Undercover Sistah Day on Suits

Undercover Sistah Day on Suits

On Wednesday night, two of my guilty pleasures came together… well, three, actually. Suits + Pretty Little Liars + two of my favorite undercover sistahs, Meghan Markle and Troian Bellisario.      I know I’ve mentioned many times how I enjoy being the Biracial Whisperer. PLL‘s Troian Bellisario and Suit‘s Meghan Markle are two of my favorite…
Why I'm Now (Probably) an Ulta Fan For Life

Why I'm Now (Probably) an Ulta Fan For Life

When you're a woman of color, particular if your skin tone skews more brown than beige, shopping for makeup is exhausting, frustrating, and sometimes even humiliating. Even though it is 2015, many makeup companies haven't attempted to make many shades for us darker ladies. Even those that make darker shades make far less of those hues than they do beige, and they often get the undertones completely wrong. Many beige women of color aren't completely exempt from the awful makeup-buying experience either. The problem here is, again, undertones. Well, really, the problem is bias.

This isn't a new problem, really. Ask any brown woman about her experiences with buying makeup or using makeup artists, and you're bound to get an earful.

Enter Nykhor Paul. She's a South Sudanese model, and she's gorgShe's also dark-skinned. On Monday, she posted this (much warranted) rant on Instagram:

Dear white people in the fashion world! Please don't take this the wrong way but it's time you people get your shit right when it comes to our complexion! Why do I have to bring my own makeup to a professional show when all the other white girls don't have to do anything but show up wtf! Don't try to make me feel bad because I am blue black its 2015 go to Mac, Bobbi Brown, Makeup forever, Iman cosmetic, black opal, even LancĂ´me and Clinique carried them plus so much more. there's so much options our there for dark skin tones today. A good makeup artist would come prepare and do there research before coming to work because often time you know what to expect especially at a show! Stop apologizing it's insulting and disrespectful to me and my race it doesn't help, seriously! Make an effort at least! That goes for NYC, London, Milan, Paris and Cape Town plus everywhere else that have issues with black skin tones. Just because you only book a few of us doesn't mean you have the right to make us look ratchet. I'm tired of complaining about not getting book as a black model and I'm definitely super tired of apologizing for my blackness!!!! Fashion is art, art is never racist it should be inclusive of all not only white people, shit we started fashion in Africa and you modernize and copy it! Why can't we be part of fashion fully and equally?

A photo posted by nykhor (@nykhor) on Jul 6, 2015 at 9:55am PDT

Her message resonated very deeply with women of color, famous and not so famous alike. My pal from law school, Robinne Lee, expressed similar sentiments on her Facebook page about her frustration of dealing with on-set makeup artists who are not prepared for women of color:

"I never ever show up on a set without my own foundation and powder. Never ever. I've been in this business for twenty years and you only need a couple of bad experiences to learn a lesson..." (reprinted with permission from Robinne Lee) 

All over Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, black women, celebrities and non-celebrities alike shared stories of makeup artists, hairstylists, and stores that treated our blackness—our black hair, our black skin—as an inconvenience. Like nearly every other brown woman of color in this country, I have been there before. This May, when I was browsing through Ulta, looking at aisle after aisle of "30 shades of beige and two of brown, but not YOUR brown" and "our colors only come in light, light/medium, and medium. 'MURICA!", the frustration was just too much for me. I tweeted the following, not really expecting anything to come of it [because nothing ever does]: 

So imagine my surprise when Ulta actually responded:

So, I took this open invitation, and I ran with it. Below is the part of the very long e-mail I fired off to Ulta the next day: 

In response to your request to me on Twitter ..., here is the recurring problem I have in Ulta's stores ... :
As is evident by my signature line, I am a woman of color. Now, it's hard enough being a woman of color and trying to find makeup. Most brands, unless they are minority-owned, simply just don't make enough colors for women of color. So I'm not going to fault Ulta for not carrying more colors if the brand itself doesn't carry them. However, if a brand carries a more diverse line of makeup, I would expect that your stores—particularly those in diverse neighborhoods—would. I can't tell you the exact demographics for ... However, just looking at the schools zoned in the areas near this particular Ulta, this neighborhood is about 40% non-white. Looking around, I can tell you that there is a heavy population of black, Hispanic, Indian, Vietnamese, and Filipino. Although there are huge variations of colors within those communities, we tend to have a lot of tan-to-brown people. So I would expect that for brands that actually carry makeup in brownish colors, Ulta in our neighborhood would have them.
No, it doesn't. I have requested several times. I have been in the store when other customers have requested more colors (and have been told, sometimes mistakenly, that the brand doesn't carry them. I've looked online, this isn't true). I've even had people who work in the store complain to me that they can't find colors for themselves either. So, obviously, this is either a management or corporate problem. And, from what I can see on Ulta.com, this is a corporate problem.
Yesterday I was looking for Dermablend. From their color match system, I know that my concealer color is Cocoa. Looking at Ulta.com, "Cedar" and "Cocoa" (the only two brown concealers) are listed as "online only," which means none of your stores will carry this. Similarly, every brown color of Dermablend's Cover Creme except for the very darkest brown, which is a good 8 shades or so darker than the darkest beige you carry (which means you've missed pretty much every tan or brown woman who isn't extremely dark with red undertones—a description which actually matches exactly no one I know), is listed as online only. I looked for the color of Smashbox Photo Filter Powder Foundation that matches my tone per Smashbox's website. That, too, was available online only. You used to carry Iman (a brand for women of color) in stores. Now it's online only. The Smashbox Try It Kit: BB+Halo comes in a "Dark" variety, and Ulta doesn't even bother to carry that one online (but Birchbox does, and so does Amazon.com...).
Basically, everywhere I look in the Ultaverse for colors that might fit me, Ulta has deemed that these colors are "online only" and not fit for store shelves—if it carries them at all. While I love very much to shop online, the one thing I loathe buying online unless I absolutely have to is makeup (foundation and powder, at least). This is for obvious reasons. I mean, how do I know that a foundation or powder is going to actually work for my skin without trying it on? Is it really necessary to have space for 25 shades of beige but only 1 shade of brown (if any)? This is ridiculous and biased. It's also demoralizing. .... I shouldn't feel like a second-class citizen when simply trying to buy powder foundation.
I'm sure your response will be that these colors just don't sell and that's why you can't stock them in store, but how could they if, based on experience, women of color don't actually expect to find colors in your store? Honestly, I didn't even go looking for foundation/powder yesterday ..., since every time has been a disappointment. But I looked anyway, and, as expected, I was disappointed.
You may not realize this, but blacks have the most purchasing power of any single ethnic group in the United States. Combine us with Hispanics, Indians, and certain Eastern and Southeastern Asian groups, and are you really prepared to say that our purchasing power isn't worth a little bit of effort to make some room on your physical shelves to make our shopping experience more pleasant? I really like Ulta's branded products, but I can't continue this game of purchasing in store and then having to go home to complete my makeup purchases online. And I know a lot of other women who feel the same way.
In closing, I would like to add, I would greatly appreciate it if you took the time to give me a thoughtfully crafted response rather than a canned "Thanks for your input. We're looking into it." In addition to it being insulting to the intelligence, the fact is, you guys reached out to me after my small 140-character rant on Twitter. I obviously took the time to send you a detailed response of the problem, and I would appreciate some reciprocity.
Regards, [Pop Culture Mom]

Honestly, I really expected that all I might get out of this very long, soul-bearing e-mail was a bit of catharsis. So imagine my surprise when the next day, I received a voicemail from the Ulta corporate office.

Now, my phone number was never on the e-mail. However, I'm an Ulta rewards member (and, despite my difficulty finding makeup in-store, a platinum one at that), and the Ulta Guest Services Manager [shout out to Ron!] was able to get my phone number and purchase history from my account. The message let me know that my e-mail had been received and was being taken very seriously and let me know that I could expect a response after the Memorial Day holiday. I was also given a direct phone number in case I wanted to talk before I had gotten a complete response.

After the holiday, Ron and I touched base to schedule a call to discuss his findings in more detail. Honestly, even though Ulta corporate had reached out to me and was clearly making a concerted effort to keep the lines of communication open, I was not expecting much to come from the call. So when Ron started out by telling me that the various corporate heads he had spoken with to inquire as to why there weren't many products available in store for women of color had responded that they also didn't understand why that was the case in this day and age and saw it as a problem, I was shocked. But then when the blame shifted to the corporations manufacturing the makeup, my shock waned, and I expected another conversation reciting business as usual. But I shouldn't have, because Ron continued to surprise me.

Among other things, Ron explained to me that Ulta's old corporate model could not allow for stores to be diversified, and the result was that every single Ulta store carried what was basically the national average in terms of sales. So the Ulta store in, for example, Sandy, Utah carries exactly the same merchandise as the store in Atlanta, Georgia, even though the demographics of those cities are vastly different [Sandy, Utah is, by the way, 86% non-Hispanic white per Census data; Atlanta, on the other hand, is 36.3% non-Hispanic white and 54% black]. And because this nationwide data is collected based on a country where the vast majority of people are white and where non-white people (particularly those that are either darker than "honey beige" or don't have pink or blue undertones) don't actually expect for most cosmetic stores to service them, you can pretty much guess which way the data skews. [And, unless you're bathing in a sea of privilege, you can also see where the problem lies.] But Ulta is now in a position where it can customize its offerings by region. So in areas like mine where dark people of various ethnicities abound, come early 2016, we should expect to see more of our hues offered not just "online" but also in-store.

Ron also informed me that this "bigger and better" Ulta extends not only to their technology and inventory tracking but also to their ability to court more diverse brands and put some pressure on those brands who haven't caught up with the times to join the rest of us in the ultra-diverse 21st century. That pressure has apparently worked on some brands, and a few are now expanding their offerings to add several new shades. There were more details, more happiness to share about Ulta's coming changes to accommodate its customers of color. But the bottom line is that Ulta isn't just giving lip service; it clearly cares about customer satisfaction—all customers, not just the beige and pink-undertones ones. And as if all of these changes and all of this time spent meaningfully addressing my concerns wasn't enough, Ron also arranged for the Prestige Manager [since my purchase history is primarily of those cosmetics they consider their "Prestige brands"] at my local Ulta store to meet with me one on one and introduce me to some of their newer lines and colors that might work for me better. The P.M. totally hooked me up, and I have found a new foundation to love. Her name is Becca (one of Ulta's newer offerings), and, miracle of miracles, there are several shades of brown with various undertones available.

The sad fact is, beauty woes are just one source of the microagressions that daily confront people of color with white privilege in this country. It may not seem like a privilege to buy makeup, but when you're a person of color denied the simplicity of that experience that others feel, it is evidence what a loss of privilege it is for makeup purchases to become an ordeal. For anyone who would respond, "Well, then don't buy makeup" (ignoring the flippancy and ignorance of such a comment), the simple fact of the matter is that for many women, buying makeup isn't really an option. Yes, it would be great if we lived in a perfect world where sexism didn't make work life easier for women who wear at least natural looking makeup or if women were imbued with so much self-confidence that we didn't feel the need to wear makeup ever. But this isn't reality. Additionally, when we live in a world where models and actresses of color feel compelled to bring their own makeup kits to their jobs—a job necessity that is automatically provided for their paler skinned counterparts—or otherwise risk re-inviting the feelings of despair and embarrassment experienced after someone has half-heartedly attempted to do their hair or makeup without putting in any real effort to account for different skin tones or hair textures. It is absolutely galling that someone would think this is equal, fair, or trivial.

This world is diverse. This country is diverse. On most continents on this planet, you can find people ranging from the palest of pale beiges to the darkest of dark browns. There are many different hair types and shades. It shouldn't be asking too much for professionals be able to do their jobs for every person who might sit in their chairs, and not just the white ones. And it isn't "baiting" to require that stores selling beauty products be able to service the clientele present in the areas where they chose to setup shop.

Note: Ulta did not ask me to write this post, nor is this an advertisement for Ulta. However, I'd be lying if I said that, given their stated commitment to improve diversity, I'm not interested in ringing the bells and sounding the alarms that Ulta is a store women of color need to add to their rotation. I will always be of the firm belief that the same way we should buycott those brands who have absolutely zero interest in tolerance and diversity [I'm looking at you, Almay, Simply Aryan], we should similarly reward those who do.

Rachel Dolezal and the Problem of Colorism

Rachel Dolezal and the Problem of Colorism

Like many people, I've been fascinated (in horror) watching the Rachel Dolezal "passing" story unfold. I'm not going to rehash the various layers of how what she did was so very wrong or why "transracial," as it has been used with respect to this story, is not a thing and should not be compared to Caitlyn Jenner or any other transgendered person. Those issues have all been artfully discussed and dissected ad nauseum, and there is little more I could add to them that hasn't been said before. One thing I have seen very little discussion on, however, is how the discussion regarding Rachel Dolezal's deception relates to colorism.

"Colorism," for those who don't know, is an intraracial form of bigotry, prejudice, discrimination, or supremacy based on the lightness or darkness of skin tone. Colorism does not really exist within the white community as an intraracial issue (as there is not as wide a range of skin tones among whites as there are in other races and ethnicities), though whites may exercise some bit of colorism against other groups, where they prefer the lighter-skinned of those groups to the darker [however, I would still classify that as just "racism," rather than "colorism"]. Although the roots of colorism in the black community can be traced back to the benefits and status afforded blacks during slavery and Jim Crow, colorism continues to persist to this day. And it is a two-way street.

In 2013, OWN (the Oprah Winfrey Network) ran a documentary called "Dark Girls," in which dark-skinned black women discussed the ways their skin color has affected the way they have been treated and perceived, largely hurtful. This documentary was followed this January by "Light Girls," which shared the stories of hurt and rejection experienced by light-skinned black women by questioning the belief that light skin makes for an easier life. Both documentaries have their fair share of acclaim and criticism, both of which is beyond the scope here. My issue is the idea of questioning someone's "blackness" based on his/her appearance.

Let me make it crystal clear from the outset that I am in no way arguing that Rachel Dolezal can consider herself black. As I have previously stated, self-identification is important, but that self-identification must be rooted in reality. Unless Rachel Dolezal presents a 23andMe or Ancestry.com DNA report verifying some African ancestry [doubtful], there is no reality in which she can be considered a black woman in this country. I am only discussing those people who self identify as black or part-black whose reality and ancestry would support that claim.

Moving on...

One of the things that has disturbed me the most as this story unfolds is watching the amount of colorism spewing forth. From the black men who make comments insinuating Rachel Dolezal "can stay" because she's hotter than most black women to the comments that people "should have known that she wasn't black," because she doesn't look the part, this story has brought forth my uncomfortable feelings with colorism.

The latter charge feels like an assault on the claims of blackness by those who don't pass a color check. During slavery and Jim Crow, lighter blacks exercised colorism against darker blacks by way of the "paper bag test" (those whose skin was darker than a paper bag were not allowed to enter) and the "comb test" (you "pass" if a fine-tooth comb can go through your hair without stopping). I don't know where the color line is allegedly drawn by those asserting Rachel Dolezal doesn't look black by any reasonable standards of blackness, but it appears that some combination of beige skin + light eyes + fine-ish hair + European features = you fail the Blackness Test. It is not 100% clear to me if, say, Rashida Jones fails because she's more olive than tan or she passes because her dad is Quincy Jones. Or if she is over the color line, do we get to welcome Catherine Zeta-Jones to the tribe, too? Pete Wentz, yay or nay? How about Mariah Carey? What are black people going to do if we lose Mariah Carey? Does her 20+ year career now become cultural appropriation? And does Amber Rose retain membership to the black community based on that fantastic ass alone?


You see where I'm going with this. The possibilities are endless, numerous, and utterly ridiculous. It's also hurtful. How dare someone else decide that your black isn't "black enough." If someone (rightfully) self-identifies as black or part-black, how messed up is it to say that they just don't look the part enough to be who they were raised to be? And how ironic is it that the same people who would deny membership in Club Black because someone's hair or nose is too straight or eyes are too light usually flock to those articles and blog posts about "people you didn't know are black." I guess now some of us are ready to kick them all out until we can further investigate their claims of blackness. Oh... We are...

Look, I'm not denying that someone who appears white to most white people is enjoying a great deal of white privilege that darker people of color will never share; but that doesn't mean we throw away someone's ancestry, their culture, their life experience, or their identity, simply because they have those privileges. Does it mean there are certain discussions to which they can't relate because they have never and will never have those experiences? Of course. Does that make them any less black? No.

I guess the only solution here is we're just going to have to start issuing Black Cards. If your children, siblings, or other loved ones are too light to pass the Black Test, make sure they know to carry their cards at all times when they are not with you until we can get this whole thing sorted out.


Never leave home without it

Or, you know, we can stop telling other black people that they are too white-looking to sit with us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Walking the Walk and Talking the Talk (AKA How I Spent My Winter
Vacation)

Walking the Walk and Talking the Talk (AKA How I Spent My Winter Vacation)


I know it's been a slow year on this blog, so for those of you who have stuck around, let me first thank you. Whether you're old or new here, welcome (welcome back) and Happy New Year to all!

Honestly, it's been hard to write more than rants on Facebook walls or quick blurbs on Twitter. My heart has been really heavy. There have been times where I have just been at my breaking point. I'm fearful of the world we are leaving our children. I truly am. And though I've kept on a brave face for my girls and even still found time to find some levity in the world [moment of silence for Joe Manganiello's singlehood] and have kept myself busy with craft project after craft project, whenever there was silence I couldn't fill, one thought always came back: we are fucked.

So I could just keep being afraid of the silence, or I could do something.

Pop Culture Dad is from St. Louis. [Yeah, I know]. Between the events in Ferguson and some other things, the likelihood of us making it to our annual Christmas trip this year was low like a girl in a Flo Rida song. But... it's family, you know? And we only get to see them twice a year. But PCD and I decided that if we were going to go into the belly of the best, some good was going to have to come of it.

I had been following the action on Twitter and Facebook since the very beginning, but realized as Christmas was approaching that I didn't actually know where to find information on how to get involved. I asked around and got several references for groups looking for lawyers to help out. I got in touch with those groups, and they all said they would get back to me... Then we got to St. Louis and... I just waited. No calls. I called again. I was told they would get back to me. My plan to be part of a solution was being thwarted. And, quite honestly, I felt a little depressed about it. In my head, our entire week in St. Louis was going to be filled with one rally or jail visit after another with us shouting to the family, "Come along or we'll just have to catch you later!" In reality, it was basically like any other trip to the city: family, food, movie, Magic House. Then finally the morning before we went home to Texas, my phone rang with a text alert:
TODAY (SATURDAY), 2PM: STL's United We Stand Silent March. Meet at Union Station downtown (18th and Market).
Finally! I informed Pop Culture Dad that, despite all the things we needed to do that day and all the promises we made to family, we were going. He was totally game, but we were also unprepared. On the way there, we ran into Michaels and grabbed posters and markers. The Pop Culture Girls decided they wanted to do their own posters. They did not, however, know how to spell "Black Lives Matter" on their own. So I wrote it out for them and told them they could follow it. Little Diva (being six and all) did a pretty great job. Super Girl got all of the letters, buuuuut, well, they weren't exactly in any particular order. So she allowed me to make her a new sign, and she decorated it.

Super Girl and Pop Culture Dad
Little Diva made her own sign ("MY LIFE MATTERS"). Mommy probably should have told her yellow on pink doesn't really show from far away.

This is the adorable sweatshirt hiding under those huge coats. It was far too cold to show them off.

Despite our rushing, we made it to the meeting place in time and ready to go. It was cold (particularly for us Southern folk), and it was rainy. However, this group of a little over 100 people was not deterred. We walked arm-in-arm, silently (except for the children...), with our mouths covered with the names of a victim or victims of police and para-police violence, down Market Street toward the St. Louis Arch. As you can see in my pictures, this isn't just a group of black people. This is truly St. Louis UNITED. There were people of various races and ethnicities. The ages ranged from 0 to somewhere in the septuagenarian range. There were people of various physicalities and physical disabilities.
You notice how that microphone says "5" (as in "News 5")? The same reporter during those interviews later stated during the 5 p.m. Channel 5 newscast that he could not confirm that there were protesters in the area. Apparently the fact that he was with us from beginning to end was not enough to confirm our presence. See, people? This is why you need to have a healthy skepticism and distrust of mainstream media.
Now here's where trolls on Twitter and people within the Arch who have unrecognized and unresolved race bias issues differ from what people outside the Arch will tell you. Trolls on Twitter who were never there have been arguing that the group was violent, raging, and vandalized the Arch (seriously). Anyone with half a brain knows that isn't true. In fact, you can witness it for yourself. I videoed various parts of the protest, and if you look on Twitter for #STLunited, you will see several people who live-blogged or later videostreamed parts of the protest. In addition to what you can see for yourself, here's what I can tell you: three of the protesters actually went inside the Arch to use the restroom. Once inside, security had noticed there were protesters, and those women were locked inside. When you hear us chanting "Open the gates!" it started because people were asking for security to let those women out. By the way, the Arch is a free, federal landmark open to the public. Can they restrict entry and exit for security concerns? Of course. Is prohibiting a group from exercising their First Amendment rights in a nonviolent manner in a way that doesn't otherwise violate laws something that can be done at a federal landmark? Honestly, I don't know [I haven't done the research on that yet]. It's a non-issue anyway. Because I think there is reasonable disagreement as to whether there would have been a security risk (probably something as little as a fire hazard) from allowing a marching, chanting group of 100+ people inside. I'm not saying I agree that there was a risk; I just agree that I see both arguments, and so we don't even really get to the First Amendment issue. 


What I can tell you, however, is that this protest was most certainly non-violent. As I mentioned, this was a varied group, which included a lot of families. We had a woman in a wheelchair, a man on crutches, etc. This group marched in total silence [again, minus the children, who don't really get that whole "silent" part of the silent protest] for nearly two hours before we reached the Arch. Yes, there were guys in Anonymous masks. And, honestly, the most annoying thing they did the entire time was smoke in close proximity to children and senior citizens. There was only one person in this entire group who raised my antennae, and I was side-eyeing and closely watching that guy the entire time. And, yes, this guy was the one who, after chants I wasn't too uncomfortable having my children hear, decided to lead a much smaller group in a round of "Fuck the Police." That's one guy, out of over 100. There's always one. And that one person is not the group. He was not representative of the group at all. In fact, he didn't even march in close proximity to the rest of us (and I have the picture to prove that too). [ETA: I suppose I should clarify, I case I get another troll like the one who thought I would publish his comment (WRONG) that we left the area as soon as that started and that several people told that person and his small group that it wasn't the time or place for that]
The police, who kept a safe distance from the group (because no crimes were broken, HELLO) stay close to the guy I was side-eyeing.
The Arch was not vandalized. We created a "memorial" using the pieces of colored tape that had previously been on our mouths. Easily removable. Does not destroy property. It is no different from when people leave signs, flowers, and other memorabilia on public property. Anyone who calls that vandalism is a moron (and probably also an overreaching racist, but I digress...). As I mentioned on the Pop Culture Mom Facebook page, I'm a government attorney. Do you really think I would participate in or encourage any sort of activity that would violate federal law? Of course not. Any suggestion otherwise is preposterous.
tape bearing the names of victims of police violence
Correction of some of the falsities I've heard aside, this was a beautiful moment. I actually cannot find adequate words to express how moved I was by the entire experience. Seeing all of these different people come together was amazing. People who didn't even know each other and hadn't even learned each other's names, were linking their arms and hands to stand united. People were helping each other (picking up the wheelchair together, offering food, holding things to allow someone to tend to children, checking on the children and talking to them, etc.). This total group of mostly strangers came together for one common reason—wanting to make sure that law enforcement and the general citizenry realize that black lives matter too—and it was amazing
Super Girl has the best seat in the house


Arms linked marching toward the Arch
 
Strangers united for a common good



Even more than the experience itself, I was so glad to have shared it with the Pop Culture Girls. Due to all of the craziness going on and the unavoidable conversations in our house that Little Diva is entirely too smart (and too nosey) to miss. I had to have "the talk" with her earlier than anticipated. We had the talk over Thanksgiving. More on that later. But suffice to say, even at six, she understands the gross unfairness in treating people differently because of their skin color, and she can't believe that there are adults who think it is perfectly fine to support a broken system that systematically treats "the other" unfairly. So, despite the fact that she was not exactly down for all that walking (and none of us were down for the cold and the hail), Little Diva was glad she did the protest. One of the gentlemen who had been gathering everyone together when we initially arrived asked Little Diva at the end what she thought of everything, and she answered "Pretty good. Pretty good for my first protest."
"Pretty good for my first protest."
I'm proud of my kids for sticking with the elements and trudging along. I'm proud of my oldest daughter for understanding these issues that are so much bigger than anyone should have to understand at six years old [and, sadly, it turns out she "gets it" a lot better than many adults I've seen online]. I'm proud of my husband (and his entire family, amazingly) for recognizing and trying to fight against his white privilege to make a better world for, not just our children, but every child in this country. I'm proud of everyone who was there. 

Every time I get overwhelmed with despair, I look at the pictures from this march and I realize that there are people out there fighting to make a difference. I'm not sure if their work will change everything, but they're bound to change some minds. Every little bit counts!

Donald Sterling: Some Quick Perspective

Donald Sterling: Some Quick Perspective

(1) If someone ASKS to be recorded and is fully aware he is being recorded when he makes ignorant statements, it is neither an injustice nor "shady" to record said person.

(2) A private company taking action has NOTHING to do with your "First Amendment rights" or "civil liberties," even when that private company is your employer, who doesn't like something you said.

(3) The NBA is a FRANCHISE. Donald Sterling's ownership interest is nothing but a license, revocable by the licensor (the league) at any time, within the guidelines set forth in that license. A licensor is allowed to protect the reputation and monetary value of its brand as it sees fit.

(4) Sterling will be bought out. He stands to make a HUGE profit on the sale. Don't cry for him, Argentina.


(5) A "lifetime" ban imposed on an 81-year old man who is clearly not in the best physical condition isn't exactly 50 years here, people.
 someecards.com - Happy Birthday to someone young enough that a lifetime ban from the NBA would last for more than a couple years.}

(6) NO ONE (except maybe the NBA and NAACP) is arguing that it was fine and dandy for the NBA and NAACP to stand and watch this man's decades of racism and even honor and support him. But that doesn't negate the fact that it is a *good thing* that those organizations have FINALLY responded (even if those responses are probably more commercially driven than anything).



(7) I don't give two flips about the character and history of Donald Sterling's mistress. I don't think anyone ever assumes that a 30-something-year old woman with thousands of dollars of plastic surgery/enhancements who has changed her name to an initial and is dating a wealthy, racist, obese, married octogenarian is a highly moral and likable individual. She is a gold digger and has questionable ethics?? You don't say!! It still doesn't change the fact that this man is reprehensible and has been for a LONG time. He didn't have to be goaded or tricked into saying a darn thing.


GIVEWAY ALERT! The Veronica Mars Movie is HERE

GIVEWAY ALERT! The Veronica Mars Movie is HERE

OMG, OMG, OMG, y'all! The Veronica Mars movie is here!

I'll be the first to admit, despite having friends who swore by the show, I was late to the Veronica Mars game. In fact, I watched it for the first time EVER last month. Actually, "binge watched" is a more accurate description. I watched all three seasons over the course of three weeks. At some point during my Season 2 viewing, Pop Culture Dad said to me, "You're an addict." It's sooooo true!

I started watching it out of sheer curiosity, since Amazon Prime finally started offering all three seasons for free. My curiosity paid off in spades, particularly after I found out that the much-anticipated Veronica Mars movie was coming out March 14th. Goddess bless you, Princess Anna... er... Kristen Bell and all those VM fans on Kickstarter for making this happen!

Anywhoo... To get everyone primed and ready for the movie release [like we weren't already], Warner Bros. has released a Veronica Mars Marshmallow Super-Fan Purity Test [c'mon... Click it!]:

Veronica Mars: Purity Test Marshmallow Super-fan Trivia - Think you know all there is to know about Neptune, California? Test your Veronica Mars knowledge with all 3 levels of super-fan trivia and find out if you are the ultimate Marshmallow


Additionally, the DVD, which is scheduled to come out some time in May, is already available for pre-order. AND.... *drumroll*...

ONE OF YOU LUCKY MARSHMALLOWS CAN WIN IT FOR FREE!

You heard me. Warner Bros. Is going to provide one luckily Pop Culture Mom Blog winner with a free copy of the Veronica Mars Movie DVD when it is released. 

Here's how to enter:

Mandatory: Like the Pop Culture Mom Facebook page.
Optional: 
(1) Take all three levels of the Purity Test and leave a comment below with your scores
(2) Tweet to me @popculturemom and tell me if you're #TeamDuncan, #TeamLogan, or #TeamPiz. Add the hashtag #VeronicaMarsMovie. If you have enough characters, go ahead and say why [FTR, I'm #TeamLogan, but I won't hold it against you if you aren't]
(3) Leave a comment on the Pop Culture Mom Facebook page letting me know your favorite episode or scene. 

You have to be logged into Rafflecopter (below) for the entries to count:

DISCLOSURES:
Contest begins at midnight on March 14, 2014. Entrants must reside in the United States or Canada. Each household is only eligible to win One (1) Veronica Mars DVD via blog reviews and giveaways. Only one entrant per mailing address per giveaway. If you have won the same prize on another blog, you will not be eligible to win it again. Winner is subject to eligibility verification. The prize can only be shipped to physical addresses; no P.O. Boxes please.

Entries may be received until 11:59 p.m. CDT on March 26, 2014. Winner will be notified within 24 hours. If no valid address is provided within 48 hours of notification, the prize will forfeited, and a new winner will be selected and notified.

About the Veronica Mars Movie
On the eve of graduating law school, Veronica Mars has put Neptune and her amateur sleuthing days behind her. While interviewing at high-end New York law firms, Veronica Mars gets a call from her ex-boyfriend Logan who has been accused of murder. Veronica heads back to Neptune just to help Logan find an attorney, but when things don't seem right with how Logan's case is perceived and handled, Veronica finds herself being pulled back into a life she thought she had left behind.
See it In Theaters MARCH 14
Pre-order on DIGITAL HD
ABOUT HOW THE FILM GOT MADE:
Following a record-breaking Kickstarter campaign that ended on April 12, 2013, Veronica Mars was shot over 23 days during June-July 2013. It will be released in selected theaters nationwide on March 14th, 2014.


All promotional materials and the prize are supplied by Warner Bros. 

Pop Culture Dad on Matthew McConaughey's Golden Globes Acceptance Speech

Pop Culture Dad on Matthew McConaughey's Golden Globes Acceptance Speech

Watching Matthew McConaughey's possibly drunken and definitely weird, messed up, and slightly-disrespectful-to-two-of-his-fellow-nominees acceptance speech evoked a lot of reaction in my household. But I have to say, Pop Culture Dad's was the best.

In response to this:


He quoted (in part) this:

Stewie: You know Matthew, I may never get another chance to say this so I just want to get this off my chest.
You are just awful, you're one of the worst actors in the history of film and I think you need to just go away
Matthew Mcconaughey: Oh thanks man, the truth is I spend at least 90% of my year going away, exploring exotic places, having sex with my beautiful girlfriend, just doing sit-ups, I mean that really... and then counting money.
The money that I made off my terrible films I put out into the American populous because they just love to see me doing what it is that I do.
Stewie: Yes but you're not hearing me... 'Dazed and Confused' was the one thing that was passable after that...
Matthew Mcconaughey: Oh thanks man that actually launched my career
Stewie: After that, everything else was awful, 'Contact' They didn't even need you in that movie, they could have done the whole movie without you
Matthew Mcconaughey: I know, I know I said the same thing, but they were just like - Oh we need a good looking guy with a great ass and some tight abs to provide some down home enthusiasm to this picture. Something to counter balance Jodie Foster, they took her to be slightly cold, uh unapproachable so they put me in there.
I said it didn't make any sense. Said the same thing about that Bill Murray elephant movie but they said well the audience needs you.
Stewie: You make me physically sick to my stomach and I wish you that would get a heart attack.
Matthew Mcconaughey: I totally feel you man, the truth of the matter is I don't like my movies either but man they keep offering me money and I do it and I get to around the world, I mean did you see 'Sahara'. I'll tell you what that movie gave me, was the opportunity to take an Airstream all across the country and sell that picture one person at a time.
Stewie: You suck donkey ass
Matthew Mcconaughey: Hey you can't prove that
(Family Guy, "The Former Life of Brian")

And wished this had happened at the end:



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
And I Shall Buy a Thousand Swiffers!

And I Shall Buy a Thousand Swiffers!

Have you seen the new Swiffer commercial?? The one with Zack Rukavina,the guy who lost his arm to cancer, and his beautiful multiracial family?? I almost cried tears of joy when I saw it this morning. We already have a Swiffer mop, but we will never buy generic refills again. More money to Swiffer and its wonderful ad team!!




Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson Is...

Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson Is...

He's... He's...

You know what? Fuck it! That bigot isn't even worth my time, nor is anyone who is so ignorant and intolerant as to call his level of bullshit bigotry "religious freedom" deserving of support.


I am the Biracial Whisperer (or Maybe I have Biracialdar?)

I am the Biracial Whisperer (or Maybe I have Biracialdar?)

I was watching 'Suits' this morning and actually paying close attention for a change. There was a close up of Rachel (played by Meghan Markle) taking the LSATs. I saw her freckles and hair and immediately and excitedly blurted (out loud, sadly), "OMG! She's biracial!" For some reason, I always had assumed she was Hispanic, even though "Zane" (her character's last name) isn't a particularly Latino name. But there wasn't any mistaking the HD closeup. I Googled "Meghan Markle biracial," and BOOM, there it was. Just like my kids, her mom is black, and her father is white of Irish descent. 




Meghan Markle and her mother (from her Instagram)


Mariah Carey... Jennifer Beals... Rashida Jones... Soledad O'Brien...  Vin Diesel... Wentworth Miller... and now Rachel Markle. Even before seeing some "OMG! She looks white, but SURPRISE!!" article, I could tell they were biracial. Look, I know I am not the only one. There are probably a lot of you reading this going, "Duh! I knew too!" But, just like when a celebrity comes out as gay or lesbian, there's something oddly wonderful and fantastic to me about finding the closeted (whether it is simply because the issue has never been raised or addressed because here's no necessity to it or because a record company or TV producer intentionally wanted to leave the impression that the performer is white) biracial people.

I also get people who don't understand my excitement about these discoveries. But for those people, when someone asks you if or implies that you are the nanny of your own child, you'll get it.






Parenthood: "She's So White!"

Parenthood: "She's So White!"

While I was party planning this afternoon, I started watching last night's episode of 'Parenthood'. Barely five minutes in, I fell over laughing when Crosby held up his newly-born daughter and exclaimed with shock, "She's so white!" And 10 minutes in, I nearly died again when Grandpa Braverman said, "She's even lighter than she was in the hospital!" and then expressed his confusion at the term light-skinned. Ah... All of this is so familiar to parents of biracial children.

Pop Culture Dad and I had the same reaction when Little Diva was born. I mean, we knew she would likely be born much more pale than she would eventually end up. Many black children (particularly with lighter-skinned parents) and most biracial kids are. My doula with Little Diva has biracial grandchildren, and she tried to prep us for the possibility before we went into the delivery room. This wasn't an earth shattering revelation. I was a pale child, and I've been around plenty of black and biracial newborns. I don't know any black person who would be particularly shocked by the revelation that some black and biracial babies will be darn-near white at birth.

What Pop Culture Dad and I were not prepared for, however, was that our then-blue eyed (now green), pale child, would pretty much stay pale—very pale—for years. My multi-ethnic mother comes from a long line of "high yella" women. My dad's mother was also very beige. But I'm brown. And my mother-in-law is a pretty deep tan. My husband isn't even that pale himself. Somehow, though, for the first three-and-a-half years of her life, our baby girl was lighter than her father.

This was a real problem for me when Little Diva was a baby. Despite the fact that she looks just like my toddler pictures, when it was just the two of us, people often asked me if she was my child or just assumed I was the nanny. I was so glad when she learned to talk and started calling me "Mommy" in public, so the people who were staring and trying to figure things out would look away. I also bought her several shirts that said things like "She's my mommy, not the nanny!" or which hadn't picture of a vanilla/chocolate ice cream cone baring the slogan "Swirled!" Even now that Little Diva has (finally) got a little bit of a tan, her skin color is often a topic of conversation among people. Annoying...

All of this "nanny" and "OMG, she looks white" [she does not] stuff is perhaps why immediately after giving birth to Super Girl, I exclaimed, "Oh, thank goodness! She has some color!" No one wants to be called the nanny.

I'll be interested to see as the season plays out, if Jasmine will experience any of the "Uh... Is that... um... your baby,... or, uh... are you the, um....?" nonsense that so many black mothers of biracial (or just light-skinned) babies deal with. If there are any black writers (or white writers with biracial families) on staff, I imagine it's coming.




Five Reasons Why I Have No Problem With Ben Affleck as Batman

Five Reasons Why I Have No Problem With Ben Affleck as Batman

When it was announced over the weekend that Ben Affleck would play Batman, people immediately lost their damn minds. All of the sudden, it was like they had been personally betrayed or something. I don't get the outrage. What's wrong with Ben Affleck?

Okay, sure, he's made some missteps in his career (like Gigli). But he's also done some fantastic movies (Argo, The Town, Pearl Harbor, Chasing Amy... Just to name a few). He has two Oscars. I mean, okay, neither one of them is for acting; but he still has two Oscars. 

Matt Damon Defends Ben Affleck as Batman – But Won't Be Robin
Ben Affleck and Matt Damon
MARION CURTIS/STARTRAKS
So what is the issue? Because he started out as mainly a comedy actor rather than an action hero, do people think that he is not allowed to make the transition to Batman? If so, let me remind you of a few things:

1. Matt Damon, Ben Affleck's BFF, had the same acting roots, yet no one has had any problem with Matt as Jason Bourne. Sure, he's been more selective in his roles, but he's had a couple of movie duds, too. Not to mention, Ben still has one more Oscar than he does, so...
2. The first big screen Batman in modern-ish times was Michael Keeton. Let the sink in: Michael Keeton. As in Mr. Mom, Multiplicity, and Beetlejuice Michael Keeton. And he was phenomenal. No shade to Christian Bale (or Adam West) or anything, but he is still my favorite Batman of all time.
3. Batman has been played by so many men in movies. Even if you're used to Christian Bale, you had to expect his reign to end at some point. It's like James Bond or Doctor Who—many men will portray, you won't like them all equally, but you should at least watch the performance before declaring it awful and unworthy of the title. And, lezbereal for a minute here: Is it even remotely possible that Ben Affleck could be a worse Batman than Val Kilmer??? Doubtful.
4. This isn't a Dark Knight movie, so there's no need for someone dark. It's Batman vs. Superman for cripes' sake!
5. Ben Affleck is sexy. Damn sexy. And he's going to look fabulous in that Batsuit.
How ya like them apples?
Yet Another Moral Outrage

Yet Another Moral Outrage


I had some other things planned for today's post... some lighter, fluffier, hopefully little-bit-funny things... then I found out about Judge G. Todd Baugh in Montana, and all those plans went out the window.
 
On Monday, Judge Baugh sentenced a pedophile... a then-49-year old teacher who two years ago raped his 14-year old student... who from the pressures brought on her by both the "relationship" and the trial killed herself in January of this year... to a month. I guess, to be more accurate, I should say that he sentenced this stain on humanity to 15 years, but then decided to give him time served for the one day the d-bag actually spent in jail and reduced the entirety of the sentence to 31 days. I'm not making this up.
 
What could have possibly made the judge believe that 31 days is a sufficient punishment for a teacher betraying the trust of a young girl in his care, grooming her to be a sexual partner, violating her, and then dragging this thing out until she could no longer take the emotional pressure [the sentencing was prolonged while this jerkwad underwent a three-year treatment program... which it turns out he wasn't really attending, and during that time he was supposed to be in treatment, he continued to—in violation of the terms of the program—have contact with minors and entered into a sexual relationship, resulting in him eventually getting kicked out of the program]? Well, because the child was much "older than her chronological age" and was "as much in control of the situation" as her 49-year old rapist-teacher with respect to the relationship. 'Scuse me??? She was a child. And this child was in this man's care. He was supposed to be someone she could trust. And he violated her. She was not in control. She was 14. I don't care how sexually experienced she was or was not or how much makeup she wore, he was still the adult here, he was still in a position of power, and he knew he shouldn't be touching a 14-year old girl. Period.
 
The "judge" was also persuaded by the rapist's pleas for leniency, because he was going to be "branded as a sex offender" for the rest of his life and has had his life ruined by the "scarlet letter of the Internet." No, buddy, your life was ruined because you raped a child. You had a choice to make here which would have prevented you from being "branded as a sex offender" and having your life ruined—that choice was to not rape a child. But you did, and under normal circumstances, with a normal judge, you should have been required to pay the consequences.
 
All of this slut-shaming of the victim while feeling sorry for the perpetrator eerily reminded me of CNN's coverage of the Steubenville rapists, wherein Candy Crowley, Poppy Harlow, and others harped on and on about how the guilty verdict and maximum fine would affect the poor rapists and showed not one minute of concern for the girl the "two young men" had raped. Poppy was practically on the verge of tears talking about how it was "incredibly difficult" to watch "as these two young men—who had such promising futures, star football players and very good students—literally watched as they believed their life [sic] fell apart." Seriously. She said that. And it went on and on. Contributor Paul Callan weighed in on what such a verdict meant for these 16-year olds who were crying in court and how they would be punished for the rest of their lives: "There's always that moment of just... Lives are destroyed. But in terms of what happens now, the most severe thing with these young men is being labeled as registered sex offenders. That label is now placed on them by Ohio law. That will haunt them for the rest of their lives."
 
Yes. That happened. That was said. Are you outraged? If you aren't, you should be.
 
These boys (like this teacher) will be "haunted" by the "label" of sex offender for their entire lives, because they made a conscious decision to become sex offenders. Sure, when each of these three men decided to pursue the act of raping a teenage girl, it never occurred to them that a consequence might some day be that they would be registered sex offenders... but it should have. Honestly, I would hope that the act of having sexual intercourse with someone too drunk, too unconscious, or too young to legally, knowingly, or rationally give consent should be enough of a deterrent to this kind of behavior; but for those fools who are somehow not motivated by morality and a conscience like the rest of us, I would hope that the legal system doing its job would be enough of a deterrent. For those who persist, then I'm happy we have the legal system there as a backup. At least it worked in the case of the Steubenville Rapists [I hope]. But this teacher? Where's his motivation to stop?
 
"Judge" Baugh said he believed the Teacher-Rapist wasn't a likely repeat offender. He had no basis for this really. I mean, the man couldn't even successfully comply with a three-year treatment program after being caught raping one of his students! So now we're just supposed to trust that he—after being given the lightest of slaps on the wrist—is supposed to prevent himself from diddling with young girls in the future? Not likely. And, I'm sure if someone was motivated to poke around a bit more, they would find that he's poked around with a lot more students than this one.
 
If you're curious of Judge Baugh has had anything to say since the backlash for his sentencing started, you're in luck. Turns out he totally had something to say on Tuesday:
 
I think that people have in mind that this was some violent, forcible, horrible rape ... It was horrible enough as it is just given her age, but it wasn't this forcible beat-up rape.
 
Oh.... I get it! Not one of those "legitimate rapes"? Well, I guess we can't be upset then, can we? Cuz, ya know, it's not like those rapes where you don't get beaten up at knifepoint actually count, right? Enjoy your re-election efforts this year, Braugh. Should be an interesting political season in Billings.
 
As for the rest of society, those possibly capable of learning, when are we going to learn to stop feeling sorry for the perpetrators and stop blaming the victims? When someone gets carjacked, you never hear, "Well, what did you expect driving around in a nice car like that on the open road where anyone could see you? You're just asking to get it taken from you at gunpoint." When a company is hit by embezzlement, no one argues, "C'mon now! It just had all that money sitting in its bank accounts! What did the company expect an employee would do??" But there are certain types of situations—those usually involving the already powerless (like rape, sexual orientation-based hate crimes, or racial/gender discrimination) where it's perfectly normal to hear the victim getting blamed rather than holding the perpetrators accountable for their actions, even by people who are themselves similarly situated as the victims. We have seen it in Poppy Harlow and Candy Crowley sympathizing with the rapists over the rape victim. We saw it when Don Lemon blamed blacks for racial discrimination perpetrated against them. We hear it when a transgendered person or a gay person who is thought of by (those with issues) as "too flamboyant" is killed or beaten.
 
Perhaps its because we've let the powerful dictate the treatment of the powerless for so long that the powerless have started to believe the propaganda? I'm not sure. But I do know it's time we put an end to this. Victimization is rarely (if ever) the victim's fault.