• 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 free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Are Aussies Racist?

#81
Luke.Walton said:
Well I had to type something that would get people's attention didn't I? :D

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 :p)
Click to expand...

I don't think it is arrogant at all. IMO it is more his responsibility to know the culture that he is in, than it is for the culture to be respectful of him.

lowsound
 
#86
john turner said:
an interesting perspective - a little usa-centric, but still a lot of good points are brought up.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/10/14/sawyer.blackface/index.html
Click to expand...

Bah, articles like this really annoy me, where the whole thing is spoilt by a couple of small things.

He brings up good points, but then feels the need to chuck the word 'racist' in there. There are people out there subject to real racism, where they are beaten or killed, treated unjustly simply becasue of the colour of their skin, and crying racism at every little thing like this doesn't help their cause.

It just annoys me that the term racist is used so often, its diluting the meaning of the word to use it to discribe something like this, leaves me thinking 'boy who cried wolf, boy who cried wolf'
 
#87
john turner said:
an interesting perspective - a little usa-centric, but still a lot of good points are brought up.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/10/14/sawyer.blackface/index.html
Click to expand...

Hmm. I'm not convinced by that article. He mentions traditional blackface performers mocking stereotypical characteristics, etc.

The guys on the show weren't mocking any of the stereotypical characteristics of black people. They were mocking the Jackson 5 and Michael Jackson, who happen to be black - they weren't mocking them for being black. OK, so their paint was much darker than the skin tones of any of the Jackson 5 (as pointed out in the article), but if they had been accurate in their choice of paint, would this make the act 'OK'?

Is the guy who was playing Michael Jackson also seen as being racist, because Michael is actually black but has a skin condition which causes pigment loss? Because surely that guy was pretending to be a black person who just happens to have very pale skin?
 
#88
Simo98 said:
Bah, articles like this really annoy me, where the whole thing is spoilt by a couple of small things.

He brings up good points, but then feels the need to chuck the word 'racist' in there. There are people out there subject to real racism, where they are beaten or killed, treated unjustly simply becasue of the colour of their skin, and crying racism at every little thing like this doesn't help their cause.

It just annoys me that the term racist is used so often, its diluting the meaning of the word to use it to discribe something like this, leaves me thinking 'boy who cried wolf, boy who cried wolf'
Click to expand...

Your second paragraph is a response I see often, and it always intrigues me. Why is racism only real when extremes are involved? Further more, "Crying" racism, or "boy cried wolf" actually is what has brought change, rights, etc. Sometimes it IS little things like this that ppl try to slip by. However if it doesnt affect you, you can easily brush it off. There maybe some that are unwarranted, but alot of times after someone takes a real, unbiased look, they see the truth.

Also, google, bing, yahoo, and other search engines are your friend. It takes 1-2 minutes to look up info on pretty much anything you really want to know about. People will do that for equipment, but not for historical matters Ive come to learn.
 
#89
Happynoj said:
Hmm. I'm not convinced by that article. He mentions traditional blackface performers mocking stereotypical characteristics, etc.

The guys on the show weren't mocking any of the stereotypical characteristics of black people. They were mocking the Jackson 5 and Michael Jackson, who happen to be black - they weren't mocking them for being black. OK, so their paint was much darker than the skin tones of any of the Jackson 5 (as pointed out in the article), but if they had been accurate in their choice of paint, would this make the act 'OK'?
pale skin?
Click to expand...

And you or anyone else see no relevance or even a fraction of a reason why this could be misconstrued?
 
#91
Dr_Funkdamental said:
Your second paragraph is a response I see often, and it always intrigues me. Why is racism only real when extremes are involved? Further more, "Crying" racism, or "boy cried wolf" actually is what has brought change, rights, etc. Sometimes it IS little things like this that ppl try to slip by. However if it doesnt affect you, you can easily brush it off. There maybe some that are unwarranted, but alot of times after someone takes a real, unbiased look, they see the truth.

Also, google, bing, yahoo, and other search engines are your friend. It takes 1-2 minutes to look up info on pretty much anything you really want to know about. People will do that for equipment, but not for historical matters Ive come to learn.
Click to expand...

You misinterpreted what i said. (or maybe i wasn't clear)

Racism is not only 'real' when extremes are involved, i just believe that the term 'racism' should not be applied to things such as name calling.

Racism is when a person is not entiled to the same rights as someone of a different race. if its only little things in this case, they are still racist, such as someone been picked for a sporting team or job because of their race. However calling someone a name is not racist in my opinion.


Though i also believe that people need to pick their battle, and let the little things slide sometimes lest their complaints be ignored in the future. But thats was not my point.

Im not sure what the google referance was about? however the internet is not always what i would call a relaible source of information.
 
#92
Simo98 said:
You misinterpreted what i said. (or maybe i wasn't clear)

Racism is not only 'real' when extremes are involved, i just believe that the term 'racism' should not be applied to things such as name calling.

Racism is when a person is not entiled to the same rights as someone of a different race. if its only little things in this case, they are still racist, such as someone been picked for a sporting team or job because of their race. However calling someone a name is not racist in my opinion.


Though i also believe that people need to pick their battle, and let the little things slide sometimes lest their complaints be ignored in the future. But thats was not my point.

Im not sure what the google referance was about? however the internet is not always what i would call a relaible source of information.
Click to expand...

So if someone just makes racist remarks, its not them that are racist, just what they say? Just asking for sincere clarification.

As far as the net reference, that was just a general statement. Ive read so often in topics (including this one) where ppl inquire about the subject (say "black face" or Minstrel show) that would take 2 minutes to look up and get caught up with what is being talked about. I mean, to reply, youre already on the internet, so is it that hard to do some research? :confused:
 
#93
The term "racist" is losing contextual value by the day here in the USA. It is SO overused, abused and just generally wielded as a hate tool to stop conversations dead in their tracks. So it appears that it's rapidly becoming meaningless. I am so glad about that too... If I never heard that word again I wouldn't miss it one bit,
 
#97
Dr_Funkdamental said:
So if someone just makes racist remarks, its not them that are racist, just what they say? Just asking for sincere clarification.
Click to expand...

I would consider a person making racist comments to be a racist person, or at least acting racist.

I just think that all too often people get the two confused, words or actions that are simply offensive, such as name calling or stereotypes, and racist words or acts.
 
#99
Rattman said:
The term "racist" is losing contextual value by the day here in the USA. It is SO overused, abused and just generally wielded as a hate tool to stop conversations dead in their tracks. So it appears that it's rapidly becoming meaningless. I am so glad about that too... If I never heard that word again I wouldn't miss it one bit,
Click to expand...

If ppl didnt do racist things, none of us would have to hear it :). But we know how that goes. Walked around the White House lately? I have. You wouldnt believe some of the signs people carry. Some even tried to hide them when we walked by them (kinda hard to hide poster board). Lets just say they went further than political disdain.

Simo98 said:
I would consider a person making racist comments to be a racist person, or at least acting racist.

I just think that all too often people get the two confused, words or actions that are simply offensive, such as name calling or stereotypes, and racist words or acts.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I see...
 
#100
I think that in answer to the OP, yes and no. Certain areas, in which white Australians are the minority I believe are the really racist parts. Places like Melbourne and Sydney, massive cities with many dimensions to them are far to culturally diverse and densly populated to not have elements of rascim to them, yet they seem to have less concentrated racism than say Springvale, near where I live, where there is a high concentration of Asians, to the extent where English is the second language there.

Another point I feel needs to be made is the fact that Australia's sense of humour is very different from America's. In Australia, your best mate falls down the stairs and gets seven stitches, you bring it up every time you are near a set of stairs, with comments such as "Look out mate, better take the elevator on this one, can't afford a hospital trip today". This is normal in Australian culture, very much rip on your mates, and take it when it comes back to you. I'm not saying this is the right way to go about things, simply that's how it is in Australia, and I think that it is all good when you know someone well, but on national television, it is very easy to misconstrue the intention, which I believe has happened.

And finally, Red Faces is something which is meant to be crass, stupid and ultimately, not taken seriously. Do you take what you see on "The Gong Show" to be serious and solemn?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back