My boyfriend is finally coming over to the awesome geekside. We went to Best Buy last night to look around. He decided to try out anime on his own accord because it seemed interesting.
He picked up Full Metal Alchemist and Bleach. I had yet to watch Full Metal Alchemist, and I don't mind watching Bleach because I've seen the first 30 episodes fan subbed.
This is the first time he's ever bought an anime series. I had to make him watch Cowboy Bebop and other various anime. Having him buy it on his own will is heartening to me. ^_^
So he is to make an impersonation of someone black, whilst looking white? I mean, yes, it was racist back in the day due to context. It's the same thing with the famous chick that appeared in a picture squinting with her friends and an Asian dude, that is not racist, its just taken out of context. Also notice he painted his face more accurately in a deep brown with brownish lips, not those huge ones.
Easily offended? Try socially aware. I am not saying he shouldn't have the right to do it, just that I do not like it. You probably dislike a lot of things that I like and vice-versa.
Same comment as Avatar Thread: That isn't seeing racism in any nook and cranny. It is just as offensive as the Mickey Rooney's yellowface performance in Breakfast at Tiffany's. Mickey Rooney and the director probably had good intentions, but that doesn't mean that the product wasn't offensive. As someone that has lived their lives in the Theatre world, the blackface, yellowface, brownface, and whiteface traditions are ultra-taboo. If you cast a black person in a traditionally white role or vice-versa, it is better just to let them look the way they look and move on with the story. Unless their is a specific reference to the race within, it is usually fine. That guy could have done a fun impression of Louis Armstrong without the Aunt Jamima Makeup.
Easily offended? Try socially aware. I am not saying he shouldn't have the right to do it, just that I do not like it. You probably dislike a lot of things that I like and vice-versa.
Same comment as Avatar Thread: That isn't seeing racism in any nook and cranny. It is just as offensive as the Mickey Rooney's yellowface performance in Breakfast at Tiffany's. Mickey Rooney and the director probably had good intentions, but that doesn't mean that the product wasn't offensive. As someone that has lived their lives in the Theatre world, the blackface, yellowface, brownface, and whiteface traditions are ultra-taboo. If you cast a black person in a traditionally white role or vice-versa, it is better just to let them look the way they look and move on with the story. Unless their is a specific reference to the race within, it is usually fine. That guy could have done a fun impression of Louis Armstrong without the Aunt Jamima Makeup.
No, I'm sorry, whilst you have a right to be, there's no denying you are easily offended. It's satire. This is the second argument I've seen where you're stuck in the past. You're sticking to old traditions and values that just don't apply anymore.
(If you were wondering, I'm referring to the uniform debate. See my recent post in that thread.)
What was I offended about in the uniform thread? I had a differening opinion, that doesn't make me "offended" by anything. If I was, it was so minor that I have forgotten it already.
Also, STUCK IN THE PAST?! Aren't people in this thread taking offense to the race of actors in the Avatar movie? I said that I didn't care about it, while others were up in arms. Race, racism, and racial portrayal are still big issues. We all have our lines. For me, putting on bad make-up and portraying a flagrant stereotype of a race is distasteful and there are still many that take offense to it. How the media portrays a race shapes how that race is perceived and treated in society at large. It is a big deal, you just aren't sensitive to it.
I think it is one of those cases when the historical context comes back to haunt the present. Blackface and yellowface performances stem from a time when there was a lot more stereotypical bigotry. There are echoes of that in the video, so even if, as you say, the performer meant no harm, it still evokes the era of minstrel shows, and therefore shows a certain ignorance on the performer's behalf.
To your "stuck in the past" comment, I say "Too soon, too soon!" As long as the person doing this is not doing it as a tongue and cheek send up of those type of performances, its basically a relative of those old racist minstrel shows.
It's satire.
Um, no, it's not really satire. Satire of blackface is like Robert Downey, Jr. in "Tropic Thunder." This is just blackface.
I think it is one of those cases when the historical context comes back to haunt the present. Blackface and yellowface performances stem from a time when there was a lot more stereotypical bigotry. There are echoes of that in the video, so even if, as you say, the performer meant no harm, it still evokes the era of minstrel shows, and therefore shows a certain ignorance on the performer's behalf.
To your "stuck in the past" comment, I say "Too soon, too soon!" As long as the person doing this is not doing it as a tongue and cheek send up of those type of performances, its basically a relative of those old racist minstrel shows.
It's satire.
Um, no, it's not really satire. Satire of blackface is like Robert Downey, Jr. in "Tropic Thunder." This is just blackface.
Too soon? c'mon, your current president is black, you were born in an era where blacks, whites, reds, greens, purples, etc. are treated equal. What I do believe is that people that go tiptoeing around trying not to offend people are the real racists, as they are the ones perpetuating the stereotypes treating other races as if they were "special", all this crap about affirmative action, how about hiring the best man/woman for the job? I don't see how having a quota of different races and sexes is not sexism and racism if you are obligated to hire based on race and sex.
The only way to overcome racism is not to think too soon, it never too soon to rid yourself of taboos and cliches.
Can the thing of my day be that I found out we have President's Day off for some reason so I have a surprise 3 day weekend? We've never had President's Day off!
blacks, whites, reds, greens, purples, etc. are treated equal.
The thing is THEY AREN'T! Racism/Sexism/Homophobia still exists! To pretend is doesn't is naive and foolish. Sure, things have gotten better. Sure, there are more legal balances in place to prevent discrimination. Yup! Progress is a great thing. But we aren't there yet.
c'mon, your current president is black
And why do you think everyone made a big deal about that fact? If everyone were truly color-blind they wouldn't mention his race any more than they would mention McCain's eye color. Why do we act like he "overcame barriers" if they didn't exist? Wow, we had a black president FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER! Hmmm.
What I do believe is that people that go tiptoeing around trying not to offend people are the real racists, as they are the ones perpetuating the stereotypes treating other races as if they were "special", all this crap about affirmative action, how about hiring the best man/woman for the job? I don't see how having a quota of different races and sexes is not sexism and racism if you are obligated to hire based on race and sex.
Sure, political correctness can go overboard, but to bring back old racist cliches with a straight face is not going forward, I'm sorry. I had this discussion about Hetalia, about "when is it too soon to laugh at wars." Laughter can be healing, as can the breaking of taboos. I don't believe that any one race should be treated "special," in fact, I consider myself great proponent of equality. However, to deny that in certain cultures some races are historically privileged, and that that privilege persists to this day is, as I said, naive at best.
Can the thing of my day be that I found out we have President's Day off for some reason so I have a surprise 3 day weekend? We've never had President's Day off!
Sure. Getting a surprise day off is always a bonus! As for myself, I work four 10 hour shifts Tuesday thru Friday. I automatically get Mondays off, and because Monday is a holiday I get Tuesday off as well, so four day weekend for me!
Maybe I can get some work on some sewing projects, finally. >.>
Oh, I'm not saying there is absolutely no racism, sexism, homophobia in the US let alone the world, but categorizing every single thing that involves the mention of someones race or reference to as racist is not helping either.
I'll put it this way, a white dude goes to a show, shaves the top of his head and draws red birthmark in his forehead, he is impersonating Gorbachev, is that an insult to bald people? to people with birthmarks? or even to Mr. Gorbachev himself? does he not have a red birthmark? is he not bald?. Lets add the "race" thing to the mixture. Was Armstrong that color? did he not have awesome pearly whites? did he not make those faces while playing? if all, its an awesome look into detail that made the performance so good, it didn't have to be tongue and cheek or a satire to not be racist, its just that, an impersonation. It is not bringing back a cliche.
There's a saying that's along the lines of "Only white people think racism no longer exists."
I haven't watched the "Louis Armstrong" performance, so I can't judge whether or not it's racist or not. However, I'll say that not all blackface is necessarily evil; Robert Downey, Jr. made it funny in Tropic Thunder. If the video is more a tribute, then it's not exactly the worst thing in the world. It's really all about the content of the performance. Blackface was traditionally used in vaudeville acts to very specifically satirize black people, and those applications of it are bad. But if you use the old motif to do a tribute, while it is racist, I wouldn't say it's necessarily bad.
We've all seen the "Read a Book" video that aired on BET, and that was incredibly racist. It was intended to be so, as it was a poignant piece of social commentary. Does the fact that it's racist make it less meaningful?
As for Mrs. MacRoss, do not confuse one who is passionate with one who is easily offended. I've been in some arguments with her, and while I would say there are times that she gets offended, more often than not, she's being passionate about an opinion. I'm the same way about, say, pseudoscience; I have gotten into extremely vicious real-world arguments with people who believe in fake medicine because I'm very passionate about it. Technically, I am offended, but I'm offended by someone's utter lack of intelligence; Mrs. MacRoss is "offended" by the cavalier attitude towards racist portrayals.
I know it's meant merely as an impersonation (maybe by a Japanese fan), but as to why Mrs. MacRoss got offended:
I think it is one of those cases when the historical context comes back to haunt the present. Blackface and yellowface performances stem from a time when there was a lot more stereotypical bigotry. There are echoes of that in the video, so even if, as you say, the performer meant no harm, it still evokes the era of minstrel shows, and therefore shows a certain ignorance on the performer's behalf.
edit: Pete, man, as eloquent as ever. You said it better than I could.
Also, please note that I am NOT super sensitive about any possible perceived racist remark or act. My husband is Jewish and I use that as license to make horrible, horrible Jew Jokes. As I said before, as a performer, I wince at blackface. It didn't bother me in Tropic Thunder because that was actual satire, not just being in blackface.
It's an impersonation! A very good one at that. That performer tries to give his audience an as authentic as possible impersonation of a great artist. If it were blackface, he would be making fun of Louis Armstrong, but the only guy I see that he makes fun of, is himself with his breaking trumpet. He shows that he is less of a performer by not being able to play the trumpet, and thus not being able to make it even more authentic to a real Louis Armstrong performance.
Watch this video and then honestly try again to keep this bullshit "OMG SUCH RACISM" nonsense up.
Okay, maybe I went about my argument wrong. I apologize for that. What I'm trying to get at here is that we need to move away from these comments about "You can't do that! It's racist!" The world we live in will never move forward away from racism if we call it out every time we see something that we think may be racist.
I know it's meant merely as an impersonation (maybe by a Japanese fan), but as to why Mrs. MacRoss got offended:
I think it is one of those cases when the historical context comes back to haunt the present. Blackface and yellowface performances stem from a time when there was a lot more stereotypical bigotry. There are echoes of that in the video, so even if, as you say, the performer meant no harm, it still evokes the era of minstrel shows, and therefore shows a certain ignorance on the performer's behalf.
This is where I got my "Stuck in the past" comment from. This should no longer even be considered. Why does it matter that this once offended people? It shouldn't matter that it's something people used to do.
You're going to think I'm crazy and argue this point, but I feel it's still valid (see next sentence). People used to burn witches. I act like a witch. Should I be burned? No, you'll say, because that's just what ignorant people used to do who didn't know any better. I feel the same way about blackface/yellowface/etc. There are a lot of things that people say are taboo in society for no good reason. Just because something once meant something bad, doesn't mean it has to now.
Okay, maybe I went about my argument wrong. I apologize for that. What I'm trying to get at here is that we need to move away from these comments about "You can't do that! It's racist!" The world we live in will never move forward away from racism if we call it out every time we see something that we think may be racist.
I never said he shouldn't do it. My specific statement was it was "kinda racist". It is. I am not equating that guy to KKK member.
I know it's meant merely as an impersonation (maybe by a Japanese fan), but as to why Mrs. MacRoss got offended:
I think it is one of those cases when the historical context comes back to haunt the present. Blackface and yellowface performances stem from a time when there was a lot more stereotypical bigotry. There are echoes of that in the video, so even if, as you say, the performer meant no harm, it still evokes the era of minstrel shows, and therefore shows a certain ignorance on the performer's behalf.
This is where I got my "Stuck in the past" comment from. This should no longer even be considered. Why does it matter that this once offended people? It shouldn't matter that it's something people used to do.
You're going to think I'm crazy and argue this point, but I feel it's still valid (see next sentence). People used to burn witches. I act like a witch. Should I be burned? No, you'll say, because that's just what ignorant people used to do who didn't know any better. I feel the same way about blackface/yellowface/etc. There are a lot of things that people say are taboo in society for no good reason. Just because something once meant something bad, doesn't mean it has to now. This isn't a "stuck in the past" issue. Racism is still rampant. Black face still offends A LOT of people. I never even said I was offended. I just can see how could be taken as such.
Comments
When it's a hand bound version of a virtual printing of a book based on a published book. Step 6 is the important one, and most hilarious.
Effectively the guy made a fully printed and bound non-book due to a EULA that says it is only a token for a virtual version of a real book..
He picked up Full Metal Alchemist and Bleach. I had yet to watch Full Metal Alchemist, and I don't mind watching Bleach because I've seen the first 30 episodes fan subbed.
This is the first time he's ever bought an anime series. I had to make him watch Cowboy Bebop and other various anime. Having him buy it on his own will is heartening to me. ^_^
Obama Bobble Head:
Can be purchased here.
Same comment as Avatar Thread:
That isn't seeing racism in any nook and cranny. It is just as offensive as the Mickey Rooney's yellowface performance in Breakfast at Tiffany's. Mickey Rooney and the director probably had good intentions, but that doesn't mean that the product wasn't offensive.
As someone that has lived their lives in the Theatre world, the blackface, yellowface, brownface, and whiteface traditions are ultra-taboo. If you cast a black person in a traditionally white role or vice-versa, it is better just to let them look the way they look and move on with the story. Unless their is a specific reference to the race within, it is usually fine. That guy could have done a fun impression of Louis Armstrong without the Aunt Jamima Makeup.
(If you were wondering, I'm referring to the uniform debate. See my recent post in that thread.)
Also, STUCK IN THE PAST?! Aren't people in this thread taking offense to the race of actors in the Avatar movie? I said that I didn't care about it, while others were up in arms.
Race, racism, and racial portrayal are still big issues.
We all have our lines. For me, putting on bad make-up and portraying a flagrant stereotype of a race is distasteful and there are still many that take offense to it. How the media portrays a race shapes how that race is perceived and treated in society at large. It is a big deal, you just aren't sensitive to it.
I only wish they would have covered "Cool and Unusual Punishment" by NoFX
I think it is one of those cases when the historical context comes back to haunt the present. Blackface and yellowface performances stem from a time when there was a lot more stereotypical bigotry. There are echoes of that in the video, so even if, as you say, the performer meant no harm, it still evokes the era of minstrel shows, and therefore shows a certain ignorance on the performer's behalf.
To your "stuck in the past" comment, I say "Too soon, too soon!" As long as the person doing this is not doing it as a tongue and cheek send up of those type of performances, its basically a relative of those old racist minstrel shows. Um, no, it's not really satire. Satire of blackface is like Robert Downey, Jr. in "Tropic Thunder." This is just blackface.
The only way to overcome racism is not to think too soon, it never too soon to rid yourself of taboos and cliches.
Maybe I can get some work on some sewing projects, finally. >.>
I'll put it this way, a white dude goes to a show, shaves the top of his head and draws red birthmark in his forehead, he is impersonating Gorbachev, is that an insult to bald people? to people with birthmarks? or even to Mr. Gorbachev himself? does he not have a red birthmark? is he not bald?. Lets add the "race" thing to the mixture. Was Armstrong that color? did he not have awesome pearly whites? did he not make those faces while playing? if all, its an awesome look into detail that made the performance so good, it didn't have to be tongue and cheek or a satire to not be racist, its just that, an impersonation. It is not bringing back a cliche.
I haven't watched the "Louis Armstrong" performance, so I can't judge whether or not it's racist or not. However, I'll say that not all blackface is necessarily evil; Robert Downey, Jr. made it funny in Tropic Thunder. If the video is more a tribute, then it's not exactly the worst thing in the world. It's really all about the content of the performance. Blackface was traditionally used in vaudeville acts to very specifically satirize black people, and those applications of it are bad. But if you use the old motif to do a tribute, while it is racist, I wouldn't say it's necessarily bad.
We've all seen the "Read a Book" video that aired on BET, and that was incredibly racist. It was intended to be so, as it was a poignant piece of social commentary. Does the fact that it's racist make it less meaningful?
As for Mrs. MacRoss, do not confuse one who is passionate with one who is easily offended. I've been in some arguments with her, and while I would say there are times that she gets offended, more often than not, she's being passionate about an opinion. I'm the same way about, say, pseudoscience; I have gotten into extremely vicious real-world arguments with people who believe in fake medicine because I'm very passionate about it. Technically, I am offended, but I'm offended by someone's utter lack of intelligence; Mrs. MacRoss is "offended" by the cavalier attitude towards racist portrayals.
As I said before, as a performer, I wince at blackface. It didn't bother me in Tropic Thunder because that was actual satire, not just being in blackface.
Watch this video and then honestly try again to keep this bullshit "OMG SUCH RACISM" nonsense up.
You're going to think I'm crazy and argue this point, but I feel it's still valid (see next sentence). People used to burn witches. I act like a witch. Should I be burned? No, you'll say, because that's just what ignorant people used to do who didn't know any better. I feel the same way about blackface/yellowface/etc. There are a lot of things that people say are taboo in society for no good reason. Just because something once meant something bad, doesn't mean it has to now.
And an epic /a/ thread had started.
42332248
39252548
35191688
39530953
38853086
39114803
38378836
39488995
39192538
38898111
You're going to think I'm crazy and argue this point, but I feel it's still valid (see next sentence). People used to burn witches. I act like a witch. Should I be burned? No, you'll say, because that's just what ignorant people used to do who didn't know any better. I feel the same way about blackface/yellowface/etc. There are a lot of things that people say are taboo in society for no good reason. Just because something once meant something bad, doesn't mean it has to now. This isn't a "stuck in the past" issue. Racism is still rampant. Black face still offends A LOT of people. I never even said I was offended. I just can see how could be taken as such.