White trick-or-treaters in blackface: C/D?

Er, is this an ultra-politically correct euphemism for "black", or do you mean something else? As for the question itself, I know your society is far more delicate towards these issues (and for a reason) than mine, and I know that the historical context of blackface is quite problematic, but still, it's kids dressing up as sportsman. If they'd dress up as a generic black man in order to appear scary, that would've been a different case. Most likely they don't know the connotations of blackface (then again, their parents should) and they're probably just imitating an idol of theirs, so I don't think you should overreact.

No, not at all -- it was a way to emphasize the absurdity.

I don't think I'm overreacting. I wouldn't let my kid do it. If he intended to do it, I would see the situation as a golden opportunity to instill in him a healthy amount of white guilt.

There was also a group of girls walking around like extras from ONJ's "Physical" video. They had a boombox that played Wham and the Weather Girls. As the missues observed, we had been thrown into that episode of Buffy.

for fuck sake!

Tasteless, stupid, unfunny, lamentable and idiotic. Anyone beat up for same deserves it.

Okay, substitute "instill healthy amount of white guilt" with "talk about blackface." I was being a little silly.

Why unexpectedly? We may have different tastes, but does that make me an idiotic asshole?

What's a "lawn jockey"?

Unfortunate racial epithet based on dated front lawn ornamentation.

the fact that you even find these comparible is lamentable. the kids were dressing up as a character they (presumably) admire. a guy at Optimo this weekend was dressed up as Don King - his costume was hysterical.

http://kotisivu.dnainternet.net/houtsone/lakupekka.jpg

(x-post)

xpost ahahhahahahahahha

(x-post)

xp

dan doesn't seem to agree with you!

No, I meant literally dated....as, to the best of my knowledge, they don't make them (the actual lawn ornaments) anymore.....though drive around Long Island and you'll still spot a few, not to mention in midtown Manhattan.....

http://orient-express.lbwa.verio.net/onyc/images/220images/onyc_220_entrance.jpg

No, probably not. Since most of our ethnic minorities have been here for thirty years or less, I assume American culture is far more sensitive to racial imagery as related to, say, Asian or African people. We do have seem older ethnic groups such as the Sami and the Roma people, but they obviously don't show up at all in American culture.

i don't know if he does but, if so, it does call into question your use of the phrase "De Facto".

Blackface is de facto offensive. My issue is this: should a child dressed up as Ben Wallace for Halloween be considered blackface? Exactly what does that say about how you view people like Ben Wallace that that was your first reaction to seeing the child? In my mind, this is the racist liberal issue rearing its ugly head again.

dan i think the point is that blackface is de facto offensive
-- _ (...), November 1st, 2005.

which i agree is debateable but i think most americans would agree
-- _ (...), November 1st, 2005.

Er, I'd argue that in the kid's mind it isn't.

Yes, I think that that entire line of thought is incredibly dehumanising to black people because the point SHOULD be that we are all people and therefore should get treated the same. There shouldn't be anything special or taboo about a child wanting to dress up as a highly visible and incredibly popular basketball player. Basically, by blanket-calling every single instance where someone wears makeup darker than their skin tone "blackface", you are helping to peretuate the racial divide in this country.

Finally, don't fucking tell me what I should find offensive, white boy.

And would it be offensive for a girl to dress up like a man?

face-ah.

xposts. Dan, Ken, OTM

(xxxx-post)

You know, I've been at ballparks where these are given away to all kinds of people...

http://kotisivu.dnainternet.net/houtsone/lakupekka.jpg

in which actual context is this not offensive?

and she was japanese, rather than chinese :((((

also i was crawling out of a "sony" brand TV which is a japanese TV manufacturer when i really should have done with say "Konka" brand, just so that i don't appear to have stereotyped Japan with the Sony brand when actualy it just happened to be a famous TV brand used to signify my cardboard box to be a TV. :((((((((((((((

i was a racist dick :(

Also wtf kind of person gives someone else shit for wearing a Negro Leagues hat?

and i sometimes wear tshirts with english writings on them :((((

I don't know that we are. Why do you think this ethan?

Honoring the Negro Leagues is obviously a good and necessary thing, but again, there's the context. It sort of irritates me in the same way as the NYFD hats worn outside of NY by people who would never be firefighters in a million years. I need to elaborate here...

Hopefully I can explain more and answer other stuff when I'm off work.

Er, I wasn't saying that image was not offensive at all in Finland. What I was saying is that the lack of black population in Finland made people ignorant of the connotations of such images. Sure, most folks would recognize it as crude caricature of a black man, but they didn't probably know about the history of such racist images, so they didn't see it that much more offensive as a caricature of, say, a Frenchman with a big nose and a beret, or an American with a cowboy hat and a revolver. So, while the image probably offended, say, Africans visiting Finland, it most likely wasn't that offensive to the majority of people because they didn't know the historical context of it.

q.v.

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005UWAB.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

http://www.millionaireplayboy.com/images/blackloiscover.jpg

http://www.impawards.com/1986/posters/soul_man.jpg

Yeah, god forbid people's fashion choices go to support worthy organizations instead of purchasing their 17th Yankees hat (now in Lime Green!)...?

This movie offended me because the two hapless black voodoo victims did not end up teaming up with the lily white protagonists against the wicked creole voodoo! That would have made this so much better.

Hence my usage of words "most" and "majority".

http://www.cinema-city.com/bamboozled.jpg

New Era gets the money in both cases.

are you trying to say "africans" are also faggos who love their socialist education systems?

In May, Mr. Fox initially refused to apologize for a comment stating that Mexicans cross the border to take jobs that "not even blacks" want. The comment led to a meeting with the Rev. Jesse Jackson and an eventual rapprochement.

BECKER!

It's making me wonder if you were to ask people what are the first three physical 'characteristics' they would associate with Ben Wallace, one of the three answers would be 'dark skin' or similar. And whether that is wrong and the sort of thing to be discouraged (skin colour tending to be one of the first 'characteristics' when Caucasians describe non-Caucasians).

ethan you're grasping now. Also, I saw that South Park episode too.

Are the Birmingham Black Barons playing in a new stadium with their cut?

I really doubt that New Era has put all of their profits from Negro Leagues merchandise into the pockets of the children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Negro Leagues vets. I could see a few museum displays, perhaps.

(I WOULD REALLY LIKE SOMEONE TO PROVE ME WRONG HERE.)

xpost yeah no, I know you wouldn't have an issue with that, I have no fucking clue what Andy is on about.

ok NOW you're stretching

What about a FUBU shirt?

maybe you should have compared blacking up with dressing up as a ghost, and it would have made it more clear.

Jesus god, Dan & Ally Oll Korrect here.

You haven't explained how a kid dressing up as his favorite athlete is racism in any way, still. Besides making a really tenuous complete-lack-of-perspective comparison to actual racists pretending to be blacks and doing minstrel shows. Which, like I said, is kind of a disservice to any kind of civil rights/anti-racism cause. This is the kind of bullshit that gets people mired into ridiculous arguments because, you know what, no, most Americans would not find a kid doing this inexcusable. He's NOT dressed up as Hitler. He's NOT dressed up as, say, OJ Simpson.

Haha I am Duran Duran.

if you draw this conclusion from a kid who dressed up as a sports person who happens to be black. then perhaps YOU are the one who is stereotyping???

It's on the same level as when my high-school cafeteria, to celebrate Black History Month, served fried chicken and greens.

we aren't talking about some fucking douchebag with shoe polish on his face and bright red lipstick and white out around his eyes waving around a bucket of goddamn chicken, you're talking about a kid, probably under the age of 12, wearing a basketball jersey and some darker-colored foundation! You don't see at all how the reaction this is garnering from a couple of you is a little off?

Like I said, I can understand being like wtf, or saying something to the kid like "Some people might find that offensive," I mean I really wouldn't want my kid doing that just because of that, but this level of outrage? Comparing it to Hitler and rape? Jesus christ.

I gotta say, ken OTM.

http://www.papalazarou.co.uk/pd/images/postcard3.jpg

wtf?

Reeves & Mortimer blacking up to play Otis Redding and Marvin Gaye with Geordie accents, WAS deemed offensive by some though (they then had to do the act minus paint).

http://www.manmademultimedia.com/magazine/news/ent/2004/2/All_Star.jpgs/Ben_Wallace.jpg

I mean how do you wear a Ben Wallace costume without at least doing the hair--which was already labelled as being "uncomfortable" when white people don the 'fro wigs. WTF, I mean a kid walking around with just a Ben Wallace jersey on and nothing else to signify, "I am Ben Wallace," that's a lame ass costume. I wouldn't give that kid a 3 Musketeers, that's for sure.

I mean, I'm not saying that he should've necessarily gone the whole hog with it (I mean I am the person who already said WTF, Ben Wallace?) but I mean how do the two of you recommend someone do a Ben Wallace costume without putting on ANYTHING that might be offensive to you?

Or do white people have to dress as white people, blacks as blacks, men as men, women as women, etc etc etc? I don't see anything wrong with a totally innocent Halloween costume.

xpost no one is pretending anything, we're telling you you are overreacting HARDCORE.

the point SHOULD be that we are all people and therefore should get treated the same.

which can be used to excuse a lot of foul, racist shit

Can I echo that?

This I can understand more than the Halloween costume thing...I mean why not just hire black comedians? Saturday Night Live does this as well and I'm not that fond of it, especially since the guy they always "black up" is such an awful unfunny douchebag whose impressions are all crap. I mean seriously just hire some more black comedians, people.

there have never been that many good ones in the UK [/'racist']

i can

xpost no I mean that one dude, the one who sometimes does Bill Clinton, who is that guy? Whatever he is, he's crap.

xxpost ETHAN NO ONE IS SAYING THAT, WE'RE SAYING THAT YOU ARE OVERREACTING, IS THIS QUESTIONABLE? YES. IS THIS "INEXCUSABLE"? NO, IT'S A KID DRESSING UP AS HIS HERO. SHOULD HIS PARENTS HAVE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THIS? PROBABLY, THEY SHOULD'VE ASKED HIM TO NOT DRESS UP AS BEN WALLACE. THE CONCLUSIONS YOU ARE DRAWING FROM THIS EVENT AND PEOPLE SAYING "LISTEN IT'S NOT AS BAD AS THAT" ARE REALLY KIND OF CRAZY. ALSO YOU ARE WHITE. ALSO YOU ARE TEAMING UP WITH A DUDE WHO IS BOTHERED BY PEOPLE WHO WEAR NEGRO LEAGUE HATS AND AFROS ON HALLOWEEN WHICH KIND OF PROBABLY MAKES YOUR ARGUMENT LOOK MORE CRAP.

posted in caps cos I don't think you are getting it that we're just saying "You are overreacting."

xpost i am not "teaming up" with dude, but i agree about afro wigs on halloween as stated above

if there weren't a protest, you probably didn't know about it?

-- miccio (anthonyisrigh...) (webmail), November 1st, 2005 11:28 AM. (miccio) (later) (link)

http://xanga.projectblogsphere.com/images/video-southParkMrJefferson.jpg

http://www.dreammovies.net/affiches1/soulman.jpg

Huh?

And I mean if they didn't "black up" but kept on the synthetic afros to signify Ben Wallace, is that ok? Cos Andy is saying it isn't. I mean is it just not ok for them to be Ben Wallace for Halloween, or is it just the blackface?

xpost, I guess not. Why is THAT bad? I've seen white dudes with actual 'fros, you know.

Huh?

that its an 8 year old most likely emulating someone he admires rather than a frat kid at "pimps and hos night" or Al Jolson in The Jazz Singer

I'd blame rock music for that, personally.

This is probably the most ostentatiously offensive thing written on this thread so far. Good job!

I still wanna know if it's just impossible for a kid to do this at all, minus the blackface. Why would it be bad for a kid to put on a wig and a jersey and be Ben Wallace?

well, i don't think i need to point out the irony of this, but what the hell. "give your peers some respect or fuck off"... um, okay... and, to be fair, i thought that

and yeah i dont blame the kid but its the parents job to teach them whats deemed racially insensitive just as it is to teach them all cultural standards.

shows some sympathy to the kid. i think alex's comments that a child deserves to be beaten up are far more offensive than anything else here.

haha jess are you his dad?

is it perfectly inoffensive to say that black people are predisposed to being able to write with big paragraphs?

Yeah, right.

the birmingham black barons became the birmingham barons, and are the AA affiliate of the chicago white sox (famously, you may remember michael jordan getting some at-bats as a baron). their stadium isn't incredibly old, i'm gonna guess it was built in '89 or '90? it's in hoover, tho.

i'd like to reaffirm my "show your peers some respect or fuck off" stance.

and I'd appreciate a cut'n'paste of dan's comment that thinking of minstresly when seeing a kid in blackface is racist, as I can't seem to find it.

-- Dan (Excruciating Back Pain) Perry (djperr...), November 1st, 2005.

xxpost

"pretending that theres no racist context for blackface" = You haven't explained how a kid dressing up as his favorite athlete is racism in any way, still.

xpost wearing a freaking miniskirt was a controversial act at one time. Also there are plenty of white people and jewish people with "nappy hair," labelling them as assholes for choosing a hairstyle is a little odd. Please explain to me how someone can go in costume as Ben Wallace without sporting a wig.

xpost Ethan no one is condoning all people ever doing things for imitative purposes, is the thing here. I mean you just said you would maybe even laugh at a kid dressed up like that and I'd bet you wouldn't assume it was racism rearing its ugly head.

WHERE IS DAVID STERN TO MAKE SURE THE BAD BLACK BALLPLAYERS WEAR SUITS?!????!?

I find the rasta cap wig thing really offensive. Especially since it's usually paired with the "irie, mon. watch me smoke my big spliff" mock patois. I gave a lot of evil looks over that at the Halloween party at was at over the weekend. Kids, adults, whoever need to be confronted and set straight on that shit a lot more often.

xpost And the "jewfro" = an afro wig is totally ridiculous.

were you dressed up as .. evil?

ts: comically overstated misanthropy vs. noblesse oblige

No, I was Sarah Dash from Labelle. I'm naturally evil.

well I mean that's true.

cf. the miasppropriation of Joel Chandler Harris, etc.

YOU GET WHAT YOU GIVE

AHHHHHHHH

also we just split the bill and didn't argue.

And no, the "jewfro" thing isn't "totally ridiculous" because ethan just said nonblacks with fros are "assholes"! I mean I think jess and I have a right to point out two prominent froed out Jews who probably weren't trying to ironically co-opt black culture if y'all have the right to call them "assholes."

So, again, ethan, are you saying that people just shouldn't go as Ben Wallace to Halloween (without the blackface)? This is patently offensive no matter what? I mean I agree people shouldn't go to Halloween as Ben Wallace cos quite frankly, as I keep saying, that's a pretty crap costume. But I'm asking, should the kid just not have gone as Ben Wallace (again, assuming no blackface), or is there some alternative, Ben Wallace with shaved head, that you are thinking of?

Love and Theft: Blackface Minstrelsy and the American Working Class is a really wonderful book.

I am 8. There is some stupid school lipsync contest. My then best-friend and I want to do "Old Man River." His parents tell him it would be racially offensive to do so! I am 12. A good friend who is an actor is cast as MLK in this stupid school play/pagent (yeah, the jr high is nearly all white and latino, so virtually no black kids to be found anyway) and he's told that he can't do his spot-on MLK voice imitation because to talk too much like MLK, being white and all, becuz that would be "racially offensive." So he has to end up giving the speech in this stupid nasal dorky voice.

These things both pissed me off to no end.

In unrelated news, I went as Arnold Schwarzenegger (omg! fake-austrian accent! offensive!) to a halloween party on saturday and threatened to kick out all the hispanic folx. I think this was taken in good fun.

That bit you got right, certainly.

I wouldn't let my child wear blackface, or anything like that. I don't understand why anyone would let their kid go out like that. Maybe in some world of complete equality of oppurtunity, equal rights, equal status, it would be ok, but we very much don't live in that world.

I can remember the black & white minstrel show being on bbc1 every week, sat night iirc. It was very popular, though we didn't used to watch it.

When we were kids in junior school (this would have been in the early 1970s, I think 1972.) one year the school nativity play was done in blackface, ie as if the play was done by the black & white minstrels. This was the teachers idea. I remember my parents and others not being very keen on the idea. Nevertheless it went ahead.

If I think about it now, I feel kind of dizzy, what the fuck, you know? Why the fuck did they do that? It would be nice to think that people in 2005 had more sense than people in 1972, anyway. Obviously some people don't.

well i think a white kid in a ben wallace jersey with an afro wig should be welcomed, and i can think of plenty examples where that type of stuff is interesting and funny and ok (one of the funny things about this whole argument was that i actually stuck up for ted danson's whoopi-written celebrity roast, or the concept at least - not actually funny but i dont think it crossed any lines that good comedy shouldnt, different of course if its johnny carson or colin quinn in blackface)

ok. That's all I'm saying though seriously Ted Danson sucks.

Also if you're allowed to play Ann Coulter I am too, dude. Don't get too crazy on the idea that you gotta explain power distribution problems! :P

When I was a kid (7-8), my favorite movie was "The Wiz." My school friend Kianga and I, along with a few other kids, put on an playacting production of the show in school at one point. I played the wis, and tried my best to dress up like Richard Pryor, including an afro wig and blackface. My motivations were totally positive--I loved the movie and was trying to emulate something I loved. Kianga played Dorothy--she was black, and didn't use blackface. Neither one of us had any idea what the context of blackface was.

The more interesting questions to me revolve around whether *the parents* recognized the faux pas here, and what that means. I wouldn't let my kid do it either, but the problem comes when I try to explain to him or her why doing it is wrong--in a better world, where the historical context of blackface was less clearly terribly, it seems that my child could take exactly the *wrong* message away from being forbidden to dress up as Ben Wallace of whoever, and that message could perpetuate for yet another generation the fallacy that there is something a priori wrong/different/lesser/frightening/whatever about people of different races.

I mean obviously, we're not in that world, but what's the right solution here?

xpost thank you ally thank you stelfox!!

You know as well as everyone else that he meant wigs and has even since backed off that, so what are you even getting at?

Why's Ben Wallace with a wig and no blackface such a crap costume? I mean, it's Halloween. No one is especially authentic. I had foam abs on my old Batman costume, but it was recognizable enough that I was Batman though the whole thing was made of spandex and foam. A white kid with a Ben Wallace type afro wig, the Ben Wallace jersey, and saying "I'm Ben Wallace" is really authentic/recognizable enough.

Yeah, that's why I keep asking how old these kids were cos that can make a big difference in this argument, quite frankly as to whether their parents condoned it, just how innocent it might or might not have been, etc.

xpost J I think that's what Dan was getting at, about how it's just as likely a kid might take away the wrong message as the right one, dependent on WHY he wanted to dress that way, how old he was, how it was explained exactly, etc etc.

xxpost ethan like I said part of the problem seriously was your (well admittedly somewhat overblown argument tho really that's how we roll) argument getting conflated with someone else's argument as well that it's not even ok for white kids to wanna wear negro league stuff and feeling guilty for having red and black and green beads. The lines were purty blurry for a while in my head who was saying what actually, but that is cos I need more coffee.

I was Batman for like 3 years in a row in high school.

Um, it's not (other than the fact that I don't like the Pistons!), that was my point! That without the blackface is ok! If you reread the original post, it was stated that this wouldn't be ok.

You mean that picture alone? Yeah, it is kinda funny.

All of these blog entries have taught me that apparently, blackface is still a common practice. I mean, "Shirley Q. Liquor". Good grief.

And yes Ben Wallace is a RUBBISH Halloween costume because he is just a normal human.

fuck that, things aren't ever that rigid! There are many explicable and inoffensive contexts for use of a word like "nigger" (swap in 'spic' or 'faggot' or 'bitch' or what-have-you…) be they scholastic, illustrative, recaimed, or as emblematic of a particular attitude or speech pattern. Provided they're used with an awareness of their history and context, and among people who understand their use as other than blankly derisive or for labelling purposes, I hardly see any reason why we should continue to avoid them at all costs. It's privileging in this way that continues to keep them powerful and hurtful.

Such a stupid blanket statement.

if i were a parent perhaps i will, as well as teaching them not to offend people with blackface etc., also to teach them not to take offence themselves of these things that are, fairly outdated ideas/connotations.

i think this would make the world a better place.

surely that's a bonus.

-- jdubz (dr_...), November 1st, 2005.

yes, we know stelfox can do much better

plz note also said creation and consumption occurs against a backdrop of of nasty homophobia as well

http://www.screenselect.co.uk/images/products/7/1327-large.jpg

I'll get my coat.

you can kinda see how some fucked up kid might draw the conclusion that hitler would make a good costume

better ban GTA while you're at it

1) algierz baller caricature stuff

i got given a heap of this stuff and i do admit, i only ever bust it out when the rest of my clothes smell, because i feel a complete twat in it!

u musn't have been here long

This is precisely what I mean: bad analogies.

xpost I do understand what "choke on cock" means though.

It depends how you're defining "cross-dressing". This is a HUGE subject, and needs its own thread, if it doesn't already have one.

I know I'm probably stating the obvious, but dressing in women's clothing because it fulfills some inner need or because it feels right are very different than dressing up in women's clothes to set out to mock women. For the most part, I'd say that people of either sex dressing in a manner that subverts traditional gender-roles serves to challenge patriachy, rather than to reaffirm it.

That said, I think you might have trouble proving that transgendered individuals actually feel oppressed by gender signifiers they have chosen.

It was in the UK -- I don't remember how their crazy grading system worked.

transverstism!=drag

And transgender issues are another thing altogether, and don't really belong in the same conversation.

your assumption would be wrong, for i know several people who quite enjoy choking on cock

...and I'll reflect on this the next time I suck on a beernut.

The situation you give is "drag", if I'm understanding your question correctly. The distinction is that the one is for "show" and the other is for more personal need.

I still don't really see that there's anything intrinsically offensive in a man wearing a dress. If it IS used to mock, that's another scenario entirely.

http://www.hrwiki.org/images/d/d9/StrongMad_BenWallace.PNG

-- Alfred Soto (sotoal...) (webmail), Today 10:18 AM. (Alfred Soto) (later) (link)

Explain to me how this is a bad analogy.

xpost There is at least one religion where it's sacrilegious to write the name of God fully. It might not be offensive to you, but it is to them.

Just unfunny like just about everything else on that show.

To be honest I think my annoyance has a lot to do with method. If someone's supposed to be a specific black person, and they've done a decent/realistic job with the makeup, that's not so bothersome. When people do their faces in all-around jet black apart from the lips, they look like minstrels and piss me off. When people just smear shoe polish around their faces like that's really, really hilarious, that pisses me off even more.

NB I sometimes think people who get offended by Apu are dipping into the backward-racist category: Apu doesn't really have any negative stereotypes associated with him! I mean, cooking him up for the purpose of running the convenience store is a little obvious, but beyond that they've made him pretty much the most dignified character on the show -- cf when his religion gets classified as "other" and he says "I am Hindu, there are nearly a billion of us."

the kid is obviously reacting to and absorbing the media he is growing up around. there are probably basketball player posters all over his room. maybe he is trying to inhabit that space, to bridge the gap between his white suburban existence and his black sports heroes.

This is completely, totally and absolutely OTM.

That's what the kids looked like last night. Good-natured Ben Wallace appreciation by kids who don't know any better, yes, but also troubling negligence/ignorance on the part of the parents.

that and his parents dropped $100 on a ben wallace jersey.

It's too easy to picture an SNL writers' meeting where all the funny scripts have been read and everyone's in a good mood, and then Hammond stands up to say, "Hey, what if Donald Trump made a guest appearance on a soap opera?", chilling down the entire room.

You know Andy, you could have avoided all of the fighting and nonsense on this thread by SAYING THAT at the beginning!

This whole debate could have been avoided if only the kid had carved a Ben Wallace pumpkin instead of wearing the costume.

dressing as hitler = bad
dressing in a KKK hood = bad
dressing in minstrel blackface = bad

White kid dressing in dark makeup as a specific popular black basketball player on Halloween = who gives a shit? It's Halloween, and it's not a stereotype! I don't see any connection between a halloween tradition of dressing up, and the stereotyped minstrel culture that had it's heyday in what, the 40's, and hasn't been popular or acceptable for generations.

I want to hear what you think about this one. I dressed as a mexican bandito for halloween. I did that because I just happened to have an inflatable cactus and an authentic vintage mexican sombrero laying around (that was in my grandma's basement.) I wore a rug for a poncho, a gun and a fake mustache too. I wasn't able to acquire a bullet bandolier. So I bought 10 cans of refried beans, cut off the labels and turned them into a bandolier.

Umm, he did make a guest appearance on a soap opera. Just, you know, sayin'...

Everything is offensive to somebody. Full stop.

In fact, my incomplete sentence above just offended the National Grammar Society... Oh! The horror!

I mean Jesus Fucking Christ, what is this world coming to. Oh, wait... I mean golly gosh, no, wait, I mean...

What happens next year if I go out trick-or-treating as Watermelon Hitler? I'll tell you what would happen: I'd be trapped in my Watermelon Bunker while my neighbors try to kick my ass.

"A passion of Christs"

One can yell "Chaplin! Chaplin!" when the mob sets upon you.

I mean, it's weird. I'm half Goan. 99% of the time I *hate* seeing white people doing comedy Indian accents. I'm not offended by Apu from the Simpsons - everyone in the Simpsons is a caricature and he's a more positive one than most of the others. Likewise, I'm not offended by Ben Kingsley in Gandhi - another tricky one, he's of Indian descent, he still LOOKS white most of the time, he's still blacked up in the role. They could have got a 'proper' Indian actor to play him. Where do you draw that line?

(Or words to that effect...)

I mean, who the fuck is anyone to dictate what other people can or cannot be offended by? It's a matter of common courtesy not to cross that line unless you have a very good reason (ie a serious political point to make). And "it's just a bit of fun" is not one of them.

http://is1.okcupid.com/users/570/250/5712517942420203273/p1097418461.jpg

It's a matter of common courtesy not to cross that line

Who defines what/where that 'line' is?

Ron Mael! Ron Mael!

Have you tried buying a modestly proportioned fake afro lately?

but this is v different from the 'blackface' scenario. these kids weren't actually in blackface, as per tracer, but the thread has kind of worked on that assumption. anyway, 'blackface' has a cultural resonance that 'randomly dressing up as a Bangladeshi' doesn't quite have. it would depend entirely on the context.

as for "the 95% of people you might come across whose views you DO NOT HAVE A FUCKING CLUE ABOUT" well, this is race-unspecific isn't it?

(Ally's post rather crushes mine.)

ANyway the best thing about the Randy Moss/Brandy Chastain thing was that the Mexican dude ran out and was like "THAT IS SO NOT MOSSOME!" and I was like wtf does that even mean? Real Randy Moss also squired an entire bottle of water all over Chastain. Really I'm not sure why people watch anything besides the shows that lead up to/immediately come after football games, because it's like there's no way anything that occurs in them makes sense.

that looks pretty great, written out: afro qua afro.

anyway it's like this one interview i read with kyp from tv on the radio where the interviewer (probably white) was all "how do you get your afro to look so good?" and kyp responded with something like "it's not an afro, it's a natural. next question."

Everybody knows that the dice are loaded
Everybody knows that the good guys lost
I like it,
I love it,
I can't get enough of it...

STOP THE MADNESS.

http://www.gothamist.com/archives/2004/08/26/kyp_malone_guitarist_tv_on_the_radio.php

Tell us about the afro.
I don?t have an afro. I wear my hair in a style called a natural. It?s what happens if you're black and you grow your hair long and don?t process it or braid it , I recommend it to anyone who has the genetic ability to rock it. It is a good barometer of who I need to take seriously in regards to their reaction towards it. It?s just fucking hair.

'I used to have to wash it every week,' she said. 'It was just too much.'

Second.... from the chicago tribune:

U. of C. gets rap for theme of party
White students' `thuggin' bash offends some blacks on campus and school is set to show why

By Jodi S. Cohen
Tribune higher education reporter
Published November 2, 2005

By all accounts, it was a boring party in a University of Chicago dorm, attended by fewer than 20 students who sat around listening to rap music and thinking they dressed the part.

But the gathering, called a "straight thuggin'" party, has sparked a campuswide debate about race relations on the Hyde Park campus, where about 4 percent of the undergraduate students are black.

The students at the party last month, none of whom were black, said their clothing--sideways baseball caps, gold chains and pants so low that their underwear showed--was not intended to mimic a particular race. One student wore handcuffs as he lifted a bottle wrapped in a brown paper bag. They listened to rap artists 50 Cent, Nelly and the Notorious B.I.G.

Yet fallout from the party has led U. of C. president Don Randel and other top administrators to call for an open meeting next week to discuss the campus atmosphere for minority students and staff and to ask faculty members to create programs about issues raised by the party. The president of the Hyde Park-Kenwood Community Conference plans to discuss the party's potential ramifications and the university's response at a meeting Thursday.

The fear, university officials and community members say, is that the party has reinforced the feelings of isolation that some African-American students said they already feel on a campus with relatively few black students. It also could undermine the progress that Randel has made in reaching out to largely poor and minority South Side communities that surround the university.

"The issues at stake ... are larger than this one distressing episode and raise questions about the campus climate for minority students, faculty and staff," Randel and other administrators wrote in a letter e-mailed to students last week.

`Ghetto' reference disputed

The party's theme, according to the letter, was offensive and "parodied racial stereotypes based on assumptions about economically disadvantaged members of society."

The Oct. 14 party, also referred to as a "ghetto" party, was held in a four-student suite in May House, a section of the Max Palevsky dorm. It began at about 10:30 p.m. and lasted an hour. Students talked and listened to music. Some drank beer, a violation of university policy.

The party--but not its theme--was registered with the resident heads of May House. If they had known about the theme, the party would not have been authorized, said Stephen Klass, a university vice president and dean of students.

The "straight thuggin'" gathering was the second in a series of theme parties at May House. The first party celebrated the '80s. The third, which never was held, would have focused on the '90s, said freshman Natasha Hodnett, one of the students who attended the party.

Katie Brookoff, one of the hosts, said the term "ghetto" wasn't used to describe the gathering.

But days before the party, as some freshmen were dressed in costume to take pictures to publicize the event, they stopped sophomore Eve Ewing, the only black student in May House.

"They said, `We are taking pictures for our ghetto party,'" Ewing said. "At that point, they were using the word ghetto. I don't know at what point the moniker changed. When they initially presented it, they did use that term."

After hearing about the party, about a half-dozen black students decided to check it out. They arrived too late, but ran into freshman Galen Simmons on their way to the suite. He said he told them that they "would have been the most thuggin' people there," and said he meant it as a compliment.

"It was meant to say that they had appropriate clothes for the theme of the party," said Simmons, of New York City. He said that "most of us were ignorant about how our comments or actions might be taken," and suggested that the university do a better job of teaching new students about racial tensions on campus and in the community.

Several black students said they were offended by the party and by pictures that temporarily were posted on a Web site.

`No bad intentions'

"I was just totally flabbergasted," said sophomore Kristiana Colon of Chicago, who graduated from Whitney Young High School in Chicago. "If that is what they think hip-hop looks like or black people look like, that is a serious problem."

Colon, one of the students who showed up late to the party, also found it offensive that a group of mostly whites would romanticize a "thug" culture.
Hodnett said "there were no bad intentions at all" and the party was intended to imitate pop culture, not objectify a group of people.

"In our opinions, be they ignorant or not, everyone thought that it was a cross-culture thing and it was more mocking MTV culture and dressing up in baggy clothes and listening to rap or hip-hop music," said Hodnett, of Palatine. "We are being used as guinea pigs and being used to make a statement about the racial dynamics on campus."

Klass, the dean of students, would not say whether any students faced disciplinary action, but Brookoff said they hadn't. He said the party has sparked a needed discussion, to be held Tuesday at Hutchinson Commons, about how to improve the campus climate for minorities.

There are relatively few black students at U. of C. compared to the nearby neighborhoods. Of the 4,667 students enrolled in the undergraduate college this fall, 4 percent, or 192 students, are African-American.

"The issues here are broader than the party.... The real issue here is what are the conditions that minority students and faculty face on a regular basis," Klass said. "This is a bit of an ah-ha moment. They are saying this is an example of the kinds of things that students of color have to face not just on campus but everywhere."

Community ties questioned

Faculty and residents of Hyde Park also said they wondered whether the party would affect campus-community relations. Randel has led efforts in recent years to improve relations with the South Side community, including opening a second charter school this fall and three more schools in coming years.

"The young people, if they are venturing out of campus, it is not to any of the communities that they were making fun of. They are not seeing any of the people who they think would be thugs," said Rolisa Tutwyler, who works at the university and lives in Hyde Park.

Amanda Lewis, a professor of sociology and African-American studies at the University of Illinois at Chicago, said parties like the one at U. of C. occur when people use cultural symbols and slang terms like "ghetto" and "thuggin'" without understanding the historical and societal significance.

"Universities have more work to do to make sure students have a realistic understanding of the world we live in," Lewis said.

Brookoff, who grew up in Memphis and had been a student at U. of C. for less than a month, said she has received a crash course on race relations.

"I know most of us are learning more about respect and being sensitive to other people," she said. "We want everyone to feel welcome around here."

it's seriously that low? that's fucking pathetic, esp. given its location.

this thread is all about hypothetical racism rather than actual racism.

NOT UNDERWEAR! DO THEY HAVE NO SHAME? Will no one think of the whale-tails?

what is this, the onion?

LOST AT BIRTH, RAISED BY THE DISCOMBOBULATED LEFT...

Students talked and listened to music. Some drank beer, a violation of university policy. in particular. but, also the concept of dressing up as a rape victim for halloween. not quite sure how that would be done. or, dressing up as a basketball player for...halloween! with ilx the way it is, sometimes i wonder if these threads are elaborate hoaxes

Things like that are a vicious cycle. Bright-eyed and bushy-tailed black prefrosh asks a current UC student what it's like. They say, "I like my classes, but there's all sorts of crap I have to deal with in other areas. If I had to choose again, I might go somewhere else." Prefrosh chooses somewhere else. Acceptance numbers fall. Etc.

xpost yeah, totally, although do you really think it's cause of lack of interest?

u of c ain't that liberal, but yeah, it is on the SOUTH SIDE.

"white boy" is a racial slur now?

xpost - not UIC, allyzay, U of C. i doubt UIC has such pitiful numbers.

yeah, it's certainly low compared to, say, Columbia, whose endowment isn't that much bigger than UoC's, but most or all of the Ivies have higher yields (and a greater range of undergrad programs), I believe

so?

OR, it's stupid and reductive, by and large.

xpost well, Ethan is a boy who is white and I think Dan's point was that it was "cute" he was telling a black guy how black people feel about things.

Speaking of churches, I had a very unsettling time at a church Halloween
carnival recently. My children and I attended the carnival at Pulaski
Heights Methodist Church last Sunday at the invitation of a friend/member.
Walking around and laughing with all of the adults was a young gentleman
dressed completely in blackface, including full afro, carrying a wine
glass. He may have been portraying some funny character from a movie -- I
dunno, not as hip as I used to be.

Its ironic, because the same day the D*G referenced a judge who had been
suspended for 6 months for doing that exact same thing. Am I missing
something? I'm not very PC, but it still seems rather offensive and taboo,
not b/c its offensive in and of itself, but simply b/c of the cultural
history including the old Step n' Fetchit bs. Kind of like flying an
airplane into a building isn't offensive per se, but given the context
after 9/11, it is now.

Did his parents not say anything to him? What about the older adults at the
church? They didn't have many AA's in attendance, so maybe the church
members thought it was no big deal.

Oh, and quit sniveling .......... You'll get over it soon, white boy.

but, again, you have no proof, unless U of C actually releases stats on minority recruitment, which i doubt they do. i'm going to assume it's a failure, perhaps it's just my pessimism, but i'm not sure what drives your defense of an institution that has never particularly seemed to try too hard, afaik, to recruit from its own community.

hstencil, you can recruit all you want, but if it's not the right situation, kids are not going to go. It's pretty much as simple as that.

sure. but there's a lot more that can be done than just half-hearted efforts at recruitment (if that's the problem - none of us knows the actual reasons the percentage is so low). i am not so sure, as gabbneb is, that the reason the percentage is so low is because qualified black students go elsewhere, esp. if it's local students we're talking about.

xpost - bard is in the middle of nowhere, not the "capitol of black america" gabbneb.

OTM. (Sorry for calling you a dumb ass, Ethan.)

I was picking schools that, like UoC, have unfortunately low yield rates due to their particular image. Oberlin is in the middle of nowhere, too, and is 7% black.

even just a short walk away from louis farrakhan's house

right across the street from Richard Epstein

Probably because the majority of the posters are male? I could be wrong though.

oberlin was founded by abolitionists, and is only 45 minutes from cleveland.

Also black people don't want to live around Hyde Park, either.

i always thought it was a nice neighborhood! ok, some not nice parts near it, but in general it seems pretty good.

oberlin was founded by abolitionists, and is only 45 minutes from cleveland.

you get 7% at Swarthmore too. and how long does it take to get to NYC from Bard?

I left immediately -- not only because it was offensive, but also EMBARRASSING that the kids did not realize how offensive it was. Also, because there were no blunts.

http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/27.html

xpost

And Gabbnebb, of course personality's an issue. There's nothing at all about the U of C that tries to entice students in normal ways. It's rigorous and it's weird, and that's obvious. It's hard to leave the neighborhood, and the undergrads act like grad students, and they "value neurosis." They have t-shirts that say "where fun comes to die." It self-selects for a particular kind of person, you know, and that needn't make a huge difference with white people or Asians -- the pool of qualified applicants is large enough that you can select and select your way as much as you want. But when you're fighting over the not-yet-proportionate pool of qualified black students, you don't have room to select that fiercely. To be honest I'm surprised they're even close to competitive with some of the other schools listed here.

City Percentage of Total Population
Gary, IN 85.3%
Detroit, MI 82.8%
Birmingham, AL 74.0%
Jackson, MS 71.1%
New Orleans, LA 67.9%
Baltimore, MD 65.2%
Atlanta, GA 62.1%
Memphis, TN 61.9%
Washington, D.C. 61.3%
Richmond, VA 58.1%

does Gary count as Chicago? among the top 10 absolute largest cities, Chicago is 3rd after Detroit and Philly

(2000 numbers)

My understanding is that the Chicago area contains the largest settlement of african-americans north of the mason-dixon. Thats not percentage but pure numbers. Not that I'm taking sides in the SEARCH FOR THE CAPITAL OF BLACK AMERICA

“We all assume that more progress has been made than has really been made,” says Beverly Tatum, president of Spelman College. A psychologist and the author of Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria and Other Conversations About Race, Tatum says: “While colleges and universities are more diverse today than they were 20 or 30 years ago, that isn’t true for public schools, many of which are more segregated. So you have a lot of young people growing up in racially segregated schools and their only exposure to other groups comes from stereotypes in the media.”

Popular culture gives these students — many of whom are clueless about those who are different from themselves — a false sense of race relations, says Charles A. Gallagher, an associate professor of sociology at Georgia State University who studies white attitudes about race.

“People who are 18 to 20 have been raised in a cultural environment with ‘Cosby Show’ re-runs, hip hop, identifying with black characters, they have gone through the multicultural training — for whatever it’s worth — in school,” he says. “They have the perception that they are not only not racist, but they share a kind of social space with non-whites through the media, so they think race doesn’t matter anymore, which just isn’t the case.”

“These pranks reflect the students’ idea that we are in a post-race society and we can make fun of everyone, and make fun of everything,” Gallagher says. “So they don’t see the difference between a ‘ghetto’ party and a toga party.”

Not only are students unaware of the feelings of minority students, many have so little sense of history that they don’t know instinctively that images like lynching aren’t going to be looked at casually by black people. And for all the talk about how colleges these days focus on multiculturalism, experts points out that most white students never study minority history in a sophisticated way or have any sustained focus on race relations.

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/10/27/race

well, school diversity statistics often include International stats, but I would imagine that most schools want to count Caribbean students, say, in both categories

As a white man, I feel threatened by lots of things: 1) people that watch TV; 2) terrorists; and gangs, to name a few. However, every time I claim that I feel “threatened” by people they tell me that because I am “white” I can take care of myself. (In fact, a black administrator once mocked me because of my fear of TV-watchers!)

(...)

There is an irony that Kuh’s comments are included in an article addressing how stereotypes continue to cause students pain, but yet he stereotypes fraternity members and their actions.

(...)

I don’t think that there is too much “institutional racism.” Instead, there may be clashes of cultures. In my culture it is considered dishonorable to blame others for one’s problems or watch TV and talk about basketball. In other cultures, watching sports, blaming people, or talking about basketball is acceptable. Is it wrong to notice that our cultures differ in so many profound ways ?

PS: I like rap music.

and West of the Hudson

And that's a pretty great book...not that I needed to read it. I got placed into the all-black dorm frosh year (not by choice) and it was always the source of all sorts of uproar from the rest of the student body. One (white) kid actually argued at a forum that he came to the school for diversity and it wasn't fair for kids to be in a dorm where he couldn't see them. As if it was in Siberia and not like across campus. And as if the only reason we came to college was the bring some color into his life.

xpost Seriously. "I need to know how they wrap up their hair at night! Dammit...you're taking away my cross-cultural experience"

Is this actually true? I got my stat from Upski Wimsatt so it could be wrong, but I'm interested.

In a total offhand observational stereotyping gesture, I'd say yes: poor minority students do indeed tend to look toward pre-professional tracks more so than liberal arts. It's my experience that poor people of any sort are likely to make that decision, for obvious and healthy reasons: they're going to college to make something of themselves, and are pretty up-front about moderate wealth and social status being involved.

this is actually the only basis on which the supreme court has found affirmative action in higher education to be valid; thankyew rehnquist/scalia

very possibly right, but what if they had different ideas about what would enrich your experience?

in absolute 2000 numbers, NYC has twice the black population of Chicago. maybe there's something different if you start looking at different metro definitions, but i doubt it.

The main rebuttal of "why are all the black kids sitting together" is "well, why are all the white kids sitting together?" Just because there are less of us doesn't mean we're not just sitting with our friends like everyone else. Just because we all look the same (though we really don't) doesn't mean we are. My all-black table actually had a token, my white friend Aaron from HS, and it used to baffle the shit out of everyone. For whatever reason.

Heavens, no.

Air America (used to?) air a commercial insinuating that not allowing a white kid into a black frat would be wrong because any form of discrimination is bad, yet another case of blacks huddling into separatist comfort zones.

Because they always break the canes during step routines?

Obv.

YOU MIGHT'VE MISSED THIS ON ESPN.COM

http://search.espn.go.com/keyword/search?searchString=mike%20tyson&page=multimedia&multimediaCount=15

because white people don't need to be liked by Asians

RACISM AT HALLOWEEN!

My friend (of indian descent) went as a grand-wizard. He got my other friend's mum to make the white hood for him.

np: vioxx ~ waterfalls of ecstacy (2 bad mice remix)

Am I right, folks?

It's really, really dangerous to start thinking "racism" is solely limited to people who actively hate certain other races and take active steps to be mean to them; this describes like a really tiny portion of the history of racism, which is almost always more about having particular expectations of people or ideas about them and their status based on race. Whether those ideas are "conscious" or "ignorant" is a pretty vague spectrum based on how much people have sat down and thought about the nuances of their belief systems -- i.e., something really, really hard to judge without mind-meld technology.

i have never had a racial slur directed to me, though i'm sure that in various confrontations some people may have regarded my actions as having to do with being white. i have been with friends who have been racially slurred in my presence and it is indeed an incredibly awkward, hurtful and, yes, sometimes somewhat funny situation. the right idiot making the right bizarre racist comment can sound so absurd that you have to laugh at it. is that okay?

i don't think that sensitivity is always necessary to promote the alleviation of racism. i'm not asking for permission to tell racist jokes, i'm saying that it seems like there's a way to talk intelligently and with humor about race that shouldn't offend people.

as long as they speak english on the job *groans*

He always knew how to drop science.

TS: ethan in "righteous outer of racists" mode vs. ethan in "THAT'S NOT FUNNY" mode

in other words, it's often a bad term precisely because it's connected to slavery and segregationist, and this let's everyone off the hook.

No, my sense is that people are hyper-aware of the possibility of getting accused of racism, and of its consequences, and so they'd like to restrict the word to some clear-cut realm of pure hate, in order to be clear they can never accidentally stumble over into it. This is why so many white people run around complaining that black people "overuse" accusations of racism. And interestingly enough they might sometimes be right, but what's bizarre about this is how it's white people who enforce that supposed "hyper-sensitivity" -- if black people are too quick to shout racism, you'd think you'd more often see frank racial discussions in which people actually stood up and said they didn't think the accusation was unwarranted. I mean, this is a side-issue, but it's odd to me that people will claim blacks "over-accuse" of racism, but not, like, grow some figurative balls about it: I'm seriously still amazed that when that guy in D.C. used the word "niggardly" and everyone got angry, his supervisors and colleagues actually hemmed and hawed and tried to be sensitive and placate -- instead of just saying "sorry, it's a word, it means something else, look it up."

So I suppose my question is this: how is it that like 80% of this country's population can live in weird irrational fear of being called racist by some little subset of 10% of the remainder? How can people claim that the term is overused and "played" as a "card" and devalued -- and yet fear it so much that they wind up on eggshells over it? In other words: what real power does an accusation of racism have over a white person -- apart from the power other white people will give it, by abandoning the accused? Do you see where I'm headed with this?

Up your ass?

because i dont think it's pragmatically expedient to do so! "racism" has all sorts of connotations and contexts that people use to distance themselves from it.

this is exactly my argument:

No, my sense is that people are hyper-aware of the possibility of getting accused of racism, and of its consequences, and so they'd like to restrict the word to some clear-cut realm of pure hate, in order to be clear they can never accidentally stumble over into it.

except im arguing that the "clear-cut" meaning of the term has already been (largely) sorted out. if you avoid shouting racism at someone they are more willing to look at those beliefs or actions which are in fact probably racist but dont fall under the "pure hate" portion of that definition.

me at halloween

im arguing that the "clear-cut" meaning of the term has already been (largely) sorted out

Sorry, Ryan, but I'm arguing that this is total bullshit. For instance: segregation was racist, yes? But just think how ridiculous and ahistorical is it to imagine that segregation was perpetuated strictly by "clear-cut" hood-wearing card-carrying racists! No, segregation in practice was held in place by any number of everyday, normal people: store owners and lunch-counter operators and employers and bus drivers. In the South, chances are the bulk of these folks liked black people -- they employed them, were friends with them, brought them into their homes. They didn't have a "problem" with them. But when it came down to it, they'd still tell these people to use the back entrance or give up their seats, and when it came down to it, they wouldn't give them jobs beyond sweeping up and ironing the clothes. That is what racism is -- the murderers and cross-burners are just an extreme expression of it. The word "racist" shouldn't refer strictly to cross-burners any more than the words "liberal" or "conservative" should refer strictly to the extreme left and right wings.

Just for instance, look at anti-Semitism in late-30s Germany. If we were to say a German of that era was an anti-Semite, we wouldn't exactly be accusing him of masterminding the death camps, or even standing outside cheering -- all we'd be saying is that this person had swallowed some percentage of the rote, everyday, caricatured anti-Semitism that was all over the time and place. And if that were true, how in the world would "but I disapproved when I found out about Auschwitz" matter? What bearing would that possibly have on the workaday stereotypes or conspiracy theories or other bullshit this person might have casually believed about Jews?

No: Nazis and Klansmen and virulent racists are red herrings in this conversation; they're just the organized extremes, the far-out bizarro expression of attitudes (of everyday racism, or anti-Semitism, or whatever else) that are all around in everything else. Surely this makes sense?

to say that an accusation of racism only has power over a white person because other white people give it power is ridiculous

My question: how so? Being called a racist doesn't do anything more to a person than being called an asshole does -- it's an insult that hurts your feelings, but it doesn't hold any particular power over you except insofar as you and other people believe it. I say white people give it power for a reason: a white principal isn't going to fire or suspend a teacher because someone called the teacher an asshole, but he's a lot more likely to get scared and take action if the accusation is racism. (To be completely fair, a lot of that also has to do with there being whole systems of black organizations that can follow up on an accusation like that -- with bad publicity or boycotts or whatever -- but the same is true of any number of interest groups that people don't feel quite as beholden to!)

But just think how ridiculous and ahistorical is it to imagine that segregation was perpetuated strictly by "clear-cut" hood-wearing card-carrying racists!

it IS ridiculous but that's probably what most people believe! it certainly wasn't people like THEM who did it, it was crazy racists. just like the nazis were inhuman monsters not at all like you and me, etc.

(i mean we could change out "racist" for "facist" and have this same discussion)

whether the words are appropriate or not i just dont feel they are useful. my position is purely about which rhetoric is most practical.

And at some point you have to start dealing with that the same way you deal with people calling you an asshole -- you think hard about whether you're actually wrong, and if you don't think you are, then you stand by whatever you did and shrug it off.

i mean, people just dont do this! ever! i wish for the sake of clarity and semantics we could talk about this or that being racist but people just freak out when that word comes up. it just shuts down discussions because it's a blanket, objective-seeming, all encompassing term that obliderates any careful distinctions you want to make. (trick-or-treaters and klansmen in the same category!) this is often politically useful, i admit, and often it's not. it comes down to whether you think it's useful at this or that moment to observe difference or cover it over with a generalized term.

Anyway yeah: I've been called a racist. And yeah, I've had people claim that things I've said or believed were racist, or anti-Semitic, or misogynist, or whatever else. There have been times when the person's had a point, and I've had to go back and rethink whatever I said or did. And there have been times when the accusation's just bullshit ridiculous, in which case -- no matter how much it sucks to know people believe stuff about you that Just Isn't True -- well, what are you gonna do? You explain yourself as well as you can, and from there on it's just a difference of opinion and interpretation.

(The last time I was accused of racism was when this dude who looked like Fabolous was blocking a stairway, and after passing by I made some joke like "what's up with Fabolous back there getting up in everyone's way," and the girl I was with -- who was white, and probably still thinks I'm Indian -- kinda started arguing that there was something racist about that comment. The conversation that followed sucked ass, yes, especially since I'm not used to winding up on the "lighten up, it was a joke" side of an argument. But in the end I know damn well that I made the joke because the dude looked, dressed, and did his hair enough like Fabolous for it to be funny, and I remain convinced that if the girl with me had known more about Fabolous she would have found it funny, too.)

*ducks*

-- _ (...), November 1st, 2005.

I think a rousing chorus of "DUMBASS" would have sufficed.

i'm not sure if that NG cover is really any different to dressing up as Ben Wallace, synthetic skin tone and all, in terms of the outcome. it's useful here for perspective.

re 'Arabing up' - for ages on this thread i wanted to mention Eminem as Bin Laden in the 'Without Me' video, and even Chris Morris as 'Fur Q' in Brass Eye and the differences there, how they escape potential outrage and why, but I couldn't get round to formulating the point fully and it seems kinda moot ultimately.