“Badness is in the eye of the beholder. It is first and foremost a fantasy.”

A father dressed as Aladdin, who dressed up as the son of the monkey Abul, a friend of the character, was criticized on social networks this carnival. The episode took place in Belo Horizonte, when theater producer Fernando Bustamante and his wife, Cintia, who was dressed as Jasmine, posted a photo on Facebook of the family costume. Mateus, the couple’s son, is black and adopted. After the flood of comments, Bustamente publicly apologized, saying that “Many can see a monkey in yesterday’s costume. I see Aladdin’s best friend, who will experience the ideal world with him and Jasmine”. To discuss the controversy, we invited people from different positions to write about the topic. Journalist Mario Mendes sees the social media criticism as an exaggeration: “As that worn – but true – cliché prays, evil is in the eye of the beholder. What can be seen from the photos is the very happy Mateus boy, having fun in his father’s lap”. African art and culture teacher Renata Felinto, on the other hand, believes that the children’s parents should review their attitudes, since they are now responsible for a black boy: “Fernando and Cintia need to be attentive to what is crystallized as a joke, these subtleties are apparently inoffensive that hurt and embarrass, that structure Brazilian racism”.

Below you can see the position of Mario Mendes🇧🇷 Renata Felinto’s text can be read HERE

Abu, you handsome!

By Mario Mendes*

It took me a whole day – an eternity when it comes to online communication – to fully understand the carnival controversy involving the couple Cintia and Fernando Bustamante, who went out to play Carnival in a block dressed as Disney cartoon characters. He was Aladdin, she was Princess Yasmin and her son Mateus, dressed as the little monkey Abu, the mascot and best friend of the hero of One Thousand and One Nights. So far so good, all very well, except for the fact that the parents are white and the child is black – he was adopted by the couple. What for? The sky fell on the parents’ heads, immediately condemned to the virtual lynching practiced with great vigor and enthusiasm on social networks.

Not only was Bustamante not called a saint, however, there was no lack of indignation – in the best of scenarios – and violent ridicule and even threats – in the worst – on the part of the current guardians of morals and good customs that make the network environment their favorite tribune for decide who should live or die in this cybernetic version of the Roman circus.

As we are going through times of a strong moralist conservative character – to the right and left of the Father – with political correctness adopted as the ideal measure for all things under the sky that protects us, Fernando and Yasmin received the thumbs-down verdict. Not only were they declared racist – and therefore unworthy – but also negligent parents handing over the helpless child to all sorts of vilification on the part of the dominant white society that now, surely, will exercise the right to call him a “monkey” because he has parental permission. As if the parents’ intention was solely and exclusively to humiliate a black child who, of course, was adopted with the worst of intentions. That perverse mechanism great companion of those who are always willing to throw the first stone – or shoot to kill, choose your weapon.

I would like to clarify that I called the controversy “carnivalesque” simply because it happened during Carnival, but there is no way to despise its chanchadesque character. It must be remembered that this is, above all, a fantasy and the character Abu, in addition to being cute and beloved by children, has a positive character of empowered protagonism within the narrative of Aladdin – I am using current terms that are very dear to the audience. progressive wing to be better understood by the patota inserted in the context. And what can be seen from the photos is the very happy boy Mateus, having fun on his father’s lap, without any demonstration of attacks by the revelers – the digital Holy Office court was constituted later, directly from the safe environment in front of the tablet and computer screen. Some protested: “Why didn’t they dress him up as a genius?”. Some were indignant: “Shame!”. Others suggested, without the slightest clue: “Why didn’t they wear another animal’s clothes?”. And there were even the usual rebels with their pathetic mantra: “It’s the PT’s fault!”.

What surprised me most about this episode is not the ignorant mob eager for a violent demonstration of force – there are the high ratings of police programs on open TV, which leave not the slightest doubt – but the position of well-disposed people , apparently well-thinking and even recognized declared intellectuals – these ones shouting shining academic titles, as a standard of infallible virtue – thickening the broth of hysterical folly that wants, above all, to elect executioners and victims.

Fernando Bustamante still entered the game and even apologized publicly. Because? For taking the family to have fun at Carnival? Why, if he was the one who received a barrage of curses and aggression for the fact that someone would be offended by a child dressed up as an innocent cartoon character?

As that worn – but true – cliché prays, evil is in the eye of the beholder. Or as I heard someone say the other day, in the face of the generalized pity that insists on problematizing even laughter as an instrument of oppression over those who do not have complete dentition: “Come down from the cross because we are in need of wood”.

For my part, I still prefer the mambembe show starring Monga, the Gorilla Woman. Empowered and pushing everyone to run. #pray

*Mario Mendes, 57, is a period journalist. He has worked in vehicles such as Interview, Folha de S.Paulo, IstoÉ, Vogue, Elle, Trip and, more recently, Veja. He is currently an independent professional producing printed and online content, in addition to curating the 2016 edition of Flica (Festa Literária de Cachoeira – BA). He declares himself addicted to social networks and cannot resist a virtual controversy.