Not sure what you’re trying to say here?
There’s plenty of people who see the harm in it and have the historical evidence to back it up.
It seems like the people who don’t see the harm are the ones telling us that there’s nothing wrong with it.
"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.
Not sure what you’re trying to say here?
There’s plenty of people who see the harm in it and have the historical evidence to back it up.
It seems like the people who don’t see the harm are the ones telling us that there’s nothing wrong with it.
Yeah, I am referring to the people who don’t see the harm in the situation. I shuld have said “some people”...
I apologise for the apparent stupidty of this question because I do struggle to understand. If you are not offended by it, how do you deem it offensive?
I'm not trying to be funny here. Just genuinely curious.
He has apologized?
Yeah check his twitter.
Post has gone down
Blacking your face up is offensive, as evidenced by dozens of people throughout this thread. That’s factual.
Being offended is a choice you make in response to a situation.
I chose to not be offended purely because I don’t have the energy for the amount of racism that’s still prevalent in 2017, and it would exhaust me otherwise.
Except that Lukaku's chant was at the very least racially insensitive simply because the chant purposefully singled Lukaku out based on the colour of his skin by reinforcing an age-old stereotype. The intent was there, and the same principle could also be applied in the case of Park's eating dog chant.
It's different with Griezmann's blackface. There's no doubt he should have known better in the sense that it's never a good idea in the first place to paint your face black in this day and age (regardless of whether one fully understands the negative connotations of the blackface), but the whole making a huge drama out of an innocuous faux pas seems to be a classic case of SJW outrage in my book.
I wouldn’t say it’s an innocuous faux pas, but I agree the Lukaku chant was intentional, this wasn’t.
Tbf, if your taste in comedy is over reliant on dressing up as other races, you’ve probably got a really shit taste in comedy. When was the last hilarious example of that working? What will we ever do without Rob Sneider’s ‘Mexican’ cameos in Adam Sandler films!?
Wooshhh
The Mighty Boosch?
Jesus what a stupid quote in this context. Not all ignorance is privilege. If a Slavic kid growing up on the streets in the Balkan, orphaned by the war, sees Ronaldo on tv in the 2002 World Cup and dresses up as him for some occasion, painting his face to be more like his hero, is that 'privilege and power'? What does this American idea of "racially segregated neighborhoods" and ignorance of this particular aspect of US history have anything to do with privilege or power?
Black face is idiotic but so is thinking that quote is in any way relevant to a French footballer, who grew up in France, Portugal and Spain, painting his face brown to look like the players on a team he looked up to.
I think people would have easily understood that he was supposed to be a Harlem Globetrotter without the blackface, purely because he was wearing a Harlem Globetrotter kit. It wasn't a remotely necessary part of the costume, and was pretty much him going "haha I'm a black man now," as if that is somehow funny.
Aye, millionaire footballer Antoine Griezman is akin to a Slavic orphan who grew up on the streets.
Your hypothetical Slavic kid can wear a Ronaldo jersey, doesn’t need to paint his face at all. His jersey will be more than enough.
How does that even make the news? He did absolutely nothing wrong here. Is it racist now to dress up as a black person?
Excellent point that so many are missing.
Both Lukaku's chant and this are racist regardless of intent and that should be the end of it. It's just that after reading the whole thread I get the impression that many on here are giving Griezmann way too much stick, in typical SJW outrage fashion, for something he may not have been aware of and has apologised for on top. 'Innocent faux pas' might not be the right phrase, my apologies, but I think you know what I'm trying to say here.
Here we go again..How exactly do you dress up as a black person without painting your face black?
I agree with that and also the fact that if he chooses to dress up like people he supposedly looks up to, he should do so in a way that doesn't likely offend them, which this most likely does, and by doing so as a public figure has more of a responsibility to be careful with these things.
What does his money have to do with his ignorance about US cultural history? Griezmann is clearly a privileged person, but his ignorance in this case is not a result of his privilege. My point is simply that outside of the US specific context that quote was written, it doesn't apply the way @MoneyMay implied it does.
But if he does paint his face, ignorant of the connotations over in the US, is that the "quintessential element of privilege" and does it reflect his "privilege and power"?
Yep I agree.
I don’t think people are giving Griezmann slack - I think most people have accepted that he’s not the sharpest tool in the box and he clearly was too absent-minded to know better, plus he’s apologised.
Most of the outrage has been directed at those who have turned around and decided that this isn’t racist, and there’s nothing wrong with blacking up - at least that’s who I find most issue with in this thread.
Not really a fan of the SJW term myself, but that’s neither here nor there.
Educate me please. How do you portray a black person when your face is white?
Why would you portray a black person?
Can we just lock this now? Posts like this are driving this round and round in circles - either people can't be arsed to go back and read, or they are genuinely on a wind up.
When I was a kid I wanted to be Romario, I didn't feel the need to paint my face, just a stuck on earring and the Brazil shirt with his name on was suffice.
How are people still trying defend this ffs.
Given your hypothetical situation involves a kid - then the blame falls upon his parents, painting your skin is an unnecessary component to dressing up as someone.
Regardless - the difference between whiteface and black face has been pointed out in this thread countless times.
Read the whole thread for a start.
Why would you portray anything then? What kind of a question is this? Earlier in the thread someone said "So if he dresses like yao ming, you would expect him to color his skin yellow and slant his eyes?". My answer to that would be yes. If I wanted to go as Yao Ming, then (as a non-Chinese person) of course I would have to use make up to make me look more Chinese. How else am I supposed to give the impression that I'm Yao Ming. I really don't get the outrage.
Some people are best ignored, otherwise their ignorance will exhaust you.
Easy, you'd wear a Houston Rockets joursey with Ming on the back and stand on stilts of some kind.
If you still think people won't get it, you could always wear a Yao Ming mask too...
I will rephrase it, what is the context of the portraying?
For example, if a white american portrays a native american just to have a laugh then people have the right to take it as they want and be offended because being a native american, looking like a native american isn't a joke, it's someone's essence. Now, if you portray a native american in a play or a movie in a serious and respectful way, then there is no problem.
The core problem is that often painting your skin is a medium to make fun of someone's identity and the reality is that that person has every rights to be offended.
His parents? I told you he's an orphan
Anyway I'm saying he grew up in the Balkan, but he could be Griezmann's age in my hypothetical and it still wouldn't change things.
Also even if the hypothetical Balkan kid had parents, how would you expect his 20th century Balkan parents to know this small detail about US cultural history and expect them to think it significant enough to their lives to teach their son about it at some point? What other knowledge do you expect everyone globally to magically be aware of and live by?
And again I'd still like to hear an answer whether the hypothetical reflects any sort of power or privilege?
Also I've never mentioned whiteface nor am I defending black face. In my own country, I'm against the Zwarte Piet/Black peter 'christmas' tradition of blackface. I don't think it comes from a bad place, nor do I think it was racially motivated for at least the decades I've been alive, but I do see how it affects some people and I don't see reason to defend i's usage simply because we didn't used to hurt anyone with it. (also I've never really liked the character tbh)
All I'm arguing is this idea from the quote that this form of ignorance == privilege and power, in the context of this thread and in most contexts outside of the US and maybe the UK.
I guess you'd also have to grow about two feet.. because how else will everyone know you are Yao Ming and not just Mao Zedong in a basketball top.
His parents? I told you he's an orphan
Anyway I'm saying he grew up in the Balkan, but he could be Griezmann's age in my hypothetical and it still wouldn't change things.
Also even if the hypothetical Balkan kid had parents, how would you expect his 20th century Balkan parents to know this small detail about US cultural history and expect them to think it significant enough to their lives to teach their son about it at some point? What other knowledge do you expect everyone globally to magically be aware of and live by?
And again I'd still like to hear an answer whether the hypothetical reflects any sort of power or privilege?
Also I've never mentioned whiteface nor am I defending black face. In my own country, I'm against the Zwarte Piet/Black peter 'christmas' tradition of blackface. I don't think it comes from a bad place, nor do I think it was racially motivated for at least the decades I've been alive, but I do see how it affects some people and I don't see reason to defend i's usage simply because we didn't used to hurt anyone with it. (also I've never really liked the character tbh)
All I'm arguing is this idea from the quote that this form of ignorance == privilege and power, in the context of this thread and in most contexts outside of the US and maybe the UK.
Yeah I’m not big on arguing hypothetical situations because they’re pointless.
If your hypothetical Balkan is actually an adult and decides to don white face, then he’s ignorant yes.
And being ignorant to the effects of black face represents a privilege because you aren’t exposed to the offence it can cause.
Having privilege isn’t about being rich or poor, which I guess is why you decided to hypothesise about a poor white kid.
why is it so difficult for people to understand this.
I don't understand it, sorry. Essentially what you're saying is that you can never use make-up to make yourself look more like another person if that person is of a different ethnicity. I assume you'd be okay with using bronzer to make myself look like Cristiano Ronaldo, though.
Jesus, this can't be a serious question?
You're not going dressed as a random black person. You're not going to a fancy dress party as jamal or malcolm, the random blacks. You'd generally be going as a famous black person. You're going as a specific basketball player, a specific figure.
If I'm going to a party as batman or superman, the fact they're white does not make the character. I can go in a cape with my pants on top of my trousers with a big S on my shirt and it be very obvious that I'm going as superman. I don't need to whiten my face to make it obvious. Nor do you need to blacken your face to make it obvious you're going as a harlem globetrotter.
Not to mention the obvious historial connotations behind going as blackface, as opposed to 'white-face' for example.
And yep, I think most people would acknowledge that griezmann is not a marauding racist who's just steps away from pulling out his white power flag. The problem comes when people take extreme views and decide that people analysing the situation in any way other than this is all a massive laugh means them jumping to these extremes where apparently he must be a massive closet racist.