Tom And Jerry Racist?

[lilpixieofterror]

It's the style of depiction, not merely having a black maid. Again, "Mammy" is from minstrel shows, which were created specifically to mock and lampoon black people. In the slavery days, slavemasters were known to sexually exploit their somewhat lighter-skinned female slaves. Minstrel show writers tried to whitewash this fact. They de-sexualized the maid by depicting her as obese and old and exaggerating her dark skin tone. In other words, they made the character represent everything that society considered ugly back then. They also made her extraordinarily subservient to her white family and portrayed her as being perfectly happy and content with her status as a slave. It was an attempt to propagate the myth of the happy slave, to suggest that slavery was a humane and benevolent institution. They wanted to convey the idea that black women were unattractive and fit only for service labor, and the slaveowners were kind-hearted individuals who took them in for that purpose.

You really have to go a long way to pull nonsense out of your rear end, don't your your majesty? If you actually bothered to look at cartoons of the era instead of seeing racism behind every tree, it wasn't all that uncommon to hide the upper body of characters on cartoon shows. Many of the Looney Tunes shows with Sylvester and Tweety did that. You'll also find shows with Charlie Brown also tended to cut off the upper body of adult characters too. Are you going to say they are racist for doing that too (even though they did that to white characters too)? Perhaps you should stop looking for racism behind every tree your majesty. While it is true that many of these cartoons could be loosely linked to racism, that isn't one of them.

[fm93]

You really have to go a long way to pull nonsense out of your rear end, don't your your majesty? If you actually bothered to look at cartoons of the era instead of seeing racism behind every tree, it wasn't all that uncommon to hide the upper body of characters on cartoon shows. Many of the Looney Tunes shows with Sylvester and Tweety did that. You'll also find shows with Charlie Brown also tended to cut off the upper body of adult characters too. Are you going to say they are racist for doing that too (even though they did that to white characters too)? Perhaps you should stop looking for racism behind every tree your majesty. While it is true that many of these cartoons could be loosely linked to racism, that isn't one of them.

Wh-where did I ever say a single word about "hiding the upper body of characters?" That's--I mean, that's literally so different from what I said that I'm honestly wondering if you hallucinated a completely different post. What part of "Mammy is from a racist archetype in minstrel shows" is even slightly related to "hiding the upper body of characters is racist?" I am completely and utterly baffled here.

Although, this bewildering exchange does serve to illustrate a point. Given this incontrovertible evidence of you completely misreading my post, I think that I deserve vastly more benefit of the doubt from other readers when I say that you and Sparko tend to misread my posts. It's pretty hard for the Sparkoesque response of "No, YOU'RE just backpedaling!" to apply to something this egregious.

But anyway, if you really care, I don't at all "go looking for racism behind every tree." This is an instance of racism wearing a bright flashing neon suit, waving a giant sign that says "I'M RACIST" and jumping out into the open to anyone who's sufficiently educated on these issues. The black maid is named Mammy. "Mammy" is the name of an archetypal figure from minstrel shows, which, as I said, were created specifically to mock and lampoon black people. There is no question that minstrel shows and their mammy depiction are racist. It's pretty hard to claim that Tom and Jerry's use of a character named Mammy was unrelated to minstrel history. It gets even harder when you consider that the mammy in minstrel shows was generally depicted as obese and old, and Mammy in Tom and Jerry is obese and old. The creators clearly derived "Mammy" from the racist minstrel shows.


I'll gladly accept an apology right about now.

[lilpixieofterror]

Wh-where did I ever say a single word about "hiding the upper body of characters?" That's--I mean, that's literally so different from what I said that I'm honestly wondering if you hallucinated a completely different post. What part of "Mammy is from a racist archetype in minstrel shows" is even slightly related to "hiding the upper body of characters is racist?" I am completely and utterly baffled here.

And your majesty, where, in the entire series, do you see any sort of evidence that she is a 'archetype in minstrel shows' or did you just make that up, whole cloth, and hope your accusation sticks? What's the problem, if you're allowed to make whatever assertions you want to make and call it good, why can't I make up whatever assertions I want and call it good? Turn about is fair play or is that only allowed when King Square Peg I does it, but nobody else is allowed to do it?

Although, this bewildering exchange does serve to illustrate a point. Given this incontrovertible evidence of you completely misreading my post, I think that I deserve vastly more benefit of the doubt from other readers when I say that you and Sparko tend to misread my posts. It's pretty hard for the Sparkoesque response of "No, YOU'RE just backpedaling!" to apply to something this egregious.

Of course everybody 'misreads your post' your majesty because admitting you could be wrong is beyond your abilities to admit it. Do you know why I refer to you as a king? It is because you seem to see yourself as infallible and never admit to being wrong, so you act just like a king does when proved wrong. Blames everybody else for his mistakes and inability to prove his arguments. I want evidence your majesty, not bald assertions. Funny how Rogue produced evidence of how wrong you really are and you just ignored him and didn't admit that your bald assertions were wrong in any way because evidence doesn't matter to you. Only your assertions matter.

But anyway, if you really care, I don't at all "go looking for racism behind every tree." This is an instance of racism wearing a bright flashing neon suit, waving a giant sign that says "I'M RACIST" and jumping out into the open to anyone who's sufficiently educated on these issues. The black maid is named Mammy. "Mammy" is the name of an archetypal figure from minstrel shows, which, as I said, were created specifically to mock and lampoon black people. There is no question that minstrel shows and their mammy depiction are racist. It's pretty hard to claim that Tom and Jerry's use of a character named Mammy was unrelated to minstrel history. It gets even harder when you consider that the mammy in minstrel shows was generally depicted as obese and old, and Mammy in Tom and Jerry is obese and old. The creators clearly derived "Mammy" from the racist minstrel shows.

Bald assertions are not arguments sweety and screaming, "Oh yeah, they use the name Mammy so there!" is not an argument. You made the assertion, so go ahead, show from the actual producers or artist of the show that mammy was, in any way, linked to these archetype that you claim she was linked to or admit you can't and you're just hoping nobody calls you on this. Look at other cartoons of the era your majesty and you'll find women, both white and black, being depicted in a very similar way. Are you going to claim they are racist too? Oh, that's right, you can't admit you're wrong in any way. My bad.

I'll gladly accept an apology right about now.

Irony at it's finest. This coming from the same guy who ran away from another thread, when I proved him wrong, demands others admit to 'mistakes' he claims they made that he will not admit to himself. As soon as you show I was wrong or show you're capable of admitting to error, maybe I'll do it myself. Right now, all I see form your is hypocrisy and you getting the same attitude you deserve thrown back in your face. Act like an arrogant jack ass, you get treated like an arrogant jack ass. Turn about is fair play, don't you agree?

[Cerealman]

Why not ask some actual African-Americans about Tom and Jerry?

I never saw the show as racist.

[fm93]

I noticed that you didn't bother explaining how you somehow misread the post as "it's racist because it cuts off the upper body of the character."

And your majesty, where, in the entire series, do you see any sort of evidence that she is a 'archetype in minstrel shows' or did you just make that up, whole cloth, and hope your accusation sticks?

oh, good grief. Literally every appearance that she makes in the series is evidence that she's derived from the archetype in minstrel shows. Here's what the mammy figure looked like (you can find essentially the same thing if you type "mammy" into Google Images):


And here's what Mammy from Tom and Jerry looks like:


The Tom and Jerry character is clearly based off the minstrel archetype. Additionally, the mammy in minstrel shows spoke in heavy, stereotypically black "plantation dialect," and Mammy from Tom and Jerry does as well.

What's the problem, if you're allowed to make whatever assertions you want to make and call it good, why can't I make up whatever assertions I want and call it good? Turn about is fair play or is that only allowed when King Square Peg I does it, but nobody else is allowed to do it?

Well, as you've just seen, I make assertions based on truth. I absolutely don't make them up out of thin air.

Of course everybody 'misreads your post' your majesty because admitting you could be wrong is beyond your abilities to admit it. Do you know why I refer to you as a king? It is because you seem to see yourself as infallible and never admit to being wrong, so you act just like a king does when proved wrong.

I see that the pot has been introduced to the kettle.

I want evidence your majesty, not bald assertions.

Which I have provided.

Funny how Rogue produced evidence of how wrong you really are and you just ignored him and didn't admit that your bald assertions were wrong in any way because evidence doesn't matter to you.

Please show me where he did that.

Bald assertions are not arguments sweety and screaming, "Oh yeah, they use the name Mammy so there!" is not an argument.

Unfortunately for you, my argument was based on much more than merely "they both used the name 'Mammy.'" But even if that's all there was, it would still be odd to name a character after a clearly racist archetype.

Look at other cartoons of the era your majesty and you'll find women, both white and black, being depicted in a very similar way.

Bald assertions aren't an argument. Do you have any evidence that white women were also depicted like mammy figures? Because to my knowledge, cartoon white women from that era tended to be depicted like this:






They're quite different from the mammy archetype. They're depicted as slender and attractive, their skin tone isn't exaggerated, and they can take on far more roles than merely being in a house almost all the time. Furthermore, they generally speak in proper English rather than exaggerated plantation dialect.

Oh, that's right, you can't admit you're wrong in any way.

I certainly can admit that I'm wrong. It's just that, well, it doesn't make any sense to "admit that I'm wrong" unless I actually am wrong, and...that doesn't appear to be the case here. I have supported all my claims, whereas you haven't.

This coming from the same guy who ran away from another thread, when I proved him wrong

Please show me where this took place. After you egregiously thought my post was about "cutting off the upper body" when it clearly was not, I'm a bit skeptical about your ability to accurately summarize exchanges.

As soon as you show I was wrong or show you're capable of admitting to error, maybe I'll do it myself.

I've done that. So...when's that apology coming?

Right now, all I see form your is hypocrisy and you getting the same attitude you deserve thrown back in your face. Act like an arrogant jack ass, you get treated like an arrogant jack ass. Turn about is fair play, don't you agree?

Excuse me. You haughtily attacked me for an argument that isn't even remotely close to anything I said, condescendingly demanded evidence for Mammy being derivative of the mammy archetype when anyone who knows anything about Tom and Jerry and American media history can show that there's a clear link, and boldly claimed that women of all races were "depicted in a very similar manner," which you have yet to prove and to which there is much evidence to the contrary. So who, exactly, is the one acting like "an arrogant jackass" here?

[fm93]

I never saw the show as racist.

Neither did I. But if you know about minstrel shows and historical American media portrayals of African-Americans, then do you acknowledge that it does occasionally feature relics from a racist context?

[Jedidiah]

No one in this thread is whining and crying.

Except figuratively.

Some people on this forum apparently refuse to even acknowledge the possibility of racism existing today.

We all know racism is real today. No one questions that. Two points:

A whole lot of the racism we see today is against whites - refusal to recognize the black racial hatred and violence for what it is.

There is a whole lot of moaning and groaning about stuff that is insignificant if people would just deal with the real problems. The real problems have nothing to do with wringing hands about what happened in the past. Let's clean up the present on both sides of the street.




It's not a good thing. They didn't have to make her as thin as a runway model, but they also didn't need to make her obese. And since the discussion was about the mammy archetype, minstrel shows did tend to portray mammy figures as obese in order to de-sexualize black women.[/QUOTE]

[Jedidiah]

I never saw the show as racist.

Hey, you are altogether too sensible.

[Jedidiah]

Whatever happened to the dream of a color blind society.

[Epoetker]

Whatever happened to the dream of a color blind society.

Was never anything more than a daydream.

[lilpixieofterror]

I noticed that you didn't bother explaining how you somehow misread the post as "it's racist because it cuts off the upper body of the character."


oh, good grief. Literally every appearance that she makes in the series is evidence that she's derived from the archetype in minstrel shows. Here's what the mammy figure looked like (you can find essentially the same thing if you type "mammy" into Google Images):

Sorry your majesty, throwing out pictures and screaming racism at the top of your lungs does not make them true. Want to hear something I found that was interesting? The character is based on the actor Hattie McDaniel. You might remember seeing her in the movie Gone With the Wind playing the part of mammy. Who would of thought that 70 years later, modeling your character after the first black actor to win an academy award would make you a racist?

And here's what Mammy from Tom and Jerry looks like:

The Tom and Jerry character is clearly based off the minstrel archetype. Additionally, the mammy in minstrel shows spoke in heavy, stereotypically black "plantation dialect," and Mammy from Tom and Jerry does as well.

As I pointed out above you majesty, she is based upon the first black actor to win an academy award, where her most famous role was playing the part of mammy, which what do you know... was the character who was a black slave (for bonus points, wh. Tell me, did you bother to go and check and see who she was based on BEFORE you started screaming racism at the top of your lungs like a banshee? Of course not because you seriously believe the nonsense you post. Here, take a look at the famous role she played yourself:

Notice a resemblance? Of course not because screaming racist is all you're capable of doing because you can't think for yourself as you keep showing below.

Well, as you've just seen, I make assertions based on truth. I absolutely don't make them up out of thin air.

Yeah, you do make assertions based on your own fantasy world because it seems you didn't bother to go and check to see what the actual people who wrote Tom and Jerry based their characters on. See, as a bit of an artist in both drawing and writing myself, I understand that artist tend to base their work on somebody else. Considering that Tom and Jerry was written in the early 40's and Gone With the Wind was one of the most famous movies of the era. It isn't too far of a stretch to link the two together. Who would of thought that you'd be screamed at as being a racist by his royal highness, King Square Peg I, 70 years later? I wonder what King Square Peg IV will consider racist 70 years from now...

I see that the pot has been introduced to the kettle.

And this coming from the person who judges a women based on her looks and speech patterns and screams 'racist' at the top of his lungs when a cartoon character doesn't fit his ideal definition of not being a racist. You sure love to say stupid things and not even notice your own hypocrisy, eh?

Which I have provided.

If you mean that you proved you're an idiot that will scream racist at the top of his lungs without even bothering to get the facts first. Yeah, I guess you proved that his royal highness, King Square Peg I shouldn't be taken seriously. Who would of thought basing their character on a famous actor would earn them the label of racist by his majesty 70 years later? I wonder what King Square Peg IV will royally decree as being racist in 2084...

Please show me where he did that.

You can't read? It's ok, perhaps a 4 year old can teach you how to read. Does Tom and Jerry have racial stereotypes? Of course, I just don't think that the whole 'mammy' thing is among those things (from what I've remembered and discovered, the same exact character was introduced as a white women. Funny how an larger white women, with the same general character isn't racist, but a black one is, isn't it?). Who would of thought that basing your character on a famous actor would make you a racist in the eyes of 21st century race baters? Who have no real arguments to work from?

Unfortunately for you, my argument was based on much more than merely "they both used the name 'Mammy.'" But even if that's all there was, it would still be odd to name a character after a clearly racist archetype.

Which seems to be based upon idiot racist baters, such as yourself, who scream racist at the top of their lungs and don't even bother to gather the facts first. What I found amusing is how the wiki article on the character linked to an opinion piece on The Huffington Post. Yeah, as though an opinion piece is a great source of information. I guess when race baters don't have an actual argument to work off from, finding racism where none was ever intended or met is easier than you know... dealing with actual racial strife in the US.

Bald assertions aren't an argument. Do you have any evidence that white women were also depicted like mammy figures? Because to my knowledge, cartoon white women from that era tended to be depicted like this:

More unintended irony and stupidity, how about I help you out here?

Wonder Women - yeah a women who wears outfits that looked like she picked them out of a Victoria Secret catalog, who is depicted as being bound about every comic, by of course, men who do this to her. I could also point out her body type, thin with really big upper parts, with a really small overall figure. Yep, such a realistic and uplifting deception of women, eh? Well, at least she looks beautiful...

Betty Boop - yeah another one of those women who wears rather revealing clothing (at least for her time) who gets looks by men and seems to be often depicted as being rather ditzy and clueless as to what effect she is having on those men. Yep, another realistic and uplifting deception of women. Well, at least we know where his royal highness sits when it comes to an good artist depiction of women...

Lois Lane - while this one is depicted as quite the sex symbol as the other two are (well I guess you can pick some that are not, good job). Too bad she is depicted as getting herself into dangerous situations she can't get out of and needs a big strong man to save her from herself, eh? Yep, another great and uplifting depiction of women in the world eh? One who seems utterly helpless and always needs a big strong man to save her from the situation she finds herself in.

You sure show yourself as being well at spotting racism (real or imagined), but seem to ironically ignore the sexist symbols seen in many of these characters of the era. How very ironic and outright funny! And when I go back and look at pictures of Hattie McDaniel (who isn't a skinny women herself) what does this message tell us about his royal highness? Hummm, it appears sexism can be ignored, but racism has to be pointed out, no matter if it exist or is just a product of the imaginations of the race baters. Depicting women as skinny little things, with a small figure and rather large breast is okay in the mind of his majesty. Depicting them as being larger or older (even when the character they are based on is larger and older) is apparently wrong and racist, in the mind of his majesty. Thanks for a good chuckle at your expense. That was rather entertaining.

They're quite different from the mammy archetype. They're depicted as slender and attractive, their skin tone isn't exaggerated, and they can take on far more roles than merely being in a house almost all the time. Furthermore, they generally speak in proper English rather than exaggerated plantation dialect.

Yeah, quite a bit different, if you ignore the sexual stereotypes present in all of them. It appears overt sexism, a okay in the mind of his majesty, but a more realistic deception of women, not so much. As for shows her in the house? I guess you missed the fact that Tom and Jerry tends to take place in a neighborhood and is a cartoon aimed at children. Where the other characters you mention are cartoons often targeted at teen and older men. Who would of thought that a cartoon based upon a cartoon mouse and cat, doing things no normal cat or mouse does, doesn't accurately depict life as a whole. I guess though having a white women being shown as being stuck at home is ok in the mind of his royal highness, but is wrong when the said women is black, More intended sexism and irony there your majesty?

I certainly can admit that I'm wrong. It's just that, well, it doesn't make any sense to "admit that I'm wrong" unless I actually am wrong, and...that doesn't appear to be the case here. I have supported all my claims, whereas you haven't.

No you will not and I've seen plenty of situations where you seem to be wrong and totally clueless as to what you are actually saying. As you show above. Overt sexism = a okay in the mind of his majesty; hidden racism = wrong in the mind of his majesty. You are not very good at this, huh?

Please show me where this took place. After you egregiously thought my post was about "cutting off the upper body" when it clearly was not, I'm a bit skeptical about your ability to accurately summarize exchanges.

Sorry I don't keep track of the latest material of the race baters, such as this whole 'mammy stereotype' nonsense that seems to have worked you into a frothy rant. It shouldn't be that hard to find the exchange. Do you not remember your ranting about 'hidden racism' and pretending sociology experiments are absolute 100% hard scientific arguments that you can't refute? The thread is currently active. Just use your nose that you use for finding anything and everything related to racism and homosexuality on tWeb and find the thread for yourself. It should attract you like blood in the water attract sharks.

I've done that. So...when's that apology coming?

As soon as you admit that you are projecting sexist stereotypes, while attacking racist ones. Deal?

Excuse me. You haughtily attacked me for an argument that isn't even remotely close to anything I said, condescendingly demanded evidence for Mammy being derivative of the mammy archetype when anyone who knows anything about Tom and Jerry and American media history can show that there's a clear link, and boldly claimed that women of all races were "depicted in a very similar manner," which you have yet to prove and to which there is much evidence to the contrary. So who, exactly, is the one acting like "an arrogant jackass" here?

Like I said, I haven't kept track of the latest lunatic rantings of the race baters and what works them into a foaming rant. I wasn't aware that basing your character on a famous actor of the era would make you a racist. I'm sure the artist, directors, and produces of the era would have loved to have you around, so you could boldly call them racist and ignore their rational for picking a larger black women as one of their characters. Assume bigotry where none exist and pretend there could be no other possible answer. What a lovely way to proceed in life. Assume everybody, who dares to disagree with you, is a racist and assume it until proved otherwise. What makes it even funnier is how it seems you have no issue with depicting women as being sex objects, helpless, or have no issue with the same deceptions of white women, but get into a foamy rant when it is a black women instead. Your irony and hypocrisy, amuses me to no end. Keep it up your majesty.

[lilpixieofterror]

Whatever happened to the dream of a color blind society.

Race baters don't like it because they can't blame everything on racism.

[fm93]

I noticed that you still didn't explain how you got the idea that I was arguing about "cutting off the upper body." I'd really like to know how that misunderstanding happened.

Sorry your majesty, throwing out pictures and screaming racism at the top of your lungs does not make them true. Want to hear something I found that was interesting? The character is based on the actor Hattie McDaniel. You might remember seeing her in the movie Gone With the Wind playing the part of mammy. Who would of thought that 70 years later, modeling your character after the first black actor to win an academy award would make you a racist?

This is certainly an interesting response. "Gone With the Wind" has been criticized for whitewashing the reality of slavery in the South, and Hattie McDaniel was criticized by members of the black community for playing roles that pandered to stereotypes about black people. The film and actress aren't exactly sterling examples of anti-racism. So...I'm not sure how the fact that a black actress played a role that was considered by many black people to be demeaning to black people helps your position.

As I pointed out above you majesty, she is based upon the first black actor to win an academy award, where her most famous role was playing the part of mammy, which what do you know... was the character who was a black slave

Here's what seems to be your fundamental misunderstanding. One of the reasons the mammy archetype is considered racist is that it involved a false depiction of historical black maids and whitewashed reality. Black maids generally were not obese, old and deeply dark-skinned, but thin, young and lighter-skinned (as they weren't given much food, didn't have a particularly long life span, and were generally of mixed race).* And the portrayal of slaves as showing such subservience and loyalty to their white masters is a romanticized myth. So by depicting Hattie McDaniel's character in those false manners, the filmmakers were playing upon something from a racist context, and if Mammy from Tom and Jerry was based off the character from Gone With the Wind, then it, too, is ultimately based off something from a racist context. So my argument--that the Tom and Jerry character is based off a racist context--still stands.

*source is Maythee Rojas' "Women of Color and Feminism," page 35

Additionally, the fact that audiences enjoyed the character and gave McDaniel an award is not something positive for your position. Do you agree that racism was unfortunately pervasive in American society in the 1930s/40s? If so, then of course predominantly white audiences would enjoy a character who fulfilled false stereotypes in a context that made white people look good. It wasn't nearly as well-received by black audiences.

And this coming from the person who judges a women based on her looks and speech patterns and screams 'racist' at the top of his lungs when a cartoon character doesn't fit his ideal definition of not being a racist.

Of course I judge a character based on her looks and speech patterns when trying to determine whether her depiction is racist. How else would one possibly make that evaluation? What other criteria are there to consider? And my "ideal definition" of not being racist involves "not having clear allusions to a clearly racist archetype." Crazy, huh?

Who would of thought basing their character on a famous actor would earn them the label of racist by his majesty 70 years later?

Someone who realizes that the character played by the famous actress was itself racist, so that therefore a cartoon character based on that actress' character would by extension also be racist?

Does Tom and Jerry have racial stereotypes? Of course, I just don't think that the whole 'mammy' thing is among those things (from what I've remembered and discovered, the same exact character was introduced as a white women. Funny how an larger white women, with the same general character isn't racist, but a black one is, isn't it?

A white married woman who is young, slender and speaks proper English. Hardly "a larger white woman with the same general character."

(Go to 1:31 in the video.)

You sure show yourself as being well at spotting racism (real or imagined), but seem to ironically ignore the sexist symbols seen in many of these characters of the era.

Now you're reading things INTO my posts that aren't actually there. Nowhere did I ever say that the typical cartoon depiction of white women was a good thing. I agree that it tended to be sexist, as that era wasn't particularly great for women or racial minorities. Both types of media portrayals are wrong. However, your claim was that white women were depicted in essentially the same manner as Mammy, and my examples show that that simply isn't true. You still haven't provided evidence that cartoon white women were depicted in an unflattering manner that played upon racial stereotypes.

Sorry I don't keep track of the latest material of the race baters, such as this whole 'mammy stereotype' nonsense that seems to have worked you into a frothy rant.

A number of comments here:

1) "Latest?" The Tom and Jerry character has been recognized as racially insensitive for quite some time. That's why she was changed in later episodes. I'm not presenting a new paradigm here.

2) Please take a deep breath, step away from the laptop, take a nice, long, relaxing bath while humming your favorite music, and then re-read my posts and your responses with a refreshed mindset. I don't think my tone at all seems like a rant. Meanwhile, you've scattered quite a few smilies through your post (which are generally used to express action and energy, which are commonly associated with rants), have gone on tangents about sexism for at least four paragraphs (going on tangents is generally a sign of disjointed rambling, which is commonly associated with rants), and have frequently used sarcastic phrases and tones (also commonly associated with rants). If my posts qualify as "a foaming rant," then your posts have to count as such as well.

It shouldn't be that hard to find the exchange. Do you not remember your ranting about 'hidden racism' and pretending sociology experiments are absolute 100% hard scientific arguments that you can't refute? The thread is currently active.

I see. You were referring to the thread entitled "Texas rural Conservative racism - Calvin Beckett in the movie American Violet." I wrote a response to you that appeared on page 9, and your response to that didn't come until the bottom of page 13. The pages between those posts consisted of other users attacking shunyadragon and Epoetker making sporadic nonsensical interjections. I simply got bogged down reading all the other posts. I'll respond to it tomorrow.

As soon as you admit that you are projecting sexist stereotypes, while attacking racist ones. Deal?

But as I explained, I wasn't. I simply wanted to point out that the stereotypes of white women were different from those of black women, not that sexist stereotypes are okay.

[lilpixieofterror]

I noticed that you still didn't explain how you got the idea that I was arguing about "cutting off the upper body." I'd really like to know how that misunderstanding happened.

You were given an explanation your majesty. I don't keep up on the latest rantings of the race baters. I'll be sure to keep up with them next time I run across your frothy rantings, deal?

This is certainly an interesting response. "Gone With the Wind" has been criticized for whitewashing the reality of slavery in the South, and Hattie McDaniel was criticized by members of the black community for playing roles that pandered to stereotypes about black people. The film and actress aren't exactly sterling examples of anti-racism. So...I'm not sure how the fact that a black actress played a role that was considered by many black people to be demeaning to black people helps your position.

Your majesty, have you ever watched the movie Gone With the Wind or are you basing this opinion off from things you've read online vs stuff you've actually seen yourself? The slaves depicted on the movie or in the book are the slaves that generally had it much better than the slaves that worked on in the fields or even many of the freed slaves had it for many decades later, so it is naturally going to depict slaves that might not have been as angry about their situation as the ones picking cotton out on the fields might have been. Plus, it doesn't depict poor whites as being seen as much better than slaves. Many plantation owners saw themselves as superior to their black slaves or their poor white neighbors. These plantation owners are often pained as having an era of superiority over almost everybody around them and only really see other rich plantation owners as their equals. It doesn't paint them in nearly as good of a picture as you pretend it does your majesty. Anyway, it was a very popular book of the era and still ranks among one of the most popular movies of all times. Almost everybody, in that generation, watched the movie and even to this very day, it is considered of the classic of the early 20th century. Naturally, people who were alive and saw the movie for themselves, might base stuff off from the movie (sort of like what they do today). How many little girls do you think are going to be running around wearing Anna and Elsa costumes this year? Have you seen the new season of Once Upon a Time and who was introduced this season? Imagine that, a popular movie attracts people to copying characters from the movie and placing them into other media. Who would of thought?

Here's what seems to be your fundamental misunderstanding. One of the reasons the mammy archetype is considered racist is that it involved a false depiction of historical black maids and whitewashed reality.

Oh yeah because we all know that the media is based upon depicting people accurately, fairly, and even... Sorry your majesty, I couldn't keep a straight face because your ranting is so far from reality, I wonder what sort of fantasy world you've been living in for your entire life. Shoot, take a look at Disney movies. Isn't it funny how royalty is depicted as being so sweet, kind, nice, and your best buddies when the historical reality paints a way different picture? Many real life monarchs were brutal tyrants, who killed people who got in their way. I guess that wouldn't work as well for these nice and sweet princess and princes, to be shown ordering the execution of some political enemy, so they give a false deception of royalty and white wash history to make them seem far nicer than many of them really were. Welcome to the world of the media your majesty, since just about every movie, book, TV show, etc does very similar things (isn't it funny how a drinking song never mentions the day after the binge drinking?).

Black maids generally were not obese, old and deeply dark-skinned, but thin, young and lighter-skinned (as they weren't given much food, didn't have a particularly long life span, and were generally of mixed race).* And the portrayal of slaves as showing such subservience and loyalty to their white masters is a romanticized myth. So by depicting Hattie McDaniel's character in those false manners, the filmmakers were playing upon something from a racist context, and if Mammy from Tom and Jerry was based off the character from Gone With the Wind, then it, too, is ultimately based off something from a racist context. So my argument--that the Tom and Jerry character is based off a racist context--still stands.
*source is Maythee Rojas' "Women of Color and Feminism," page 35

Please your majesty, I could pick out white washed history and inaccurate deceptions from about every movie, which takes places in an historical time frame, that exist. The movie Braveheart is a great example of this, in action. The Butler is another good example of this too. As I pointed out above, Disney loves to paint monarchs as these nice and kind rulers. Who rule their subjects evenly and with great dignity and respect. Too bad though the point flew right over your little head. The point was (which you missed) is that they based their character from a famous movie of their time. Much like you might see happening to this very day. I see no racist intentions, just a cartoon show, making a nod to a famous movie of their era. Nothing more or nothing less.

Additionally, the fact that audiences enjoyed the character and gave McDaniel an award is not something positive for your position. Do you agree that racism was unfortunately pervasive in American society in the 1930s/40s? If so, then of course predominantly white audiences would enjoy a character who fulfilled false stereotypes in a context that made white people look good. It wasn't nearly as well-received by black audiences.

Yeah because I'm sure they enjoyed a black character, taking to a white girl like she was her mother or something. You are aware that not all white people enjoyed the character of mammy, right? You did go and read some of the stuff before you decided to rant and rave, right or did you go and read a quick review of the movie online and that was it? As for your question, of course it was, but here is the problem... you're ironically doing the very same thing you accuse them of doing. Do you have any evidence, what so ever, that the writers, artist, or produces of Tom and Jerry wrote their character to be making fun of black people vs being a subtle nod to a character of a famous movie they thought would make a funny addition to their cat and mouse? Assume evil intentions is the way you run, eh?

Of course I judge a character based on her looks and speech patterns when trying to determine whether her depiction is racist. How else would one possibly make that evaluation? What other criteria are there to consider? And my "ideal definition" of not being racist involves "not having clear allusions to a clearly racist archetype." Crazy, huh?

And of course, depicting white people, as being 'white trash' is a okay, as so long as the people in question are not said to be 'black, eh? Here is a scene from the Simpsons, with a stereotypical projection of this 'white trash' sort of people:

It's ok though to depict white people as being ignorant, inbred, drug smugglers though, but God forbid anybody make a projection of a black person, in the same way though, eh? Can you please explain how the above clip isn't racist or demeaning towards an entire group of people, but making a 'mammy archetype' is?

Someone who realizes that the character played by the famous actress was itself racist, so that therefore a cartoon character based on that actress' character would by extension also be racist?

Aww yes, because she doesn't act like a 'typical black person' so naturally... it must be racist to base any character off from her. Do tell, how should black people act or behave since you seem to be the ultimate authority on declaring who should be copied and who shouldn't be. Can you please let me know this your majesty so I can let other people know this?

A white married woman who is young, slender and speaks proper English. Hardly "a larger white woman with the same general character."

(Go to 1:31 in the video.)

Your majesty, you do know that the MGM version of Tom and Jerry isn't the only version that exist, right? You are aware that in the late 2000's, there was another version of Tom and Jerry made, which brought back the mammy two shoes character, but made her a white women vs a black woman. Don't believe me? Here is what I found:

In the modern Tom and Jerry Tales a redesigned Mammy has appeared, debuting in the short Ho, Ho Horrors and turning up again later on. Though keeping her buxom, overweight build, tough personality, Southern accent and tendency to call Tom "Thomas," Mammy's skin tone has changed to Caucasian, presumably to avoid any possible controversy. Several photos on a mantle in Ho, Ho Horrors also imply that Mammy now has a family (a man and a boy, also shown only as legs and partial torsos), though they have yet to appear in actual animation. In the short Power Tom the story casts Mammy as a superheroine called Power Gal, though it's only for this one cartoon.

In the new shorts, the now-Caucasian Mammy is explicitly called "Mrs. Two-Shoes".
http://tomandjerry.wikia.com/wiki/Mammy_Two_Shoes

So there we go, depicting a white women the same way. That fine, but don't make her a black women or else his royal highness, King Square Peg I will royally decree you're a racist and that you must really hate black people.

Now you're reading things INTO my posts that aren't actually there. Nowhere did I ever say that the typical cartoon depiction of white women was a good thing. I agree that it tended to be sexist, as that era wasn't particularly great for women or racial minorities. Both types of media portrayals are wrong. However, your claim was that white women were depicted in essentially the same manner as Mammy, and my examples show that that simply isn't true. You still haven't provided evidence that cartoon white women were depicted in an unflattering manner that played upon racial stereotypes.

I'm just doing what you do your majesty. Assume horrible intentions about people who dare disagree with you, project onto them some sort of flaw, and puff... you have King Square Peg I's 'argument'. What's the problem, your majesty, is that only ok when you do it, but nobody else can? In reality (this is the place that exist outside your ivory tower), I know the reasons why things are done this way. Comic books are mostly than, just as today, read by young men and what would they rather see on their comics. A good looking woman, who bares much of her body for them to state at or an 'average looking one' for them to stare at? Wonder Woman, Betty Boop, nor Lois Lane were written with women in mind your majesty. They were targeted at men for a reason. Are these writers and artist all sexist bigots, who hate women? Unlikely, they are just humans who are trying to make a living and trying to sell a product (that might say something about the men who buy these things though, but that is totally different argument for a different day). Likewise, Tom and Jerry is marketed to mainly children and it is designed to be funny for these children. Having somebody beat the stuffing out of Tom can be rather funny and thus the character is born. I somehow doubt they were trying to make a racist attack on black people, your majesty.

A number of comments here:

1) "Latest?" The Tom and Jerry character has been recognized as racially insensitive for quite some time. That's why she was changed in later episodes. I'm not presenting a new paradigm here.

You do know that Tom and Jerry did have a brief modern run, right your majesty?

2) Please take a deep breath, step away from the laptop, take a nice, long, relaxing bath while humming your favorite music, and then re-read my posts and your responses with a refreshed mindset. I don't think my tone at all seems like a rant. Meanwhile, you've scattered quite a few smilies through your post (which are generally used to express action and energy, which are commonly associated with rants), have gone on tangents about sexism for at least four paragraphs (going on tangents is generally a sign of disjointed rambling, which is commonly associated with rants), and have frequently used sarcastic phrases and tones (also commonly associated with rants). If my posts qualify as "a foaming rant," then your posts have to count as such as well.

Your majesty, I'm as relaxed as can be. I'm just giving you a taste of your own medicine and giving you a sample of how you often sound to others. Don't like it? I would suggest you take follow your above advice and take a breather yourself. I really doubt the writers of Tom and Jerry had any racist intentions when their made their character anymore than I doubt most of the artist or writers of DC comics were secret sexist, who went out of their way to dehumanize and humiliate women. They most likely saw her as kind of funny and though she'd make a pretty good human character for their show. The fact her character was copied and replaced with a white women in their latest incarnation, seems to show that she was actually a pretty darn funny character. Funny how something as subtle as making a character white instead of black magically gets the race baters off your back, eh?

I see. You were referring to the thread entitled "Texas rural Conservative racism - Calvin Beckett in the movie American Violet." I wrote a response to you that appeared on page 9, and your response to that didn't come until the bottom of page 13. The pages between those posts consisted of other users attacking shunyadragon and Epoetker making sporadic nonsensical interjections. I simply got bogged down reading all the other posts. I'll respond to it tomorrow.

Told you that you could use your nose and track it down in no time. You're like a blood hound tracking its quarry when it comes to finding a post about racism or homosexuality around here.

But as I explained, I wasn't. I simply wanted to point out that the stereotypes of white women were different from those of black women, not that sexist stereotypes are okay.

And my point made a loud woosh as it flew over your head, eh? That is often how you end up sounding to others. Perhaps you should work on fixing that.

[fm93]

You were given an explanation your majesty. I don't keep up on the latest rantings of the race baters. I'll be sure to keep up with them next time I run across your frothy rantings, deal?

That's not an explanation.

Your majesty, have you ever watched the movie Gone With the Wind or are you basing this opinion off from things you've read online vs stuff you've actually seen yourself? The slaves depicted on the movie or in the book are the slaves that generally had it much better than the slaves that worked on in the fields or even many of the freed slaves had it for many decades later, so it is naturally going to depict slaves that might not have been as angry about their situation as the ones picking cotton out on the fields might have been.

But...that's what critics mean when they say the film whitewashed the reality of slavery.

Oh yeah because we all know that the media is based upon depicting people accurately, fairly, and even... Sorry your majesty, I couldn't keep a straight face because your ranting is so far from reality, I wonder what sort of fantasy world you've been living in for your entire life. Shoot, take a look at Disney movies. Isn't it funny how royalty is depicted as being so sweet, kind, nice, and your best buddies when the historical reality paints a way different picture? Many real life monarchs were brutal tyrants, who killed people who got in their way. I guess that wouldn't work as well for these nice and sweet princess and princes, to be shown ordering the execution of some political enemy, so they give a false deception of royalty and white wash history to make them seem far nicer than many of them really were. Welcome to the world of the media your majesty, since just about every movie, book, TV show, etc does very similar things (isn't it funny how a drinking song never mentions the day after the binge drinking?).

I explained earlier in the thread that the false depiction was done for self-serving reasons to make the white slaveowners look good. The reality is that slaveowners sexually exploited female slaves, and to whitewash that reality, mammy characters in shows were desexualized and depicted as ugly and deeply loyal to the white families. There's a difference between that and simply having inaccurate depictions in movies like Braveheart.

Do you have any evidence, what so ever, that the writers, artist, or produces of Tom and Jerry wrote their character to be making fun of black people vs being a subtle nod to a character of a famous movie they thought would make a funny addition to their cat and mouse? Assume evil intentions is the way you run, eh?

I didn't say anything about evil intentions. I don't think Hanna and Barbera actively hated black people. But they did use a character that was ultimately derived from racist minstrel shows (by extension of Mammy from GWTW being based off the mammy archetype, and hence they used racist elements in Tom and Jerry. Having racist elements isn't the same thing as having evil racist intentions.

And of course, depicting white people, as being 'white trash' is a okay, as so long as the people in question are not said to be 'black, eh? Here is a scene from the Simpsons, with a stereotypical projection of this 'white trash' sort of people:

This is irrelevant, as I never made any comment on whether it was okay. Whether it is or isn't doesn't affect whether the depiction of black women in mammy archetypes is acceptable.

Aww yes, because she doesn't act like a 'typical black person' so naturally... it must be racist to base any character off from her.

No, the argument is that she acts similarly to how a racist caricature acted, and hence it is a racist element.

Your majesty, you do know that the MGM version of Tom and Jerry isn't the only version that exist, right? You are aware that in the late 2000's, there was another version of Tom and Jerry made, which brought back the mammy two shoes character, but made her a white women vs a black woman.

I don't see how a different version made 60 years later is relevant to racial attitudes in the 1940s and 50s.

The fact her character was copied and replaced with a white women in their latest incarnation, seems to show that she was actually a pretty darn funny character. Funny how something as subtle as making a character white instead of black magically gets the race baters off your back, eh?

It seems logical rather than amazing that portraying a character in a manner that doesn't reflect racial stereotypes isn't considered racist. But oh well.

And my point made a loud woosh as it flew over your head, eh? That is often how you end up sounding to others. Perhaps you should work on fixing that.

I wonder if you know how you seem to others, frequently saying "my point went woosh over your head" but rarely ever clarifying your point, and describing posts written in a calm tone as a foaming rant. Paprika evidently noticed that something was amiss with your characterizations.