I wonder, if the OS staff read a post that spoke of the African-American mind, as if all blacks thought alike, would they put it on the cover. I don't think so. What if the African-American mind were in that same post represented in terms of Superfly, complete with images from blaxploitation films. Surely, while not censoring such a viewpoint, the editors would never promote it by giving it cover status. But that is exactly what they've done with a recent post by Mary Ann Sorrentino, who seems to feel there is such a thing as the "Italo mind," which she proceeds to associate with mysogyny, racism, and, film clip in hand, the Mafia of Hollywood's imagination. She calls upon Italian American groups not to denounce the stereotype but rather to denounce Carl Palladino for
a) typifying the "Italo mind," with which we Italo-Americans are all, she claims, familiar; and
b) for thereby bearing the stereotype out.
It is hard for me to believe that a Jewish blogger who denounced a politician for evincing the "Jewish mind," which she illustrated with images of Shylock, would merit a cover from the OS editors. But so implicit, in every sense of the word, is prejudice (literally pre-judging) against Italian-Americans, that a post a entertaining the notion that one ignorant bully-clown of a politician could stand for Italian American men in general (yes, this was a rampantly sexist post as well) receives the ultimate OS stamp of approval--under the heading the heading no less of Italian American disgrace. The disgrace belongs to the editors, and to the group of similarly benighted readers who congratulated Ms. Sorrentino on her ignorance.