Born to be Wild -- Colonial Legacies

So, I have been sitting on this one for quite some time due to my crazy schedule over the last few months, but I saw a movie at the Boston Aquarium recently that was adorable and yet terribly unsettling.

 The movie was called "Born to be Wild 3D" and it documents two programs that help orphaned wildlife in terribly "exotic" and romanticized corners of the world (note: this is drenched in sarcasm and distaste). While the baby animals were unbearably cute, my main critique lies with the choice of human subjects in the film. Though the documentary follows animals in Kenya and Borneo, filmmakers chose to follow elderly white women, blatant remnants of colonial legacies in these countries, as the protagonists. The white women give many interviews describing their love for the baby animals and how amazing it is that they are able to "rescue" them. All the while, black Kenyan men are seen in the background actually taking care of the baby elephants!!! These Kenyan men remain nameless and voiceless throughout the film. No one bothered to ask them about their roles in caring for the animals. While the colonial women are imparting their knowledge of these wild animals, the Bornean and Kenyan caretakers are seen playing with the animals in the background in a way that constructs them as "wild" and "animal-like."

 In this day and age, why do cute films aimed at child audiences continue to reify colonial legacies without questioning the role of race in representation? Why did it seem as though I was the only person in the theatre who left feeling mildly disturbed by the portrayal of people of color as mere props in the background of these white women's heroic stories? Normalizing this type of representation of race and colonialism in entertainment for our children makes it that much harder to deconstruct these problematic (and powerful) notions in the future. While children leave thinking about the cute monkeys and elephants, on a subconscious level there is much deeper schema-building at work. Without even realizing it, by leaving these representations uninterrogated, we encourage our children to accept these representations as truth and thereby reaffirm pervasive and institutionalized racist, Western-centric thinking.

Gun Violence: Blaming the Mentally Ill

“‘People who have mental health issues should not have guns,’ Mr. Cuomo told reporters. ‘They could hurt themselves, they could hurt other people.’” (NYTimes.com 1/15/2013)

True. Anyone with a gun could hurt themselves or other people. While I am hardily in favor of restricting the sale of lethal weapons, I am concerned that statements such as the one above works to further stigmatize an already marginalized population. Increasing stigma around mental health issues will only make people LESS likely to seek support for themselves and their children.

 Also, how are we defining "mental health issues?" I suffered from severe depression as an adolescent, though I am currently a happy thriving adult. Do I still count as someone with "mental health issues?" Do you only count as having a "mental health issue" if you seek treatment and your "issue" is documented by a licensed mental health professional? What about the millions of Americans who suffer with mental health problems but remain undiagnosed? Is it okay to sell them a gun so long as they don't mention their troubles to a doctor or therapist?

 Long story short, I completely agree that this epidemic of mass shootings indicates more than a just a gun problem; these tragedies point to a failure of the mental health system in this country. I firmly believe that any comprehensive approach to preventing more of these tragedies requires gun legislation reform as well as a close examination of the state of mental health in this country. However, I do NOT think that legislation that further stigmatizes mental illness is the way to go. Helping people who struggle with mental illness to receive the treatment and support needed to live fulfilling lives is not exactly the same as pegging the mentally ill as criminals.

 Don’t get me wrong, I am not arguing that people who report that they plan to harm themselves or others should be in possession of assault weapons. I am arguing that only addressing one side of the issue (i.e. punishing those who struggle with mental illness rather than promoting mental health and wellness) will not lead to the kind of change that I think the legislators hope to achieve. And in the meanwhile, mental health becomes even more taboo and stigmatized in the process.