I like what the Luscious Librarian said about Michelle Obama’s Afro on this week’s New Yorker cover:
… but what got me was not only the unfunny elitist satire that says “If you don’t get you’re just not sophisticated as we are”, but the depiction of Michelle Obama with an afro that somehow makes her sinister and terrorristic.
As a natural woman it is disheartening to still see the politics of hair played out on a national external scale. I understand that internally black folk have issues with straight and nappy (that’s hundreds of years of psychosocial indoctrination), but we really have a long way to go if the entire nation still feels that way.
That cover says that with my natural hair I am not to be trusted, I am serious and pro-black, which means that I am anti-white and because of that I am anti-America and to be feared. I resent it and I have to say if you tell a joke and you’re the only one laughing it’s because it’s not funny.
See also:
I agree. Its like saying that if you dont conform to what society perceives as being normal, then youre not to be trusted or even worthy of being respected
LikeLike
MDDAY, QUERCIANELLAM ITALIA had this to say but put her comment under the wrong post:
Okay, I have to weigh on this one. Yes, this is yet another freedom I have had since leaving America. Whereas, I was in the professional world and always had to be conscious of my hair. I always maintained a usually a short style that was straight and free. In other words, no gel, no weaves, no braids, nothing to “ethnic” because I was the only woman of color and I was watched like a hawk. Most people know that in the professional world many a times, black women will receive a label as “Mrs. Attitude, A snob, or “when I look at you, I don’t see a black person.” It was stressful trying to battle those stereotypes, so I ended up usually being “a snob.”
Now, while I have been in America, I notice that the Italians have a range of colors and hair textures. When I could not find the products I needed, some of the Italian women would say, “my sister has hair like yours and she uses, or I have a friend with hair like yours, I will ask what she uses. Many of them if they do have curly and sometimes pushing the mark to peppercorn hair, they wear it natural. There are many people here who have dreadlocks and afro’s and it is not looked upon as wrong. So last month, I decided to try to wear my hair natural. I actually like it. In fact, I don’t have to worry about parting it this way or that way to suit my face and terrorizing it to get the correct volume. I wash it and let it go. The only problem is that I don’t want to be mistaken for Brazillian because over here the women have a bad reputation, so I have yet to go out with the style. However, it does feel good to be in a place where I have the option.
LikeLike
I first went “natural” two years ago; my hair went from silky fine to short and textured. Reactions I received were mixed. I was already employed at my current job, so even though I received strange looks and veiled comments there was not much that could be done. I LOVE my natural hair and feel like such a fool for all the money and time wasted trying to undo what looks best on me. I strongly encourage every black woman I met to “go natural” it has been the most freeing experience for me. As a side note I agree most of America still vilify the afro and are uncomfortable. GET OVER IT! Beauty should be represented in a variety of modes. Nice to see you back!
LikeLike
Glad to be back. I am not a woman but philosophically I agree with you, if that makes sense.
LikeLike
First, my condolences to Agabond on the recent events in his family. My apologies also for this late note on that matter. I’ve been busy at work and not posting.
As to the New Yorker cover, I understand what the editors were trying to do, and I also understand why they failed. What they were trying to do was not to create “sophisticated” humor. The New Yorker has been a consistent supporter of Obama and they understand that this candidacy is of humongous historical importance that is no joking matter.
What they were trying to do was to show (1) the image of the Obamas that is even as we speak being circulated, in various ways, throughout the right wing blogosphere, and (2) the patent absurdity of that image. I do think that it would be helpful to Obama’s candidacy if he figured out how to embrace that image, expose it for the abusurdity that it is, and thereby emasculate it.
The New Yorker failed to accomplish this because it posted this image on its cover without any context. Even a headline, such as “The Politics of Fear,” would have provided something to casual observers to help them contextualize the image, though in my mind the image should more appropriately have been placed inside the issue, in connection with an article about this matter.
LikeLike
Thanks. Interesting.
I think the New Yorker was well-meaning, like you said, trying to name and shame the fears about him, but it seems to have backfired. I just hope this does not become Obama’s Dukakis-in-a-tank moment – an image of him that unjustly sticks in people’s heads.
LikeLike
When Michelle was attending Princeton, she was allied/aligned with the Black Panther Party. This is why ALL of her photographs taken during the 1980s are not available for public (web) viewing.
LikeLike
Why is the Black Panther Party a problem? If white folks would act like humans we would not need the Panther Party.
LikeLike
There was no BPP to speak of in the 1980s. Nice try, though, John.
LikeLike
i remember when this cover come out, I was offended. But i forgot this is supposed to be satire and i guess i am just not very sophisticated. I think this satire crap is used at the expense of black people and other non white people of color. They are throwing shade and being racist and we (black people) are supposed to be ok with this.
LikeLike
Just like the Stephen Colbert foolishness.
LikeLike