Speaking of unpleasant and disagreeable - it was in there, somewhere - I've been meaning to say a few words about Dr. Laura Schlessinger and the comments that led to her leaving talk radio.
It's worth remembering, for one thing, why Dr. Laura rose to prominence in the first place: her show, and her shtick, had everything to do with a pendulum swing response to the rise of psychologizing every personal problem,
especially for daytime television. That movement - the "pop psychology" wave that took flight in the sixties, and became something of a driving force in the seventies - was a lot of what built Phil Donahue into the phenomenon he became, along with a slew of imitators, obviously and most directly leading to the modern day dominance of Oprah Winfrey.
Schlessinger's rise was part of the oppositional response, grounded in a sense that pop psychologizing had become a lazy, catch-all way of evading personal responsibility for one's own flaws and mistakes. Nor was this an entirely outrageous assessment - while pop psychology helpfully removed the stigmas surrounding say, addiction, and conditions like depression, there was also a tendency to substitute the naming of a problem for actually doing something about it. The naming itself was so refreshing and freeing that the struggle of actually dealing with the problems in question - of actually treating depression, or overcoming addiction - seemed superfluous. It was also the case that actually solving those problems also turned out to be difficult, painful... and not necessarily uplifting television that fit conveniently into a 48 minute talk show format. And so the easy shorthand became: present tortured victim with problem. Bring on "expert" to explain name of problem and possible solutions, and finish with some indication that hope is possible and suggest further reading.
The blowback to that was the intersection between people who felt, in an especially American way, that taking action and personal responsibility was being de-emphasized in favor of a "victim-ology" and a new kind of inertia; and traditionalists who viewed progress on psychological problems with skepticism, and favored older, more "common sense" approaches to personal problems.
Schlessinger was neither the first, nor the best of the anti-pop psychologists; but her heavily rightwing stances and her willingness to say uncompromising, controversial things guaranteed success on talk radio and a kind of notoriety that would increase curiosity and ratings.
In the rush to tag Schlessinger's latest "n-word" comments as beyond the pale, many people lost sight of the fact that Dr. Laura - who, as many noted, had slunk well out of the spotlight after a number of controversies in the nineties - was not saying or doing anything especially surprising. The "advice" she has offered to her callers has always been about providing confrontational "you're the one with the problem" type of harangues that insisted all could be fixed by taking some responsibility and wallowing in less self pity. The advice she was offering to her caller that day - revolving around the woman's concerns that her husband's friends were expressing prejudices that made her uncomfortable in her mixed-race marriage - was of a piece with her advice all along. Get over it. Stop complaining. Grow up.
It's also worth pointing out that, really, much of pop psychologizing has become more attuned to this sense of personal responsibility and taking action; Oprah's presentation of these issues - her discussions of struggles with diet and weight issues, of relationship complexities, etc - reflect the sense that a viewer should feel "empowered" to tackle her problems, take action, and work towards concrete results. Eat... Pray... Love... is still, ultimately about doing something.
Criticism of Schlessinger has focused, naturally, on her use of "the N word". I have little use for either the word itself or the "N word" construction we use to avoid saying the actual word in print or aloud. Am I shocked that she used the term, repeatedly in her extended diatribe? Perhaps, as we all are, given how it is so anathema for it to be said in polite society... but given Dr. Laura's willingness to shock, I'm not, really.
And beyond the word, the real problem with Schlessinger's advice, and the real prejudice she revealed was when she said to her caller, a black woman, "if you can't put aside some of your sensitivities, you shouldn't have married outside your race."
What perked up my ears - and why I suspected that Laura's retirement was not far off was that final clause: "married outside of your race." It's a wording that's, well, archaic. "Married outside your race" speaks volumes to notions about staying with your own, about enforcing social conventions, and making judgments about other people's life choices. Love sees no color... but we, as humans, do. It's what we do with what we see that matters. And when you look at an interracial relationship and think "ah, look - they're dating outside the race..." their relationship is not the problem. What you're seeing, is.
The reason Schlessinger's type of harangue is of such limited value in the end is that it, too, is inherently contradictory: rejecting "victim" status, standing up for yourself are celebrated in her worldview... but for Schlessinger's advice to be meaningful you have to agree that she, in the end, is better at evaluating your life and your problems than you are; that is, you should stand up for yourself... after I tell you how you are a mess-up. But who is she to judge? Especially when, as Laura herself has demonstrated in the past few weeks, she rejects anyone's assessment of her own actions, other than her own?
Finally, Schlessinger's "why can they say n****er when I can't" is itself a generic, poor substitute for a thoughtful discussion about attitudes on race and language; it's a coy way of saying "I want to be able to use an ugly insult, but can't because it's socially unacceptable... yet others can use the term as long as it isn't used in that deeply offensive way." The whole construction is naive, and ultimately, makes the point it's trying to avoid. Moreover, Schlessinger seems well aware that she crossed a line, a tacit admission that, in fact, her shtick has been, in its way, shtick all along. More than what she said, that she said it at all, desperately pushing her way back to the kind of cultural relevance she once enjoyed, is a good indication of why the ride is over for her. And as much as Schlessinger has become yet another example of the way we avoid, as a society, the complicated discussions of racial issues - like attitudes about interracial relationships - in favor of isolating those who challenge the established truce of silence, the fact remains... she's no more interested in the hard parts of the discussion than anyone else. The discussion we need on race is about more than some cheap shot from a has-been radio host... and extends beyond one unnecessary word. You feel me?
It's worth remembering, for one thing, why Dr. Laura rose to prominence in the first place: her show, and her shtick, had everything to do with a pendulum swing response to the rise of psychologizing every personal problem,
Schlessinger's rise was part of the oppositional response, grounded in a sense that pop psychologizing had become a lazy, catch-all way of evading personal responsibility for one's own flaws and mistakes. Nor was this an entirely outrageous assessment - while pop psychology helpfully removed the stigmas surrounding say, addiction, and conditions like depression, there was also a tendency to substitute the naming of a problem for actually doing something about it. The naming itself was so refreshing and freeing that the struggle of actually dealing with the problems in question - of actually treating depression, or overcoming addiction - seemed superfluous. It was also the case that actually solving those problems also turned out to be difficult, painful... and not necessarily uplifting television that fit conveniently into a 48 minute talk show format. And so the easy shorthand became: present tortured victim with problem. Bring on "expert" to explain name of problem and possible solutions, and finish with some indication that hope is possible and suggest further reading.
The blowback to that was the intersection between people who felt, in an especially American way, that taking action and personal responsibility was being de-emphasized in favor of a "victim-ology" and a new kind of inertia; and traditionalists who viewed progress on psychological problems with skepticism, and favored older, more "common sense" approaches to personal problems.
Schlessinger was neither the first, nor the best of the anti-pop psychologists; but her heavily rightwing stances and her willingness to say uncompromising, controversial things guaranteed success on talk radio and a kind of notoriety that would increase curiosity and ratings.
In the rush to tag Schlessinger's latest "n-word" comments as beyond the pale, many people lost sight of the fact that Dr. Laura - who, as many noted, had slunk well out of the spotlight after a number of controversies in the nineties - was not saying or doing anything especially surprising. The "advice" she has offered to her callers has always been about providing confrontational "you're the one with the problem" type of harangues that insisted all could be fixed by taking some responsibility and wallowing in less self pity. The advice she was offering to her caller that day - revolving around the woman's concerns that her husband's friends were expressing prejudices that made her uncomfortable in her mixed-race marriage - was of a piece with her advice all along. Get over it. Stop complaining. Grow up.
It's also worth pointing out that, really, much of pop psychologizing has become more attuned to this sense of personal responsibility and taking action; Oprah's presentation of these issues - her discussions of struggles with diet and weight issues, of relationship complexities, etc - reflect the sense that a viewer should feel "empowered" to tackle her problems, take action, and work towards concrete results. Eat... Pray... Love... is still, ultimately about doing something.
Criticism of Schlessinger has focused, naturally, on her use of "the N word". I have little use for either the word itself or the "N word" construction we use to avoid saying the actual word in print or aloud. Am I shocked that she used the term, repeatedly in her extended diatribe? Perhaps, as we all are, given how it is so anathema for it to be said in polite society... but given Dr. Laura's willingness to shock, I'm not, really.
And beyond the word, the real problem with Schlessinger's advice, and the real prejudice she revealed was when she said to her caller, a black woman, "if you can't put aside some of your sensitivities, you shouldn't have married outside your race."
What perked up my ears - and why I suspected that Laura's retirement was not far off was that final clause: "married outside of your race." It's a wording that's, well, archaic. "Married outside your race" speaks volumes to notions about staying with your own, about enforcing social conventions, and making judgments about other people's life choices. Love sees no color... but we, as humans, do. It's what we do with what we see that matters. And when you look at an interracial relationship and think "ah, look - they're dating outside the race..." their relationship is not the problem. What you're seeing, is.
The reason Schlessinger's type of harangue is of such limited value in the end is that it, too, is inherently contradictory: rejecting "victim" status, standing up for yourself are celebrated in her worldview... but for Schlessinger's advice to be meaningful you have to agree that she, in the end, is better at evaluating your life and your problems than you are; that is, you should stand up for yourself... after I tell you how you are a mess-up. But who is she to judge? Especially when, as Laura herself has demonstrated in the past few weeks, she rejects anyone's assessment of her own actions, other than her own?
Finally, Schlessinger's "why can they say n****er when I can't" is itself a generic, poor substitute for a thoughtful discussion about attitudes on race and language; it's a coy way of saying "I want to be able to use an ugly insult, but can't because it's socially unacceptable... yet others can use the term as long as it isn't used in that deeply offensive way." The whole construction is naive, and ultimately, makes the point it's trying to avoid. Moreover, Schlessinger seems well aware that she crossed a line, a tacit admission that, in fact, her shtick has been, in its way, shtick all along. More than what she said, that she said it at all, desperately pushing her way back to the kind of cultural relevance she once enjoyed, is a good indication of why the ride is over for her. And as much as Schlessinger has become yet another example of the way we avoid, as a society, the complicated discussions of racial issues - like attitudes about interracial relationships - in favor of isolating those who challenge the established truce of silence, the fact remains... she's no more interested in the hard parts of the discussion than anyone else. The discussion we need on race is about more than some cheap shot from a has-been radio host... and extends beyond one unnecessary word. You feel me?
As an interracial dating expert, I thought Dr. Laura's comments were beyond insensitive, not just the N-word rant, but that is it was so misplaced. This was not a conversation about being PC or even racist, it was a woman with a real marital problem that was reaching out for advice, which is really hard for most people and instead of really listening and helping her with her problem Dr. Laura uses Jade to put forth her own agenda. Dr. Laura when it becomes more about ratings than helping people I think its time to hang up your microphone and do something else. People call relationship experts to be heard and for understanding, Dr. Laura offered this woman neither.
Our Blog: http://jcdaviesauthor.com/
social media: jcdaviesauthor
Posted by: Racy JC | August 25, 2010 at 04:57 PM