Go Ahead, Vote for Obama’s Body (Slightly NSFW)

by Racialicious Sexual Correspondent Andrea Plaid

As some of you Racialicious readers know, quite a few of us love some fine men around here, regardless of our genders and orientations. And what I mean by “fine” is how Lisa Jones, author of Bulletproof Diva: Tales of Race, Sex, and Hair, means it: “cute with a story.” So, I’m getting this out of the way right now.

I think Senator Barack Obama is a fine-looking man.

But what’s been said recently about this sexy man and his self-identified Black phallus is causing some consternation and situating his sexuality in a strange dichotomous discourse.

Former Playgirl editor-in-chief Nicole Caldwell wrote a feature in last week’s NY Press about how obsessed some people are about Obama’s looks, by how sexy he is, and how their ideas about his sexiness falls into racialized sexual fantasies, namely that his Black maleness makes him good in bed and how that stereotype may anchor some of the buzziness in folks’ erotic fantasies about him and may be the reasoning behind their voting for him. However, that stereotyped-based buzziness, Caldwell contends, may be the very thing could ruin his chance to become president.

This being a sex-centered issue of the NYP, Caldwell tried hard—maybe a little too hard—to bring the bawdy talk about Bama. In her lede she interviewed a 52-year-old white moderate Republican man who had sex with a white twenty-something Obama supporter. During the sexual encounter, the Democrat moaned a name: Obama’s name. In the piece itself, she describes how women have written to her about how Playgirl perpetuates racist stereotypes about Black men by featuring brothas with long penises, the post-Kennedy/Nixon debate mindset of the physical and the visual mean the political, and the US celebrity culture and race operating in our collective erotic imagination. Then she calls in the cultural and political analysts, including our own Carmen Van Kerckhove.

(Note: Caldwell called Racialicious “salacious.” Like I said, we can get down like that over here—and, yes, Carmen starts a lot of it with her Keanu Reeves posts–but La Playgirl EIC is seriously reaching, like all we do is write about the folks we want to sex up and how, served anti-racism style.)

“I’ve always been a little perplexed around the media’s obsession with Barack’s looks,” says Carmen Van Kerckhove, co-founder and president of racial consulting firm New Demographic and head of the popular and salacious blog, Racialicious. “He’s good looking for a politician, but he doesn’t have movie-star good looks.” Van Kerckhove calls this overemphasis on the candidate’s looks trite. “People think, ‘I can’t be racist, I think Obama is good looking.’ I’ve always interpreted people tripping over themselves to say how good-looking he is as revealing a level of [embedded] racism.”

But for George Farah, Obama’s looks and demeanor are the chief reason he’s made it this far. “Racist stereotypes can only be rebutted by a visual representation of Obama,” he says. Ticking off all of the ugliest racist stereotypes society has traditionally reserved for blacks—sloppy, inarticulate, lustful, sexual, untrustworthy—he explains how “these stereotypes can breed in a vacuum.”

But give the public YouTube, tabloids and talking heads on every media network, and Obama has the opportunity to disprove each assumption. “Only with cameras, and at the debates themselves, can Obama come out and say, ‘Hey, I am not the negative stereotype of this race.’ He is a post-Kennedy candidate. It’s impossible to imagine a world without TV making Obama this politically successful.”

Perceptions of Obama are complicated, however, and a number of the contradictory, racist and celebrity perceptions of the presidential hopeful reflect what Van Kerckhove describes as “a fine line between fetishization and finding something beautiful and unusual.”

“It goes to show,” Van Kerckhove says, “racism is well and alive in America. People like to pat themselves on the back and say we’ve moved beyond race—we’re really scared to go anywhere near it.”

“Although most believe that Obama is single-handedly at the forefront of changing perceptions of black men, sociological research does not support this claim,” adds Rashawn Ray. “While interactions with upwardly mobile Latinos and Asians changes the perception whites have of all Latinos and Asians,” he says, referring to extensive research he’s studied and performed, “social interactions between blacks and whites only change the perception whites have of that one black person. So in this regard, Obama is simply seen as an exception to the rule, and thus a token.”

Taken together, Ray says, abovementioned examples of pop-culture Obama obsession “go back to the stereotypes of black men as being overly aggressive, sexually promiscuous, physically superior, yet intellectually inferior.”

I agree with Carmen and Ray about people fetishizing and tokenizing Obama as the exceptional Black man who’s acceptably fuckable. But I don’t think we should, therefore, desexualize him to only look at his policies in some effort to forward an unracist stance. But this is exactly what Jezebel did in its critique of Caldwell’s story. This is the way that Megan starts the takedown:

Former Editor in Chief of Playgirl Nicole Caldwell, who notably steered the magazine through the end of its decline, takes on the heady issues of race and sex in play in this election season …at this point in my introduction, I would normally attempt to summarize it, but it’s so all over the place that I’m afraid it doesn’t exactly lend itself to summary. In short: women want to have sex with Barack Obama; Obama is hot; people think he has a large penis; thinking black men have large penises is racist; racists might not vote for Obama; so stop saying he’s hot.

Megan rightly points out that the things Caldwell writes to sex up the article makes the article ludicrous. However, Megan comes off like a trying-too-hard-to-be-unracist prude, saying self-righteously that “this is the first time I thought about Barack Obama’s penis,” correcting Caldwell’s assertion that this is “literally a dick-waving contest” when, as Megan points out, it can’t be literal when we’ve never seen either Obama’s or McCain’s penis. For all of what Megan says, the fact remains that Obama is a Black man who’s easy on the eyes…and folks are going to look at him—and yeah, vote for him–because he is handsome, whether we like it or not.

Now, if people are inscribing racist ideas around his Black male skin and body and assume, on the virtues of those alone makes a better sex partner, then, yes, we can call that kind thinking racist, be it through fetishization or by making him a token. But I don’t think, therefore, that should negate all discussion about his pulchritude and that some people are going to respond to him sexually because of it. I think there’s nothing wrong with that: we are, for the most part, sexual beings, and we do respond to each other sexually—without such feelings, human family wouldn’t survived this long. Shushing talk about Obama’s beauty isn’t going to make it—or the possible racism undergirding it—go away.

Not talking about Obama’s fineness desexualizes him, which is another (and opposing) stereotype of Black people (other images in that canon: the Magical Negro, Mammy, etc.). I think the good senator presents a healthy Black male sexuality, especially when he’s around Michelle. In fact, they both embody a healthy and adult eroticism that’s (almost) publicly sublimated. And I suspect that they sublimate it because they don’t want to excite all kinds of uproar around their sex lives in a country that pathologizes Black sexuality. Crazily enough, whatever our own fantasies about our POTUSs, we still want to hold the (opposing) vision that our leader are essentially sexless.

Obama’s run, whether he succeeds or not, has given us a perfect opportunity to develop a way to talk about race, physical beauty, and sexual attraction without the skittish or self-righteous silence because we’re so busy trying to appear unracist or the drooling fetishization because we’ve got these racialized sexual stereotypes in our heads that we’re dying to know if they’re true or not.

So, yeah, I’m voting for Senator Obama because, for the most part, I agree with his policies of ending the war in Iraq, improving the schools, and getting folks some healthcare—and I look forward to seeing his fine Harvard-educated Caesar-cut-and-suited self every day for, at least, the next four years.

[Image Credit: The Obama Dildo, courtesy of Head O State. (Via.)]

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • NewsVine
  • Current
  • email
  • Print

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. Erection Results Are In. — Media Assassin on 14 Nov 2008 at 10:45 am

    [...] think it speaks to the general quality of Racialicious that what, for them, is a mere side illustration is, for me, my whole act: The Head O State Sex [...]

  2. Latex and Lube, Luvie: How President-Elect Obama Should Commemorate World AIDS Day « The Cruel Secretary on 24 Aug 2009 at 9:04 pm

    [...] Photo credit: LOL Obama/Pundit Kitchen; Headostate dildo/Head O State (Via) [...]

  3. Go Ahead, Vote for Obama’s Body « The Cruel Secretary on 25 Aug 2009 at 8:30 pm

    [...] Go Ahead, Vote for Obama’s Body Cross-posted at Racialicious< [...]

Comments

  1. atlasien wrote:

    It looks like nobody’s touching this post with a… um… with a ten-foot… um… pole.

    But it’s a great post, and I agree with it.

    By the way, Obama does have at least one magic power… he can get his supporters laid, as shown by this sleazy story.

  2. LaurynX wrote:

    I don’t think Obama’s bad looking (no hetero…haha), but yea the issue of sex came up around him a lot. I agree that desexualizing him is too far in the other direction, and doesn’t allow him, or people to see him, as a three dimensional person.

  3. Fransky wrote:

    I….am….horrified!
    As a queer lady who uses toys & as a person who cares about the election. Just… umm..wow.
    ~F

  4. jvansteppes wrote:

    Hooray Cruel Secretary!
    Obama is handsome and brilliant, its no wonder folks have the hots for him, but yeah, there has to be an analysis of what informs people’s desire and this culture is really irresponsible when it comes to that kind of reflection. Playgirl sounds very sketchy. I hadn’t heard about the dildo stuff but I’m not surprised.

    The fetishization of race via a dildo is an interesting topic: what is with the majority of dildos being black in color? I for one don’t think it’s not supposed to mean anything. Black dildos may not actually match African American’s skin tones but symbolically they are a huge deal because of their association with black male virility and its the ultimate fetishistic commodification of such fantasies. And it’s so obviously dehumanizing and gross.

  5. drispe wrote:

    Perhaps no one is touching this topic with a ten foot pole because that would validate the Mandingo fantasy. I’ll try something smaller.
    Of course Obama has had his share of magazine covers during his campaign, but sex appeal is one component of the opportunities afforded to him by the media. How can we forget his youth? The age comparisons between him and McCain have been fodder for television pundits and late night comedians alike. This is a country where youth IS sex, basically. In ten years nobody will dare mention whether Obama is fine or not. Even sexual race fetishes have an expiration date. And it’s not like he’s getting props for being the first hot Black man with an intellect. I recently saw a list of attractive male politicians, including Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick and Newark, NJ’s mayor Corey Booker. There will be some fools who are surprised by Obama’s looks, though. Recently a congressman said Obama has good teeth. WTF?

  6. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    atlasien–Thanks for your compliment, luvie. You know I love you back!

    ::mwah::

    I think the Obama dildo may have shocked some folks into silence; they’re laughing too hard at said dildo to type a response;
    or the moderator is fielding some serious “how-could-you-show-that-thing-when-a-Black-man-may-be-our-next-POTUS” emails. Or, optimally, the Racialicious peeps are VOTING(thankyouverymuch!:-)) even as they read our exchange. Or another response altogether, perhaps?

    But I’ll take on the dildo: I’ll be honest–my initial reaction to the toy was to giggle in that “C’mon, WTF” way ’cause it’s tooooo outrageous for me to get outraged about.

    I also know a person that I follow (and who follows me) on Twitter was too through with the Obama dildo. And I can completely see the reasoning: the sex toy can be seen as a form of ridiculing the seriousness of Obama possibly becoming this nation’s first president of color, the culmination of nearly 3-centuries’ worth of PoC struggles in the US reduced to this. And it does perpetuate the stereotype of Black men being nothing more than a serving, available phallus.

    As I explained to my tweeting cohort, this toy, as much as it is a deeply problematic thing, is the latest of a line of race-based sex toys. If the editors say it’s OK, I think I may write it for a future Racialicious post.

  7. KuriusJurge612 wrote:

    He still don’t look as good as me

  8. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    Whoops! I was so busy answering to atlasien (which I didn’t mind at all–you’re cool peeps!) that I didn’t catch your other responses. So here it goes:

    @LaurynX–exactly! Which to me says book- and photo-loads of how and where Black male sexuality–and sexuality in general –is skewed. In the US, we can’t seem to get out of this either/or way of thinking about sex and race, though we navigate those and other verities in our lives all the time.

    @ Fransky–what *exactly* are you horrifed about? The post, the toy, or both? Or that such a post and photo would appear on Racialicious?

    @ jvansteppes–it’s you, dahling!

    ::hugs::

    Yeah, the NYP article written by the former Playgirl editor-in-chief (EIC) was sketch. I think she and the editors had a great topic but it was so poorly written because she was trying to sex up the piece. The analysts really held the article–and I’m not saying that ’cause I with with Carmen.:-D Caldwell’s analysis the reaction she experienced at her former magazine around the Black models–which would have been such a great examination of how a stereotype can be visually perpetuated–got short shrift.

  9. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    @ drispe–

    Hmmm…I think we have to agree to disagree somewhat. Remember Senator Obama and his wife Michelle are in their mid-40s; in ten years, they’ll be in their mid-50s. In an age of MILFs coupled with long-held notions of men being able to age, which also means aging gracefully, we may still talk about about their fineness….

    …and your saying that no one is touching this topic with a ten foot pole because that would validate the Mandingo fantasy. Talking about Obama’s good looks doesn’t unto itself validate the Mandingo myth. When people do employ it, that’s more a function of what their racist ideas on the way he looks, not something inherently Mandingo-like about Obama. And what I’m saying is we can–and should and should be able–to do so without using the same tired ideas which just serve to flatten the man’s humanity–and ours.

  10. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    @ KuriusJurge612–LOL! You are fabulous.

    Look, my Racialicious peeps, it’s 5pm, and I’m taking off for Election Night festivities. (Invited to 3 parties, and I’m going to try to make it to all of them, dammit!) So, I won’t respond until the morning. Please keep commenting, and I’ll catch you then!

  11. Fransky wrote:

    The toy. Yuck!
    ~F

  12. dalia wrote:

    i always thought the phrase “move-star good looks” was a bit of a misnomer! i can think of many, many actors (movie stars!) who aren’t half as good-looking as obama… and it’s such a subjective thing to say, anyway. i have a girlfriend who thinks phillip seymour hoffman is a dreamboat, another who finds tommy lee jones “spontaneously orgasmic,” and thinks don cheadle is “the hotness.”

    um… IMO, none of these men can hold a candle to barack, with his megawatt smile, and ruggedly handsome features. i would rather see him on the poster for some action movie rather than will smith (who i just think is comical looking).

    but that’s just my point: it’s all subjective.

  13. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    ::rubbing eyes::

    Good morning, everyone!

    Okay, let me act a fool for 2 seconds: President Barack Hussein Obama! President Barack Hussein Obama! YES! WE! DID!

    ::shakes self off::

    Okay, to the last couple of comments…

    @ Fransky–hey, that’s your opinion. Right on to it, and I’ll go ahead and assume that you won’t add the dildo to your collection. :-D

    @ dalia–as Chief Don Cheadle Fan, I feel that Mr. Cheadle’s hawtness is a fact, not subjective. Any negative statements about said man’s hawt-er-acity will be heretofore construed as hateration.:-D

    Seriously, as I said at the beginning, President Obama’s (!) fineness is simply my opinion. And I really offered it as a way to open the discussion about another way to talk about his physical beauty and his politics w/out getting into a racialized mind/body split that’s so pervasive in US cultures, that’s all.

  14. Christie wrote:

    Well, to me he is just the right combination of looks, smarts, niceness & good political ideas, so I get a warm fuzzy feeling whenever I watch videos of him speaking… I am white but it never occured to me to “fetishize” him until reading this post. Even now the whole idea leaves me unmoved. Maybe it is the white Republican women who are secretly having fetishist thoughts. Of course people have their own personal taste, but in my opinion he is very good-looking. I am weird maybe, but I don’t like my men too pretty or too shiny or too muscly or too forward… my movie star hero is John Cusack (mwah). Now let me go back to watching my Barack Obama videos…

  15. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    @ Christie–ummm…my post wasn’t a directive *to* fetishize our President-elect; part of what I wrote was the fact that the man *has*–and now probably will be, now that he’s sticking around as POTUS, is and will be–fetishize(d). If you feel you don’t do it, groovy. But I also caution you in believing only “those folks over there” do the bad stuff, like fetishizing Obama and other PoCs. Fetishization crosses party lines–the most progressive folks do it as much as the staunchest conservatives.

  16. Fransky wrote:

    As a dyke I really don’t need to put a silicone cast of a man, regardless of whom he is, in my pussy. Ya dig.

    CS- I remember in ATR #93 there was mention by you of a woman getting hit on by other women in a bar & your attitute toward it seemed a little homophobic to me.Just because the woman was of color & the women who hit on here was white does not automatically make the moment racist. Though I was not ther, obviously, the way the tale was recounted felt prejudiced, to me, against LGBTQ people.

    My hope is Racialicious & co. will get a correspondent soon that doesn’t have a heterocentric view towards race & sexuality. My humble 2 cents.
    ~F

  17. Christie wrote:

    @Cruel Secretary … don’t worry, I didn’t think you were advocating fetishizing!! You were merely reporting a very relevant Playgirl article and (odd-looking) new sex toy. I am glad to have learned about these developments, although I don’t relate to the views involved in the original article and toy. I was just hoping to point out that, although this race-fetishization issue with B.O. may well exist (though I have not personally seen evidence of it, as of yet), there are plenty of white women around who find him attractive in a normal, healthy way.

    Whether it is appropriate or not that his youth and attractiveness undoubtably helped him on his way to becoming president is another topic, I think. We can’t really separate out the different parts of him in this way, although it is too bad that there are undoubtably many equally deserving men about who are older and not so good-looking. I think his whole family makes a wonderful first family. And I was just joking about the white Republican women! :)

  18. Christie wrote:

    errr… and equally deserving women, too. Big oops.

  19. Carmen Van Kerckhove wrote:

    Hi Fransky, I believe that in that episode we were discussing this post by M. Dot:
    http://www.racialicious.com/2008/07/01/for-colored-girls-who-have-considered-homicide-when-the-patriarchy-is-enough/

    Hopefully that helps contextualize it a bit.

  20. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    @ Carmen–thanks so much for the back-up, in more ways than one. ::mwah::

    @Fransky–wow! I’m sorry that I so deeply offended you with what I said and that my tenure here has displeased you so. So, please accept my apologies.

    With that said, as you (hopefully) read in the post, the author herself recounted the incident as both racist and sexist, which I thought is how I recounted in the sense of how Black women have occupied this degraded space in the US imagination, in both folks of various races, ethnicities, and genders, and orientations. In M. Dot’s case, the person who treated her in such a degraded manner was a white woman. In that sense it was, we can agree, a negative incident involving people of the same gender.

    Now, the sexual orientation of the woman who did this to M. Dot? Dunno–if you read the post, Fransky, M. Dot never says. (And, you read the post even closer, Fransky, M. Dot never reveals her sexual orientation, either.) And, really, it doesn’t matter–the white woman felt she could come at M. Dot and treat her in a way that M. Dot felt was racist and sexist which, ultimately, she felt degraded her. So, what I recounted was not in a homophobic sense (”how dare that queer white woman come on to straight M. Dot!”) but, I hope, was closer to what M. Dot meant, namely “how dare that white woman–and anyone else, regardless of their race, gender, or orientation–come at me and other Black women, regardless of our orientation, in this manner!”) Like my mom always says, no one has the right to lay their hands on you, and I suspect that’s where M. Dot was coming from, too; however, some folks feel like, influencd by the racialized sexist images of Black women, they can. I apologize that I wasn’t clearer about that point in the podcast.

    As for my comment to you about the dildo: in my neighborhood, we call that being facetious. But, underneath it all, I still stand by my opinion–do you. Apparently, by your response, you’re going to….

    …wait! Didn’t Latoya invite you to email me personally so you and I could talk about your concerns stemming from the podcast a while ago 1) one-on-one and 2) off this blog? Because I recall never hearing from you, Fransky. If Latoya didn’t (and I truly understand if she didn’t, the busy woman!), the offer still stands. You can find my email at my blog, The Cruel Secretary. I’d sincerely love to discuss this with you.

  21. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    This:
    in the sense of how Black women have occupied this degraded space in the US imagination, in both folks of various races, ethnicities, and genders, and orientations.

    should read this:
    in the sense of how Black women have occupied this degraded space in the US imagination, in various folks of various races, ethnicities, and genders, and orientations.

    Apologies…

  22. Fransky wrote:

    Yo CS-
    Thanks for responding. I didn’t get an invite from Latoya to discuss it but no biggie.

    As I mentioned I was not there. So if the *way* Dot was being approached was clearly racist, then I stand corrected. But the way the story was recounted on the podcast didn’t seem clear that it was absolutly racist. It was recounted as a white women hit on a Black woman & that was bad bad bad. So perhaps that should have been more clear. And I should have asked you for clarification.

    I have no beef with you. I just felt some sense of heterosexual entitlement coming from your words & my perception may indeed be wrong. One thing I love about this blog is that we can challenge each other & understand each other better. So please CS, know I do respect your voice & hope both of us can keep on keeping on!

    ~F