Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! This March 2010 cover image from "Vanity Fair" was put together to show off the latest up and coming female stars of hollywood, aside for the apparent fact to be such a star you have to be emaciated, they all appear to be white. Cries of racism were imminently slammed on this magazine (to be fair though they probably were just portraying Hollywood selection, so it may just be Hollywood is racist). But some pointed out that two of the actresses technically qualify as actresses of color. Both of these actresses are of mix breed and clearly "pass" for white. This begets the question is racism about actually genealogy or about what you can pass for? I introduce exhibit B: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Aaah yes the iconic crying Indian, disheartened by the white man pollution of his sacred land, of course the man playing this oooh so famous scene is Espera Oscar de Corti, and italian! So then he white?, well not according to the Hollywood Native American community who honored him in 1995. Certainly many conservatives have pointed out how Obama is only "half-black" in a ignorant attempt to placate their own disgust for blacks in general and/or to put down liberals. It doesn't matter, obama looks "black". So again the question is, is racism distributed based on who a person technically is or on who they appear to be?