Blackface

User avatar
spot
Posts: 38759
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Blackface

Post by spot »

I'll drop a link here if I may. It perturbs me that what is genuinely racially offensive - blacking up in parody - now has what's completely race-blind caught up in it and banned as an unthinking reflex reaction.

Aboriginal mum posts daughter's 'whiteface' photos - BBC News

That's my first. Nothing at all to do with parody.

Shrewsbury Folk Festival bans 'blackface' Morris dancers - BBC News

That's my second, and has nothing at all to do with race at all.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

Blackface

Post by Bruv »

Let me throw into the mix Zwarte Piet and Golli***s and for luck The Black and White minstrel show



I wonder what this over sensitive sensor will do with Terry ***an ?

And THAT is the problem to me........inappropriate over sensitivity.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

Blackface

Post by Bruv »

I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38759
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Blackface

Post by spot »

Bruv;1500501 wrote: Let me throw into the mix Zwarte Piet and Golli***s and for luck The Black and White minstrel show

All three of those are deliberate parody.

Neither of my examples were parody at all.

I'd quite happily see yours banned.

I'm very annoyed that anyone's interfering with the Morris or criticizing those two instances of children's dress-up.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
minks
Posts: 26281
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:58 pm

Blackface

Post by minks »

sad.

what next you can't stick a feather in your braid or wear chaps and a Stetson.

Wait do kids play Cowboys and Indians anymore?
�You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough.�

― Mae West
User avatar
FourPart
Posts: 6437
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 3:12 am

Blackface

Post by FourPart »

The blacking of Morris men is what Morris Men are all about. The very origins of Morris is from "Moorish" - from Morrocco, originating in the 15th century. It has nothing to do with modern PC rubbish. It is a historical tradition, 100s of years old, and when the PC brigade start denying us our own heritage the time has to come when we have to stick up for our OWN culture. We cannot allow ourselves to be dictated to.
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2885
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

Blackface

Post by magentaflame »

Pc police were all over a mother recently becauce her child wanted to dress up as his favourite footy player. Dreadlocks black face....etc. i dont see the problem. The child dressed as a particular person...not a race.
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
Momus
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 7:11 am

Blackface

Post by Momus »

We have been governed in recent decades by those who dictate what we must be offended by, while the very people who call for social cohesion, cause more racial disharmony than any other sector. You have to look no further than a young 16 year old girl killing herself this week for fear of being branded racist. As a joke, she darkened her skin colour and wore a headscarf in order to prank her Asian boyfriends parents. When the photograph was shared outside of her social network circle, she was so afraid, that she hung herself. If this is not the strongest signal that this nonsense has gone too far, then we are lost. Racism is ugly and of course, there is no place for it. Racism and hurt feelings are worlds apart. The debate whether anyone should be offended by blacking up for a parody, or even whitening up, would be lost, had the bleeding hearts not made such a ridiculous culture of fear. Black communities would be no more offended by a parody of a white, blacking up, any more than the white community would be offended by a black, whitening up. It's purely down to the fact, they were are indoctrinated with claptrap, that we must be offended. If any of the elder community can remember how much they enjoyed the Black and White Minstrel show from the 50's to the 70's, they are now left wondering if that enjoyment was due to them being racist.

Society has not changed over the years, the amount of racists has not changed. All that changes, is the politicians and leaders who tell us, what is racist and what is not. If races are left to live their lives without continual interference, the majority would continue to live along side each other in harmony. Naturally, we'd still see racist incidents but much of racial tension in the UK today, is inter-racial tension. Most of which is stated as racist, is down to a few politicians who decide exactly what is and what isn't. In other words, we are governed by the opinions of a select few. The political correctness brigade are in fact, dictating what we must be offended by and perpetually, finding offence where there is none. Since mass immigration, the UK has to be one of the most tolerant nations worldwide and 57 languages are spoken here. Those who live in the real world, understand that there is bound to be some inter racial tension somewhere at sometime, seeing how so many nationalities and religions live alongside each other. With immigration came the culture of fear. It is not about how blacks see whites or whites see blacks, it's about, leaders and politicians fearing racial conflict so much so, that they have induced a culture of fear, that led to a young girl hanging herself because of a silly joke. Her death highlights exactly how that culture of fear has impacted on normal rational people.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38759
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Blackface

Post by spot »

Momus;1500541 wrote: You have to look no further than a young 16 year old girl killing herself this week for fear of being branded racist. As a joke, she darkened her skin colour and wore a headscarf in order to prank her Asian boyfriends parents. When the photograph was shared outside of her social network circle, she was so afraid, that she hung herself.I've had a good search but I can't find any reference to this on a news site - do you know where you saw it?



If any of the elder community can remember how much they enjoyed the Black and White Minstrel show from the 50's to the 70's, they are now left wondering if that enjoyment was due to them being racist.Damn right they were! You only need recall the program and the performances to know perfectly well that the reaction was hardcore racist from one end of Britain to the other!
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

Blackface

Post by Bruv »

spot;1500503 wrote: All three of those are deliberate parody.

Neither of my examples were parody at all.

I'd quite happily see yours banned.

I'm very annoyed that anyone's interfering with the Morris or criticizing those two instances of children's dress-up.


Golli***s have been banned.

Black and white minstrels have been banned.

Zwarte Piet is on the verge.

I can understand the banning of the name Golli***, but not the caricatured doll.

I can understand unease viewing white singers ridiculing black singers, I can understand black singers complaining about those singers taking work that is rightly theirs , but I never considered the show a cruel racist parody, it was a singalong show.

Perhaps my sensitivities were untainted back then.

To be honest I know less of Zwarte Piet, but I understand he is Santa Claus helper that happens to be black.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38759
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Blackface

Post by spot »

Bruv;1500563 wrote: To be honest I know less of Zwarte Piet, but I understand he is Santa Claus helper that happens to be black.The story isn't racist but the caricature imagery grotesquely parodies happy blackery down on the old plantation in the Dutch East Indies just as much as the Minstrel Show did for the Confederacy.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
FourPart
Posts: 6437
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 3:12 am

Blackface

Post by FourPart »

That Golli***s have been banned is actually just an urban myth. However, I can't help wondering if the original Rupert books have been banned and / or removed from print, as they were unbelievably racist with the wicked ****s of **** Island. Of course, when I was a kid, reading these books there was absolutely no consideration of racism. Even then we could recognise these characters as being totally fictional & not relevant to real life characters.

The question really lies in whether or not Political Correctness can be allowed to 'burn the books' of historical classics, such as this. If so, where does it stop? Would Othello be banned from the libraries / stage?

Politically Incorrect 5: Coon Island
Momus
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 7:11 am

Blackface

Post by Momus »

spot;1500559 wrote: I've had a good search but I can't find any reference to this on a news site - do you know where you saw it?



Teenage girl killed herself amid fears she would be branded racist over joke photo she sent friends, inquest hears



Damn right they were! You only need recall the program and the performances to know perfectly well that the reaction was hardcore racist from one end of Britain to the other!


While there is no doubt that at the time, the creators and writers of the show, deliberately parodied and characterized black American's, the assumption that millions of people enjoyed the show for the same reasons, can not be proven. Those millions who watched it, are just the ordinary public. Millions of people did not tune in just to see black Americans lampooned, but because in that era, there was a element of the old time music halls lingering and that just happened to be what people enjoyed in the 60's.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38759
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Blackface

Post by spot »

Momus;1500594 wrote: While there is no doubt that at the time, the creators and writers of the show, deliberately parodied and characterized black American's, the assumption that millions of people enjoyed the show for the same reasons, can not be proven. Those millions who watched it, are just the ordinary public. Millions of people did not tune in just to see black Americans lampooned, but because in that era, there was a element of the old time music halls lingering and that just happened to be what people enjoyed in the 60's.


I wouldn't dream of trying to prove it. I was there, and my culturally-induced attitude to Africans whether they lived in Africa or in the UK was racist by assumption. It was based solely on the opinion of society at large and it was, in retrospect, utterly disgusting. It conditioned my inherent support for segregation in the USA, apartheid in South Africa and I'd have been ostracised by my acquaintances had I thought any different. I definitely didn't know anyone who said they thought different.

If you look back for a link to the news story from last week, I'd be grateful.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

Blackface

Post by Bruv »

spot;1500596 wrote: It conditioned my inherent support for segregation in the USA, apartheid in South Africa and I'd have been ostracised by my acquaintances had I thought any different.................................................... I definitely didn't know anyone who said they thought different.


Bloody What ?????

Black and white minstrel show.........conditioned your inherent support ?????

You sir are very easily lead, and must have a feeble grasp of life's realities.......and change your friends, they are a bad influence.

I remember clearly my shock and horror at news of Sharpville astounded at Watts riots, felt ashamed when I learned of re-classifications amongst families in South Africa, the 'pencil in the hair' test and the spread of nostrils splitting families. The 'Pass Laws' the Soweto massacre, moved me as much as Frejus, Aberfan and Agadir.

And all the time I watched and enjoyed Tony Mercer 'blacking up' to sing on a Saturday evening.

I have said this before, and I still think it....................one day it will be alright to use the race of your opponent in an argument, the same as today you might use the hair colour or body shape such as "Shut up you long haired fat git"

We are still a long long way from that time as yet. But changing black board to chalk board and other such over sensitivities will not help.

There are as many black people 'Playing' the race game as there are anally retentive 'right on' whites 'feeling their pain'..............only time and hopefully future generations will change things.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38759
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Blackface

Post by spot »

Bruv;1500602 wrote: the same as today you might use the hair colour or body shape such as "Shut up you long haired fat git" Good lord, you don't really think people can do that do you?

I was married and renovating a house in London when the Soweto massacre happened. My earlier comment describes 1960. Before Kennedy, before Martin Luther King, before Montgomery, it's a very accurate statement of fact and I definitely heard nothing about Sharpeville at the time.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

Blackface

Post by Bruv »

spot;1500606 wrote: Good lord, you don't really think people can do that do you?

I was married and renovating a house in London when the Soweto massacre happened. My earlier comment describes 1960. Before Kennedy, before Martin Luther King, before Montgomery, it's a very accurate statement of fact and I definitely heard nothing about Sharpeville at the time.


The Black and white minstrel show ran from 58 to 78......so all the events were in that timescale.

There was massive support in the UK to end apartheid despite The Minstrel show................how do you explain that ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38759
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Blackface

Post by spot »

It's 1960 I was describing from personal memory. By all means we can go through the entire period you've indicated, saying what changed in each year, but back in 1960 that's how I saw it. The BBC was describing terrorist ANC attacks and everyone thought white supremacy was God's appointed natural order. You needed to be Trevor Huddleston to think different.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Momus
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 7:11 am

Blackface

Post by Momus »

spot;1500596 wrote: I wouldn't dream of trying to prove it. I was there, and my culturally-induced attitude to Africans whether they lived in Africa or in the UK was racist by assumption. It was based solely on the opinion of society at large and it was, in retrospect, utterly disgusting. It conditioned my inherent support for segregation in the USA, apartheid in South Africa and I'd have been ostracised by my acquaintances had I thought any different. I definitely didn't know anyone who said they thought different.

If you look back for a link to the news story from last week, I'd be grateful.


I posted the link for you in my prior post last night. I posted it under your first paragraph asking for it. Here it is again.

Teenage girl killed herself amid fears she would be branded racist over joke photo she sent friends, inquest hears

My theory as to whether it was or was not racist, is based on perception. Today, all perception will concur, it was racist. Five decades ago, because our leaders and politicians were not telling us, that it was racist, did we know it was racist? If racism decades ago was not a crime, then those watching it, would be ignorant to the fact that it was.

Further more, 50 years ago, there was little immigration nor the global migration we see today. In today's society, in a multi cultural environment, where we are in daily contact with black African's, we know that the manner in which black Americans were portrayed in the show, is not indicative of that race. We would recognise immediately watching the show today, that it was lampooning black Americans. Yet, 50 years ago, the average British probably had no idea of how black Americans acted and behaved and most, in that era, hadn't yet come into contact with them to know the show was sending them up.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38759
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Blackface

Post by spot »

Momus;1500635 wrote: I posted the link for you in my prior post last night. I posted it under your first paragraph asking for it. Here it is again.Ah. You put it inside my quote, I didn't look at the content of my quote, I thought I'd written what was in there.

I note neither the BBC nor the Guardian reported anything about this.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

Blackface

Post by Bruv »

spot;1500631 wrote: It's 1960 I was describing from personal memory. By all means we can go through the entire period you've indicated, saying what changed in each year, but back in 1960 that's how I saw it. The BBC was describing terrorist ANC attacks and everyone thought white supremacy was God's appointed natural order. You needed to be Trevor Huddleston to think different.


Bruvver Trev for me in future then.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Blackface

Post by gmc »

spot;1500631 wrote: It's 1960 I was describing from personal memory. By all means we can go through the entire period you've indicated, saying what changed in each year, but back in 1960 that's how I saw it. The BBC was describing terrorist ANC attacks and everyone thought white supremacy was God's appointed natural order. You needed to be Trevor Huddleston to think different.


What utter bollocks. there have always been those who saw no reason to treat others as inferior to them, racism is a man made construct from time immorial people have always opposed bigotry and hatred. I remember sharpeville as well and the anti-apartheid marches and calls for a boycott of south africa.

Robert Burns Country: A Man's A Man For A' That:

A Man's A Man For A' That




What do you think he was on about?

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; ...


Where did that sentiment come from?

User avatar
spot
Posts: 38759
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Blackface

Post by spot »

gmc;1500643 wrote:

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; ... Where did that sentiment come from?




Slave-owning America?
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Blackface

Post by gmc »

spot;1500655 wrote: Slave-owning America?


Not entirely they bwere hardly being original

Thomas Rainsbrough

Really I think that the poorest he that is in England has a life to live as the greatest he; and therefore truly, sir, I think it's clear that every man that is to live under a government ought first by his own consent to put himself under that government; and I do think that the poorest man in England is not at all bound in a strict sense to that government that he has not had a voice to put himself under.


Surely as a bristol man you are familiar with the levellers and the putney debates?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... epooresthe

My point, which I'm not making very well is that there have alway been those who opposed manifest destiny and the white man's burden, emperialism and that kind of crap and thought all should have equal opportunity and live together without destroying the environment for the sake of quick profit but they get shouted down in the noise from the winners and it's happening even as we speak. - Ukip et al go on about the 1689 bill of rights and sem to know nothing about things like the putney debates now we have the prospect of a UK bill of rights to replace the human rights act that will actially make us worse off and the people cheer while they are being shafted convinced all is for the best and anyone who says hang on a minite gets shouted down as unpatriotic and standiong in the way of democracy. Liars, cheats and bigots are about to take us out of the eu and an insne racist and mysiginist is about to win the US presidency. Sod consopiracy theories reality is even more unbelieveable.

Though I do agree with you maybe those who object to the morris dancers could do with a little histrory lesson.
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2885
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

Blackface

Post by magentaflame »

This years sitting of parliament is about including aboriginals in the constitution. But at the same time watering down the racial villification laws. It shouldnt be illegal to be a bigot basically.

I kind of agree with the latter.... but im afraid about the constitution inclusion. I think a treaty not inclusion.
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
User avatar
FourPart
Posts: 6437
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 3:12 am

Blackface

Post by FourPart »

In my opinion, the result of Political Correctness is to work AGAINST the fight for equality (of ALL types - not just Racial), as being told what to think does nothing more than get people's backs up & consequently forms resistance to the objective. Positive Discrimination (an oxymoron in itself, as it's still Discrimination), in particular, as it not only goes against equality, but favours Discrimination in the opposite direction. Not surprisingly, this is going to cause resentment, resistance, and general ill will. You cannot force attitudes on anyone.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38759
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Blackface

Post by spot »

One should not need an attitude forcing on oneself. Simple good manners is invariably sufficient. Nobody with good manners would cause undeserved offence, neither deliberately nor carelessly.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!

Return to “Social Human Rights”