Dear Carlotta Ferlito: We will paint ourselves white

Freedom of speech. According to the First Amendment of the United States, individuals are granted this liberty. Other countries and institutions have also incorporated this ideology as a paramount freedom that extends to all individuals. However, in some cases, this right can be utilized to harm individuals, rather than serve as a conducive tool for individuals to communicate thoughts. In the case of Carlotta Ferlito, an Italian gymnast, she issued this statement upon the announcement of Simone Biles' placement as a World Champion Gymnast, the first black woman to do so:

'Maybe next time we'll paint our skin black so we can win'


The knowledge issue that is posed here is the extent to which one's 'freedom of speech' should be protected.

Some individuals who became aware of Ferlito's comment said that she should not be penalized because it was a 'slip of a tongue' and 'she has a right to express her disappointment of not winning the World Champion Gymnast title'.

Although I agree that individuals have a right to complain and express disappointment, I do not agree with using any racial, homophobic, islamophobic, or any other form of discriminatory and prejudiced remark to express this emotion. It simply has no place. In the context of Carlotta Ferlito's remark, she implies that in order to succeed, one must paint himself/herself black to gain some sort of privilege that 'blackness' (somehow) entails. In response, I have issued the following statements:

Dear Carlotta Ferlito,

Thank you very much for exposing your ignorance to the world. I will take some time out of my day to educate you on a few things. Firstly, I suggest instead of you paining yourself black to gain recognition as the gold medalist in the World Championship, Simone Biles should paint herself white. I think its imperative that in order to be taken seriously, one must resemble those of European ancestry. Ms. Ferlito, don't paint yourself black, it will simply cause a plethora of troubles ahead. You will be subject to racial insults and taunts. Your value will be reduced to stereotypes and any accomplishment you received will be deemed credible only because 'she was black, they gave her the position because she's black.' As you can see, painting yourself black won't do you any good. Last time I checked, you are white. There are no negative stereotypes associated with being white. So take heart dear, your skin color is perfect to society. Stay white. Simone Biles, on the other hand, is black. With this in mind, it would be beneficial for her to paint herself white. That way, she will be taken seriously on her accomplishments because apparently, if one is black, then his or her achievements will be reduced to being 'wanted' on the basis of 'being black'. Black people aren't good enough to be seen for the skills they (apparently) have. If Simone Biles paints herself white, then maybe, just maybe, people will think her winning was authentic and credible.

Sincerely,

T

America: Melting Pot or Melting Not?

America, named the 'cultural melting pot' nation. Individuals from diverse backgrounds, ethnic groups, religions, and races migrate here. Consequently, one can find rich and diverse cultures.
Although I acknowledge this aspect, I disagree with the term 'melting pot'.

Why?

Because, by definition, a substance that melts to form a cohesive unit with other components loses some of its chemical properties in the process. Take bronze for example, although it is primarily composed of tin and copper, the components that make it up are not apparent in the final product (bronze). We don't see the tin and we don't see the copper. We just see the bronze.
In the same way, by saying that America is a 'melting pot' of cultures, one is saying that several cultures merge together to form one uniform substance. This is not true.

The multitude of cultures in the United States are distinct. One can easily separate Asian, from African, from African-American, from Hispanic, from European, from American cultures, etc.

There is not a significant overlap within the cultures in the United States.

A bowl of fruit salad, rather than a smoothie, is symbolic to the multitude of cultures that exist in America. One can readily 'pick out' one culture from another in the same bowl. The cultures that exist are not 'blended' to the same consistency.

To be or not to be: Makeup

The seemingly imperative accessory that is worn by most women, makeup.

A touch of gloss to create an illusion of voluptuous lips, a thick black trace of eye-liner that accentuates the form of the eye, a dash of powder to add vibrancy to cheeks, and a seal of eye shadow to deepen the depth and dimension of her eyes. Makeup.

Although I understand that beauty is in the 'eye of the beholder', a knowledge issue that I often encounter is the extent to which the use of makeup serves a deterrent to recognizing 'true beauty'?

The media contains a plethora of misconstrued ideals of beauty; light skin; extreme thinness; painfully white teeth; and protruding and large breasts. The average female does not have all these features, yet the media is not representative of this fact. Consequently, you have a large population of females who are attempting to attain the fictitious ideal of beauty, with an emphasis on makeup. Additionally, you then produce a society that defines a female's attractiveness in this respect.

Now, with that in mind, I find it really hard to accept the fact that people say beauty is subjective if a consistent (and distorted) image of beauty is presented. If you ask a panel of people to rate a female's beauty (ranging from no make-up to increased make-up), there will be a positive correlation as the amount of makeup increases. 

Although there is a predominant understanding that excessive/heavy make-up is unattractive, there is a prevailing belief that make-up usage makes a female appear more attractive. This begs the question, is there an inherent universal 'understanding' of what beauty is? Or is this universal perception a result of the presentation of beauty in the media? 

Yes beauty is subjective, but to what extent?

Westgate Shooting: Kenya - Somali Border

The Westgate shooting was an incident that immediately resulted in shaken relations between the Kenyan government and Somali refugees in Kenya. Officials are considering removing the refugee camps; their reasoning is that  "some of these facilities are being used as a training ground" (Kenyan `MPs 'to demand Somali refugee camps closures'). Al-Shabaab is a terrorist group based in Somalia that has links with Al-Qaeda. The shooters in the Westgate shooting are said to have connections with the aforementioned militant organizations.

As paralleled with the stereotype that ensued after 9/11 of Muslims being militant extremists, the WestGate shooting deemed all Somalis as rouge thugs. Consequently, more measures have been proposed in Kenya's government to heighten boarder patrol.

The knowledge issue at hand is the extent to which preconceived notions about a specific ethnic group contribute to boarder control?

Although it is true that the amount of crime that follows certain group is a contributing factor to how stringent a border is, this creates room for generalizing. For example, in the United States, once the issue of legal documentation in the Hispanic community arose, so did the issue of crime This was one contributing factor, among others, that perpetuated the stereotype of Hispanics are crime inducing illegals.
Similarly, in Kenya, and at the national level, Somalians are being viewed as terrorists who could be arriving in the form of refugees.

Each nation has the right of securing safety, but it is vital to ask if the increased need for safety is fueld out of genuine concern or preconceived notions about a certain group of people.