No, of course not...
"Blackface" Discussion
- Thread starter Mister_Stubbs
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
No, of course not...
In your culture, not in mine. At all.
It's a shame that in this day and age opposite ends of the spectrum just go to extremes during debates and make absolute statements without being willing to look into any context or giving any ground. This thread is a disgrace to both sides. The irony of someone trying to make the point that somebody else has no right to tell others what to feel, while doing exactly that themselves. Or making false equivalencies left right and centre. These issues are never going to be resolved, because none of you are interested in resolving them, only in winning the argument and appearing morally superior.
What was your outfit out of interest?
Well, then I guess they are. Even our minister of foreign affairs and the king of Belgium were part of it.
Roughly translated from Dutch:
This was talked about for 5 minutes in the local news.
So explain to me, what was the historical context in which you paint your skin in your culture?
And why not use actual black people now, rather than resorting to black face?
Keeping in mind what @oneniltothearsenal has already said about the racial system which Portugal has a history of.
That's your answer. Like I said earlier, I don't mind it if you do it in a context that isn't a big joke, some won't because the reality is that historically it was mainly and still is a big joke, a caricature. Also, to me it applies to everyone, the color of your skin doesn't make it more or less racist, it's the act of making a joke out of it.
I'd ask why people feel the need to place such importance on skin colour when dressing up?
Did you paint your skin?
That doesn't make any sense. How do those two things correlate? Why would the fact there was a racist class system centuries ago mean wearing blackface is inherently racist?
100% agree. If someone does it while mocking or stereotyping against black people then it's 100% a racist act. If someone wears blackface simply to portray a biblical figure or some celebrity as a costume without any bad intentions then I don't see the problem.
The snake on a string is quite inventive tbf.
Sounds like you got your evening all planned out.
I can kiiiinda see where that’s coming from... some times. It’s a word that black people use in different contexts. It depends on the user and the situtation. It can be used as an insult or as a term of endearment. So I guess for some it’s the latter that they’d like to be “in on”. There’s even an expression for allowing a friend to use it, it’s called “granting n-word privileges”. It’s a bit childish and all but it is what it is.
I can’t imagine anyone would like to use it as an insult or with strangers around these days. Not anyone remotely normal in the head anyway.
Also I don’t think it’s used as much in the UK as it is in America. Or at least in the Hollywoodian depiction of America. Most people I know here abhor it. If I ever called my friend that she’d slap me silly.
Because while the negative social effects of your nation's colonial and racist practices might be invisible to you, the effects of that system are still felt worldwide.
I understand that but people need to understand that it's an act of deweaponization of the word. In west Africa, the younger generations will also use the words blackro and negro but it really is to be used by someone else.
My point is that skin colour is at the forefront of peoples mind to the point they think its essential to the outfit.
We'd have got you were a snake charmer without you having to cover yourself in coal.
Well put. He doesn’t seem to understand though.
Some people just love to be offended.
It's defo more a US thing. Is it legitimate to sing along to Straight Outta Compton? Can't really think of any other reason a white person might need to use the word, barring the obvious.
Earlier you were saying that I’m putting too much power into my skin colour, and in your words racism would be solved if no power was given to our skin colour at all.
Therefore, why now is it important to black up as part of an outfit being authentic?
Surely, if we’re not giving any power to the skin colour, then you shouldn’t have to try and emulate it?
Otherwise, skin colour is important and holds power.
It seems that the biggest issue with this, is calling it racist. It simply isn't. Racism has a clearly defined meaning and emulating somebody to the T for the purposes of simply looking like the person you are emulating does not fit any of the criteria of racism and no amount of mental gymnastics that those who are offended can do in order to insinuate that the person intended something that they did not, can change that. It may offend you, and fair enough - you can make a great case for that. It may be insensitive, and fair enough - you can make an argument for that too but none of those things are racism. That doesn't mean it's suddenly okay, but it's important to approach the issue for what it actually is, and not for what you think it is or what you're trying to tell somebody else they mean or have in their head when you have no way of knowing that.
The negative social effects of my nation's colonial and racist practices aren't invisible at all. I see it everyday. My grandfather came from Angola and was there during the colonial war.
But why does that make blackface an inherently racist act? Why would me going as LeBron James for a carnaval party without stereotyping or mocking black people be a racist act at all?
Of course I don't understand when no explanation given makes sense.
If it’s not racist then what is it?
Painting your skin black doesn’t make you look like the black person you intended on looking like - so what are you doing?
What’s the point, and what do you gain out of it?
If you can’t emulate a basketball players height as part of a costume, because it’s physically impossible, why would you try and emulate their skin colour? That too is physically impossible.
Well not really because an outfit can be authentic without the need to focus on the skin of the person.
Blacking up implies that, that persons skin colour is noticeable and it matters right?
Yet you are suggesting to take away the power of skin colour - surely the best way to do that is to not even allow skin colour to be a factor when wearing an outfit?
If 5 white kids decide to dress up as the Jackson 5, without blacking up and are still recognised for their accurate costumes then that would be the definition of skin not mattering and not having power.
If they need to black up in order for that outfit to be deemed more ‘authentic’ then how can you say skin colour doesn’t matter?
If anything you are suggesting that the skin colour is the most important aspect.
Some people don't ignore history. Sorry if this offends you.
And if people get offended because they don't know you or the context. Do you see there might be a problem then?
Not that it would be anyones fault if they were not aware, but then you extend that line of thought to the next time they decide, somehow, that it might be a good idea to paint their skin black. Is that still okay given they now know it offends?
It could confirm what your username has always made me wonder.
It's insensitive, inappropriate, and to some people offensive. Note some, not all. But some and fair enough, who can tell somebody else not to be offended by something? Noone. But that doesn't make it racist. You're applying that term to it in order to give it more gravitas, and all it does is skew the discussion, and prompt a discussion about what constitutes racism rather than a discussion about whether what he did was insensitive or not. It creates a side argument that encourages the two extreme sides of the argument to just clash with each other and it starts to become ridiculous and nobody ends up caring about the initial discussion. It isn't physically impossible to emulate skin colour, as proven by people who apply black colour to their skin, or girls on nights out who paint themselves blue and pretend to be smurfs. Please don't take that as me saying that those two acts are equivalent because I'm not, or that it's okay to do so just because you can, it's merely just an example of physically emulating skin colour in order to reinforce an appearance. It doesn't have to be termed racist in order to be inappropriate, but it does have to meet the criteria of racism in order to be racist.
Do you think that those kids who dress as the Jackson 5 have a racist intent? Perhaps they see it naturally, without being scandalized, precisely because their main concern is to achieve the greatest resemblance, ignoring the historical importance of the color of the skin.
To be honest while I could tell of lots of places where slavery existed I couldn't name a single place where it didn't, at least not with any certainty. Maybe the Innuit didn't have it or some other remote and isolated people ? So I know slavery was endemic throughout the world. But how can we learn from that, as you say, and not give a feck, as you say ?
I also know that the West is not responsible for every evil thing that has happened in the history of humanity and I don't feel personally ashamed about, in the sense of responsible for, things that happened before I was even born, which is not to say shameful things didn't happen. This thread is related to why black people might feel angry, upset or dismayed by some people blacking up and I think we can understand why, partly, by looking at the past.
"The Slave Trades" - might be a good idea for a new thread. You've obviously cared enough to look into the Arab and or Muslim slave trade and events such as the Zanj rebellion, so why don't you begin ?
Last edited:
I’m not giving it more gravitas by calling it racist.
It has a history that is steeped in racism, that can’t be forgotten.
If it’s insensitive or inappropriate then why?
You can’t answer those questions without having a conversation about race and the representation of black people especially in media.
You have this fixated and binary definition of racism that you believe certain things must fulfil in order for it to be deemed racist.
Society doesn’t work like that, and all that does is draw the conversation away from race and only implies that racism can only be experienced when it’s defined in a dictionary.
I think you’ve got that the other way around.
If skin colour has no importance or power then someone can dress up as a black person/celebrity without feeling the need to ‘look’ black, right?
Because by doing so you are completely removing race from the equation because it’s not important.
If you have to involve race as part of the outfit, then skin colour is crucial.
The kids wouldn’t have a racist intent no, but their parents should know better.
The Jackson 5 are pretty iconic worldwide, 5 kids in a fro and glittery outfits singing and dancing is enough for anyone to understand who they are meant to be.
Cover their skin in tar and soot you’re going to look like you’re making a mockery, and certainly won’t look more accurate
Yeah, because it's racist.
Except it's not. It's really that simple. You just saying that it is doesn't make it so unless you can show how his act was intended to discriminate or belittle, or make fun of the black race. You're smarter than this, but I know the way you engage in these conversations so a discussion between us is probably pointless.
But my point still stands - if race isn’t important and skin colour should hold no power, then dressing up as a black person shouldn’t require you to imitate their skin colour.
If you need it for ‘optics’ or ‘authenticity’ or ‘similarities’ then skin colour is important.
Why is it inappropriate and insensitive if not racism?
Because it has the potential to offend people. Which isn't inherently racist. Offense is not limited to issues of racism, and you know that.
You probably missed it but most if not all have agreed that it wasn't racist in the case of Griezmann. The subsequent conversation was about why would it ever be racist and you gave the answer by mentioning the making fun of blacks(which isn't a race).