Wrestling with Racism: Neo-colonialism and "TNA"
We′re guessing that our regular readers were anticipating a blog about Betty Brown, the Texas state legislator who suggested that Asian Americans change their names so that they’re “easier for Americans to deal with?” It’s already getting a lot of attention, and we don’t have much more to add. Racialicious does a great job explaining the various elements that render this statement worthy of critical attention.
Or maybe folks expect us to discuss the Turkish newsman who reported on Barack Obama’s recent visit while in black face (see below). This one is a bit trickier because while it is patently offensive to Americans, there are cultural considerations that deserve attention in a full analysis. We have asked someone more familiar with the language and culture to draft an analysis for our companion blog, This GUEST on Race. We hope to have something appear in that space soon, but until then, see commentary from Atlas Shrugs, which references a video explanation by Young Turks that by and large confirms our culturally-constrained impression, but offers some context.
Instead, we turn our attention back to the realm of popular culture THIS WEEK, focusing on a genre that we have not previous addressed: professional wrestling.
The April 9, 2009 episode of TNA Impact contained a match that featured a Black woman named Awesome Kong (recall the controversy over LeBron James’s image on the cover of Vogue last year, below) fighting three Barbie-esque White women, collectively named The Beautiful People. Before we even get to the imagery of the fight (i.e., the violent interaction of these two symbols), we should give some attention to the parties individually.
Besides the Vogue cover, there has been considerable attention given in the past year to ape or monkey images as applied to African Americans. In this space alone, we have commented on the blatantly bigoted Obama monkey doll and little girl doing a monkey impersonation at McCain-Palin rallies in Pennsylvania, the Obama sock puppet, and the insensitive New York Post cartoon. And we haven’t even mentioned the Obama Chia Pet (left), which is considered to be racist by many (and has been removed from some Walgreen’s stores’ shelves).
The image of Awesome Kong (played by Kia Stevens) is striking. Not only is she named after perhaps the most famous primate in popular culture (including the original movie, remakes, and video games), but the character makes menacing animal faces (and does not speak, so far as we can tell).
Dehumanizing images are not new in professional wrestling. Previous generations have been entertained by the likes of George “the Animal” Steele, who had hair in places that we didn’t even know hair could grow on a human, as well as a green tongue. Further, the notion of a wrestler whose very species might be called into question has been replicated over the decades (think Andre the Giant, for instance). There has even been another “Kong” — King Kong Bundy – who is White. So what’s the big deal?
“Why, TWIR guys, is it okay for White wrestlers to be dehumanized but not a Black wrestler?”
First, we should note that dehumanization is to be avoided in any case. We understand that there are times in entertainment and literary contexts where such portrayals have a role, but the line between reality and fantasy in professional wrestling is blurry enough to cause concern. The question about us not being critical when it happens to White wrestlers brings us back to the reciprocity fallacy: what is acceptable for those in positions of relative power and privilege may not be acceptable when applied to members of groups that have been historically oppressed. It’s the reason that comedians (of any ethnicity) can make fun of Whites, but only African Americans can make fun of Black folks, for example. If the joke can serve to perpetuate injustice, it’s inappropriate if it can work to undermine it, it is acceptable.
In fact, one of the dehumanized characters in professional wrestling is Junkyard Dog, a Black man who assumed the role of. . . well, you get it. While it is always troublesome for a Black person to be seen in a dehumanized context given the widespread dehumanization that characterized so much of the African American experience, there is more concern when the animal in question is a primate because of the long-standing offensive imposition of that imagery toward Blacks.
So that’s bad enough on its own, but Awesome Kong (formerly known as Amazing Kong) has been around for a couple of years, so this is not new. What got our attention THIS WEEK was the contrast in “Kong’s” match with three White women dressed in provocative attire (breasts exposed and pushed up high, tiny shorts — one with fishnet stockings — or skin-tight pants) and looking very much like living Barbie dolls (an important sexist objectification and dehumanization in its own right). These women, presented as ornaments for the sexual gratification of the overwhelmingly heterosexual male (and White) audience, are conspicuously named The Beautiful People.
The reduction of women to spectacle is part and parcel to what TNA is all about: the very name, which stands for “Total Nonstop Action,” is a play on the colloquial reference to “tits and ass″ (”T & A”). As the women enter the ring, they writhe suggestively, using the ropes as phallic props (left). Even though these women are presented as villains in the context of the program (their signature “move” is cutting the long hair of their female opponents, presumably making them even less “beautiful” by denying them one of the symbolic indicators of conventional beauty), the bias toward European-style feminine beauty is clear: all of the women are White and have long, flowing blonde hair. Their bodies are artificially curvy at the top and fitness-thin elsewhere. In short, they look as if they just walked off the cover of Maxim or FHM or any other of a number of objectifying “men’s” magazines that tacitly advocate that women’s only worth resides in what can be seen in the photos.
The clash of these two images — the White fantasy sexpot and the savage Black creature — is reminiscent of the colonialist psyche: the good, desirable, refined Europeans are destined to conquer, tame and even enslave the Africans with force. In the match, “Kong” wins, but not before providing imagery suitable for a heterosexual male fantasy of lesbianism (left). As is often the case in professional wrestling, though, the “match” doesn’t end when the bell sounds. The “Beautiful People” team up against “Kong” as she celebrates her victory and attacks her (below). (Since neither of us regularly watches TNA, we are not sure why there would be a three-against-one match in the first place.) They beat her viciously (to crowd jeers), and ultimately pull out a pair of shears in an attempt to cut her braids. At that point, another scantily-dressed White woman rushes the ring (some rival, we surmise), and the segment ends.
To get the full effect (if that’s really necessary), you may wish to watch the action for yourself. You can see it here (the match begins at about the 55-minute mark of the broadcast).
“But, professors, isn’t ‘Kong’ choosing to have herself portrayed that way? She’s Black, so it must be okay, right?”
This provides an excellent illustration of the difference between racism and bigotry. We are guessing that Ms. Stevens does not hate Black people (that is, she’s not bigoted toward African Americans). It’s also probable that she does not recognize that she is contributing to racist stereotypes by the image she projects. If she is and continues to do it anyway, we should consider the context of that decision: Who is really making the money from this imagery? What pressure is she under to perform like this? What are the parameters of the choices she has?
Racism is not about White people being bad and doing bad things while people of color are saintly victims. The power of racism is that it affects everyone in a racist society in the same direction (to privilege and propagate White supremacy). The fact that actors of color throughout history have contributed to racist stereotypes reflects the pervasiveness of racist images; it does not mitigate the racist nature of those images. The American imagination is shaped by, saturated with and burdened by narratives of colonization that center on manifest destiny and the inherent “goodness” of Europeans.
A critical examination of THIS WEEK’s episode of TNA is revealing, interesting and informative. A passive viewing of the episode, though, has the propensity to solidify and perpetuate harmful stereotypes.
Recent Comments