Trackbacks & Pings

1. Parting Shots / Stereohyped on 03 Jul 2007 at 5:31 pm

   [...] I wonder how Indian 7-Eleven employees feel when confronted by Apu from The Simpson’s every time they go to work. [RCLCS] [...]

2. Ultrabrown � Meanwhile, over at Racialicious… on 05 Jul 2007 at 5:50 pm

   [...] Racialicious asked me to cross-post the original 7-Eleven/Simpsons post. A few smart and painfully earnest commenters there call it cultural appropriation to draw an analogy to racial caricatures like Aunt Jemima: Too often non-Black racial minorities will describe a pop culture racial offense to their group by likening the offense to a random element of anti-Black prejudice, and that needs to stop posthaste… That refrain only says that American society should treat those groups as fairly… as those most Americans supposedly consider the most reviled and problematic – African Americans… [...]

3. CNN misses the point of the 7-Eleven Simpsons controversy at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture on 11 Jul 2007 at 8:46 am

   [...] in last night to watch the Paula Zahn Now segment on the Simpsons movie promotion in which they are turning 7-Elevens into Kwik-E-Marts, and was very [...]

4. Pilgrim in Progress » Blog Archive » Mind Dump on 12 Jul 2007 at 9:26 am

   [...] do you think of 7-Eleven transforming their stores into Simpson’s Qwik-E-Marts? Is it racist? Read this article that says it [...]

5. Latina Viva on 19 Jul 2007 at 8:12 pm

   The Simpsons Movie Boycotted in Latin America…

   Not everything is sweet and funny in the life of Matt Groening, creator of the world’s most famous animated family: The Simpsons. giant Homer raised the ire of pagan groups, and the Kwik-E-Mart racist promo controversy, Latin American fans……

6. ATR 76 - Apu from The Simpsons - 07/24/2007 - Submit an Audio Comment: 206-203-3983 at Addicted to Race - beyond diversity buzzwords on 30 Jul 2007 at 3:41 pm

   [...] Step’n Dispense It: racist Apu promo for 7-Eleven [...]

Comments

1. dnA wrote:

   Wow that is gross.

   Posted 03 Jul 2007 at 12:29 pm ¶

2. mondo wrote:

   Sometimes, it seems being politically-correct or anti-racist means pretending something in right in front of you doesn’t exist at all. Fact: most 7-11 owners and employees (as well as most convenience stores and Dunkin’ Donuts) happen to be Indian immigrants. They all have heavy accents. These people are now very much part of the fabric of everyday American life. I believe little hostility exists towards them (at least from the middle-class and up). Are we supposed to deny their existence? Apu may be looked down upon, but he’s a friendly character in the Simpsons universe.

   Posted 03 Jul 2007 at 12:49 pm ¶

3. gatamala wrote:

   mondo, mondo, mondo

   The only way affirm Indian-Americans’ existence is to have a white American of Spanish Sephardic extraction do “the accent”????????

   Fact: most 7-11 owners and employees (as well as most convenience stores and Dunkin’ Donuts) happen to be Indian immigrants.

   Not true. That brownish guy behind the counter may be Ethiopian, Pakistani, Iraqi, Puerto Rican.

   They all have heavy accents.
   Please.

   These people are now very much part of the fabric of everyday American life.

   Clearly, for some of us they make up the fabric of prime time tv & 8:00 EST Sun .

   I believe little hostility exists towards them (at least from the middle-class and up).

   Reducing someone to a caricature and compelling a franchisee to participate in his/her own debasement is a hostile act, despite your laughter. Po’ folks aren’t the only ones who exhibit hostility to Indian-Americans (google: George Allen).

   Apu may be looked down upon, but he’s a friendly character in the Simpsons universe.

   Good, non-threatening darkies are always looked down upon. (google: Aunt Jemima, Uncle Ben, Cream of Wheat guy, Frito Bandito)

   Posted 03 Jul 2007 at 1:38 pm ¶

4. merq wrote:

   I knew this was coming… DAMN!

   I was a hardcore Simpsons fan in my youth, but my interest faded as the show lost quality.

   Still, I was surprised to find myself completely intrigued and drawn in by the notion of actually walking into a Kwik-E-Mart and buying a box of KrustyO’s Cereal.

   That being said, I bit my lip in fearful anticipation of the Apu-ification of the 7-Eleven proprietors. I friggin’ KNEW this would come and steal my joy!! Just like Ian Maxtone Graham did ten years ago!!!

   Posted 03 Jul 2007 at 6:36 pm ¶

5. Anonymous wrote:

   merq Still, I was surprised to find myself completely intrigued and drawn in by the notion of actually walking into a Kwik-E-Mart and buying a box of KrustyO’s Cereal

   considering my other post, I was diggin’ Jasper in the freezer!! I just hope these franchisees have SOME say in whether they have to participate.

   Posted 03 Jul 2007 at 8:37 pm ¶

6. James wrote:

   Bravo, Kumar. Maybe Aunt Jemima will one day inspire a young black American to become a nanny.

   Was this obnoxious statement really necessary?

   Why use antagonistic and offensive African American stereotypes to illustrate the racial issues inherent in the anti-Indian movie promotions for The Simpsons, Manish? African American stereotypes have no bearing on this promotion at all, and I find this unneeded quip ignorant and divisive.

   Too often non-Black racial minorities will describe a pop culture racial offense to their group by likening the offense to a random element of anti-Black prejudice, and that needs to stop posthaste. Just because Aunt Jemima was used by a corporation to profit from the Mammy stereotype does not mean that people upset by this new Simpsons promotion need to reflect on Aunt Jemima’s insanity to justify their position.

   Apu offends enough on his own, thank you.

   African American history is not a random grab-bag for all other racial minorities to pull justifications from whenever they consider themselves oppressed by mainstream American pop culture.

   The unavoidable inference the end of this post offers involves the usual Include-Us-Too! non-Black racial minority refrain to racist advertising: If corporations shouldn’t (or can’t) treat the Blacks this way, then why us? Sadly, that’s not a reason to end racist advertising that lampoons non-Black racial minorities.

   That refrain only says that American society should treat those groups as fairly or as justly as those most Americans supposedly consider the most reviled and problematic – African Americans. It’s immoral and illogical to speak against racism while implying such a racist perception about Black people.

   Posted 03 Jul 2007 at 11:46 pm ¶

7. merq wrote:

   JASPER IN THE FREEZER!!!

   Why must you tempt me?

   Posted 04 Jul 2007 at 12:46 am ¶

8. Jay Smooth wrote:

   Yeah man, Ian Maxtone Graham.. harrumph. I had to stop watching around 1999-2000

   The list of writers does look promising tho, james l brooks and other OG crew back in effect..

   anyone know which one has this in nyc, so i can see how the vibe is with this promo in effect? the one on 23rd and lex or so?

   Posted 04 Jul 2007 at 2:21 am ¶

9. Jay Smooth wrote:

   (list of writers for the movie, i mean)

   Posted 04 Jul 2007 at 2:21 am ¶

10. Nokhi wrote:

    well, james, as demonstrated by an earlier comment, maybe these sorts of analogies wouldn’t be necessary if people understood that indian-americans and other “non-black racial minorities” face racism, discrimination, bigotry, etc. unfortunately, many people – including black people and other racial minorities – believe that asian americans (including south asians) just don’t really face racism and discrimination. i once read that something like 70 percent of african-americans believed that racial profiling of “arab-looking people” post 9/11 was legitimate. no one is trying to make a mockery of discrmination against african-americans, but rather using an example from african-american history often seems to be the only way people can understand that other groups face racism too.

    and it’s not really about “if corporations shouldn’t treat black people this why, then why not us” – i think the sentiment is more like, “corporations continue to treat black people like this, and here is another example from another racial group.”

    and if the author did not include other historical examples, people would think this is an “exception.” or people would say, “how dare you ignore examples involving othe racial groups!”

    if, however, your beef is that no non-black should ever bring up or talk about black experiences, well, then, we’re on totally different sides of the spectrum.

    Posted 04 Jul 2007 at 10:41 am ¶

11. James wrote:

    I simply request that non-Black racial minorities fight ignorance about their experiences with discrimination with public speech about their racial narrative, instead of borrowing the experiences of other groups to justify their anger.

    People can’t understand an Asian American racial perspective when they are given the African American racial perspective as proxy for Asian American anti-mainstream anger. Statistics like the one you cite Nokhi only expose the idea that African Americans are just as susceptible to political groupthink as everyone else; a logical response would be to have Arab American victims of racial profiling discuss their experiences in public.

    Using examples from African American history to fight racism only teaches people why discrimination against African Americans remains immoral. If other groups want people to realize the immorality inherent in discriminating against them, they have to talk about themselves. Possible public reactions are immaterial, because they can’t be controlled.

    The general truth has not changed – African American political history should not be used by other groups to justify their responses toward the prejudice they face, because that action cheapens the political perspectives of the non-Black minority group and implies that African Americans always occupy the lowest common denominator in American society.

    Posted 04 Jul 2007 at 12:45 pm ¶

12. JC wrote:

    I think Jame’s retort is illogical. It’s as if he’s trying to make racism against blacks “special” and racism against others are less so. Racism from whites in Hollywood hurts equally, no matter who’s the target.

    I thought the attack on the Kumar the 7-11 owner was uncalled for though. Minority-American here on this blog seemed to believe that recent immigrants should bore the same type of pain when encountering racism in the media – they don’t. A lot of recent immigrant don’t think like Americans and they relegate racism in the media as a fact of American life. After all, they have encountered Hollywood racism in the films way before they immigrated. If Kumar still believe that he’s more Indian than American, then his home is filled with Bollywood films and TV shows; he has plenty of entertainment options in which people like himself are not treated like an exotic perpetual foreigner. Caricatures like Apu doesn’t hurt him nearly as much as the hyphenated-Americans reading this blog. So unless you know Kumar personally, please lay off him.

    Posted 04 Jul 2007 at 2:36 pm ¶

13. Tony Liu wrote:

    James,

    According to your flawed logic, Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela should not have derived the inspiration for obtaining equality through peaceable means from the great Indian patriot Gandhi. This sentiment seems to hold some weight amongst certain African Americans. As if the plight of non-Black minorities is somehow less significant, or we haven’t paid our dues and therefore shouldn’t piggy back on the achievements of African American civil rights pioneers. It’s time for everyone to apply the same metric when it comes to racialist remarks and divisive behaviour, regardless of the ethnicity of the perpetrator(s) or victim(s).

    Posted 04 Jul 2007 at 7:50 pm ¶

14. merq wrote:

    Jay Smooth,

    The only one I know of is in Times Square, which is why I’ll probably make repeated excuses not to go until it’s too late.

    Times Square… not a fan.

    Good blog, by the way.

    Posted 04 Jul 2007 at 9:19 pm ¶

15. nadia wrote:

    james, at first i wasn’t with you, but as i continued reading your first comment and read your second comment, i think you make a lot of good points that really need discussion within POC organizing. namely that our experiences are not all the same, and it is better to acknowledge these differences and allow each other the space to speak on our own experiences, rather than homogenizing them and creating a situation where any POC feels qualified to speak on issues experienced by other POCs because “it’s just like when xyz happens to us!”

    these visual representations (apu, aunt jemima) share similarities and were borne of a white supremacist framework…but there are differences in historical context and in community experiences that are too great to reduce to soundbyting. i can understand the knee jerk reaction–”racism isn’t just about black people, it affects us too, so include us dammit!”–but i think that has more to do with previous negative experiences than with what james’ actual comment says. how does it help advance our movements to 1)shut down and invalidate worthwhile criticism; 2)mistakenly equate our experiences as all the same thing, when our differences are so great?

    also, i think JC makes a good point about the effects of media representation on “-americans” vs. their effects on those born somewhere else. within the arab community, that has been a big issue in terms of fighting for media justice; our parents, grandparents, etc. tend not to even watch american TV (mine are watching an arabic soap opera on satellite dish right now), take an interest in american politics (outside of it’s effects on the middle east), etc. of course this is not true across the board, but often it is, especially among more recent immigrants (earlier immigrants are definitely more assimilated). it is this situation where media representations aren’t as important to the parents, but they end up having a great effect on the self-perception, and outsiders perception, of their kids.

    Posted 04 Jul 2007 at 9:38 pm ¶

16. merq wrote:

    In other news,
    IllDoctrine needs a video podcast on iTunes. Make it happen, man.

    Posted 04 Jul 2007 at 9:39 pm ¶

17. Eun-jung wrote:

    HA!! This is ridiculous. Thank you for the good laugh that I needed this morning.

    Posted 05 Jul 2007 at 8:35 am ¶

18. Katie wrote:

    James -

    I’m also with you. Reminds me of the ways in which mainstream white feminist and gay rights struggles have sometimes appropriated black civil rights struggles as metaphors for their fights. I’m not comparing South Asian anti-racism to those struggles; rather, I’m saying that the use of another lens (in this case, anti-black racism) for one’s own fight speaks to the constant co-option of that movement by the dominant culture, something that we don’t want to play into.

    Also reminds me of that – I think it was Yoko Ono? – song – “Woman is the N—– of the World.” What kind of bullsh-t is that?

    Posted 05 Jul 2007 at 11:28 am ¶

19. Ananse wrote:

    [Merq: I stopped watching long ago because Jasper wasn't given enough screen time.]

    Nadia and James: Sorry I missed just caught this all now. There is much to appreciate in what you both have said. I wish Manish had not ended his other wise telling piece the way he did.

    It actually prompts me to bring up one glaringly obvious, frequently misunderstood, enduring epochal icon– shared by Indians, Africans, and Americans alike– that could have actually been employed to much better use, yet seems to have escaped Manish’s grasp: Sambo…

    I’d like to think this was simply an accidental oversight, not an intentional lapse. Yet it is quite telling that this one cultural flashpoint that actually raises more issues of overlap and mistreatment from mixed common sources (British and US southern whites) with “seemingly” good intentions in the service of entertainment (sound familiar) wouldn’t be suggested. Worth a reminder:

    http://www.cnn.com/US/9801/28/sambo.revival/

    Posted 05 Jul 2007 at 11:58 am ¶

20. Kai wrote:

    Good points, Nadia. I think I’m kinda feeling all sides of this discussion.

    I agree with the sentiment that racism against any group is equally worthy of criticism. Nevertheless, in my view the African American experience is indeed uniquely central to the history of American racism (alongside the ongoing genocide of indigenous peoples, which receives not even a fraction of the attention it deserves); because no other racial group was kidnapped by the millions across the ocean, and legally dehumanized and brutalized as slaves for centuries.

    Now I’m not at all downplaying the serious racism that other communities of color face (for example, I’ve written about the largely-ignored history of systemic legal anti-Chinese racism, and connected it with the current anti-Latina/o immigrant-bashing). But as I see it, identifying the similarites between our respective experiences with white supremacy can comfortably co-exist with recognizing the unique dimensions of each community’s circumstances and experiences.

    I think we can both respect and honor our differences while also respecting and honoring our commonalities. I’m an advocate of intersectional analysis, cross-cultural dialogue and inspiration (e.g. you can trace the inspiration from Martin Luther King to Gandhi to Thoreau to the Upanishads), inter-community collaboration and coalition-building, joint activism. I don’t think we can build effective coalitions if we gloss over historical differences; neither should we overlook the many parallels and broad areas of overlap.

    Generally speaking, I guess I favor developing far more solidarity and understanding among all communities of color, because one of the most powerful operative principles of white supremacy is pitting communities of color against one another instead of against the institutions of racism.

    Peace.

    PS- I do feel that the invocation of Aunt Jemima in this post’s last-line quip was rather reckless, but I didn’t address this is the body of this comment because I feel that the discussion has actually moved on to more interesting ground.

    PPS- I strongly suspect that if Jay Smooth wanted to be on iTunes, he would have been there long ago; as a longtime fan of his radio show, I’m guessing it ain’t gonna happen.

    Posted 05 Jul 2007 at 12:21 pm ¶

21. James wrote:

    It’s important to realize the difference between appropriating movement strategies to combat racism and appropriating another group’s racial history to interject one’s own need for social equality into the public sphere. Dr. King’s embrace of nonviolence as a movement strategy to combat American racism displayed his deep respect for Gandhi’s success with that philosophy.

    At no time to my knowledge did Dr. King argue that African Americans deserved equal treatment because of British colonial oppression of Indians. Someone who borrows the protect march concept isn’t equivalent to the person who borrows Stepin Fetchit or Aunt Jemima.

    I am not trying to make anti-Black racism ’special’, but we should remember that because of the distinct histories of American racial minorities, the racism that affects one group is not identical or interchangeable with the racism that affects any other group. This is no small point: if I as a Black man consider the racism within my narrative universal, that only encourages me to ignore the perspectives of other racial minorities in this nation, and to pretend that social gains that benefit my race benefit all races. That would not be positive. We aren’t all alike.

    Therefore, I’m really annoyed when non-Black racial minorities pretend that the racism they face is so similar to anti-Black racism that they can interject their anger over racism that affects their group into the public sphere while using African American sociopolitical history as justifying evidence. Americans personalize the underlying values that support our domestic institutions, and while everyone can respect any citizen’s need for equal protection and equal treatment, I think pop culture examples of everyday racism present harder social problems for Americans unconcerned with oppression issues.

    To explain why a character like Apu presents an offensive caricature of Indian American small business owners then, it’s important to personalize the argument, to discuss the values, culture, and racial history of Indian Americans, to humanize their image in the American public sphere. Strategically, it’s important to teach Americans about the Indian American people, not to replace Indian Americans with African Americans to berate the American mainstream into showing the same compassion toward Indian Americans that they show toward their supposed perpetual problem children, Black people.

    Nadia and Katie speak truth here – the point isn’t anger in defending non-Black racial minority narratives, the point involves using the most sensible strategies to combat racism against those groups. Co-opting Black people’s narratives, or implying that Black people occupy the lowest strata of American life does not assist anyone’s anti-racism goals.

    Appropriating Blackness does not combat racism against non-Black people; it just applies burnt cork to the insulted and disenfranchised.

    Posted 05 Jul 2007 at 2:08 pm ¶

22. Manish wrote:

    James, you seem like a thoughtful guy, and I agree Indian-Americans need to educate the mainstream about our culture, but your argument is fuzzy thinking IMO.

    “Was this obnoxious statement really necessary?”

    Yes. Its purpose is to shock.

    The one-liner does not appropriate black history or relegate black Americans to the lowest rung of society, it draws a parallel with a 2×4 for the clueless mainstream. It’s the centrality of the black experience in America that makes it an effective analogy, not an argument-by-degradation. The parallel also works with caricatures of (for example) Jewish, Chinese and Irish-Americans.

    Argument by analogy with something already familiar is one of the best way to persuade someone. You have to link it into something they already understand. And it is very word-economical, which makes it pointed and pungent.

    People must reference previous struggles, otherwise else every new minority has to re-fight the same battle.

    The one-line reference supports your overall point of view. It is not a racial caricature pushed by a large corporation backed by $millions.

    Ananse: correct, Sambo originated in India.

    Mondo: “most 7-11 owners and employees (as well as most convenience stores and Dunkin’ Donuts) happen to be Indian immigrants”

    No. 1/3rd of 7-Eleven franchisees are immigrants. Of that 1/3rd, a large number are Middle Eastern and Bangladeshi as well.

    ‘They all have heavy accents.”

    Immigrants often have accents but the Apu one is completely fake. A singsong tone is rare in India (I’ve only heard it with Punjabi men and upper-class Bombay women) and it sounds nothing like Apu. The accent in the show is fictional, created by the British in India and exported via Peter Sellers and now Hank Azaria.

    Anonymous: I don’t think the franchise owners are being compelled, though the employees probably have no say.

    JC: “Caricatures like Apu doesn’t hurt him nearly as much as the hyphenated-Americans reading this blog.”

    Perceptive and insightful. I don’t need first-gen immigrants to share 2nd genners’ pain, I need them to avoid making the problem worse.

    Posted 05 Jul 2007 at 4:14 pm ¶

23. Manish wrote:

    By the way, there’s an extensive discussion on this issue here and here.

    Posted 05 Jul 2007 at 4:25 pm ¶

24. Elle wrote:

    This whole thread reminds me why I stopped hanging out with “activists” who only love to hear the sound of their own voices.

    Let me get this straight:

    -We should learn the history of other racial minorities’ struggles in this country

    -But we shouldn’t use examples from those histories to highlight similar struggles

    -To do so would be co-opting

    -But to not speak about other minorities’ histories is to ignore and marginalize them

    -But to speak about their histories is to deny them a voice to speak on their own terms.

    Yeah, that’s not confusing. Thanks for setting the rules.

    I get that it’s not cool to cast all racial minorities’ histories under the same umbrella – every history is unique and snowflake-y. No, the African-American experience is not the “common denominator.” But here’s the thing – Manish DIDN’T DO THAT. He simply made an analogy between a degrading caricature of a racial minority (Apu) and…a degrading caricature of a racial minority (Aunt Jemima). And here’s the thing: there’s a difference between co-opting (which is what you describe Manish’s behavior as) and gaining inspiration and finding similarities.

    What Manish did was find one instance of commonality and he used it to make a point. That’s not co-opting. Co-opting would be saying, “Well, this Apu promotion just goes to show that Indian-Americans face the same struggles that African-Americans face.” Or: “Indian-Americans are also people of color and deserve equality because we face the same issues as African-Americans.” That’s not what he did.

    Why do you think an example from African-Ameican history was taken? It wasn’t to debase African American history or to relegate it to some lowest common denominator. Think about this: it’s HIGHLY impractical to expect him to find a similar example within Indian-American racial history in this country for very obvious reasons – the IA population is much smaller, the history is much shorter in this country, and there just aren’t as many representations of Indian-Americans in pop culture beyond the past few years.

    I’d really sincerely like you to tell me the substantive differences between Aunt Jemima and Apu in an analogous context. Aunt Jemima is a stereotype of a racial minority used to sell a product by perpetuating the idea that the product being offered is somehow tied to the “quirky service” offered by the happy minority. Apu is a stereotype of a racial minority used to sell a product by perpetuating the idea that the product being offereed is somehow tied to the “quircky service” offered by the happy minority.

    No one in this thread (and I’m mentioning this thread b/c you blew this argument into something much larger – fine, but now we’re on a thread that was supposed to be about discrimination faced by Indian-Americans and we’re yet again talking about the African American angle) is saying that the Indian-American struggle shares all of the same characteristics of the African-American struggle or that one size fits all.

    And you’re seriously downplaying the role that Gandhi had on MLK. MLK didn’t just “adopt” strategies, as if Gandhi gave him some crash course in how to organize a march. MLK imbibed a belief system, a set of ideals. He saw the similarities in struggle between colonial oppression and racial oppression. He sought out examples of how domination and power were exercised around the world, and how that all related to the struggle he was heading in the US. He used examples from Ghana to India. Non-violence isn’t just a “strategy,” it’s a world view. Most people would say that MLK gained inspiration from Gandhi’s politics…but maybe you’d just call it “co-opting.”

    The more I read these types of blogs (and no offense to the blog owners, it’s just about the subject matter, whether it be race, feminism, etc.) I honestly think people decide to give up on practicality and discretion and judgment. Meaning, not every discussion or point someone makes is “amazing” or worthy of a full-blown analysis at every point and time. This whole thread has now devolved into progressive in-fighting as usual. I think, for some people, it’s more about reading these blogs and picking on every little word and using a perceived slight as an opportunity to holler down someone’s throat. It’s not about picking battles, or TRYING to understand why someone would do something.

    For example, you say in your comment, “To explain why a character like Apu presents an offensive caricature of Indian American small business owners then, it’s important to personalize the argument, to discuss the values, culture, and racial history of Indian Americans, to humanize their image in the American public sphere.”

    Instead of trying to “get” where you are coming from, I can be pretty damn literal and yell at you: “How DARE you! How dare you use your male patriarchial privilege to demand that I discuss the “values, culture and racial history” of Indian-Americans – there’s ISN’T a monolithic value set, culture, or history. I think you need to educate yourself because you are clearly ignorant and racist. I WIN.”

    That’s really what it’s all about. It’s about hearing your own voice. It’s about getting upset whenever a non-member of my group brings up my group, because that automatically involves “co-opting” and “speaking for others.” It’s not about listening, it’s not about the bigger picture. I really don’t think you’re interested in this Apu caricature promotion – you really didn’t mention anything you find offensive about it. Instead, you decided to go on a missive and devolve this thread.

    Well, I’m gonna devolve too. I’m tired of this progressive in-fighting. Unless I agree with what everyone says and constantly nod my head at really a cacophony of mixed messages, I know I’ll be labeled as the careless racist bitch. But that would have happened anyway, and no matter how much I say that in reality I’m fighting for goodness, equality, justice, kindness and UNDERSTANDING – it’s not going to resonate. I’m a racist bitch now b/c I “dismissed” a silly irrelevant argument (not b/c it’s not relevant generally, but b/c this thread wasn’t offending that sensibility and it wasn’t the time nor the place) and therefore I’m ignorant and I need to educate myself on history and struggles of other peoples but not speak about them in a way that is marginalizing while at the same time acknowledging them but not in a tokenistic way while at the same time making sure this knowledge isn’t just cursory and occuring during only one month of the year and blah blah blah blah blah.

    I’m over blogs.

    Posted 06 Jul 2007 at 12:15 am ¶

25. merq wrote:

    Kai,

    But now he’s tackling a different medium, so you never know.

    Posted 06 Jul 2007 at 7:14 am ¶

26. Anonymous wrote:

    I agree with Manish in regards to James’ concerns.

    I am also a non-black minority, and I do see that for many people, their idea of what racism and stereotyping is is centered on the experiences of African-American people. Countless times I’ve encountered people who simply cannot understand that Asians (South and East) are discriminated against and that its just as wrong to make fun of or insult Asians as it is to make fun of and insult blacks.

    I don’t make analogies to the black experience/black history in America in order to perpetuate them as the “lowest rung” of society or as my personal litmus test. I make analogies to the black experience/history in America so, frankly, that white people will understand that all racism is bad.

    A recent example of this is a personal discussion of whether the repeated lines of “Asian hooker bitch” in the summer movie “Live Free of Die Hard” was offensive or not. Most of the (white) people participating in the discussion did not think so. However, someone asked if the Maggie Q character had been played by an African-American woman and John McClane/Bruce Willis had repeatedly called her a “black hooker bitch”, would it be offensive? And most people said “Yes!” And then the discussion veered to, “Why is it not offensive to refer to Asians in a certain way but it becomes offensive in reference to blacks?”

    This was not to “use” blacks or the black experience. It was actually the ONLY WAY these people could process what exactly was wrong with their thinking. Thankfully, they had automatic understanding and sensitivity to the hurtfulness of language that insults black people. But they didn’t have the same sympathy– couldn’t even comprehend the same– in regards to Asians.

    Making an analogy to their more immediate understanding of anti-black racism helped them realize the faultiness of anti-Asian racism.

    Racism is not a black-only issue though many people seem to think it is. Ironically though James, the most effective way in my experience to expose racism towards OTHER minorities is to make analogies and references to the treatment of, well, blacks.

    That’s how farked up race in America is.

    Posted 06 Jul 2007 at 7:23 am ¶

27. Kai wrote:

    Nicely said, Manish.

    merq, true, true. I don’t really know what will happen. But I do know that the Apple corporation, with its approach to intellectual property and digital rights management, is not exactly well-liked among WBAI types. The WBAI community is more an open source kinda space, ya know?

    Elle, well obviously you should stay aways from blogs and “activists” (hehe, I take it you think most “activists” aren’t really activists) if you find these things upsetting, but frankly all I see in this thread is a few people expressing a few divergent opinions, quite thoughtfully at that. Nothing particularly vicious as far as I can see, nor do I see the inevitable disagreements among progressives as in-fighting, but rather as a part of the necessary and sometimes-uncomfortable work of inter-community and cross-cultural dialogue. I mean, I think James might have gotten a little carried away with his annoyed booming commandments on how Asian Americans are supposed to discuss anti-Asian racism, but a number of opposing viewpoints have been eloquently expressed in response, so I think it’s actually quite a healthy discussion that might very well be interesting or educational to quite a few readers and participants, not something negative. Just sayin.

    Peace.

    Posted 06 Jul 2007 at 9:48 am ¶

28. James wrote:

    Manish, I believe that one-liner had no useful purpose. It’s egotistical and counter-productive to assume that the so-called ‘clueless mainstream’ does not possess the intellectual capacity to understand why racist caricatures of Indian American small business owners have no place in American popular culture without analogies that invoke the African American experience.

    Further, the historical record does not promote that unneeded parallelism; political activists concerned with the unfree labor of slavery and the unjust segregation of Jim Crow presented their argument about social equality to the mainstream directly, focused on the effects suffered by all Americans, regardless of race.

    Uncle Tom’s Cabin illustrated the abject degradation of the slave experience in a multiracial American context; the NAACP legal team that argued Brown spoke eloquently about the effects separate but equal education imposed on Black and White children. The point? The so-called ‘clueless mainstream’ can understand perfectly how racism against a particular group cheapens everyone’s pursuit of happiness in America, regardless of race.

    All that’s needed to ensure this shared knowledge in regards to Asian American racism are Asian Americans willing to discuss their experiences with American racism. Aunt Jemima can’t help that.

    Posted 06 Jul 2007 at 1:57 pm ¶

29. Manish wrote:

    Anonymous: yup, those lines in Die Hard were incredibly racist.

    Kai: Thanks.

    In case anyone’s interested, I’ll have a sound bite on CNN Tuesday night, July 10th (8pm ET/5pm PT, ‘Paula Zahn Now’) discussing this controversy.

    Posted 06 Jul 2007 at 5:46 pm ¶

30. atlasien wrote:

    I hate to bring it down to intentions, but I believe that referencing another group’s struggles can be appropriating or not, depending on context. I have heard Asian-Americans invoke anti-black racism (like the Maggie Q example) where they ask ” if it were a black person, would you realize it as racism?” and do it in a very resentful way, as, if they were black, then everything would be better! I have also heard them ask that kind of hypothetical in a very logical and useful way, like the commenter Anonymous on this thread just did.

    Race relations in this country so often are boiled down to black and white. It’s very hard to make the point that there are other races involved. I do actually think black people occupy the “lowest common denominator” in American society when it comes to race relations; they are the most visible, and face the harshest discrimination in many ways. For example, economic/workplace discrimination and criminal justice system. As an Asian I have faced racism that people refuse to consider as racism… and if I was black, they would have realized it as such! On the other hand, I have “non-black privilege” in the workplace and other areas where I have it much easier and face much less institutionalized racism… where my status as a provisional honorary white actually works in my favor.

    So I agree with part of James’ argument and I believe I should be wary of appropriation… but going further and saying we should consider each group’s issues on their own strikes me as a very bad strategy. We are not all on some flat plane of racism. It’s a structure where black people occupy the largest and most visible space, Native Americans occupy a smaller and less visible one, another part is reserved for the Perpetual Foreigner groups and further subdivided into Honorary Whites and Model Minorities and so on, and all these groups are compared to each other CONSTANTLY. Because different minorities are so often played off against each other — “why don’t black people value education like Asians?” and “Asians shouldn’t complain, after all they have it so good, not like black people” — it doesn’t make sense to isolate ourselves.

    Posted 07 Jul 2007 at 9:27 am ¶

31. hoo_boy wrote:

    Manish: Thanks for clarifying. Yeah, I get the “I need to shock or else no one will get what I’m saying” argument you’re making. I can’t buy that *no* other ethnic examples came to mind.

    Anyway, your intentions don’t matter none to me. Actions do. Swinging your 2×4 as wide and hard as you did with as loaded and blunt a phrase– not just the image but the phrase– you smacked some of us standing behind you upside the head hard, given the tone of rage that preceded it. And you just weren’t thinking. Or maybe you were. Don’t know, don’t care.

    The appropriation aspersions are crap, so people, stop it. But out of respect, Manish, think: you have an opportunity to describe what’s bad and why to a captive national audience in your own relevant terms..

    What’s more important: getting your point across, being heard, being understood, sympathy for what you’re saying, etc..– by like minds or others?

    Give people credit to understand that the insensitive, clueless, shocking, tasteless things they do can offend and horrify other the sensibilities, tastes, lifestyles, etc. of people from other cultures and backgrounds. How you address it says a lot about dominant players in a society, right? The ones who don’t get it, well, you aren’t going to reach them (yet). It’s the fence-sitters and the clueless…

    You had a vibe of righteous anger and rage in this post. I just want to know now: Do you plan to make Aunt Jemima nannies and Uncle Ben waiters of Blacks on CNN or will you find another way to shock that will just come as a spontaneous surprise in the heat of the moment? Anything for the cause, I guess…

    Posted 07 Jul 2007 at 5:09 pm ¶

32. Wendi Muse wrote:

    going back a little bit (to the main premise of the article), i wanted to ask a broader question about representation of minorities. “mondo” commented on how people very much like apu exist, which is a valid point. but it made me want to go further. if there were more diverse portrayals of people of south asian descent on american television, would having an apu-like character on the simpsons bear the same weight and ultimately bring about the same criticism as it does at present? i hate this question, but i’ll go ahead and put it out there: “will we ever be satisfied?” i obviously don’t think we’re anywhere close to having balanced representations of people of color on television, but if we were to ever reach that point, would we still find fault in characters like apu, or other stereotypical representations of people of color, even though they do exist in real life?

    Posted 07 Jul 2007 at 5:39 pm ¶

33. Anonymous wrote:

    Wendi Muse, I’m not an Indian or Indian American, but I am a Chinese American so I actually feel I can relate to what Manish and others have been saying. Asians, both South and East Asians, are really poorly portrayed in American media. I’m not saying other minorities aren’t, but in my opinion we’re the “easiest” targets in Hollywood and TV, mostly because there are so few of us in America.

    Many non-Asian Americans have negative perspectives of Asians and since there are so few, its hard for them to see in real life that Asians can be just as regular as they are. They instead base their assumptions on the stereotypes they see thrown about in the media, and that’s very hurtful. The extent to which the media affects our perspectives and our ideas of what is true and acceptable about others– especially if we have no real life experience with these others to counter certain portrayals– can not be underestimated and can be devestating.

    That said, I personally only wish for BALANCE. I don’t like seeing stereotyped characters of Indian 7-Eleven owners, or Vietnamese nail salon workers, or Chinese laundry workers or nerdy, accented Asian men. BUT… if the media decided to put out FAIR, realistic roles– Asians as non-accented, “regular” Americans who are doctors, teachers, historians, artists, lawyers, handymen– then I would NOT be so miffed when I see yet another movie with a dragon lady Asian massuese or “comic” body waxer. Because there would be a balance– there would be positive or neutral portrayals of Asians along with stereotyped, negative portrayals.

    Currently, the majority of portrayals of Asians are incredibly negative. We’re nerds. We’re hypersexual, Oriental hooker-types. We’re poor, short, accented dry cleaners or convienence store owners. We’re bad drivers. We’re crazy, chop-socky kung-fu fools flying around. There’s NO BALANCE at all. We aren’t given decency or depth or, most treasured of all, normality.

    Even if Hollywood continued spitting out cheap stereotypical roles, if they deigned to give positive roles or even neutral roles to balance it out, I wouldn’t mind those stereotypical roles very much. I would be “satisfied.”

    But apparently that would just be way too hard for Hollwyood or something.

    Posted 08 Jul 2007 at 12:59 pm ¶

34. ccch wrote:

    I say: “Nip these sterotypes in the bud, now!”. As, referencing what happened to AAs in Hollywood, it has come back to bite us in our too tender, tight tushes.

    It really can’t be helped to liken a situation to another to garner understanding, empathy, although I agree that the last analogy sounded quite angry and wondered who it was directed at.

    Posted 09 Jul 2007 at 6:00 am ¶

35. Tish Jackson wrote:

    Carmen, this is so true. However, (maybe I missed it living in my cave of lurkdom) but I wish folks would see the same about the 70’s show. LOOVE the show. I do. It’s funny. But unfortunately, a lot of the humor comes from bagging on the colored guy, Fez. From the very beginning, it seemed like Fez played the traditional Black minstrel role, but it was okay, cuz he wasn’t Black, he was–other. I mean, did they ever really say what nationality Fez was? They only mentioned his otherness in references to “when you lived over there” etc. Same shite, different day…

    Posted 09 Jul 2007 at 4:04 pm ¶

36. Dave wrote:

    Overly PC thin skinned article…. the Simpsons mocks many races, mostly whites, with chief wiggum as an incompetent obese police officer, mr burns as a greedy corporate tychoon, ned flanders as a protestant zealot, fat tony as an italian mafioso, and finally homer himself, a lazy buffoon.

    Moreover ,just because one character on a show happens to be Indian and happens to have an accent and happens to have some personality traits you disagree with.. DOES NOT mean the simpsons are racist. That is a strong accusation to make and a blanket argument which is used too often in my opinion.

    Oh.. Gatamala…Hank Azaria.. who does the voice of Apu… is Greek to the best of my knowledge.

    Posted 10 Jul 2007 at 7:52 pm ¶

37. Jay Smooth wrote:

    wow the discussion has been jumping.. just wanted to mention I went by the times square 7/11 and i gotta say the staff didn’t look too buzzed about rocking actual kwik-e-mart uniforms.. they seemed to feel non-plussed at best, if not straight-up demeaned.. (i didn’t ask them but that was the vibe i got)

    Posted 11 Jul 2007 at 12:03 am ¶

38. Anton wrote:

    Have you even been watching The Simpsons for the past 18 seasons? Apu has come a long way. He’s not some background painting but an essential and adored character. He’s come along way. He’s had whole episodes devoted to his naturalization, his marriage, the birth of his octoplets, and even his infidelity. If anything he’s come to represent one cog in the American machine of diversity. Like many Indian-American immigrants he came to this country seeking education and settled down to work hard at his own business and raise a family. You do the character, the voice, the writers, and the fans of the show an injustice by writing Apu off as a racial stereotype. You do an even greater injustice by ridiculing a character who’s life closely mirrors that of real life Indian immigrants trying to live their own American dream.

    Posted 11 Jul 2007 at 9:25 am ¶

39. Cisco Pagan wrote:

    For your information, Apu is NOT the only person in the Simpson with an accent, You seem to forget about the spanish fat man with the bee costume that only says”No es bueno”
    The fact that he talks with an accent makes no difference. Has he paid he dues? Definetly. He definetly mirros what most imigrants do when they reach our shores…Works his ass off and you can always see him in the store.

    Posted 11 Jul 2007 at 1:50 pm ¶

40. ABCD wrote:

    I searched on Flickr for the Times Square (NYC) Kwik-E-Mart, and came upon this:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/brainware3000/777364474/

    A real Indian next to a racist caricature of us.

    Posted 11 Jul 2007 at 2:51 pm ¶

41. Tiana Johnson wrote:

    pop culture at its worst.

    so sad. i really liked the simpsons.

    i first read about this at GlobalGrind.com’s myspace. Check them out at http://www.myspace.com/theglobalgrind

    Posted 13 Jul 2007 at 10:11 am ¶

42. Shankar wrote:

    Read Histroy!! Throught history itself Europe nations was determine to rule the world. The English Empire, Roman Empire, No matter where the English Empire went they took over the land the peopele of color live all their lives. Australia and the Aborigines people, North America Indigenous Tribes. India, Asia, Africa every single island there is, all have been ruled by a coutry in Europe. People of color should stand together, but we don’t do that why? Indian people don’t mind if there son or daughter marries a white man or woman, but if he or she is considered a Black American they better not. Black American and Indian American all have many shades of brown, from the lightes shades to the darkes shades. We all have the same color hair and eyes. But yet one race acts like they are better than the other, wake up were not. To the White eyes were are all the same color “Darkie”. As long as we act like them marry ito there race it o.k for them. They have no culture at all. People of color always have, we lose onself as we marry into the world. Bottom line is If you are not white you will always be discriminated against, it does’t matter if you marry there son or daughter, they will always have that thought in their minds. Black America and Indians American we must stick together!!

    Posted 14 Jul 2007 at 11:34 am ¶

43. World of Apu wrote:

    For what its worth, I do agree with James, and I’m Indian-American. Yes, Indian-Americans are often the butt of racist stereotypes, and their being of color marks them out for marginalization more than, say, Russian immigrants.

    Notwithstanding that, this is all about respecting sensitivities, and why is it so hard to respect James’ sensitivity to the borrowing of the Aunt Jemima example. Nothing bad was meant by the borrower, but it should be just as easy to acknowledge that the conflating of African-American and other colored race experience is profoundly discomfiting to African-Americans. 20 million in the middle passage, untold others in the years of slavery and after, the horrors of the African-American historical experience are indeed unique in its size, scope and nature. To claim otherwise is simply disrespectful of those who suffered greatly.

    On the other hand…did you know that the first Indian-American was brought here to Jamestown in the seventeenth century, and then sold into slavery? So back then, white folks did not see much of a difference.

    Posted 17 Jul 2007 at 2:37 am ¶

44. jk wrote:

    Just a point of fact; most people reading this won’t remember the old Aunt Jemima or the Frito Bandito, because these readers were born after the stereotypical representations were eliminated from advertising.

    Additionally, the Aunt Jemima stereotype was not a “nanny” but a “mammy”. The mammy stereotype was a maid. Unfortunately, due to persistent racism in our society, many women of African descent are still working as maids, and being paid poorly. Ultimately, there is nothing dishonorable about being a maid, and the only real dishonor is of the society that perpetuates the racism that creates the stratified labor markets where specific races and genders are assigned to do specific jobs.

    Posted 18 Jul 2007 at 4:16 am ¶