Racism + Sexism in the Providence Journal
In response to:
A ‘masculist’ worries about Ms. Clinton by FRANCIS DALY Jr. and
Barack Obama’s great exotic emptiness by FROMA HARROP
A white anti-racist feminist man responds to racist/sexist rhetoric in the Providence Journal….
It is unfortunate that the Providence Journal Editorial Board feels the need to print not one, but two articles which serve to marginalize people of color and women. As a white man who is an active anti-racist feminist ally, I feel that it is my responsibility to address these oppression-oriented pieces of rubbish.
In the column titled “Barack Obama’s Great Exotic Emptiness,” Obama is labeled as an exotic person who is not a “conventional” man. The normalizing of whiteness is used to discredit Obama’s abilities. It is a shame that such oppressive language can be included in a newspaper that is supposed to be free of bias.
Why is it that a white man is never labeled as “exotic”?
I love that Obama is not a limited dualistic thinker. Black and white thinking only serves to polarize people. It creates hierarchies and division. I feel that a leader is someone who can operate from the center and affirm everyone’s dignity.
It’s a shame that Harrop felt the need to strike at Obama’s relationship with his wife. It’s a pathetic attempt to pander to sexist readers.
The 4th estate can have an agenda and in this case, it seems that the opinions which are printed in the Providence Journal serve only to disparage women and people of color.
In “A ‘masculinist’ worries about Ms. Clinton,” Hilary Clinton’s ability to lead is attacked by a raging sexist who seems to believe that gender equity is something to be feared. It is scary to think about giving up privilege and most men offer up multitudes of sexist verbiage in an attempt to undermine feminism and the feminist movement.
It is insane to talk about repealing the 19th amendment. I feel that it is also irresponsible for a major newspaper to print an opinion discussing such an oppressive and unjust suggestion.
P.S. The not so subtle jab at Islam did not go unnoticed. It is incredibly disheartening that so-called objective newspapers print pages that are imbued with racism, sexism, and religious intolerance. Clearly the agenda of the Providence Journal and of Froma Harrop and Francis Daly Jr. is to further dialogues which marginalize people of color/women.
Related posts:
A quick question: Does it make any difference for you that the Hillary piece was a letter to the editor?
Because from a journalistic perspective, letters to the editor are considered much different than, say, editorial columns or articles. The key difference is that the newspaper is in some way not responsible for the content of the letter. For example, the forum editor for the paper in question may (let’s hope) think that the letter is totally wrong – yet still print it, both to let the writer make a fool of themselves and because they may not see any grounds for *not* printing the letter.
Or, to put it another way (at least in regards to the letter): Where do you draw the line between free speech and moral speech? Isn’t the answer to bad speech more speech, not censorship? Or am I missing something here?
Dennis
3 Jan 07 at 1:18 pm
I’ve been reading the “Projo” for more than 2 weeks during my stay in Rhode Island and they are fairly consistent with their editorial pieces. Letters to the editor which support racism, sexism, abstinence only education, homophobia, etc. are more likely to be printed than letters which are anti-oppression oriented. I feel that the Providence Journal’s contributor articles, letters to the editor, and editorial pieces all combine to send an anti-social justice message to its readers.
Eric Stoller
3 Jan 07 at 2:24 pm