Showing posts with label Piers Morgan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Piers Morgan. Show all posts

Friday, May 6, 2016

The N-Word Controversy

At the White House Correspondents' Association dinner

THE HISTORICAL & CULTURAL DIVIDE BETWEEN  NIGGER/NIGGA 

Long before the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner on Saturday, April 30 in which the host, Larry Wilmore was said to have broken a taboo, many hypocrites and polemicists were, and remain, fascinated with the controversy over the use of the N-word. That fascination, interestingly, stems from, and thrives on ignorance. No matter, it was not surprising that Wilmore’s n-word quip stoked concerns about possible implications of such usage, particularly in reference to the first black president of the United States.

Piers Morgan
Not one to pass up a chance to wade into a controversy so tempting and so contemporary, especially when baited by a tweet that said, “Piers Morgan’s next troll piece just wrote itself,” the British polemicist came out swinging in a Daily Mail opinion piece. “By calling the first black president of the United States a ‘n***er’ on national TV, Larry Wilmore let down Barack Obama, and himself, and only guaranteed one thing: its longevity,” he wrote.
To make the point, Piers Morgan quoted Wilmore’s quip (or what he believed was Wilmore’s quip): “Yo, Barry, you did it my n***er!”

He was wrong and this is why. Aside from the hypocrisy of hiding behind three asterisks, it is important to understand that when black people, specifically black Americans, use the so-called n-word, they do not say “nigger” even if it sounds that way, they say “nigga” and there is a huge difference between the two.
Wilmore explained the usage and context of the word on his show, The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore, as follows:
“[Morgan] quoted me as saying ‘Yo, Barry, you did it my n***er.’ Now hold on, are you saying that I called the president a n***er? Ok, that’s horrible. I would never do that. ‘N***er’ is what white people use to denigrate, demean and dehumanize black people and ‘n***a’ is a term of endearment some black people use between each other to take back that power.”

In his Daily Mail piece, Morgan alluded to the fact that Wilmore’s quip was a publicity stunt. “Wilmore’s a smart guy who knew exactly what he was doing,” he wrote. “He was center stage on national TV at an event attended by many of the most powerful people in America, and watched by millions around the world. He planned that N-word quip to Obama very precisely because he knew it would spark an instant twitter firestorm and get him global media attention.”

Piers Morgan, of course, knows a thing or two about courting controversy for relevance—from Susan Sarandon’s cleavage to Kim Kardashian’s nude selfie to netting a petition for deportation (signed by over 100,000 people) for expressing his opinion on American gun issues louder than Americans.
Richard Pryor
To buttress his argument against the use of the N-word, he quoted the late black comedian, Richard Pryor, who dramatically changed his view of the N-word after a visit to Africa. Morgan wrote, “He [Pryor] explained to Ebony magazine: ‘While I was there [Africa], something inside of me said, “Look around you Richard. What do you see?” I saw people. African people. I didn’t see any ‘n***ers.’ I didn’t see any there because there are no ‘n***ers’ in Africa. Can you imagine going out into the bush and walking up to a Masai and saying, ‘Hey n***er. Come here!’ You couldn’t do that. There are no ‘n***ers’ here in America either. We black people are not ‘n***ers’, and I will forever refuse to be one. I’m free of that, it’s out of my head. I realized that terms like ‘n***er’ and the word ‘bitch’ that so many black men call our women, are tricks, like genocide on the brain.’”

Great quote, except that Piers Morgan missed one interesting point - until he went to Africa, Pryor always saw black people with the eyes of whites. In Africa, and for the first time, he saw black people for who they really are: humans, short and simple, not the way many whites see them: black first, then humans, maybe.
With that sudden awareness, Pryor decided that he'd start seeing blacks with his own eyes, not with the eyes of those who see them from a position of superiority; so, in the statement Morgan quoted above, Pryor was liberating himself of the demeaning slur ‘nigger,’ not the black term of endearment ‘nigga.’

Larry Wilmore
Now, Larry Wilmore, in an interview with Fresh Air, a radio show distributed by NPR, told Terry Gross that while acknowledging that using the N-word might upset some people, his intention was to recognize and honor Obama’s significance as the first black president. “What Obama means to me as a black person, and to many black [people], really is hard to quantify,” he said. “...I wanted to take the opportunity to turn that [word] upside down and to use it in the way that we’ve used it inside the community...as that show of affection that only we can understand.

Though President Obama said through press secretary Josh Earnest that “he appreciated the spirit of the sentiments that Mr. Wilmore expressed,” some people still make a big deal of it. Gregory Clay, in an opinion piece in the Dallas Morning News, said that Larry Wilmore’s n-word liberation was Richard Pryor’s imprisonment. He then wondered what would happen if Paul Ryan uttered the n-word as a speaker at the annual spring dinner. That, in the first place, is an ignorant argument because Paul Ryan, being white, does not understand the difference between ‘nigger’ and ‘nigga’ and even if he does, he possesses not the cultural experience and/or sentiment that impels one black man to refer endearingly to another as ‘my nigga.’   

President Obama & Larry Wilmore
It seems that many critics, in pontificating on the inappropriateness of the n-word, lack an insight into the cultural significance of the word as used by those who understand that the context in which ‘nigga’ is used cannot, and should not, be confused with the hurtful context in which the word ‘nigger’ is used. People do not necessarily have to use and/or create controversies around race-based expressions or ethnic slangs that have a cultural import of which they are not equipped to understand. 

Every race, after-all, deals with its history its own way. And should be free to do so on its terms.   

Tuesday, March 15, 2016

Nudity: Beyond the Controversy

Kim: "When you're like I have nothing to wear LOL" 
Probing the blurred lines between female empowerment,
naked protests & sheer exhibitionism 

Last week, as the world marked the International Womens Day, a bizarre cycle of creative ferment rocked social media over Kim Kardashian’s naked selfie Instagram post, which, in a way, was surprising since it was not the first time the reality star “broke the internet.”

Nevertheless, it got television personality, Wendy Williams wondering if Kanye West had hijacked his wife’s phone. It also prompted former CNN presenter, Piers Morgan to offer, derisively, to buy her clothes in response to the puckishly captioned post, “When you’re like I have nothing to wear LOL.”
Bette Midler, who actually set the tone for the ferment, wrote the hilarious tweet, “If Kim wants us to see a part of her we’ve never seen, she’s gonna have to swallow the camera.”

Moms share nude snaps following Kim's internet offering 
And Kim, in a rather uncharacteristic reaction to the hoopla, did what some called ‘pulling a Kanye’ (which seems to be another way of saying ‘taking the bait’ especially if it involves engaging in a twitter feud). She said afterwards, “I am empowered by my body. I am empowered by my sexuality. I am empowered by feeling comfortable in my skin. I am empowered by showing the world my flaws and not being afraid of what anyone is going to say about me. And I hope that through this platform I have been given, I can encourage the same empowerment for girls and women all over the world.”

She did, in fact, ‘encourage’ some British mothers to feel empowered enough to strip for the camera. This week, the London-based Sun Newspaper published nude photos of five new moms who stripped off to show, according to the paper, what REAL post-pregnancy women look like naked.

But beyond the utterly pointless controversy over Kim’s nude selfie, many now see the line between naked protests aimed at female empowerment and the sexy stereotypes that feminists scorn becoming steadily blurred. And the question they are asking is, does nudity really prove the point?

Protesters at the Pamplona bull run
In a Vice Media blog post, Bertie Brandes wonders if “It’s time for women to rethink naked protests.” Analyzing the adventures of Heather Varley, a 22-year-old British student, who traveled to Spain last year to participate in a PETA-inspired protest against animal cruelty during the Pamplona bull run, Bertie offered interesting insights. While other protesters sprayed red paint on their bodies, Heather chose instead to protest topless. “I’ve got an inkling,” Bertie wrote. “Just an inkling—largely due to the total disregard of the equally nearly-naked male protester next to Heather in the story—that yes, yes! Heather’s nipples might have been what got this protest into the news.”

FEMEN protest against EURO 2012
The truth, though, is that over the years, nudity has been effectively employed in protests to attract public attention to a cause. But nudity, according to Bertie, might not have much to do with animal rights, all the same, Heather understood that the only way to get attention was to strip because of the power still carried by the image of a woman’s naked body. Further, Bertie observed that nude protests had worked for FEMEN (a group of Ukrainian topless female activities) up to a point. “The problem is that their argument was entirely undermined when it turned out that these beautiful women who risked their lives to campaign against stifling sexism had apparently been auditioned on the basis of their attractiveness.” Her verdict? “Exploiting other women’s confidence and trust on that level is pretty depressing.”

Mollie King
In fact, many pundits hold the opinion that a line should be drawn between nudity as a form of protest for a specific cause and nudity for the sheer purpose of exhibitionism. 

Last November, the British newspaper columnists, Jan Moir, in her piece in the Daily Mail captioned, “Why these X-rated red carpet dresses betray women,” went as far as saying that those guilty of this indecent exposure were deluding themselves and demeaning their sex.
Down on the red carpet and up on the stage, a new frontier in feminism is being established,” she wrote. 

Rosie Huntington-Whiteley
“Battle lines have been drawn in a crusade where she-celebrities seem to be competing to see who can wear the least the best, all in the name of emancipation and fashion forward self-expression. Who dares to bare wins? Everyone loves a bit of sexy glamour, but stars are stepping out in ever more terrifying outfits: barely there frocks that seem to get skimpier, tighter, more outrageous and revealing than before. First there was actress Salma Hayek in eye-popping ruffled plunge, showing more breast than a 10lb turkey. Then there was Marks & Spencer model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley in the kind of navel-grazing sequins that might give Jessica Rabbit pause for thought. Pop singer Mollie King wore a dress slit to the navel - from both directions - which was so revealing we could all see she had dutifully kept her waxing appointments…That is why it is rather depressing to see that, within the Tinseltown confines of show business, so many of them seem to be content to reduce themselves to the kind of sexy stereotypes worshiped by men.”
Salma Hayek

As with other aspects of feminism, the talk about women’s freedom to express themselves through nudity and fashion is an ongoing debate.
In this context, Angelina Chapin, the Blog editor of the Huffington Post said that “Some of the most important moments in modern feminism have been the result of tensions between feminists.” 

In her opinion piece in the Ottawa Citizen entitled, “Why Feminists Should Argue Over Kim Kardashian’s Selfie,” she asserted that “We should also ask questions older feminists did not, such as why Serena Williams’ body is shamed while Maria Sharapova’s is celebrated and why a white woman’s assault matters more than an Aboriginal woman’s murder.”


Caitlyn Stasey
It probably doesn’t come as a surprise that the argument, inevitably, touches yet again on the body issue, which the Australian actress, Caitlyn Stasey had a rather unusual response to early last year. 

Caitlyn, according to a report in the Mail Online, in a bold move to show her dissatisfaction with the way women were being presented across all forms of media, launched what she called a female-empowerment website complete with a series of full-frontal photographs. 

While the initiative was positively received, pundits are still struggling to find a convincing answer to the all-important question, does nudity really prove the point?