The Hypocrisy of Stereotyping

[Cartman]

I was watching Warners' very last theatrical cartoon INJUN TROUBLE last night and it got me thinking about stereotyping in cartoons. By the mid-1950's we know that blacks were no longer stereotyped in cartoons yet Native Americans were still plentiful even into 1969 when INJUN TROUBLE was released. Is there any reason why it wasn't okay to stereotype black people but it was still okay to stereotype Native Americans?

[Sogturtle]

I was watching Warners' very last theatrical cartoon INJUN TROUBLE last night and it got me thinking about stereotyping in cartoons. By the mid-1950's we know that blacks were no longer stereotyped in cartoons yet Native Americans were still plentiful even into 1969 when INJUN TROUBLE was released. Is there any reason why it wasn't okay to stereotype black people but it was still okay to stereotype Native Americans?

Cartman~

More than anything it has to do with the fact that African-Americans had an organization (The NAACP) that protested things. And there are far more African Americans than American Indians.

[Marty26]

I don't think American Indians were really stereotyped as much in a mean way as African Americans were either. Even as recently as the early-1990s, there were still a lot of Native American stereotypes on television. It was really only in the mid-90s that people really did away with it completely.

[Sogturtle]

I don't think American Indians were really stereotyped as much in a mean way as African Americans were either. Even as recently as the early-1990s, there were still a lot of Native American stereotypes on television. It was really only in the mid-90s that people really did away with it completely.

Marty~

I think you're right... I suspect that in part the REAL difference is that so MANY "Anglos" in America (particularly those NOT in the Northeast) are of partial Indian descent and know it ("yeah gr-grandma on the one side was an Indian but we don't talk about that";)). It's POSSIBLE that Hollywood became aware of that fact at some point. Ifffff the producers actually were aware of that then would they want to grossly-offend a huge percent of their audience with wild-insulting images??? No probably not (though Indians were necessary as heavies in Westerns)...

Interestingly enough DNA-testing has come up with a fascinating fact about people descended from Antebellum Southerners... It appears that a very high percent of those folks even though they "appear" Anglo are not only part Indian but are actually part African-American!!! And that over the course of time the families either forgot about it or blotted it out from their memory!:eek: And in a reversal of that;), I read a letter from an African-American lady who was extremely upset that her Mitochondrial DNA when tested had shown that her ancestral female line was White!!! Things are so much more complex among descendants of Southerners (of every stripe) than anybody has ever known or believed. :cool:

And me??? I had a BUNCH of DNA tests done, pretty darn funny results;)...

[BloodyChamp]

I don't want to post a no no but there's also the minor detail about the NAACP suppossedly milking a dead horse :o

[Jack]

I also go with Sogturtle's answer about how black people had the NAACP while American Indians didn't have a similar orginization with political clout. I recall how one of the Elementary schools I went to in the early 90's had bleachers behind it with a huge Indian head painted on the side - it was the high school team mascot (the building had been a high school before, but was changed to an elementary when a new school was built). I kinda wonder if they still use that mascot or if they've painted over it by now.

Marty~

I think you're right... I suspect that in part the REAL difference is that so MANY "Anglos" in America (particularly those NOT in the Northeast) are of partial Indian descent and know it ("yeah gr-grandma on the one side was an Indian but we don't talk about that";)). It's POSSIBLE that Hollywood became aware of that fact at some point. Ifffff the producers actually were aware of that then would they want to grossly-offend a huge percent of their audience with wild-insulting images??? No probably not (though Indians were necessary as heavies in Westerns)...

This sort of strays off topic, but when did "Anglo" come to be used to describe white Americans who speak English as a first language? I never encountered it until very recently. First in an article I read about tensions between "Anglos" and Mexican immigrants in a Catholic Church regarding what language to use for Mass (apparently nobody ever thought about using Latin), and the second time from a college professor who used the term. I sort of get the reasoning behind the term (refers more to language rather than anscestry), but it still strikes me as odd since I always associated the term with England and Great Britain and only with particular Americans ("WASPs").

[Ray Pointer]

It's not so much hypocracy, but a double standard. I was always puzzled by the portrayal of Native Americans as well, particularly since I have that ancestry through both of my parents. On the other hand, I recall an episode of THE BEVERYL HILLBILLIES where the Clampetts conceived of the Indians as the stereotype, when in fact they were modern, affluent, and assimilated. That is one of the few times an effort was made to bring Native Americans into mainstream consciousness as living with the times. But isn't it ironic that these people who were the natives of this continent were not even considered citizen of this country until 1925? That was worse than the treatment of Blacks. How's that for a hypocritical double standard?

[Mark J]

I don't want to post a no no but there's also the minor detail about the NAACP suppossedly milking a dead horse :o

That's not true - if anything they were always a step behind and far too mild in their protests and complaints. The only time they possibly went overboard was over the Amos and Andy TV program, which was actually well written, employed a lot of great Black actors playing all kinds of characters, and was popular with all races. Their anger about that show is understandable since it's humor still fed off the stereotypes and mangled speech of the blackface radio show, and the characters were the same as the radio show.

[Mark J]

But isn't it ironic that these people who were the natives of this continent were not even considered citizen of this country until 1925? That was worse than the treatment of Blacks. How's that for a hypocritical double standard?

Treatment of the American Indians was awful - forced removal from their lands, mass murder (including by deliberate infection with disease), forced relocation and imprisonment on reservations and near destruction, but I don't think it's worse than the treatment of Blacks, maybe about even. Black people were forced from their homes, brought over to this country against their will, sold and treated as property for 200 years, freed and granted citizenship on paper but still basically enslaved defacto and by state and local laws until the mid 20th century.

[mammy2shoesfan]

Treatment of the American Indians was awful - forced removal from their lands, mass murder (including by deliberate infection with disease), forced relocation and imprisonment on reservations and near destruction, but I don't think it's worse than the treatment of Blacks, maybe about even. Black people were forced from their homes, brought over to this country against their will, sold and treated as property for 200 years, freed and granted citizenship on paper but still basically enslaved defacto and by state and local laws until the mid 20th century.

Well in many cases some are still enslaved defeacto in many social and economical circles. But at least that is changing. I'm still very disgusted with the way the people native to the Americas have been treated.

[Sogturtle]

Treatment of the American Indians was awful - forced removal from their lands, mass murder (including by deliberate infection with disease), forced relocation and imprisonment on reservations and near destruction, but I don't think it's worse than the treatment of Blacks, maybe about even. Black people were forced from their homes, brought over to this country against their will, sold and treated as property for 200 years, freed and granted citizenship on paper but still basically enslaved defacto and by state and local laws until the mid 20th century.

....
This sort of strays off topic, but when did "Anglo" come to be used to describe white Americans who speak English as a first language? I never encountered it until very recently. First in an article I read about tensions between "Anglos" and Mexican immigrants in a Catholic Church regarding what language to use for Mass (apparently nobody ever thought about using Latin), and the second time from a college professor who used the term. I sort of get the reasoning behind the term (refers more to language rather than anscestry), but it still strikes me as odd since I always associated the term with England and Great Britain and only with particular Americans ("WASPs").

Mark J.~

The treatment of both Indians and African-Americans really only mirrors what the English did several hundred years ago to the Irish... Slaughtered, herded off into inhospitable parts of their own country and forbidden to return, deported to work in (near) slavery to foreign lands... All of that was done to the Irish!:eek: (Noooo I have no ax to grind as there's not a drop of Irish blood in my veins).

Jack~

Insofar as I can remember "Anglo" first gained some usage back in the 1980's. I believe it really was an attempt to get away from the race-centered term "White", in the same way that "African-American" attempts to move away from the race-centered "Black". ...Although logically we'd then end up with an unending array of hyphenated descriptives ("Anglo-Americans, Irish-Americans, Italian-Americans, Polish-Americans" etc. to the point where it sounds like bowling leagues:D). The term "Anglophone" would be the really correct term to designate people based purely on mother-tongue. ['Course "Anglophone" sounds like an early record-player...:p]

The problem with all of it, is as you pointed out that "Anglo" most assuredly does SEEM to point to purely English-descended folks. And there were/are a LOT of Irish-descended people who would resist that:eek: sort of grouping. The acronym "WASP" even though it was just a descriptive always came off as somewhat insulting since it would unintentionally conjur up the immediate mental image of an very nasty stinging insect:eek:. And it of course leaves out the tons of Catholic people here who descend from a variety of national stocks. I guess you could go for "European-Americans" but for a LOT of us whose ancestors have been here for 300 plus years that one comes off as somewhat insulting...

And then there's people like me, who LOOK generally "White" but are descendants of Indians mixed with every group that came into the southern part of the country. Let's see now... in broadest possible terms I could be a W.I.J.A.A.C.:p:D;)

[Ray Pointer]

I'm still very disgusted with the way the people native to the Americas have been treated.

Me, too. Especially when I am asked if I am an American citizen!

[Sogturtle]

Me, too. Especially when I am asked if I am an American citizen!

My own brother just LOVES it when people (both white and Black) have come up to him and addressed him this way "Say CHIEF, I was wondering...":rolleyes:

[wundermild]

And then there's people like me, who LOOK generally "White" but are descendants of Indians mixed with every group that came into the southern part of the country. Let's see now... in broadest possible terms I could be a W.I.J.A.A.C.:p:D;)
If one applies some mathmatics to the model that two parents generate one offspring, the entire concept of "races" of humans becomes questionable. As Jan Klein and Naoyuki Takahara have pointed out,
[...] consider a situation in which all individuals [of the present generation] have been traced back to a pair of MRCAs [most recent common ancestors] in any particular generation. The parents of the two MRCAs are also common ancestors of all individuals [of the present generation], as are the grandparents, the great-grandparents, and so on. As we follow the track backward through the generations, the number of common ancestors increases until in some distant generation, each individual is either a common ancestor or its line of descent has become extinct. [It has been] deduced that this situation [for one present-day generation, which covers one billion individuals] is reached in [...] 53 generations. [Provided that one generation encompasses 20 years], if you meet someone who claims to be a descendant of Charlemagne, you need not to be too impressed. You can reply with confidence: "So am I."
J. Klein, N. Takahara: Where Do We Come From? The Molecular Evidence for Human Descent. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York 2002, ISBN 3-540-42564-00
wundermild (98.7% chimpanzee)

[J. J. Hunsecker]

This sort of strays off topic, but when did "Anglo" come to be used to describe white Americans who speak English as a first language? I never encountered it until very recently. First in an article I read about tensions between "Anglos" and Mexican immigrants in a Catholic Church regarding what language to use for Mass (apparently nobody ever thought about using Latin), and the second time from a college professor who used the term. I sort of get the reasoning behind the term (refers more to language rather than anscestry), but it still strikes me as odd since I always associated the term with England and Great Britain and only with particular Americans ("WASPs").
Sounds like it's short for Anglo-Saxon -- German descendants who settled in England before the Norman conquest. WASP = White Anglo-Saxon Protestants.

[doctoon]

I noticed at least among theatrical works that 1973 seemed to be the last year in which Indian gags were used. After DFE's Apache on the County Seat and The Shoe Must Go On, the studio stopped.
In television, when Scooby-Doo met Josie in 1973, ther was an "Injun Joe" ghost. But I don't know enough to say that he was the last Indian character in tv animation.

Concerning theatricals stopping that imagery in 1973, I'm not sure if its just coincidence that 1973 was also the year of Wounded Knee and of Marlon Brando's "Littlefeather" stunt at the Oscars.

[Mr. Semaj]

This discussion reminds me a lot about a conversation we had in my college freshman year about Native American characterizations, and how some negative characterizations persist to this day. They removed the "indian red" crayon from Crayola products in 2001, and there's still the talk about how the terms "Chiefs" and "Redskins" are used for football team names, as well as the more apparent "Indians" for MBL.

It probably has a lot to do with how the situation is dealt with. African Americans have documented individual incidents of prejudice for centuries, and have actually used mainstream, sometimes aggressive methods to challenge them, the NAACP and the Civil Rights Movement being among many examples.
But how often do we hear about a Native American legend who was treated poorly? Or of any mainstream organizations established to protect their rights? They have reservations, which among other things give them certain rights that are otherwise illegal in the US.

Maybe the fact that Native Americans are much more passive with civil inequality has something to do with their current attitude towards land onwership that hasn't been fully addressed yet.

[janiepooh34]

You know, it is hard to have a thread like this going because it always seems to get into a political tirade instead of talking about cartoons.

I really have nothing else to add without getting into a political tirade.

[Do-Do]

I also go with Sogturtle's answer about how black people had the NAACP while American Indians didn't have a similar orginization with political clout. I recall how one of the Elementary schools I went to in the early 90's had bleachers behind it with a huge Indian head painted on the side - it was the high school team mascot (the building had been a high school before, but was changed to an elementary when a new school was built). I kinda wonder if they still use that mascot or if they've painted over it by now.

The high school here still uses the Marquette Redmen mascot.

On the first season of Saturday Night Live (when it was still NBC's Saturday Night), there was a very clever routine by Al Franken & Tom Davis depicting a TV news broadcast in an America where the Indians won control of the country. The Indian anchors speculate whether or not such team mascots as the Cleveland Kikes are offensive to white tribes.

[Ray Pointer]

The high school here still uses the Marquette Redmen mascot.

On the first season of Saturday Night Live (when it was still NBC's Saturday Night), there was a very clever routine by Al Franken & Tom Davis depicting a TV news broadcast in an America where the Indians won control of the country. The Indian anchors speculate whether or not such team mascots as the Cleveland Kikes are offensive to white tribes.

Even in a parody, the comparision is really not equal. Althouigh references to Native Americans as "Indians" has held its improper place in our culture, the terms "Indian" and "Redman," or even "Redskin" do not compare as such slurs suggested above.

[Jack]

Sounds like it's short for Anglo-Saxon -- German descendants who settled in England before the Norman conquest. WASP = White Anglo-Saxon Protestants.
I know, but I was referring to its more recent usage to describe anyone of white European anscestry who happens to speak English. So a man descended from Italian Catholics would also be an Anglo under this new usage.

As for the term "Indian," last year I read a display put up by a local college group mentioning that in a 1995 poll over 50% of natives most prefered "American Indian" with only around 30% preferring "Native American." The group describes itself as "American Indian" on all of its signs and posters.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

I know, but I was referring to its more recent usage to describe anyone of white European anscestry who happens to speak English. So a man descended from Italian Catholics would also be an Anglo under this new usage.
AN ITALIAN CATHOLIC CONFUSED FOR A DIRTY, SHIFTLESS ANGLO!?!? As an Italian Catholic I find that highly insulting!! (Just kidding.)