It started with George Bush's dad when Bush Sr. paraded wild haired, dark skinned Willy Horton before voters in his race against Michael Dukakis. Ever since then the Republicans have stooped to scour the bottom of the garbage pail whenever their backs have been to the wall. The Dems (who are not above lying and pandering) just don't do much race baiting, perhaps only because most minorities vote Democrat. While I have no doubt that the RNC (and Karl Rove) are super sleaze balls, I have a slight problem with the interpretation of this particular ad.
So what if a white woman is seen giving Harold Ford the come hither? Is it against the law for a black man to date a white woman? Why do the Dems have their panties in a knot over this? Does this mean we won't vote for men or women who date/ marry across racial lines? Or even consider the possibility of them doing so? And if there are people for whom this little sly innuendo about forbidden sex is a Rorschach test for their deep seated fears, they weren't likely to vote for a black man in the first place. (Or am I missing something here? Are there more Americans other than southern Whites, for whom too this is an issue?) Strangely enough, I think it is the Dems who have fallen into the racist trap here. The ad is offensive because it is sleazy not because it is racist.
ruchira, you make a good point, and have some of the same sentiments. nevertheless, i think the issue here is that the south has a long history of bestializing black males and their ravenous appetite for white women, and this is a neck-and-neck race so this might induce some poor whites to vote against ford because of the race issue.
btw, during the jindal (brown repub.) vs. blanco (cajun housewife) race in 2003 for gov. in louisiana the dems seemed to have played the race card a bit, or looked the other way. blanco did rather well in the same parishes that david duke did in the 90s, and many of the newspaper stories lingered over jindal's dark-skin and shiny black hair, etc. (i doubt they would have described the physiognamy of a democratic african american candidate in the same manner).
My point is that those folks wouldn't have voted for Ford, a black man, in the first place.
In any case, it is the white woman who is seen salivating over Ford - not vice versa. That is the other little secret of white racism. The myth is not just that black men are ravenous for white women but that white women too secretly desire black men. Talk about insecurity!
Yet the truth is that mixed race pairings in the US have historically involved white males and black women far more frequently than the other way around. I just read Cane River by Lalita Tademy for my book club. The book chronicles the true life stories of generations of black women (the author's ancestors) born into slavery on a Louisina plantation before and after the Civil War. The family gets progressively "bleached" as Elisabeth, the family matriarch observes in her old age. Every nubile black slave girl was a target for adult white males from the time they entered puberty. All mixed race children were products of white male / black female pairings. So why this upside down stereotyping? Remember segregationist Storm Thurmond and his "affair" with a fifteen year old maid servant? Talk about hypocrisy!
My point is that those folks wouldn't have voted for Ford, a black man, in the first place.
the vast majority of them. and in any case, it isn't a black and white sentiment. many people struggle with their prejudices and this could "tip" some people.
Yet the truth is that mixed race pairings in the US have historically involved white males and black women far more frequently than the other way around.
So what? Black men have the power now that they never did before.
well, the "so what" is democratic politics. i just heard on the radio that the number #1 variable among southern whites for whether they would vote for a black politician is their attitude toward racial issues. not religion. not income. etc. so if you make racial issues salient than it is a problem for democrats. not being a democrat i don't care much myself...i personally found the add kind of funny with the playboy bunny & porn tie in. but i'm not a typical southern voters....
Yet the truth is that mixed race pairings in the US have historically involved white males and black women far more frequently than the other way around.
Not since the end of slavery or anyway in recent decades, according to Steve Sailer, who in my experience/to the best of my knowledge generally has his statistical type research down cold. Particularly not in marriages or child bearing unions. You can easily find his article or two on this at his site.
As we all know many men of whatever color/stripe will casually bang especially on the sneak tip much of what moves. Hence the vast gender skewing of prostitution despite legions of women these days in western countries that could afford to on their independent dime.
it isn't a black and white sentiment. many people struggle with their prejudices and this could "tip" some people.
And many people don't struggle at all with their prejudices, and aren't expected to by this (or Euro) society. Black women for example, who are given a free pass, or are even generally regarded sympathetically, when they mightily and publicly resent successful black men dating and marrying white women.
The double standards of all this bothers me considerably. I understand it comes from the Leninist Who/whom?, oppressor/oppressed, advantaged/victim ideology. Which I largely reject.
Not to sound mean, but anyone who doesn't get the implications of a white coming on to a black man, in a political ad run in the south, has never been to the south, and has no knowledge of racism there. For as long as there has been racism in the south, one of the things that has driven it is the fear that black men will have sex with white women. It's a theme that you will find everywhere in the history of southern racism, and there are even people who will argue that it is the issue in southern racism. Furthermore, there are plenty of white people in the south who would ordinarily vote for a black candidate, but are appalled at even the hint of a sexual relationship between a black man and a white woman, so I do think the ad could sway some voters. In a close race, that can matter.
By the way, I say this as someone who was born and raised in Tennessee, and still considers it home.
I hope you guys are not implying that the stereotype is true! I hope you mean that only the irrational and the prejudicial fear is. Which is why I brought up the historical point - not because the practice holds true today. I live in Texas. I am not a babe in the woods in this matter. I am aware of the image of the predatory male. (In India the same fear plagues Hindus about Muslim men) It is not just a southern white thing. It is the common thread in all prejudices based variously on race, caste, religion and nationality.
Call me Pollyanna. But I am just angry and am objecting vehemently to this sordid ploy. The Democrats made a huge mistake by taking the bait. They should have ignored the ad and kept hammering away at the mess in Iraq and the failed Republican leadership. As I said, those for whom this is a red flag, were probably not in Ford's camp in huge numbers in the first place.
As for black women getting angry about their successful men marrying white, it is not a racist reaction. It is a sense of betrayal. I am not saying that it is necessarily right - just that their cause for anger is different from how whites react to the same unions. Black women now surpass black men in education and professional advancement. Yet they find a shrinking pool of black male peers to marry because 1)the successful black women outnumber successful black men, 2) many successful black men end up marrying non-black women. So it is resentment not racial fear. There is a difference.
So it is resentment not racial fear. There is a difference.
There is? What?
To be more neutrally descriptive, you should have admitted that some black women feel racial resentment against some white women using their partially racially based attractiveness to some black men, to steal away too many of them.
As opposed to the wholly abhorrent racial resentment, which you chose to call racial fear, of some white men that some black men will use THEIR partially racially based attractiveness to steal away too many white women?
Yes, a double but fair standard in as much as I am assigning different weights to the harm the two types of resentments can do at this point in US history . Even if the two arise from similar suspicions and race based emotions. It is the social impact of that resentment I am concerned with, not its psychological basis.
I can see where you are going with your moral equivalence. You have pegged me for a knee jerk liberal who condones every wrong perpetrated by minorities and will vent my rage only at the majority, powerful community. You are wrong. You'd know that if you'd been familiar with my views on a broader range of issues. But since Razib's blog is not the forum for you and me to familiarize each other with our world views, I will stick to the issue at hand.
I have lived in the US for twenty four years. Until now, the greatest harm I have seen black women do with their "resentment" was to let O.J. go free. (BTW, I believe O.J was guilty as hell.) But I have seen white men kill, wrongfully incarcerate, humiliate and stop cold the careers of threatening black males with "their" resentments. (James Byrd Jr. the homeless man who was not even threatening, just black, was dragged to his death behind a pickup truck, in Jasper, TX - not far from where I live.) You decide now if there indeed is a "difference" between the racist "angry grumblings" of black women and the racist AND lethal "sticks and stones" wielded by angry white men.
"...that some black men will use THEIR partially racially based attractiveness to steal away too many white women?"
there is a different. you seem to disregard the relative sizes of the subgroups. while interracial marriage will imply that only a small % of white females are married to black males, the proportion of black males not available to black women as a result of interracial marriage will be very significant from the perspective of a black female. so black women have a much more legitimate claim to "injury" here than white men when it comes to interracial marriage. the effect is magnified in the presence of other races in that white men can and do marry asians, for example. this is not the case for black females.
I'm going to side with Chris here. This isn't some subtle, double-reverse psychology- it's just your regular, run of the mill, thinly veiled racism. And on that score it matches up pretty well with the earlier Republican ads featuring a darkened, kinkier-haired Harold Ford, Jr. To be honest, it's this crap that is the only thing making me vote for Ford, considering all the Ford family antics going on here in Memphis.
Memphis:
You are actually agreeing with me too. I am glad to hear that this will make you vote for Ford although I myself find him to be a little too slick for my taste. But a resounding "NO" to the sleazy Republican Southern Strategy will perhaps be a message for the race baiters that the race card can fail, even in the south. Cheers.
It started with George Bush's dad when Bush Sr. paraded wild haired, dark skinned Willy Horton before voters in his race against Michael Dukakis. Ever since then the Republicans have stooped to scour the bottom of the garbage pail whenever their backs have been to the wall. The Dems (who are not above lying and pandering) just don't do much race baiting, perhaps only because most minorities vote Democrat. While I have no doubt that the RNC (and Karl Rove) are super sleaze balls, I have a slight problem with the interpretation of this particular ad.
So what if a white woman is seen giving Harold Ford the come hither? Is it against the law for a black man to date a white woman? Why do the Dems have their panties in a knot over this? Does this mean we won't vote for men or women who date/ marry across racial lines? Or even consider the possibility of them doing so? And if there are people for whom this little sly innuendo about forbidden sex is a Rorschach test for their deep seated fears, they weren't likely to vote for a black man in the first place. (Or am I missing something here? Are there more Americans other than southern Whites, for whom too this is an issue?) Strangely enough, I think it is the Dems who have fallen into the racist trap here. The ad is offensive because it is sleazy not because it is racist.
ruchira, you make a good point, and have some of the same sentiments. nevertheless, i think the issue here is that the south has a long history of bestializing black males and their ravenous appetite for white women, and this is a neck-and-neck race so this might induce some poor whites to vote against ford because of the race issue.
btw, during the jindal (brown repub.) vs. blanco (cajun housewife) race in 2003 for gov. in louisiana the dems seemed to have played the race card a bit, or looked the other way. blanco did rather well in the same parishes that david duke did in the 90s, and many of the newspaper stories lingered over jindal's dark-skin and shiny black hair, etc. (i doubt they would have described the physiognamy of a democratic african american candidate in the same manner).
My point is that those folks wouldn't have voted for Ford, a black man, in the first place.
In any case, it is the white woman who is seen salivating over Ford - not vice versa. That is the other little secret of white racism. The myth is not just that black men are ravenous for white women but that white women too secretly desire black men. Talk about insecurity!
Yet the truth is that mixed race pairings in the US have historically involved white males and black women far more frequently than the other way around. I just read Cane River by Lalita Tademy for my book club. The book chronicles the true life stories of generations of black women (the author's ancestors) born into slavery on a Louisina plantation before and after the Civil War. The family gets progressively "bleached" as Elisabeth, the family matriarch observes in her old age. Every nubile black slave girl was a target for adult white males from the time they entered puberty. All mixed race children were products of white male / black female pairings. So why this upside down stereotyping? Remember segregationist Storm Thurmond and his "affair" with a fifteen year old maid servant? Talk about hypocrisy!
My point is that those folks wouldn't have voted for Ford, a black man, in the first place.
the vast majority of them. and in any case, it isn't a black and white sentiment. many people struggle with their prejudices and this could "tip" some people.
Yet the truth is that mixed race pairings in the US have historically involved white males and black women far more frequently than the other way around.
yes, but that's not true today.
So what? Black men have the power now that they never did before.
So what? Black men have the power now that they never did before.
well, the "so what" is democratic politics. i just heard on the radio that the number #1 variable among southern whites for whether they would vote for a black politician is their attitude toward racial issues. not religion. not income. etc. so if you make racial issues salient than it is a problem for democrats. not being a democrat i don't care much myself...i personally found the add kind of funny with the playboy bunny & porn tie in. but i'm not a typical southern voters....
Ruchira Paul
Yet the truth is that mixed race pairings in the US have historically involved white males and black women far more frequently than the other way around.
Not since the end of slavery or anyway in recent decades, according to Steve Sailer, who in my experience/to the best of my knowledge generally has his statistical type research down cold. Particularly not in marriages or child bearing unions. You can easily find his article or two on this at his site.
As we all know many men of whatever color/stripe will casually bang especially on the sneak tip much of what moves. Hence the vast gender skewing of prostitution despite legions of women these days in western countries that could afford to on their independent dime.
Razib said--
it isn't a black and white sentiment. many people struggle with their prejudices and this could "tip" some people.
And many people don't struggle at all with their prejudices, and aren't expected to by this (or Euro) society. Black women for example, who are given a free pass, or are even generally regarded sympathetically, when they mightily and publicly resent successful black men dating and marrying white women.
The double standards of all this bothers me considerably. I understand it comes from the Leninist Who/whom?, oppressor/oppressed, advantaged/victim ideology. Which I largely reject.
Not to sound mean, but anyone who doesn't get the implications of a white coming on to a black man, in a political ad run in the south, has never been to the south, and has no knowledge of racism there. For as long as there has been racism in the south, one of the things that has driven it is the fear that black men will have sex with white women. It's a theme that you will find everywhere in the history of southern racism, and there are even people who will argue that it is the issue in southern racism. Furthermore, there are plenty of white people in the south who would ordinarily vote for a black candidate, but are appalled at even the hint of a sexual relationship between a black man and a white woman, so I do think the ad could sway some voters. In a close race, that can matter.
By the way, I say this as someone who was born and raised in Tennessee, and still considers it home.
I hope you guys are not implying that the stereotype is true! I hope you mean that only the irrational and the prejudicial fear is. Which is why I brought up the historical point - not because the practice holds true today. I live in Texas. I am not a babe in the woods in this matter. I am aware of the image of the predatory male. (In India the same fear plagues Hindus about Muslim men) It is not just a southern white thing. It is the common thread in all prejudices based variously on race, caste, religion and nationality.
Call me Pollyanna. But I am just angry and am objecting vehemently to this sordid ploy. The Democrats made a huge mistake by taking the bait. They should have ignored the ad and kept hammering away at the mess in Iraq and the failed Republican leadership. As I said, those for whom this is a red flag, were probably not in Ford's camp in huge numbers in the first place.
As for black women getting angry about their successful men marrying white, it is not a racist reaction. It is a sense of betrayal. I am not saying that it is necessarily right - just that their cause for anger is different from how whites react to the same unions. Black women now surpass black men in education and professional advancement. Yet they find a shrinking pool of black male peers to marry because 1)the successful black women outnumber successful black men, 2) many successful black men end up marrying non-black women. So it is resentment not racial fear. There is a difference.
Ruchira Paul said -
So it is resentment not racial fear. There is a difference.
There is? What?
To be more neutrally descriptive, you should have admitted that some black women feel racial resentment against some white women using their partially racially based attractiveness to some black men, to steal away too many of them.
As opposed to the wholly abhorrent racial resentment, which you chose to call racial fear, of some white men that some black men will use THEIR partially racially based attractiveness to steal away too many white women?
This isn't a double standard?
dougjnn:
Yes, a double but fair standard in as much as I am assigning different weights to the harm the two types of resentments can do at this point in US history . Even if the two arise from similar suspicions and race based emotions. It is the social impact of that resentment I am concerned with, not its psychological basis.
I can see where you are going with your moral equivalence. You have pegged me for a knee jerk liberal who condones every wrong perpetrated by minorities and will vent my rage only at the majority, powerful community. You are wrong. You'd know that if you'd been familiar with my views on a broader range of issues. But since Razib's blog is not the forum for you and me to familiarize each other with our world views, I will stick to the issue at hand.
I have lived in the US for twenty four years. Until now, the greatest harm I have seen black women do with their "resentment" was to let O.J. go free. (BTW, I believe O.J was guilty as hell.) But I have seen white men kill, wrongfully incarcerate, humiliate and stop cold the careers of threatening black males with "their" resentments. (James Byrd Jr. the homeless man who was not even threatening, just black, was dragged to his death behind a pickup truck, in Jasper, TX - not far from where I live.) You decide now if there indeed is a "difference" between the racist "angry grumblings" of black women and the racist AND lethal "sticks and stones" wielded by angry white men.
"...that some black men will use THEIR partially racially based attractiveness to steal away too many white women?"
there is a different. you seem to disregard the relative sizes of the subgroups. while interracial marriage will imply that only a small % of white females are married to black males, the proportion of black males not available to black women as a result of interracial marriage will be very significant from the perspective of a black female. so black women have a much more legitimate claim to "injury" here than white men when it comes to interracial marriage. the effect is magnified in the presence of other races in that white men can and do marry asians, for example. this is not the case for black females.
I'm going to side with Chris here. This isn't some subtle, double-reverse psychology- it's just your regular, run of the mill, thinly veiled racism. And on that score it matches up pretty well with the earlier Republican ads featuring a darkened, kinkier-haired Harold Ford, Jr. To be honest, it's this crap that is the only thing making me vote for Ford, considering all the Ford family antics going on here in Memphis.
Memphis:
You are actually agreeing with me too. I am glad to hear that this will make you vote for Ford although I myself find him to be a little too slick for my taste. But a resounding "NO" to the sleazy Republican Southern Strategy will perhaps be a message for the race baiters that the race card can fail, even in the south. Cheers.
Harold Ford is black? If he's black, he's the most barely black man I've ever seen. I guess if Lisa Bonet is black, Harold Ford is too. Silly world.
Harold Ford is black? If he's black, he's the most barely black man I've ever seen. I guess if Lisa Bonet is black, Harold Ford is too. Silly world.
ford is from the light-skinned black elite.