Jesse Helms, one of the most controversial and prominent Republican Senators of the past half-decade, passes away at 86.
UPDATE: A 2001 review of Sen. Helms' career by Michael Graham. Plus, more from WTVD-TV, CNN and CBS News.
SECOND UPDATE: From 1997, a (not entirely flattering) profile of Sen. Helms by Fred Barnes.
About fifteen years ago, I came across a book written by an African-American feminist denouncing various forms of perceived “white supremacy.” In one section of the book, the writer actually condemned interracial dating between black men and white women as an example of “white supremacy”, arguing that black men only desired white women as a result of media manipulation.
According to the writer, the media exclusively promoted blond-haired, blue-eyed white women as the epitome of American beauty, and intentionally downplayed the beauty of other racial groups. Because of this, she argued, black men were conditioned to think that only white women were beautiful—and thus, their dating choices were influenced not by affection or common interests, but by the underhandedness of white-dominated mainstream media.
My reaction then was, “So what?” It’s still my reaction today.
It’s impossible to deny that it took a while for Madison Avenue to deviate from “traditional” definitions of beauty. It’s nice to see Queen Latifah and Halle Berry as spokespersons for major makeup companies, because not all that long ago, they would have been turned down as spokespersons. It’s a great sign of American progress.
However, this doesn’t mean everything that took place in the “old days” was evil. It can be argued that the preponderance of blue-eyed blondes in previous generations of advertising was not the result of racism, but of business.
Let’s face it, years ago advertisers were exclusively focused on selling products to the majority of American consumers. Who were those consumers? “Typical white people,” as Barack Obama would put it. If a majority of American consumers had been black, African-Americans would have dominated advertising back then. However, since the majority of American consumers happened to be white, American advertisers went hunting where the ducks were.
Advertising has always been about selling fantasies—fantasies of beauty, power, wealth, agelessness. Years ago, American advertisers knew there was a general cultural fascination with blondes—a fascination that, as British author Joanna Pitman noted in her 2003 book On Blondes, has actually existed for centuries. Advertisers exploited that fascination for years—and, from a business perspective, they weren’t wrong to do so. If hiring a blonde model to advertise a product helped to move more of that product, then the decision to hire the model was not an act of racism, but of common sense.
In an increasingly diverse country—a country whose white population is anticipated to drop under fifty percent over the next fifty years—it makes sense for advertisers to broaden the definition of what is considered beautiful. If hiring Halle Berry to advertise your makeup brand will lead to increased makeup sales, you’d be a fool not to hire her.
There’s a clear logic in the new way of doing business—but there was a clear logic in the old way of doing business, too. The old advertising model was not necessarily evil. The social results weren’t necessarily evil either.
Were black men—like white men, consumers of the dominant media culture—influenced by Madison Avenue’s old-school standards of beauty? Of course! Black men are, after all, men, and they will naturally respond to projections of beauty.
Was Sammy Davis Jr. subtly influenced by Madison Avenue’s standards when he dated Kim Novak and married May Britt? I’m almost certain he was—but as Dick Cheney would say, “So?” Plenty of white guys were influenced by Madison Avenue’s standards when they dated and married blondes. Davis was behaving just as anybody else would.
Advertisers used blondes to sell images of happiness—and millions of American men of all races emotionally responded to those images. That’s not nasty or noxious; it’s natural.
Today, Madison Avenue is promoting a broader definition of beauty to reflect the increased diversity of America. That’s also good. Beauty can be found in all races, and it’s wonderful that capitalism compels American business to reflect this variety of beauty. Perhaps the beauty standards of previous eras prevented nonwhite women from being perceived as sex symbols. No one can seriously argue that this is the case today.
Promoting blue-eyed blondes as the American standard of beauty was good for business years ago. Promoting women from a variety of ethnic backgrounds as the American standard of beauty is good for business today. Those who were promoted as beautiful years ago became the objects of cultural desire; this will be the fate of those advertised as gorgeous today. It’s a phenomenon that’s real—and really no big deal.
Barack Obama rips off George W. Bush. I've seen it all.
UPDATE: More from the New York Times and Washington Post.
Dan Quayle kinda likes Barack Obama. Lord love a duck... (Dan, no matter how much you praise Obama, the mainstream press will never like you, pal.)
Jonah Goldberg and Mark Levin on conservatives and civil rights. Levin is right that conservative skepticism about the 1964 Civil Rights Act was based more on libertarianism than it was on racism--but the problem is, regardless of what the motivation was, conservative skepticism about the Act led to, among other things, four and a half decades of really bad PR for the American right.
The Barack Obama-James Dobson feud heats up.
UPDATE: More from Ross Douthat, the Washington Post and World Net Daily.
Recent Comments