"I try to treat everyone equally": Except When It Comes to Miscegination

I had to re-read this article from The Guardian a few times to make sure I wasn't missing something.

A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage licence to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have.

Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa parish, said it was his experience that most interracial marriages did not last long.

"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way," Bardwell said. "I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."

Bardwell said he asked everyone who called about marriage if they were a mixed race couple. If they were, he did not marry them.

[...]

"There is a problem with both groups accepting a child from such a marriage. I think those children suffer and I won't help put them through it."

If he did an interracial marriage for one couple, he must do the same for all, he said.

"I try to treat everyone equally."

First, how ironic is it for Bardwell to say he "treat(s) everyone equally." How can he possibly make such a statement after he clearly rejects some couples and accepts others according to their racial composition?

But the most interesting aspects of this article are how Bardwell justifies his actions, first through his so-called evidence of non-racist attitudes and behaviors by befriending African Americans and letting them "use (his) bathroom." And then through his anecdotal "evidence" that African American and Caucasian families don't treat mixed race children well.

Bardwell is using his power to further essentialize racial differences and divisions in society. He is literally influencing peoples' behaviors without their consent by forcing them to seek marriage elsewhere and cope with the emotions of knowing those in power still generalize socially constructed groups' behaviors (e.g., African American and Caucasian families won't treat mixed-race children fairly).

Next, let's return to the issue of "prooving" one's lack of racism by having friends from the racialized group being discriminated against. The is the exact same argument Boston police officer Justin Barrett used after writing in an e-mail that Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. was a "banana eating jungle monkey" -- he's not racist because he has black friends even though he writes glaringly racist statements.

Having African American friends, even marring a minority spouse in itself, proves nothing of one's supposed lack of racism. Men from majority groups frequently marry minority women specifically so they can control them. People frequently, often times unconsciously, befriend minorities based on racial stereotypes (e.g., I play basketball all the time with my black friends).

Let's not forget the grotesque case of police brutality enacted upon Haitian immigrant, Abner Louima, by four white New York police officers back in 1997. Two of the officers had intimate relationships with African American women -- Justin Volpe (who inflicted the most severe damage on Louima) and Thomas Wiese. From a 1999 article in the World Socialist Web Site before the trial was to begin:

One of the arguments that will be made by the defense in the Louima case is that branding the cops involved as racists is contradicted by the facts of their personal lives. One of the officers, Wiese, is married to an African-American woman and is the stepfather of her son. Another, Volpe, is engaged to a black woman.

As Bijan Bayne of TheRoot.com accurately notes, racism exists along a continuum of severity, and simply because one holds espoused positive relationships with members of minority groups does not mean attitudes and acts of racism automatically dissipate. If Bardwell does not want to be labeled a racist, then he needs to do more than have African American friends over for dinner and allow them to use his bathroom. He needs to stop essentializing his attitudes about African American and Caucasian communities and stop using his position of power to steer interethnic couples away from forging their relationships.

Approaches to anti-miscegenation take new twists, turns, and justifications...

Commodified Labor in Mixed Martial Arts

About a week ago, MMAFanhouse and other websites reported that former Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) fighter, Junie Browning had been arrested for assault after being taken to the hospital for over doing it on anti-anxiety pills. Read below:

Junie Browning, whose antics on the UFC reality show The Ultimate Fighter made him one of the bad boys of mixed martial arts, was reportedly arrested in Nevada and charged with assaulting three nurses who were treating him for a drug overdose.

Lawrence Mower of the Las Vegas Review-Journal reports that the 24-year-old Browning was at the hospital because he "took 16 pills of Klonopin, an anti-anxiety drug, in an attempt to harm himself." Citing the arrest report, the Review-Journal reports that Browning is accused of pushing a female nurse, punching a male nurse and kicking another male nurse, and yelling, "Do you know who I am? I will kill you and rape your family."

Browning was portrayed on The Ultimate Fighter in 2008 as a drunken lout who picked fights outside the Octagon, and the UFC and Spike TV were criticized in some circles for tolerating his antics. But Browning has said since then that he has changed his ways and devoted himself completely to his training.

In two UFC fights since leaving The Ultimate Fighter house, Browning has gone 1-1. His last fight was a loss to Cole Miller on April 1, and he did not have another fight scheduled.

Update: According to Yahoo! Sports' Kevin Iole, the UFC has decided to release Browning following the incident.

This is an excellent example of worker expendability in a corporation with little (if any) protection for workers. Junie Browning, as MMAFanhouse says, was The Ultimate Fighter reality show, season 8 bad boy. Out of anger and in non-competition environments, he tried to throw a contestant in a pool, he got in the face of another contestant immediately after that contestant had finished competing, he consumed immense amounts of alcohol, and he threw a glass at another contestant that shattered. Despite multiple warnings from the UFC’s President, Browning was never kicked off the show. Perhaps his controversial persona was too valuable for the show’s ratings.

Instead, after the glass throwing incident, Browning was given the opportunity to fight, with the caveat that if he lost, he’d have to leave. He lost and left. Of greater importance, MMA was turned into an institution of criminal justice, used to solve non-sporting violence. I cannot think of another sport, mainstream or otherwise, that would define itself in such a way. But in the world of MMA, Browning appeared to be a valuable commodity to the UFC -- he was loud, controversial, and would inflate ratings.

Browning of course had agency as a contestant and subsequent employee. He used The Ultimate Fighter and UFC to build a controversial personality, to brand himself an extreme bad boy that would sell tickets and reap the ensuing rewards. But the power differential between employer and employee was too great. In the end, what the UFC got out of Browning was far more than what he got out of the company. According to the SPIKE website, UFC President, Dana White, framed his lenience with Browning as a constructive opportunity for someone with problems.

“Obviously, I’m very disappointed,” White said. “I haven’t heard anything regarding Junie where he’s acted up or been bad in a long time. You could tell on the show he had issues. I saw (fighting) as an opportunity for the kid to turn his life around and make something of himself…”

“He was given an amazing opportunity, but he has some serious issues that are beyond me and what I can do. I’m there for guys and I realize nobody is perfect and guys are going to get into trouble. When that happens, I want to try to help and do something for them. But he needs more help than I can give him. I did what I could for him.”

But is opportunity through fight sport the best way to help an individual who may have serious mental health problems? As also stated on the official SPIKE website:

It was beginning to look like Junie might have just been a victim of the stressful and bizarre environment of The Ultimate Fighter house, but this news sadly reveals that Browning really does have mental/emotional problems that require serious attention.

As an athlete with pedestrian skills in the UFC, Browning’s controversial personality could only sell so many tickets. With the social structure of MMA unable to constructively address Browning’s mental health concerns, he has clearly fallen into personally unhealthy and socially criminogenic behaviors, thereby minimizing his usefulness to the UFC and rendering him a company threat. If the UFC truly wanted to help him, couldn’t he have been given a health plan that offered (and perhaps mandated) some kind of mental health assessment and therapy? Instead, Browning was essentially turned into commodified labor.

Whether intended or not, the company got what they could out of this emotionally unstable employee -- higher ratings for a minimal time period. From the UFC and MMA structure (or lack there of), Browning’s mental health problems appear to have escalated; he now faces serious criminal charges, and appears to have been a threat to the community. Any question as to who came out where in this business with virtually no worker solidarity or protection?

(Photo courtesy of MMAFanhouse.com)

Commodifying and Controlling Love in the Global Economy

From a story linked up on AsiaOne.com -- “Get an Aussie hubby for $10K.” The story explains how high-income, professional women from Singapore can dish out a fee to have access to men from Australia looking for marriage.

When most marriage consultants are helping men to find foreign brides, one company in Singapore has come out with a blue ocean strategy, only for women.

In view of the rising number of unmarried women in the republic, the company has an ideal package to offer.

The company is matching up its clients with Australian lifetime partner and is charging a fee of S$10,000 (RM24,540) for each successful match.

The men, aged between 30 and 60, and mostly from Brisbane.

“So far, we have paired up about 30 couples,” he said, adding some of the men they introduced were professionals such as lawyers and engineers.

Most of the local clients were career women aged between 20 and 50.

“We also have Chinese women who are working here as well as single mothers who are accompanying their children studying here,” he said.

He said Singaporean women had high expectations of their prospective husbands. They wanted men with a stable income and to look decent.

A few comments. First, this represents the theoretical position of “co-option,” where a smaller number of women are able to utilize the same types of leverage as men in constructing gendered relationships. In short, some women enter the men’s world but must play by the same rules. Thus, the gendered relationships don’t exactly shift since the structure remains the same.

However, this story also has a few twists that illustrate further male privilege in the global marital building business. Even when higher-income women use men’s tactics to purchase access to potential marriages from overseas, these Singaporean and Chinese women appear to be pursuing men who will advance their collective economic advantages. Thus, the women and men are on equal footing economically and likely educationally.

This is drastically different from western men who purchase access to meeting women for potential marriage from lower-income countries. As documented in the Asian American Studies literature, western men frequently marry women from low-income countries who are disempowered once in their new “home,” lacking adequate language and educational skills, and virtually no social-networking connections that would help these women know where to turn if being abused.

Thus, when men are in essence purchasing poor, foreign women for marriage, there tends to be a more deliberate effort to perpetuate race and gender power imbalances. In these cases, the globally constructed marriage is on far less equal footing.

Then another story from Southeast Asia, covering a stepfather who chained his stepdaughter as a prisoner because he did not approve of her boyfriend. From AsiaOneNews:

KUCHING, MALAYSIA: A 20-year-old woman has lodged a police report against her stepfather for keeping her in chains in the house.

The girl claimed that her stepfather, a foreign national, and her mother took her away from the boyfriend's house at Kampung Rampangi in Santubong and forced her to return to their home in Bandar Baru Semariang on Friday night.

The couple then shackled her legs with chains to prevent her from leaving the house. He secured the chains with a padlock.

The ever-growing inter-cultural relationships that emerge with globalization are clearly ridden with power inequalities, influenced by patriarchy manifesting across stratified countries, class groups, and within families.

[Photo courtesy of AsiaOneNews.com].

Selling Disrimination: "He Is Gay -->"

President Obama appears to be taking a more overt and strong stance against the U.S. military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. From The Independent:

"I will end 'don't ask-don't tell'," Mr Obama said to a standing ovation from the crowd of about 3,000 at the annual dinner of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay civil rights advocacy group.

The law was passed by Congress in 1993 and signed by President Bill Clinton, who also promised to repeal the ban on homosexuals in the military but was blunted by opposition in the military and Congress.

Mr Obama said he's working with Pentagon and congressional leaders on ending the policy.

"We should not be punishing patriotic Americans who have stepped forward to serve the country," Mr Obama said. "We should be celebrating their willingness to step forward and show such courage ... especially when we are fighting two wars."

So the wheels might be in motion to end an obvious example of institutionalized discrimination (for a great interview on this topic, click HERE).

Yet on a broader cultural level, the casual nature of discriminating against the LGBTQI community remains pervasive to say the least. I saw the shirt pictured here advertised in a store window yesterday in Honolulu.


The shirt saying, "He is gay -->" is reminiscent of a shirt widely sold from the past which said, "I'm with stupid -->." Just as it is perfectly acceptable in many schools, families, and peer groups for children and adolescents to say, "That's so gay" as an insult, here we have another glaring symbol illustrating how acceptable it is in our society to discriminate based on sexuality.

And of course nobody seems to care that suicide attempts and ideation among gay/bisexual men are off the charts relative to the heterosexual population. What's more important? -- Utilizing whatever strategy works to boost sales in the global marketplace, even when those strategies rely on obvious forms of discrimination.

Selling Fitness Lifestyles and Beauty Standards

So I enjoy challenging myself physically through different workouts. Much of the time I'll view what I know is a very difficult workout as an opponent that I will eventually "defeat." Definitely a blessing and a curse, but if I feel a workout augments my running, I'll at least give it a shot.

In any case, one cannot help but notice how the fitness industry is not so much about physical and mental health as it is about physical appearance. Yes, stating the obvious. A few times a week I've been doing this workout called "Insanity," and I have to admit, I love it. It's not the most difficult workout I've ever done, but it's certainly up there (although admittedly they say you're supposed to do it six days/week, and I stick to only two).



I learned the "Insanity" crew is part of a larger fitness corporation called "BeachBody," which sells other workouts put on DVD (P90X, Hip Hop Abs), nutritional supplements, workout attire, and they even have their own social networking system. They're not simply selling a product, but a lifestyle and community that encourages ongoing spending and selling of multiple fitness products.

A central dimension of that lifestyle is pursuing the fountain of youth. But again, this youthful pursuit does not seem to revolve around staying physically fit as a means to lower cholestorol, lower blood pressure, prevent diabetes, and so forth. The fitness pursuit seems ultimately about reaching a socially constructed aesthetic ideal where one turns heads at the beach.

Hence, the standards of beauty for women as portrayed through this industry are not the tall, gaunt models, but instead the ripped fitness instructors with rock hard abs, thighs and triceps for everyone to see; the same goes for men. By setting the aesthetic standards so high, the public must keep working out and purchasing the fitness lifestyle. All the while, consumers continue to age away from the unatainable standard, thereby requiring an even stronger pursuit, ostensibly achieved by purchasing more products.

In the following video describing "Insanity," there is little (if any) mention of physical or mental fitness, unless that ultimately leads to looking fit. Starting at 4:18:

"…because Insanity is going to test your limits physically and mentally. You see Insanity is probably the hardest workout ever put on DVD. But if you can stick with it for 60 days, you’ll end up with the hardest body you’ve ever had."

In the realm of popular culture, it is critical to keep tabs on how beauty standards are shifting and coinciding with capitalist ventures. How will this industry spread to other countries in East Asia, Southeast Asia, South America, and other global markets? For men, these beauty standards are not terribly new. However, the ultra-toned, athletic look is definitely emerging and spreading as a new standard for the average female consumer.

But will the pursuit for that look truly be healthy, or eventually ridden with laxatives, supplemental muscle mass products, bulimia, depression, credit card debt, etc.? Genetically, we're all very unique, and no matter how hard some people work and discipline their diet, some simply cannot look like those in the video, nor should anyone feel pressured to do so. Fitness should be about health, not vanity.

On Sexual Deviance and Masculinity

Interesting how sexual deviance is defined differently within and between cultures.

In the United States, infidelity by the likes of former President Bill Clinton, “Late Night” host David Letterman, and South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford leads to enforced sanctions manifesting in the form of public shaming.

However, official sanctions imposed upon these high profile, powerful men have nothing to do with their infidelity. For example, in Sanford’s case, possible sanctions revolve around leaving his post as governor, not gallivanting through Argentina with his mistress. In the end, sexuality in these cases is relegated to a private matter where state meddling is negated. And in the case of Letterman, it appears that getting busted for infidelity has increased his “Late Night” show ratings. Not surprising when we consider the social rewards men often receive for being sexual studs.



Not that any high profile married women are being publicized as cheaters (in all likelihood there simply are fewer), but we all know what would likely happen if the tables were turned. Discussions would burst, criticizing the woman’s excessive promiscuity and potential to break up the family. For the afore mentioned men, the former topic was explored moderately in the media; not so much the latter.

Moving over to Saudi Arabia, the official state sanctions imposed upon a male for boasting of his sexual exploits on television appear particularly harsh by American standards. From a story in The Guardian:

A Saudi man who boasted about his sexual exploits on television has been sentenced to five years in prison and 1,000 lashes — drawing worldwide attention to the conservative kingdom's highly repressive laws on personal morality.

Mazen Abdel-Jawad, a podgy 32-year-old with receding hair, was convicted of "publicising vice and confessing to crimes on a satellite television channel" for describing his conquests on LBC TV's Bold Red Line talkshow. He bragged that he first had sex at the age of 14.

Abdel-Jawad was also told by a criminal court in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia's second city, that he would not be allowed to travel abroad for five years after his release. His lawyer said he would appeal against the sentence

[…]

Many ordinary citizens reportedly filed petitions with the authorities after the programme was broadcast in mid-July, demanding that Abdul-Jawad be punished, even executed for "moral corruption".

While Clinton, Letterman, and Sanford did not necessarily boast of their extra-marital affairs (at least not publicly), the tendency of men to do so as means of bolstering their masculinity is clearly global. For Abdel-Jawad, because sexual promiscuity is defined differently (i.e., deviance) in Saudi Arabia, the official state sanctions levied upon him coincide with the culture’s values and norms.

I wonder, what would the sanctions have been had Abdel-Jawad been female? Or we could turn to another country, Iran (or "somewhere in the Middle East"), to see how infidelity by women is handled and depicted in film (see here for a description of Stoning of Soraya.

The 1965 Immigration Act Isn’t Supposed to Work Like This

Thinking back to those old school days of Asian American Studies, I just don’t recall the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 being intended to operate this way. From an article in the USA Today:

Unions representing teachers in Louisiana have filed a complaint with state authorities alleging that a Los Angeles recruiting firm broke the law by holding more than 350 Filipino teachers in "virtual servitude" in order to hold onto their jobs in five Louisiana parish school systems, including New Orleans' Recovery School District.

The complaint, filed Wednesday by the Louisiana Federation of Teachers and its parent organization, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), alleges that Universal Placement International charged Filipino nationals about $15,000 apiece to get jobs — more than 40% of some new teachers' salaries in a few Louisiana parishes — and required that they pay 10% of their monthly salary for two years to keep them.

[…]

"This is the kind of exploitation that we have read (about) in history books and taught our students — the fact that teachers would be subject to it in the United States in the 21st century is just totally and completely immoral," says AFT President Randi Weingarten. She notes that the allegations still have to be investigated, but says that, if true, it'd be "mind-blowing that a recruiter could actually get away with this. Even if it was an isolated incident, it would be horrible, but my hunch right now is that it's not isolated."

In Louisiana, many of the Filipino teachers told union investigators that they were required to rent housing provided by Universal, which sublet apartments at a profit. The complaint also alleges that Universal threatened to "take them back to the airport for a return flight to the Philippines" if teachers questioned the contract terms.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 shifted Asian American communities’ demographics tremendously. The act increased immigration by easing back on prior restrictions. Current immigrants present in the United States could use the family reunification clause to bring over relatives. A greater percentage of political refugees would be admitted. And potential immigrants with particular job skills lacking in the United States were given preference.

It is through this latter clause that we still see teachers and nurses from foreign countries (including the Philippines) migrate to the United States in higher numbers. Unfortunately, this story also shows that time doesn’t necessarily change occupational exploitation. Should these allegations be true, it appears the open and overt contract labor injustices (extortion through stolen wages, threats of heavy debt, deportation back to the Philippines, and actively exploiting populations from poor countries) from 19th and 20th century United States just aren’t dying out.

Also listen to this NPR podcast on the story HERE.