ADVERTISEMENT

Megyn Kelly controversy

ThunderCat98

Platinum Buffalo
Jun 23, 2007
13,765
8,477
113
This post is really less about Kelly and more about the underlying issue. There is no question that "blackface" was, and is, a disgusting practice. But is there a difference between a white person darkening their skin to be Tina Turner, LeBron James, or some other person of color that they like and admire and actual "blackface"? Blackface was obviously a derogatory caricature, where the other is trying to emulate someone as closely as possible. Is there, or should there be, a difference between the two? Thoughts?
 
This post is really less about Kelly and more about the underlying issue. There is no question that "blackface" was, and is, a disgusting practice. But is there a difference between a white person darkening their skin to be Tina Turner, LeBron James, or some other person of color that they like and admire and actual "blackface"? Blackface was obviously a derogatory caricature, where the other is trying to emulate someone as closely as possible. Is there, or should there be, a difference between the two? Thoughts?

Oh no, it's 100% malicious racism if someone dresses as someone from a different race for comedy or Halloween.

1BEBA34B-46DF-4E0B-BBC4-271E05179861_400x400.jpg


eddie+murphy.jpg


aha_coming_to_america.gif


BwQLFOpIQAAUO8I.jpg
 
It is ok for hollywood to do it

thumb_you-went-full-retard-never-go-full-retard-quickmeme-com-14399881.png

Yep, remember when Never Trumper Jimmy Kimmel racistly portrayed Karl Malone on the Man Show? He has a late night talk show on a major network now. The left is full of hypocrites.

 
Haven't we gone over this before for the self-proclaimed "social liberal"?

There is a long, historical, racist past of whites using blackface to mock blacks, perpetuate stereotypes against them, and dehumanize them for the entertainment and amusement of whites.

This was one of those things you argued about in the past but just didn't have the polish or education to know about. It is no different when Kimmel does it.
 
This post is really less about Kelly and more about the underlying issue. There is no question that "blackface" was, and is, a disgusting practice. But is there a difference between a white person darkening their skin to be Tina Turner, LeBron James, or some other person of color that they like and admire and actual "blackface"? Blackface was obviously a derogatory caricature, where the other is trying to emulate someone as closely as possible. Is there, or should there be, a difference between the two? Thoughts?

A very reasonable question. I think it is out of poor taste. I get it; on the surface, it seems innocent and harmless, right? However, it's important to realize just how recent blackface was being done to perpetuate racism and the dehumanizing of blacks. This was going on during the lifetime of your parents. That's way too recent to allow it and give free passes regardless of the intention.
 
I really hope the sarcasm of that movie didn't go over your head.
It did not. But it still had a white guy face painting his face black. For entertainment.
No different than a kid using it for entertainment in Halloween
 
A very reasonable question. I think it is out of poor taste. I get it; on the surface, it seems innocent and harmless, right? However, it's important to realize just how recent blackface was being done to perpetuate racism and the dehumanizing of blacks. This was going on during the lifetime of your parents. That's way too recent to allow it and give free passes regardless of the intention.

I find it odd that no one batted an eye when people did this 5-10 years ago, but now they lose their minds over it. I get that the outrage is based, at least in part, on a raised awareness in society of the ills suffered by blacks following the Civil War. But have we swung too far the other way?
 
I find it odd that no one batted an eye when people did this 5-10 years ago, but now they lose their minds over it. I get that the outrage is based, at least in part, on a raised awareness in society of the ills suffered by blacks following the Civil War. But have we swung too far the other way?

It was still very much an issue 5-10 years ago. Are people more educated on it now? Perhaps those from insular upbringings. I don't think more people now knowing about the recent history of it is a bad thing.

And your claim that it is "ills suffered by blacks following the Civil War" is bogus. These ills were and have been suffered into current times. Blackface was used in the 50s, 60s, and through the 70s.

Hell, there are many people on this board who were alive when it was illegal for blacks to marry whites in many states. And yes, those laws resulted in prosecution and convictions during the lifetimes of people on this board. You should educate yourself on anti-miscegenation laws if you think the outrage is outdated since it is based on ills suffered following the Civil War.
 
And your claim that it is "ills suffered by blacks following the Civil War" is bogus. These ills were and have been suffered into current times. Blackface was used in the 50s, 60s, and through the 70s.

Didn't mean to imply that. It was poorly worded. I simply meant to reflect the fact that this was around the time that blackface was put into widespread use (although it had apparently been used in some respects since the 1830s), which certainly persisted well into the last century.
 
I guess I am not understanding your possible position. Are you saying that this wasn't that big of an issue in the past, but we have now swung (possibly) too far the other way and are too sensitive to things like blackface?

I don't think all people intend to be racist or racially insensitive when using blackface. I do think, however, that most of them are aware that it is taboo. They either like the attention it provides (even if just some stupid college kid at a Halloween party) or have the "I don't give a fvck/I'm not a racist" attitude and don't care to understand why it is such an issue.

Twenty years ago, it wasn't popular to want certain statues down that celebrated controversial historic Americans. Have we swung too far to the other side now because we don't want traitors of this country who fought for the enslavement of blacks celebrated with statues around cities? This phenomenon caught on just within the last few years. However, even as a middle schooler, I would frequently question things like how some places would actually have a school named after a Confederate general, how schools made children say the Pledge including "under God," and other mind-blowingly dumb things. I've mentioned him before, but a good friend of mine from 1st grade through high school had parents who came to the U.S. from Nepal after the father completed medical school. They weren't Christian. My friend, along with a couple of other Hindus in my elementary classes, would stand up and say the Pledge. I didn't get it. I knew they weren't Christian. Hell, I used to get into arguments with him about the existence of Santa Claus. I knew they didn't believe in a single, monotheistic god. I knew their gods weren't the same as the one the Pledge was written to include. Why would they say it? Why should they be ostracized in that they'd obviously be the odd one out - during an awkward stage for kids - due to a different belief? Why, most of all, would a public school take part in something like this?

I don't think being a little more educated, empathetic, and wise about these things is a bad thing, especially when it's not done to mainly pretend to be outraged. I don't celebrate Christmas for the religious aspects of it, but rather, I celebrate it for the cultural, family, and giving aspects of it. I have no problem with people saying "Merry Christmas." However, I error on the side of caution, and I don't think that's a bad thing. I use "Happy Holidays" not as a way to piss off Christians, but rather, to include those who may not be Christians in a season of celebrating, giving, and acceptance. Going forward, I look for things like the Pledge's inclusion of "under God" and other government sponsored things (money, etc.) to eventually lose that bullshit.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT