Casting Nancy Drew: No Whiteys, Please!

By Kimberly Bloom Jackson

CBS Entertainment has announced plans to remake the classic television series Nancy Drew. What young actress wouldn’t want to audition for the opportunity to reprise the role of this iconic detective? Unfortunately, there’s just one problem: White women need not apply.

Nancy Drew

“I’d be open to any ethnicity,” but “[She will] not [be] Caucasian,” said CBS President Glenn Geller.

Imagine if Geller had said he was open to casting Nancy Drew as any ethnicity, but that she would not be black or Hispanic. He would be inundated with hate mail for being a racist. In fact, had any other business suggested that black or Hispanic women need not apply, there would be all kinds of discrimination lawsuits, Al Sharpton would swoop in to stoke the flames of bigotry, and today’s new totalitarian activist groups like the NAACP would make it their mission to have the business shut down.

But we’re talking Hollywood, where diversity (aka color) is considered a virtue of the highest order. How do I know? I’m an actress turned cultural anthropologist who spent several years behind-the-scenes interviewing some of the most distinguished Hollywood insiders about the industry’s obsession with race and social engineering. As for Geller, let’s just say his methods don’t surprise me.

Subtracting White, Adding Color
Nancy Drew made her debut in 1930, with the Nancy Drew Mystery Stories original novel series running from 1930 to 2003. The book franchise became so successful, it spawned an assortment of screen reincarnations, including an ABC television series in the 1970s, The Hardy Boys/Nancy Drew Mysteries and a made for television movie Nancy Drew in 2002. Additionally, Warner Brothers Pictures made four Nancy Drew movies in the 1930s and a fifth movie in 2007.

Policing Culture at the University of Washington

By Kimberly Bloom Jackson

There’s a new wave of hard core political correctness sweeping college campuses. It’s called cultural appropriation. As explained by a University of Washington student, it’s when “you take something from a culture that isn’t yours and basically use it for your own purposes. A lot of times this involves a majority culture taking bits and pieces of a minority culture in a way that trivializes it, in away that misrepresents it and pulls it out of context, or in a way that stereotypes other people.”

Cultural Appropriation at UW

If this leaves you scratching your head, don’t worry. There’s a whole group of UW students who, having crowned themselves with a certain level of elitism, have put together a video instructing the rest of us Cro-Magnon types on how to avoid cultural appropriation. As one might expect, they make fools of themselves in the process.

Nevertheless, as you watch the video, you can almost imagine yourself in a museum walking from one “cultural exhibit” to another as you’re immediately hit with a sense of separatism and victimhood. Of course, it would have been more helpful had the students actually known something about culture before starting their little grievance project.

Still, as an anthropologist who escaped the grips of leftist academia before my own brain could turn to mush, I am somewhat sympathetic to those afflicted with critical thinking attrition, a common byproduct of today’s higher education. Perhaps these students deserve a refund.

It used to be that anyone could take a good Anthropology 101 class and get an honest lesson on cultural diffusion. This simply refers to the natural spreading of cultural traits, mainly through migration, trade, and war. Cultures adopt and tinker with traits that work for them and abandon those traits that don’t. It’s one of the key mechanisms of cultural change and advancement, and the primary reason isolated cultures tend to lag behind everyone else.

While it’s obvious the students never learned about cultural diffusion they do, however, seem to know plenty about cultural isolation. In case you haven’t noticed, college campuses are hotbeds of victim identities, where many students have aligned themselves with a special, separate culture of oppression. Victim cultures wear their victimhood as a badge of moral virtue. They see themselves as innocent and everyone else is out to get them.

Keeping Up With the Real Racists

By Kimberly Bloom Jackson

The definition of racist has changed so much it’s hard to keep up.

Remember the days when a racist was someone who believed in the innate superiority of one race over another? Tragically, this ideology provided the basis for racists to segregate, victimize, and deny the rights of others. Nevertheless, this is precisely what defined a real racist.

America isn’t perfect, but a lot has changed for the better. Just look at all those of color who want to come here and all the white America haters who won’t leave for what they think is better grazing. To me, this speaks volumes.

Still, progressive rabble-rousers must keep their investment in race current. In 1997, for example, UC Berkeley sponsored a conference, The Making and Unmaking of Whiteness, where activists “critically” examined whiteness. Within three days, they concluded that white people are the “passive inheritors of a system of privilege and wealth.” You know it by its more fashionable name white privilege.

Such sweeping Marxist pronouncements have helped real racists forge their own definition of racism, not as acts or attitudes committed by individuals, but a racism that permanently links all white people. And since no white person wants to be associated with racism, many whites today have enthusiastically embraced feigned diversity oriented reforms and policies just to disassociate themselves from any taint of historical racism. This is called white guilt and it’s the real racist’s secret weapon.