bruitdautrui

some one said it has been over analyzed and i agree.
i actually, dare i say it, prefer the cover picture to the to the calmer one,
LeBron said he was comfortable with the picture and like above im sure he wouldn't of proceeded with the photograph if he was not.

"to LeBron and his handlers, he looks like LeBron clutching a pretty white woman on the latest cover of Vogue, and the image conjures up the idea that LeBron can race up court with a basketball and a supermodel."

this was taken from Jason Whitlock's article for fox sport

and i think thats all people need to know. and not look for hidden agendas.

dibzzz

harlo

The cover photo captures energy, and a pair of the "best bodies" in action, doing what they do best. How is that supposed to offend me, excatly?

neko_indi

SweetAngelOfHellAndLove

keloucks

King Kong is as alpha male as it gets. He goes for what he wants and takes it without apology. Maybe he could have used a little more game, but hey, dude had no vocal cords, cut him some slack. Anyway, fuck that PC shit.

T.

I don't generally drink (bad for the complexion, with holiday exceptions for Perrier Jouet & Saint Emilion Grand Cru), but I could be free for cocktails on Friday.

Rooo sez BISH PLZ

But anyhoos, I think I'll hang in my hat on this one, too. My first 3 posts and I'm already tired of hearing (reading?) myself :p Thanks for the super-fair discussion (seriously). Yay, Jezebel.

newdeley

thehandspeaks

You seem to think that I'm generalizing; I only wish I were. I, personally, with my own eyes, have seen the things I mentioned. And I'm not saying that there isn't a bias in the media, and that there aren't thousands of examples of this kind of subtle racism that appear every day, but there is just nothing that will make me believe that the cover of Vogue led directly to the guy who lives on the street outside my school. I know what led to that guy: hundreds of years of institutional socioeconomic bias and oppression in a state that has an incredibly bloody racial history. A place that reacted to integration by starting all-white private schools; a place where the governor tosses around the "n-word" and no one calls him on it; a place where the white people in charge don't need to read Vogue to develop their sense of superiority and dominance because that's they way they were raised, and their parents were raised, and their slaveowning great-grandparents, too. I'm not saying that your point about media bias is invalid; only that the real problems-- the homelessness, the de facto segregation, the economic inequity-- have their roots in a history and a sociology that goes far deeper than a magazine cover.

girlscoutcookie

OK. One more time (and perhaps I didn't mention this part; newdeley mentions something that perhaps might help put it in perspective).

(Also this analysis is going to be a little simplistic because I'm pressed for time today.)

Here's the thing. Racist representation, visually likening people to animals, is precisely the type of imagery that, consistently repeated over time, subconsciously enables people to think thoughts that create the very situations you observed.

(You're NOT supposed to notice it. Ask your friends that work in advertising or media criticism how subliminal imagery works.)

It is much easier to rationalize harassing the man who is having a difficult time trying to find a place to sleep outside if you don't even perceive him as human.

What I do find interesting about the situations you speak of that you say disturb you is that you speak of seeing only the black people (actually, only black men, but that's a different post) that are homeless and sleeping outside. You speak of only seeing black people that are having trouble finding something decent to eat.

The more you learn about media literacy, the more you'll realize that it's not an accident that you framed it that way.

These assumptions -- in your own language and observations -- are enabled and triggered, in the larger society by the unending repetition, from history to now, of the very images you deem inconsequential.

Here's the last parallel I can think of. You go abroad. You go out to get a drink. Some man at the bar grabs at your breasts and tries to paw you. You push him off and yell, "What do you think you're doing? Where did you get the idea you could treat me like that?"

He says, "Aren't all American girls sluts that want it all the time? I watch Spring Break on MTV; it airs on repeat over here. I thought you were all like that."

Bad images breed bad ideas breed treating people with less than full human dignity.

Do you see the problem now?

Rooo sez BISH PLZ

thehandspeaks

I can see how I misinterpreted it if you meant that I would never be compared to a gorilla, because I'm not a strong, black man and if you meant if I couldn't see the racism in the cover, even after it was pointed out. I never took it as "only black people get racism." I wouldn't ever accuse a Jezebel reader of saying something so ridiculous. I actually took it as "if you're black and you don't see the racism off the bat, you don't know your history." It's an equally ridiculous idea, but some people do say those things. I actually didn't get that it could be construed as racist until the website told me it was (granted, I've also only seen the King Kong poster maybe once in my life, so it definitely wasn't an immediate juxtaposition). Again, I recognize that it was just my (apparently uber-sensitive) reading of the comment.

newdeley

thehandspeaks

Nothing in my comments said anything about it being offensive. In fact, I even said on the scale of racism it is pretty low ranking.

My comments were directed only at the people who did not have a context to place this to accept that a racist read was valid.

If you didn't see it that way at first, I was not calling anyone racist or stupid, but rather recognizing that it probably isn't your personal experience to be affected by black stereotypes or you have an unfortunate limited historical view (... ok officially broken record now). Because if you are not one of those 2, then I would have something truly negative to say about your perception of reality.

As for being called condescending by people who seem to get it and agree... that just doesn't even make sense.

thehandspeaks

tupance

newdeley

No-You-Cannot-Touch-My-Hair

DubonnetDelRio

DubonnetDelRio

There's no artistic merit to the shot, the Headline is The Shape issue but and Gisele looks horribly small and uncoordinated and LJ just looks dumb hunched over, dribbling, yelling and holding her at the same time. She's dressed to the nines in both shots but he's in the same $20 dollar short set. There no play on the contrast of the two, no real artistic use of lighting, color, blocking, prop. The gels are wrong for LJ like they picked them out for her and tossed him in at the last minute instead of finding one that works for both of them.

It's just a sloppy piece of work controversy or not.

Final

girlscoutcookie

oshango

I also doubt that being unable to see this cover in those terms is denying that there is an international problem. We all know racism exists on all sides and obviously it has gotten more subtle throughout the years in the mass media (well somewhat). Does this mean if someone's mind does not automatically jump to this man being portrayed in a racist way, that person is ignorant? Does that person just not care about the problem because it may not concern them? In some cases, possibly but not all.

dummyfakeroller

if we all had to take away common ground... is there any? Curiosity speaking here...

Because I believe that it is just basic observation to say racism exists and the cover can be read that way. And saying that, it is not to point any fingers to say anyone here is racist and if you didn't see it at first that way it doesn't make anyone stupid. (But to not recognize it after it has been pointed out to you as a relevant read? hmm. I can't comment on your perception then. )

As to the whys and the how comes behind the cover coming into play, can we also agree there is a lot of complexity here? Personal backgrounds, social context, historical viewpoint all are informing the opinions here.

Can we agree not to put down those for sharing their thoughts? Thinking is not overanalyzing. and I thank all who have spoken openly and honestly (even the ones who i did not agree with) because it has only added here to push, bolster and require more expressions on the topic.

thehandspeaks

Maybe no one will read these 2cents, you know, almost 300 posts and after the jump...but here goes.

There is a lack of nuanced vocabulary to discuss race these days. Like debates over sexism, the discussions tends to fall into 2 inter-related binarisms:
The first: racism as willful/bad vs. ignorance as innocent/excusable.
The second: particular experiences vs universal problem. Aka, a kind of identity politics.

Both of these have shown up all over this commentroversy!
The first: 'Did they mean to do this or are you reading too much into it?'
The second: 'LeBron intended this, *I* don't see the problem, etc. Meaning is subjective and racism is a matter of being offended.'

Both are also, of course, off the mark.

I take the position that we are all necessarily informed by partial truths. As a minority-woman, I have been marked and situated in such a way that I am sensitive to types of racisms/sexisms that another person may not be. Others might not see the same message but that does not make them "stupid" - just situated differently. But, this is not a call for relativism - the ethical goal then is to try and bridge understanding. It is cruel to claim that "I" as atomistic subject interpet something as harmless and all those crazy/liberal/angry minority people should take their wine and cheese somewhere else. But it is also unfair to brush away all white people as the Evil Majority.

Briardahl had a good method. Instead of debating if this is "bad" or "okay," we should question why African American men seemingly only gain recognition as professional sports or as entertainers. We might also reflect that Vogue's cover choice IS singular considering the paucity of men -and blacks - in general on their covers. Similarly, why is Giselle only available as an athlete's expensive trophy?

Oh 2 cents spread so far. Sorry for the long post!

eri401

sonofabiscuit is sprinkling greatness

purplejesus

molly

Sophie_Satsuma

Nothing for Malcolm X, though. Or Biko.

Are those baby steps you mention forwards or backwards?

Rooo sez BISH PLZ

rhinestonedarling

Sure it's about being ignorant, but it's more about being in active denial about there actually being a problem -- to the point where if someone shows you examples of the problem you shout "LA LA LA LA LA" and stick your fingers in your ears because you don't even want to think about it.

After all, it doesn't affect YOU -- or at least it doesn't, today, until TPTB decides that the pale brunettes should get gassed along with the darkies, 'cause they're not blonde -- so why should you bother?

Rooo sez BISH PLZ

Help me, somebody. Just because it doesn't affect YOUR life doesn't mean it DOESN'T AFFECT ANYONE ELSE'S.

What part of "just because it's unintentional does not mean it's harmless",

"when pale bandaids/crayons/pantyhose are the only 'nude' colors, then 'white' is the default skin color and anything else is by default ABNORMAL", and

"if it were 'unconscious' sexism not as many people would miss the point" do you NOT understand??

Are you honestly going to sit there and argue that people's perceptions -- however unconscious -- of how other people look is NOT going to affect how they behave? On a woman-centered site, you're going to argue this?

Instead of overanxiety about "semantics", you might want to do some research on "semiotics" and "symbolism."

You know what? Never mind. Stay ignorant. Much more fun. Much less work. Enjoy.

Rooo sez BISH PLZ

Most people who have never had to deal with racism usually do.

(Also, you may want to watch your passive verbs. I'm sure you were in a hurry, though. You know, to thoughtfully comment?)

I'm not even going to get into your username. The ramifications probably haven't even occurred to you yet.

Rooo sez BISH PLZ

And, a-course, it wouldn't be Vogue without the usual totally unsubtle visual humor: "This picture is TONGUE IN CHEEK! *wink wink* Get it?" Damn, I hate Vogue.

Yeah, guys? Don't you get it? It's not racist; it's tongue in cheek!

hotpotatoes

Lipstickiller

Way to miss the larger picture.

eri401

On a personal note, I sincerely appreciate the defense of my comments (and even the reality heck on when they became snarky).

As regards to the topic at hand, you just injected a refreshing bit of blunt honesty. Speak!

thehandspeaks

I mean cut her some slack-when you are talking about race, christ, this will never end, I don't care how open minded white people are-unless you have traveled every corner of the world and lived there and spoken to black people in Africa through to UK and the states OR even read literature from those country-you/one can't understand how much, shit, someone feels-for want of a better word.

My point is, in a debate like this unfortunately when someone is trying to diffuse the situation, it can make things worse.

What I'm shocked at is why so many posters here who claim to be soo educated have come out with the most un-researched or perceptive comments about race, and race in America!

I'm not American but the civil rights movement just stopped 50 years or so back-how the fuck can you say that racism can diminish in such a small time!? You have no big black movie stars bar 1 or 5 (and how typecast are they!), you have no reasonable number of black models who have large contracts, how many black people in great jobs do you see...??

I'm perplexed. I've lived in Africa and I've lived in the UK-were I am now. I've also traveled but not to the states. But I do think a few people are in denial in the US about race...

Not YOU but some posters....

Disclaimer: We are not talking about how racist the UK is, cause it IS. The UK isn't America. You are ALL immigrants bar the native americans, I'm just flabbergasted....you all came for a better life so what gives? Ahh, power and economics?

rantersparadise

ULookinAtMyJunk is the Hate Mitigator

virginiawoolf

Baby steps.

Drowner

thehandspeaks

"And just because Lebron willingly took part in the cover doesn't mean that the cover is automatically acceptable and thereby, beyond reproach."

Exactly. Tiger Woods shrugged off the comment by the TV reporter about how he should be "lynched." He may not have been that offended. Frankly, I don't give a damn. A lot of other black people were. Comments like that are not just about him.

I might also add that nobody knows how much control Lebron had (probably zilch). Who knows how many photographs were taken? And as someone else said, he's an athlete, the people who would be expected to be cognizant of stereotypes would be the supposedly sophisticated people at Vogue.

Lastly, I'm getting tired of this idea that mocking and baiting people can be defended as a strategy for building buzz. If that's Condé Nast's idea, it should be advised that it's a nonstarter if the company is interested in attracting buyers and subscribers.

Seeräuber Jenny

yeah, i did. she told you that you were being excitable. not unintelligent or even incorrect. just excitable.

and you called her an idiot. which, ironically, only confirmed her position, but we'll leave that alone for now. but maybe, in the future, if you want the discussion to stick to the "content," you might want to reply with a little less vitriol. it was out of line, dude. it just was.

inchworm

thehandspeaks

I am not here to attack anyone.. on tone or otherwise... but I will respond.

And as several people have mentioned and I have acknowledged, I may not be sweet talking anyone (to my own disadvantage) but let's not missrepresent my actual comments...

I am not going on the offensive to attack anyone here.

thehandspeaks

Silverbee

this is all just a discussion to me.

thehandspeaks

oh come ON. really? those eyes not so sharp after all?

your comment to SBJ about how you thought you were in a conversation with people who could talk about things other than sneakers? that wasn't nasty? any implications as to her intelligence were purely coincidental? because if you weren't intending for that to be a prideful, arrogant response you might want to work on your communication skills.

inchworm

thehandspeaks

But I haven't called anyone on here racist or stupid. Please don't read something into what I am saying that just isn't there.

thehandspeaks

Personally, I prefer the first photo to the second one. The second photo makes me think of the whole White Female Ideal on a pedestal which does not jive well with the nasty aftertaste of the Men Prefer Lighter Skin thread. That said, if given the option, I would burn both and replace them with a nice pic of Lebron in a suit holding a basketball.

Plus, I got all kinds of love for thehandspeaks right now. it's hard to hold down the platform, but you're doing a great job.

ULookinAtMyJunk is the Hate Mitigator

I am RESPONDING to attacks but not initiating them. Consider that in your evaluation when you think I am beeing so nasty. I have not singled out anyone here to attack their views on the subject at hand.

I have not stated an actual disagreement with any one person. Or implied that anyone doesnt have the right to their view.

I have not even defended myself to say I wasn't being condescending (just that even if I am that is not the totality of my point)

So all the vitriolic attention, I can take, but at least be accurate in the assessment of where its source is.

thehandspeaks

nerdsausage is a busysausage

look, it's easy. PLAY NICE.

also, don't assume that everyone who calls you out on being a CONDESCENDING ASSHOLE is racist and/or stupid.

let's call this how to win friends and influence people 101.

inchworm

the reason i made it about tone is because while perhaps unintentional, your comments kind of gave off a 'more-pc-than-thou' thing (common among first year women's and cultural studies students in my experience - i'm sure i was projecting a little), and sometimes that type of thing can get in the way of the more important points being made. for example. my younger brother is frequently a racist, sexist asshole. it makes me so angry that sometimes i feel like i can't even breathe, much less make a coherent argument. but if i'm not careful how i address him, he will never learn or change - only lash out at me and refuse to listen even more. you don't win friends with salad, handspeaks! you have many anti-racist allies on this site who will back you up against the ignorant haters - just don't assume you're a lone wolf. handshakes?

BritneyCanadaWhore

If this doesn't include you, great.

thehandspeaks

maybe some people really care about the issue and think that you're doing it a disservice by being SO smug? i mean, dude, your response to britneycanadawhore and SBJ was NASTY, and those people are on your team.

MAYBE, if people who agree with you DO seem to be responding so intensely to your tone, you should turn that sharp mind and those eagle eyes back on yourself. because you're being a dick, dude. you probably lost any hope of convincing someone who disagreed with you the MINUTE you got so nasty and condescending, and you've even drawn ire from people who are on your fucking side.

inchworm

But if you don't see it, you are likely not as sensitive to the particular Black stereotype personally OR just have a limited historical view. There was no judgement or speaking down to anyone intended, just a simple acknowledgment that racism exists and can even pop up in Vogue whether intentional or not. And so yes, I do think having EITHER a personal context OR an informed historical view would make it easy for anyone to get the racist read on the cover (among many other reads) and the lack of one of those criteria would lead to you not being able to come to that view.

All this and on the scale of all things racist, I wasn't saying this was even up there.

thehandspeaks

myrtlebeachbum

Fine, maybe the cover isn't Vogue's sly witty homage to King Kong.
I get that.
But here's the funny thing ...when is the next time an African American will be deemed worthy of the cover?
Who knows right?
So on those rare times that a Negro does get on the cover of the fashion bible
could they not have their mouths open, looking crazed and primed for an attack?

Could they look human (notice I did not say mainstream) and not look like some escapee from the Island of Dr. Moreau?

IamnotStarJones

BritneyCanadaWhore

BritneyCanadaWhore

So under those circumstances, sure, you were right. Sure, you got to speak.

But did you really accomplish anything??

(And for the record, dude, I agree with you. At least here. But I would say to you what I believe you said -- "my point still stands".)

Rooo sez BISH PLZ

thehandspeaks

whoa, back the FUCK up. she does NOT need it broken down for her, and neither do many of us. yes, some people do, but you risk alienating people when you speak to them in a condescending, nasty way.

you lose your content when you act like a flaming asshole.

inchworm

I may be "reductive" but you clearly needed to have it broken down to you.

thehandspeaks

TruculentandUnreliable

thehandspeaks

Rooo sez BISH PLZ

and if you tell me to go read bell hooks now i swear to fucking god.

BritneyCanadaWhore

thehandspeaks

Scoregasm

thehandspeaks

thehandspeaks

Example: The cover of the French edition of Saul Bellow's novel Ravelstein created an uproar. When I saw it, it looked simply like a caricature, but so many Jews thought it was a specifically French, anti-Semitic caricature that I'm not prepared to contradict them. That would be presumptuous on my part.

[www.decitre.fr]

[www.observer.com]

@trayday:
Thanks so much for comment. I gotta get to work now, too.

Seeräuber Jenny

thehandspeaks

TruculentandUnreliable

--the design prominently featured monkeys.

Protests ensued.

Seeräuber Jenny

rantersparadise

drugman

And it is interesting that LeBron would lend himself to that sort of depiction. Perhaps it doesn't matter since he's making money and he assumes he's in control (maybe he's getting the girl in the deal). This is typical model motif; the White Beauty in 3rd world, exotic backdrop.

A month ago I was at the National Potrait Gallery, looking at a series of photographs that potrayed blacks as dignified human beings. That has now been lost. What has happened is that black lower class culture, as represented by hip-hop, is now the face of black America. (That may change if Obama wins the presideency, but that's a long shot.) However, the thuggish mien that hip-hop inflected basketball represents is now the dominant face of black America if not blackness in general.

Yet, if you look at the subtext of that image, especially next King Kong image, you have to wonder if Obama's pastor, Jeremiah Wright, right.

normankelley

BUT, I applaud you (for real, your comments have been on POINT!) and thehandspeaks for voicing the unpopular opinion that ALWAYS seems to get the commenters who "don't get it" all whipped into a tizzy. Thank you, on behalf of a woman who just started a new job and can't comment and peruse as much as I'd like. But this post, and the subsequent comments, had me 'acting' like I was working while quietly stewing in my office.

trayday

dummyfakeroller

It's on my list. I saw the author, Donald Bogle, on Turner Classic Movies a while ago. He programmed a series of films on the portrayal of blacks in American movies. It was fascinating.

[www.tcm.com]

Seeräuber Jenny

It is incredibly frustrating and time-consuming, but I don't think you can let comments like that go unanswered. If one has a moment, it's imperative to respond.

Seeräuber Jenny

Then they should do a little research or listen to other people before opining that people who complain are reading too much into things or, the old chestnut, being hypersensitive.

BTW, that kind of arrogance goes right along with racism and other forms of oppression.

Seeräuber Jenny

TruculentandUnreliable

Racism is a Klan rally, certainly. But it's also the assumption that it's natural for a black man to be portrayed as aggressive and intimidating because *duh* that's what black men are like. Racism is assuming that an all-white fashion show is natural because there don't happen to be any pretty black models available.

Gumbina80

And cuz I gotta go and can't respond to anyone that absolutely NEEDS to counter, just go kick rocks yo. Seriously.

trayday

"Lebron is an athlete and I believe that the cover would have been the same with a number of other athletes, white, black, asian, indian, whatever."

That's not correct. A South Asian would have been portrayed playing cricket or soccer, an Asian, maybe in some kind of stereotyped Asian martial-arts posture, or they would have done the whole Sumo wrestler thing again. Even if a big, brawny, white athlete had been posed with a baseball glove or football pigskin it would not have been read the same way because there are literally millions of images of white men portrayed in every attitude of life. With black men, with black people, the range is far more limited, and often derogatory and/or infantilizing.

If you don't understand this, try taking Racism 101 again.

It's not an accident that Lebron is posed that way. The media are filled with images of big black men who look animalistic or like simpletons. Frequently, they are shown lusting after the fair, white damsel. In the past, they used to be shown raping the fair, white damsel (The Birth of a Nation, originally released under the title, The Klansman. [www.imdb.com]).

The King Kong connection was made long ago. Yes, I had to read about it to recognize it, but that's because I don't think like a racist white person. I've since been carefully taught the language of racist symbolism:

[www.avclub.com]
[ecx.images-amazon.com]
[literature.sdsu.edu]

This cover may not be the most vicious example, but I certainly understand what people are complaining about.

Seeräuber Jenny

dummyfakeroller

ineffable.me

ineffable.me

"Nude" is a name applied to a color somewhere in the middle of the flesh-tone rainbow, and even though it looks nothing like my nude flesh, I can't find anything offensive about it. Would calling it "pecan" really be any different or better? How about "latina"?

Now, "suntan," I can see -- but still, they have to call a color something, and they'd get even more shit for explicitly calling out the skintone it's made for.

GingerVitis

Scoregasm

No.

ceejeemcbeegee

I had this problem when I was a ballerina... all the pointe shoes and tights were pink because most ballerina's have pinky flesh. I had to get my tights and shoes dyed to match my skin tone. I think the Dance Theater of Harlem dancers still have to have their things dyed, too.

ceejeemcbeegee

ineffable.me

girlscoutcookie

ceejeemcbeegee

thehandspeaks

TruculentandUnreliable

I also got the same attitude re feminism, via all my male good friends...'hey but you're really funny and cool, you can't be a feminist?'

lol. All good, I'm with Bess marvin..

rantersparadise

thehandspeaks

yes, I'm well aware of the reply button, but I'm in the habit of cutting and pasting and typing because that's what I do on most other blogs. I didn't know it was problematic.

For someone as condescending as you, I'm surprised that you would yield so easily at the mention of someone calling your points (not necessarily you) naive and weak. After all, you did posit that Paris Vogue decided to put Andre J ON THE COVER out of mere happenstance? And am I really "saying nothing" or is it that you either won't or can't keep up? Why don't you read some of "the hand speaks comments" as an introduction to racism 101, and then get back to me.

uhoh-ohno

girlscoutcookie

My comments here are not intended to say that only ONE reading of the picture is valid and that one being that it is racist. I do want to to say that reading it as racist IS valid and based on strong foundation.

thehandspeaks

Elin

thehandspeaks

on a separate note, i love crayola! the non racist ones....

missmay

nicebrownboy

sybann

janna

Can we all scream about that for awhile? Because I find it incredibly offensive. I'm completely serious; I can't believe this is an actual product. (Forgive me if this site has already discussed that elsewhere.)

girlscoutcookie

Baaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrraaaaacccckkkk! Please to tell us what you think of this offensive cover?!

buggeroff

There is a comedian (I can't remember which one) who has made jokes about "flesh-colored" Band Aids being racist. That joke is funny to me on two levels: 1) because it is screwed up to imply that any particular color is the color skin is supposed to be and 2) because the joke is also making fun of people who get all up in arms about things like Band Aids.

Anway, I've never met a person who is actually the color of a Band Aid :)

janna

bess marvin, girl detective

rantersparadise

girlscoutcookie

@thehandspeaks: Dude. I realize buried somewhere beneath your rhetoric is an actual point re: racism, but...you sound like a noobz on a feminist post who just got out of their first women's studies class, yo. Make like a nice red wine reduction and simmer down. (Note: That was NOT a subversive racist reference to any minority group. Kthxbai.)

buggeroff

TruculentandUnreliable

kami2000

Political Party Girl

anonymousone

janna