A Daycare Called Cuba: Iberia Ad More Than “Sexist”
by Racialicious special correspondent Wendi Muse, originally published at The Coup Magazine
“It was completely trivial” said a spokeswoman for Iberia Airlines’ new ad. I suppose that should be expected, but it never ceases to amaze me that some people consider the degradation of historically oppressed groups as “trivial,” “fun,” or “just a joke.” Maybe that’s because our society has a history of accepting stereotypes as truths, so veiling them in humor is its feeble attempt to disguise the simple fact that it can’t distinguish between one or the other. It may also be a result of the belief some hold that we are all equals and treated fairly. If this condition of equality is a given, then debasing one group or another is not expected to cause harm, embarrassment, or any real long-term affects. Maybe Spain’s national airline felt that they were engaging in harmless fun, simply teasing their colonial little brother Cuba, but not everyone shared Iberia’s interpretation. Ruben Sanchez, a spokesperson for Facua, a Spanish consumer rights group, found the commercial to be sexist and generally offensive to Cubans. Facua called for the advertisement, which is part of a set of commercials for Iberia’s website, to be pulled. Iberia complied. They apologized, stating that the ad was not meant to offend anyone, and removed it from television on May 16th. But considering that someone had thought up the commercial and allowed it to air in the first place, the damage had already been done.
When I saw the ad for the first time, I thought beyond sexism. Before me was a representation of women of African descent that has somehow lasted for more than three centuries. I saw an animated articulation of the remnants of European colonial dominance over a Caribbean nation and its women. There was so much to take in from such a short clip that I wanted to slow down and think about it in parts. I watched the video again, this time in silence. After muting the volume, I began to mentally catalogue the images I saw. Before the clip commenced, a tableau appeared of a fair-skinned baby in a rocking chair surrounded by two brown-skinned, dark haired, large lipped women frozen mid-dance, holding maracas and wearing bikini tops with Daisy Duke cutoff shorts. Once the video unfolded, it seemed. . . fairly harmless, but three things stood out to me:
1. The color contrast between the baby and his adult playmates.
Both women featured in the commercial have brown skin, one a shade slightly darker than the other, and the men who provide musical accompaniment for the commercial are also varying shades of brown, from light to dark. This contrast is common in tourism advertisements, particularly those in Europe and the United States (with the exception of the recent Bahamas vacation ads). The tourist is almost always white and the “natives” are always brown, black, or yellow. Last time I checked, people of color also go on vacation, but maybe advertising executives don’t want to confuse the consumer audience by featuring them as tourists alongside people who look just like them. Funny enough, this never seems to be a problem in white-on-white ads encouraging people to go to European countries.
2. The caricatured bodies and faces of the women in the ad.
Given, it’s a cartoon. Illustrators are known to utilize exaggeration as a way of adding humor to a piece or simply demonstrating the breadth of their artistic abilities. The women’s bodies and faces, however, stood out to me because they were somewhat reminiscent of blackface imagery. The “mulatas” have large red lips and eyes, and emphasis was added to showcase their rotund bottoms and wide-set hips. I have lost count of how many times I have seen the image of a black and/or Latina woman with exaggerated body parts, particularly those that signify fertility and sexual prowess (i.e. hips, butt, breasts, lips), in advertising, film, and television. Another image that stuck with me is the women’s body language in some scenes. They are shown more than once with their hands on their hips, another commonly featured image of brown women but usually one that alludes to domination or anger. It’s an interesting choice to have animated the women with arms akimbo, particularly because the stance usually evokes cultural meaning that runs somewhat counter to the subservient actions of the women throughout the commercial. Their positioning seems to convey, at times, a message of surrogate motherhood, an ironically Oedipal statement considering the sexualization of the women. Yet considering slave-master relationships of yore, when rape of women and the female offspring that resulted from such forced liaisons was common, maybe this image isn’t so ironic.
3. Images of the women dancing for the baby’s entertainment and providing for his every need to secure his comfort while on their island playground.
The women’s smiling faces while dancing, feeding, fanning, and massaging the child throughout the commercial resonated with me. The image was hauntingly reminiscent of the “happy darky” representations of blacks before and after slavery and even the abolitionist ads that portrayed blacks as passive and harmless in hopes to quell fears that freed slaves would pose a threat to whites. Because of Cuba’s highly politicized global position in addition to the fact that it was once one of Spain’s colonial possessions, it comes as no surprise that the ad’s creators used women, and passive women at that, to demonstrate that Cuba was safe, an optimal travel destination.
I then turned on the volume and watched the commercial again. Here are excerpts from what I heard (all to a reggaeton beat, mind you):
“me marche huyendo de panales y papillas (I’m fleeing diapers and baby food) /volando, llegue hasta estas calidas orillas (after flying, I arrived on these warm beaches) he venido aqui por la cara (slang: I’ve come here for fun)”
The meaning here is pretty obvious. The baby needs a vacation, and quick! But what exactly would he do for “fun” and why would his “fun” involve two women? Hmm. . . He quickly explains:
. . . “mulatas dan me de comer y dan me de beber” (the mulatas (women of black/Spanish mixed racial origin) feed me and give me things to drink)/ingrese Iberia.com, ya no quiero volver! (I typed in “Iberia.com” and I don’t ever want to go back!)
So let’s re-cap. The baby wins a vacation and is whisked away to Cuba where he is waited on hand and food by two brown-skinned multiracial women who give him whatever he wants. Then he brings it home with a few lines from the chorus:
mulatas: Esta chupao, esta chupao! (It’s easy! It’s easy!)/
baby: vengan mamitas (come here, mamitas)/
mulatas: Esta chupao, esta chupao! (It’s easy! It’s easy!)/
baby: Lleven me a la cuna (Take me to my crib)
Iberia swears it didn’t mean to offend anyone. If that were the case, however, I question why they opted to feature only brown-skinned women as the baby’s sexy caretakers? Cuba has an incredibly diverse population, after all, with many of its citizens tracing their ancestry back to Africa, Asia, Europe, and indigenous groups. Is it that brown “mulata” women are the first ones who come to mind when one thinks of Cuba? Possibly. But when you compound some of the commercial’s content with history, you end up with heavy results. For example, consider the commercial’s sly sexual references like “take me to my crib” and the fact that the baby refers to the women with the flirty term “mamitas.” These lines are framed by the lyrics “esta chupao,” a shortened, European Spanish version of a longer phrase “esta chupado,” which means something is “easy.” In English, the adjective “easy,” when used to refer to women and girls, signifies promiscuity. In Spanish, this is also the case (“mujer/chica fácil”). Combine the aforementioned with the women’s subservience, their national origin, and their physical image in the commercial. Also consider Cuba’s reliance on tourism as a major source of revenue following its political separation from the USSR in the 1980s. This shift catalyzed a significant increase in prostitution, making Cuba no stranger to sex tourism, many of its customers coming from wealthier nations, including Spain. Finally, add in a few thoughts about the term “mulata,” which, though commonly used in Spanish and not in necessarily an offensive way, nevertheless has a loaded meaning and comes with its own stereotypes in Spanish and Latino history. Iberia had created a recipe for disaster.
One would think that Iberia would have re-thought the creation and airing of this ad, particularly in light of the public condemnation of racism and discriminatory behavior in Spain. After several soccer players of African descent were verbally assaulted at games by fans alike, an anti-racism group called Kick It Out was formed and Nike launched a campaign called Stand Up Speak Up in hopes of countering racism within international football. Groups like SOS Racismo and Amnesty International have criticized Spain’s handling of illegal immigration by way of a border fence and trigger-happy border patrollers.
Yet despite all this, the people at Iberia didn’t get the memo.
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of -Robinson-big.jpg){kind=link}
A. wrote:
While I understand why you see the ad as offensive, I don’t see the “happy darky” undercurrent. I also don’t see any conscious malevolence about the ad, but only a lot of simple-minded ignorance… which is different from knowing better and being racist or stereotypical anyway.
Cuba is extremely diverse but its obvious that Iberia is playing on the generalization that many of the women have African ancestry. I don’t think the ad is saying, “Oh, white Spaniards will enjoy being fawned over by black-skinned women in Cuba!” I think the ad was saying, “Cuba has a lot of mulatas unlike Spain, and so they’re exotic, and what’s exotic is sexy, and wouldn’t it be funny if we had a Spanish baby being pampered by some of these exotic ladies?” I don’t think it was a “Let’s think of stereotypes of black women and make sure the white baby treats them like a slave!” Its not that they deliberately went out to create a “happy darky” type situation, but that they thought exotic Cuban girls just happen to be mulatas.
It’s typical bizarre, poorly-thought-out advertisement “creativity.” A baby being pampered by two sexy exotic ladies! How novel and clever and funny! Ha, ha. Ha.
To be honest, I thought of the Snoop Dogg and Pharrell music video for the song “Beautiful.” The video was shot in Brazil with dozens of beautiful Brazilian women (who all happened to be of at least part African ancestry). You see the rappers getting their hair done by these women, being fawned over, having sex, whatever. I thought in essence, it was the same thing as the Iberia ad.
The song had nothing to do with Brazil in particular, but the rappers/director/producers were basically thinking, “You know where some really hot, exotic girls are? Brazil. Let’s film you in Brazil with some girls (black/mixed-race girls, exclusively) doing your hair and fawning over you. That’s be hot.”
I also thought about the movie “Love Actually” where an ugly English guy goes to America where all these really beautiful American women just go nuts for him and go to bed with him right away. Its all just stupid, FANTASY caricatures of the racial/cultural other making you their object of desire and attention.
I can see the same in the Iberia ad– mulatas with big lips, hair, hips and boobs are exotic and sexual fantasies of the type of ladies they think are in Cuba, and everyone wants to have a good time wherever they go, so these are the “types” of women who’ll show them a good time.
A lot of different people fantasize about the exotic other showing you a good time. It’s not necessarily race-based. There are always ads/movies/TV shows with Americans lusting after the buxom blonde Swedish backpacker or whatever.
I agree that the ad is stupid and ignorant in almost all the ways you described. What I don’t agree was that its purposefully or actively malicious in its intent, or that it consciously draws on mammy, “happy darky” stereotypes.
Everybody has their own version of the “exotic ladies pleasing improbably lucky American/Englishman/Spanish baby/whatever” theme. Because Cuba happens to have a large population of women with African heritage, it worked out that way for the Iberia ad. If the Iberia ad was for Scandanavia, they’d probably have the baby being pampered by tall blonde Nordic goddesses saying, “It’s easy!” in Swedish or Dutch etc. Not RACIAL or intentionally racially offensive persay, just a generalization playing on the fantasty of the image of the people who happen to be there.
And no, I don’t work for Iberia, in case any one is getting suspicious.
Posted 29 May 2007 at 8:01 am ¶
gatamala wrote:
I laughed when I saw the “sexist” criticism. The sexism here is nothing compared to the blatant out and out racism of this ad. The social consequences of commerce in human beings didn’t begin or end w/ N. America or the Anglo world.
Good critique. Sadly, we’re about 40 years from seeing that kind of critique of racist imagery in Spain OR Latin America. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been told that racism is only a problem from/in the US.
Posted 29 May 2007 at 8:07 am ¶
Lyonside wrote:
A: If whoever came up with the ad thinks being of mixed race means you’re EXOTIC (NOT a compliment, implicating foreigness and otherness, with a layer of subhuman/unequality to boot), then YES, it’s RACIST.
Sheesh. And mixed =/ beautiful. “Positive” stereotyping is still a stereotype and wrong.
Posted 29 May 2007 at 8:18 am ¶
Lyonside wrote:
A: “What I don’t agree was that its purposefully or actively malicious in its intent, or that it consciously draws on mammy, “happy darky” stereotypes. ”
I should add that “conscious” thought is not a criteria for racism. Really, that’s the main facet of INSTITUTIONAL RACISM – the embedded, subconcious racial sterotypes and biases that motivate actions and reactions.
Most racists don’t think they’re racist. Because of insitutional racism and the society we live in, we all have been exposed to racial, ethnic, gender, etc. stereotypes and to some degree we all have some of that running in our head about SOME group or another. Awareness lets us not act on it, or to realize when we or others do.
The pathetic part of this is that NOONE along the line thought this might be a problem. That’s insitutional racism right there.
Posted 29 May 2007 at 8:24 am ¶
Wendi Muse wrote:
Hi A. I agree with you in that I don’t think the commercial was necessarily malicious (in intent)…but I think that’s mainly because some stereotypes are so firmly rooted in our minds that we neglect to reflect on how they got there, where they came from, and whether or not it’s ok to perpetuate them in things we create.
re: Beautiful by Snoop Dog…I thought the same thing about that video as I did when I saw this commercial. In fact, a lot of people criticized the video when it came out, mainly alongside simultaneously released criticism of sex tourism (and its American patrons) in Brazil. Some critics of the Iberia ad also felt that it condoned/promoted the patronage of prostitution in Cuba…
Thanks for providing the parallel analysis!
Posted 29 May 2007 at 8:24 am ¶
Henry Gomez wrote:
The ad is blatantly racist and sexist. The fact is that Spaniards have been using Cuba a destination for sex tourism since the early 90s. The Spanish government claims its policy of dialogue and economic engagement is meant to help free the people of Cuba but this Iberia ad belies the fact that the Spanish are simply looking at Cuba as a sexual playground. Ironically the Revolution was supposed to do away with prostitution ye after 48 years there’s more of it than ever before on the “worker’s paradise”. Spanish hoteliers actively participate in the enforcement of Cuba’s tourist apartheid and engage in labor practices that we don’t accept from our own companies when they are doing business overseas in countries where the workers are much more free than Cuba. And it’s not just Cuban exiles that are denouncing Spain, it’s leading Cuban dissidents on the island like Dr. Darsi Ferrer Ramirez.
For more info go to http://BUCL.org
Posted 29 May 2007 at 11:51 am ¶
gatamala wrote:
Thanks Henry
Posted 29 May 2007 at 2:09 pm ¶
Vox wrote:
Also, the way that the two Cuban women are drawn is pretty stereotypical. Compare the women in the Cuba ad (or the rappers in the New York one) to the people in the Argentina ad (Argentina is, I believe, considered to be the most “European” country in South America).
And compare the actions, too. The Argentina one definitely comes off as that being the “sophisticated” place to be, with champagne, tango, debonair men in fancy suits who treat you like a queen. As opposed to New York, where you rap in front of graffiti and eat burgers, and Cuba, where you play around on the beach and get women to dance for you.
Whether they meant to be racist/sexist or not, A., they very, very clearly were, and that’s a problem. Intent doesn’t negate action (or, to be cliche about it, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”).
Posted 29 May 2007 at 2:36 pm ¶
Bohemian Writer wrote:
I am going to half to agree with A & some of the other previous posters. I don’t believe this ad was intended to be racist/malicious. If this ad is racist then so are most of the other cartoons on television. I am Cuban (my mother is what you would call a mulata Cubana) and my father is Trinidadian. What one has to understand is that the words “mulatas/negras” are not seen as offensive in the Latin American community. More often than not, they are viewed as pet names or terms of endearment. However, I can understand what some of you are saying when you say it is offensive. Although I am not offended by it. Being raised in the United States, of course if you look hard enough there may be some underlying racism in the form of subtlety and references. It must be by the way they used a “white” baby being pleased by “black/mixed” ladies, and the reggaeton beat playing in the background.
Just my 2 cents.
Posted 29 May 2007 at 3:30 pm ¶
Latoya Peterson wrote:
And I thought I was the only one that noticed that vaguely reggaeton-ish back beat…
Posted 29 May 2007 at 4:32 pm ¶
Henry Gomez wrote:
It’s not that they used Mulattas. It’s how they portrayed them. Every time you look at that video you see more to make you nauseated. Take a look at them driving down el malecon in the convertible. The one woman is bottle feeding the baby. Now take a real close look at the feeding, it’s definitely insinuating breast suckling. Then take a look at how the baby is being massaged by the one woman while the other one fans him with a palm frond. The point is that Cuba is great place to “follar”. The word is out, buy a girl a panty or a t-shirt and she’ll give you the entire GFE (Girlfriend Experience).
Posted 29 May 2007 at 9:03 pm ¶
dnA wrote:
You don’t get much more “happy darky” than mouths twice the size of their heads.
Posted 29 May 2007 at 9:04 pm ¶
LM wrote:
Not much to add, but my compliments to Wendi for a methodical, thorough, reader-friendly breakdown. That’s a rare trifecta.
Posted 29 May 2007 at 10:46 pm ¶
mr guy wrote:
My first thought wasn’t racism ( it’s still not) my first thought is bad flash animation.If you’re going to use flash, try not to make it look so cheap actually try to actually animate rather than cutting corners………..
P.S.
reggaeton sucks :p
Posted 30 May 2007 at 10:20 am ¶
K.S.V. wrote:
i agree strongly with Vox that intention doesn’t negate action. i used to inadvertently defend racist, sexist or homophobic acts by saying that “oh surely this person didn’t MEAN for this to come out that way” but the fact is that it did and damage has been done. there must be accountability around that damage whether or not the offender MEANT to offend. a mentor of mine once told me that intentions don’t equal results. i mean george w. probably didn’t INTEND to completly decimate and disable Iraqi society and murder thousands of innocents by declaring war but that is the result. that’s a pretty extreme example but you catch my drift.
also, i disagree with A. on the following:
“If the Iberia ad was for Scandanavia, they’d probably have the baby being pampered by tall blonde Nordic goddesses saying, “It’s easy!” in Swedish or Dutch etc. Not RACIAL or intentionally racially offensive persay, just a generalization playing on the fantasty of the image of the people who happen to be there.”
comparing white baby with Mulatas to white baby with Scandinavians is like comparing apples and oranges. there’s no white privilege at stake with the Scandi women…which makes the baby more like an equal in terms of race….so the power dynamic of white skin privilege is nonexistent. also, i don’t recall white European women ever being forcibly enslaved and coerced into nannying white children as has happened with women of color since the dawn of colonization.
Posted 31 May 2007 at 12:44 am ¶
Henry Gomez wrote:
KSV,
I agree with you but your point about historical treatment of black leaves out one important factor which is that Cuba is in fact a prison country where many of the women are engaging in prostitution because it’s the only way they can earn a living despite the alleged accomplishments of the Revolution. These tourists (more than ordinary tourists to underdeveloped countries) are exploiting this sad state of affairs. Swedish women as a rule don’t have to sell their bodies to feed their kids.
Posted 31 May 2007 at 10:51 pm ¶