GOOD

Black Pete Survives Another Holiday Season

You’re damn right the traditional Dutch Christmas character is racist

Van Sinterklaas en Pieterbaas by S. Abramz, J. G. Kesler, illus. 3rd edition 1926. Via St.nicholascenter.org

Growing up, though we were infrequent churchgoers, Christmas was a huge deal in my family. Even during those years when my parents couldn’t afford the shiniest, most heavily advertised toys for my sister and I, they made up for it with a loving atmosphere, boatloads of decorations, and the kind of Christmas cheer that seems cheesy to my adult mind now, but meant the world to me on those early December mornings.


Decorating our artificial tannenbaum each year, eclipsing any tree-topping angel, our black Santa ornament was the star of the show. My mother doesn’t remember where she found him, and he was painted unevenly, as though some underpaid artisan had wanted to include differing skin tones of Black-with-a-capital-B so that no kids felt left out. In a world of Miracle on 34th Street (and every other street for that matter), my family wanted me to relish in the possibility that Santa could be black, even if TV, Coca-Cola ads, and movies were constantly telling me otherwise.

Children of color get enough negative messages about who they are before they’ve even suited up to play in the game of life. In a just world, around the time of this widely celebrated holiday that’s tied to words like “peace” and “joy,” little black boys and girls wouldn’t have to steel themselves against the slings and arrows of racist caricature. But, leave it to adults to fuck that up.

Enter: Black Pete

Black Pete is seen on the left. Original Edition, Theod. Bom, ca. 1850. Via St.nicholascenter.org

Widely accredited to Jan Schenkman’s 1850 book Saint Nicholas and his Servant, the Dutch Sinterklaas archetype was depicted as being not unlike the Santa Claus many American kids came to know and love, delivering gifts and all that jazz. Schenkman’s fan-edit in question, however, was a black-skinned servant that would come to be known as Zwarte Piet (Black Pete). Though depictions in picture books vary in the decades since, the constants of his subservient position—charcoal-dark skin, bright red lips, wide eyes, and curly hair—are difficult to process a century after Piet became a staple of Christmas fare for the Dutch and other Europeans. Even today, children sing “…Even if I’m black as coal, I mean well…” in a popular song based on the origin story of Santa’s “savage” helper. Portrayals of the character by white Europeans wearing blackface with painted lips and afro wigs during Sinterklaas parades and festivals are even more egregious.

Top photos via Wikimedia Commons; bottom left photo via Flickr user Floris Looijesteijn; bottom right photo via Flickr user Tobias64

“Is Black Pete racist?” seems to be a query posed regularly by European media around this time of year. Given that these are predominately white outlets (“Black Pete: Harmless tradition or racist throwback?” asks The Week), with predominately white audiences, I guess that may at least seem like a valid question. Yet, with the Sambo-esque appearance, servile demeanor, and general buffoonery of the character, most people of color would retort, “You’re damn right it’s racist!” The eventual reason given—because racists always seem to have a rebuttal—for Black Pete’s dark skin is that he is dirty from sliding down chimneys delivering presents. As for the red lips, hair, and broken Dutch the character is often portrayed as having, who knows?

Debate over whether something like this is racist or not is not unlike the alcoholic who debates whether she has a problem or not as she desperately swills mouthwash in a hotel bathroom. (If you have to ask…) Considering Black Pete’s origins are rooted in the 1850s, after decades of Dutch slave trading, there’s not much of an argument. The visceral horror of seeing one’s self defamed and lampooned, whether in the name of tradition or outright malignant racism, is a sensation difficult to impart upon even the most well-meaning whites. With recent, regrettable Merry Cripmas college parties—where our supposed best and brightest don their finest blackface to chug Milwaukee’s Best, embarrass their universities, and alienate any black friends they may have had—we here in the States can hardly wag our fingers. Like the U.S., the Netherlands’ deep history of enslaving Africans still has a ripple effect on the present day.

Black Pete, like blackface in this country, is rooted in the laziest, most raw type of anti-blackness, a dangerous (and sometimes deadly) combination of malevolence and ignorance. The United Nations has officially condemned the use of Black Pete in the Sinterklaas celebrations, yet with Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte stating that it is not up to him (or politics in general) to decide whether Black Pete should be done away with, the black children of the Netherlands must continue to have the spirit of the season (and potentially their senses of self) distorted, all in the name of “tradition.”

Articles
via Chela Horsdal / Twitter

Amazon's "The Man in the High Castle" debuted the first episode of its final season last week.

The show is loosely based on an alternative history novel by Philip K. Dick that postulates what would happen if Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan controlled the United States after being victorious in World War II.

Keep Reading Show less
Politics
via Mike Mozart / Flickr

Chick-fil-A is the third-largest fast food chain in America, behind McDonald's and Starbucks, raking in over $10 billion a year.

But for years, the company has faced boycotts for supporting anti-LGBT charities, including the Salvation Army, the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, and the Paul Anderson Youth Home.

The Salvation Army faced criticism after a leader in the organization implied that gay people "deserve to die" and the company also came under fire after refusing to offer same-sex couples health insurance. But the organization swears it's evolving on such issues.

via Thomas Hawk / Flickr

The Fellowship of Christian Athletes explicitly announced it was anti gay marriage in a recent "Statement of Faith."

God instituted marriage between one man and one woman as the foundation of the family and the basic structure of human society. For this reason, we believe that marriage is exclusively the union of one man and one woman.

The Paul Anderson Youth Home teaches boys that homosexuality is wrong and that same-sex marriage is "rage against Jesus Christ and His values."

RELATED: The 1975's singer bravely kissed a man at a Dubai concert to protest anti-LGBT oppression

In 2012, Chick-fil-A's CEO, Dan Cathy, made anti same-sex marriage comments on a radio broadcast:

I think we are inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, "We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage". I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about.

But the chicken giant has now decided to change it's says its charitable donation strategy because it's bad for business...Not because being homophobic is wrong.

The company recently lost several bids to provide concessions in U.S. airports. A pop-up shop in England was told it would not be renewed after eight days following LGBTQ protests.

Chick-fil-A also has plans to expand to Boston, Massachusetts where its mayor, Thomas Menino, pledged to ban the restaurant from the city.

via Wikimedia Commons

"There's no question we know that, as we go into new markets, we need to be clear about who we are," Chick-fil-A President and Chief Operating Officer Tim Tassopoulos told Bisnow. "There are lots of articles and newscasts about Chick-fil-A, and we thought we needed to be clear about our message."

RELATED: Alan Turing will appear on the 50-pound note nearly 70 years after being persecuted for his sexuality

Instead, the Chick-fil-A Foundation plans to give $9 million to organizations that support education and fight homelessness. Which is commendable regardless of the company's troubled past.

"If Chick-Fil-A is serious about their pledge to stop holding hands with divisive anti-LGBTQ activists, then further transparency is needed regarding their deep ties to organizations like Focus on the Family, which exist purely to harm LGBTQ people and families," Drew Anderson, GLAAD's director of campaigns and rapid response, said in a statement.

Chick-fil-A's decision to back down from contributing to anti-LGBT charities shows the power that people have to fight back against companies by hitting them where it really hurts — the pocket book.

The question remains: If you previously avoided Chick-fil-A because it supported anti-LGBT organizations, is it now OK to eat there? Especially when Popeye's chicken sandwich is so good people will kill for it?

Lifestyle

Oh, irony. You are having quite a day.

The Italian region of Veneto, which includes the city of Venice, is currently experiencing historic flooding. Venice Mayor Luigi Brugnaro has stated that the flooding is a direct result of climate change, with the tide measuring the highest level in 50 years. The city (which is actually a collection of 100 islands in a lagoon—hence its famous canal streets), is no stranger to regular flooding, but is currently on the brink of declaring a state of emergency as waters refuse to recede.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
via Gage Skidmore / Flickr and nrkbeta / flickr

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) dropped a bombshell on Tuesday, announcing it had over 900 emails that White House aide Stephen Miller sent to former Breitbart writer and editor Katie McHugh.

According to the SPLC, in the emails, Miller aggressively "promoted white nationalist literature, pushed racist immigration stories and obsessed over the loss of Confederate symbols after Dylann Roof's murderous rampage."

Keep Reading Show less
Politics
via Twitter / Bye,Bye Harley Davidson

The NRA likes to diminish the role that guns play in fatal shootings by saying, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

Which is the same logic as, "Hammers don't build roofs, people build roofs." No duh. But it'd be nearly impossible to build a roof without a hammer.

So, shouldn't the people who manufacture guns share some responsibility when they are used for the purpose they're made: killing people? Especially when the manufacturers market the weapon for that exact purpose?

Keep Reading Show less
Business