I am debating Daryl Cobranchi about an ad by a group called America's Pac. He thinks it is racist, I think it isn't. We're running polls on our two blogs to see what our respective readers think. Here's the transcript of a conversation between two black men:
"If you make a little mistake with one of your ‘hos,' you'll want to dispose of that problem tout suite, no questions asked," one of the men says.
"That's too cold. I don't snuff my own seed," the other replies.
"Maybe you do have a reason to vote Republican," the first man says.
Let me know whether you think this snippet, in isolation, sounds "racist" to you. After you've left an (honest) comment, check out the full transcipt of "Don't Go There" and the other 23 radio ads on the America's PAC "Vote Our Values" site. Or you can go over to Daryl's site and see the comments there.
I don't think this ad is racist--to be racist, it would have to attack and it doesn't do that. However, as a white woman living in rural America I'm not crazy about it, but I don't like boombaboomba "music" either. I think to get a true reading as to it's offensiveness, I think you'd have to ask the target market. I would imagine that they would think it's more funny than anything, just like I think it's funny when someone makes fun of my southern twang.
This is kinda fun - seeing a little bit of blunt contextualized hyperbole 'offend' the cultural sensitivities of the left! whodathunkit?
How can a person (or group) be racist against one's own race? It doesn't make any sense! There is definitely a bias coming through, but it is behaviorally based, not racially based! It's a bit of dialog (scripted for the purposes of the ad, to be sure) that could be placed within any number of contexts and still be on point - whether you agree or disagree. I find it to be rather encouraging, not necessarily offensive!
I don't know how many of the previous commenters are black. It might be a matter of perspective. Personally, I find the ad rather offensive and, yes, racist (though perhaps not intentionally so). It's rather ignorant and condescending to try to reach out to black male voters by featuring an ad talking about "one of your hos".
I worked for a year or two with a roomfull of people who I have no problem imagining them having that conversation, with those words if the topic had ever come up. So, it is true to life in my experience.
And they were all of the same racial group and city. That was their style of talking, their vocabulary - the music that they listened to. Except for the part about voting Republican.
So .. is an accurate portrayal racist? It's clear to me who's being stereotyped in the ad. Insofar as their racial group *chooses* to talk like that and someone uses that to communicate to that racial group - I suppose you might call it racist.
Is a message in computer tones and using techno-speak therefore speciesist?
I've known several men (of various ethnic backgrounds) who would refer to women in such disrespectful terms as the one used above, but I've never known anyone who would mix the word "ho" with the phrase "tout suite." Have you? ;) Somehow I have a great deal of trouble imagining the conversation above taking place between real people.
I'm not arguing that the sponsors of the ad are racist against their fellow black Americans, but they are perpetuating a racist stereotype. The ad sends the message that this is what black men are like - they're ignorant and they disrespect women. Some black men are like that, and the same could be said of white, Asian, or Hispanic men. But you and I both know a number of black men who do not fit the stereotype perpetuated in our society, and this ad is insulting and condescending to those men - men like my father and uncle and brothers. So yes, I find it incredibly offensive.
I can't help but wonder if you would all be so sanguine about an ad that depicted a group closer to home in a similarly unflattering light. Say, an ad that portrays white men as sexist oppresors, or Christians as hateful bigots, or Southerners as racist reactionaries? I'm reminded of an ad that aired in rural Maryland, warning men that if they beat their wives, the state would confiscate their guns.
If you haven't listened to the whole ad, you won't get the whole picture. I find the entire ad disturbing, but it's INTENDED to be disturbing. It's a dialogue between two black men: one, a Republican, has returned from Iraq. He's a father who refuses to go to the casino. He is faithful to his wife, unlike his friend.
Both men are black: one is a hardworking Republican, the other a loose living Democrat. The issue that tips the scales in the conversation is abortion--the Democrat draws the line at "snuffing his own seed."
If you believe there IS such a thing as a black Republican, then it's a pretty harsh PARTISAN ad, but it isn't "racist." If you believe that all African-Americans are Democrats, then you might say it is racist.
But if you believe all black folk are Democrats, you're too prejudiced to argue with...
I'm afraid listening to the entire ad only reinforces my original impression.
First off, it's not at all clear from listening to the ad that both men are black; only one of them "sounds" black, at least in the stereotypical sense that black voices are usually portrayed on the radio. Where are we getting the information that this is a dialogue between two black men?
I don't think the ad is at all redeemed by the fact that it features a clean-living, hard working black Republican. The fact is that most black Americans are staunch Democrats. The ad pits the lazy, shiftless, unfaithful black Democrat against the hard-working, loyal black Republican. This could be seen as implying that black people who have their acts together are Republicans (and therefore in the minority of black Americans) while black people who are frittering their lives away are Democrats (and in the majority of black Americans). Black people, and black men in particular, have historically been portrayed in American culture as lazy, shiftless and sexually promiscuous - and continue to be portrayed as such. So it's difficult for me, personally, to avoid the conclusion that this ad is perpetuating insulting and negative stereotypes about black people.
In any event, I wonder who this group expects to persuade with this entirely unflattering and condescending ad. Black Democrats are unlikely to be attracted to a party whose supporters portray them as lazy and immoral.
I expect that the following will offend you to some degree, but it is an honest response. I'll respond to your comments from bottom to top.
Just about every single time someone says the word racist, I assume that they're referring to me: a white male. Insofar as I don't want to get into trouble, I have to watch what I say, how I look when something is said, what I laugh at, which positions I hold, how I address anyone who's not also a white male. I live with racism on a constant and daily basis. Anybody who's different and disagrees with anything I say - BAM - they *can* (not that they always or often do) say, 'That cracker's just a racist bigot!'
I've heard the ads you're referring to, but it doesn't bug me nearly as much. I'm not even going to type the n-word even though I've probably heard it half a dozen times this week directly from the mouths of African-Americans addressed to other African-Americans. Are they being racist? If one of them turned and called me cracker in the post-office, would everyone be as shocked as if I addressed them with the n-word. To use the recent controversy surrounding VA Senator-candidate George Allen for an example - I have to watch everything I say and write because thirty years down the road who knows what they'll go back and try to accuse me of.
Not that I seek to conceal who I am or what I think ...
One of my ancestors was a plantation owner who had multiple slaves. My grandfather worked for years with the Civil Rights movement and Martin Luther King, Jr. My parents chose a black man for my God-father. I've got an honorary "Uncle Bill" who's straight off the boat from Ghana. My sons (if, as, when I have any) *could* possibly grow up and choose to revive the KKK (although I fervently hope not).
I hate racism. It's a special form of pride, of hatred, of contempt for men and women created in the image of God. The same goes for sexism (contempt of men for women AND women for men). Again, just pointing out that the vitriolic acid poured out on men (brutes, beasts, bigots, louts, boors, dumb, stupid, etc) goes unaddressed and uncorrected. Those men (and women) of any race (white, hispanic, oriental, black, etc) who participate in such beliefs and express it in such language are not people I want to closely associate with. As a Christian I am commanded to love everyone - "Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all." Col 3:11.
For any man (or woman) who lives a life dedicated to serving and respecting others - they have my respect and admiration. We need more of them, we need to encourage them, and we need to point others towards their example.
On a very practical note - obviously the authors of the ad (african-americans, themselves, by all accounts) put those two phrases together and believed that it would be believable to their audience. They're the ones shelling out the big bucks for these ads, and they're the ones coming out of the urban culture. I'll take their word on this one.
I agree with Scott that it's meant to be offensive, to some degree. They're challenging one another's beliefs.
I'd be careful to be the first to say that not all Democrats are gamblers and cheaters. Republicans have their fair share of men (and women) who have those and other vices. Vices are not party property. (Well, I was going to be first to say it, but you beat me to it, when I checked the original page)
On the other hand, when I look at the positions held by the two parties, I do agree with the ad that Republican positions (generally) are more favorable towards creating and keeping wealth*, towards promoting faithfulness to one's spouse, towards protecting life, towards defending American lives and property, and towards individual resonsibility. As I understand Democratic positions (generally) they favor distributing wealth rather than creating it, providing for families (i.e. mothers) out of wed-lock, which encourages guys to sleep around/walk off, they're obviously pro-abortion, and they seem to me to be eager to run home rather than take the fight to our enemies.
*creating and keeping wealth doesn't depend on race - it depends on playing by the economic rules in this country. Just about EVERY immigrant group in America has had it tough and been (violently) discriminated against as a race at one point or another: Irish, Germans, Chinese, Hispanics ... they've all succeeded or begun to do pretty well.
There's a lot to respond to in your comment, but much of it will have to wait. I do have to say, though, that I *highly* doubt that the sponsors of the ad are coming out of an "urban culture". We have no reason to believe this - the fact that it's a black group does not mean that they are from an urban context. African-American cultures are no more uniform than white cultures are - they are urban, rural, suburban, etc. I think it's a bit naive to assume that a group of black Republicans wealthy enough to sponsor a large radio ad campaign are coming out of the urban demographic they are attempting to reach with these ads.
I'm sorry that people have used the term 'racist' indiscriminately in your presence, but I hardly see what that has to do with my use of the term. Same goes for the n-word. The fact that some black people use the term has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not *you* should be able to use it. A lot of people have made that argument to me; I have yet to understand how it's at all relevant.
My understanding (and please correct me where I'm wrong) is that proportionately speaking, it's a simple set of facts that blacks in America have a greater percentage of: young men who commit crimes, single-parent (mother) homes, drug abuse, failing schools/students, poor/low economic status, a disproportionately high rate of abortion, etc. [In short, it reminds me of the Irish in the 1800s to a large degree]
These issues are heart-breaking in any context - for any people - for any person.
I DON'T see that as a *racial* problem, but rather as a *cultural* problem. Y'all are no different from the rest of the human race - there's the same qualities of love and hate and courage and cowardice and creativity and apathy and dignity and shame. But it does seem that insofar as one thing leads to another, your culture in America (predominantly Democratic, by your own reckoning) contributes to the ongoing cycle of problems.
Strong marriages for example lead to less crime, greater economic success/stability, fewer STDs, happier children who do better in school, which leads in time to a new generation that is richer, stronger, and better equipped to marry and raise their own families.
By no means would I say that every Democrat is lazy and shiftless (nor every black man) ... but on the other hand, if the statistics are true ... it would seem there's a greater proportion of them.
And, in the final analysis, obviously politicians and party workers choose to paint as vivid a contrast as they can in the 30 seconds they have. Nuances are lost and (to put it with only a hint of the pun intended) "truths" are communicated in black and white terms. It isn't good, but neither does it have to define the debate.
