Why sub-groups tend to fight each other despite being labelled among the same tree.

I believe that many people who are apart of certain races and religions tend to face struggles of discrimination that is done not necessarily by different groups but people among their own groups who practice their views differently despite being under the same tree.

I as a Muslim who was raised in New Zealand have had my fair share of discrimination among people of different categories but also people who fall under the same category as mine, Muslims who came from different cultural backgrounds. Of course I do not justify any discrimination, I believe that there are people who are devout and people who are not necessarily devout but follows aspects of Islam due to it being apart of your culture, I am the latter.

Knowing this, I have had many Muslims thinking I am crazy due to my Ideology in life ad have been laughed at. This goes to show that despite laws of and faith within ones beliefs, we still live by an imperfect social code where there are loopholes; loopholes in the sense that there is closeted prejudice among every community despite their claim of being welcoming to anyone.

With a social code, we live by an unwritten social contract where unwritten rules or acting in society gives humans ways of communicating and are taught what is normal and abnormal but in the process we fall to social control and ranking. Despite collectivism being the desired practice in certain communities, it will always fall to individualistic ideologies where people are seen as better to so race, gender, sexuality and factors that are given among these sort of circumstances.

Black and White movies... next up US

I recently watched the movie "Baggage claim" which has a predominantly black cast. Which is a good thing, personally I enjoy watching Black movies. Not that i'm being racist to white films I think that sometimes its just good to see Colored people being represented on Television, even though i'm not African American i think i can relate more to their stories than white stories. I love the series Empire I think it is very empowering to black people, and i hope that one day i'll be able to help create influential and empowering stuff for Pacific people as we are a minority and we are hardly ever represented on screen, apart from within New Zealand. Anyways watching "Baggage claim" i started thinking about how by having a predominantly black cast makes the African American race seem like the superior people rather than white people. I think this is done not necessarily to be racist to white people but rather to empower African American people.

I think colored people have in someway or the other had influential success within the Film Industry. For example Bollywood, Chinese Action Films and African American films. But Pacific people have just touched the surface of this. I think this is what makes us again a minority in the way that we are hardly ever present or being represented onscreen's worldwide. And when we are it is the question of how we are being represented, and who is creating this representation.

I find that the people of the Pacific are at a disadvantage and at a advantage.
The disadvantage is that we are under represented in the world, people all over the world hardly know that we exist because we are hardly represented. And when we are represented are we being represented in the right ways, who is creating this representation of us and can this representation be changed.?
The advantages we still can change these representations because we are under represented on screens world wide. Our stories have not been told thus we still have time to develop an identity hopefully one that is empowering and influential.

Is colonization a bad thing?

The lecture on Colonization got me thinking... Is Colonization in regards to where i come from a bad thing or a good thing?

Colonization is and has always been thought of as a negative ordeal, because of how it negatively impacted the loss of culture, the loss of land, and all the oppression that came with it.

However in this blog I want to question this. 

How would Samoa life be like if it wasn't for Colonization?

What would be different

For one thing, religion would be different in regards to Christianity and how Samoa's culture is built off of it, hence "Fa'avae i le Atua Samoa" meaning "Samoa is founded on God" This statement motto in Samoan is an indication of how Christianity is apart of Samoan culture. 

Christianity arrived in Samoa when the missionaries arrived on their shores. 

What would Samoa be like without Christianity? would we be better of or worse?

I guess i can't answer this question as I cannot imagine Christianity not being apart of Samoan Identity... because it is so embedded into their way of life. For example the way i was brought up i was never to question anything about God and i had to attend Sunday school and Church every Sunday even though I never really understood why. 

I don't know I guess what im trying to say is Colonization isn't all negative if you think about it in the right way because without Colonization would I be born here in New Zealand getting these opportunities that are available to me? or what kind of person would i be if Colonization didn't happen?

I'm not saying that Colonization is a positive thing, No! I just wanted to think about what would it be like if things (Colonization) didn't happen the way that it did?

There is Feminism... and then Colored woman.

Feminism we all should be familiar with what Feminism is, we all should know that Feminism is to do with political views, ideologies and social movements that empowers woman, by standing from the point of view that Females should have equal rights as Males, right?
Does Feminism empower all females?
Or is it another white construct that dictates white authority?..

The first really diverse show that i was ever introduced to around the age of fourteen in 2008 was the show "The L word." I loved this series because at that time i never saw anything like it. I loved it because the cast was predominately female. Predominately WHITE females.
Everyone talks about "Orange is the New Black" and how this show breaks boundaries, I agree the show does break boundaries in the way that the cast is a even mix of white and colored characters. Whereas "The L Word" used a predominately White cast. "Orange is the New Black" and "The L word" are similar in the way that they both deal with the prevalent issue of Female empowerment through Lesbian relationships.
The question that i am trying to formulate is: Can colored Females identify with Feminism or does feminism in some way only cater to empowering white females?

White feminist woman complain"I don't make as much money as the Man" and colored woman are like "Well i don't make as much money as you." Just using this as an example to illustrate that Feminism allows for Woman to challenge dominant views of Men being more privileged in society, when white Females are more privileged than colored Females. So is Feminism really empowering all Females or is Feminism in someway racist in the way that it lacks inclusion of colored females situation within society?

Even in "Orange is the New Black" the main character is thus still white so really it stands from a white perspective in the way that the female perspective in the series is a white female perspective. Therefore everything within the series is positioned within the frame from a white perspective. I'm not saying that Colored Females can't identify with Feminism because obviously they identify because they are females BUT their is still a lack of understanding that colored woman are in fact are below the average white female. Colored females don't only have to feel inferior to men they also feel inferior in terms of color in terms of sexuality. So in my opinion Feminism does not even begin to empower colored females...

The Privilege we give to the WHITE.

It seems its a defense mechanism for us colored people when white people seem to say something that offends us to automatically reply "You're Racist!!" or think that the white person is being racist. When really their just Racist!! (haha) I remember as a kid when i shifted to Melbourne Australia I automatically hated it and at that age i didn't even know what racist was. But i literally remember the feeling of being different surrounded by so many white people. The power of white people is in how they live pretty much anywhere and are everywhere in world and have made contact with everyone in the world (Colonization). Therefore they are not strangers in foreign lands because everyone knows of them. In my family I hate to say it but your deemed prettier the fairer your skin is and the smaller your nose is, i don't really know if this is the same in all Samoan families. For example the "Afakasi" literally meaning half cast, half white and half Samoan. The Afakasi kids in my families are always given special treatment are always complemented on how beautiful they look etc. As for the the rest of us getting compliments such as "You're getting fat", or "man your really black". My point is we colored people can play a role in "White privilege" in the way that we separate ourselves from the whites, unconsciously putting ourselves down in comparison to them. Religion is a really influential part of Samoan culture yet we are praising a God that is illustrated as a white man. We learned and accepted a religion that was from a white man. My point here is that in a way, at times we give white people privilege. The color white is associated with meanings such as light, purity, perfection in comparison to black, therefore the color itself reinforces its power. We colored people complain about when white people point out their superiority or authority and yet we don't just tell them where to go or put them in their place. I remember an incident that happened to me in Australia when i was around twelve. This was my first time going to an all white school, so me and my sister were the only brown kids. Coming from a school where there are only one or two white kids at school and then it being switched, and you actually see how different it is to be white. So the incident was there was these three white girls sitting behind me and my Mum at the park after school when my mum came to pick me up. My mum was talking in Samoan to me and i was talking back and I could hear these white girls in the background giggling and mocking the way we were talking in our language. My mum just ignored it, but it was loud, so I knew she could hear them mimicking the way she was talking to me. I was getting so annoyed and angry i had a can of coke in my hand and what i did was i walked over to them my Mum just looked at me surprised, I stood in front of them they looked up at me because they were seated on the grass, and they continued giggling. I got the can of coke i had in my hand and poured it all over the top of them. Then I laughed at them and said "Whats your problem?" they replied "You ******* coconut go back to where your from" they got up and started running away, I was running after them. My mother kept calling my name but i was so furious at how they disrespected my Mum, I didn't care about myself but just seeing it being done to someone you love is a whole different story. Anyways after when i got back to my Mum she was like "why did you do that for?" And me being that age i was just thinking their mocking the way we talk? why should we let them make us feel insecure about the way we speak? And that was the first time I experienced how we colored people give the white people privilege at times by putting ourselves down in their presence.

Maori and Media: The Basics

Out of 1757 Stories on ONE News, 3 News and Prime, only 1.8% referred to Maori, which are 15% of our population. Of this small percentage, 56% were about one single topic: child abuse.

This means that someone forming their opinion or image of Maori people only based on the surrounding Media, as many people do, would have a negative image that link Maori people to crime, drugs, domestic and child abuse and poverty. This is a vicious cycle as it perpetuates a stereotype and encourages a 'self fulfilling prophecy'.

Mainstream Media and Maori.

Mainstream media have a history of excluding, marginalising and stereotyping Maori, Maori issues, and te ao Maori. It also has a history of not reporting treaty issues fairly or properly.

This is improving, some media practitioners and organizations are doing better job than others, but much still needs to be done to create a fair and balances representation of Maori combat the negative images perpetuated by the media.

Commonalities between Indigenous Races around the World

Indigenous people are too often at the bottom of social indicators in their country. They also share the experience of being colonized. These two factors are not unrelated. The resurgence of indigenous groups reclaiming their resources has created conflict with the state. Too often, mainstream media has represented such claims, not as justifiable requests for land and resources illegally taken but as “taking something away from “us”. 

Us being the dominant ‘majority’ that doesn't include the indigenous minority. The mainstream media has power in determining the majority perception about indigenous people: not definitely and absolutely, but it certainly offers influence and reinforces the status quo. It can encourage or undermine fair and progressive rights and often chooses the latter.

United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of Indigenous People by Rodolfo Stavenhagen said: These findings are of special concern to the special rapporteur and highlight a systematic negative description of maori in media coverage, an issue that should be addressed through the anti-racism provisions of New Zealand’s Human Rights Acts.

Black Chives Matter

A little progressive comedy to lighten up the dialogue. Initially I was a little weary of a pun being made of something sensitive and important, but what the creator is aiming to do is raise this issue in a grammar of her own in order to make a point. A great way to make a positive impact through her forum and to connect to and inform people while being accessible.

Humour has the power to raise difficult subjects. If you read through the comments you'll find plenty of people that disagree and condemn the video for being tasteless and others taking the social amnesia root of "so sick of hearing about this aren't we all equal" (Polysemic Bimodality anyone?)

BUT you'll also find people engaging with the content in a way that continues the conversation in a progressive direction. Though I don't know why this young man thinks that black lives matter is about social inclusion. Will it help black people to hang out with him? He'd have to be a pretty top notch guy? Could Mitchell Stacy be the answer to authentic equality?  I think not. (White hero anyone?)

Thanks for reading,
Vik

Social Justice Warrior

This is a different kind of ‘us and them.’ I wanted to touch on the new divide between progressive and regressive actions and individuals. This is obviously not a new divide- in fact it must be one of the oldest – but I am interested in the new ways it is materialized. It was Edmund Burke who said “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”. Old Ed has no particular relevance himself (as the thoroughly white founder of modern conservatism) but he makes a good point.

There is a trend towards dismissing those concerned with social circumstance as ‘too sensitive’, ‘shit stirrers’, ‘social justice warriors’ and occasionally ‘terrorists’. Once upon a time there was a certain dignity is saying fuck you to the man. Now I’m not denying there would have been backlash and ‘you’re upsetting the status quo’ moaning, but at least the cause was recognized as actually existing.  If another white man tells me that racism and sexism doesn’t exist I am going to blow a gasket.

This brings me back to Edmund Burke. Contemporary resistance to social justice (which contrary to popular belief is actually a GOOD thing) is mostly delivered with a sort of ignorant ambivalence. There’s no firm counter argument to equity that has any foot to stand on, at least none I’ve ever been offered in a debate. When someone offers a criticism of dominant systems or structures to point a finger back and yell traitor (or ‘too sensitive’, ‘shit stirrer’ etc) does NOTHING for either side.  When someone talks of their own disadvantage, it’s not about YOU.

I.e. When someone criticizes western feminism for dismissing the concerns of people of color, it does not devalue your right to vote or wear pants or reap any other benefits of the movement. It opens a possibility for progress into an even better future. When someone questions why we don’t mourn the dead after acts of terrorism in Syria the same way we do France: they challenge Eurocentrism, not the French or your freshly filtered profile picture.

This is what I mean by an ‘us and them’, we are so quick to get up in arms and reject anything we’re given that we destroy any hope for meaningful progress. I think part of this is because of the new media and the increasing ‘sound byte’ nature of information and conversation. There is so little said in 140 characters but there is SO much to misinterpret. We should spend more time thinking about progress (especially for those who are less fortunate than ourselves) and should re-inject some dignity into saying fuck you to the man. No ones ever made change without getting a little loud!

Thanks for reading,

Vik

Playing into the stereotypes.

PLAYING INTO THE STEREOTYPES

The lecture on Comedy and racial profiling explained a lot for me in regards to the Pacific Media and how it is shaped. For a year i attended Pacific Institute of Performing Art, a tertiary that aims to foster the growth of talented Pacific Performers. The lecture for week 6 used the example of "The Skits" and how stereotypes were used by people with insider knowledge not to reinforce and affirm the stereotypes but to explore them through satirical humor according to Sarina Pearson. The show reflects certain truths about Samoans situations within domestic and religious life. I find the show hilarious and was introduced to the program from a young age. The show is one of the first pieces of media that put Samoan people on screens in New Zealand. My point is that this show is very influential in the way that roles are determined for Samoan or just generally Pacific Islanders. Is that a Good thing or a bad thing? If you think about it since "The Skits" have Pacific Islanders on screen grown out of these stereotypical roles or are they still creating media that explore the same Stereotypical roles through satirical humor. "Fresh" a T.V series that is similar to "The Skits" in the way that it is they both use Television as a media platform, but also because they both explore stereotypes associated with the Pacific Community in Aotearoa through satirical humor. If there is about 10 years in between "The Skits" and "Fresh" how has Pacific Media changed? For me it hasn't and that is due to the audience that such media is made for. Such media texts explain Audience tastes which in a way reflects the people. Pacific Islanders love their Comedy and have always loved satire since before Colonization. It was present then in traditional performing arts and still is present today in their form of traditional performing arts, and thus it is still present in other forms of performing arts through media in "The Skits" and in "Fresh." I guess what i'm trying to say is how is Pacific Media and Pacific roles going to evolve if Pacific people just keep reproducing the same content over and over again. Yes they do appeal to our Pacific audiences that are familiar with these regulated images of our situation, but don't we want to move forward and out of these situations instead of continuing to laugh at our misfortunes? To be honest  i loved to watch pacific Media as a kid my favorite was "The Laughing Samoans" when i used to watch it i used to feel empowered because I was seeing my people represented through media which was rare. But now when i watch, yeah I get the jokes and I get whats ironic about it, but I don't feel empowered and I guess that's what I wanna see the empowerment of Pacific Peoples through Media and casting.

Would the James Bond still be James Bond if he were black?

There has been a lot of speculation on who will be the next James Bond and whether or not it could or should be a black male. I believe that the perfect actor to play the next James Bond would be Idris Elba. I believe that the idea of a James Bond actor being black is of no relevance to the character (I mean are they setting the moves in 1950’s or 2016). The idea that this could be a problem amuses me because if I was to point out an idea that was troubling to the James Bond series, I would most likely talk about the character of James Bond’s relationships with women (he often hits them, like all the time, like every movie). If you were to watch an older James Bond movie you would be surprised and probably amused by the issues that are being dealt with (German villains, who does that anymore?) and this is the true problem changing people’s childhood and there first conceptions. James Bond is a relic of the past and only reflects the idea of a ‘gentleman’ not what his ethnic background is. Ian Fleming’s James Bond is a reflection of the past (before Facebook) but cannot be treated as such. Time passes and the ideas which hold a character should change or risk being part of the history books.