• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

A proud day for Australia... (another race thread)

Your examples are silly, but OK. Also,what was shown wasn't "blackface". I thought we covered that already.

Of course it was silly. That's the only way (apparently) I can put it on your level. And their faces are painted jet black. They may not be in a play, or a film, but you look at that picture, and you see white guys in blackface.

If you don't get it, then you just don't get it. Like I said before, that image is quite appalling to a very large faction of people. Until it isn't anymore, it just is.
 
I could always count on you to see me as something other than an angry black guy! :D

95InternetHigh-Five.jpg
 
Of course it was silly. That's the only way (apparently) I can put it on your level. And their faces are painted jet black. They may not be in a play, or a film, but you look at that picture, and you see white guys in blackface.

If you don't get it, then you just don't get it. Like I said before, that image is quite appalling. Until it isn't anymore, it just is.

There's no reason for you to be insulting. I assure you, I understand what you're saying. I simply disagree with it. You have no idea who I am or what the racial makeup of my family is. You simply choose to be outraged. Your choice.
 
I don't exactly get why this is so bad.

Neither do I. How is this considered "appalling"?

I said 'If you don't get it, you don't get it," because you said that you don't get it. Wasn't meant as an insult. I tried to explain how it is appalling to many people, and you're not seeing the connection. So that's fine. But until it is no longer appalling to a whole lot of people, it just is. The wounds from this particular phenomena are too fresh.

I wasn't outraged at the story itself. No outrage in post #2. I don't like to be disrespected, though. I don't know why you say "There's no reason for you to be insulting."

They're great when you can find 'em.

I guess context and an explanation aren't good enough for you. OK.

That's being unreasonable.

Your examples are silly, but OK. Also,what was shown wasn't "blackface". I thought we covered that already.

How am I supposed to receive any of these posts? There's no reason for you to be insulting.
 
I said 'If you don't get it, you don't get it," because you said that you don't get it. Wasn't meant as an insult. I tried to explain how it is appalling to many people, and you're not seeing the connection. So that's fine. But until it is no longer appalling to a whole lot of people, it just is. The wounds from this particular phenomena are too fresh.

"I don't get it" meaning in this particular instance, there shouldn't be a reason for outrage. Yes, there will always be someone pissed off by some image somewhere. I think someone else made that point earlier in the thread. Not everything can or should be sanitized to the point that it offends no one. I still contend that you're reaching mightily to be offended by this. Be offended. I really don't care. Sure, I understand why some could find that particular image offensive, but a truly reasonable person will easily see past the image and understand that it was a couple of fans dressing up as their favorite rugby player. You disagree. No biggie.






macaroni tony said:
How did you mean that? I wasn't pissed until this little ditty came out. There is no need for you to be insulting.

Why did you assume that was about anyone in particular? Don't assume. But again, if you choose to be pissed off by it, be my guest.


EDIT: Tony has now edited his post above to include more quotes from me, so what I'm responding to here ^ will seem out of context. What I'm referring to here ^ is where I stated reasonable people are great if you can find them. That was directed at no one in particular. It was simply a statement. The other quotes he has now added certainly were directed at him. They were not insults. They were my observations of his responses.
 
Of course it was silly. That's the only way (apparently) I can put it on your level. And their faces are painted jet black. They may not be in a play, or a film, but you look at that picture, and you see white guys in blackface.

If you don't get it, then you just don't get it. Like I said before, that image is quite appalling to a very large faction of people. Until it isn't anymore, it just is.


Their faces are painted black, but this is not BLACKFACE, which specifically refers to the stereotyped caricature of a black person.

There is none of that here. It is 2 guys dressing up like their favorite player.

I can understand it being "appauling" to people that saw the pic for the first time without context, but with context, no reasonable person would consider it racist in any way.
 
Their faces are painted black, but this is not BLACKFACE, which specifically refers to the stereotyped caricature of a black person.

There is none of that here. It is 2 guys dressing up like their favorite player.

I can understand it being "appauling" to people that saw the pic for the first time without context, but with context, no reasonable person would consider it racist in any way.

Tasty, I understand that. And I don't think those two guys are being racist at all. I just think that this is one of those cases where enough people are stabbed by the image itself that the explanation doesn't make up for it. Evidenced, in part, by the fact that they had to take it down. Misstep by the company, IMO.

And to the "Everything offends somebody" copout...of course, everything will offend some people. But this isn't just a few people, in some tucked away weird corner of society. It's a giant faction of people.
 
Their faces are painted black, but this is not BLACKFACE, which specifically refers to the stereotyped caricature of a black person.

There is none of that here. It is 2 guys dressing up like their favorite player.

I can understand it being "appauling" to people that saw the pic for the first time without context, but with context, no reasonable person would consider it racist in any way.

Yep.
 
Question: Has anyone ever heard of BROWN paint?! Is there no brown paint in Australia?! SNL has been mentioned a couple of times in this thread. There were skits where Billy Crystal did a Sammy Davis, Jr. impression, complete with brown makeup. In another skit, Crystal and Christopher Guest were made up as old Negro Leagues baseball players. No big, angry protests ensued. Why? Because they actually looked and sounded like real black people! Blackface represents decades of oppression and ridicule, period. Eddie Murphy playing a white character does not.
 
Question: Has anyone ever heard of BROWN paint?! Is there no brown paint in Australia?! SNL has been mentioned a couple of times in this thread. There were skits where Billy Crystal did a Sammy Davis, Jr. impression, complete with brown makeup. In another skit, Crystal and Christopher Guest were made up as old Negro Leagues baseball players. No big, angry protests ensued. Why? Because they actually looked and sounded like real black people! Blackface represents decades of oppression and ridicule, period. Eddie Murphy playing a white character does not.

I forgot to mention these. Never got around to it...I wonder why :rolleyes:

There's also Neil Diamond, who had his face painted brown in a movie. A small faction of people found all of these things offensive. They weren't to me; it readily doesn't conjure up images of minstrel shows. Jet black paint and a goofy demeanor does.

Now to me, the people who got up in arms needed to take a chill pill and sit down somewhere. I've always wondered, though, how do you decide when something is worth getting upset over, and what isn't? How do you quantify or put a value on someone else's feelings? The best I could come up with was, if it is a large enough faction of people, and it is something that truly represents who they are, and what they ask is not unreasonable (like hire black actors for the play instead of painting the white ones black, or choose a different winner for the airline ticket contest), then they are not asking too much.
 
How silly of us not to expect every Australian to understand African American sensibilities?:D

That said, the company which does have a lot of dealings in the US should have known better. The soccer fan kids who wore the make-up, they probably know as much about American history as the average American in the same age group, which is to say not to much. :rolleyes:
 
if it is a large enough faction of people, and it is something that truly represents who they are, and what they ask is not unreasonable (like hire black actors for the play instead of painting the white ones black, or choose a different winner for the airline ticket contest), then they are not asking too much.

Maybe, but the people who chose the two guys who dressed up as their favorite rugby player don't see the world the same way you do. I'd like to believe they looked at all the entries, saw those two guys and thought "wow, they really have some spirit and put some effort into the contest." Were they "wrong" for not realizing that some might be offended? I don't know.
 
Of course it was silly. That's the only way (apparently) I can put it on your level. And their faces are painted jet black. They may not be in a play, or a film, but you look at that picture, and you see white guys in blackface.

If you don't get it, then you just don't get it. Like I said before, that image is quite appalling to a very large faction of people. Until it isn't anymore, it just is.

Please suggest how you would have them costume themselves to look like the fellow they were trying emulate/parody, or whatever. If they had not applied some type of makeup, would the costume have worked?

To grab and hold an action that can either be quite harmless or offensive, and say it can never be harmless because "it's MY chosen offense that makes ME a victim and dammit, nobody's gonna take away my right to be a victim anytime somebody puts a darker shade of makeup on their skin" is a little bit of a stretch. Would it be correct to assume that you never want any caucasian to ever make themselves up to be ANY darker skinned race under any circumstances, theater, contest, movie, television, whatever? Should they come to you and ask permission first?

These guys wore makeup to look like their sports hero. Google Al Jolson and you will see what blackface looks like. Then maybe you will see the difference. But probably not, it would somehow diminish your victimhood.