Editorials
The Hidden Curriculum: Microaggressions and Resistance in ‘MASTER’ (2022)

“You can’t get away from it Jasmine. It’ll follow you, believe me, I know.”
If there’s anything more certain than the sun, it’s the irreverent notion that a person of color is not only not qualified, but they should also feel lucky to be within the spaces they reside when “allowed”.
As of late, during this tumultuous election year, we’ve gotten used to (not really) the term “diversity hire”. In the 80s, it was the great disdain for Affirmative Action acts from the 60s. In the 50s, it was the civil rights movement. We’re 30 years shy of a century of oppression, adversity and undertow in academic institutions, and it permeates everything we can possibly think to be involved in, appointed to or admired for. In the 2022 film Master by Mariama Diallo, we explore cultural depth and neverending societal issues with race, microaggressions, and othering in the academic world.
The film opens with Gail Bishop (Regina Hall), the first Black Master of House at Ancaster University, a predominantly white collegiate atmosphere that’s almost as old as the country. She works to settle in as best she can in a home rife with pictures of old white men and cookie jars in the shape of derogatory Black effigies, but we’ll get to that later. At the same time, an eager and hopeful Jasmine Moore (Zoe Renee) arrives at Ancaster. Jasmine is given her assignment, room 302, the haunted room. Oooooh!
Well, she’s not even told that it’s haunted. It’s alluded to quite haughtily by the Welcome Crew.
It’s a shame the steep spiral downward in trauma this film takes because these experiences, save for most of the supernatural pieces, are true to life. The wonder of starting new, being a part of something that sparks joy. Being the first Black anything academically is always seen as a how-did-they-get-that-couldn’t-be-because-they’ve-earned-it, and it’s a mountain on top of a mountain. For Jasmine and Gail, the hike is just beginning.
A Live One:
Jasmine takes to the haunted room, and realizes, quite startlingly, that she has a roommate, Amelia (Talia Ryder). Amelia and Jasmine hit it off nicely when it’s just the two of them, but when they are joined by Amelia’s more affluent, more snotty (and also white) friends Cressida (Ella Hunt) and Katie (Noa Fisher), the tables turn out of Jasmine’s favor. She’s constantly interrupted when she shares her own stories in order for them to tell their own. She is picked on, cornered, and subjected to soft-handed bullying at the hands of these girls’ possible paramours as well. It’s a common situation for any person of color in a predominantly white space. The period of adjustment takes longer because the goalposts keep changing. And the game of making you and keeping you ill-adjusted is an ongoing sport.
Now, the haunted room theory permeates Jasmine’s waning emotional and mental state as she begins to have hellish nightmares: losing time, waking up believing she’s being attacked by an entity or treated like a specimen to be studied. Jasmine uncovers the death of the first Black student who resided in that room, and from that point on, the thinly veiled and petty racist cracks become less subdued.
Jasmine’s struggles with belonging and the doubt of her aptitude begin externally. A valedictorian, a brilliant mind, and a bubbly personality squashed into a shell of Blackness. The Black lunch staff is all smiles with the white students but when Jasmine comes through the line, she’s treated brusquely, silently as if to say, you think you’re something special by being on that side of the aisle. It’s such a visceral scene because society has made its perpetuated caste system for so long, there’s bound to be some internal issues that folks struggle with. Sometimes it causes anger, jealousy or shame. In this scene, it’s a mix of it all and cuts deep in less than 120 seconds.
In light of being a suspect, she’s investigated when an alarm sensor goes off in the library. When it’s revealed that Jasmine has nothing belonging to the library, the urge is to check her bag. The accusatory tone of the librarian and the growing crowd behind her only adds to the humiliation. Guilty until proven innocent. During a class with the only other person of color, her instructor, Dr. Liv Beckham, discussed color usage in The Scarlet Letter. Jasmine believes that using the color white so often points to Hester’s daughter Pearl’s innocence, but you can tell she wants to dive deeper than that – much deeper. When white student Cressida chimes up that the white points to white people of that time and their ignorance and disdain for color or non-conforming women. Listen.
I know many people of color who viewed this film and felt everything Jasmine’s body language was showing. For real, Cressida?! If that statement had come out of Jasmine’s mouth, would she be seen as the angry Black woman? The race card thrower? The reverse racist? Surely, and not as the wise, forward-thinking, woke, and diversity-first crown-wearer like Cressida gets to be. And there’s another rub. Don’t be too smart, don’t be too confrontational, don’t question the system.
When Jasmine confronts Liv for giving her a poor grade in class and praising the white students, Liv construes that Jasmine was from an “inner city, poor graded school, things work differently here”. Jasmine has to fight to tell her she’s not a hard knock case, she’s from the suburbs, AND she was the valedictorian, to which Liv is like oh gee wilickers I didn’t know. The casual assumptions about her intelligence and background, especially from Liv, sting, in the same ways the attitudes from the lunch crew stung. Jasmine’s experience is compounded by the ingrained and institutional barriers that exist for Black and Brown students. She’s constantly having to prove herself academically and socially, play maid and errand runner, and in a coup de grace to further distance and isolate her from her roommate, she’s made into a pawn as Amelia’s crush. Tyler (Will Hochman) begins to flirt and make out with Jasmine in a “how scandalous is it that I’m hooking up with the Black girl” way, because that’s a scandal ‘round his parts! Extensive spiritual sigh.
She’s constantly reminded that she doesn’t belong and is some sort of bone of contention for many members of the school and faculty. It’s almost as if, even though all of our barrier-breaking, that these spaces are not designed for us to succeed, much like corporate and government spaces; the navigation of personal and racial bias has you exhausted before you even end your workday.
And Nothing Ever Changes:
Gail’s situation is less nuanced and much heavier in the “you should feel incredibly lucky we’ve decided to let you do this” vibe. There is not a person of color out there in an academic, corporate, or government setting (and let’s go further, a friend group) where they didn’t feel tokenized or like a box tick. As a tenured professor, Gail Bishop represents the more mature side of this coin for Black women in academia. Despite all her successes, she’s constantly countermanded and undermined, not to mention low-key chided by her colleagues with comments like, “Should we call her Obama?”. The microaggressions are more serrated for her, especially when her all-white board – mirroring Jasmine’s all-white “friend” group – cast doubt on her professional merit and her ability to be impartial when faced with a serious situation regarding another professor of color. She’s deemed unqualified and unsuited for the prestigious gift they’ve given her. It’s this type of structural inequity and institutional racism, not to mention gross lack of cultural awareness on the part of predominantly white institutions that create this caustic and hostile environment where stereotyping and discrimination often impact promotions, tenure opportunity and space for new Black and Brown professors. Is Gail as secure as she thinks she is? All signs point to no with conditions.
Despite all of her glossy ideals and sense of friendship and availability with her student, the lion’s share of the faculty at Ancaster have deep-seated racial bias that’s imbruing on the school through Jasmine and Gail’s experiences and not only are they none the wiser – they don’t seem fussed enough to care. When Jasmine is overcome by visions, nightmares, and just enough racism to push her over the edge and out of a window, Gail tells a recovering Jasmine not to let them drag her down. Fight.
“You can’t get away from it Jasmine. It’ll follow you, believe me, I know.”
Advice Gail should heed herself. As that tension between her and the faculty escalates after poor Jasmine’s suicide, Gail knows that even though they create shiny diversity programs and exude a semblance of a beacon for marginalized academics, they don’t truly care for Black or Brown students. The microscope will always be at full magnification, the scrutiny and judgment on eleven and the bias, sky high. Our experiences, knowledge, achievements, and mental prowess will always be viewed through a lens of skepticism.
By the end, Gail knows that she is merely that token, that box tick to get things done and having the public ignore their racist ways as long as a Black patsy is standing at the front of the line to prove they don’t see color. Nothing is ever going to change. Not for her, not for any other student of color, ever.
Diallo’s film was released with mixed reviews, and I understand it’s a polarizing film. It’s a stark look at what it’s like to be a Black woman in higher education, and I don’t think people were ready for the “Are we the baddies?” conversation. Thinking back to my college days, I was met with millions of microaggressions at the time that I didn’t know weren’t just part of life. Majoring in Business, we were asked to make a business plan for a business we’d like to create someday. I chose a bookstore/record shop, basically a small-town Borders. When I presented it to my professor I was met with, and I quote, “Oh wow! I was expecting like a hair salon, weaves and nails and stuff.” Hmm. Even having the highest GPA in the course, I was constantly asked to further cite my sources as the reports were “just a little too clean”, something my white counterparts were never asked to do.
It’s hell representing yourself and all you’ve accomplished, and in just a few months, that light is dulled, diminished, and, in Jasmine’s case, snuffed out far too soon.
Master’s prestigious Ancaster is more than just a setting, it’s a symbol of a broader societal issue with race, privilege, and power. Black and Brown academics are devalued by design. It’s a vacuumed microcosm of a society that promotes diversity and meritocracy, all the while creating and perpetuating systemic barriers that prevent Black and Brown groups from thriving without mobilizing or leaving all together. Master keenly explores how microaggressions add up. Assumptions about intelligence, qualifications or the capacity to succeed, reveal a deep unspoken bias that infiltrates marginalized women beyond the classroom.
Editorials
What’s in a Look? The Jason Voorhees Redesign Controversy
The Jason Voorhees redesign sparked heated debate, but is the backlash overblown? Dive into Friday the 13th’s formula and fan expectations.

If you’re a longtime reader of Horror Press, you may have noticed that I really really like the Friday the 13th franchise. Can’t get enough. And yet, I simply couldn’t muster a shred of enthusiasm for piling hate on the new Jason Voorhees redesign that Horror, Inc. recently shared with an unwitting public.
Why the Jason Voorhees Redesign Controversy Feels Overblown
Hockey mask? Check. Machete? Check. Clothing? Yeah, he’s wearing it. I really didn’t see the problem, but very many people online pointed out all the places where I should. The intensity and specificity of the critiques shot me right back to 2008, reminding me distinctly of watching Project Runway with my friend’s mom while I waited for him to get home from baseball practice. What, just me?
But the horror community’s sudden transformation into fashion mavens got me thinking about other things, too: the character of the franchise as a whole, how Jason Voorhees fits into it, and why I feel like this reaction has been blown out of proportion. (A disproportionate reaction to a pop culture thing? On my Internet? Well I never.)
What Does A Jason Look Like, Anyway?
What confused me the most about this reaction was something I couldn’t quite get a bead on. What does Jason Voorhees look like? His look, both masked and unmasked (especially unmasked), changes wildly from film to film, even when he’s played by the same person (in three consecutive movies, Kane Hodder played a hulking zombie Jason, a shiny slime monster Jason, and a Jason who was mainly seen in mirrors and looked like his face was stung by a thousand bees). And then there’s the matter of him being both a zombie child and a bagheaded killer before receiving his iconic hockey mask.
However, if you synthesize the various forms of the character into the archetypical Jason Voorhees, the one that most people might visualize in their head when told to imagine him, the result doesn’t not look like this new redesign. Frankly, I even think “redesign” is too strong a word for what this is. This image shows a dude in outdoorsy clothes wearing a hockey mask. It looks enough like “Jason Voorhees” to me that my eyes just slide right off of it.
What Do We Expect From Friday the 13th, And What Do We Need?
Ultimately, many people clearly disagree with my assessment of this redesign, which led me to ponder the franchise as a whole. If there’s something to complain about with this new look, that implies that there is a “right” way and a “wrong” way to be a Friday the 13th movie.
This I can agree with. While the franchise is wide-ranging and expansive to the point that it has included Jason going to space, fighting a dream demon, and taking a cruise ship from a New Jersey lake to the New York harbor, the movies do still follow a reasonably consistent formula.
Step 1: Generate a group of people in a place either on the shores of Crystal Lake or in Crystal Lake township (they can travel elsewhere, but this is where they must start).
Step 2: Plunk Jason down near them, give him a variety of edged weapons, and watch what happens. One girl survives the onslaught, and sometimes she brings along a friend or two as adjunct survivors. Bada bing, bada boom, you have yourself a Friday the 13th movie.
If you fuck with that formula, you’ve got a problem. But beyond that, there’s really not a hell of a lot that the movies have in common. Sometimes you have a telekinetic final girl, other times you have a child psychologist. Sometimes the dead meat characters are camp counselors, but other times they’re partiers or townies or students attending space college.
Hell, even the people killing them aren’t always the same. Look at Pamela Voorhees in the original movie or Roy in A New Beginning.
So why this protectiveness around the minutiae of Jason’s look?
It’s Us, Hi, We’re The Problem, It’s Us
I don’t mean to discount everyone’s negative opinions about this Jason redesign. There are a multitude of aesthetic and personal reasons to dislike what’s going on here, and you don’t have to turn that yuck into a yum just because I said so. But I think we’ve had online fandoms around long enough to see how poisonous they can be to the creative process.
For instance, was The Rise of Skywalker a better movie because it went down the laundry list of fan complaints about The Last Jedi and basically had characters stare into the camera and announce the ways they were being fixed?
Look, I’m not immune to having preconceived disdain for certain projects. If I’m waiting for a new installment in a franchise and all that I’m hearing coming out of producers’ mouths is “prequel” and “television show,” those are fighting words.
However, the constant online pushback to projects that are in early development might be one reason it has taken us so long to actually get more Friday the 13th (I’m talking in addition to the long delays amid the lawsuit, of course). It’s been more than a decade and a half without a new Jason vehicle, and that time keeps on stretching longer and longer.
What Fans Really Want From a New Jason Voorhees Movie
Instead of just letting the creative tap flow and having a filmmaker put out the thing they want to make, then having somebody else take the wheel and do that same thing for the next installment, it seems like producers are terrified of making the wrong move and angering the fans, which has prevented them from actually pulling the trigger on much of anything.
Look, we survived A New Beginning. And Jason Takes Manhattan. Even Jason Goes to Hell. A controversial misstep can’t kill the immortal beast that is Friday the 13th. I say let’s just let them make one. Having something tangible to complain about is better than having nothing at all.
Editorials
Monstrous Mothers: Unveiling the Horror in ‘Mommie Dearest’ and ‘Umma’
The horror umbrella is massive and encompasses many subgenres including thrillers, sci-fi, and even true crime. I like to quip that movies like Mommie Dearest and Priscilla belong to the latter category. I even point out they have final girls surviving their monsters, but like most jokes, there is a lot of hard truth behind that. To be clear, Mommie Dearest is highly contested even by Christina Crawford, who wrote the book about the abuse suffered at the hands of her alcoholic guardian. However, the fact remains that there is an abusive mother terrorizing children at the heart of the horror. This is a tale as old as time in the genre, and we see these themes of motherhood, mental illness, and generational trauma often. So, why do we typically forget this movie when discussing titles like Psycho (1960), Run, Hereditary, etc.?

I challenged myself to fill a gap in my cinema history this month and watched Mommie Dearest. I was very familiar with the movie due to how many drag queens reference it and because of Joan Crawford’s villainous reputation. However, I had never seen it in its entirety before, which is weird because I write about my own maternal baggage often. Without ever seeing the film, I knew this movie, categorized as a drama, belonged under my favorite genre label. Some sources even try to meet in the middle and classify it as a psychological drama, which is a phrase that does a lot of heavy lifting to remove itself from what it actually is. After all, what else should we call a film about being abused by the person who should love us most other than horror?
Does Mommie Dearest Belong in the Horror Genre?
The horror umbrella is massive and encompasses many subgenres including thrillers, sci-fi, and even true crime. I like to quip that movies like Mommie Dearest and Priscilla belong to the latter category. I even point out they have final girls surviving their monsters, but like most jokes, there is a lot of hard truth behind that. To be clear, Mommie Dearest is highly contested even by Christina Crawford, who wrote the book about the abuse suffered at the hands of her alcoholic guardian. However, the fact remains that there is an abusive mother terrorizing children at the heart of the horror. This is a tale as old as time in the genre, and we see these themes of motherhood, mental illness, and generational trauma often. So, why do we typically forget this movie when discussing titles like Psycho (1960), Run, Hereditary, etc.?
Mommie Dearest recounts a version of Christina Crawford’s upbringing by Hollywood royalty Joan Crawford. It depicts her as an unstable, jealous, manipulative woman who only holds space for her beliefs. As with most abusive parents, she takes out her frustrations and feelings of inadequacy on those around her. Specifically, those who cannot fight back due to the power dynamics at play. This version of Joan is a vicious bully, which feels familiar for many people who grew up with an abusive parent. How many of us never knew what would set our parental monster off, so just learned to walk on eggshells? How many of us grew up believing we were the problem for way longer than we should have? How many of us normalized the abuse for so long that it carried over into adulthood, letting us believe being mistreated is just part of living?
Watch the trailer for Mommie Dearest
The Lasting Impact of Abusive Parents in Horror Movies
While my mother wasn’t the active bully in our home, part of my struggle with her is her complicitness in the hell she helped create for all of us. Which is why, while I don’t think Mommie Dearest is a great film, I believe it’s a decent horror flick. It made me want to revisit a better movie, Umma, that also dealt with motherhood, mental illness, and trauma. Iris K. Shim’s 2022 PG-13 horror sees Sandra Oh playing a single mother who has not healed. After growing up with her own mother, who was especially cruel to her, she has built her world around that trauma and forced her daughter to live within its walls with her. As someone who was severely homeschooled by a woman who still really needs to find a therapist, Umma hits me in my feelings every time.
Watch the trailer for Umma below
Maternal Monsters: A Common Thread in Psycho, Hereditary, and More
Before the film starts, Oh’s character, Amanda, has turned her back on her family and cultural heritage. She has built a life that she’s not really living as she hides in her home, afraid of electricity due to the abuse she suffered at the hands of her mom. So, when her uncle shows up with her mother’s ashes, she is triggered and haunted. All of the issues she hasn’t dealt with rush to the surface, manifesting in ways that begin turning her into her deceased mom. Amanda does eventually force herself to confront her past to avoid becoming her mother and hurting her daughter. So, while Umma is different from Mommie Dearest, it’s not hard to see they share some of the same DNA. Scary moms make the genre go round which is why movies like M.O.M. Mothers of Monsters, Serial Mom, Mother, May I?, and so many others will always pull an audience by naming the monster in the title.
I doubt I am the first person on Norma Bates’ internet to clock that some of horror’s most notorious villains are parents, specifically moms. I’m also sure I cannot be the first person to argue Mommie Dearest is a horror movie on many levels. After all, a large part of the rabid fanbase seems to be comprised of genre kids who grew up wondering why the film felt familiar. However, I hope I am the first to encourage you to watch these two movies if your momma trauma will allow you to hold space for a couple more monstrous mothers this month. Both have much to say about how we cope with the fallout of being harmed by the people who should keep us safe.