REWRITING HISTORY: WHERE WERE BLACK SOLDIERS AT IWO JIMA?

The rivalry between two Hollywood filmmakers has shed light on the issue of minority representation in the media in America. Spike Lee and Clint Eastwood have quarreled over Eastwood’s last two movies about World War II hostilities in Iwo Jima.
Clint Eastwood made two consecutive films about Iwo Jima. The last one is about American soldiers raising and waiving the flag after defeating the enemy. The Battle of Iwo Jima featured the capture of the island of Iwo Jima from the Japanese during the Pacicific Campaign of World War II. The battle, known as Operation Detachment was aimed at capturing the airfields of this part of Japanese territory.

Yet not only the movie shows no blacks waiving or raising the flag but also does not include images of black soldiers at all. The main question that might be asked is where were those hundred blacks soldiers who fought in an ammunition company at Iwo Jima.
In fact, Thomas McPhatter, a US Marines sergeant who crawled up the landing beach under a hail of Japanese fire, was one of hundreds of black servicemen involved in the attack.”

Spike lee attacked Eastwood by arguing that "Of all the movies that have been made of Iwo Jima, you never see a black face. This is the last straw. I feel like I've been denied, I've been insulted, I've been mistreated. But what can you do? We still have a strong underlying force in my country of rabid racism."
I do contend that it is a big mistake to make a film off Iwo Jima without showing any image of black soldiers in it. History has revealed that there were actually two different scenes when raising the flag. The first one had black soldiers in it but the picture has never been taken. In fact Thomas McPhatter helped provide the pipe that was used to raise the flag. There are also reports that cameras were turned away when some black soldiers showed up for the picture. Yet, this episode must not be considered a racist fact from Eastwood as he based the story on the way America has wanted it to be known.

I do think this is an opportunity once again to rewrite a lot of chapters concerning the history of blacks in this country. The media should be at the forefront of this battle to establish truth and fairness as far as historical facts about minorities are concerned. This will be part of the healing process of the wound created by many years of oppression and denial. It is only in this perspective that America will be able to overcome divisive issues over race.

Expectations and Double Standards in the NFL

I was flipping through the channels yesterday, and I ran across the NFL Channel. I happened to notice a clear discrepancy between the amount of players in the league that are asking for contract re-negotiations. Among them was Chad Johnson. Many believe that he and other players like Jason Taylor are clear distractions for their teams. It seems like the only players that have good reason to complain about their pay are the white ones.

Granted blacks are the clear majority in football, I still can't understand why it seems that players of color are viewed as causing trouble when they make efforts to be compensated in greater amounts. I have a problem when I see that white players are viewed as stern business men when they opt out of training camps and practices, and request trades. It bothers me when players of color are viewed as trouble-makers for the same offense. It's almost like the league wants these players to be happy with what they get. Some of this goes along with the fact that player's attitudes on and off the field make the story, but other players with the same, if not a worse attitude, get treated as if they are standing up for themselves.

It makes me sick to my stomach to know that the NFL is using black players to make such a huge profit, only to alienate them in the long run. Players like Terrell Owens, Chad Johnson and Jeremy Shockey, a white player, all have reputations that go further than their action on the field. I get annoyed when Jeremy Shockey is praised for toughness and strength when the other two are constantly chastised for their silly antics or touchdown celebrations. There is a clear double standard for players of color in the NFL.

I posted here, i couldn't get my original one to work

I think it’s hard to ignore white privilege or at least refute it. However, it gets lost in the rush of life. We all lead lives of fast paced, high stress and carry with us as we begin the next leg of our lives a pass/fail mentality.  I have to assume that I’ve been helped from White Privilege and not even known about it. So I want to stress that’s not to say that it’s a lesser issue and should be forgotten, reading the news and media with discerning eyes can refresh ones’ memory.

At the same time, white privilege affects people of color all across the nation, however here at the university in our small bubble community the idea of Institutionalized discrimination is lesser than on a national scale. At the University, we all share the common bonds of a higher standard of education, diversity and understand. I realize that since I’m white, and its slightly odd for me to ask daily to people of color; “excuse me, have you been discriminated against today?” I wish I could do this without some sort of repercussions. But since I can’t, I cant fully say for certain whether or not I’m evoking the principle of White Denial or am I truly locked into the experiences at the University.

I recently rented a house with 4 of my friends; we had no problem securing the house with paying our money of course. Of the list of white privilege items, McIntosh provided, who knows how I’ve been helped or “overprivileged.” There is a red line under the last word. Hah. I’m scouring my brain for examples of privilege that ive experienced, but I can’t seem to find one. I believe this is because I don’t know everything about the struggles others have to endure. Sure, I can read about these things, but in my personal experience I don’t have examples to focus on in the microscope.

I do believe that I’ve heard dialogs that if examined indicate a sense of superiority. Once again, I have no one close to me that I could discuss problems and concerns on the other side of the fence. I would love to discuss this with anyone, but it’s so hard to strike a conversation of this sort.

I’ll finish with a theory I have that has troubled me, it indicates a superiority and a counter-response. Its called reverse-discrimination, striking huh? While in Spain, I spoke Spanish with everyone. Sure people could discern that I wasn’t a native speaker, but I was proficient enough that they couldn’t tell where I was from, just that I didn’t speak like they did. I’d say I was from the UK. Haha. Anyways, I enjoyed a sense of freedom speaking with almost anyone, continuing to improve my language skills. When I got back in the States, my first day, and my mom took me to EL Fenix. This delicious Mexican restaurant offers the best enchiladas in the world; it also has native speakers from Mexico. I went to the bathroom and I heard Spanish being spoken, so with my friendly Spanish mindset I say discupleme and starting talking to them. They ignored me at first and then replied in English. I was mentally displaced. So I insisted and replied in Spanish, they gave me a grin and I asked them what kind of accent I had and they said Castellano. Kinda joyful to me. Ok basically what I took from this, is that in my home area in Dallas, no white speaks Spanish, while I realize that discrimination is probably a too hard word here, but it’s the notion that when a white guy like me really talks Spanish and not the stereotypical, degrading Spanish that I’ve seen especially towards servers, its not the norm.

I wouldn’t cast judgment on either group, but it’s a sign of stereotyping. One that whites cant speak Spanish and Latinos can’t speak English. And there’s always the sense that Latinos should speak English, sometimes people speak louder in English because they think it will help understand the language. Hah.

I dont get whats going on here.

First Weekly Media Assignment

Where do I stand now?
Yes! Where do I stand now within the race, gender and media imbroglio! This question came through my mind after the first week of class. As a matter of fact, I came to this class with a string of set conceptions concerning the relationship between races and genders in this country. Yet, this first week of class has opened up a broader avenue of opportunity for me to better grasp the main concepts that play within the debates over race and gender.

I really had a general idea of the relationship between races mainly geared toward racism without really paying attention or just knowing the difference between the concepts. The readings were an opportunity to know the difference between prejudice, discrimination and white privilege. Before I took this class, they all fell within the scope of racism, period.
This also can explain the extent to which the white privilege concept is extremely relevant to this class. It helps better understand how races differ in terms of opportunity in this country.

When reading through the 46 conditions that are more linked to skin-color privilege I finally understand how white people are not even aware of the advantage they have over other races.
For instance, in crash, when the white police officer called that black healthcare provider, he even did not know that he was talking to a black woman. It is not until she told him her name (Shaniqua Johnson, a name mostly from blacks) that he knew that the other person on the phone is black. From there the conversation completely turned bitter. This tells us that black people do not have the privilege to choose a name that would actually make them an entire part of this country. A white American has the privilege to get a name that would “sounds more American”. Barack Obama’s name is a vivid example of that privilege. People sometimes judge him just based on his name.

Now after the first week of class, I do know that there are little parameters, generally taken for granted that add up and yield the whole picture of the relationship between races and genders.
After listening to Tim Wise and reading Peggy McIntosh a lot of images are flowing in my mind but I have an example that really explains it all. On April 4th, I had an accident in Oklahoma City. A white girl ran the light and directly hit my car. The car was completely damaged. While we stayed in the car waiting for the police, the white lady that was following me came to us and said: “I was making sure that you guys are doing fine, yet I will stay here till the police comes.” We waited for more than an hour and had to move our cars to the parking lot to make room for traffic. Suddenly the police officer came in and said. “who is driving this car.” “That’s my car sir,” I said.He then suddenly said: “I will give you the ticket”. In fact the officer did not even ask about the circumstances of the accident. I was so irritated that I started yelling at the officer.
Suddenly, the white lady that volunteered to stay till the police came was my savior as she was able to say what actually happened. The other amazing thing was that one of my neighbors who happened to be black was following me and knew about the accident too. Yet when the officer was asking for information I also pointed at my neighbor as a witness. Yet, the officer refused to ask him about what happened. He just trusted the white lady who was there just to help me knowing what would happen without a witness. In this example, two white privileges emanate from the circumstances. First, you are presumably at fault when you are a black person involved in an accident with a white person. Second, white people tend to be trusted by white officers when they want information about an accident they did not witness.

This is one of many examples that have strengthened my belief that white privilege is not a vain word. It does exist. White privilege has been at the core of many measures or laws that govern race relations in this country today. Ignoring its existence adds in to the already lingering issues that prevent this nation to heal itself from years of denial. The white privilege concept should stimulate awareness on both sides, "the dominant race” and other “minorities”.

BOGGED DOWN IN DENIAL!

There is a big problem related to Hillary Clinton’s attitude toward Barack Obama’s clinching the democratic nomination last night. Observers of the political spectrum have come up with important questions about why Hillary did not recognize Black Obama’s victory on the night he acquired the number of delegates to win the nomination. What is Hillary Clinton really thinking, knowing beforehand the fight was over a long time ago?

In the different scenarii offered by political strategists and commentators, some think that “Hillary will take a few days to bring her campaign to a smooth landing after a long nasty ride.” Others have analyzed Hillary’s attitude as a means to leveraging Obama for a vice presidential spot toward the upcoming elections, which will still allow her to make history as the first female vice-president of this country.

Yet, viewed in another angle, I would say, referring to Tim Wise, that Hillary’s denial of what is obvious is inherent to White privilege. In fact, this campaign was thought to be very short and easy for Hilary Clinton and his Staff in the sense that they never imagine that this nation was ready to embrace a black candidate to be the nominee of the Democratic Party. The seeds of Hilary’s demise were spread in the different caucuses around the nation. His campaign really minimized Obama until Super Tuesday, where his landslide victory appeared as a red signal to the Hillary Camp. The denial continued with the idea of the “superdelegates” having to choose the nominee to the expense of the popular vote because they will never choose a black guy as the nominee. Yet, everyday, superdelegates were rallying the Obama camp giving him later a considerable lead in the last days of the campaign.
Hilary’s denial grew to the extent to which assination was a possibility as she made allusion to the assassination of RFK. Here I’m not saying that Hillary is talking about the probable assassination of Obama, but for the sake of the argument it does strengthen Hillary’s state of Denial.

And came the last day of the primary when the whole country was expecting her to be condescending and get away with it by not only acknowledging her opponent’s victory but by supporting him for the upcoming electoral battle. Yet, one can also think that gender issues might be at the core of her attitude as she still wants to be perceived as a strong woman that the Obama camp has to court for support.

What role did race, gender and religion play in the campaign?

What role did race, gender and religion play in the campaign? This question was inspired by Tim Russert’s roundtable after Hilary Clinton’s blunder by mentioning RFK assassination while explaining her reasons to stay in the democratic nomination race. Here it is a good point to make that the question is too general and at the same time very important as it reflects the configuration of the democratic race to the presidency.

The race is at a historical turning point as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton represent two segments of the population of this country that have fought all the way to be where they are today.

Nobody ignores the way freedom for black people was fought in this country; ranging from slavery and the Civil Rights Movement of the 60s to several riots that happened in the early 90’s. Another front for woman rights was already opened in the early 18th century with figures as emblematic as Elizabeth C. Stanton and Susan B. Anthony who harshly fought to get women out of the home.

Yet, despite all the progress and this historical moment, one can look and notice that there is another long way to go to finally make race and gender part of the routine in all our actions and aspirations. To make it clear, let us say that more steps are needed weed out gender and race issues from the orchard this nation has strived to maintain successfully so far.

For this particular blog entry I’m interested in the gender issues mainly made of stereotypes toward Hillary Clinton and women in general. When Tim Russert asked the question about the role of gender and race in the primary elections, I was stunned by a certain number of reactions that really poked the wound that the American people has always endeavored to heal. One of the participants equaled Hillary Clinton’s attitude to victimism or Sharptonism (in reference to Rev. Al Sharpton

Definitely Clinton shows that women are ready to lead this country but some think she uses feminism as opportunism. I do not think that Hilary is covering her limits or blunders by playing the gender card. The issue is that this country has yet to get away from a lot of issues that are still lingering. Hope that this race would be a landmark for this to go beyond gender and race. I do think that the coming general election in November will be a good way to probe the extent to which race and gender issues characterize our way of life.