Today in American Studies we were talking about Tokenism. This immediately made me think about a character on the show, and my guilty pleasure, South Park. The only black character on the show is named Token. Token Black actually. I never really realized this little joke until today in 
class.

Token from South Park

It seems to me that children's television is the worst when it comes to tokenism. For example, just look at some shows playing on the widely popular Disney Channel. On The Suite Life of Zack and Cody, London is the token asian and Mr. Moseby is the token Black. Even on the mega hit Hannah Montana, Oliver is the only Jewish person. Of course the channel is taking strides to become more diverse. For example the show Wizards of Weaverly Place was the first Disney show to showcase a latino family. But you can still feel Disney pushing for diversity.

The other big children's network is Nickelodeon. Their show Victorious has a token black character Andre, but another show of theirs, ICarly, does not have a token character. None of the main characters on ICarly are black, but rather they are all caucasian. Is this something good or should the show be ridiculed for this? It really makes me think if tokenism is a necessarily bad thing.

I also wonder how this tokenism effects a generation if it does at all. In the movie, The Holiday, Kate Winslet's character says,"You're supposed to be the leading lady in your own life, for God's sake!" I wonder if minorities don't feel like the leading character. As kids they learn from watching TV that they are  just a side character there to give color to an otherwise bland cast.

So is tokenism bad? Would you praise a show like ICarly for having all the main characters be the same race or would you rather praise a show like The Suite Life of Zack and Cody which has a more colorful cast, pushed as it may seem?   

To Have Faith in Education

In the United States there are 244 Catholic colleges, 50 Jewish colleges, even 1 Hindu college and in Berkeley California a new college has sprung up. But this college isn't affiliated with the above religions. Zaytuna College is the first Muslim university in the United States (Click Here to see a video and USA Today article on Zaytuna College). 

Not everybody is thrilled about this new university, in fact there is much controversy over it. According to the USA Today article mentioned above Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Frank Gaffney, believes that the school is trying to spread Islam in America. 

But when you think about it, America is littered with various religious affiliated schools that include Notre Dame, Brandeis University, and many others. No one seems to have a problem with these schools, other then the occasional sports rivalry.

So why is it then, that this small college of 15 students has struck such a nerve? In American Studies we have been talking about how since 9/11 many Americans have an unclear perspective on the teachings of Islam. The ironic thing is that one of Zaytuna College's goal is to teach non-muslim americans about their world to give a better understanding and less resentment against their culture, but at the same time these non-muslim americans are the people who are not supporting the school. 

I believe the only way to stop this bias is the same way that Zaytuna College is trying, which is to better educate people on the beliefs of Islam. But how should this be taught? It seems as though many americans don't want to learn about this religion and if the information was just shoved  down their throats, they wouldn't respond well. Maybe what has to been done is to teach students in school about various religions. I know for me, I was taught about religions in World History class freshmen year. If every child in america was given the same information I got, maybe my generation could be the generation to change things, but until then we'll have to persist on with these stubborn, non informed americans.

Make 'Em Laugh?

On the first full day of school we found out that one of our American Studies teachers, Mr. Bolos, "died" and in his place was our substitute teacher Mr. Solob (okay so it really was just Mr. Bolos in outdated glasses). Mr. Solob had a very unique accent, and each time he mispronounced our names everyone, even me, would erupt with laughter. It was funny, but was if right?
What if something really did happen to Mr. Bolos and we really did have a sub from a different country, would we have laughed at his accent? Probably not, because it's just not right. According to Migrationpolicy.org, around 1.1 million to 1.3 million legal immigrants come to America each year and it is very feasible that one could become a substitute teacher. These teachers probably have accents and say our names weirdly. I would hope that the class wouldn't laugh and give them credit for trying.
But at the same time making fun of how someone talks is not a new form of comedy. Just look at Elmer Fudd from Loony Toons. Whenever he says "Wascal Wabbit" you can't help but laugh, but really you’re laughing at a speech impediment when he can't pronounce his R's. On The Simpsons the Characters of the Indian Apu and the Scotsman Willy have very stereotypical accents that are a big punchline in the story line. Even in one of my favorite movies, Singin' in the Rain, one of the biggest jokes is Lina Lamont's extremely nasally talking voice. I hope that if most people met someone like these in real life they wouldn't start laughing.
The truth is that America is very diverse with MANY different accents within it and almost all of them have been made fun of in one way or another. But I still wonder, is it right?