Are Aussies Racist?

[Jared Lash]

That was one of the dumbest movies of all time. If whites were offended by it, it would not bother me.

I was greatly offended by that movie.

Not as a white person, but as a writer. How does a movie like that get the green light and my script about the sassy robot looking for love doesn't even get me a development deal?

do your realize what blackface signifies? what it was used for? actual black folks weren't allowed to perform in a lot of the places where this kind of performance would occur, so white guys would dress like them and engage in rampant charicature.

jt beat me to it with a great post so I guess I'm relegated to a perfunctory +1

 

[Jared Lash]

Right. So taking this back to the OP, the skit was not offensive because they were portraying individuals (Jackson Five) and not just playing off of racist stereotypes.

Having watched the video (there's a few minutes of my life I'll never get back) I really don't think that the "performers" actually intended any racism but were unaware of the history of blackface or minstrel shows in the U.S. That's my take on it anyway.

 

[john turner]

Right. So taking this back to the OP, the skit was not offensive because they were portraying individuals (Jackson Five) and not just playing off of racist stereotypes.

lol. is that so? so how come none of them made even the slightest effort to render an actual representation of the jackson 5, as opposed to just a generic frizzle-wig and -black- makeup (as opposed to anything even remotely realistic)? everything chappelle did had many layers to it - many meanings. that's why he's such a great commedian - he was making a commentary with his "chuck taylor" character, beyond the humor of whatever skit was going on. these australian guys aren't making any commentary, they're not making anything, really, except fools of themselves.

that being said, like i said earlier on page 1, i don't think it's always appropriate to apply american cultural sensibilities to folks in other countries doing their thing, at least not without considering the intent of the individuals doing the performance. so is this video of australians racist? again, like i said earlier, i don't think so.

frankly i found the video offensive, but only because of how badly it sucked.

 

[MatticusMania]

Can someone please explain to me how a non-black person pretending to be a black person is racist? It seems like people think that it is racist purely because a non-black person dressed up as a black person - there were no racial slurs that I could see, no derogatory comments, nothing that I would class as racist. Is it purely the blacking up that is perceived as racist?


If a non-Jewish person pretended to be Jewish, would that be anti-semitic?

Just like how Monty Python was so incredibly sexist because the men dressed up to play women.

 

[Handyman]

I don't understand what relevance this has to Australians being racist.

gen⋅o⋅cide
–noun
the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

If genocide can't be considered an act of racisim, nothing can.

 

[UnsungZeros]

lol. is that so? so how come none of them made even the slightest effort to render an actual representation of the jackson 5, as opposed to just a generic frizzle-wig and -black- makeup (as opposed to anything even remotely realistic)? everything chappelle did had many layers to it - many meanings. that's why he's such a great commedian - he was making a commentary with his "chuck taylor" character, beyond the humor of whatever skit was going on. these australian guys aren't making any commentary, they're not making anything, really, except fools of themselves.

that being said, like i said earlier on page 1, i don't think it's always appropriate to apply american cultural sensibilities to folks in other countries doing their thing, at least not without considering the intent of the individuals doing the performance. so is this video of australians racist? again, like i said earlier, i don't think so.

frankly i found the video offensive, but only because of how badly it sucked.

How realistic do you want them to be? They're a comedy group on a variety hour. That's not even the point. I think what they were trying to accomplish with the blackface was not to lampoon the members of the Jackson Five portrayed in blackface, but to make fun of Michael Jackson's white appearance. The blackface creates a pretty stark contrast.

You can argue the merits of making fun of someone's skin condition, but that's getting off-topic.

I'll definitely agree with you on that points that this should not be held to American cultural standards and that it was offensively unfunny.

 

[rr5025]

Not as a white person, but as a writer. How does a movie like that get the green light and my script about the sassy robot looking for love doesn't even get me a development deal?

Pitch it to Pete Wentz


I don't really think this was racist. Was it funny? Not really except for the fact they played on MJ's radical change over 20 years, that did get a chuckle out of me.

For relating it to Downey in Tropic Thunder these guys are just amateurs and probably don't have access to the resources (material and cash) that Tropic Thunder did thus the black paint. The afros I think was more poking fun at the 70's and the fact (as I recall but hell I wasn't even alive then) that all of the Jackson 5 had fros.

I think this, like many other things was slightly blown out of proportion. For Australians no this is not racist. Why not? As far as I know blackface didn't really occur anywhere but here. When you have a period where things like this;
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed] happened often, and people had things like this;

in their yards then you can see why they are offensive here.

I personally think Harry Conick was just trying to say something like "oh look at how racially advanced we are in America now we would never allowed this to be shown on our tv." Of course I could be way off with that because it's just my opinion.

I've known quite a few aussies in the past year or so and not one of them was racist. Do events like this make me think everyone in one area is racist? No I will leave that to my own experiences in different places and with different peoples.

PS I found this pretty interesting according to Invalid Link Removed there was actually a 'story' behind these statues. The fact that anyone tried to defend that with a back story like that is amazing. I remember thinking even when I was young (about 7th grade or so after learning of the Jim Crow Laws) that it was obviously just a stereotype.

 

[john turner]

How realistic do you want them to be? They're a comedy group on a variety hour. That's not even the point. I think what they were trying to accomplish with the blackface was not to lampoon the members of the Jackson Five portrayed in blackface, but to make fun of Michael Jackson's white appearance. The blackface creates a pretty stark contrast.



You can argue the merits of making fun of someone's skin condition, but that's getting off-topic.



I'll definitely agree with you on that points that this should not be held to American cultural standards and that it was offensively unfunny.

they weren't even really trying to lampoon the jackson 5 - all the 'blackface' performers were wearing gloves. like you said, they were trying to charicature MJ and get some cheap laughs at the expense of his vitiligo.

something we shouldn't lose sight of, by comparing this to dave chappelle, -is- the fact that these were australians in australia doing their thing.

if they were in the u.s. doing this thing, then i think the situation would be more appropriately comparable to chappelle's show.

as it is, though, it's, again, like english-speaking folks getting offended at french folks talking about seals.

 

[knumbskull]

has anyone pointed out the excellent irony in the thread title yet?

'should we assume these people are prejudiced racially, because of their race?'

...achieved in just 3 words. almost poetic.

in answer to your question, OP: no, Aussies are not racist. there are racists there. there are racists in London, and everywhere, unfortunately.

that TV clip is a weird anomaly, which I'd guess might be explained by the fact that those dancers were on the show previously 20 years ago - so maybe there was a 'hey, let's have them back' thing happening, that eclipsed the fact that what they were doing would get them ridden out of town on a rail anywhere else.

I'm not saying that was acceptable 20 years ago, but maybe there were some people working there at the time who thought it was.

 

[john turner]

As far as I know blackface didn't really occur anywhere but here.

just as an aside, real blackface minstrel performances happened all around the world - there were televised performances like this in the uk as recently as the early 80's, from what i've found.

 

[john turner]

has anyone pointed out the excellent irony in the thread title yet?

'should we assume these people are prejudiced racially, because of their race?'

...achieved in just 3 words. almost poetic.

i didn't think the term "aussies" qualified as a racial descriptor.

 

[rr5025]

just as an aside, real blackface minstrel performances happened all around the world - there were televised performances like this in the uk as recently as the early 80's, from what i've found.

Hmm I didn't know that I just thought they were a product of the reconstruction era. I worte a paper last semester discussing Jim Crow Laws and I was shocked (and ashamed) to know Jim Crow started in Pittsburgh, my home town. I had always thought it began somewhere in the deep south.

 

[Dr. Cheese]

I personally think Harry Conick was just trying to say something like "oh look at how racially advanced we are in America now we would never allowed this to be shown on our tv." Of course I could be way off with that because it's just my opinion.

Harry Conick looked uncomfortable the moment those guys came out there in blackface. The man is from New Orleans, and is tight with a bunch of black musicians. The way everything shows up on Youtube, I can see why he felt he had to clearly state his distate for what he saw.

 

[knumbskull]

i didn't think the term "aussies" qualified as a racial descriptor.

ok, fair point.

but i stand by the fact that it's ironic - 'should i make a negative generalisation against this country, because i hear they make negative generalisations there?'

 

[GregC]

ok, fair point.

but i stand by the fact that it's ironic - 'should i make a negative generalisation against this country, because i hear they make negative generalisations there?'

It's worth pointing out that the OP lives in Australia.

 

[Simo98]

The term 'racist' is thrown around all to often these days in my opinion.

My interperatation of the term 'racist' is when someone of a particular race actually believes that a person of another race is inferior to them, and does not deserve to be treated equally.

On that note this act is not racist, but could quite easily be called offensive.

Some people may be offended because of the history of black face, some people (in particular the members of the jackson 5) should be offended by this horribly bad portrayal of themselves, but it is not racist.


Australia as a country (im biased, i live here) suffers from racism problems, and a racist history, yet we are one of the most cultrually diverse countries i know of, partly i believe because we have little culture of our own to protect, other than aboriginal culture which we spent years trying to destroy.

A lot of the racism against aboriginal people i believe stems from jealousy 'why should they get free money from the government, they just waste it on booze'. And the constant media coverage of these 'lesser people' who try to enter our country via boats doesn't help either.

On an individual basis though i don't think i have ever met someone who is genuinly racist, we like to judge people on actions, not the colour of their skin. unfortunatly people of a certain race are often judged on the actions of their stereotypes often portrayed in the media, rather than on an individual basis, this is only real evidence of real racism i see often.

 

[knumbskull]

It's worth pointing out that the OP lives in Australia.

dammit.

if anyone wants me, i'll be in the car park.

 

[iamlowsound]

The term 'racist' is thrown around all to often these days in my opinion.

My interperatation of the term 'racist' is when someone of a particular race actually believes that a person of another race is inferior to them, and does not deserve to be treated equally.

On that note this act is not racist, but could quite easily be called offensive.

Some people may be offended because of the history of black face, some people (in particular the members of the jackson 5) should be offended by this horribly bad portrayal of themselves, but it is not racist.


Australia as a country (im biased, i live here) suffers from racism problems, and a racist history, yet we are one of the most cultrually diverse countries i know of, partly i believe because we have little culture of our own to protect, other than aboriginal culture which we spent years trying to destroy.

A lot of the racism against aboriginal people i believe stems from jealousy 'why should they get free money from the government, they just waste it on booze'. And the constant media coverage of these 'lesser people' who try to enter our country via boats doesn't help either.

On an individual basis though i don't think i have ever met someone who is genuinly racist, we like to judge people on actions, not the colour of their skin. unfortunatly people of a certain race are often judged on the actions of their stereotypes often portrayed in the media, rather than on an individual basis, this is only real evidence of real racism i see often.

+1.

I don't see why people in Australia should be mindful of the culture and history of another country when they go about doing something in their own country. I work outside with out my shirt on all the time, should I not do that because some countries that have Islamic law say that I couldn't if I were in their country? Of course not. By the same token, should someone in that same country work without a shirt on because they could in Canada? Once again, of course not.

Yes, we live in a global world, but that also means that sometimes non-global issues get presented as global issues. This is a prime example of that.

lowsound

 

[aborgman]

That was one of the dumbest movies of all time. If whites were offended by it, it would not bother me.

Anyone with a brain should be offended by that movie...

 

[Luke.Walton]

has anyone pointed out the excellent irony in the thread title yet?

'should we assume these people are prejudiced racially, because of their race?'

...achieved in just 3 words. almost poetic.

Well I had to type something that would get people's attention didn't I?

However, I feel that Harry Connick Jnr has some responsibility, as much as the executives of the show. It is his job to know what kind of show he is going on, not just to do what ever his publicist (if he has one) tells him to do to soak up every bit of publicity he can get for his tour, or whatever he is here for.

Is this arrogant of me? (Serious question, not sarcasm. If this is a bit knobbish, I request that you all tell me nicely )