I am someone who has played both sides of the line – that line being calling racism on one side and downplaying it on the other. I have often called other “black” people on crying racism, thinking perhaps they were just looking for it. However, the recent hubbub surrounding both the possible blackface caricature in the video game Loco Roco, and the controversial line of Playstation Portable ads running in Holland has brought something very important to my attention. It is that racism has become so subversive, so interwoven into the fabric of modern society, that it often goes unnoticed, ignored, or patently dismissed. Worse yet, you have people using others’ claims of racism as a platform to reverse the criticism, and to accuse the aggrieved of being “too sensitive” or some kind of “reactionary”. It is my opinion that no white person has any right to even comment on what non-whites perceive to be racism.
Three of the antagonists from the game Loco Roco
In the case of Loco Roco, perhaps I could just ignore the matter and say that people are overreacting, if it weren’t for Japan’s notoriety in using blackface. The Pokemon Jynx, Oilman from Megaman, and Mr. Popo from Dragonball Z are some examples. It is true that in Japan there aren’t so many “black” people, so it’s not really a big issue there. However, that doesn’t make it any more acceptable. Just because a whole bunch of racists live in a town with no black people, does it mean that’s it’s fine and dandy for them to walk around saying nigger this, nigger that, espousing their disgusting opinions, just because no one’s around to be offended? So then are we to say that racism is okay sometimes? Wrong. It is never okay.
Now, do I think that the Japanese developers of this game personally feel any malice towards black people, or have designed their characters to be offensive to black people? No, probably not. Neither does the white person who says “Now that’s one smart black man!”. Well-intentioned, perhaps, but underlined by the implication that the person’s intelligence is in some way connected to their blackness. Is he only smart when compared to other black people? Or is it that although he’s smart, let’s not forget he’s also black? Something like this would go right over the heads of people who haven’t experienced racism.
One image shows a “white” woman conceivably dominating a “black” woman
As for the PSP ads, I don’t think that Sony intended the racist message these images appear to invoke, but they were indeed irresponsible for not recognizing the implications and people’s inevitable reactions. In the Netherlands, where the ad was posted, the “black” population is negligible and so there’s hardly anyone around to be offended. However, that doesn’t make it appropriate.
A second image shows the power roles reversed – most likely to deflect inevitable accusations of racism
Regardless of which woman “wins” the little ad-battle representing PSPs, there’s a question of why is fight imagery being used in the first place? It appeals to this notion that there has to be some kind of battle or power struggle between black and white. Why?
These two consoles are not competing with one another – they are both from the same company. So why not have an image of the black “inviting” the white onto the scene, e.g. having the two holding hands or something of that nature? The two PSPs then become like “sisters”, rather than combatants, which more accurately reflects the relationship. Not only would you eliminate the accusations of racism, but you’d be making a powerful statement outside the context of selling PSPs – that black and white can coexist and share the same space – in this case, the market.
Sounds good to me. Surely someone had to have considered something like this, but for some reason thought that a battle between black and white would sell better. So is this an issue of bad marketing, or a question of what kind of values appeal to US as a society? In any case, the ad campaign was successful in that it caused a lot of discussion, and the images spread far outside the target audience in Holland. Whether or not it was Sony’s intention to offend anyone, it can be said for certain that they are playing off of the strength of racism in the global consciousness to draw attention to their product. Even in discussing the matter here, I am supporting them. But then that doesn’t really matter, because the point I am trying to make here has little to do with Loco Roco or the PSP ads themselves, but with the larger issue which they have brought to light.
What the nay-sayers (i.e. against accusations of racism) in both cases fail to acknowledge is the idea of institutionalized racism. For those of you who haven’t heard of it, let me give you a basic explanation. It is when racism is so thoroughly integrated into a society, such an inexorable theme indoctrinated upon every citizen, that sometimes we fail to even notice it because it no longer stands out. That is the state of things in America – as evidenced by all of the people so quick to deny the mere possibility that this Japanese game is using a racist concept. As evidenced by the few black people who dismissed the suggestion out of hand – institutionalized racism often goes unnoticed. For people who have never experienced racism, it’s even more difficult to see.
It is really easy for such people to say that the aggrieved are overreacting. One of the more common responses to these claims of racism was that we don’t see white people complaining about white stereotypes, or the general acceptance of “racism” towards whites by certain minorities, such as comedians. Well, what exactly IS a white stereotype? Is there even such a thing? And if it is, does it have any real history? Does it offend ANY white person? And who, more often than not, are the creators of these images? Most likely white people themselves. There is hardly an instance of a white stereotype being used, and where they are, why WOULD any non-white person comment on it? Like white people in any instance of racism against black people or Asian people or whoever else – it would probably go over their head, because it is not their experience.
If anything, white stereotypes are a study in the celebration of whiteness. It is not only integrated into the image of power or prominence, but also in the American standard of beauty. And in that the same is true of games coming out of Japan – the creators not even representing their OWN people in their games – shows just how celebrated whiteness is everywhere. But if you still feel so personally slighted by these so-called white stereotypes, then perhaps we should start a petition against every media that’s ever used that iconic white stereotype. How DARE they cast white people in lead roles, or in positions of power, which obviously has no basis in reality! How offensive! How dare they misrepresent white people like that!
In the same vein, people mentioned the stereotypes against so-called “rednecks”. Redneck was a term invented by white people to stigmatize the sharecroppers who worked the fields alongside the slaves, which put them in the lowest possible status bracket. Their necks were “red” from working in the sun for hours. Redneck is actually an extension of the racism against black people, because it was due to their occupational association with the slaves that they were seen as low-class and inferior. People can’t cry racist about “redneck”, because it came from within. Not to mention that it is pretty much ONLY white people who continue to popularize the term – comedians like Jeff Foxworthy and Larry the Cable Guy who flaunt their “redneckness” to make money. It’s never been an issue because nobody gives a damn.
Now of course white people experience racism. The difference is that racism against whites is virtually meaningless. It holds no power. “Oh no! That black guy called me a honkey!” Yeah, I’m sure they’re so busted up about it. Because it carries such a long history of discrimination and degradation. If you can’t tell, my tongue is firmly lodged into my cheek. There has been racism against particular ethnic groups who have adopted a “white” identity, such as Italians, Poles, Slavs, Jews, and Greeks, which is usually the whole reason behind adopting that identity. However, in these cases, it is more often than not other so-called “white” people who perpetrate the discrimination. Other minorities, especially those who cannot qualify for whiteness, have internalized racism, and should know better than to turn it upon others.
Racism itself is bad enough, certainly, and I don’t in anyway justify it against anyone – including white people – but as white people as a “whole” have never been in a disenfranchised subjugated position – such as 500+ years of slavery and discrimination or having virtually your whole population wiped out, the remnants shoved onto a reservation. Again, that kind of racism has no power. It won’t affect them from getting a job, from marrying someone, from being able to be a member of Club X. Even the aforementioned racism against certain “white” ethnic groups did not prevent immigrants from being naturalized in the United States, unlike African Americans, Mexicans, and Native Americans, who remained second-class citizens even in the aftermath of slavery. Racism against “whites” won’t get them stopped by a cop for daring to have a nice car. It won’t continue to get their language and culture pigeon-holed as inferior.
A second popular argument was that minorities are always just looking for racism, and so it’s easy for them to find it in anything. This is an argument of perception which those unaffected by racism just can’t make. Hatred and discrimination have marked the history of “black” people and other non-white minorities in this country. It is something that has followed them for hundreds of years. In the present day, the techniques generally are not as blatant as hood-wearers and cross-burners (although those things certainly still exist in degenerate pockets of the country), but rather more subversive. Things like BET which fetishizes those aspects of “black culture” seen as marketable. Worse yet, in the case of black people, their own stigmas are sold to them through commercialized hip-hop culture. In what amounts to supreme irony, hip-hop originated as a statement against racism. That right there shows just what institutionalized means – that racism is so thoroughly ingrained in our society, that we’re used to it, and sometimes don’t even notice. This also includes the people who create racist imagery – sometimes not even recognizing the undertones themselves.
If you were never a victim of racism, then of course you won’t notice. Disenfranchised or otherwise aggrieved minorities don’t have to look for anything. To those who have experienced it, racism is as obvious and real as the sun. We’d have to be blind NOT to see it. And so many of us are blind – as even I have been for most of my life. It takes a personal experience with racism to become more alert and aware of it.
In cases of perceived racism, minorities must strike a precarious balance between calling it out, and avoiding the soapbox, because of the inevitable “cry wolf” scenario that ensues. Ignorant, privileged, and invariably white people then feel justified in calling minorities hyper-sensitive. So by picking and choosing the right battles, I think we take away that defense. At the same time, we should red flag cases like Loco Roco and White PSP, and perhaps use them collectively in an argument against subtle and institutionalized racism.