der go mammy again

Yesterday's NY Times piece "An Image Popular in Films Raises Some Eyebrows in Ads" was really a no-brainer for those of us who have long paid attention to the remammification of many black female images (and I'm well aware of the flipside of this image--the exoticized, usually mixed race figure, but that's the topic of another blog). What infuriates me about this article is the presumption that the image is less offensive if black folks are reproducing and "enjoying" it (as exemplified by the insane popularity of Tyler Perry's "Madea"). Orlando Patterson comments on these distinctions:

“To the black audience, this may be, ‘You do your thing, sister," Professor Patterson said. “The white audience is laughing with her. Then they go back to reality, and they laugh at her.”

I beg to differ, Professor Patterson. I think plenty of black folks are laughing AT her! Missing from this article are the gendered implications of these representations. The article's focus on whether these images are racially offensive ignores the possibility that they could be sexually offensive, especially to black women who are tired of being measured against stereotypes (like some heavy-set black women who people constantly expect to be funny or maternal. Wha? You don't think this translates into real life experiences?).

The loud-mouthed, brash black woman and the big, nurturing Mammy have a long history rooted in racial stereotypes but these images also thrive on their own and feed off the misogyny in some black communities. The revivification of Mammy (if she ever really disappeared), the "castrating" black woman borne out of "cultural Moynihanism" and the babymama of the post-Civil Rights generation are interconnected by a culture of sexualized racism that manifests itself in mediated images but that also impacts black women's everyday lives.