Peekaboo...I see you!
You're 100% correct, Peekaboo. I have been debating whether or not to watch Survivor, and just yesterday I heard someone make a racist comment. That almost seals it for me. I'm not sure if I'll be watching any of it or not. If they want racial diversity, segregating the tribes is NOT the way to do it. Just when racism seems to be dialing down, they have to do this! It's a stupid publicity stunt! I'll watch for a few episodes. If they don't merge soon, I'll stop. Racism brings out the worst in people-- I don't want to be there when it happens.
You see how easy Cook's Island's cause dissension, well Rush is known for dissension, nevertheless this is how CBS social experiment will play out. This is just the tip of the iceberg.
Rush Limbaugh Steps In It Again With 'Survivor' Comments
Compiled by the DiversityInc staff
© 2006 DiversityInc.com®
August 24, 2006
Controversial talk-show host Rush Limbaugh predicts a Latino will win the upcoming 13th season of "Survivor" because blacks are not good swimmers and Latinos "will do things other people won't do."
Yesterday after CBS announced that it would break down the tribes on the hit reality show "Survivor" by race (Asians, Latinos, blacks and whites), Limbaugh went on a racially insensitive tirade. He suggested on his nationally syndicated radio program, that the competition in "Survivor" will not "be fair if there's a lot of water events." In support of this assertion, he cited a March 2 HealthDay article reporting that "young blacks—especially males—are much more likely to drown in pools than whites."
The HealthDay article he based his argument on, however, did not address the swimming abilities of blacks in general. HealthDay, according to Media Matters, reported that "[r]esearchers don't know why black kids are at higher risk of drowning," that "[m]ost of the black [drowning] victims ... drowned in public pools," and that the "study didn't examine whether the victims had taken swimming lessons or whether the pools were supervised by lifeguards." Additionally, the article noted that according to the study, "people from poorer families were more likely to drown … regardless of race," and that one author of the study suggested "[f]uture research" will be done to "examine whether swimming instruction reduces the risk of drowning."
Limbaugh said that there "are many characteristics ... that you would think would give [the African-American tribe] the lead and the heads up in terms of skill and athleticism and so forth." But as far as an early prediction on a winner, he is counting on the Latino tribe to win unless they "start fighting for supremacy amongst themselves." He went on to say that Latinos have "probably shown the most survival tactics," and that they "have shown a remarkable ability to cross borders."
Limbaugh, not wanting to leave anyone out of his offensive speech, said "the Asian-American tribe"—whom he called "the brainiacs of the bunch"—probably will "outsmart everybody" but would not be the winners. He went on to say that "the Native Americans were excluded, because they were at one with the land and they would probably have an unfair advantage."
In response to a black caller, Limbaugh said that "the white tribe would be the best swimmers" based on the performance of white athletes at the Olympics. After apparently disconnecting or cutting the volume level of the caller, according to Media Matters for America, Limbaugh said: "[Y]ou're saying I'm being racist because I'm saying blacks can't swim … I mentioned the swimming comment only because it's not going to be fair if there is a lot of water competition in this. It just isn't. It is not a racial or racist comment at all."
Peekaboo...I see you!
Peekaboo...I see you!
I think this is actually a very clever idea. It's generated a LOT of discussion and the bottom line for ALL of the discussion is that racism and bigotry are WRONG and unacceptable. Why NOT trot out the fact that people can be racist, instead of sweeping it under the rug? From a sociological standpoint, I think that this season could be extremely interesting. However, I think that Burnett is going to be sure that any overt racism winds up on the cutting room floor.
Well-Behaved Women Seldom Make History...Laurel Thatcher Ulrich
I agree. It only takes one comment or event, even if it is misunderstood. Then someone is branded a "racist" and someone else feels like the victim of racism. Is it worth exploiting these potential problems in front of millions of the viewing public for ratings? These people have to leave the island one day and they may have to spend the rest of their lives explaining something they said or did in the heat of a reality-tv competition. This goes beyond mere backstabbing and gossip that is normal to Survivor.
Race is a junk term. We are all the same species. We just have different colors and features because we adapted to our different environments, differently a long, long time ago.
I have a "what if".
What if these people actually get along with each other (for the most part) and there are no problems attributed to race? Will it still be a bad thing? I'm sure we'll see arguements like we do every year that are tied directly to game-play, but I don't remember any of those being racial.
I think that the division of these teams is part of MB and company trying to come up with a new concept for this Survivor. Sure they tried the 4/4 person teams last year separated by age and gender. Now this year they are separating them by ethnicity. Probst is right, in that there has not been a lot of ethnic diversity in previous Survivors, and I believe that they might have thought that putting them together at the get go might create an "ethnic" alliance. However, they are not counting each person's culture into that, and that is where the true dynamics will come in. Generally speaking, this idea is most likely not meant to be racist. You have to remember that with racism, comes prejudice. Sure people are exposed to that every day in all walks of life. No other person can reflect how another person's ethnicity makes them feel because they have not been in that other person's position. But look at it this way. If you visit a large city, a large college campus or even other areas of the country, people tend (not always!) to associate with others of the same ethnic background, and through careers and classes, etc, they "merge" with others of different ethnicities. In this survivor, the competitions allow for the "merging" until they are indeed merged into two tribes. It is a bit stereotypical to put them together like this, yet, it is not completely so far-fetched in that they are denying a person or ethnic group priveleges because of race, which would indicate that this is a racist show. They all will have the same chance to win reward and immunity. I think it is possible to view this show objectively, for what it is. Survivor. It doesn't have to strictly be about race and racism. We could enjoy the idea of its ethnic diversity instead of looking at the same token model/actor types that we have been seeing season after season. Most of all, we could at least give it and the people on it a chance and always not tune in if it is not up to our expections.