy wants a Black man (his perverted, twisted Sean Michaels conception of a Black man, anyway) to ream out his lover. That fantasy operates on racism alone: the assumption that Black men are sex-crazed superhuman lovers with Olympian stamina and elephantine phalluses. To overlook this point becomes a self-serving method of denying race, and that “me first” feminism solves nothing.

    Posted 13 Jan 2007 at 8:19 pm ¶

12. the Unknown Soldier wrote:

    I agree 100 % with everything you said James, and not to be cliched, but you said it a lot better than I could have.

    Posted 13 Jan 2007 at 11:04 pm ¶

13. Luke wrote:

    “That being said, it never ceases to amaze me how obvious examples of bizarre racial prejudice are remixed by some to discuss feminism. ”

    I think that’s assuming that feminism doesn’t involve some critical, anti-racist component. Are there feminists out there who don’t give a crap about racism, who turn a blind eye when it does come up? Of course, but I don’t think that’s where April is solely coming from, I think it’s a little unfair to label her comment as that and consequently malign feminism a bit because I don’t think she’s saying “race: I don’t see it” (because she did say “”The problem is not racism alone..”) more so than she’s pointing out the sexist aspects of CUCK’s “situation” (though, yes, she doesn’t necessarily stay on complete course with the thread).

    What I am confused by is your original statement of “Of course these nauseating racist fantasies have sexist components where women are receptacles of male control and exist solely to fulfill male lusts, but in all honesty, that’s just not the major screw-up here. But this guy wants a Black man (his perverted, twisted Sean Michaels conception of a Black man, anyway) to ream out his lover. That fantasy operates on racism alone.” The fantasy may center on racism, but it doesn’t just stop there (which I think you may agree with but because of the previous statement, I’m not sure). There’s room for both here. And when you describe CUCK’s fantasy as watching a Black man “ream out” his partner,that to me speaks very clearly to being a “receptacle of male control.” Because, let’s be very clear, if he gets off on watching his wife have sex with anyone he’s putting pressure on her and in that sense is controlling her to fulfill his own male lust, just as you described.

    Just reword the sentence. Instead of

    “this guy wants a Black man to ream out his lover”

    it could very well be

    “this guy wants his wife to be reamed by a Black man.”

    Where you put the emphasis places a great deal of focus on who you see being the subject of oppression. Believe me, I agree with you in that the racism aspect of this is a huge deal, but as you both say at different points, it certainly isn’t the only thing.

    But anyways, my problem with this all is that Dan basically lets him off the hook with “There are tons of African-American guys out there who want to play the sexually dominant black stud to your sexually humiliated white cuckold” which to me basically reads as saying “hey, it’s alright to think that Asians are great with numbers because there are lots of Asians who think they’re just great at numbers!” Just because some members of both groups buy into the stereotype, the racism, doesn’t mean it’s OK. Which leads me to my other issue with this entire thing, which is just giving the letter an audience and giving his advice an audience. To me, I see CUCK as another person who has some racial or ethnic preference when it comes to sex and/or partners. I don’t care if people have them already because I doubt there’s any convincing people out of it (“The rational part of me, the part that tells me these fantasies are improper, is no match for my inner urges”). My problem is (beyond the culture in which people get convinced into it in the first place) when people start to advertise it (and contribute to the culture) themselves or when advice-columnists start advertising excuses for said “preferences.” Dan is basically giving everyone in the world a free pass when it comes to racist preferences by allowing people to say to themselves “hey, i’m not really racist so my feelings are OK” rather than “don’t kid yourself, admit and know that your feelings are informed, warped by racism and hence you are racist in that way. You’re a racist and you don’t care because sex, to you, trumps it all.”

    Posted 14 Jan 2007 at 1:17 am ¶

14. Sewere wrote:

    I’m with you Luke… It’s this part that gets me

    “There are tons of African-American guys out there who want to play the sexually dominant black stud to your sexually humiliated white cuckold”

    Because Savage can speak for “tons” of black men and their willingness to be subjected to racist fantasies.

    Posted 15 Jan 2007 at 2:17 pm ¶

15. Franklin Veaux wrote:

    This is not an uncommon dilemma. Many women who identify as feminists feel guilty and upset when they have rape fantasies, for example.

    The thing to keep in mind is that a fantasy is not reality. When people have fantasies or even act out those fantasies, the roles they play are pretend–make-believe for the benefit and enjoyment of all the people involved.

    In the movie “Die Hard,” actor Alan Rickman blew up a building. Guess what? He is not a terrorist. The movie was pretend; it was make-believe for the purpose of fantasy.

    If a woman has, or acts out, a rape fantasy, guess what? She is not really being raped, nor condoning real rape. It is pretend.

    If a man has a fantasy about his wife having sex with a black lover, guess what? He is not really a racist. It is a fantasy, a make-believe scenario for the purpose of fun and enjoyment.

    Dan Savage’s tone is flippant in his reply, but that’s no surprise…his tone is *always* flippant. And he is correct–there are many people, black and white, who have similar fantasies. It may not be politically correct, but then, sexual fantasies never are.

    Posted 13 Feb 2007 at 9:43 pm ¶

Post a Comment