“Disney Princess Makeover Sparks Outrage: Merida Petition Goes Viral”

Taken from: http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/disney-princess-makeover-sparks-outrage–merida-petition-goes-viral-175251230.html

May 10, 2013

So is turns out that Merida, the rebellious redhead star of Disney’s Pixar film “Brave,” is true princess material after all, and Disney is coronating her as its 11th official princess on Saturday at Walt Disney World to prove it. But wait, there’s a catch.

Turns out that Merida’s only joining the royal lineup after a corporate makeover that’s rendered her skinnier, sexier, and more glamorous than her original spunky, tomboyish self—stripping her, at least in some images, of her trusty bow and arrow, and putting her into the very dress that her character detested in “Brave.” It’s sparked outrage among thousands of mothers for whom Merida offered, finally, an empowering Disney role model for their girls. 

“Merida was the princess that countless girls and their parents were waiting for—a strong, confident, self-rescuing princess ready to set off on her next adventure with her bow at the ready,” reads a Change.org petition, “Keep Merida Brave,” asking Disney to reconsider the character’s redesign. The petition, created Saturday by “A Mighty Girl,” a blog and online girl empowerment marketplace, had already surpassed 50,000 signatures by Friday afternoon. 

“She had a uniqueness that people really loved, so when they took that away, it was a real affront to a lot of people,” Carolyn Danckaert of “A Mighty Girl” told Yahoo! Shine. Danckaert solicited opinions from her Facebook followers before starting the petition, and said she was quickly bombarded with more than 800 comments, “overwhelmingly negative and very passionate.” 

Signers of the petition, who include Peggy Orenstein, author of “Cinderella Ate My Daughter,” object to what they’ve called the sexualizing of Merida’s image, in which the character now appears older, with a tinier waistline, sultrier eyes, a coquettish expression, tamed curls, and more exposed skin peeking out from a bedazzled, off-the-shoulder version of the constricting teal dress she so resented in “Brave.” 

A Disney spokesperson offered the following official statement about the controversy to Yahoo! Shine: “Merida exemplifies what it means to be a Disney Princess through being brave, passionate, and confident and she remains the same strong and determined Merida from the movie whose inner qualities have inspired moms and daughters around the world.”  

But the makeover—put in place, at least in part, to lend Merida more easily to product designs, according to a report in “Inside the Magic,” which covers Disney news—was still inspiring impassioned criticism at a rapid clip as of Friday. 

“My little girl has unruly curls, wants to climb trees, run with wind, and challenge stereotypes everyday AND she is only 4 years old,” writes one petition signer, Kerri Gaskin of Canada. “How can I possibly tell her that her favorite character has given in and given up to become an overly sexualized pin-up version of her former self?” 

Other signers call the new Merida “arm candy,” “unrealistic,” “vacant looking,” “too sexy,” and “vapid.” 

“Merida was the anti-princess for all of us who don’t wear makeup, let our hair rampage free, and prefer to wear real clothes that let us hike, climb mountains, and ride horses,” wrote petition signer Kris Dorman of Utah. “Please allow Merida to remain the fiercely confident young woman who doesn’t need glitter or skin to know she is of incredible strength and worth.”

Orenstein wrote about the redesign on her blog with a tone of resigned disgust, noting that, “in the end, it wasn’t about being brave after all. It was about being pretty.” She continued, “I’ve always said that it’s not about the movies. It’s about the bait-and-switch that happens in the merchandise, and the way the characters have evolved and proliferated off-screen. Maybe the problem is partly that these characters are designed in Hollywood, where real women are altering their appearance so regularly that animators, and certainly studio execs, think it’s normal.”

For the parents who say that Merida is “only a cartoon,” asking, “Why does it matter?” Danckaert says, “It’s sending a message,” which is one that puts forth a very narrow definition of beauty. “This is how children pick up cultural messages about what is important,” she adds. “Young children don’t really distinguish between reality and fantasy, and these characters are their role models.”

“Victoria’s Secret Apologizes for Fashion Show Gaffe”

Taken from: http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/victoria-secret-apologizes-fashion-show-gaffe-194400804.html

November 12, 2012

The annual Victoria’s Secret fashion show taped last Wednesday caused a minor stir last week — but not because of any sexy underwear on display.

Model Karlie Kloss (pictured at left) set off some controversy when she walked the runway wearing a Native American headdress (also called a war bonnet), a culturally insensitive faux pas that led the company to pull the footage of the offending outfit from its planned Dec. 4broadcast.

Several Native American groups called the lingerie company out for the blunder. Native Appropriations, a blog covering imagery of indigenous cultures, accused the retailer of “egregious cultural appropriation, stereotyping, and marginalizing of Native peoples.” Ruth Hopkins, a columnist for a Native American news site, wrote that “after years of patronage and loyalty to the Victoria’s Secret brand, I am repaid with the mean-spirited, disrespectful trivialization of my blood ancestry and the proud Native identity I work hard to instill in my children.” Putting a headdress on a white model is particularly offensive, she wrote, because among the Sioux tribe, war bonnets are exclusively worn by men, with each feather symbolizing an act of valor.

The $12 million show, which had musical performances by Rihanna, Justin Bieber and Bruno Mars, showcased plenty of not-meant-to-be worn ensembles, including circus-themed outfits and a $2.5 million “fantasy bra.” Last year the show averaged nearly 10.4 million viewers, up from 8.9 million in 2010, according to Horizon Media. (This year’s show was taped on Nov. 7 and is set to air Dec. 4.)

Kloss, who walked the catwalk in a leopard bikini, turquoise beaded jewelry, high-heeled moccasins, and a floor-length feathered headdress (with the word “Thanksgiving” projected on a screen behind her), issued an apology via her Twitter account on Sunday: “I am deeply sorry if what I wore during the VS Show offended anyone. I support VS’s decision to remove the outfit from the broadcast.”

Victoria’s Secret, owned by Limited Brands (LTD) also apologized on Twitter, and issued a statement: “We are sorry that the Native American headdress replica used in our recent fashion show has upset individuals. We sincerely apologize as we absolutely had no intention to offend anyone. Out of respect, we will not be including the outfit in any broadcast, marketing materials nor in any other way.”

Whether the controversy will put any kind of dent in Victoria’s Secret’s sales is questionable. By apologizing and pulling the offending clip from the show, the company addressed the goof quickly, so the damage will likely be minimal, says Brad Adgate, director of research at Horizon Media. With a presence in nearly every shopping mall in the country, it’s the biggest specialty retailer for intimate apparel. In 2011 Limited Brands sales sales increased $751 million to $10.364 billion, while Victoria’s Secret Stores sales rose $601 million to $6.121 billion.

The lingerie seller isn’t alone among big-name retailers accused of insensitivity. There was a fair amount of anger aimed at American Apparel, which sent an e-mail blast to customers during Hurricane Sandy for a 20% off sale for people living in the affected states, with a tagline that read “In case you’re bored during the storm.”

The headdress gaffe also — oddly — comes soon after the band No Doubt pulled its music video last week after getting complaints that it was insensitive to Native Americans. In the video for “Looking Hot,” band members dress up in stereotypical cowboys and Indians attire.

“Race and College Admissions, Facing a New Test by Justices”

Sounds like this case will soon join the ranks of other landmark and highly controversial cases like Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), Hopwood v. University of Texas Law School (1996), & Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)… Hopefully someday everyone will acknowledge how systemic the legacy of white supremacy and privilege is in this country. 

Taken from: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/09/us/supreme-court-to-hear-case-on-affirmative-action.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all&

October 8, 2012

Abigail Fisher is a slight young woman with strawberry blond hair, a smile that needs little prompting, a determined manner and a good academic record. She played soccer in high school, and she is an accomplished cellist.

But the university she had her heart set on, the one her father and sister had attended, rejected her. “I was devastated,” she said, in her first news interview since she was turned down by the University of Texas at Austin four years ago.

Ms. Fisher, 22, who is white and recently graduated from Louisiana State University, says that her race was held against her, and the Supreme Court is to hear her case on Wednesday, bringing new attention to the combustible issue of the constitutionality of racial preferences in admissions decisions by public universities. “I’m hoping,” she said, “that they’ll completely take race out of the issue in terms of admissions and that everyone will be able to get into any school that they want no matter what race they are but solely based on their merit and if they work hard for it.”

The university said Ms. Fisher would not have been admitted even if race had played no role in the process, and it questioned whether she has suffered the sort of injury that gives her standing to sue. But the university’s larger defense is that it must be free to assemble a varied student body as part of its academic and societal mission. The Supreme Court endorsed that view by a 5-to-4 vote in 2003 in Grutter v. Bollinger.

University officials said that the school’s affirmative action program was needed to build a student body diverse enough to include minority students with a broad range of backgrounds and for the campus to have a “critical mass” of minority students in most classrooms. Interaction among students in class and around campus, said Kedra Ishop, the university’s director of admissions, helps students overcome biases and make contributions to a diverse society. “The role of U.T. Austin,” Dr. Ishop said, “is to provide leadership to the state.”

The majority opinion in the Grutter case, written by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, rejected the use of racial quotas in admissions decisions but said that race could be used as one factor among many, as part of a “holistic review.” Justice O’Connor retired in 2006, and her replacement by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. may open the way for a ruling cutting back on such race-conscious admissions policies, or eliminating them.

Admissions officers at colleges and universities almost universally endorse the idea that students from diverse backgrounds learn from each other, overcome stereotypes, and in so doing prepare themselves for leadership positions in society. Many critics of affirmative action say that there is at best a weak correlation between race and having a range of views presented in the classroom.

Others say the Constitution does not permit the government to sort people by race, no matter how worthy its goal. “While racial diversity on college campuses is beneficial, it cannot be attained by racial discrimination,” said Edward Blum, an adviser to Ms. Fisher and a driving force behind the Fisher case.

The competing arguments are hard to test, but a recent visit to a freshman seminar at the University of Texas at Austin suggested that the intellectual life of undergraduates there is varied and vibrant.

The course was called Debates on Democracy in America, and the topic that day was “The Known World,” Edward P. Jones’s novel about a black slave owner. It was only the third week of class, but the 18 students, of all sorts of ethnicities and backgrounds, talked easily and earnestly about contemporary echoes of slavery. An Asian student mentioned cheap labor in China. A Hispanic one talked about the ways employers in the United States take advantage of illegal immigrants.

Other comments ran counter to possible stereotypes. D’wahn Kelley, a black student, said he hesitated to condemn the slave owner in the novel too harshly. “You’re judged on what you know, not what you don’t know,” he said, referring to the limits of the character’s moral imagination. “If you wanted to be successful, you had a right to own slaves.”

In response, Ashley Vasquez, a Hispanic student, said the she rejected “the whole idea that you have to learn right and wrong.” “It’s hard for me to think,” she said, “that you can go about your day thinking, ‘Oh, I’m going to own a human being.’ ”

Three-quarters of applicants from Texas are admitted under a program that guarantees admission to the top students in every high school in the state. (Almost everyone calls this the Top Ten program, though the percentage cutoff can vary. Ms. Fisher barely missed the cutoff.) The remaining Texas students and those from elsewhere are considered under standards that take account of academic achievement and other factors, including race and ethnicity. The Top Ten program has produced substantial racial and ethnic diversity. In the fall of last year, freshmen who enrolled under the program were 26 percent Hispanic and 6 percent black. Texas is 38 percent Hispanic and 12 percent black.

The practical question in Austin is what eliminating the additional race-conscious admissions program would mean for seminars like the one on democracy, for lecture classes and for interactions in cafeterias and dormitories.

The university said the Top Ten program was a blunt instrument and that classes in many subjects have few or no minority students. It adds that the diversity generated by the Top Ten program is “mostly a product of the fact that Texas high schools remain highly segregated in regions of the state,” which “limits the diversity that can be achieved within racial groups.”

Among the kind of student excluded by the Top Ten program, the university said is “the African-American or Hispanic child of successful professionals in Dallas who has strong SAT scores and has demonstrated leadership ability in extracurricular activities but falls in the second decile of his or her high school class (or attends an elite private school that does not rank).”

Ms. Fisher’s lawyers called that “a newly minted interest in elitism dressed up as ‘intra-racial’ diversity.” They added that the university is making the unseemly pitch for “its preferred kind of minorities” at the expense of white students like Ms. Fisher with similar qualifications.

Talking in the hallway after the seminar, Joao Eloy, who was admitted outside the Top Ten program, said he had mixed feelings about the university’s approach. “My only concern is if diversity becomes a priority above merit,” he said, adding that he was wary of any system that “punishes Asians and poor whites, to name a few.” But Mr. Eloy, who said his heritage was Brazilian (making him Latino but not Hispanic, he said), said classrooms were enriched by a mix of voices. “The different perspectives help a lot,” he said. “It makes it really interesting.”

Nosa Aimuyo, whose parents are Nigerian immigrants and who was also admitted outside the Top Ten program, said race-conscious admissions were needed to address “disparities in opportunity between high schools, which disproportionately affect minorities.”

In an interview in his office in Austin, William C. Powers Jr, the university’s president, said the attributes that the university seeks have many dimensions. “We want diversity in terms of economic background, first generation, geography, inner city, suburban middle class,” he said. Asked what he would say to Ms. Fisher, whose own background is middle class, about her disappointment at being rejected, Mr. Powers paused for a moment. “We look at everyone’s holistic characteristics,” he said.

Last month, Ms. Fisher spent a morning chatting with a reporter at a private club in Washington and then took an impromptu tour of the Supreme Court, where the grandeur of the surroundings seemed to bring home to her the gravity of the question she had presented to the justices. She is working in Austin, where she had wanted to be in the first place, as a financial analyst. She said her college years at Louisiana State had been fine and that she had enjoyed the camaraderie of the bowling team. But she added that she had lost a benefit that her state’s government had decided to distribute on a basis other than merit. “The only thing I missed out on was my post-graduation years,” she said. “Just being in a network of U.T. graduates would have been a really nice thing to be in. And I probably would have gotten a better job offer had I gone to U.T.” She said she was trying to come to terms with her role in a case that could reshape American higher education. Asked if she found it interesting or exciting or scary, she said, “All of the above.” But she did not hesitate to say how she would run an admission system. “I don’t think,” she said, “that we even need to have a race box on the application.”

“‘Hitler’ clothing store stirs anger in India”

Taken from: http://news.yahoo.com/hitler-clothing-store-stirs-anger-india-133743884.html

August 29, 2012

The owner of an Indian clothing store said Wednesday that he would only change its name from “Hitler” if he was compensated for re-branding costs, amid a growing row over the new shop.

The outlet, which sells Western men’s wear, opened 10 days ago in Ahmedabad city in the western state of Gujarat with “Hitler” written in big letters over the front and with a Nazi swastika as the dot on the “i”. ”I will change it (the name) if people want to compensate me for the money we have spent — the logo, the hoarding, the business cards, the brand,” Rajesh Shah told AFP. He put the total costs at about 150,000 rupees ($2,700).

Shah insisted that until the store opened he did not know who Adolf Hitler was and that Hitler was a nickname given to the grandfather of his store partner because “he was very strict”. ”I didn’t know how much the name would disturb people,” he told AFP by telephone from Ahmedabad. “It was only when the store opened I learnt Hitler had killed six million people.”

Members of the tiny Jewish community in Ahmedabad condemned the store’s name, while a senior Israeli diplomat said the embassy would raise the matter “in the strongest possible way.” ”People use such names mostly out of ignorance,” Israel’s Mumbai Consul General Orna Sagiv told AFP.

Esther David, a prominent Indian writer in Ahmedabad who is Jewish, said she was “disturbed and distressed” by the shop, but added that some Indians used the word “Hitler” casually to describe autocratic people. David said Jewish residents had sought to change Shah’s mind about the store’s name and told him about the Holocaust.

The row evoked memories of a controversy six years ago when a Mumbai restaurant owner called his cafe “Hitler’s Cross” and put a swastika on the hoarding, claiming Hitler was a “catchy” name. The restaurant owner eventually agreed to change the name after protests by the Israeli embassy, Germany and the US Anti-Defamation League.

Hitler attracts an unusual degree of respect in some parts of India, with his book “Mein Kampf” a popular title in bookshops and on street stalls. Gujarat schoolbooks issued by the Hindu nationalist state government were criticised a few years ago for praising Hitler as someone who gave “dignity and prestige” to the German government.

” Nike Olympic ‘Gold Digging’ Shirt Stirs Controversy”

Taken from: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/entertainment/2012/08/nike-causes-controversy-with-olympic-gold-digging-shirt/

August 15, 2012

Nike is in hot water over a new Olympics t-shirt they’ve released, especially since it’s only being offered for women.

The plain black shirt boldly states “Gold Digger” across the chest. The product was intended to reference aspiring to win an Olympic gold medal, but some Facebook and Twitter users would beg to differ.

“Sort of undermines the strong woman image Nike has spent $$ to market,” said one Twitter user. “Whoever thought a Nike t’shirt emblazoned with ‘GOLD DIGGING’ was a fitting tribute to female Olympians shuld be fired,” said another. Even the product description on WorldSoccerShop.com acknowledges the underlying tone behind the slogan. “We aren’t saying they’re gold diggers – we’re just saying they’re out for the gold! What’s wrong with that?”

Nike stands by the shirt. In a statement released to ABC News, the company said: “Nike has consistently supported female athletes and the position they enjoy as positive role models. The t-shirt uses a phrase in an ironic way that is relevant given it was released just as the world focused on the success of female athletes.”

But they’re not the only sports brand to stir the pot with controversial products. In June, Adidas decided to cancel their plans to release the “Shackle” shoe that critics said evoked slavery. The shoe adorned with rubber fasteners was canceled after an image posted on the Adidas Originals Facebook page ignited a firestorm of controversy. The photo of the shoes, dubbed JS Roundhouse Mids by the company, was captioned, “Tighten up your style with the JS Roundhouse Mids dropping in August. Got a sneaker game so hot you lock your kicks to your ankles?” Critics, including the Rev. Jesse Jackson, called the $350 shoe racist and intensive, saying it evokes the era of slavery.

“Brad Pitt’s mother pens anti-gay marriage letter”

Taken from: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/brad-pitt-mother-pens-anti-gay-marriage-letter-130708977.html

June 6, 2012

Brad Pitt once said he wouldn’t marry Angelina Jolie until everyone—gay or straight—had the same right.

Apparently his mother doesn’t share his views.

In a letter to her hometown paper, the Springfield (Mo.) News-Leader, Jane Pitt writes that Christians, like herself, should not refuse to vote for Mitt Romney just because he is a Mormon. The published response to an earlier opinion in the paper describes President Barack Obama’s opponent for president as “a family man with high morals, business experience, who is against abortion, and shares Christian conviction concerning homosexuality.”

Jane Pitt’s letter continues:

Any Christian who does not vote or writes in a name is casting a vote for Romney’s opponent, Barack Hussein Obama—a man who sat in Jeremiah Wright’s church for years, did not hold a public ceremony to mark the National Day of Prayer, and is a liberal who supports the killing of unborn babies and same-sex marriage.

She concludes with, “I hope all Christians give their vote prayerful consideration because voting is a sacred privilege and a serious responsibility.”

The newspaper even verified the identity of the letter’s author in this editor’s note: “To clear up earlier confusion, the News-Leader has verified the letter writer is the mother of actor Brad Pitt and local businessman Doug Pitt.”

Brad Pitt worked with George Clooney in the play “8,” a YouTube-streamed reading that charted the proceedings in the federal appeals court hearing that deemed Proposition 8, a California ban on same-sex marriage, unconstitutional. Pitt has been vocal about his support for same-sex marriage. Brad Pitt told People magazine in 2011: “No state should decide who can marry and who cannot. Thanks to the tireless work of so many, someday soon this discrimination will end and every American will be able to enjoy their equal right to marriage.”

Well, this could make for an interesting discussion should Brad and Angelina take their kids to visit Grandma Jane in Missouri.

“Israel crowns ‘Miss Holocaust Survivor’”

Taken from: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/06/29/israel-crowns-miss-holocaust-survivor/

June 29, 2012

Grinning and waving, 14 women who survived the horrors of World War II paraded Thursday in an unusual pageant, vying for the honor of being crowned Israel’s first “Miss Holocaust Survivor.”

Billed by organizers as a celebration of life, the event also stirred controversy. In a country where millions have been touched by the Holocaust, many argued that judging aging women who had suffered so much on physical appearance was inappropriate, and even offensive.

“It sounds totally macabre to me,” said Colette Avital, chairwoman of Israel’s leading Holocaust survivors’ umbrella group. “I am in favor of enriching lives, but a one-time pageant masquerading (survivors) with beautiful clothes is not what is going to make their lives more meaningful.”

Pageant organizer Shimon Sabag rejected the criticism, saying the winners were chosen based on their personal stories of survival and rebuilding their lives after the war, and physical beauty was only a tiny part of the competition. ”They feel good together. They are having a good time and laughing in the rehearsals,” said Sabag, director of Yad Ezer L’Haver, or Helping Hand, which assists needy Holocaust survivors and organized the pageant. ”The fact that so many wanted to participate proves that it’s a good idea.”

Nearly 300 women from across Israel registered for the competition and contestants were whittled down to the 14 finalists who appeared Thursday.

The contest, part of Helping Hand’s annual “cultural” night, included a lavish dinner and music at a Haifa reception hall. Some 600 people attended, including two Cabinet ministers, Moshe Kahlon and Yossi Peled, himself a Holocaust survivor.

The women, ranging in age from 74 to 97, clearly enjoyed themselves. Wearing black dresses, earrings and necklaces, and sporting blue-and-white numbered sashes, they grinned and waved as they were introduced to the adoring audience. Music played as the contestants walked along a red carpet, introduced themselves and described their memories of World War II.

“I have the privilege to show the world that Hitler wanted to exterminate us and we are alive. We are also enjoying life. Thank God it’s that way,” said Esther Libber, a 74-year-old runner-up who fled her home in Poland as a child, hid in a forest and was rescued by a Polish woman. She said she lost her entire immediate family.

A four-judge panel consisting of three former beauty queens and a geriatric psychiatrist who specializes in treating Holocaust survivors chose the winner. Hava Hershkovitz, a soon-to-be 79-year-old, was banished from her home in Romania in 1941 and sent to a detention camp in the Soviet Union for three years. Today, she lives in an assisted living home run by Helping Hand. ”This place is full of survivors. It puts us at the center of attention so people will care. It’s not easy at this age to be in a beauty contest, but we’re all doing it to show that we’re still here,” the silver-haired Hershkovitz said.

Wearing a glittering tiara, she was joined by her granddaughter, Keren Hazan. “I’m very proud of her because she’s the most beautiful woman in the room tonight,” Hazan said.

In addition to the contestants’ accounts of surviving Nazi ghettos and concentration camps, their later contributions to their communities were also considered, Sabag said. Physical appearance was maybe “10 percent” of the criteria, he said, though a cosmetics company was recruited to help the women dress up for the occasion. ”We always tell them to dress well and look good. To think positive and to take care of themselves,” Sabag said. “Always look at life with a smile and continue to live.”

The thought that physical appearance could even remotely be a factor rubbed some the wrong way. Avital, of the Holocaust survivors’ umbrella group, criticized the cosmetics company, saying it was using Holocaust survivors in a cheap marketing stunt to promote their products. ”Why use a beauty contest to show that these people survived and that they’re brave?” wondered Lili Haber, a daughter of Holocaust survivors who heads an Israeli organization that assists survivors from Poland. “I think it’s awful. I think it’s something a decent person shouldn’t even think about.”

The Holocaust, in which Nazi Germany oversaw the systematic slaughter of 6 million European Jews, plays a unique role in Israeli society. The country gained independence in the wake of the Holocaust, serving as a refuge for hundreds of thousands of people who survived the genocide.

Nearly 200,000 aging survivors live in Israel today, and the country’s annual Holocaust Day is one of the most solemn occasions on the calendar. Restaurants and cinemas close, and the country comes to a standstill as sirens wail for two minutes. Israeli leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, frequently make references to the Holocaust when discussing the threat they believe a nuclear-armed Iran would pose to the Jewish state.

Thursday’s contest was among the many unconventional beauty pageants that have sprouted up over the years. The war-torn countries of Angola and Cambodia have held “Miss Landmine” contests for survivors of land mine explosions, Star Trek fans enjoy the “Miss Klingon Empire” contest in Atlanta, and plus-sized women in Thailand compete for the honor of “Miss Jumbo Queen.” There are also a senior citizens’ pageants in the U.S.

Gal Mor, editor of the popular Israeli blog “Holes in the Net,” said Thursday’s pageant was well-intentioned but misguided. ”Why should a decayed, competitive institution that emphasizes women’s appearance be used as inspiration, instead of allowing them to tell their story without gimmicks?” he wrote. “This is one step short of ‘Survivor-Holocaust’ or ‘Big Brother Auschwitz.’ It leaves a bad taste. Holocaust survivors should be above all this.

“Time Magazine Cover: Are You Mom Enough?”

The sudden rise in interest over breastfeeding this week was thanks in large part to this controversial Time Magazine cover.  Any thoughts?

“Obama Backs Gay Marriage”

Taken from:  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304070304577394332545729926.html

May 10, 2012

President Barack Obama said Wednesday he supported gay marriage, reversing his position on a controversial social issue just six months before the November election and adopting a stance fraught with uncertain political implications.

Mr. Obama had been under intense pressure this week to lay out a clear stance on same-sex marriage after Vice President Joe Biden and other top advisers endorsed it. Mr. Obama said that after years of lengthy discussions with friends and family, including his wife and two young daughters, he now “personally” believes gays and lesbians should have the right to marry.

“I’ve been going through an evolution on this issue. I’ve always been adamant that gay and lesbian Americans should be treated fairly and equally,” Mr. Obama said in a television interview with ABC. “At a certain point I’ve just concluded that, for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.”

Mr. Obama is the first sitting U.S. president to publicly support gay marriage. His endorsement is largely a symbolic moment for a country that is actively wrestling with the issue.

While the president opposes the federal Defense of Marriage law that defines marriage as a union of a man and a woman, he doesn’t plan to pursue new U.S. policy on gay marriage, aides said, because he believes states should decide the issue.

Mr. Obama was against same-sex marriage as a candidate in 2008 but supported civil unions. In the fall of 2010, he said his views on gay marriage were “evolving,” a stance widely interpreted as moving toward an endorsement. Asked numerous times afterward whether his position had changed, the president deflected the question and pointed to his record on other gay-rights issues.

On Wednesday, he explained, “I had hesitated on gay marriage, in part because I thought civil unions would be sufficient… And I was sensitive to the fact that for a lot of people the word ‘marriage’ was something that invokes very powerful traditions, religious beliefs and so forth.” He said his position was influenced by gay members of the military and his staff who are raising children together in monogamous relationships.

Mr. Obama informed a handful of top aides earlier this year he had decided to publicly support gay marriage before the Democratic National Convention in September, senior administration officials said. Mr. Biden’s public support, in a TV interview Sunday, and the 72 hours of fallout that came afterward sped up the president’s timetable, these officials said.

President Obama spoke Wednesday with Robin Roberts of ABC’s Good Morning America in the Cabinet Room of the White House.

Mr. Obama’s position puts him squarely at odds with that of Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee. Mr. Romney has said he believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. He also opposes civil unions and has said he would back a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

Asked Wednesday about Mr. Obama’s gay-marriage endorsement while campaigning in Oklahoma, Mr. Romney acknowledged that it is a “very tender and sensitive topic.” He said states are able to make decisions about domestic-partnership benefits, including hospital-visitation rights. “But my view is that marriage, itself, is a relationship between a man and a woman and that’s my own preference,” he said.

Polls show Americans’ views on gay marriage are shifting faster than for many other hot-button social issues, with 49% in favor, according to a March Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, up from 41% in 2009. Some 40% of Americans oppose gay marriage, according to the poll.

Other surveys show similar levels of backing for same sex-marriage, but some show opposition to have nearly equal support. In a recent Gallup survey, 50% approved of gay marriage, while 48% said they opposed it. But polls consistently show rising support in recent years.

Voters have enacted constitutional bans on gay marriage in a number of battleground states that will decide the 2012 election, among them Ohio and Florida. Mr. Obama’s Wednesday announcement came a day after residents in North Carolina, a state the president hopes to win in November, voted overwhelmingly in favor of a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. North Carolina is also hosting the Democratic National Convention, where Democrats were set to battle over whether to make gay marriage rights a plank of their party’s official platform.

The issue holds potential perils for conservative Democrats, and benefits for Mr. Romney.

GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney reacted to President Obama’s endorsement of same-sex marriage Wednesday by doubling down on his own view that marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

Ralph Reed, founder and chairman of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, a social conservative group, said Mr. Obama’s gay-marriage switch would fire up the GOP’s conservative base. “This is an unanticipated gift to the Romney campaign. It is certain to fuel a record turnout of voters of faith to the polls this November,” he said.

“Just before an election, you’re going to rile up the right-wing base, there’s no question about it,” said Peter Fenn, a Democratic consultant. “It will hurt in rural areas and the West, and you may take some fallout in the black community.”

Wading into the gay-marriage issue now poses potential risks and rewards for Mr. Obama among different types of voters who helped him win the White House in 2008. The move could energize young voters, who support gay marriage by a wide margin—57% of 18- to 34-year-olds in the Journal poll were in favor.

But a major question is how his changed stance will be received by African-American voters, who are central to Mr. Obama’s re-election strategy. Support for same-sex marriage had been relatively low among blacks, but views have evolved: The Journal poll showed African-American support for gay marriage rose to 50% in March from 32% in 2009.

Senior administration officials said Wednesday they are unsure whether Mr. Obama’s new position would produce a net gain or loss in support, or whether the support and opposition for it would balance each other out.

The marriage issue is likely to resonate in future months, as White House aides said the president will continue to discuss the issue. At the same time, some Democrats are pushing for Mr. Obama to include support for gay marriage as a plank of the party platform when he accepts the nomination at the convention in September. That move has the potential to divide the party.

States that have adopted constitutional bans on gay marriage also include the presidential-election battlegrounds of Wisconsin, Michigan, Virginia and Colorado, as well as Florida and Ohio. But because public opinion is fluid, it is hard to determine how Mr. Obama’s view will affect his standing in those states.

Obama on Gay Marriage

• 1996, running for Illinois state Senate: “I favor legalizing same-sex marriage.”

• 2004, running for U.S. Senate: “Marriage is between a man and a woman.

• 2010, as president: “My feelings are constantly evolving” on gay marriage.

• 2012, as president: “I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.

“UndocuMemes Show What’s So Funny About Today’s Immigration Battle”

Taken from: http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/04/undocumemes.html

April 17, 2012

UndocuMemes, created by members of DreamActivist.org, is a new forum from the perspective of young people engaged in the immigrant rights movement. The growing contributions voice complexity, humor, frustration, and diverse political commentary. In less than two days, it had more than 600 likes on Facebook and inspired a companion Tumblr page.

I spoke with a couple DREAM Act leaders to talk about the power of humor in such a politically precarious situation.

First, here’s Luis Serrano, who contributed one of the first memes to catch on, depicting President Obama laughing with his staff about family separation.

Tell me about the President Obama UndocuMeme (pictured above), and why there’s so much buzz about the forum.

When I saw the picture of President Obama laughing, that’s just what I thought about. Humor helps you escape all of the seriousness. That’s what humor is for, to express this crazy reality. It’s funny how you find humor about your own situation. We are politically aware about our reality and we make fun of it.

Why might some people be surprised to see memes that spark controversy and point to humor in the hardships of undocumented life?

Some people may expect us to be these polished perfect people that don’t commit any errors. We’re only human and we’re regular people. I kind of want to make people feel at ease and that it’s cool to be who you are and embrace it. I’m happy people are enjoying it and finding a humorous outlet. Also it’s a forum, we take submissions and there’s really different reaction from everyone on the different topics.

Now, Tania Unzueta, a graduate student at the University of Illinois at Chicago’s Latin American And Latino Studies Program, and a co-founder of the Immigrant Youth Justice League. She’s currently writing a paper on undocumented humor.

The UndocuMemes humor is really varied, from criticism of allies, to people making light of their own undocumented experience. I was surprised the forum was so public.

Some of this undocumented humor is becoming more public, particularly after the failed Dream Act of 2010. There has been more space to voice our frustrations and anger. Many of the memes also illustrate that we are unapologetic about nourishing our own undocumented community.

What are your favorite memes?

I like the Secure Communities one with Napolitano, and the one with President Obama laughing. Another one that’s interesting is the dinosaur meme about whether or not to support Dream Act legislation regardless of which party is proposing it. It points to an intense conversation that the immigrant rights movement is about to have.

What else do you want to share about undocumented humor? TU: There has been a lot of creativity expressed with undocumented humor. I like the Dreamers Adrift videos http://dreamersadrift.com/. My sister and I wrote immigration policy recommendations for the end of the world.

This all speaks to how we’re human. We’re just people. We laugh about our status, but just because it’s funny, that doesn’t mean we’re not angry and frustrated. These memes stimulate conversation and expresses very clear ideas about what we’re feeling and our politics, but also that there is internal satisfaction being able to say what we think.

“Proposed AZ law sparks more birth control controversy”

Taken from: http://blog.sfgate.com/hottopics/2012/03/14/proposed-az-law-would-let-women-be-fired-for-using-the-pill/

March 14, 2012

A proposed new law in Arizona would give employers the power to require women being prescribed birth control pills provide proof that they’re using it for non-sexual reasons.

According to the statepress.com:

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 6-2 Monday to endorse a controversial bill that would allow Arizona employers the right to deny health insurance coverage for contraceptives based on religious objections.

Arizona House Bill 2625, authored by Majority Whip Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale, would permit employers to ask their employees for proof of medical prescription if they seek contraceptives for non-reproductive purposes, such as hormone control or acne treatment.

… “My whole legislation is about our First Amendment rights and freedom of religion,” Lesko said. “All my bill does is that an employer can opt out of the mandate if they have any religious objections.

Because Arizona’s an at-will employment state, Jezebel.com worries that bosses critical of their female employees’ sex lives could fire them as a result. Theoretically these firings would be illegal since obtaining birth control is protected by the right of privacy and you can’t legally be fired for a constitutionally protected reason — but the idea is scary nonetheless.

It’s all about freedom, (Lasko) said, echoing everyone who thinks there’s nothing ironic about claiming that a country that’s “free” allows people’s bosses to dictate what medical care is available to them through insurance. First amendment. The constitution. Rights of religious people to practice the treasured tenets of their faiths, the tenets that dictate that religious people get to tell everyone who is not of faith how they’re supposed to live, and the freedom to have that faith enforced by law. Freedom®.

The funniest part of this incredible story is that lawmaker Lesko says the bill is necessary because “we live in America; we don’t live in the Soviet Union.”

What is in the water out there in Arizona?

“Disney’s Habit Heroes Accused of “fat-shaming”"

Taken from: http://shine.yahoo.com/healthy-living/disneys-habit-heroes-accused-fat-shaming-232300194.html

March 1, 2012

Meet Snacker: Disney’s newest fairy at the center of a major controversy.

The zaftig Snacker, along with a bean-bag shaped mob figure named “Glutton” and a ball-bellied couch potato named “Lead Bottom” make of a few of the cartoon villains in Epcot Center’s educational exhibit Habit Heroes.

The theme park’s interactive experience and corresponding website were created in collaboration with Blue Cross and Blue Shield, to teach kids healthy eating habits. But after a soft launch three weeks ago, critics have accused the exhibit of “fat-shaming,” and Disney has responded by closing the exhibit as the company mulls a relaunch. And the website is down for maintenance.

“It’s so dumbfounding it’s unreal,” Dr. Yoni Freedhoff, an assistant professor of family medicine, told the Calgary Herald. “I just can’t believe somebody out there thought it was a good idea to pick up where the school bullies left off and shame kids on their vacation.”

In question are the over-exaggerated body types of the villains and their association with being bad. Visitors entering to the three interactive rooms are first introduced to their heroes: The fit, muscular Will Power and Callie Stenics. They’re also confronted with the overweight caricatures, each one a product of unhealthy habits. Snacker loves processed foods, and visitors use arcade guns to shoot vegetables at the cream puffs and hotdogs that surround her like an aura.

The intention is to inspire kids to live healthier, but the message, says Salon’s Mary Elizabeth Williams, is that “fat people are bad.”

Disney princesses have come under fire before for sending negative messages to young girls about their own waistlines. A recent study found young girls who viewed several Disney movies were more likely to identify a virtuous, aspirational “princess” as someone who’s thin. Consider the Little Mermaid, a movie where the slender main character spends most of her time in a bikini, while villain Ursula fills the screen with her voluptuous tentacled body.

Much has changed since the early days of Ariel. We’re now living in a country with a 17 percent childhood obesity rate. At the same time, school bullying cases and teen suicides have called attention to the need for sensitivity.

While combating obesity through education is crucial and certainly commendable, it’s not as simple as a few cartoons and some tips on diet and exercise. Genetics, finance and family support play key roles in managing kids’ weight in a healthy way. So does self-esteem.

A recent Atlanta PSA featuring overweight kids as cautionary tales, became a prime example of how not to teach kids about weight issues. Shame and fear are harmful tactics when it comes to tackling childhood obesity, because weight isn’t the only issue on the table.

Disney’s Habit Heroes may be learning that lesson. The exhibit has already been shuttered and the website is down for maintenance.  ”The attraction is currently closed as we work to further refine the experience,” Kathleen Prihoda, Disney’s media relations manager told Shine on Wednesday. “Our goal with Habit Heroes is to make sure it conveys a positive message about healthy lifestyles in a fun way.”  Now they’re looking to fix the fail and relaunch an improved exhibit. Prihoda added that the exhibit had never officially opened. “It was in soft open period, which allows us to get guest feedback, prior to the official opening.”

Disney’s rep couldn’t offer any details on when Habit Heroes would re-launch or what it might look like when it does.

One problem with the exhibit that’s harder to fix is its location. Disneyworld has it’s share of restaurant options, but it’s still a theme park. Funnel cakes and hot dogs are just what you do while you wait on line for Space Mountain. “You want to promote good heath? Start by looking at your own sugar and animal fat-laden menus,” writes Salon’s Williams. It’s hard to practice healthy eating in the happiest place on earth.

“As colleges obsess over rankings, students shrug”

Taken from: http://news.yahoo.com/colleges-obsess-over-rankings-students-shrug-171654887.html

February 5, 2012

When US News & World Report debuted its list of “America’s Best Colleges” nearly 30 years ago, the magazine hoped its college rankings would be a game-changer for students and families. But arguably, they’ve had a much bigger effect on colleges themselves.

Yes, students and families still buy the guide and its less famous competitors by the hundreds of thousands, and still care about a college’s reputation. But it isn’t students who obsess over every incremental shift on the rankings scoreboard, and who regularly embarrass themselves in the process. It’s colleges.

It’s colleges that have spent billions on financial aid for high-scoring students who don’t actually need the money, motivated at least partly by the quest for rankings glory.

It was a college, Baylor University, that paid students it had already accepted to retake the SAT exam in a transparent ploy to boost the average scores it could report. It’s colleges that have awarded bonuses to presidents who lift their school a few slots. And it’s colleges that occasionally get caught in the kind of cheating you might expect in sports or on Wall Street, but which seems especially ignominious coming from professional educators.

The latest example came last week at Claremont McKenna, a highly regarded California liberal arts college where a senior administrator resigned after acknowledging he falsified college entrance exam scores for years to rankings publications such as US News. The scale was small: submitting scores just 10 or 20 points higher on the 1,600-point SAT math and reading exams. Average test scores account for just 7.5 percent of the US News rankings formula. Still, the magazine acknowledged the effect could have been to move the college up a slot or two in its rankings of top liberal arts colleges. And so it was hard not to notice Claremont McKenna stood at No. 9 in this year’s rankings, which to people who care about such things sounds much sweeter than No. 11.

“For Claremont, there is I would think a psychologically large difference between being ninth and 11th,” said Bob Schaeffer of the group FairTest and a rankings critic. “We’re a top 10 school,’ (or) ‘we’re 11th or 12th’ — that’s a big psychological difference. It’s a bragging rights difference.”

If it was an effort to gain an edge, it backfired badly. Another popular list, Kiplinger’s “Best College Values,” said Friday it was removing Claremont McKenna from its 2011-12 rankings entirely because of the false reporting. The college had been No. 18 on its list of best-value liberal arts colleges.

Competitiveness may be naturally human, but to many who work with students, such behavior among fellow educators is mystifying. Contrary to widespread perceptions, they say, students typically use the rankings as a source of data and pay little attention to a school’s number. ”When I started in this business, I thought, ‘The rankings are terrible,’” said Brad MacGowan, a 21-year-veteran college counselor at Newton North High School outside Boston. “But spending all this time with students, I just don’t hear that much about them. I’m sure it’s colleges that are perpetuating it.”

It’s hard to know how common cheating like that reported at Claremont McKenna is, given that while US News cross-checks some data with other sources, it relies largely on colleges themselves to provide it. Modest forms of fudging through data selection are undeniably common, especially in law school rankings. The most high-profile case of outright cheating involved Iona University in New York, which acknowledged last fall submitting years of false data that boosted its ranking from around 50th in its category to 30th.

But most rankings critics say by far the most pernicious failure of colleges isn’t blatant cheating, but what they do more openly — allowing the rankings formula to drive their goals and policies.

Colleges, they argue, have caved to the rankings pressure in a range of ways. A big one is recruiting as many students as they can to apply, even if they’re not likely to be a good fit, just to boost their selectivity numbers. And they’ve showered shower financial aid on high-achieving, and often wealthy, kids with high SAT scores.

In the mid-1990s, roughly one-third of grant aid, or scholarships colleges of all types awarded with their own money, was given on grounds other than need (typically called “merit aid’). A decade later, they gave away three times as much money — but well over half was based on merit.

Yes, some colleges recruited better students, but there was a price to be paid. Consider a 2008 study by The Institute for College Access and Success that examined the $11.2 billion annually four-year colleges were awarding in grant aid. Of that, $3.35 billion was awarded as merit aid. That would have easily covered the $2.4 billion in unmet need-based aid that the colleges said their low-income students still faced.

Rankings critic Lloyd Thacker, founder of the group Education Conservancy, calls that a shift in financial aid from “charitable acts to competitive weapons.” Or, as Schaeffer describes it, “they end up giving the money to rich white kids.”

The vast majority of students attend college within three hours of home, so national rankings have little meaning. What matters? Usually more mundane or subjective concerns. One student who went to MacGowan’s office last week for a college planning meeting, junior Bridget Gillis, said she’d yet to even see a college ranking guide. Her criteria: “If they have my major, if it’s a nice campus, how big it is, if they have the sport I want to play in college (field hockey).”

The latest version of a huge national survey of college freshman conducted annually by UCLA’s Higher Education Research Institute asked students to list various factors affecting their choice of college. Rankings in national magazines were No. 11 for current college freshmen, with roughly one in six calling them very important, well behind factors such as cost, size and location.

Those findings may be somewhat misleading. The leading factor cited, by almost two-thirds of students, was their college’s “academic reputation,” which can be hard to disentangle from its ranking. A reputational survey ranking accounts for 25 percent of a college’s score in US News, and fame from a high US News rankings contributes to reputation, even if students say the ranking itself wasn’t a factor. Such circularity is one of many things critics dislike about the US News methodology.

But the survey data do suggest students generally heed the magazine’s advice not to use the rankings to make fine-grained distinctions between schools. ”As someone who is asked every year to comment on the rankings, it seems to me that who cares most is the media,” John Pryor, who directs the UCLA survey, wrote in a blog post last year. “Second would be college presidents and development officers. Way down the list seem to be those who are actually trying to decide where to go to college.”

Thacker says the rankings do have negative psychological effects on students, though usually only the top 10 to 15 percent who are applying to competitive colleges. But it has affected a much broader swath of colleges that have been unable to suppress their competitive urges for the educational common good. ”It has more an impact on colleges, presidents and trustees than it does on students,” Thacker said. “The colleges have shifted resources and changed practices and policies that were once governed by educational values to serve prestige and rank and status.”

That effect, he says, is dishonorable, even if some colleges at least feel guilty about it. More than 80 percent of college admissions officers surveyed for a report last fall by the National Association for College Admission Counseling felt the US News rankings offered students misleading conclusions, and roughly the same proportion agreed they caused counter-productive behavior by colleges. Yet more than 70 percent said their schools promoted their ranking in marketing materials.

The fact that the highly regarded dean apparently involved in the scandal at Claremont McKenna may have been driven to submit inflated test scores is an indicator of the scale of pressure that surrounds the rankings, said David Hawkins, director of public policy and research at NACAC, the counseling group. That pressure comes from all corners of the university — trustees, alumni, presidents, even politicians. ”It’s clear from the (Claremont McKenna) story that admission offices are under pressure,” he said. “The key question is, how do you stop the madness?”

Bob Morse, who oversees the US News rankings as director of data research, says many of the behaviors the rankings have incentivized in colleges are benign. He points to universities like Northeastern and Southern California that have moved up in recent years through concerted efforts to improve their stats in variables that go into the formula — but which also are good for students. Things like more small classes, programs to boost retention, higher faculty-to-student ratios. And why, Morse asks, should colleges be criticized for casting a wider recruiting net?

But even Morse, who says colleges paid the rankings little attention when they debuted in 1983, says he’s been shocked by how seriously they now take their standing, and the lengths they go to move up. ”None of those things when we first started we had in mind would even happen or even could happen,” he said. “It’s evolved in ways that have taken on a life of their own. To us, it’s proof people are paying attention.”

“Why Microsoft’s So-Called ‘Avoid Ghetto’ App Is Really American”

Taken from: http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/01/why_microsofts_so-called_avoid_ghetto_app_is_really_american.html

January 31, 2012

Microsoft has recently been at the center of a whirlwind of controversy over a new app that critics allege is downright racist. On January 3, the company was granted a patent for technology related to its “Pedestrian Route Production” application, a tool that that the company says would navigate the user “safely through neighborhoods with violent crime statistics below a certain threshold.”

While the patent makes no explicit references to race, the project has been unofficially dubbed the “Avoid Ghetto App” by various online news sites. Microsoft, for its part, has been silent throughout the ordeal, and declined to comment on the matter to Colorlines.com. But intentions aside, the fact that the app was so quickly racialized begs the larger question of how and why technology perpetuates systemic racism, and why consumers should care.

“Almost the moment this patent got granted, [this app] got racialized so that ‘violent crime’ became ‘mugging’, which became ‘black and Latino people’, which became ‘ghetto,’ ” says Sarah Chinn, a professor of English at the City University of New York and author of the book “Technology and the Logic of American Racism.” Chinn has been among Microsoft’s most vocal critics.

Microsoft’s app has stirred so much discussion, Chinn says, because the United States is a “very racist country. When you say the words ‘violent crime’, in the public imagination that turns into ‘dangerous urban black man or Latino man.’ “

Others disagree. Industry analyst Rob Enderline told NPR last week that Microsoft’s project is just a matter of technology trying to make life easier for users. “It’s part of an overall effort to make navigation systems more intelligent so they keep you out of danger, whether you’re driving or you’re on foot,” Enderle told NPR.

Yet even if that’s the case, it’s based on the widely held misconception that violent crime is more likely to hit random strangers. In fact, the opposite is true. The vast majority of violent crime happens to people who know each other. For instance, 75 percent of rapes are committed by someone the survivor already knows, according to statistics provided by San Francisco Women Against Rape. The majority of murders are committed by members of ones own racial group. Missouri has the nation’s highest black homicide rate, and when the Violent Prevention Center looked at statistics from 2009, it found that—whenever the relationship could be identified—76 percent of black murder victims were killed by someone they knew.

In Washington, D.C. and New York City, robberies are on the decline.

Huffington Post’s Black Voices points out that the FBI’s 2010 crime report revealed that whites were arrested more often for violent crimes that year than any other race. But, according to Chinn, the myth that black men in particular are more likely to perpetrate violent crime against white strangers resonates so strongly because it’s become an indelible part of America’s racial identity.

“This is a myth that’s been with us since the days of Reconstruction,” Chinn told Colorlines.com, calling the period an era of “terrorism against black people.” Chinn noted that whites unconsciously knew that they were the perpetrators of violence against black people, particularly sexual violence against black women. Thus the myth of dangerous black men evolved as way to justify racist violence against black communities. The logic, Chinn says, was “you’re violent so we have to criminalize you, we have to put you in jail, we have to stop-and-frisk you, and we have to move out of your neighborhoods.”

Microsoft’s new technology is just the latest in a series of scientific parallels with the past.

The problem isn’t the technology itself, but what people imagine the technology will do. So while DNA and finger printing may on the surface be seemingly race-neutral technologies that only offer specific information about someone’s body, they’re quickly used to reinforce people’s preconceived ideas about race. “Once they enter the public discourse in the United States it’s all about how can we identify [people of color] and prove that they are not as good as white people, or prove that segregation is justified,” says Chinn.

Chinn does not expect that Microsoft will market the app as it is now, but will fold it into its next generation of mapping technology. ”It’s really about why we should be afraid of certain neighborhoods and certain kinds of people. People take these technologies and they use them to ‘prove’ things that they actually already believe about people of various racialized groups.”

“Is Hollywood ‘whitewashing’ Asian roles?”

Taken from: http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/13/is-hollywood-whitewashing-asian-roles/

January 13, 2012

America’s embrace of Japanese pop culture, particularly manga and anime, hasn’t resulted in an embrace of Asian and Asian-American actors when those storylines go to Hollywood.

Two upcoming feature films based on Japanese material are already stirring controversy after rumors that white American actors will be cast as characters originally written as Japanese.

Tom Cruise is rumored to be in talks to play the lead role in the Warner Bros. adaptation of Japanese novel “All You Need is Kill,” replacing a Japanese main character. Warner Bros., which is owned by the same parent company as CNN, is also in the pre-production stages of making a live-action version of “Akira,” a graphic novel that was made into a landmark 1988 animated feature film in Japan. All of the actors rumored to be in consideration for the upcoming film’s main characters are white Americans, although casting calls invited actors of “any race” to audition.

That’s troubling to both the series’ devoted fans and advocates of diversity in casting.

Kent A. Ono, a professor of Asian-American studies at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, said the practice of casting white actors to play Asians and Asian-American characters has a long history in Hollywood. Until recent decades, this mostly took the form of white actors playing stereotypical representations of Asian characters, such as Mickey Rooney’s portrayal of I.Y. Yunioshi in 1961′s “Breakfast at Tiffany’s,” Rita Moreno as Tuptim and Yul Brynner as King Mongkut in the 1956 film “The King and I,” and Katharine Hepburn as Jade Tan in 1944′s “Dragon Seed.”

In recent years, Ono said, Asian characters have been replaced with white American versions played by big-name Hollywood stars. It happened with films like the 1960 western, “The Magnificent Seven,” which starred Brynner, Steve McQueen and Charles Bronson, and was based on the influential 1954 Japanese film by Akira Kurosawa, “Seven Samurai.” As Japanese manga and anime have grown more popular, it has happened in films like “Dragonball: Evolution” and “Speed Racer.”

“Animation and anime are these interesting contexts, because casting directors, producers and directors can say, ‘Well, the anime character is fictional and not a real live body … and to cast them as another race is OK,’” Ono said.

The result is fewer opportunities for Asian and Asian-American actors who want a shot at a powerful role.

“Not only do Asian-American actors find this a displacement of their ability to work as laborers, as performers in these sort of roles – they also find this an affront to their identity, to their work to overcome racism and be seen as legitimate actors,” Ono said.

Racebending.com, an international grassroots organization founded in 2009, protests what it sees as the “whitewashing” of film roles and pushes for the fair representation of minorities in media. Spokesman Michael Le said that the increasing popularity of manga and anime titles means that movie producers are keen to cash in, but many don’t see value in keeping the original Asian characters that made them popular. “I remember 10 years ago, I could walk into [the comics aisle of] a Barnes and Noble and it would be all western comics, all DC and Marvel. Now I walk in and the Asian section is bigger than the western comics section,” Le said. “Asian culture is enormously popular and acceptable, but the people are not. The people are inconveniently the wrong race, and so whitewashing is a result.”

Le and other fans want the studios to avoid the debacle associated with the 2010 live-action film “Avatar: The Last Airbender.” The M. Night Shamalyan production tanked with critics and fans after being dogged by controversy surrounding its casting. The ”Avatar” animated television series, on which the movie was based, takes place in a fantasy world populated by four Asian- and Inuit-based cultures. But the actors for each of the lead roles were white, except one – the villain, played by “Slumdog Millionaire” star Dev Patel. Racebending.com was formed to protest the production’s decision to “racebend” the characters – wordplay that alludes to the element “benders” from the “Avatar” series.

The Warner Bros.’ planned live-action adaptation of “Akira” has fans watching closely. According to articles in The Hollywood Reporter and sci-fi blog i09.com, Garret Hedlund was being tapped to play the lead role of Shotaro Kaneda, with Kristen Stewart, Helena Bonham Carter and Ken Watanabe in talks to play other main roles. Except for Watanabe, who is Japanese, all are white. An unnamed studio insider told the Hollywood Reporter for a January 5 storythat preproduction had stopped due to issues related to script, budget and casting. Warner Bros. spokeswoman Jessica Zacholl said the studio had no comment regarding the holdup in production for “Akira” or any rumored casting decisions.

The original Japanese anime version of “Akira,” made in 1988, is considered a pinnacle of Japanese animated film. The story revolves around a catastrophic explosion that destroys the city of Tokyo – an explosion which is first implied to be nuclear in origin, a reminder of fears about atomic destruction in Japan since the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Fans of the manga and original movie question whether the nuances of a plot so deeply intertwined with Japanese history can survive a setting change to Manhattan.