Shouldn't New Orleans be neopolitan?

Nah, I held on really, really tight.

As has been previously mentioned, all television (with very few exceptions--Telemundo and BET) is essentially "White Entertainment Television." The media is biased to, not just white people, but rich white people (I am not one of those, so I have forgone television completely). With regards to "labeling," the notion that there exists "Black Entertainment Television" throws the bias of "general-audience" television into sharper relief. As such, I think it is perfectly appropriate.

Having lived in Louisana for more than five years, I witnessed, first hand, the two cultures at work (sometimes with, sometimes against each other).

All-African-American Mardi Gras krewes like Zulu in N.O., all-African-American cultural celebrations like the Zydeco Festival in Plaisance, all-African-American clubs like El Sido's and Hamilton Beach Club in Lafayette (I have been honored to witness, participate, and enjoy all of these unique experiences) exist. They exist, at least to me, as a means for perpetuating a very separate and a very valuable culture. There is nothing colorblind about any of this. I do not see this separation as racist--I see a community that has been threatened, and I see a community that is struggling to stay in-tact.

I would like to concede, however, that arbitrary lines and separations are too easily drawn based on skin-tone and/or native language. I see deeper, more easily hidden, lines being etched. Economic difference might soon trump the rifts that have, to this point, been all about skin tone.

Oh man I seriously meant to type chad. LOL

You disagree that the US is predominantly white? I did not offer it as a justification for reverse racism, I simply stated a fact. I don't believe BET refuses to allow white people on their programs since, as an avid watcher, I do notice the token whites on the shows.

This is not a situation similar to legally barring one type of person from using the water fountain. Ebony is not a racist magazine. It is targeting a culture that is predominantly black.

You want them to rebuild New Orleans in the style of Naples, Italy? http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=neopolitan

Or did you mean out of vanilla, strawberry, and chocolate ice cream?

Or did you perhaps mean cosmopolitan?
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=cosmopolitan



P2

No offence Euterpe but I think this is wrong.
This kind of analysis was certainly true in the 70's, (and was also a favorite of 1980's style Cultural Studies programs), but it has become less and less true over time. I don't think it's particularly relevant to talk of "white culture" anymore in this way, certainly not in a global sense.

The white persons counter argument to the kind of statement made above, has always been that the dominant culture is not really "white" but simply the dominant "monoculture" and therefore a blend of all the rest. It's certainly true that this point of view has traditionally had a kind of hollow ring to it when you look at the actual cultural and racial makeup of the leading members of this supposedly "colourblind" monoculture (mostly white, mostly male, and mostly rich), but times have moved on.

In my part of the world, (as in many others) the members of this dominant monoculture are *not* mostly rich white males. This is simply a lot less true than it has been in the past. Although again, it does seem generally true that in the US things havent progressed as fast as in other areas.

A great deal of the media produced in the area that I live in, written by the people that live in this area or acted in/directed by those people is "mainstream" monoculture media but media that *does* include different races, ethnicities and both genders to a very large degree. Many European cultures are also like this now. You only have to go to a good foreign film festival or read some of the local literature to see that.

Of course it's not perfect and yes, traditional "white culture" (whatever that is) has had a great influence, but to simply brand the rest of the world as "rich white guy stuff" is (I feel) a serious mistake.

I have had friends from many different races over the years but more importantly many of my friends have been "blends" of many different races and cultural backgrounds. Irish-Japanese-Amerindian, Chinese-Black or even just White folks who's grandparents are from four different European countries. I have had several friends who are born and bred in Africa, but that are white skinned (or more commonly), of East Indian origin. It is *these* people that are the representatives of the new monoculture and *they* that form the backdrop to my personal perception of things like "Black TV."

I am with Chip on this one.

The idea of a magazine or a TV show that's "just for Black people" is offensive to me and definitely "racial" even if you chose to not use the hot-button "racist" word. I just dont think it's appropriate in this day and age to be seperating yourself off by the colour of your skin and saying you need some kind of special media or treatment and then turning around and getting upset when others characterise you by the same criteria.

Even if you say that its simply the wording that's wrong and that "Black" is not really about the colour of your skin but about your ethnicity of cultural heritage, it's still wrong. In common parlance "racism" is about ethnicity as well. (Jewish people are not a race, but we still talk of "racism" against them.) Even if you re-labelled all these "Black" things as "Afro-American" where does that leave my white and East-Indian friends from Africa?

Is a man who grew up in Detroit (who happens to have a black skin), wearing Nike runners and listening to rap music made by another man who grew up in California (also with a black skin), more "African-American" than an East-Indian lady who grew up in the burbs in Zimbabwe and recently immigrated to the US?

Even if you talk about a group that is specifically black-skinned and specifically from Africa like the Zulu's, if you aren't prepared to include the white GF of one of the members, or have a female leader, or maybe deal with the half-chinese children of another member, you're definitely going down the wrong path in my view.

For this reason, the very word "Black" (as a cultural seperator), is rapidly becoming some sort of quasi-racist term IMO. It seems clear to me that whatever labels are used, the groups in question have to allow for people of different skin colours to "join" before we will ever be rid of racism. It seems clear to me that as a very minimum we have to start using more accurate and inclusive labels instead of ones that directly refer to a racial origin.

It also seems clear that while we protect our varous cultural heritages, we must also be prepared for the coming reality of disolving into the mainstream monoculture like so many snowmen on a sunny day.

I was wondering, but then, I figured I'd just go for the laugh.

We'll have to agree to disagree. If calling something White History Month, or White Entertainment Television is inappropriate (which it is), it's the same for black, minority status or not. You can target a culture without making it about race.

Edit: Great post Dianne I agree with everything you said and you put it far more succinctly than I did.

Does that mean I can't drink green beer on St. Patty's day?

Technically, that's incorrect. At least given a certain definition of racism, which requires that it be institutionalized.

Technically.

Sadly, that's the main point I grasped out of all the race-related theories I've been studying lately, aside from the fact that any discussion on, or attempt at avoidance of, the topic of race, is so problematic that it seems doubtful anyone will arrive at a solution even in any given intellectual "circle" anytime soon.

That said, many of the arguments here back up what I've long believed: separation isn't a good solution, nor is artificially raising one group over the other (like programs intended to correct for current imbalances, such as Affirmative Action); if the latter were ever to be fully realized, it would merely be a replacement of our current system and prejudices with the same system, but designed for someone else's benefit. As it is, something like Affirmative Action is such an imperfect, temporary, partial solution as to be hardly a solution at all.

On the other hand, I don't mind that BET and such exist, as long as I'm not denied admittance to an event, for instance, because I'm not Black or whatever. And I really wish there was never a need for such things for any minority group - to give a personal example, it'd be great if I could find "lesbian-themed novels" (or more of them anyway) in any ordinary bookstore, maybe even mixed in among non "lesbian-themed" works of similar genre (often romance, but some might be sci-fi, general fiction, mystery, etc.).

Of course, it is convenient to have similar things all grouped together - the moreso if they're normally scarce or even underrepresented. EDIT: By "similar things" I mean books, shows, etc., with minority themes, or for niche audiences generally.

On a lighter note, I don't like to think of people as flavors of ice cream. It ruins my appetite for ice cream.

That last, by the way, was all I was originally going to post. Heh.

This guy is truely the Brother from Outer Space. Remember all that UFO talk? Oh yea...

While it's appropriate to say, cut the guy some slack.

His city was wiped out in a hurricane and he got the shit end of the stick, primarily because it's largely occupied by blacks.

I find that way more offensive.

Yeah, good thing 'Bama and Mississippi are all recovered now huh.

I certainly hope we reach the state where we truely are colorblind, but the sad truth is that we aren't there yet. Discrimination based on skin color does still exist in the US and it's more common than many of us would like to think. The difference is that it isn't done overtly anymore. I do think things are getting much better as time goes on, but it isn't time to "declare victory" yet.

Because of discrimination in the past, the black experience in the US is unique. For me, things like black history month are not about exhaulting one group of people just because of the color of their skin, but rather an opportunity for all of us to look at our history from a different perspective and understand what really happened, face it and come to terms with what it means to all of us. It should never be about shame and guilt, but about learning and growth. It is also about celebrating those who achieved in the face of overwhelming odds. I do hope for the day when it isn't neccessary to have a special black history month like discussed in the Morgan Freeman article quoted earlier, I just don't think we're there yet.

I don't know what the best solution is, but saying that we're done and everything is fine won't work. I do think we need to constantly reevaluate how we address these sorts of issues and how we move forward.

What we need is more tolerence all around, not just based on skin color, but also on gender, sexual orientation, religion etc. We should live in a society where people have an equal opportunity to achieve based on their individual abilities, not on some arbitrary grouping. We should also be free to call a jerk a jerk, regardless of what catagories they fit into.

bleh, i'm babbling now... hopefully some of what I said made sens

I find it hard to think of something such as BET as racist as it isn't exclusionary. I agree that the creation of White Entertainment TV would get the extremists such as The Rev. Farrakhan in a tizzy.

So, I ask if you would have the same issue with BET if it was called Urban Street Entertainment Media and continued to target the rap, Afro, urban culture?

As it is, taking the name out of discussion, the station is just a media outlet marketed to a specific group of people that they felt was a large enough untapped market to warrant it's own station. Nickelodeon, We network, and Outdoor Life all have specifically defined audiences and I fail to see the difference. BET is not a government sponsor entity, but free enterprise at work. BET, btw is owned by Viacom.

Had you been discussing employment quotas and the like, I would be more likely to agree with you.

No, I wouldn't have the same issue. In case you hadn't noticed, popular culture is saturated with urban, rap, hip-hop, R&B, and other things that have their roots in African-American culture. It's no longer "black" culture. It's mainstream. BET has some great jazz programming that I like to watch. I find it entertaining, and I'm not black. Imagine that.

Amen to that. I don't understand why adding a visual component somehow changes things. Look at this forum. We don't know the race or gender of most of the people we're communicating with and it doesn't matter because it's irrelevant.

Fess up Chip, you're a lesbian african-eskimo mix woman in her late 50s, arent you?

Great discussion going on here, I find it novel and am enjoying it immensely.

Damn, you're on to me!

N. O. development plan. Note the proliferation of nuts.