2.1 The alledged 'racist' picture and what followed
Going into the next controversey on the list I want to say this. I make no reservations that what I am about to write here will be like walking through a minefield, AND IF ANYONE IS OFFENDED I WISH TO APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE. Race relations and racism is a touchy subject. Especially in today's world. And while I will try to be objective about this even though there were some things about this I found....upsetting. I found it upsetting to the point where I will probably not be able to hide my anger at times. So word of warning, I will not go out of my way to hurt anybody here, but I will pull no punches either.
Around February of 2009 a picture with Miley, and other individuals, was leaked onto the net. In it it had most of the adults stretching their eyelids in an apparent slant eyed gesture, while one of Asian descent looked at the camera with a wide eyed gesture. This picture caught the attention of George Wu, chairman of an organization called the OCA, who deemed the photograph 'racially offensive' and demanded Miley apologize for the picture.
No one else in the picture had to apologize, just Miley.
One guy, who happened to be chairman of an organization designed to promote awareness among Asian Americans (an admirable goal). One guy who singled out a sixteen year old girl in a crowd of mature adults....allegedly. With the exception of the one of Asian descent who looked wide eyed, and Justin Gaston Miley's boyfriend at the time, who was singled out by others. One guy who had an office, an organization, perhaps even a community, behind him. One guy who went to the media to state his case. A media that seems hungry for scandal.
But one guy nonetheless.
Now I know what you might be saying here. "But he's a chairman of an organization. An organization that is meant to promote awareness among people about a nationality and ethnicity". True, but there are cases where to maintain the integrity of the office that person holds it is necessary to separate the office of chairman from current occupant of the office at the moment. So if the power of the office is misused,or used in a questionable manner, a new occupant can come in and maintain the integrity of the office if need be.
However there seemed to be people that agreed with the assessment of the occupant apparently. A woman believed him enough to sue Miley for what seemed to be every cent she had. Reports differ on the amount that ranged from $5 million to $1 billion...to $5 billion. Regardless it seemed like a taking to the cleaners. The woman, Lucie Kim, said it was for the members of the Pacific Asian Community who were scarred by Miley's actions. Another believed George Wu to the point where she called Miley a 'disgrace'. A shock comedianne named Margaret Cho.
Suing a teenaged girl? Calling a teenaged girl 'a disgrace? I probably shouldn't say this as it might make me sound preachy and/or sanctimonious, but I will anyway--Doesn't this seem a bit...I don't know...LOW to anyone?
For one thing Miley was under age, and under parental authority still. If anyone had a concern it should have been directed towards her parents Billy Ray and Tish. Until she turned 18, they were responsible for Miley's actions and upbringing. Another thing I want to emphasize is that Lucie Kim was looking to sue Miley under corporate law. It makes me wonder if it helped not to see Miley as a girl growing up, but rather a heartless corporation. Or just a name that meant money.
And Miley did apologize. Twice, and a few times more after that I think, but the first one didn't seem good enough for the media or George Wu. She said she was not making fun of an ethnicity. That all she did was make a funny face and everyone was getting all bent out of shape. She also criticized the media saying that now that Brittney was back on the top of her game that they were looking for someone to be the new 'bad' girl.
I could see her point, but the media couldn't as they labelled her apology 'bratty' and Wu 'questioned her sincerity'. To that end Miley apologized again. The second apology was accepted. I take a look at some so called 'humor' on YouTube, and I can see how she might come to that conclusion as she has been a frequent user posting videos there. Also a lot of that apparent 'humor' from some posters tends to come off as....borderline obnoxious to some. If not mean spirited.
Meanwhile people were taking Wu's 'racially offensive gesture' accusation and used it to accuse Miley of being an actual racist. That she actually hated the Asian American community, and that because of the gesture the Asian American community hated her in return. Add to that the haters already out there on the web that apparently thought they now had a righteous reason for their hate. "Well they say Miley's a racist. That makes hating her okay right?"
But was the picture 'racist?' Was the picture done to make fun of the Asian community (which I doubt it was)? I doubt anyone in that photo would be that....brazen. Whose idea was it to take the picture? What was the actual intent? Obviously I don't think what happened with the media was what was intended.
Before I attempt to give possible answers for those questions I want to point out Lucie Kim's lawsuit. A lawsuit that seemed to be done on behalf of the Pacific Asian Community. To which if Kim won those offended will get $5,000 out of damages. Miley apparently was supposed to pay all of Kim's legal fees as well, which last I checked were approaching $20,000 or so.
I guess the first question to ask is 'Who elected Lucie Kim to represent the Pacific Asian American community'? Did anyone appoint her? Did only a few appoint her to be a 'chosen champion' against the apparent racism of a sixteen year old? Or was the position a self appointment? Did Kim elect herself to represent? And say for sake of argument that Kim won. What if people didn't want Miley's money should she have won? Would it have been forced on people to go along in compliance? Or would Kim have kept it for herself giving her a bigger pay day? It's probably a good thing these questions are left unanswered.
And if her actions, to quote and paraphrase Captain Xantor of the Space:1999 episode 'Earthbound', "were done out of ignorance and not malice why require judicial revenge?" Especially since the haters seemingly have acted completely out of malice yet no one punishes them.
Whoopi Goldberg mentioned in a CNN interview with Campbell Brown that "Even if an actor makes a million dollars that the actor doesn't always see a million dollars. Half would go to taxes, some would go to publicists, some their agents to the point where at the end of the day you are lucky to receive four cents."
I also want to point out another something about 'slant eyes'. Not everyone of Asian descent has them. That is a misconception that is apparently promoted in some areas. But the apparent belief that people of Asian Descent have slanted eyes is as big a misconception that only the guy in the red shirt dies in the classic Star Trek.
2.2 Misconceptions and double standards
In Star Trek there is a fan 'myth' that when someone wearing a red shirt goes down to a planet with Captain Kirk they wind up dead. This myth is designed to promote 'expendability among characters'. But that is not always the case. Sure there are a few crewmen in red shirts that get blasted. But there were others in blue and gold shirts that died too. There were also some women in blue and red skirts that died too. In the Trek episode 'By Any Other Name' a Yeoman was turned into a cube and...forced to 'take a powder'. I know, bad joke.
In retrospect however, the concept of race has more importance than the fictional concept of 'expendability'. Race has been part of our identities as has upbringing. And by no means do I mean to downplay the concerns people have about race. The above comparison was done to only point out a misconception and compare it to another misconception. A misconception that can be taken to the point of believability if promoted enough.
So what other explanations are there for 'slant eyes'? One possibility is that they were demonstrating eyeliner. Showing off their eyeliner applications as one article mentioned Joe Jonas doing when he was caught doing that same gesture. Another possibility, and one that I think is more closer to the bullseye, is that the supposed 'humor' was meant to be 'self depreciating'. They were going about saying "Take a look at us. We're being stupid." Believe it or not, there are people that do that. Let their guard down and just do something dumb in order to let off steam. Unfortunately that was not the conclusion George Wu reached. And that was not the conclusion the media promoted. At least not until Joe Jonas was caught doing the same gesture, and he seemed to be given the benefit of the doubt as well as an alternative meaning.
It was reported that he was possibly doing something with eyeliner.
Sure there was a slight mention of 'racist' overtones. But the coverage seemed more kind to him than it did to Miley. Plus, no groups were on his case, or chairmen of groups were on his case. No one suing him. No shock commediannes calling him 'a disgrace', or others that I knew of. Is this a double standard here? Who do we condone? Who do we condemn?
Recently Taylor Swift got caught in a shot that prompted a similar acusation. She stood next to a fan that had a swastika painted on his shirt, and Swift stood next to him as she wore a 'JH' necklace. Someone took that as meaning 'jew hater' as that was what the story indicated. The fan in question said his shirt just had an 'X' painted on it until someone decided to butcher it.
Not many people ran with Taylor's story, or Joe's for that matter. Everyone seemed to go hog wild when it came to Miley though.
I also want to point out Tyra Banks as she was reported wanting to do something that explored different races on 'America's Next Top Model'. She wanted to do her models with different racial tones and do poses that reflected different ethnicities from across the globe. Someone mentioned if this was not a racist practice. A political cartoon in the New York Times I think showed a gorilla representing President Obama's health care plan and Republicans trying to stop it. The use of a gorilla (to some a symbol of power and strength) was seen as 'racist' and an apology was demanded as well.
It does make me wonder if 'racist' is not the big 'power accusation' of the current time. Like 'witch' was during the Salem Witch Trials. Or 'communists' was during the era of McCarthy.
2.3 Subjective humor
I remember Eddie Murphy's comedy video called 'Delerious'. In it he did some ethnic humor. Or rather he did a take on ethnic humor and the reactions to it. He portrayed an individual of an Oriental nationality and then portrayed another individual that was mocking him. Murphy's bit then featured counter mocks as if to dilute the impression that he was being derogatory to one specific nationality. From my perception, it was a case on discrimination and reverse discrimination. But humor can be a subjective thing. And racial humor can be a powder keg.
In his own joke books Milton Berle wrote several racial jokes however he also made note that racial humor needed to be used sparingly, and sometimes the situation did not always warrant the use of racial humor. Nowadays I'd say there are few, if any, situations that warrant it. Humor is also a very subjective thing. And sometimes the bit meant to dilute the least offensive bits can be overlooked. One example is William Shatner's 'Get a life' speech that he did for Saturday Night Live.
In the skit he performed in he played himself giving a speech at a Star Trek convention that played off of stereotypes of Star Trek fans. That they were people that couldn't face reality, never kissed a girl, and lived in their parents' basement. Stereotypes that aren't true for the most part, but fans took offense to that. The part at the end of the skit, where Shatner was getting into a fight with convention officials and gave an apology at the end, woefully were overlooked. All fans caught onto was Shatner saying "Get a life". and be offended by it. Even when a second Star Trek skit where Shatner's Kirk was in charge of an revolving Enterprise that was turned into a hotel by the Mariott corporation appeared, "Get a life" was still the big focus.
And perhaps the wide eyed gesture by Miley's Asian friend in the 'humorous' photo was meant to dilute any racial offense, to balance the scales so to speak. Sadly, for Miley, it didn't work out that way. And she was the one who wound up paying the price. And all it did was empower malicious haters, apparent opportunists, and save the media from a slow news day. I guess George Wu diluted the diluter. Which can happen.
I should probably also make mention of a comedian named 'Jamie Foxx' and some remarks he made on his show 'The Foxxhole' On his show he made mention of how Miley "Needed to get a sexually transmitted disease from her bicycle seat, have a lesbian relationship, do heroin, make a sex tape and grow up." Remarks that offended Billy Ray, for which Jamie had to apologize. And did, as he realized that sometimes as comedians they tend to go too far.
And the reason why he went to far? Well the seemingly real possibility that there are people in the world that ACTUALLY want those things to happen to her. And some of those individuals may even be members of the media. They want her to get a sexually transmitted disease from her bicycle seat, have a lesbian relationship, do heroin and make a sex tape as part of her 'growing up'. Just so they can say "I told you so" or to save media outlets from a slow news day?
Or do they just hate Miley so much they want to tear her down some more? Is 'malicious humor' just 'malicious' in this case? Another free pass given to bad behavior? Only this time at a sixteen year old girl?
2.4 How one thing can become another
Recently I was reminded of another 'humorous' bit that others didn't find so humorous. A character that was meant to be one thing, but turned out to be something else.
In the WWE there was a man by the name of Ed Ferrera who did an impression of WWE announcer Jim ('Good ol' J.R.) Ross J.R. was considered the best play by play man in the buisness, and is much loved by fans even today. J.R. also suffered from a disease that paralyzed half of his face making it difficult for him to talk or eat. That disease was called Bell's Palsy.
WWE's head writer Vince Russo decided to bring out Ed Ferrera to do an impersonation of J.R. That impersonation had him talking out of the side of his face in a southern accent. It was done only one time on WWE programming, but when Vince Russo went to then Ted Turner owned (it was then bought out by AOL/Time Warner) WCW he took Ed Ferrera with him and used him, and his J.R. impression, to create the character of 'Oklahoma', which was where J.R. was from.
There were people outraged by the character, and the impression. Mostly because people believed the impression mocked not just J.R., but people that had Bell's Palsy as well. Russo's impression had effects he never intended. What was intended to be a characterization (some would probably call a mockery) of one man, turned into a mockery of someone with a serious medical condition. Soon enough the character of 'Oklahoma' was dropped and never seen again. Some time later WCW was bought and it TOO was never seen again.
But I think this example serves as how one thing can be intended, and it can lead to another thing. And that 'other thing' can wind up being not a good thing.
2.5 The benefit of the doubt
Despite my....feelings on how things were handled by George Wu, I think it best at this point to try to give him the benefit of the doubt at this point. For all I know he probably believed he was doing the right thing. Also I want to point out that I have no grievance against the OCA. I just have...grave concerns about how the organizations' chairman handled a certain situation and the effects that followed.
I took a look at the article that quoted Mr. Wu, and what I tried to hold onto was the term he had used. And from what I read by no means did he call Miley a racist. He just said that the slant eyed gesture was "racially offensive". By no means was he using the term 'racist' to describe Miley personally. Others however apparently would.
Somewhere along the line the term "racially offensive gesture" turned into an accusation of racism to being an actual racist. George Wu's words were seemingly being twisted into a whole different meaning. Probably to the point that when the term "racially offensive" reached Miley the term 'racist' immediately followed. And the 'racist' accusation got the lion's share of attention.
'Racially offensive' vs. 'racist'. Which term speaks the loudest and makes the accused want to have a heart attack?
Like Miley I want to believe that Wu saw his words, like Miley saw her "funny face", become twisted into something he never intended. If he became aware of how his words became twisted by haters and the media I'd like to think he'd be offended by that. George Wu may have sought to bring a matter to light and educate Miley and others on the situation she had been in and that would have been the end of it.
But this is not that world anymore. People see one thing and can come to different conclusions. Terms become twisted so they mean something else.
And if someone is knocked down due to a mistake that was made there is no shortage of people looking to do their share of kicking while the person is down. And some even make a profit off of the kicking. Some just enjoy it, and what worries me the most is that the haters, due to Mr. Wu's accusation and how it was portrayed and twisted, come off believing that they now have a righteous reason for their hate. They say "Well she's a racist. That makes our hate just and right, right?"
Not in my book. But then again that's just me.
Mark Twain once said 'A lie can make it's way around the world before the truth can get it's boots on.' That sounds like what happened. Either that or the truth got twisted to serve other agendas and desires.
And there is one thing I wish George Wu would do. Whether he does it or not is up to him. Basically say "We had an issue to bring to Miley's attention, which she apologized for. We do not look for what we/I say to be used as fodder for malicious hate, haters and the actions brought about by hate. And people that have called Miley an actual 'racist', has done no one any favors, and done no one any good."
And personally, I think it hasn't. But whether Mr. Wu does this or not is up to him.
2.6 Stereotypes
It should also be noted that racial stereotypes have been around for years. Not just with Asians or Africans, but with all nationalities. Even whites.
One that comes to mind is the symbol for the Cleveland Indians. A symbol that basically had a grinning indian with a feather in his hair. Some consider that term 'derogatory' even to this day. And the debate continues on as to whether that symbol should be changed. And it probably would be if not for one thing....that symbol has been the traditional symbol for the Cleveland Indians for years, if not decades.
When people go to an Indians game, a lot of them don't see a racially offensive symbol. They see a symbol that their team rallies behind, and that their fans can rally behind as well. To root them on to victory, or to show support if they face defeat. So while some see a racially offensive symbol others see a positive symbol of their favorite team. And to them the positives dilute any negative impact the symbol may have.
Another symbol, or rather two, are the symbols that go with Uncle Ben's rice and Aunt Jemima pancakes. Symbols based on racial stereotyping of African Americans as they were limited to specific roles. However, like the Indians sign, these stereotypes seemed to have surpassed the derogatory meanings that may have been associated with them. To some consumers at the grocery store Uncle Ben's rice and Aunt Jemima pancakes are a quality name brand that is associated with good food and good cooking.
Even other shows have depicted racial stereotypes in looking to establish identities for ethnicities. In Kim Possible there had been use of the 'squint eyed' gesture, but not to depict nationality. Instead the meaning seemed to reflect age and wisdom for elders. Granted the elder in the episode was of Asian descent but there were other Asian characters that did not have the same squint eyes that the elder had. Thus leading to the racial sterotype being disproven. Also squint eyes have been used by other artists to depict characteristics. Characters on the Nintendo Wii, called Mii's, make use of squint eyes for Mii designs.
Whether we like it or not stereotypoes are part of our cultural identity and heritage. But as the debate about them goes on about their offenses they tend to lose their potency over time, and can turn into positive symbols meant to inspire and rally behind. And as I said before, no race is immune to stereotyping. Not even whites.
I remember a bit Eddie Murphy had done for Saturday Night Live when he was a cast member. 'Delerious' was his big breakaway from the show. But while he was on SNL he did a bit called 'Mr. White' where he got into 'white face' and played a 'stereotypical white man' in a humorous exploration of race relations. While not flattering, I did see the point, and humor, behind it. And while it might have offended on some levels it did make one think on others.
Like whether such portrayals are possible? Or whether they could actually be occuring?
As I said before no race immune to racial stereotyping. But how can we determine if stereotypes are wrong if they're everywhere?
Let me focus a minute on a character that was basically founded on racial stereotypes. A character that has become iconic in Science Fiction history.
That character? Ming the Merciless on Flash Gordon.
2.7 Ming and his foundations
In the history of Sci-Fi there was/is a character that was basically founded on racial stereotypes. A character that has become iconic in Science Fiction history. That character? Ming the Merciless on Flash Gordon.
Before I go any further, I want to mention that what I said here came from a college level course. So this I believe would be considered 'college level knowledge'.
In the days of Buster Crabbe (1920's-1930's), which was when Flash Gordon made his debut, the stereotypes revolving around 'Asian' or 'Oriental' characters' revolved around the concepts of 'ornate' and 'sinister'. Slanted eyes and goatees (a beard design done by the British to reflect 'sinister' natures as well) were done to protray an image of an 'evil' character while all the while they were surrounded by riches and art giving a reflection of a being of power as well as intelligence. By giving the name 'Ming' to Flash's arch enemy from the planet Mongo it seemed to only reinforce the image portrayed to those of Asian descent.
Over the years Ming had changed in attempts to distance himself from the stereotypes. In some cartoon versions (Most notably in the series 'Defenders of the Earth) Ming was portrayed as part of a reptillian species in order to enhance a 'cold blooded' ideology. Yet the ornate aspect of the character remained, as well as other stereotypes to keep the 'sinsiter' image he portrayed.
The Sci Fi Channel (now called Sy Fy) made an attempt to develop their own version of Flash Gordon with Eric Johnson as the lead character. They also tried to do a version of Ming that did not reflect the stereotypes that had defined previous versions of Ming. What they wound up coming up with was a blonde, clean shaven politician who believed the evils he was doing was for the 'greater good' of his people. Who had reasons for his actions that weren't necessarily 'sinister'.
Needless to say Sci Fi's version of Ming was considered a flop, and fans even referred to this version as "Biff the Merciless". A reflection of the character Biff Tannen in 'Back to the Future' as this version of Ming seemed to look so much like the bully that tormented the McFlys during the 'Back to the Future' trilogy.
I guess in looking at Sci Fi's Ming and the previous versions of Ming, I'm wondering if what happened to him happened to other stereotypical symbols. They started to lose their stereotypical meanings and took on their own individual identities and meanings. Somewhere along the line Ming started to lose his stereotypical image, and audiences looked past them to see what Ming was supposed to be-the arch villain of Flash Gordon who sought to conquer the universe for his own gain. When the stereotypes were removed, it seemed like so much of what had made Ming....well Ming, became lost as well. Hense giving one reason out of several for the failure of Sci Fi Channel's 'Flash Gordon'. Other reasons were how the show was put together, and how other characters like Flash, Dale, and Zarkov were developed as well-not in the best of ways.
I remember another show from the 1980's called 'Super Dave'. It starred a comedian named Bob Einstein who played a daredevil named 'Super Dave Osborne', who was always doing outrageous stunts, and getting into the most outrageous crashes. Sure the crashes were done by a dummy in shots, and you knew that, but I think it also built on the bigger idea of 'who was the bigger dummy'? The dummy or Super Dave? A joke within a joke I guess.
The show however also had a stereotypical Japanese character named Fuji Hakayito who served as Super Dave's stunt supervisor. A character that could be considered 'racist' by today's standards. or at least stereotypical. He spoke in a funny voice, seemed to make a squiny eyed gesture and was the one responsible behind many of Super Dave's crashes. But then when one watched the show it was revelaed that Super Dave wasn't actually the sharpest knife in the drawer either, as he came off as a bit snobbish and profit minded. Plus he was also the guy in the crashes all the time....which was the REAL funny part of the show.
So cartoonish, and outrageous, were those crashes, that they even carried over to a Saturday Morning cartoon show on FOX. Which lasted for a year or so called 'Super Dave. Daredevil for Hire.' And now appears on Spike TV's Super Dave's Stunt Show Spiketacular where you can see him in even more wrecks.
So while some shows may have played on stereotypes they were not intended to be racist as with racism-must prove malicious, hateful and hurtful intent. While at the same time proclaiming your own races' supposed superiority. Which I guess now has become difficult to do as every race has its own, if not more than, its own share of bozos.
I take a look at the world as it is now and it is a world that is divided by politics, nationalities, ethnicities, ideals, and borders. Divided to the point where we have become labelled by them. And it seems like each 'side' has to prove themselves dominant over the other, with that other being considered 'beneath them' or 'inferior'. A view that can lead to what happened to Loki and Biel on the Star Trek episode 'Let That Be Your Last Battlefield' where two races on the planet Charon had become so defined by their own hatreds that their hatreds left behind only a dead world. No one left alive. And instead of finding peace Loki and Biel returned to that dead world only for them to kill each other. Their hatreds consuming them.
Smart man that Gene Roddenberry huh?
2.8 Is Miley a racist?
Looking at Miley's gesture, even if it was believed to be "racially offensive", does that make Miley a 'racist'? Maybe this speech from a Barack Obama comic made by Blue Water Comics that mentioned his white grandmother can shed some light.
"A woman who sacrificed again and again for me. A woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world. But a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe. These people are a part of me and they are part of America. This country that I love. We have a choice in this country...we can tackle race only as spectacle--as we did in the aftermath of the O.J. trial--or in the wake of tragedy--as we did in the aftermath of Katrina--or as fodder for the nightly news..
...or at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say 'Not this time'
This union may never be perfect. But generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected."
I read this speech, and the passages above. This speech that has said a woman who helped raisd an African American grandson, a grandson who would become the 44th President of the United States, uttered racial and ethnic stereotypes on more than one occation. And who had a fear of men from another race as she walked down the street.
Does this make her a racist?
No!
And I will say why.
I read in a Webster's Dictionary the definition of racism. It defined racism as a three part formula. Ignorance of another race. A belief in your own race's superiority. And then there is the third and final ingredient of racism. The ingredient that makes it the evil that it is.
Hatred.
And Obama's grandmother, nicknamed 'Toot' did NOT hate her grandson. Nor did she hate an African American janitor whom she would call 'Mister Reed', despite the glares she would receive. Just as I believe Miley does not hate members of the Asian American community. Remember, there was a member of Asian descent in that photo. If there was a problem should he have not said something? And would that voice have been heeded, unless something was said that put fears at rest? Fears that as it turned out should NOT have been put at rest?
But what really irks me about this is that some of her on line accusers that called her 'racist' seemed to have embraced the very element that makes racism the evil that it is today....hatred.
And while it is not a racial hatred it is a hatred nonetheless. A hatred directed towards a 15/16 year old girl. With some of this hate being from grown adults
Again I ask--Doesn't this seem low to anybody?
2.9 Where's the honor?
I mention this because I think of something I saw on Star Trek:The Next Generation. Namely, the character of Lt. Worf.
Worf is a character that holds honor very near and dear to him. The way of the warrior is his way of life. And the path of the warrior is the path of honor. One of the things Worf mentions very sternly is that "There is no honor in attacking the weak". He mentions this to his young son Alexander when he refuses to share. And while Alexander says that he would have won Worf responds with "No, you must earn victory."
This is emphasized in the first episode of the fifth season of Star Trek the Next Generation when Worf is faced with the honor of killing the young son of his enemy. Toral, son of Duras. A child left behind by his two aunts Lursa and B'Tor who sought to take over the Klingon Empire and suceed it to the Romulans. The leader of the Empire, Gowron, gives Worf Toral's life to take. By right, Toral's life was Worf's to take as Toral's family had caused great crimes against Worf's.
But Worf does not take Toral's life. He sees no honor in it. For Toral is still a child. His death would have had no honor.
The emphasis of 'no honor in attacking the weak' is reflected on again in Deep Space Nine in the episode 'The House of Quark' where Quark the Ferengi, a profit minded individual, is called upon to fight to the death so honor would be satisfied. Quark however throws down his weapon saying that they only want a battle so that honor would be satisfied. That the fight was nothing more than an execution. To that end Quark gets on his knees and says this line:
"Let it be what it is then. An execution. No honor. And when you tell the tale of how you took Grilka's house from her I hope you include that you killed an unarmed Ferengi, half your size."
Quark's Klingon opponent D'Gor decided to go ahead to grant the killing stroke, but is stopped by Gowron who said that if he could kill Quark as he was helpless then D'Gor had no honor....and no place in the Great Hall. As such D'Gor was excommunicated from the Great Hall. And most likely the Klingon Empire. Quark is also commended for his bravery.
So to that end would attacking Miley for her mistakes also have no honor? As she is still a child herself as of this writing? Perhaps, but who's to say those that attack her have honor? That all that matters is a result, even if the intentions are believed to be good?
As I come to the end of this passage it had come to my attention that the lawsuit was dismissed. That's good news for Miley, however there will still be some that cling to their hatreds and use what happened to their advantage. They will still call her 'racist' even if a court proves she's not. Perhaps even 'slut'. After all if people can still call the Original Battlestar Galactica a 'Star Wars' ripoff' even when a court proves it wasn't, what makes this case any different...except that one was about a TV show and the other revolved around a teenage girl. Regardless the same logic will most likely be followed. The haters will find Miley guilty until proven innocent.....and even then she will be found guilty.
At the end of the day I have one belief when it comes to race relations. "It doesn't matter what race or ethnicity you are. Everyone has an equal chance of being a bozo."
But also at the end of the day I take a look at this story, and if you strip away Miley's celebrity status, I wind up seeing a chairman of an organization, a housewife and a shock comedianne, not to mention the media and haters going after a teenage girl for a mistake. Even when there were enough adults in that shot to point out, and Miley was still under parental authority. But due to her celebrity status Miley was the target.
Celebrity status or no where's the honor? Grown adults going after a kid when other adults seem to have gotten a free pass? I think this could apply to those 'outraged parents' on the Vanity Fair incident as well.
And I'm wondering if there isn't a certain amount of bullying going on on the part of the outraged adults too. A question they may have to answer someday.
No comments:
Post a Comment