andyprickett.com

If you know me at all, you know that I relish any and all humor that is considered politically-incorrect (not to mention crude, offensive, or poor in taste). I take sinful pleasure in watching people squirm as I openly say and laugh at things that are ‘off-limits’ socially.

While I am often quickly accused of being something else, I am quick to correct and maintain that I am a fair-game stereotypist. I love stereotypes, because they are so generally, knowably accurate, and they spit in the face of the pervasive ‘cultural equality’ sentiment that so polices our every form of media, speech, and behavior these days. Every culture and race have amusing, self-effacing stereotypes that are all too close to home and that’s that. Fair game, I say. Let’s let ourselves be different.

So in this unique American time frame where we have our first truly viable Presidential candidate who is notably of something other than Euro/Caucasian lineage, I am relishing the daily culture bombs going off all around him. And the fact that Obama is coming off as humorless while he attemps to be racially/culturally neutral is even more amusing, especially when people of his shared racial lineage like Jesse Jackson and the Reverend Wright are doing their darndest to ‘claim’ him on those terms. Their direct play into stereotypes is abundant fodder for my sense of humor. I wish that he got it, too. To be fair, of course, McCain is so laughably stereotypical as well, be certain that I am equally ‘racially’ entertained. He isn’t doing anything to break out of any of the goof-butt white guy stereotypes out there, that’s for sure.

But I have some questions. If Barrack wins, what are we gonna call the guy? Our first black president? Our first African-American president? Our first Negroid president? Difficult considering that each of the above are only partially true. And which of those terms did you find most/least…appropriate? Why? I’m just trying to figure out what’s OK. For the record, I am of Caucasian/European/German-Polish decent. At least half of my direct family line didn’t even get here until the very early part of the last century. Yet, I am most commonly referred to as simply ‘American’. I don’t insist on being called ‘Europen-American’, but maybe I should. Doesn’t bum me out if you call me ‘white’. And if you refer to me as Caucasian, I think of it as scientific and historical. What about all the brown and yellow people? I’m pretty sure I gotta be carefully choosy when I call a Latin-American person Hispanic or Mexican, and it isn’t cool to just call them brown even though they refer to themselves as that when they are talking about their power. And I have been expertly advised by someone on the inside that Asians don’t dig being called ‘oriental’ because they’re ‘people, not rugs’. Fair enough. I’m not sure, but I don’t think it’s ever been cool to call them yellow. Certainly I could go on and on with this and discuss others, like how we call a certain group ‘Indians’ based on their continental geography, yet nobody from New Delhi refers to themselves as ‘Indian’. But I’ll stop here. I guess the bottom line is I just wish the terminology would be more standardized, or that it would be more OK that it wasn’t.

To the best of my knowledge, there are only a small amount of racial origins, and most obviously no one is superior to the other. But tribes and countries create cultures, and there are plenty of undeniably funny stereotypical truths associated with them. With good reason they are called Generalizations: they apply quite generally to the general populace. That fact is what actually makes us all most alike. Or, if you prefer, ‘equal’. So I say enjoy them. Laugh. Have fun. ‘Cause if you don’t, the joke’s on you.