Sikh people considered "terrorists"

Prabhjot Singh , a university
professor attacked in upper
Manhattan New York 

When we see a man wearing a turban, we have many thoughts going through our mind, the first thing that comes to peoples mind when they see a Sikh man is, “he’s probably a terrorist”, “their responsible for 911”, “what is his turban symbolizing?”. Society stereotypes people just because of how they look and what they believe in, this gives people the wrong idea about who they really are. Sikh people are normal people like you and me, however Many people have a misconception that turbans and beards are associated with terrorism. Absolutely not, a turban and beard are linked with the Sikh faith which is used to show the true identity of a Sikh.

The big question is “who is to be blamed?” The answer to that is media. The reason why is because the western society consumes large amounts of media which comes in different forms such as television, internet, radio, telephone and newspaper. Therefore through consuming hours and hours of media, it’s possible that 1 article can change a person’s perception. Moreover, during the attack on the world trade center, multiple news stations (fox, CNN, ABC) all mentioned how the attacks were conducted by Osama bin laden. Notice how Osama bin laden has a turban and a long beard; also Sikhs have turbans and long beards. From this we see that the media convinced the audience that the suspect responsible for the attacks fits the same description of a Sikh mans physical features (turban and long beard).

To get a better sense of how Sikh people are being portrayed, the wall street journal had put out an article which surveyed 1500 people and found that Americans tend to associate turbans with Osama bin Laden. It said "49% believe “Sikh” is a section of Islam and 79% did not know that Sikhism originated in India. It also stated “of the 1,184 answers to a question on which respondents would associate with a turban and beard, 35.3% said Osama bin Laden. Nearly half (47.3%) answered “no association,” while 14.3% chose Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini”. 

Sikh man in California
found his property vandalized, it read
"Its not your country" 

That is not all, a month after 9/11; more than 300 hate crimes were committed against Sikhs according to the Sikh Coalition, a New York-based community group formed in response to attacks on Sikhs. These hate crimes continue to grow and grow. The mass shooting at the Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, on august 5 2012 was another disturbing example of a hate crime towards Sikhs. Wade Micheal page (a white supremacist) stormed into the Sikh temple killing 6 and wounding 4 worshipers.  The most disturbing form of discrimination towards a Sikh happened in Mississippi when a Sikh trucker was pulled over for a flat tire. The 49 year old  trucker from California insisted that he was harassed by 2 police officers just because of his religious beliefs. “The officers laughed at him and mocked his religious beliefs,” the letter read. “One officer declared that all Sikhs are depraved and ‘terrorists." To make matter worse, the trucker was taken to court where the judge insisted the trucker to take the “rag” (insulting the turban) of his head. 

As a result, we see that media has such a negative impact on Sikhs since media has created a dominant discourse where if a Sikh man in a turban is spotted, people assume he is a linked with a terrorist organization.  In North America, many Sikhs are judged by their physical appearance, their religion, which makes them feel their different from others. However, identifying people wearing turbans as terrorist and making them a target of hatred is completely wrong. Just like every person wearing a baseball hat is not a bank robber; every person wearing a turban is not a terrorist.
Furthermore, we must learn that there is a major misconception on how different minorities are being portrayed in media. In other words we must think from a different perspective on what the media is trying to convey to the audience rather than jumping to conclusions. Therefore, analyze the text, and look at more than one media in order to get a full understanding of a certain situation. I wanted to share this post since I believe it has affected me personally since I have some relatives who wear turbans and they are sometimes the center of attention in malls or public places since the turban distinguish them from others. All in all, we must all learn to not discriminate and stereotype against one another since we are all equal in many ways. 

Please check out the following links to get more information:

The wall street journal

http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2013/09/24/in-the-u-s-associating-sikhs-with-terrorism/

Police officers insult a innocent Sikh truck driver

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/sikh-truck-driver-labeled-terrorist-mississippi-traffic-cops-judge-calls-man-turban-rag-aclu-article-1.1470362

New reporter suggest Osama bin laden may be responsible 911

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uFMIvS9vkg

Discussion questions:

1. Will this dominant discourse of Sikhs being categorized as terrorist continue in North America?
2. Is there any other religion aside from Sikhism that faces the same stereotype?
3. How do you feel when you see a Sikh man,  Do you really consider him a terrorist? 
4. What do you think could be done to stop discrimination against Sikhs?
5. Has this post changed the way you think about Sikhs in general? 

Hot girls do indeed face many obstacles made inconsiquential by their presentation

When we think of dominant discourse, we think of subtle and sometimes even subliminal messages which shape the lens with with we view the world. A media text must be deconstructed to see the messages hidden in it, ranging from an appeal to one's pity to an influx of loaded terms. People consume media because it is constructed to appeal to them. But there are times, when the stars align and you get something that can not be described in words more socially acceptable than "the f***". I am of course referring to "Double Take" masterpiece conceived from something along the lines of cockroach feces "Hot Girl Problems".

 

Double Take has made a genuine effort to portray the dilemmas faced by hot girls everyday. Hot girls are just like us except that they are hot, the poetry in their words is almost Shakespearean. Being perfect means that you get phone calls from weird guys and girls calling you names, these girls need your sympathy people. They contradict themselves many times throughout the video, they cannot decide whether they are perfect, textbook perfection or not perfect. We have been looking at hot girls and thinking that they have no problems because they look nice but Double Take has made a revelation with this video.

Now on a less condescending note, this song is not borderline offensive, it raises the bar for insensitive music. The lyrics are degrading to insecure girls and some boys, and the music video is an asinine individual's attempt at something pretentious. If boy bands have taught us anything, its that a very high number of teenage girls who are insecure about how they look. This song is a big "f*** you"(couldn't find a better way to put it) to those girls. This implied message this song sends is that your looks are proportional to your happiness. And it is also implied that guys who don't look to a certain standard are 'weird' for messaging them. The problems these girls have make first world problems seem like monstrous catastrophes.

1. Do you think the problems that these girls are talking about are real 'problems'?

2.  In your view where does this song cross the boundary from arrogant to asinine? 

3. Do any of the things these girls say hold true in reality? (Think about this one)

 

Ching Chong Ling Long Let's Hear a Racist Song

Offensive isn't it! I can guarantee, that when one of you (my peers) read the title, the thought of Eastern Asians popped into your mind. It is truly amazing how media has influenced our views of society and how it impacts the way we look at the people around us. One of the largest forms of media that has been taking humans by storm for thousands of years is music. Whether the medium is the radio, television or internet, the fact of the matter is that music greatly influences the way we see things in life, be it in a positive or negative manner. The sad truth is that many artists have been using music in such a way that it negatively perpetuates stereotypes of various races. Ergo, it increases the affects it has on the minds of males and females throughout the world. A question should now be asked. What does the dominant discourse in music say about certain races? More specifically, what does the dominant discourse in music say about Asians (Politically Corrected to Eastern Asians).

To answer the question we must move on to the meat of the topic. Let's take a moment and deconstruct two songs that fall into the racist category. By doing this, we will be able to see who is being negatively affected by the song, how it might affect younger generations and how it helps to increase stereotypes against Asians. First of all, take a second and watch the video presented above. Produced by the talent agency, PMW Live, Chinese Food is a song that focuses on...well just that. Right at the beginning of the video an Asian man is shown cooking a dish that consists of noodles and vegetables. The interesting thing is that throughout the video when Alison Gold is "singing", unnecessary subtitles are provided in various languages. However, when the Asian man in the beginning speaks in his native language, no subtitles are given. Fast forward to the inside of the restaurant, behind the counter is an Asian girl who serves Gold. As Gold "sings" her order to the girl, the girl is shown to be an expert at using the register; she is able to input the order without looking, all while she constantly laughs and smiles at Gold. [Notice how sad it is that PMW Live did not have the decency to at least change the numbers on the register while they are being "imputed", it stays at 65 from the outside and 6.58 on the inside (this was the price of the previous order)] Continuing on, I find it slightly inappropriate that the man under the panda suit places the dog piece on "Oriental Avenue". Now comes the part where Gold and the other females are seen wearing kimonos while the two girls on the side are seen in a geisha like getup. This is very wrong for two reasons. Firstly, the kimono is the traditional Japanese outfit for women; the Chang-ao is the traditional Chinese garment for women and therefore the kimono does not belong in the video. Secondly, a geisha is a traditional Japanese entertainer and thus the getup should not be donned for a video about Chinese food. What makes it worse is the constant bowing which is really unnecessary. Finally, at the end of the video, the words "Fortune Cookies Are Never Wrong" appear while a stereotypical gong is sounded and the Asian man bows. That phrase can be offensive because fortune cookies are not even part of the Chinese cuisine/tradition/culture. It was popularized in the United States and it seems to have originated in Japan. "Fortune Cookies" are not widely present in China. Now if i were to look at this video though the lens of an Asian man, i believe that this would offend me. Not only does it make fun of Asian heritage and the language but it is also disrespectful to the Asian culture and tradition. People may say that i am taking this video too seriously or that i should not analyze this in such a harsh manner, but i believe that it is necessary to do this for two reasons. Firstly, it helps me recognize stereotypes and how they should not be used and abused in society. Secondly, the 12 year old that sings this is just a child and feeding her such stereotypes at such a young may negatively affect her in the future. By analyzing this video, one can understand that this is wrong and that one should not condone it.

Now before i provide you all with my questions i would like to quickly talk about one more thing. That is the song Asian Girlz by Day Above Ground. Due to the video's explicit content i cannot provide it here. Many have said that this song was just a joke and even the band (yes, it's a legitimate band) claimed that it was done for fun. However, these claims only came out when the reviews turned out horrible, before that they were promoting this song everywhere, especially on their new album. To give you a little taste of how racist this song is, i will provide you with some lyrics. Here we start with "I love your sticky rice" and "I love your creamy yellow thighs/Ooh your slanted eyes". Let's skip ahead to the bridge where it says, "Yeah, shark soup/Oh, tradition, tradition, tradition, yeah yeah/Baby, you're my Asian girl/You're here illegally/So baby marry me/Come on sit on my lap/Or we'll send you back/And you age so well/I can barely tell/17 or 23?/Baby doesn't matter to me". Finally the song ends off by listing various stereotypical names and words pointed towards Asians, ranging from Bruce Lee and Sailor Moon to Chinatown and Toyota. Now you see why i find this song to be the epitome of offensive. I have provided you with these two songs just to give you a glimpse of how Asian stereotypes are being used in the music industry. This should not go without saying that other racial stereotypes are also used in music but that should be the topic of...another post.

I would like to leave you all with these questions. Ponder upon them, derive an answer and spark a discussion below. Thank you all for reading. Please forgive any grammatical errors and if i need to correct/clarify anything, please tell me (comment).

1. What other Asian stereotypes have you seen in musical lyrics or music videos?
2. Do you think early exposure to stereotypes can negatively impact the way a child thinks throughout their life?
3. Why do you think PMW Live produced this song? What was it's purpose? It's message?
4. Do you think using stereotypes and racial remarks is a money making scheme using by large music industries?
5. How do songs like these affect you? Do they?
6. If songs like these are mass produced, in what way(s) will society be affected?

"The Yellow People”?

Why it is that media is so biased against the Eastern Asians? Why does it show them in a specific negative light? Is it really fair to the Asians, when they are misrepresented in the media? The media today, is one heck of a stereotypical, racist and politicized medium. How would you feel if people of your race, colour or ethnicity were being misrepresented on a consistent basis? It is our media which is highly racist and unfair to the people of  East Asian background. Asians are always shown inferior and unimportant in many media TV shows, commercials ,advertisement, etc.Asians are people with just a different culture who share the same planet as who live, eat, breathe, act and feelings and emotions just like us. They are one of us and aren't different from us in any aspect of life. 

With the media portrayal, they are shown as a nerds, spies, gangsters, and people who are excessively close to their culture has only recently emerged; prior to this Asian men and women were shown as spies from Japan. This relates back to the Pearl Harbour incident. Now, since Japan and United States are on good diplomatic terms this hatred has shifted to China; in TV shows today most Chinese people are shown as spies. Overall, one way or the other the media finds a way to crucify the culture of Eastern Asians, rather than celebrate it. This shows that media is politicized; it is not independent in its opinion. 

Moreover, the media has defined a specific role of Asians in our society and our culture. They are known as people who have connections with triads (gangs), they are depicted as nerds, spies and people who have strong ties to their culture. Many times, it has been the case that Asians are not considered a part of the majority. In America and Canada they are several examples that this is the case. For example, in the TV show CSI: Crime Scene Investigation the forensic doctor of the investigating team is shown as a nerdy and an unattractive person. In the show narrow Asian people are shown as gangsters and part of triads. In NCIS: Los Angeles many episodes show Asian people as Chinese spies. In the Canadian TV show Murdoch Mysteries in an episode Asian people are always shown wearing their cultural clothing. Similarly, in an ad featuring Lebron James, shows him winning from the Chinese god in a one-on-one game. This ad goes way beyond just simple stereotype of cultural clothing and martial arts moves. In my view it shows China against the Americans and shows the victory of Americans over Chinese people. It again demeans them Asian culture.

 Not only that, but the dominant discourse of today’s society proclaimed Asian people who lack communications skills, are shy, overachievers and technologically savvy. There are several of examples of such cases. For example, in Law & Order: SVU, forensic psychiatrist George Huang is shown as a nerdy, and an intelligent man who has extraordinary thinking skills. Moreover, another character from the TV series “Lost”, Jim Kwon is a character who does not speak English at all is shown as a son of poor fisherman from a Korean background. It does not end there, the media find more ways of stereotyping against East Asians such as showing Isabella from “Miami Vice” and Hiro Nakamura from the TV show “Heroes” as untrustworthy, evil, foreign people who could not fully absorb in the American culture. 

Apart from all that, the young famous NBA Asian basketball player Jeremy Lin who currently plays for Houston Rockets was called for a Taiwanese Talk show, and have been reported saying, “I have been racially discriminated when I was in college…There are a lot of slurs being shouted by the crowd” while the games is on. This type of misrepresentation affects the American and Canadian youth who are studying with their Asian peers and problematic situations will appear such as hate crime, racial discrimination, racial harassment and bullying. Now the question arises, why do we let media define our lives?

(In this ad, everyone despite being black or white all the actors are shown 

to have been wearing typical western clothing and speaking English with a

proper accent. In comparison with that, we see two Eastern Asian men dressed

in Martial Art uniform and speak in their weak English accent. Also their dancing style

is the media's art of mocking people's culture. This video hints a little stereotype the 

American media presents in to make fun of someone's background)

Questions to reflect upon:

Have you ever been through racial discrimination at school?

Would there be a time, when we will stop discriminating among your peers and not let media 

shape our perceptions about Asians?

Do you think that these stereotypes hold any truth in them?

If you were to work in the media industry, what would you do to tackle this issue?

Males and Hardworking Go Hand & Hand?

Media has had a profound effect on our minds and the society that we are currently living in. The dominant discourse has really influenced our ideas, behaviors and perceptions that males are to be the only hardworking people.  I will have to disagree on that. Women too are hardworking but media has embedded into our minds that they're only stay at home mothers and take care of the children. That's the stereotype we believe in when we think about females. We can't blame society for thinking that males are the only hardworking people. We are constantly bombarded with all sorts of media text that we consume that implies that males are hardworking and females aren't.

If you were to deconstruct the video with the attached link, you will see the message they are trying to send.

Firstly, let’s take a look at what the ad is trying to implement to its viewers. The producer of the video is telling its viewers that hardworking men deserve a big meal because they work hard. Let’s look at this differently, so the producer is sending a message regarding that only males should eat this meal offered by this restaurant because they are hard workers. This tells the viewer that this meal is not for females because they aren't as hardworking as males. 

Secondly, if we look at this from a neutral-gender lens we will see what the producer is trying to say. Similarly, he is implying that females are not hardworking. I have to totally disagree on that point. Maybe this director has his own beliefs and value messages in the ad but it doesn't give him the ability to forget that females are hardworking. There are female firefighters, cops, doctors, pilots and other professionals in the society we live in today. The implicit message being sent is that females are weak and they aren't hardworking. 

Lastly, media has embedded into our minds and has reshaped us on how hardworking females are. They have labeled the female community as "weak" and "lazy". This video has a special interest. The ad is insisting that males are the majority of people that are hardworking and therefore they can make a healthy profit if this audience accepts their ads message. They are trying to exclude the female community because they believe that there are more hardworking men then females. I believe that this ad misrepresents men. Hardworking men are not just firefighters, policemen and construction workers but they can be hardworking teachers, doctors, investment bankers and so on. We can't just stop here from deconstructing the ad even further. I believe that the female community will view this ad as misrepresenting and omitting them. This media text indicates that females are not hardworking individuals. It paints an image of females as weak and lazy people.The feminist that exist in this world will disagree with this medium. Likewise, the male community will strongly agree with the ad because they believe that they're the backbone of this nation. It's safe to say that the stereotype of men being the hardworking people is truly false and invalid. Yes, there are hardworking men but we can't forget that there are hardworking females as well. For example, look at Hillary Clinton who is a hardworking female who is the United States Secretary of State. She is a hardworking individual who advocated numerous times for the State Children's Health Insurance Program, Adoption and Safe Families Act and the Foster Care Independence Act. This also brings up the question that you don't have to be a firefighter nor policemen/women to be considered a hardworking individual. Hardworking people come with all different types of jobs. Society shouldn't have the ability to label and stereotype which gender is hardworking and which isn't. Another example of hardworking women is our very own, Kathleen Wynne who is the Premier of Ontario. She too is a hardworking woman who has successfully proven that the stereotype of males being the only hardworking people is truly wrong. We can't let the male dominant world 
forget about the hardworking

Hillary Clinton

 females like Mother Teresa, Oprah Winfrey, Malala Yousafzai, Eva Peron, Helen Keller and many more who have contributed to this world we live in. All of these hardworking women have done so much for the female community and the world, which in fact will be really disrespectful to let all sorts of media that we consume affect the way we look at females. The male stereotype of them being the backbone and hardworking people is wrong. We live in a society that is built upon by both genders, male and female.

Video:

Hardworking Guys

Discussion questions:

Do you think that this ad purposely excluded females?

Do you think dominant discourse has gone to far? 

If you're a female would you disagree with this video? Why or why not?

If you're a male would you approve that females are not hardworking? Why or why not?

Do you think that females are capable of doing the same intense work as males?

Should we blame society for this wrongful stereotyping of men being the only the hardworking people?

Hi Everyone,

In preparation for our live-blog round table discussion tomorrow please read this article that addresses the Steubenville rape case,  a teen suicide in Nova Scotia, and the phenomenon of "rape culture."  Just like our previous round table on abortion, I caution you all to be very careful about the tone of your comments.  For some reason when people express themselves through technology their sense of accountability disappears.  Also, it is very difficult to detect tone through text alone (are people being sincere, or sarcastic?).  Since this live-blog will be marked like a regular round table I encourage you to be respectful and mature when writing your comments (as I know you are capable of doing) since you cannot know the past experiences of your peers, or their friends and families.

The article is a bit long, but brings up a lot of interesting points of discussion.  Here are some of the leading questions for our live-blog. 

Questions to consider:

1. To what extent do you believe technology has contributed to incidences of sexual assault?

2. From your experience as a high school student, how well do you think sex education informs students about "consent, new technology, and sexual assault?"

3. What is your response to the statistic listed in the article that, "About one in four college-age women will be sexually assaulted at some point during their time at university?"

4.  “Boys who normally would never sexually assault a girl are much more likely when they feel their peers are watching and will support their efforts . . . And in high school, peer support and likability is everything,” Donovan says." Do you believe this is true? Why/why not?

5. In regards to police questioning victims of rape: "Lots of questions are still asked about: Why did you put yourself in a position where you were going to get raped? . . . We never ask these questions when a person’s house is burgled. What did your curtains do to invite the intruder to break the glass?"  Why do so many people assume that rape is justified on the grounds of what the victim is wearing? How might this be changed?

Please consider these questions carefully tonight and post your responses during class time tomorrow.  I'm looking forward to it!

Violence Against Women in the Media and the Arts

The holiday season is upon us, and with that comes a wave of new products for consumers. The picture to the left is an image being used by NARS Cosmetics as part of their new holiday collection, entitled NARS by Guy Bourdin. Guy Bourdin is an infamous fashion photographer, who is the inspiration for the products in the line.

Let’s deconstruct the image: We’re looking at a woman with an apparent bruised eye (based on my interpretation), headfirst into the grass, and presumably naked. NARS selected the image from one of Guy Bourdin’s photographs, as seen here. For me, the picture raises a lot of immediate red flags and questions. Why would NARS think that showcasing this seemingly battered woman would somehow make female customers want to buy this product? Are they implying that violence against women is somehow the woman’s fault, which is why women would find this image desirable? We all know that these types of decisions are made carefully and deliberately, especially in aesthetic-based industries like beauty.

The picture above is an entryway into a bigger topic, because this is not the first time we've seen companies use questionable images on their products. Focusing on Guy Bourdin for a minute, a lot of his photographs that can be seen in the link above feature women in demeaning, almost-nude positions. He’s known for having a fascination with violence, sex and death. But interestingly enough, he’s also an extremely celebrated and revered fashion icon. In industries like art and fashion, this trend of violence (mostly having to do with women) is considered edgy and mysterious. But why is portraying women in that way acceptable, but if we exchanged those spots with men, it would not be cool or interesting anymore? The media knows that the dominant discourse within our culture is that women automatically equal sex and weakness. Even when discussing topics like rape, we always talk about its effects on women. Well, women are not always the victims as men get raped too. But because of the way history and many other things have shaped the way we think, the issue of women being victimizers does not get discussed as much.

These types of advertisements have a big effect on the way men perceive women, how women look at themselves and even how they look at men. The picture itself portrays women in an unfavourable light that transcends outside of stores and magazines, into the minds of young people who don’t realize that these advertisements are more than just hollow pictures. They are meant to evoke emotion and thought, whether it is good or bad. How we let controversial images, like the one NARS has used, influence the way we as a society think is extremely crucial to moving forward with issues like gender equality and feminism.

The important thing to realize is that the whole reason why companies and media outlets create the advertisements they do is based on us. They pay people tons of money to understand what we as consumers like, and what we don’t like. What’s the new “thing”? Who’s the new “it” girl? All of these things are considered when the commercials and advertisements we’re discussing on the blog are being made. Their creations come from us inadvertently accepting these controversial issues, and not doing anything about it until we see it in a magazine or read an article online. In a way, these media texts are a reflection of us and our ideologies.

Additional Note: If you have a Twitter account and would like to chime in on the issue, you can tweet to NARS Cosmetics with your thoughts to their twitter handle, @NARSissist, with the hashtag #NotBuyingIt. 

Questions to Ponder:

1. Where do we cross the line on free expression?

2. Do you think it's right to portray women in a violent/belittling manner, in the name of art? 

3. What kind of message, if any, do you think NARS is trying to send by using this specific photograph on one of their products?

4. How can we collectively change the negative way women and other groups of people (e.g. teenagers, Muslims) are represented in the media?

Original Article: NARS Cosmetics Glamorizes Violence Against Women