Racist Disney Fan Site Exposed

[schoolofsoul]

Popular Disney fan site MiceChat.com likes to think of itself as tolerant, particularly in light of the fact that it's run by two gay white men, but it has a secret history of hypocrisy and racism at its core, and a tremendous intolerance of Black and other non-white perspectives, especially when those perspectives come into conflict with white

Comments

[schoolofsoul]

Nah, actually most of the folks there were cool with the Tia Dalma character; some were saying she was their favorite and all - although when the rumor that Tia Dalma might be added to the Pirates of the Caribbean ride at Disneyland (in the Blue Bayou section at the start of the ride) was mentioned in one of their sister sites' articles (MiceAge.com), many thought it would ruin the ride and make a lot of noise, where it's currently very quiet. I thought that type of knee-jerk reaction was a bit telling, and probably not a little bit racially tinged.

It wasn't so much Tia Dalma herself that was at issue. It was the fact that occasionally I would bring up Black news items and issues and give my POV and there'd be a constant whining about it - "why's everything got to be 'black this' and 'black that' - why do we have to make it about race?" That sort of thing. I was regularly accused by the moderators of being a troll, when I clearly was not, as I was active in several forums and was often very polite and made jokes and provided interesting Disney info and so forth regularly. When I started a thread on the recent international tribunal on Hurricane Katrina, I was accused of being a socialist, and was asked "what about the white people who lost their homes too?" Always this "what about the white people" stuff. When I started a thread on the Jena 6 case, all the apologists for the racist white kids started coming out of the woodwork. When I posted an article about elections in Sierra Leone, it was met with a stifling indifference, and one snotty prick came right out and said "nobody cares, dude." Of course, he was not criticized or punished in any way for that remark. Any inference or accusation toward, say, the US government or police of being racist was met with sarcasm and criticism. Yet I was holding my own, and doing my level best to be civil, in the face of so much incivility. That's not to say there weren't a few decent folks with good heads on their shoulders on that site. The moderators and administrators, though - VERY heavy-handed and ego-driven. VERY cliquish.

The really irritating thing is that, as a group, they tend to promote "being different" and "being outside the norm," but apparently there's a limit to that. If you're gay, you're embraced with open arms and lovingly supported. If you're a goth, same thing. If you're just an odd duck, you'll find a good spot. But if you're Black, you'd better damn well not be TOO Black, let alone politically outside the two-party system, or you'll get dumped on a lot, catcalled a lot, made fun of, dismissed, and challenged constantly, and if you don't kiss everyone's ass, you're bucking for a suspension and/or banning. Also, the notion that only they could determine what was racist and what wasn't, and yet I couldn't, was insulting and extremely racist in its very nature. This was why I was accused of being racist and bigoted for being pro-Black (which I am, but that doesn't mean I'm anti-white), yet they couldn't see that by accusing me of that, especially for that reason, they were being racist themselves, even though they'd deny it to their last breath.

It's a good place to see white privilege in action. The idea of "you only see racism if you want to see racism" runs amok there, even amongst some of the few people of color who are members (most of whom, more often than not, have a white spouse)!

[schoolofsoul]

You make a very good point. As it is, I've been banned from MiceChat (even though my popularity was increasing, going from the positive rep I was getting), which is a bit of a shame, because it's an otherwise good board that can be very entertaining and informative. There are decent people on the site who, for whatever reason, are just reticent to discuss more serious issues. The ones who are willing to discuss mature subjects are either 1. smart alecks who don't know anything but think they do, or 2. more secure people who are willing to address it but tend to be in agreement or don't often elaborate enough on an issue to make it worth pursuing.

[schoolofsoul]

I know exactly what you mean about kids (and others) thinking forums are places to be all chirpy (I like that phrase, too, it's perfect).

The fact that it was a Disney forum - that had been asked of me by one moderator early on - "you're aware that this is a DISNEY forum, right?" - but considering that they're willing to talk about plenty of other non-Disney-related topics pretty much rendered that argument moot. As for the age range on the site, it's all over the place, from teenagers to people in their 50s and 60s. Some of my critics were younger, some were older, a few were around the same age (I'm in my early 40s). Some of the arguments in rebuttal were reasoned (even if I disagreed with them), others were clearly emotional. Much of it was of the "tit-for-tat" variety of argument (which I'm well-versed in myself), others were just heckling and mocking. Thread hijacking happened more than once. Mods only stepped in when I'd request that a thread be closed. Just not a good way to run a board.