You are browsing the archive for 2012 December.

Huffington Post UK Claims Afro Hair Makes Black Women Fat, There’s Been A Study Apparently!

December 20, 2012 in beauty and race

By Donalea

Originally posted at Get Perspective blog

It’s been a long time since I’ve read something that made me really angry and deeply annoyed, and this is probably more down to my ability to avoid offending articles then intelligent journalism! So imagine my annoyance when I spotted on my Twitter timeline a tweet by Huffington Post UK declaring that “40% of African-American women avoid exercise because of concerns about their hairstyle, a study has found”.

According to the article a recently published study in America has identified that 40% of African American women purposely avoid exercise to maintain their costly hair styles. The study which used (only) 103 African American women participates between the ages of 21 to 60, consisted of a 40 question questionnaire and was led by dermatologist Dr Amy McMichael.

While it’s not the study per say that put me in a fit of rage, it was the clearly irresponsible and quite frankly racist journalism that got me in a huff (no punt intended). I mean what value or interest does this American study hold for the UK public, apart from supporting racist stereotypes of overweight black women, with extreme obsessions with their ‘strange’ hair.

It was mentioned early on the article that the study is said to ‘fuel concerns about the obesity epidemic in the United States.’ Though what ‘concerns’ this study actually fuels the article (I believe) is intentionally ambiguous. Considering the article focuses solely on African American women surely this would imply that this group/race of people are potentially at the bulk of this epidemic.

It was irresponsible of the article to imply that a greater reason or cause of obesity exclusively within black women is down to vanity of their hair when the study quoted was far too small to confirm this. Yet the article had no problem highlighting the amount of money and time African American women spend on regularly maintaining their ‘coarser’ hair on ‘time consuming’ processes which makes their hair ‘incompatible’ with heavy exercise.

It is this tone that makes the article highly racist, since it intends to imply not only that black women’s vanity over their hair is more extreme to that of their white female counter parts but also that the very make up of their hair hinders their ability to take up exercise.

Clearly those at the Huffington Post failed to notice all the brilliant black female athletes that par took in this years Olympics, with the likes of British boxer Nicola Adams, American sprinter Allyson Felix to Jamaican swimmer Alia Atkinson all proving that their hair need not hold them back.

What does hold black women back is the ignorant cultural perceptions of black hair and it exclusion from beauty ideals. I took much offensive in the article’s description of black hair as ‘coarser hair’, I mean how dare they there is nothing coarse about mine or any other head of afro hair! Though it is with this segregated way of thinking about black hair which made Viola Davis’ appearance on the read carpet with her natural hair exposed seem so revolutionary, it is also what clouded Gabby Douglas’ Olympic gold medal win.

This ignorance to consider it a valid reason that obesity in black women could be largely down to race and our biology instead for the same reasons why other races of women may become obese is racist. The article concluded by quoting an American magazine whom had also spoken about this study’s findings though they had dismissed this hair vanity as being an excuse exclusively used by black women for their lack of exercise. While it is clear this was an attempt to ‘balance’ the articles argument, the use of a few lines to counteract its entire article of its racist connotations just didn’t cut it.

It’s an appalling article, bad journalism and lazily written.

Read offending article here.

Does an Increasingly Mixed Race Britain Mean That British Society is Postracial?

December 14, 2012 in multiculturalism

Minna Salami

Results of the 2011 census were published this week revealing that the number of mixed-race people in Britain has almost doubled in ten years. As a result, several journalists distributed what I’d call “unwarranted postracialism”, suggesting, for instance, that thanks to people like Jessica Ennis perceptions of race are hardly an issue any longer, and according to Sarah Mulley in The Guardian, the diversity in the census data “doesn’t contain much that would surprise most people in the UK – these changes happen all around us, all the time, and most people are just getting on with their lives.”

Really?

The fact remains that prejudice has not fallen sufficiently at all, and sadly the increase of mixed race people in Britain does not in itself rectify its stubborn persistence.

In September 2012, a first ever UK analysis of its kind revealed the broad impact that racial prejudice has on the health and well being of non-Anglophone children. Other recent studies show that racism and the belief that hereditary factors endows some races with an intrinsic superiority has increased in the past years.

However, there is a cause to celebrate that mixed race Britain has almost doubled in ten years, and that is that the more people that identify as mixed race, the more likely the flaws of the race-as-hereditary-biological factor will continue to be exposed.

Throughout history, mixed race people such as president Obama, Bob Marley, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, Mellissa Harris-Perry, Mary Seacole, Frederick Douglas and August Wilson and countless others, have proven an uncomfortable thorn in the side of the social experiment called race, firstly as they are viscerally inclined to know that race is a biological fallacy (given that they do not ‘purely’ belong to one race). Also, by sheer existence, mixed race people raise a serious question around the continued racial profiling that takes place in medical research, for instance. And this despite that the world of science has in fact on several occasions declared that race is biologically quite meaningless, that it is a fallacy even, a social construct developed by mid-century Europeans to justify a financial venture.

What the census must not do is give those who are not mixed race carte blanche to report about how harmonious it is to be mixed race, or that prejudice is well of the past. It is best that people who may or may not experience racial prejudice are the judges of that.

Kate is Pregnant- So What?

December 5, 2012 in motherhood

kate pregnant

By Lola Okolosie

So, I know that with it being the jubilee year, the Olympics and Bradley Wiggins winning the Tour de France, not to mention Andy Murray’s first grand slam win, a royal pregnancy should be, forgive the pun, the crowing glory of the year.  But, as a staunch republican, for me, it’s not.

In a true meritocracy, which we keep being told our liberal capitalist democracy is, all children should have the possibility of being head of state. But that isn’t the case is it?  I do not and will not ever believe that ANYONE has a god given right to rule me and, indeed, that their de-facto power makes them an intrinsically better human being than I.  That is how the media machine is attempting to justify the royal’s place in society. You all know what I’m talking about, the endless useless stories of the amount of ‘charity’ work they do- when in reality, they are the state’s chief welfare recipients.

But on this one my strong republicanism finds it’s way to some sympathy for Kate and Will.  The weeks before the 12 week safety zone, where it becomes ok to announce your pregnancy to the world, is arguably, one of the most private moments a couple can share.  They are eight weeks in and yet have to share this news with the world so that the entire saga can be played out in full, for as long as possible, in the public arena.  After all, the nation is deeply concerned with the fruit of their loins!  And, if you aren’t, that is just tough luck because on Monday this was the ‘breaking’ news of the entire day. Maybe unsurprisingly, it was given top billing on nearly all news broadcasts, over and above the possibility that George Osborne is set to make big corporations like Starbucks and Amazon pay their corporation tax. Evidently, more of us are affected by Kate’s pregnancy than tax reform for the very rich.

To justify what might be considered an intrusion too far, we are told that the reason for releasing the news is because Kate is suffering from acute morning sickness.  Surely this gives us yet more reason to see her as a princess dutifully, through her silence, bearing the burden of being female.  She is in hospital being a ‘strong’ woman, made to suffer like all women, yet obviously with the best prize of all at the end- an heir. Think of it as the modernised biblical retelling of Eve’s great legacy to women the world over.

Kate’s morning sickness is so severe that she needs to be privately hospitalised. Women up and down the country know exactly what that feels like but sadly, their babies aren’t important enough to warrant such measures- they won’t be 3rd in line to the throne so they will just have to suck it up. As a new mother, the thought that my baby’s life is worth significantly less than someone else’s makes me, to put it mildly, mad as hell.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...