Is this impression of Serena Williams a form of blackface?

[Elder Sister]

Why would you google it when it had no bearing on your decision at all? Without context you don't really think about stepping lightly. Do you google every joke you make of a friend? For some I imagine that the possibility of an issue doesn't really register.

If I'm planning something like that and I am an international tennis player, then, yes, I should have enough sense to run whatever it is by a media/public relations group, or just Google it myself. It's not rocket science. Terra says it took him seven seconds.

[Castel]

If I'm planning something like that and I am an international tennis player, then, yes, I should have enough sense to run whatever it is by a media/public relations group, or just Google it myself. It's not rocket science. Terra says it took him seven seconds.

That's because Terra already sees it as racist. Look at a lot of people in this thread. People see this as a sort of friendly jabbing, they wouldn't have googled it because it feels perfectly natural. And considering that this has apparently happened more than once with no response I'm not surprised that a person simply wouldn't think about googling it.

[Shryke]

It is racist, "on some level." To be exact, it's on the level of fetishizing and sexualizing black people due to the association of black people being more animalistic and thus less in control of their desires. It's a different sort of exiticizing than, say, East Asian women get or the de-sexualizing that East-Asian men get, but all of these are racist at their roots.

Is it now? Cause the only argument that at all applies to what happened is the "big booty/big tits" argument, not the one you state here. And that's just not an argument I find compelling in this case since it's not about Serena's race at all but about her-as-a-person's body-type, nor are "big tits and big ass" a specifically black stereotype if one at all.

I believe I answered that already:

I mean, take the "Paki" example. I'm not British. I do not live in the U.K. Does that mean that I'm in the right to argue with someone on whether the word "Paki" is a racist term? Will you? Will you seriously argue with a U.K. resident who objected to someone on this board using the word "Paki" because, hell, that's their racial baggage, not yours!

That doesn't answer the question though because the heart of the disagreement here is over whether it constitutes a "cogent argument that's historically and culturally relevant". Because it seems many think it's not at all culturally relevant right now.

Your definition puts it right back to my question: How many people need to think it's a "cogent argument that's historically and culturally relevant". Because that conclusion can be awfully subjective.

[TheMysteriousOne]

It's not racist, it is however rude, yes Wozniacki may be a lot more attractive than Serena but doing what she did is a very unattractive personality trait.

This is not true, but it is your opinion, so...

[Elder Sister]

That's because Terra already sees it as racist. Look at a lot of people in this thread. People see this as a sort of friendly jabbing, they wouldn't have googled it because it feels perfectly natural. And considering that this has apparently happened more than once with no response I'm not surprised that a person simply wouldn't think about googling it.

I see it as racist as well.

I just think she would have been better served by doing some homework before getting up in front of cameras and an audience doing that routine.

Look, I will readily admit that I seem to be one of 3 or 4 people that thinks it was racist. I don't like being in the minority. :P.

[Darth Visenya]

It seems to be a quite a common opinion, I imagine there's a good reason Wozniacki,Sharapova,Kirilenko etc earn a fortune from modelling and endorsements and are more in demand in that respect than Serena is.

[Sci-2]

It seems to be a quite a common opinion, I imagine there's a good reason Wozniacki,Sharapova,Kirilenko etc earn a fortune from modelling and endorsements and are more in demand in that respect than Serena is.

Keep in mind it's all ultimately subjective, but also note most of that product is being sold largely to white people and other markets aligned with that aesthetic.

Also musculature has something to do with it -> Gina Carano has a beautiful face but it's unlikely she'll get a Cover Girl deal. The girl with muscles is seen as less attractive.

[Shryke]

I think Wozniacki is the more attractive one but, whatever, attractiveness is highly subjective.

Except when it comes to me.

<=== Look at those ear. That paw. You know you love me.

[Darth Visenya]

Keep in mind it's all ultimately subjective, but also note most of that product is being sold largely to white people and other markets aligned with that aesthetic.

Also musculature has something to do with it -> Gina Carano has a beautiful face but it's unlikely she'll get a Cover Girl deal. The girl with muscles is seen as less attractive.

Yes of course it's subjective and of course I appreciate others may find Serena attractive but for me and a lot of other people, she just doesn't do anything attraction wise, also Sci if she does float your boat I hope you have a random meeting and it happens for you, just if it does can you ask her if Sharapova ever swings the other way :P.

[Darth Visenya]

I think Wozniacki is the more attractive one but, whatever, attractiveness is highly subjective.

Except when it comes to me.

<=== Look at those ear. That paw. You know you love me.

You're almost as cute as a baby bunny :P.

[Young Wolf]

Huh...I didn't think the white chick was hot until she padded herself. *shrugs*

Doesn't strike me as racist, but definitely a woman on woman crime there.

[Addien]

Re: Addien

As Wilde said of people losing their parents, once is a misfortune, but twice and it looks like carelessness. ;)

I wish I understood this reference, but alas I don't. :bowdown:

[Fragile Bird]

Re: Shryke and Fragile Bird

Let's be more precise here.

I am not accusing Wozniacki of being a racist.

I am saying that the way she mocked Serena Williams' body matched the same race-based denigration of black women's bodies of yore, and which still goes in under different guises today. I am, as I alluded to in drawing a comparison to the sexism in atheist conventions incident, responding more to the reactions to someone pointing the racial element of that jest.

I have done things and said things that were racial in nature without being aware of the meaning. For instance, I was saying "I got gyp'd" up till about 5 years ago because I was not aware that it was derived from the negative stereotype concerning the Roma culture (didn't make the connection since I thought it's "jibb'ed"). Did I cause offense to others along the way? Of course I did, even though I did not intend to.

Some people intend to cause offense, but most don't. I think we accept that, in general, when some kind of insulting remark is made, it's more likely due to thoughtlessness or ignorance than it is to true malice. The reaction to these incidents, however, is more troubling sometimes than the actual incident itself. None of us perfect and I am sure I will continue to use racist language inadvertently at some point. When it is point out to me, however, it'd be rude and inconsiderate to then defend my error by arguing that those who took offense, rightfully so, are wrong to do so, or that they're over-sensitive, or that they're playing the race card, or any number of things that further trivialize their experience. If there's a cogent argument that's historically and culturally relevant as to why a word or a phrase is racist, then I'm glad that someone takes the time to educate me (like I learned from British folks that "Paki" is an offensive term).

But, you know, to each their own. As I answered Mr. E., there's absolutely no compelling reason why anyone should care about this stuff. I'm just glad that quite a few people do.

I live across the border, TP, in Toronto, as you probably recall, and my entire life I have been bombarded by American television, American radio, American movies, American magazines, American culture of all types.

While I have heard the complaints about blaxploitation films, I have never heard of "hyper-sexual representations of African American women". While you have said it took seven seconds to find items on Google, I assume that's because you have come across the concept somewhere in your university career. Elder Sister thinks Wozniacki should have just Googled it, but the question is, Googled what? If you Google anything about black women and breasts or butts, you get porn sites listed. If you Google offensive black stereotypes, the first page comes up with 1. List of ethnic slurs 2. Hollywood's 6 most offensive stereotypes (nothing about black women) 3. The Watermelon Stereotype (just what you would think) 4. Pepsi Super Bowl ad accused of fostering black stereotypes (not about women's bodies) 5. Racial Stereotypes and The Help (nothing there) 6. Why do white people stereotype so much 7. Racial food stereotypes etc etc etc.

If you Google "offensive black women stereotypes", once again, nothing like what you displayed. The first article complains black women are pictured with attitude. The second lists 8 stereotypes about black women that need to die in 2012: we are angry, we emasculate our men, we are all overweight or out of shape, we are sexually inhibited, our standards are too high, we are all man crazy [looking for a good black man, not hyper-sexed], we all have daddy issues, and, we are all either/or [light or dark skinned]. The rest of the articles are also irrelevent.

So, pray tell, how is this "hyper-sexed" "animalistic" stereotype supposed to have revealled itself to us?

I understand the concept of what Caroline did was to use a racial stereotype, but how anyone would connect it to a historic depiction of black women if they had never done a university course on historical stereotypes is beyond me.

TP, you say, "the way she mocked Serena Williams' body matched the same race-based denigration of black women's bodies of yore, and which still goes in under different guises today." The links you provide indeed show nasty looking, exagerrated depictions of the bodies of "savages".

Do you think Caroline ever saw such depictions and drew on them? Or do you think she drew on the fact that she saw Serena on the tennis court like this, or this?

And speaking of drawing, how would you then draw Serena Williams? If you took one of those 2 pictures and asked an artist to draw them, would that be a racist depiction of Williams? To accurately draw her as she is? Would you edit the document to make her breasts and her derriere smaller? I ask that because one of your links complained about Apple Bottom jeans, created by a black man to fit the body shape of black women. Are you also aware that a white designer has been attacked by the black community for deliberately not creating clothingthat fit black women's bodies? [an urban legend, btw]. So a person who addresses the needs of his community is one of those people who fall under your category of using "hyper-sexual" stereotypes?

From my experience, I think one of the cruellest things people do to each other is make fun of their physical appearance, when done with cruel intent. Even when done with love and affection, the imitation can be taken the wrong way. It's best just to avoid it. So far from what I've read in this thread, Serena Williams was not offended, and the imitation was not done with cruel intent, but I can see why people in this thread have called the depiction in poor taste, or unprofessional.

You also say the other issue is once an offensive racial stereotype is pointed out and explained, we should immediately recognize it for what it is, and go on to say:

The reaction to these incidents, however, is more troubling sometimes than the actual incident itself. None of us perfect and I am sure I will continue to use racist language inadvertently at some point. When it is point out to me, however, it'd be rude and inconsiderate to then defend my error by arguing that those who took offense, rightfully so, are wrong to do so, or that they're over-sensitive, or that they're playing the race card, or any number of things that further trivialize their experience

I knew when I was 10 years old that "Paki" was a racist term. How old were you when you used it? Doesn't it sound just like Chink? Did you really need someone to explain it to you? I grew up in a Polish and Jewish neighbourhood. We lived together because most of the Jewish immigrants were Polish Jews. They referred to themselves as Jews. They said, "I'm a Jew." I went to law school with a class that was at least one third Jewish. A lot of my Jewish classmates laughed at the gentiles who couldn't get the word "Jew" out of their mouth because, they told me, those classmates likely only used the word as a slur, as in "dirty Jew". I have in the past been accused by someone of being an anti-semite because I've used the word Jew. Again, because to them the word was a slur, but not to me, someone who was raised to use the word with respect. I was telling a friend, an RC equivalent of a WASP, that I was a Polack and proud to be one, and she almost got hysterical and begged me not to denigrate myself. I was rather stunned. I said to her, "Polack" means "Polish" in my language, thank-you. She was totally flummoxed, because she had only ever heard it as a slur and hearing me say it upset her terribly, like someone using the word "kike".

What am I trying to say? Well, I wouldn't stuff towels under my shirt and in my pants to make fun of someone's body shape, not because of what colour they are, but because it's a hurtful action. But I'm also saying Shryke is perfectly right to ask about context. You tell us of this "hyper-sexual representation", and I'll take the scholarly articles as being enlightening. But I think your comments about people who do not have this social context and don't see the action as offensive as an over-reaction.

This post is too long, and too rambling, I'm sorry for that. But I do think the reaction to the charity tennis event was an over-reaction, I don't think Wozniacki will ever do it again, I don't think Serena Williams will accept the depiction again, and that those of us who have never heard of this kind of racial slur have now been educated.

I still wonder, however, how black women with this body shape are supposed to feel about their "hyper-sexualized" body shape. Is it ok if they feel proud of it? It's one thing to be Pakistani and say fuck you, I'm not a Paki, what do you do when people say depictions of women who look like you are racist? (Not the Wozniacki depictions, the Apple Bottom and Parasuco depictions).

/sp

[TerraPrime]

So, pray tell, how is this "hyper-sexed" "animalistic" stereotype supposed to have revealled itself to us?

I understand the concept of what Caroline did was to use a racial stereotype, but how anyone would connect it to a historic depiction of black women if they had never done a university course on historical stereotypes is beyond me.

I have different expectations on different types of people when it comes to awareness of these issues. For sure,if you're not exposed to the concept, then you're not. I don't think it necessarily takes a university course on race issues to become aware of this. There are plenty of programs on the channels like Discovery and History on the ways of colonialism and chattel slavery in the U.S. Not everyone watches those programs, nor will everyone who watched those programs make the connection. That's not the issue that upsets me. People who're unaware will just need to be educated, that's all.

I also didn't take any classes in college about race. I did went through diversity training when I started working in the Residence Hall and it did open my eyes to a lot of issues, which eventually helped me educate myself more on other issues not covered in the training. The issue of sexualizing black people was a tangential issue I picked up on reading blogs/articles on entertainment and racism. This is not an obscure issue (imo) that only academics and scholars talk about. It is as commonplace as the discussions on desexualizing of Asian men and the othering/exoticizing of females from the non-dominant groups.

Do you think Caroline ever saw such depictions and drew on them? Or do you think she drew on the fact that she saw Serena on the tennis court like this, or this?

I don't think Wozniacki saw those images and decided to follow suite. I don't think she was being deliberately racist. I think it's one of those examples of unfortunate, but real, confluence of something done out of ignorance of historical context and true racist iconography. It's more forgivable than the blackface cosmetic ad because I expect an ad agency to have a higher quality of education on visual media presentation than I do for a professional tennis player.

And speaking of drawing, how would you then draw Serena Williams? If you took one of those 2 pictures and asked an artist to draw them, would that be a racist depiction of Williams? To accurately draw her as she is? Would you edit the document to make her breasts and her derriere smaller?

I still wonder, however, how black women with this body shape are supposed to feel about their "hyper-sexualized" body shape. Is it ok if they feel proud of it? It's one thing to be Pakistani and say fuck you, I'm not a Paki, what do you do when people say depictions of women who look like you are racist? (Not the Wozniacki depictions, the Apple Bottom and Parasuco depictions).

I'd imagine that it should be handled the same way when people report on, say, a scientist of Asian descent, or an accountant of Jewish heritage, i.e., you focus on their achievement and their relevant merits, not their ethnicity. If someone has to render Serena Williams in drawings, then they should do an accurate job and not present a false depiction to avoid being accused of racism. The issue, though, is that Wozniacki was not doing an accurate portrayal of Williams, rather, she's exaggerating specific traits to symbolize William. That'd be like the difference between a hypothetical Saturday Night Live skit with a comic putting on a black face and exaggerated thick lips to mimic Obama, instead of following his mannerisms or pattern of speech.

I ask that because one of your links complained about Apple Bottom jeans, created by a black man to fit the body shape of black women. Are you also aware that a white designer has been attacked by the black community for deliberately not creating clothingthat fit black women's bodies? [an urban legend, btw]. So a person who addresses the needs of his community is one of those people who fall under your category of using "hyper-sexual" stereotypes?

This is a more complicated issue and I perhaps, in hindsight, should not have chosen it as an example. While it does illustrate the result of sexualizing black people (there are equally many articles on sexualizing black men), it also is complicated by the issue of internalization of the dominant view and the struggle of agency for the minority group. The best simile I can use is the third-wave feminism where some women embrace the slut image, including the clothing and behavior that had been traditionally used to denigrate women. I happen to think that both readings, as either empowering reclaim or perpetuating old insults, can be accurate, depending on context and presentation. I think these are difficult issues to struggle with. Far as I can tell, how to approach dominant-group values of physical appearance is still a controversial issue in the black community. Chris Rock did a short film on Hair, and there's plenty of argument back and forth on straightening or not straightening the naturally curly hair that many black Americans have. You can even find articles debating Michelle Obama's choice of always straightening her hair.

I knew when I was 10 years old that "Paki" was a racist term. How old were you when you used it? Doesn't it sound just like Chink? Did you really need someone to explain it to you?

Yes, I read the term and I sensed that it was not an innocuous short-hand term, and this was confirmed by several U.K. boarders here as they explained it.

And speaking of Chink, I had to have that explained to me, as well. I had no idea that the young 9 year old girl yelling "Chink! Chink-chink-chink!" at me in front of her approving parents in the parking lot of a highschool in Cincinnati was being was being insulting until my then-bf and his entire family looked horrified and then rushed me away.

But I think your comments about people who do not have this social context and don't see the action as offensive as an over-reaction.

I will admit that I did assume that more people would be aware of this issue, since I came across it quite casually and didn't take me a lot of looking when I learned of it before. I just assumed that many people will have come across the same analysis at some point, in the same way, particularly people who grew up in the U.S. But it seems that this is much less well know than I had thought. It may also key more to colonialism than to plain racism, so that might be why fewer Americans seem to be aware of this (in general, I think colonialism as an issue is less prominent in the U.S.).

So yes, perhaps I did over-react based on the assumption that more people actually knew about this and they are just denying the connection, much like the black-facing example we just talked about a week ago.

[mormont]

Is it now? Cause the only argument that at all applies to what happened is the "big booty/big tits" argument, not the one you state here. And that's just not an argument I find compelling in this case since it's not about Serena's race at all but about her-as-a-person's body-type, nor are "big tits and big ass" a specifically black stereotype if one at all.

Let's be very clear about this:

YES IT IS.

We're all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. The facts are against you here: this is a specific racial stereotype of black women, whether Caroline Wozniacki knew it or not, whether you believe it is or not. Facts are facts.

The thing is, that these are not characteristics that Serena Williams just coincidentally happens to have, that have no connection with her race at all. These are culturally stereotypical black female characteristics. If you have honestly never, ever heard anyone refer to them in a racial manner - well, actually, forget that. You have. Whether you noticed it or remember it or not, you have. It would be practically impossible for you not to have, though very possible for you simply not to have paid attention to it. But things don't cease to be simply because you never noticed them.

And if you're mocking someone for a racial characteristic, well, that's racist.

Similarly, this notion that something isn't racist unless it was meant to be racist is dangerous. It's excusing ignorance. Racist words or images simply can't be divorced from their racial connotations by an 'oops'. Maybe in private, but not in public. Serena Williams was the target but not the sole audience of this jolly jape. Other people saw it. Black people saw it. Racist people saw it. Wozniacki was communicating with a lot of people, and she was well aware of that. So she has to take responsibility for what she communicated to them, whether it was what she meant to communicate or not. Anything else is an abdication of responsibility. If you're a public figure and you send a public message, it's on you to own it. She should come out and apologise; if part of that apology is 'I didn't realise that what I was doing had a racial connotation', fair enough, but she needs to recognise that it did have such a connotation.

[Shryke]

Let's be very clear about this:

YES IT IS.

We're all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. The facts are against you here: this is a specific racial stereotype of black women, whether Caroline Wozniacki knew it or not, whether you believe it is or not. Facts are facts.

What facts are against me here? You've shown no facts at all.

The thing is, that these are not characteristics that Serena Williams just coincidentally happens to have, that have no connection with her race at all. These are culturally stereotypical black female characteristics. If you have honestly never, ever heard anyone refer to them in a racial manner - well, actually, forget that. You have. Whether you noticed it or remember it or not, you have. It would be practically impossible for you not to have, though very possible for you simply not to have paid attention to it. But things don't cease to be simply because you never noticed them.

And if you're mocking someone for a racial characteristic, well, that's racist.

But she's not being mocked for racial characteristics. She's being mocked for physical characteristics she actually has. Physically, biologically, those characteristics have no connection to her race. Bit tits and butt are not the exclusive domain of the african american. So yeah, actually, her physical characteristics aren't directly race related.

Because of that you are left with the claim that it must be about her race because that is a stereotypical black characteristic. The racial dimensions of the act come in the perception of it by others. It depends on audience knowing the stereotype to which you are referring. But that itself is, if nothing else, not even close to universal as shown in this thread.

You are claiming racial dimensions to the act based on a subjective audience judgement that isn't even universal. This is not a terribly compelling argument.

Similarly, this notion that something isn't racist unless it was meant to be racist is dangerous. It's excusing ignorance. Racist words or images simply can't be divorced from their racial connotations by an 'oops'. Maybe in private, but not in public. Serena Williams was the target but not the sole audience of this jolly jape. Other people saw it. Black people saw it. Racist people saw it. Wozniacki was communicating with a lot of people, and she was well aware of that. So she has to take responsibility for what she communicated to them, whether it was what she meant to communicate or not. Anything else is an abdication of responsibility. If you're a public figure and you send a public message, it's on you to own it. She should come out and apologise; if part of that apology is 'I didn't realise that what I was doing had a racial connotation', fair enough, but she needs to recognise that it did have such a connotation.

But those racial connotations only exist if the audience sees them. How many actually see them? How many does it take for it to matter?

This gets right back to my point to TP: you are making a subjective analysis about what constitutes a racial message. And you are here getting all huffy and boldy claiming it's a fact.

[Castel]

But she's not being mocked for racial characteristics. She's being mocked for physical characteristics she actually has. Physically, biologically, those characteristics have no connection to her race. Bit tits and butt are not the exclusive domain of the african american. So yeah, actually, her physical characteristics aren't directly race related.

On this:I'm trying to say this without sounding smarmy but surely I'm not the only that doesn't see the fuss about Serena's body ? The whole "bodacious" thing seems to have been greatly exaggerated as far as I can see. Which is a discussion in and of itself.

[Calibandar]

Well, I don't like it. I find this one meaner than the Djokovic impressions, because it ridicules her figure, which is great btw.

This looks a bit like skanky white girl being jealous.

[Lothar Imbel]

I don't seen this as racist..... Just rude.

But as people I don't think we should be so sensitive about stuff like this.

Since we know it wont stop or change.

Hey look, a black person! Apparently it isn't racist guys, which is nice. Can we all go home now?

Seriously though, agreeing with this post 100% and while I can understand why some people think this is racist, I don't see why that necessarily facilitates a 11 page long debate on what is an isn't racist. I mean, my facebook profile picture is me swearing at an Indian girl. Is that racist?

[Roose Seal]

Y'all racist for pointing out racism!!!