Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Carla]

Ok, this is considered racist....
http://sarabeth3283.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/obama-chia-pet1.jpg

People are really going insane.

There are other people chia pets, heck, even Britney Spears has one. Mr. T has one. Give me a break. Come on, Bugs Bunny, Homer Simpson, even Taz has a chia pet. Why make it a race thing?

The really silly part is that the Obama chia was part of an "American" set that also had George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and the Statue of Liberty. Yet they aren't claiming that the Washington statue is racist.

[Street Magic]

I don't think the Obama Chia Pet or a lot of the other racist appearing or accused of being racist stuff that's come out since Obama's taken office were intended to be racist. However, I will say that a lot of the reason this stuff does come across that way is because it's in the context of the first black US president ever. I got into a prolonged argument in another forum about the stimulus bill chimp cartoon being racist. I think that one was intentional (I'm not going to argue this particular point further though after how long that last argument took; anyone reading this is free to take or leave my opinion) in that the context of the cartoon was a media source known for its past discrimination and fear mongering against minorities as well as the fact that way more people associate the stimulus bill with Obama than with Pelosi despite the latter having been the official "writer" of the bill (as can be loosely established with a comparative Google search result return count).

Back to the main point, it all has to do with context. Just because a white person is given the same or similar treatment as a black person doesn't mean that treatment can't then be racist to the black person. If someone gave George Bush a watermelon as a gift and noted how his muscular build must be genetic and that he was born to play basketball, these happenstances would not be seen as racist, nor even that unusual taken separately. If someone were to do this to a black person, the racist connotations would become apparent. Furthermore, if someone were to do this to Obama, a man known for being the first black president ever, then the implications become even harder to ignore.

I just thought of a better real life example. I actually live in Texas (moved there about a year and a half ago), which is relevant because our Governor Perry made a passing reference to their right to secede (they don't have that right, by the way) not too long after Obama, the first black president ever, had been elected. Had he done this shortly after Clinton had been elected, this would have been taken as over the top for sure and some outside the mainstream media might even put together the secession-slavery-racist connection, but when you deal with the context of Obama's recent election, the same action becomes unmistakably racist in appearance, if not in reality. A lot of times, things that weren't intended to be racist get mistaken as such because of the importance of this context, but I'd say there are just as many times where the people responsible knew exactly what they were doing.

EDIT: And to head off the question that usually comes up when I get into this topic, I happen to be white.

EDIT2: Also, I don't know if I made this clear enough before, but the way I explain why Mr. T having had a Chia pet already isn't necessarily justification for dismissing the implications of an Obama chia pet is that Mr. T isn't known for being the first black actor or something. I don't personally think the Chia pet was racist, but I also don't think that having Mr. T or George Washinton Chia pets is a solid enough argument for dismissing the suggestion of racism out of hand.

[Carla]

[Street Magic]

[The Gipkik]

Racism as a form of moral outrage is part of the zeitgeist. It's in the air and part of the early 21st century. An indicator of moral decadence and intellectual inflexibility? As the world transforms and continues to get smaller--from 6,000 nations to the present 200 or so nations--there is change in the air. Read what you like from that form of national evolution. Something is inevitable. The emotions spiked by the racism label is part of the now. Rise above the occasion. It will pass.

[yoja]

Racist? Maybe...I guess it depends on whose opinion one is consulting.

But the resemblance between that Chia head and Obama is pretty questionable.

Also, like some of the other posters, I'm not convinced that it's a good idea to get all worked up over the myriad of possible societal implications that are reflected by available chia head characters. I could probably argue that Chia Pets are also horribly biased against elderly women, the disabled, the homeless, Albanians, Tongans, the Japanese, homosexuals, the transgendered, Catholics, Jews, atheists, mountain goats, pirates, and girl scouts. And most of all, the BALD. The horror! The outrage! Who will stand up for the Patrick Stewarts, the Michael Jordans, the Vin Diesels of this world? How dare Chia turn their backs on these celebrities who are surely just as deserving of their own Chia Pet glory.

But in the end, Chia Pets are just another $2 piece of consumer crap that absolutely nobody needs, and that, I would argue, nobody really cares about. I guess what I'm saying is ... I just don't agree that it's in any way useful or accurate to project the ideals and/or somewhat-repressed prejudices of our society at large through the perspective of some random object of so little value that pretty much nobody is going to attempt to shoplift it.

That's my opinion, for what it's worth (ironically, probably even less than said Chia Pet). But by all means, carry on.

[beercanman]