Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
6 — Tuesday, March 27, 2018

An intersectional analysis of the blackface Snapchat

CRITICAL ETHNIC STUDIES AND A/PIA STUDIES GRADUATE AND FACULTY GROUP | OP-ED

W

atching 
“Love, 

Simon” 
felt 
like 

arriving at a long-

awaited destination. 
Something 
that 
I 
had 
been 

anticipating 
since 

my first encounter 
with a young adult 
movie, 
pretending 

that 
the 
vanilla, 

heterosexual 
leads 

weren’t 
actually 

heterosexual. 
And 
finally, 
when 

it 
manifested 
in 

the film starring actor Nick 
Robinson 
as 
the 
closeted-

gay high school senior, it was 
everything. And still, it will 
never be enough.

Within the past three years, 

films with queer people, mostly 
gay cisgender men, have emerged 
into the mainstream. Last year’s 
Best Picture, “Moonlight,” was 
the first Best Picture winner 
revolving around an LGBTQ+-
themed story (not to mention 
a solely Black cast). This year, 
“Call Me By Your Name,” a film 
about an Italian-Jewish boy 
falling in love with an older 
American man, was nominated 
for numerous accolades.

Yet these movies, despite 

having 
the 
themes 
that 

accompany 
typical 
coming-

of-age 
stories, 
were 
still 

thematically heavy. Their target 
audiences 
were 
inevitably 

mature, with aesthetics and 
plots more concurrent with the 
conventions of an art-house 
movie. 
Conversely, 
“Love, 

Simon” 
follows 
the 
weepy, 

popcorn-indulgent and corny 
customs of an archetypal young 
adult movie.

I grew up watching Edward 

and Bella in “Twilight” recite 
lines that were cliché and stiff 
as cardboard, and I ate it up. I 
witnessed the histrionics that 
ensued after actress Emma Stone 
lied about losing her virginity 
in “Easy A,” and recited every 
quote in “The Fault in Our Stars” 
that filled theaters with sobbing 
adolescents.

While some of these movies 

did have deeply moving, tragic 
elements (see “The Fault in Our 
Stars”), they were all swollen 
with 
unrealistic 
melodrama 

meant to send hoards of teens to 

theaters. “Moonlight,” “Blue is 
the Warmest Color” and other 
LGBTQ+-oriented films depict 

the 
raw 
truth 
of 

being queer.

Just 
as 
these 

movies 
were 

necessary 
vehicles 

for the stories of real 
queer lives, so too is 
“Love, Simon,” and 
it’s something I felt 
like I always needed. 
I needed a cheesy 
story that had humor 
and heartbreak with 

a character who also felt pinned 
down by the burdens of keeping 
his sexuality a secret.

Walking 
out 
of 
“Love, 

Simon” felt gratifying. The film 
focuses on a gay teenager coming 
to terms with his sexuality and 
navigating his way out of the 
closet. It is also a love story, 
one which revolves around the 
email correspondence between 
him and the anonymous “Blue,” 
a fellow closeted student at his 
school. It’s also, remarkably, the 
first major studio movie to focus 
on a gay teenager.

I have grown up being 

taught that my sexuality is 
either a tragedy or a commodity. 
Each 
cinematic 
experience 

exhibits either the fraught life of 
someone queer in the form of a 
tragic drama or reduces the gay 
experience by portraying queer 
men as acerbic, sassy friends.

Finally, 
an 
entertaining, 

romantic 
teen 
comedy 

that 
somehow 
managed 
to 

encapsulate the truth of coming 
out while still making my 
friends and me giggle, weep and 
fawn over the attractive leads 
like any other movie. In one 
scene, right after Simon comes 
out to his straight girlfriend, 
she instructs him on how to talk 
about cute boys.

The palpable awkwardness 

but 
ultimate 
triumph 
of 

Simon figuring it out was both 
delightfully corny and acutely 
genuine. It further exemplified 
the movie’s ability to be just 
a little too sentimental while 
still circumscribing Simon as a 
relatable character. 

For me, this movie felt long-

awaited, yet for a gay teen who 
hasn’t come out for whatever 
reason, it elucidates a message 

that, 
while 
mightily 
cliché, 

is very important: It does get 
better.

Are there aspects of the 

movie I wish could have been 
done differently? Of course. 
To begin with, the use of a 
masculine, cisgender white male 
in a fairly liberal area as a coming 
out story can barely be viewed 
as a proxy for universal tales of 
coming out. Furthermore, the 
use of a Black, gay character 
who has very little dimension 
and feels somewhat contrived 
from stereotype is a little less 
than desired.

In fact, prior to seeing “Love, 

Simon,” this was the preeminent 
misgiving I had with the film. 
From the onset, it seemed to 
engage minimally with actual 
queer culture, instead opting for 
a movie that was palatable for 
straight audiences.

However, it was bucking 

those 
same 
audiences 
who, 

for years, have weaponized 
gay 
representation 
as 
a 

pernicious form of normalizing 
homosexuality (as I’ve said, I 
have seen nearly every young 
adult 
movie 
with 
straight 

protagonists, and I have yet to 
magically become straight).

In 
the 
end, 
it 
still 

incorporated aspects of being 
queer, 
from 
the 
struggles 

of coming out to a musical 
number 
featuring 
singer 

Whitney Houston’s “I Wanna 
Dance 
With 
Somebody.” 

Perhaps it wasn’t as much 
Houston as I wanted (frankly, 
I’m still waiting for a movie 
that features an intense lip 
sync battle to her classic “So 
Emotional”), and it may not 
have 
been 
revolutionary, 

but it was an incremental 
step in breaking down the 
barriers 
that 
have 
been 

erected by homophobia and 
misunderstanding.

And for LGBTQ+ teenagers, 

whom are twice as likely 
to attempt suicide as their 
straight peers, the wonder of 
seeing themselves illuminated 
on screen will provide hope 
for their futures and validate 
their identities.

D

ear 
communities 
of 

the 
University 
of 

Michigan,

In light of the current 

news 
regarding 
students 

donning blackface to mock 
#BlackLivesMatter 
on 

Snapchat, there is an uneasy 
silence around the apparent 
presence 
of 
the 
Asian/

Asian-American 
student 
in 

the photo. As students and 
scholars 
of 
Critical 
Ethnic 

Studies 
and 
Asian/Pacific 

Islander American Studies, 
we present this letter to offer 
an 
intersectional 
analysis 

of the image as a means 
to 
better 
understand 
the 

layers of mal-intent present 
in the photo. We voice our 
concerns in solidarity with 
#BlackLivesMatter, Black and 
African-American students, in 
hopes of opening pathways for 
healing and justice.

The black masks in the 

Snapchat appear to be part of 
an Asian beauty fad that cleans 
the pores (the blackness of the 
mask stands for the cleansing 
properties 
of 
charcoal 
and 

also refers to the removal of 
blackheads), 
meaning 
that 

the “joke” intended by the 
Snapchat works operates on at 
least two levels. The students 
effectively make fun of both 
#BlackLivesMatter 
and 
the 

Asian beauty product, a kind 
of humor that relies on notions 
of Asians as being ignorant 
and indifferent to American 
racism. And though the face 
mask itself is not intended 
to be used for blackface, the 
caption of the Snapchat turns 
the mask into one. The image 
turns harmful for the ways 
it mocks the important work 
of #BlackLivesMatter and its 
trenchant 
critique 
of 
anti-

Blackness, 
police 
brutality, 

mass incarceration and the 
racist judicial system of the 
United States. 

Even though the Asian/Asian-

American student is essentially 
silent and, in a way, made into 
an accessory in support of the 
racist 
Snapchat, 
the 
student 

is 
nonetheless 
complicit 
in 

constructing this racist image. 
The ease with which he stands 
next to and in support of LSA 
sophomore 
Lauren 
Fokken 

activates a deep history of the 
“model 
minority” 
myth 
and 

its 
roots 
in 
anti-Blackness 

and 
white 
supremacy, 
and 

more recently, efforts to derail 
#BlackLivesMatter 
by 
Asian-

American communities through 
the support of Peter Liang and his 
murder of Akai Gurley.

The image further erases 

the 
history 
of 
coalitional 

activism in the 1960s and 1970s 
when the very identity “Asian 
American” arose in solidarity 
with the civil rights movement. 
Given the acts of violence and 
erasures that the Snapchat 
enacts with regards to the 
racist criminal justice system 
of this moment, police brutality 
and the mass incarceration of 
Black Americans, we wonder 
about the punitive measures 
that this racist act seems to 
warrant. What response do we 
desire from the two students 
that would alleviate the pain 
of these variously affected and 
subjugated populations at the 
University? 
What 
response 

from the University would be 
satisfying? After all, this is a 
matter of social justice and 
academic integrity.

One of the ways white 

supremacy works on us is 
through individualizing acts of 
violence that effectively reduce 
systemic issues of inequality 
into individual acts. When 
working with such ideas of 
the individual, the solutions 
to violence seem to warrant 
punishment 
and 
extrication 

from the community. However, 
if we have learned anything 

from the legacy of the civil 
rights movement, the anti-
Vietnam war movement, the 
anti-poverty 
movement 
and 

the women’s movement, justice 
works better when it serves to 
heal communities, to call in the 
very individuals who harm us 
in an act of re-imagining what 
community means. We are 
left to labor harder to build 
connections where they seem 
most impossible, so that we 
might redirect our anger at 
the structures that oppress all 
of us.

Many 
structural 
issues 

come to mind: no alternative 
processes 
that 
achieve 
the 

aims of affirmative action, 
insufficient 
programs 
for 

recruiting undergraduate and 
graduate students of color, 
lack of new tenure lines in 
ethnic 
studies 
departments, 

the insufficiency of race and 
ethnicity course requirements. 
The individual acts of racism 
on campus speak to far larger 
structural issues of inequality 
and 
reflect 
the 
current 

climate of inequality at the 
University. The justice that we 
seek is one that moves toward 
raising the consciousness of 
our 
community 
members, 

re-evaluating the purpose of 
higher education as one not 
geared 
toward 
maximizing 

one’s earning potential or access 
to pleasure, but toward building 
a civically engaged community 
that has an expressed interest 
in the ethics that govern how 
we should relate to one another 
across difference.

In solidarity,
Critical Ethnic & Asian/

Pacific 
Islander 
American 

Studies 
Graduate 
Student 

Group

Asian/Pacific 
Islander 

American Studies Faculty

United 
Asian 
American 

Organizations Executive Board

To love Simon, to need Simon

JOEL DANIELWITZ | COLUMN

Emma Chang
Joel Danilewitz

Samantha Goldstein

Elena Hubbell
Emily Huhman
Tara Jayaram

Jeremy Kaplan

Sarah Khan

Lucas Maiman

Magdalena Mihaylova

Ellery Rosenzweig

Jason Rowland

Anu Roy-Chaudhury

Alex Satola
Ali Safawi

 Ashley Zhang
Sam Weinberger

DAYTON HARE

Managing Editor

420 Maynard St. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.

ALEXA ST. JOHN

Editor in Chief
 ANU ROY-CHAUDHURY AND 

ASHLEY ZHANG
Editorial Page Editors

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s Editorial Board. 

All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

Joel Danilewitz can be reached at 

joeldan@umich.edu.

Be careful what you wear

CARLI COSENZA | COLUMN

I

f you’ve been out and about 
in the past couple of years, 
chances are you’ve come 

across some form of “Reagan-Bush 
’84” apparel. Whether it’s a hat, 
laptop sticker or shirt, the vintage 
campaign logo has made a revival 
in mainstream fashion today. The 
design, which originally was used 
during 
then-President 
Ronald 

Reagan and then-Vice President 
George H.W. Bush’s campaign (and 
their re-election), has re-emerged 
today with the idea in mind to 
“commemorate the dominance of 
Reagan’s conservatism.” Apparel 
can be bought just about anywhere, 
from Amazon to Etsy, where the 
items are so popular that they are 
listed among the sites’ best sellers.

The unique aspect of the 

Reagan-Bush 
’84 
logo 
is 
its 

appeal not only among today’s 
conservatives, but its popularity 
in modern fashion. The design is 
often worn as a “retro look.” It is 
described by Amazon sellers as 
“funny vintage retro style” and 
“lighthearted, nostalgic parody 
appeal.” However, I can’t help but 
wonder if fashion, and consumers, 
are 
missing 
the 
mark 
here. 

Specifically, I wonder if today’s 
buyers are actually aware of the 
policies enacted during Reagan’s 
time as president of the United 
States. I want to take a moment 
to address the harmful impact 
that Reagan’s racially-motivated 
policies had on the civil rights 
movement and particularly the 
lives of Black Americans. Fashion 
or not, the words that we wear 
carry a message — are we aware 
of the racist policies behind the 
Reagan-Bush ’84 logo? Maybe 
if more people were, the trend 
wouldn’t be so popular.

Reagan’s 
presidency 
lasted 

from 1981 until 1989. During his 
time in office, he was able to launch 
an attack on the civil rights agenda 
that should be enough reason alone 
for modern consumers to stop 
wearing their support for him. 
Let’s take a look at some of his most 
damaging racist policies:

1) 
Through 
his 
rhetoric, 

Reagan supported racism with 
remarks that characterized poor, 
Black women as “welfare queens” 
who “drove pink Cadillacs.” Not 
only are these statements seriously 
offensive, but they are also just 
plainly, 
embarrassingly 
wrong. 

There are 52 million Americans on 
welfare, according to a 2012 census 
bureau study, and many of them are 
children who can’t even drive a car, 
let alone a “pink Cadillac.” 

2) President Reagan sought to 

limit the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 
which aimed to overcome legal 
barriers at the state and local level 
that prevented African Americans 
from exercising their right to vote 
under the 15th Amendment. He 
vetoed reforms on the act, labeling 
it as “humiliating” to the South.

3) One of Reagan’s campaign 

promises was for less government 
intervention. Apparently, he sought 
to accomplish this goal through 
racist means. For example, he 
slashed important programs such 
as the Comprehensive Employment 
and Training Act, which “provided 
needed assistance to Black people.”

4) Despite being remembered 

as the president who made Martin 
Luther King Jr. Day a federal 
holiday, Reagan should also be 
remembered as someone who 
continuously 
questioned 
the 

integrity of civil rights leaders. He 
stated, “Sometimes I wonder if they 
really mean what they say, because 
some of those leaders are doing 
very well leading organizations 
based on keeping alive the feeling 
that they’re victims of prejudice.” 
Did he really suggest that racially-
based prejudice doesn’t exist? 
That’s not an idea that we should 
be proudly representing on our 
clothing today.

5) Reagan tried to allow Bob 

Jones University, a historically 
segregated Southern school, to 
reclaim federal tax credits that 
had long been denied to “racially 
discriminatory institutions.” So, 
his standpoint on institutionalized 
racism is pretty clear: He not only 
did nothing to stop it, but actually 
attempted to perpetuate it, at least 

in this case.

6) In an effort to silence the 

voices of Black workers, Reagan 
ordered the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture to shelve discrimination 
claims by Black farmers.

7) And, as if all of the above 

behavior doesn’t seem troubling 
enough, 
Reagan 
considered 

apartheid South Africa a “friend 
and an ally.” He even permitted 
American corporate support for 
the racist regime. In 1981, after 
pressure from Black leaders and 
organizations, Congress passed 
a bill of sanctions against South 
Africa. Reagan vetoed that.

The list could go on and on, 

but this would be a much longer 
piece in that case. But by now, it 
should be pretty clear: Many of the 
policies under Reagan were very, 
very racist. His agenda was not to 
support the civil rights movement, 
but to attack its participants and 
limit its success.

Personally, I am unable to see 

past the reality of Reagan’s damaging 
policies in the name of “retro” 
fashion. There is nothing wrong with 
wearing what you want to wear and 
everyone should have the freedom to 
do so. But as conscious consumers, we 
have to look at the bigger picture. As 
modern philosopher Lars Svendsen 
puts it, fashion is “one of the most 
influential phenomena in Western 
civilization since the renaissance.” 
So, if you choose to wear a Reagan-
Bush ’84 shirt, what are you 
representing? If you knew more 
about the racist policies behind the 
Reagan administration, would you 
continue to wear a shirt promoting 
his presidential candidacy?

I would hope that the popularity 

of the Reagan-Bush ’84 logo is due to 
the modern consumer’s ignorance 
about Reagan’s racist policies, rather 
than in support of them. If we want 
any chance at confronting modern-
day racism, we should stop endorsing 
the racist policies of the past and 
pick a new fashion trend.

Carli Cosenza can be reached at 

carlic@umich.edu.

Protecting global human rights

AUDREY GILMOUR | OP-ED

N

othing 
summons 
up 

visions 
of 
Valentine’s 

Day like roses, a box 

of chocolates or a roundtable on 
international law and justice. On 
Feb. 14, the University of Michigan 
International 
Institute 
hosted 

a roundtable to commemorate 
the closing of the International 
Criminal Tribunal for the former 
Yugoslavia in 2017 after 24 years 
of 
international 
justice. 
This 

roundtable event looked at whether 
the future of international law 
and justice is brighter due to the 
ICTY. I agree with Law professor 
Steven Ratner, who claimed that 
instead of seeing the glass as half 
full or half empty, the glass is only 
5 percent full. 

The ICTY was established by 

the United Nations Security Council 
in 1993 following the outbreak of 
violence and conflict in the former 
Yugoslavia in the early 1990s. The 
mission of the ICTY was to try 
and prosecute those involved in 
committing human rights atrocities 
such as genocide, crimes against 
humanity and war crimes.

Some 
of 
the 
University’s 

brightest minds in human rights and 
international law gathered on the 
10th floor of Weiser Hall to discuss 
the successes and failures of the 
ICTY and the future of international 
justice. Among these experts were 
John Ciorciari, associate professor 

of Public Policy, research associate 
Robert Donia and Ratner, joined by 
Dermot Groome, a law professor at 
Pennsylvania State University.

Ratner qualified his rather 

pessimistic view of a drop of water in 
the bottom of the cup by adding that 
the ICTY does still have redeeming 
qualities. Before the ICTY there was 
no glass.

Progress has been made in 

international law and justice and the 
ICTY is greatly responsible for some 
of this progress. Before the ICTY, 
the most recent trials prosecuting 
war crimes were the Nuremberg 
trials and Tokyo War Crimes trials 
following World War II. Like Ratner 
said at the panel on Wednesday, 
without the ICTY, it would still 
be considered acceptable to grant 
amnesty to human rights criminals. 
This is no small accomplishment.

However, the ICTY did not 

accomplish its long-term and most 
important goal of preventing future 
human rights crimes. The ICTY was 
not able to deter actors in the Balkan 
Wars from committing war crimes 
and human rights violations in the 
eight years following its creation. 
Bosnian Serbs murdered thousands 
of Muslims in the Srebrenica 
Massacre of 1995. Even those 
being held directly accountable in 
the ICTY were not deterred from 
committing these crimes. There 
was never a hope of it deterring 

actors around the world from doing 
the same.

Today, we still see mass 

atrocities throughout the world. 
In Syria, Bashar al-Assad has used 
chemical weapons and barrel bombs 
against civilian populations. The 
Rohingya are being discriminated 
against and driven from their homes 
in Myanmar, leading to over half a 
million Rohingya refugees. Human 
rights violations and war crimes are 
being committed daily around the 
globe with no perceived effect from 
the ICTY.

In 
1948, 
the 
Universal 

Declaration of Human Rights was 
recognized as the global standard 
by the United Nations, yet to this 
day we continue to see its principles 
of equality and security ignored. 
While we live in a world where the 
human rights of a single person 
are violated, the United Nations 
cannot consider itself successful in 
protecting the human rights of the 
global community.

The ICTY was not enough to 

establish a standard of respect for 
human rights in the global context. 
It is the United Nations’s and every 
world leader’s responsibility to 
hold their allies and enemies to the 
UDHR in all their actions and punish 
those that do not with international 
pressure and sanctions.

Audrey Gilmour is an LSA junior.

JOEL 

DANIELWITZ