If we are talking globally then everybody who isn't Asian is a minority. I think he was talking about in side Portugal though.
"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.
And somehow I haven't seen that happen in the 25 years I been on the internet.
Simply respect other people. Its really easy. I don't see how it's difficult to simply respect other people about themselves.
If people want to be called one name and not another then don't call them the name they don't like. If people tell you that some costume is offensive to people around the world simply learn that and don't dress that way. I don't think its really hard to learn how to not offend different people or cultures.
I’m not entirely sure what you want me to do with this large passage of writing.
From the hypothetical situation, to the black girlfriend, to the world without colour - how does any of this prove that blackface isn’t racist?
Matter fact, what is the difference between what Griezmann did and the minstrel show?
As we have established he hasn’t dressed up as anyone in particular.
Doesn’t have anyone’s jersey.
Nobody at the time had the afro
The black paint didn’t come with the costume - so he went to an extra length to paint himself black
So what is he doing?
The outfit was fine without the black skin, why did he feel the need to blacken up if it wasn’t to imitate being black?
At that point he’s just making a random impression of black people that’s based on stereotypes, no? The majority of black people don’t even wear an afro ffs.
People get defensive at the word racism because they’re so used to racism only existing among the extremes such as the KKK, they don’t know what racism is like for an actual black person on a daily basis.
You mention your ex getting upset at the racism she dealt with, I guarantee there were many more incidents she dealt with that she wouldn’t have spoken to you about, simply because it’s impossible to get someone who doesn’t experience it to understand how it feels.
Therefore, I’m not entirely sure where you believe it’s justified to suggest something isn’t racist to the very people who are on the receiving end of the act, all because something aren’t used to just how common racism is, therefore they are shocked to hear it so often, and their default position is to then assume that racism is being watered down.
On the contrary, racism continues to rear its ugly head and it’s only getting called out.
The other alternative will result in minorities continuing to suffer in silence for fear of disturbing the peace, and we’ve endured that for long enough.
It’s time to continue to have these awkward and uncomfortable conversations.
I don't get it? Shane a big white power name?
I didn't read back that far. In that case he is a minority and has my apologies.
Putting my personal preference aside. It has long been proven to be a racist gesture. No matter how slanted or philosophical you want to get about the issue.
Should I really?
Just the year I was born. No Nazi sympathies here. Unless being born in 1988 is offensive too?
Delighted to see we’ve made progress.
Should I really?
Just the year I was born. No Nazi sympathies here. Unless being born in 1988 is offensive too?
I bet that you made no effort to avoid that year though.
You're being either deliberately obtuse or you can't see the difference that I've pointed out to you about 4 times. Either way, this conversation with you is pointless, you're seeing what you want to see. The act of putting on black face and mocking black people has been historically proven to be racist. Putting black on your face has not. The second part of the first sentence is the entire point. It's racist because of the mocking and the intent that historically went into it.
Got any friends born in 88?Should I really?
Just the year I was born. No Nazi sympathies here. Unless being born in 1988 is offensive too?
Tend to agree. Context is important here. Very few things are inherently anything. Offence is taken and not necessarily always given.
Also, small point but a genuine question, why is 'coloured people' considered offensive, but 'people of colour' is not?
@Zarlak wins this thread by TKO.
I am not deliberately being obtuse. There is no fine tuned definition or set procedure when it comes to issues like this. The more you try to define it by book, the farther you are from actually addressing the issue.
I do?
Sorry but I couldn't disagree more. You're trying to take something at face value, in a knee jerk response with no willingness to explore it further, and no willingness to engage in any kind of dialogue to show that a.) you're right, or that b.) any of the points that I've brought up are incorrect, or not logically sound. If that's the way that you want to live your life then by all means I won't do anything to stop you. I'd rather be a rational person who attempts to see both sides before coming to a conclusion. I'm comfortable with having that mindset.
Well..that escalated quickly. Anyways, I don't need to get into a discussion about something that has been historically proven to be racist. And I am more than happy to lean on that side of the argument instead of getting into a philosophical circle jerk discussion about it. Of course you are comfortable with having that mindset regarding this issue, because none of this shit affects you in any way, shape, or form to begin with.
That's my read too, goes for most of the recent discussion. Somebody claimed that labelling someone as racist is the real issue here, as if a person can't prove they aren't just by their reaction and following actions. It's all very try hard and snowflaky...
When an act has historically been used to a particular effect, it becomes loaded with those associations. It’s not really for you (i.e. not the victim/on the receiving end) to reappropriate it or begin to add qualifiers like ‘intention’ to deem its’ level of offensiveness. I think we start going in to pointless semantics when having to specifically label the nature of this offensiveness and risk insinuating that there’s nothing racially wrong with it.
It’s been acknowledged to death that someone who’s ignorant of these associations may not have been malicious in intent; but if clearly a huge number of black people take issue with it, and the discussion becomes ‘well let’s look at the dictionary definition of racism’ - something is wrong here surely.
I might use the N word with my black mate (I don’t) in private because we’ve that understanding and he knows How I mean it, but if I used out in public and someone got offended it would be pretty absurd for me to stand there and be like ‘hey man he’s my boy yo why you trippping he knows I don’t mean it like that
‘.Admittedly not the best of examples to articulate my point, but yeah.
Best post itt.
Not looking good for you Shane.
As a person that went disguised as a Pedobear and giving a way candies to kids, I am not the most PC person to ask on that topic
Mmm, Good point. Trying to explain myself better, It was aa dorment racism as it was nobody to be racist towards to, so it was not a seen issue in the society, so it was not a perceived issue, so you can´t make people conscious of a problem if there is none, as well the policies can´t evolve if the problem does not "exist".
As I said, there are exceptions, You knew the term and the history of blackface. Congrats. Now I know too, congrats to myself. But the vast majority outside th anglosphere, specially in US does not know. And the more people knows, thee better.
Out of curiosity, , Why from that bad make up (I agree in that) you concluded that is a portrayal of being lazy, dimwitted simpletons? I genuinely asking.
It is because it is similar to the blackface issue in US that the ones that they were portrayed like that they were lazy and dimwitted simpleton? because if it is for that case I can tell you that this make up was not inspired for that, or at least no on that context. It was simple bad make up, no second intentions. And that is why I am telling you that till now I would never make the conection of this kind of make up as a lazy, dimwitted simpleton black people steretype because I did not know anything about blackface and what it meant
There are two sides to this that will yield distinctly different perspectives. There's the philosophical side that can be debated ad nauseam on social media where anyone can advance the argument that a person's lack of intent is tantamount to not being racist; and there's the practical aspect where anyone who does this sort of thing would almost surely know that it could and would cause offense to various onlookers, and as such, they may decide that good taste should prevail and they shouldn't do it. I'm in the latter camp since its very difficult to do something like this without being guaranteed to not be considered offensive to random bystanders both in real life and on the internet.
I agree with you, but then we have to look at which level of offensiveness we can or we can´t reach, because if it is none, we better don´t open your mout the rest of your life or one way or another you will offend someone. We all did racist jokes, sexist, homophobic, about aids, cancer, nationalistic, etc...
You have to analize where, when, who and Griezmann being a public figure should know better, specially if he was the one posting the picture. he appologized, the world keep spinning and the thread growing
The latter one is clearly influenced by minstrels and caricatures such as this (from Tintin, a very European comic), or this. It's not just lazy or bad, it has a clear origin. Now, I'm not saying the people painted themselves like that to be offensive. It might very well be that they're simply ignorant. Regardless, that's about as racist as it gets when it comes to blackface.
That way of portraying black people was prevalent in Europe well into the 60s and 70s (could even have gone on longer, I'm not sure). Which is why the whole idea that this way of dehumanizing and ridiculing black people is unique to the Anglosphere needs to be put to rest. We Europeans weren't any better, but the comparative lack of black people to push back against our racism allowed us to think we were.
Last edited:
Agree completely with what you are saying.
The act has been proven to be historically racist. No amount of justification should be needed to explain why doing it today is still a bad idea.
I might artistically love the swastika. I might like it so much that I get it tattooed on my forearm. The pattern may bring me happiness and joy. In light of this, would I get away with having a swastika tattoo? Absolutely not. In my culture, the swastika is synonymous with racism and I know that by publically portraying it, I am causing harm to others. People would, justifuably, call me racist, even if I try to argue intentions otherwise.
Even if there is a line, why bother crossing it? Why rock the boat? Ignorance is a poor excuse. Let alone in Griezmann's case where he was caricaturing a black person in poor taste. Borderline mockery. What does that remind us of? Oh yeah, that elephant in the room: historical context of... blackface.
And I agree 100%. And I have been agreeing with that all along the thread
The Black and White Minstrels show was on prime time telly in the UK until 1978.
When I commented on this yesterday someone mentioned the National Slavery Museum in Liverpool and it prompted me to look at their website as i had forgotten this was opened a while ago.
On the site they mention a book I remember reading & loving as a child in the 70's " The story of Little Black S***o" - I have put part of the title in asterisks as it is a word that was used as a term of abuse later on and I don't feel comfortable typing it.
The story itself is absolutely fine but at a key point in time the illustration was amended to portray a grotesque stereotype and that is when the name of the character became a term of abuse.
It is actually a fun story about Tigers in India - something like the three little pigs / jungle book type story. It has since been renamed and re-illustrated and is no problem at all.
When I saw the book cover on the website i had a weird feeling of nostalgia but also repulsion at the illustration. I was a "normal" white kid in the 70's and this book was a treasured story at the time, along with Mr Bump and later Fantastic Mr Fox. So what can appear normal and mundane to you may be a negative portrayal causing pain and enforcing negative stereotypes.
Were my Parents racists for Buying it? - No, they were ignorant of what it meant. But if they insisted that others were "over sensitive" - that it was a good book and tried to get my daughter to read the 70's version....then they would be out of order!
Last edited:
So this was circulating over the weekend at the darts championship final. (This is not the original tweet)
Aside from the intent, I’m wondering if anyone thinks this is racist but Antoine blacking up isn’t?
I would actually give this fella full marks for an accurate costume, hairstyle, even down the red nail polish and pearls - he actually made an effort to look like someone and picked up on all the details.
He’s clearly intentionally mocking her hence the ‘190’ sign, the blackface just makes this racist as well.
He’s not trying to portray an image or stereotype of all black people, but rather trying to portray an individual black person.
He intended to insult her, but he didn’t need the blackface to do that.
Such a simple but perfect post. To all the "Europeans" who have said that they can't be racist because they haven't seen black people.
The reason why race is such a big issue. Or sexual harassment has been such a big deal in the last year in the Uk/US is because they are issues that are actually being addressed and recognised. I'm half Nigerian and no one talks about domestic abuse in Nigeria but it dominates the landscape so much that its in our music, films etc but no one actually deals with it so no one says Nigeria has a domestic abuse problem.
Then you have some who talk about some utopian society which doesn't exist. Yeah it's all well and good saying in a ideal world there is no race. But we are not in an ideal world and only someone especially privileged in society would ever even try to suggest otherwise. I've lived my whole life in England, sound as English as anyone, dress well, talk with respect etc but everyday I suffer from some sort of racist incident. From people crossing the road because I'm walking towards them to my friends Making jokes about my hair. Ignoring all this doesn't make a better society and I'm sorry if it means at some point you have been racist but you should probably learn from that rather than ignore it.
Agree - if he just wore the outfit it would be a funny joke - blackface makes it crass...to quote Spinal Tap..."Its a thin line between stupid and clever"
Yeah, that's a bad argument. Nobody is trying to repeat slavery, as far as I know. Seems to me you people just want whites to feel ashamed for absolutely no reason. It's not like whites were the only ones who practiced slavery. If that was the case, then I would have seen some merit to your argument. But in the past virtually every single nation that has ever existed practiced it in one way or another. Africans enslaved other Africans, Arabs enslaved Africans in far crueler ways than Europeans did, European just bought these Africans from Arabs and other Africans. The Chinese, Indians, Persians, etc - everyone enslaved each toher.
Why the feck is the focus only on what white people did? Why don't you people try and put a focus on the problem as a whole instead of the usual "hurr durr evil white people enslaved peaceful Africans! Damn white devils and their crimes against humanity!". Sounds to me this is a form of thinly veiled racism towards white people in general, but hey - that's just me.
Everyone has the same rights these days. A black guy has the same opportunities as a white guy has, if he has the necessary qualities for the job (well, in some cases it appears they even have more rights, due to diversity quotas, I guess). Pushing more and more to the point of trying to make white people feeling guilty of what their ancestors did (what everyone else in history did) doesn't help you at all.
It doesn't have to necessarily be guilt but more recognising mistakes from the past and being wary of repeating them. It's not as if racism being acceptable is some distant thing of the past either - in the US especially, you only have to go back a few decades to find a time when it was perfectly acceptable to discriminate against minorities. Plenty of people from that time period are still alive now. Similarly, other examples of racism have been highlighted in this thread - people may be afforded equal rights now thankfully, but that doesn't mean that racism has completely vanished, or that minorities aren't discriminated against at all.
Again, look at the US - the current actual President believed that Obama wasn't born in America purely because of his race; he's currently the most powerful political figure in probably the world's most influential nation. And it's hardly the only controversial thing he's said when it comes to race, even if he'll try to disguise his prejudices.
...and here we go, the crux of the problem (as I suspected). You and others are arguing because you feel that you are being blamed for something. You're inventing positions and arguing against them, rewriting history and exaggerating and playing down different things all in some misguided attempt to absolve yourself of something that is in your own head.
I can't speak for others but I'm not blaming anyone in this thread for things they haven't done and I haven't seen anyone else doing this, so maybe you should ask yourself why you feel this way? I can't tell you because I can't relate to your position just like you can't relate to mine (minority/majority, history's, life experience, etc), but self reflection is always a good thing.
As for the rest of your post.... I'm not even going to engage.
Last edited: