|
Well, I'm still unclear how this really relates to me, but I'll throw in my opinions anyhow...
Nobody is saying it wasn't stupid, but I just don't see that its really racist. Black pornography probably has a slightly different humor/shock/intrigue value, for example, the little white kid in road trip hooking up with the big black girl. Its just kind of a less than ordinary thing for white people to be consistantly attracted to black people, which makes it more intriguing probably. I'm not sure if black people feel the same way about white porn, not sure. They probably could have used something like transexuals, but I really think that would gross the pledges out, and they probably didn't want to be at all associated with something like that. I'm not justifying anything, just trying to follow what little reasoning went on...
As for the image of black women, I somewhat understand your point. You're not gonna see many black women in romantic comedies, because they are targeting a majority audience. However, you do have "black movies" starring them, which white people usually skip. I think the audiences are very different, and thus they're targeted in different ways. I really don't think most black people will identify well with um..."must love dogs," nor will white people identify well with "insert black romantic comedy here." As for the image sought by young black women, I obviously have no idea about that. I'm not really attracted to "nappy" hair, but then I doubt they're hoping for me to come try and start a relationship with them. I imagine a lot of whats attractive is derived from what black men and the media desire, and I don't think that is much different from what white women experience growing up.
As for the Chi Phi pledges, I agree that pornography dehumanizes women. I also think they do it to themselves, although they probably had factors which led them into such things. Thus, I think pornography in and of itself can be harmful to women, but I don't think what these kids were doing was sexist.
|