Comments

1. Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist! wrote:

   There are two thoughts on the cartoon:

   -that’s sexist and racist! portraying her as a pinata (which is Mexican), being smacked around by a bunch of males (sexist and mysogynistic violence), and thirdly being LYNCHED (part of the KKK’s bloody legacy)

   -on the other hand… I can see what the cartoon means– it’s saying that the GOP is a bunch of racist, sexist idiots who cannot get past Sotomayer’s background and gender. So the cartoon itself is NOT racist and sexist– it’s merely pointing out the hypocrisy and ignorance of the GOP.

   Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 11:15 am ¶

2. David Wynn wrote:

   I can definitely see the racism angle, but I interpreted it as part of the editorial point. Obama knew he was nominating someone the GOP would bash in a horrendous way given the opportunity, so he gave it to them on a silver platter.

   It’s the classic “Oh, GOP, we weren’t expecting you. Even though we do have this place set up exactly like a political PR trap. Funny how that happened. Well, come on in.”

   Is a cartoon using racial imagery to talk about a racial setup itself racist? I don’t think so.

   At least not in this case.

   Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 11:59 am ¶

3. Shelby wrote:

   This is why I love that term “hipster-racism” so very much (thanks, Carmen!) Irony does not dissolve isms.
   So, I see the intent of this cartoon but the outcome is still racist sexism and sexist racism and also just plain-old violent. Fail.

   Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 12:05 pm ¶

4. Shane! wrote:

   I just want to expand on Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist!’s interpretation of the comic:

   Look at the troubled and apprehensive expressions on the faces of the elephants. Also see the smiles on Obama’s and Sotomayor’s faces. The humor here lies in the fact that the GOP can’t afford to beat out Sotomayor’s insides. They need the votes of women and Latinos if they ever hope to become a viable political party again.

   At first glance the imagery is offensive, but as with most things you have to delve a bit deeper to find the true meaning. It’s poignant.

   Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 12:08 pm ¶

5. RJG wrote:

   I don’t even get what the cartoon is trying to convey. If this was an article about Sotomayor being beat on by the GOP, why are the Elephants so baffled in the cartoon? Why the hell did Obama string her up? Where did the sombrero reference come from? Since when is she Mexican anyway?

   It’s like the cartoon wanted to go “the GOP feels dumb for how they acted toward Sotomayor in front of the press” but there are so many odd turns made it makes no sense in the end.

   Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 12:10 pm ¶

6. FeministLookingGlass wrote:

   MASSIVE fail. How many times do cartoonists have to continue to create blatantly racist and sexist cartoons before someone realizes this is offensive? “Hipster -isms” are still -isms.

   Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 12:11 pm ¶

7. Genevieve wrote:

   My first impression was that Sotomayor looked like she’d been hanged… it really detracts from the political commentary because for about half a minute all I saw was “NOOSE!”, then “SOMBRERO! PINATA! RACIST!” Plus I just think the cartoon is kind of confusing; I get that Sotomayor’s the piñata and Pres. Obama’s wearing a sombrero (in case we forgot Sotomayor’s Latina), and I get that the GOP are picking on Sotomayor, thus, the piñata metaphor; but I’m not sure I get how this is supposed to be funny.

   After a few minutes, my impression was that a) Sotomayor has become a prop or a symbol in the situation, b) Pres. Obama is setting up the GOP into a trap in this situation, especially by c) having the press present– with d) the GOP hesitant to step forth and be the first to “hit the piñata”, so to speak (possibly because they suspect a trap). It was unnecessary to have Obama in a sombrero; it was unnecessary to have a piñata in the shape of Sonia Sotomayor (hanging from the ceiling). A little miscalculated and heavy-handed, but not too too bad as far as race goes. I wouldn’t call it sexist aside from Sotomayor not actually being involved in the comic at all, just a prop of her in it. Unless she is tiny and full of candy.

   Personally, I think this would have been much more effective if Pres. Obama (sans sombrero) had invited the GOP to hit a (non-person-shaped) piñata, possibly with Sotomayor’s likeness or name on it. As they hesitated/were blindfolded/went for it, Sonia/the Latino community waited behind a curtain until the GOP were dizzy, with a stick of her/their own…

   Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 12:12 pm ¶

8. Fiqah wrote:

   Aright, said this already ago…but. Latino/Latina does not necessarily = Mexican. Sotomayor is an American of Puerto-Rican descent. These are NOT the same. In a cartoon designed to make fun of Republicans pitching howling fits over her gender and ethnic background, sombreros, pinatas and the concept of stringing anybody up (my good sweet Lord!) should have been left out of the equation. For the record, even if Sotomayor was Mexican this would have been a shitty joke.

   I hate lazy wit. BOOOOOOOOO!

   ::: throws tomatoes :::

   (Sorry about all the tomatoes today, I just got some produce that’s going bad that I need to get rid of.)

   Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 12:22 pm ¶

9. gail wrote:

   @Genevieve: I vote for your revised version of the drawing!!

   Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 12:44 pm ¶

10. jen* wrote:

    terrible imagery. It seems to me that Obama is set up as the one who strung her up – at least that’s what the text implies. But it certainly shows the republicans as the ones willing to take up sticks against her.

    it’s really troubling to me whenever I see people depicted as being hung from something, though. I get what the cartoonist was going for, I just think they went about it all wrong. Even if Sotomayer were Mexican, depicting her as a pinata would be all kinds of wrong. And yes, we know whoever Obama nominates will be abused by the GOP, but this set up just doesn’t work.

    Someone should’ve told the artist to go back to the drawing board.

    Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 12:45 pm ¶

11. RJ wrote:

    While I was really taken aback at the images, the message does not seem to be that bad. It really seems to be saying, “I dare you, Republicans, to even try to attack her.” That if the Republicans try to bash her, they might end up pissing off a lot of Hispanic people. Obama and Sotomayor are both extrememly confident and the Republicans are the ones afraid.

    In fact, the most shocking thing to me is that a cartoon this liberal! would ever appear in The Oklahoman (or as it used to be known, The Daily Disappointment).

    Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 12:53 pm ¶

12. Chris Diaz wrote:

    My take:
    1) Sotomayor is Puerto-Rican, sombreros and pinatas are Mexican.

    2) Since they did make a Mexicna connection, it’s worth noting some things that many Americans don’t know. Mexican-Americans did have to deal with segregated facilities, Brown vs. Board of Education had a precursor involing Mexican-Americans called Mendez vs Westminster School District, and Mexican-Americans were lynched. The rope is just inexcusableto any people of color (especially African-Americans).

    3) An image suggesting a group about to beat a woman with sticks is very misogynistic.

    4) There is obvious racism in the fact so much attention is being payed to Sotomayor’s (family’s) nation of origin. Some attention has been paid to Scalia, but he has black hair, brown eyes, and bronze skin. Alito got a tad bit of attention Souter, Bryer, Roberts, etc… had ZERO attention paid to where they came from. There were no images concerning Czech, Scottish, or any other style of dress or references to the culture of the white justices, particularly in national mainstream media.

    Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 12:57 pm ¶

13. Rachael wrote:

    I think the author of the cartoon was fully aware of the racist and sexist connotations of this imagery, and successfully used them to comedic effect. I don’t find the cartoon offensive in the least.

    Obama is smugly offering Republicans the chance to beat his female nominee like a pinata, in full view of the media, represented by the multitude of cameras. By the expressions on their faces, they clearly know the trouble they’ll be in if they dare to do it. When the cartoonist drew Sotamayor in this environment, he was obviously implying the possibility of racist and sexist violence, but also that this behavior would be wrong, while poking fun of the Republican’s reaction to this reality. The word “fiesta” simply underscores that point – although the Republicans are depicted as possible violent aggressors here, by their facial expressions and body language, Obama and his nominee are clearly the ones having a party.

    I also think the cartoon is accurate: the Republicans have been backing off of their more extreme racist and sexist statements regarding Judge Sotamayor, in advance of her confirmation hearing – the time depicted in the cartoon. noted recognizing that these tactics aren’t going to win them any public respect.

    Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 12:58 pm ¶

14. gwangung wrote:

    Muddled messages for sure.

    I thought it might be funnier if it’s clear Sotomayor is inviting the GOP in as well–that’s a more active, more ironic and more aggressive stance.

    Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 1:04 pm ¶

15. dyspeptic wrote:

    I agree with the DIMA and others who see this cartoon as on Sotomayor and Obama’s side. I am sure that is how the cartoonist meant it.

    On the other hand, you have the Repuglicans who don’t think Limbaugh is a racist and don’t know Colbert is being humorous. So, hard for me to guess which way the editors of any particular paper that runs it meant it.

    Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 2:06 pm ¶

16. April wrote:

    One word…typical.

    The moment I heard of her nomination, I knew this kind of thing would crop up. To me, the really scary thing is that this kind of thing isn’t even shocking anymore. Offensive yes, surprising no.

    Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 3:35 pm ¶

17. Nin wrote:

    I think the cartoon is kind of brilliant. The Mexican theme is making fun of Republicans who stumbled all over themselves with wrong stereotypes about Sotomayor just because she is Latina.

    The elephants not only look gloomy, they also look dumb and confused. Obama’s words also bring to mind “cast the first stone” echoes.

    The imagery is strong (and certainly offensive in a way), but it is a very honest representation of the political circus that some in the Republican base have made out of their attacks on Sotomayor.

    Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 4:06 pm ¶

18. mute wrote:

    i with rj and shane and rachel. while the image of a brown person with a rope hanging behind them is a little uncomfortable, i don’t find the cartoon to be offensive. i think its a very aware employment of particular images.

    yes, sotomayor is puerto rican, but in public discourse we don’t talk about a puerto rican vote, we talk about a hispanic vote. we clump everyone together. national differences are relevant of course, but republicans aren’t worried about alienating just puerto ricans, they’re worried about f-ing up their relations with all spanish speaking folks.

    i also agree the expressions on the faces of sotomayor, obama, and the repubs is more important than the fact that the repubs are holding bats. the repubs are wide eyed because they’re panicking. obama is heavy lidded and smirking because he knows they can’t take a shot at the judge without completely screwing themselves. even though she is strung up like a pinata, i don’t see sotomayor as powerless in this cartoon. she’s a smart woman who is currently playing her role until she is confirmed. Its what every public official has to do, man or woman. She is trying to stay golden (her smiling face) and relatively untouchable.

    Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 4:45 pm ¶

19. Barbara wrote:

    I have a unique take on this situation, since I worked for 12 years in the editorial news department of the newspaper that ran this cartoon. What it comes down to is this: So far, The Oklahoman is the only newspaper I’ve noted that’s being criticized for running this cartoon. The Oklahoman may not be the only paper in the country to run this syndicated cartoon (artist is Chip Bok, through Creator’s Syndicate, don’t forget to include them in your letters of irritation), but it’s not surprising if it is, since the cartoon easily fits the paper’s ultraconservative editorial stance and that of its readership.

    My first glance at it was, this cartoon shows racist/sexist images because it’s inherently LAZY. It uses stereotypes — and incorrect ones at that — to make its point. There seems to be a lot of effort here to explain why these are not racist/sexist images, but to me, if you have to work that hard to explain it, then the editorial cartoon has FAILED. I see a lot of articles on Racialicious where it’s explained that racism is not just about blatant acts or behaviors, but also world views and understandings of people and structures of power and privileges. This cartoon was lazy and gets its main power from unreflective privileged thinking that says it’s OK to indicate Spanish-speaking via piñatas and sombreros and women as ready for a beatin’. I’m paraphrasing Jay Smooths’ Racist Acts vs. Racist Intent bit here, but when you get down to it, there’s a lot here that IS racist/sexist, and we need to be talking about why that is instead of why that isn’t.

    Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 5:23 pm ¶

20. BSK wrote:

    I think the point, based on the expression on Obama’s and the elephants’ faces, is that Obama knows he has put the GOP in an uncomfortable situation. The GOP wants to tear apart Sotomayor, for good or bad reasons, but is afraid to do so because of fear that they will be labeled racist. It can easily be interpreted as a manipulation technique by Obama, as if he is putting someone out there who is “off limits” for criticism (valid or not) because it will immediately be dismissed as racist or sexist.

    So many possible interpretations. If a political comic is not clear, it has most likely failed. And if you are going to fail, try not to do it with racist, sexist, and other offensive imagery and memes.

    Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 8:34 pm ¶

21. Paz wrote:

    The GOP wants to tear apart Sotomayor, for good or bad reasons, but is afraid to do so because of fear that they will be labeled racist. It can easily be interpreted as a manipulation technique by Obama, as if he is putting someone out there who is “off limits” for criticism (valid or not) because it will immediately be dismissed as racist or sexist.

    I agree, that’s what the cartoon appears to be, which means the cartoonist is living in a fantasy world. As soon as Sotomayor was announced, Gingrich tweeted that she was racist, the GOP, Limbaugh, FOX and the like threw fits over her supposedly thinking herself superior to white men. They have no problems attacking her ethnicity and her gender — I’ve heard more about those two things than her actual qualifications. Even Time magazine had her on the cover with the title “Latina Judge.” As opposed to regular judge???

    *Pat Buchanan actually had the audacity to say that white men are facing what blacks faced years ago. I know I shouldn’t be surprised since it’s Pat Buchanan, but that still makes me want to throw things.

    Posted 04 Jun 2009 at 10:49 pm ¶

22. mute wrote:

    I think the context in which people encounter this cartoon matters just as much as the cartoon itself. Despite the quotation from the other blog, the cartoon here is just pretty much standing alone. (Standing alone on a politically progressive blog.)

    If you know nothing of the paper(s) in which a cartoon is printed, nor the artist and know nothing of what ideological or racial attitudes they’ve shown in the past, I think that can increase chances for far more disparate interpretations of an image.

    Posted 05 Jun 2009 at 12:37 am ¶

23. Marcel wrote:

    Interestingly, I never saw a cartoon of Condolizza Rice with a rope around her neck, and President Bush opening a game to donkeys with bats…
    I guess cartoonists with a republican tilt have just better taste.

    Posted 05 Jun 2009 at 9:25 am ¶

24. Naomi wrote:

    I am going off topic. As a Nuyorican that is the same age as Judge Sotomayor- our parents drilled into us that in order to be successful, we (latinas) had to be better than our white counter-parts in order to be accepted and succeed in our society. The judge’s comment merely reflects her challenges in overcoming racism and succeeding in spite of being Latina. When I read about her comment, it echoed what my parents told me. Some latinos succumbed to the racial stereo-types-other use it as a tool for success. Sonia-I can not wait for you to be appointed!

    Posted 05 Jun 2009 at 9:33 am ¶

25. PPR_Scribe wrote:

    The images to the center and right of the cartoon take up a lot of visual and rhetorical space. What some seem to be overlooking is the direction of the cameras and microphones. They seem to be pointing in the direction of the worried-looking elephants. The implication is that the world is watching what the GOP reaction to this Obama “set-up” or ploy.

    Both Obama and Sotomayor are smiling, like “gotcha.”

    So, I guess the elephants are the victims here–placed in a difficult position….

    Posted 05 Jun 2009 at 11:49 am ¶

26. elle the elephant wrote:

    My first take was that the image was pretty offensive, but after thinking it over and reading all of the comments, I’m more ambivalent. Without knowing the illustrators political and racial leanings, most of us cannot make a decision, of this being racist or not. It tries to parody the racist response of many republicans, but it could be covertly or subconsiously approving of those racist attacks.

    On one hand it uses lynching of a person of color, portrays Sonya Sontomoyar as a pinata, a stereotype associated with Latins in general,promotes violence against women*, and has anyone noticed that Obama’s Black features seem kinda exaggerated? The big ears,big lips, and he seems alot darker than usual.

    On the other, it portrays the republicans as cowards, they look scared and tired. Republicans don’t come out very positively either.

    So, I’m in the middle of the line. Its either badly done anti-racist satire against Republicans, or pro-racist crud against Obama and Sontomayor, and were not going to know until the creator comes out and says something.

    *The article says that Oklahoma has a history of extreme violence against women,just out of curiosity, could someone please give some examples?

    Posted 05 Jun 2009 at 7:10 pm ¶

27. Lindz wrote:

    And the Daily Disappointment plummets some more.

    I’m an Okie. We call the paper The Daily Disappointment, because that’s what it is. And I would bet the editors did not see any liberal satire when selecting this. Think Fox News in print and without proofreaders.

    Here’s what I’ve been able to find at the moment on domestic violence here.
    http://www.edmondsun.com/local/local_story_281234427.html

    And now I’m going to listen to my Carrie Underwood album and try and think about the good of my home state…

    Posted 06 Jun 2009 at 2:54 am ¶

28. Alex Lyrics wrote:

    It seems tat some biggots still will not rest until the world has completely changed colors and nationalities have totally mixed.
    I wont be alove when this happens, but it would sure be nice to see, these racist idiots, die off and become extinct. Attacking Obama, because hes a black man in the white house, and now a woman who will be in our highest court. Not too smart if you ask me. If th rest of us haven’t noticed, the politicians are backing off her for a reason.
    hahahahaha lol when she is nominated, these folks better hope never to cross her path.

    Posted 06 Jun 2009 at 3:35 pm ¶

29. Louise wrote:

    WRONG IN SO MANY WAYS!!!!

    JUST REPLACE THE LATINA WITH A BLACK PERSON AND WE ALL INSTANTLY SEE WHY THIS IS SUCH AN OFFENSIVE CARTOON!!

    NO WAY!!

    Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 9:07 am ¶