There is a form of racist prejudice in this country that seldom is ever acknowledged—namely prejudicial stereotyping of blonde people (particularly in negative ways). Often it is subtle and other times notso; and yet it seems more pervasive than many people may be willing to believe.

People could argue that “blonde” is not even technically characteristic of a “race,” save what propaganda the Nazis supposedly argued about the so called “Master Race” (more on that later). Yet it doesn’t matter whether blonde hair makes up a distinct race—the fact is it is a distinct physical feature (or biological tendency) and people do in fact harbor stereotypes about “all” types of people with all kinds of distinguishable features—whether they are consciously aware of it or not. When is the last time you questioned your stereotypes about blonde people? We are not generally prompted to think about it.

Meanwhile some newspapers are allowing more cheapshots to be printed in their newpapers—and it it not just tabloids. Although we likely read, or have read. countless (thousands) of references about racist stereotypes against minorities in this society, we almost never read about the extent of pre-judgments and acts of malice printed against blondes. Yes occasionally we gain awareness through, for example a plethora of “dumb blonde” jokes, until it becomes obvious that there is a prejudice—after all not “all” blondes are dumb?

Equally at times there will be an occasional book or movie discussing such a prejudice against blonde women (in particular) as it is usually blonde women who receive excessive focus of being in the limelight (but seldom do these statements directly discuss a truer “level” of hatred and meanness?). It is as if such racism against blonde hair (the people who have it) was merely a petty vice (versus acts and animosity acted against other people as “understood” to be more serious like in “real” racism).

For example, recently Renee Graham of the Boston Globe wrote:

“Now the Jennifer Aniston has filed for divorce from Brad Pitt, it would seem that Hollywood, and, by extension, America, is in desperate need of a new Golden Couple. ... By all indications, Brad and Jennifer were as pleasant and bland as a bowl of warm broth, but they had what was needed to make them the Golden Couple. Then again, the qualifications seem to require nothing beyond an ability to walk, smile, pose and wave at movie premieres and award shows.”

Of course these are the qualifications to gain any waitor or waitress job with the additional requirement that one can speak the language as well as say a high school graduate. Nevertheless there is a prevalent conceit in the United States by too many Americans (including and especially those that work the media and movie industry) that “blonde” equals “bland;” (when it doesn’t also equal dumb or nice); and since few challenge these prejudices, the these words have become conjoined in the public’s mind over the years (via mass culture).

Yes it is true that Hollywood predominantly “caters” to physical attractiveness (as does advertising and the modeling industries) as opposed to favoring people with real talent when they are not considered physically attractive. But then again those people that do manage to show real talent and moxie must be the “non-blondes right?”

Blonde “women” especially dominate, (in a very big way), the limelight of this multi-ethnic culture (but never mind how many brunnette males equally seem to have dominance); and this domination gives ways to jealousies and hatreds that are seldom discussed as a form of racism or prejudice (even in this overly self-righteous and politically correct society). Rather the attitude seems to be that blonde women, being privledged biologically, “deserve” the animosity heaped upon them even if it gets ugly at times. Have you ever seen one women are mean or deprecating toward a blonde woman simply because of her hair color? I have.

Meanwhile “pseudo-journalists,” that cover movie stars and the industry, do not really challenge the movie industry’s propensity to not select talent over beauty in general—save the onslaught of backhanded blonde bimbo induendoes. However, does this then make to mean other Hollywood stars are geniuses and authentic?

Take for example a reference made a while back about Sean Penn in our local NeoCon and dis-informational rag called the Daily Diarrhea. Back when Sean Penn went to Iraq to investigate, for himself, the situation there (as a non-inbedded toady), our local PR syncophant editors basically allowed the gossip section to state: “Who cares what Penn thinks” (in less becoming terms); and then compared Penn’s supposedly foolish or impetuous curiosity to “thee” unquestioned wisdom of Sandra Bullock for “not” commenting on national politics. You see Ms! Bullock was Green Eyed Envy’s answer to the dumb bimbos of Atlantic City’s Miss Pageant s. Her brunette-ness came to be seen as savvy, and yet she could dubb dumb bunny enough to be an object thing. Yet her undercover job made her a real thing—someone who could exercise power and street smart like all good cop shows against a backdrop of dumb downed culture. Screen writers must really seem like real literary agents. No mere pink ribbon and lipstick for this dish of Bullock. Obviously then “she” could be compared to our nation’s Ridgemont High flunky.

Yet “I” wanted to know what Sean Penn thought about his trip to Iraq--especially since so few actors and actresses get involved in anything really important in the world. Whereas I really didn’t give much of a damn what some two-bit gossipper thought about Sean Penn’s sense of independence—especially if that cheapshot artist has nothing better to do than engage love/hatre relationships with actors and actresses of little real significance.

Luckily I did read Penn’s essay (published in San Franciso’s Chronicle) via the Internet to learn he is a lot smarter than Hollywood makes him out to be (or he plagerized other intelligent journalists in Iraq which I doubt). But then naturally such a putdown (that is de-legitimizing Penn’s choices) was permissible for main stream corporate media when we consider that the main stream media took us to war in the first place—going along with NeoCon/ military establishment lies and propaganda. In fact one would be right to believe media editors are responsible of the unnecessary murder of Iraqi civilians and children and the torture of innocent people.

Or consider that when Paris Hilton recently had her personal phone numbers stolen from her cell phone (via electronic theft now possible). No one seemed to make a big deal about of it. After all how can any one afford sympathy for “her” supposed civil rights? In fact I remember reading an article from the New York Times a couple of months ago in which another pseudo-journalist (gossiper of movie stars) called her a slut or whore—something to the effect—in that supposed prestigious paper (in the context of other putdowns). Did anyone care or bother to apologize. No. Why—because she is a beautiful blonde that comes from a wealthy family, and who knows—she probably is not the sharpest thorn. And maybe she is a slut but it seems hate and jealousy runs high and blondes are always open season. In fact in one tabloid she was pictured with a black eye from being attacked by somebody but hell she may harbor conceits and such and has too much of what others want—attention and adoration.

Yet try that kind of malice openly on other ethnic people and see if there is not some sympathizers and defenders. If, say a women comes from a wealthy family, who happens to be Jewish—well then that is different—after all we all know that wealthy Jewish people, as “stereotype” are inevitable better rounded than just having crass wealth and shallow materialist goals—Jews have soul and sophisticated worldliness—their wealth is never mere narrow babbitry and shallow conceit. And yet there are plenty of them too, of late, have lived in well-to-do ritzy neighborhoods. (Sure we have heard of the Jewess Princess but this stereotype implies other connotations).

Furthermore wasn’t the big feminist gripe about how “men” labeled women sluts and whores? Now the truth comes out about how the phenonenon was as equally a female labeling female reality. Us men are just trying to repress women’s sexuality and freedom?

The other day, in the local smear section of our Jewish family owned newspaper, there was a long comment about frilly Reese Witherspoon (from Legally Blonde). It basically wiped dirty laundry in her face about her husband drinking too much beer and messing around on her with other women. My question is what “motivates” lowlife newspaper paparazzi employees to report rumors of a woman’s marriage problems? Was it just because this women played the part of challenging the stereotype of a blonde female law student not socially accepted by all to make it at Havard Law School? After all one can assume that this sometimes snotty Ivy League school has no long history of “attractive blondes” going there to get law degrees—or the screen play would not have been written in the first place? Granted the movie did little to show any real intelligence in Witherspoon’s role as acted—in fact it may have even reinforced the dumb blonde stereotype; but hey in real life she is just another ditz that can’t keep a man—because she must be just another flake? After all “real” women have depth and are eternal attractiveness inside! That must be why why a divorce rate in this country of about 50% even though the country.

Surely we all know that color, as perceived by our senses, is such perceived because of the way our sensory apparatus works and has evolved? Color does not really exist as an independent reality outside the mind—the features of color are reflections of eletromagnetic vibrations? Still color is skin deep and nobody is much talking about how stupid, apathetical and mis-informed Americans are in general—it is just those blondes that can’t keep a man.

In fact it doesn’t take much to be considered smart in this culture in the first place—even smug paparazzi people and Ivy Leaguers can seem brilliant here. But did you ever notice it is a hell of a lot easier for an attratice blonde female to get an news anchor job on a newcast show than a blonde male whose hair is as light (as far as ratio of announcers)? And why is it that our singular radio song kicking the media as in “... kick them when they’re up, kick them when they’re down, ... dirty laundry ...” is mentions a bleach bubble—as if bleachy decided what was going to make the news—perhaps it was just that smile? Afterall those brunnett male anchors are too competent to be attacked about their ethics and values? They are not part of the psychopathic culture that misleads the masses.

This afterall is the other side of the blonde prejudice equation—the more attention female blonde women get in our culture—it seems the less positive attention blonde men get. There seems to be an inverse relationship. By attention I mean real down to earth rapport that is established and respected—not what one thinks in ones distant head.

I make a distinction between the amount of attention and social opportunities blonde women get versus what blonde men get because this is never noticed or discussed in any overt or honest way in America.

Blonde women are clearly on top of the female ladder. Neverthelss, in case you haven’t noticed, blonde women “seldom” date blonde men whose hair is as light or lighter (apparently there is no special romanticism this way). Whereas blonde women seem to date every other type of male save blonde men (but this is not just true of blonde women—many women have no big itch to get beyond their stereotypes and discriminational practices). And when they do get attention is it for reasons of what women think it means to be masculine?

Why do women think blonde men are less desirable than some other men. Why do they prejudge in their heads as if they know the psychological makeup It seems other men have no need to get as jealous about blonde men stealing all the women? And why is there this attack about “the” occasional (the rare) Golden Couple? How many mixed hair or mixed race couples are being slighted? I never read about white women dating sexy black men, some who might just be a bit narrow and caddish in personality, as dumbing down. We never can criticize inter-racial dating as if the mere mention was racist?

Walk down a street in any major city and see what males blonde women are dating—they are not dating men of their own hair color by any large degree—so in a sense they are reinforced to be shallow toward their own—and it is based to some extend on “Hollywood/ ” stereotypes.

There are ten times as many successful blonde actresses as there are male blonde actors (and models). And it does not matter that women are dying their hair like Madonna. Sure there is always a few blonde male actors one can mention who are current stars but presumably they are perceived to be successful as actors because of their looks—not because they have any “real” talent or soul. Robert Redford was thought for years to be a mere doll for the poor fantasy needs of some American women who did not have discriminating taste save the need for eye candy. Few thought he had much substance—he was merely one of those “nice” warm broth cliche people. Take for example years of People’s Magazines most beautiful people—there is “always” far more beautiful blond females nominated than blonde men (who are in the same minority ratio as black women).

What would happen if blonde women had to settle for men of their same hair color—that they could no longer “wear” their dark men like furs on the back? Then their magical aphrodisiac hair would not be quite as important? But in reality it seems that blonde women do not “see” themselves as equal to blonde men—rather the come to see themselves as superior too blonde men as they are treated as superior. In the same manner some black men do not look at black women in the eyes and say—we are socially equal—rather some carry a conceit that women of other races kiss their behinds.

Any nastiness acted out against black men is perceived often as pure hatred that “must” be addressed by our schools and the media--immediately. It is only the blonde jealousy that never deserves consideration in this self-righteous society.

For example, a typical nightclub will hire so many blonde females that it just seems unthinking “natural” that the rest of the staff ought be people of other hair color and race? Whereas an Italian, Greek, or say Spanish restaurant manager (if male) has no problem hiring a dumb blonde hostess (that could not even pronounce the menu items) they would “never” hire a blonde male to work their unless he was truely Italian, Greek or Spanish and spoke the native language fluently.

This is not to argue that blonde men are not “esteemed” at all. At least in our “niceness” we are stereotyped as vulgar as are some peoples. Still there is this prejudice that when blonde men get attention it is simply because of their looks. Rather it is presumed that they have little soul, little grit, little talent or genius. In fact blonde people in general are thought more shallow—having mere surface realities—unlike the true animality of real soul folk, say as in the stereotype of urban culture. Just manikins as plastic symbols of America’s shallow materialism—in a nation that is so well in touch with reality. When women read their romance novels they need to read about “exotic” men and places, different from their own often socially priviledged lives here—some place away from the dull predictability of suburbia—places where people struggle and do not take things for granted—like too many Americans do in general.

But wasn’t it true that the Frankfurt school intellectuals via Columbia College decades ago enlightened us Americans about how “mass culture” was turning conformistic by the mass media? Wasn’t it already a reality for all diverse peoples long ago to become homogenized by forces beyond the home into the “one” dimensional man and woman? Or is it is “only” bland blondes that needs the status symbols of name brand clothes? Apparently everyone else is comfortable in their shoes about self-acceptance and high self-esteem. No anxiety there on their parts. No need to compare themselves to others as they feel psychologically inadequate? No grudges and presumptions here about individuality and realizing one’s self-actualized potential? Didn’t Nietzsche write about the media’s ability to robotize us from individuality some time ago into herd slavery?

Never mind that people in general are far more alike than they are different. Nevermind that people in general tend to have the same reactions to the same kinds of experiences. And in America, in which there is such an anti-intellectual climate, people are even less individuated as thinkers and opinionists. Perhaps we hate people who remind of us of ourselves? Perhaps we find it easier to hate acceptable scapegoats because we harbor disappointments and resentments about our own shortcomings and misgivings? Much easier to live in the “deep” spirituality of taking cheap snipe shots at blondes? Yet people who are truly superior do not try to lower others by tearing them down as a kind of rape or humiliation. People who are truly superior to not flatter movie stars only later to expose their every flaw in a kind of persecutorial way.

By nature all people need and want attention. Yet when blond women dominate the circuits of attention there is an inevitable amount of envy, hatred, prejudice, etc., and when there is low self esteem in a given culture the more this is likely to be true. So the question is: “Why will the self righteous that are so quick to presume shallowness in others not see the motes in their own eyes? Do they think all blonde people have it easy in life and hence never have to evolve from various forms of frustration and disapointment? Is it only people of color and ethnicity who have soul?

Here is an example of how this type of stereotyping dumb blondes works. But first a reality check—attractive blond women do not seem to need to be smart to “climb” the social ladder with many men—they merely need a pretty ass and face. Becasue the fact is that many men of “all” backgrounds give undue attention to attractive blonde women—irrespective of how intelligent or otherwise charming they are. This is a human reality. Men promote their interest with women on physical appearances more so than do women promote their interest with men because of the feature of attractiveness. Good looks in a male is seldom enough for women. “How many men would date an attractive female, for any length of time, who did not own a car versus how many women would date an attractive man who did not own a car for any length of time?” Do you think the answer is equal? If you do you do not know much about American women.

When, say, a brunnette women gets jealous because say a particular guy she has being eyeing gives attention instead to a blonde bimbo (as “she” coins it), the put-down is not toward the guy for being a “stupid brunnette” but toward her bimbo sluttiness. I mean we don’t want to alienate the guy do we (but maybe he is stupid for not realizing bimbo has little going on upstairs?). Still the psychological warfare is directed at bimby—she is the total problem—not him—and “especially” not Ms. Jeaolous for not finding a male with more brains who could appreciate her obvious endowment of psycholgical attractiveness.

Blonde has become to be thought everything materialistic and commerical. After all are blondes not the perfect “objects” symbols of the economic good life? Are they not the “cadillacs” of desire yet as some have come to rationalize—merely objects. Are not blonde women used to sell every boring and eggregious product on the market including innumerable pornographic visuals? Yet how many porn shows feature blonde on blonde?

Funny how sensitive is the rainbow coallition about prejudice and racism provided their sacred cows are never gored? And who is to say what soup broth is bland? Apparently someone can not cook anything sublty delicous? That is precisely the conceit of some immigrants, from say Mediterrain countries, regarding attitudes about their cuisine and cultures. Surely they had, and needed more spice, in their cooking linneage. They do have more vivacious lines of cooking to offer the world—yet many of theirs ideas were borrowed from other cultures.

Italians took many ideas from other cultures. They got macaronni from the Orient via Marco Polo. The took the tomato from South America. They got pizza from “pita” bread. The fact is that Italy got much of it’s genius from foreigners who happened to cross roads with the Empire in the center of the sea. Similarly to the the fact that the Mideast was a crossroads throughout history. They did not invent all they claim to take for granted. For example we do not really know for sure who invented to so called bagel—but we know who takes credit—Einstein.

Whereas there were, and are, many limitations on commerce in Northern Europe. Scandinavians could never claim the rich heritage of cooking extravagance that can many cultures of Southern Europe or the Middle East can. The same holds true of literally culture and civilization. Yet do not Eastern Mediterranean cultures conceit their superiority in the fact of what written languages have spawned as they were formulated in their lands? The north was held “barbaric” people—not unlike Americans who steal the resources from the rest of the world. Mediterrareans contrive to write history so their very own ancestry to have invented written language, hence civilization, and now they can them claim an unprecendented amount of self-righteous superiorty--eternally.

Perhaps it was the fact that Brad Pitt was delegated to play a Greek hero in a recent movie and he wasn’t quite up to the snuff of The Gladiator? What a joke that must be to some--after all there was not a lot of blonde hair down there historically, just like it was probably not that likely that the so called Aryans were blonde (those that supposedly lived and migrated from northern India). Besides how could shallow people of the north possibly portray the “deep” genius of the Greeks? What an insult to Mediterrean people of all types! Still every person of Greek heritage has reason of pride—given the great history of the Greek people (that is a minority) and their intellectual contributions to the world.

And what movie makes that more clear then something about a Big Fat Greek Wedding? Here was this culture class in black and white. The big emotionality and gesticulating gestures of the southern versus the seemingly sterile minimalism of northern Wasps. White bread is cheap nutrition versus “real” earthiness. Any lacklusterness on Pitt’s part were solely his own—especially if plot was too emperial and jingoistic—it had nothing to do with the screen play or director. He could never be a real Greek hero where everything was absolutely profound.

Blondes (Teutons) assimilated into several cultures without trying to retain separate cultural identities. Any cultural uniqueness was apparently erased anyway especially since there is little evidence of a written language and literature. Viking peoples of the north were the last cultures of Europe to become enculturated by Roman Catholism and other Christian religions, but they followed the same montheistic mind-numbing. They too then because part of the masses of what really had been the domination of Eastern religious thought. We must remember that “authoritarian” religions of the West sprang from the Middle East—specially the monomania of montheism. Yet it took the Machevillian mind of Europeans to really inspire the “terorrism” of eternal damnation of hell Dante revealed. Now Greece too is under the yoke of modern mediocrity as are most countries vulnerable to American style capitalism and brainwash.

It has not been kosher to take pride in being blonde since “blondes” were blamed for Hitler’s Nazi Aryanism. Yet by far the top Nazis and SS officers were brunette. Hitler himself, with his nose and brown eyes, was genitically a Jew. Apparently he hated his own skin. Yeah he had a blonde lady friend. But Nazi propaganda has made it too easy to blame supposed “blondes” for the idea of the blonde Aryan ideal. We don’t need to look any deeper. We don’t need to question any presupposition that blonde people are more prejudice because afterall they are shallow and therefor more ready to lurch to racist assumptions?

Although many Jews throughout history have contributed significantly to intellectual endeavors of all kinds, and have demonstrated a remarkable tenacity for intelligence, they (some) now act and seem to think “they” are the Master Race. They act as if they rule the world. For example they have have a lot of influence in the America media and movie industry (and Congress and the White House) and they are not willing to see that they too play a part today not that different in what happened in Germany—that is the manipulation of the ignorant masses of the USA.

Irrespective of who you are--your ethnicity and cultural inheritence (no matter what it may be) you are no better or worse than any one else. It does not matter color, hair color, eye color, ethnicity or religion. We are all plebians of some form who at times act dumb and suffer humiliations. So get off your self-righteous bandwagon—snobs of the media and Hollywood establishment.

P.S. Equally I have witnessed “many” blonde women in bookstores and gymnasiums working at delevoping their spirits. Furthermore hatred of the dumb blonde is really a disguised hatred of femminity in general. Androgynous women (those with assertiveness, brains, and some muscle) are not idealized in much by mass media culture—yet I see just as many androgynous blonde women as I see of others. Whereas Americans in their crassness have been taught to “adore” and promote mostly macho men (war and prison culture) and feminine women save the spites of hatred engendereds. If you have nothing better to do than gossip about others—what does that say about you?