It really wouldn't, and would have been a really lazy crap fancy dress effort
I am over using the word context in my replies, but it's the heart of the issue here. He was joking Diane Abbott the person, not the negro race
Diane Abbott: "Fire puts out water"
- Thread starter Diddums
- Start date
It really wouldn't, and would have been a really lazy crap fancy dress effort
I am over using the word context in my replies, but it's the heart of the issue here. He was joking Diane Abbott the person, not the negro race
I'm worried I'm wrong now as I'm agreeing with Roar.....
Maybe I do need to catch up on some more sleep....
The dressing up didn't have to include blackface for the joke to be funny. The wig, glasses, necklace and a red coat with a Labour badge on it would have been a big enough clue to who he was parodying.
So why is it ok to take those aspects of her image, but not a quite obvious one....that she is black! When it's obvious this isn't being done as a racial slur against the black community.
Remember, he was at a darts tournament....they probably aren't the brightest bunch in the box and need every clue available
(I like darts btw before anyone takes that too seriously )
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,697
- Location
- Shropshire
I wonder who will be the first to use that photo on a Christmas card to her....
Because of the historical context of blackface.
Remember, he was at a darts tournament....they probably aren't the brightest bunch in the box and need every clue available
You're right. I think we could be over-analysing someone being silly at a darts match and a betting company doing something almost as daft.
This.
The context/intent doesn't escape the fact that blacking up is pretty crass, just like squinting your eyes to impersonate someone from Asia or dressing up in Nazi uniform.
You might not mean it to be offensive but you'd have to be pretty stupid not to appreciate that it could be interpreted as such.
You're right. I think we could be over-analysing someone being silly at a darts match and a betting company doing something almost as daft.
And this.
No it wouldnt. Her skin colour is a major characteristic of her identity. However her skin colour is not what was being mocked.
Is men dressing as women offensive now too? People used to do that in theatre so as to prevent women taking the role.
And that's how I see it.
Of course I understand the historical context of blackface, but it wasn't her colour being mocked in this case just being used as an identifier. In a way, I think making a fuss over things like this does diminish the very valid criticism of actual racial hatred that is still very previlant. We see it in these forums, people still have very racist views, but brush off criticism of their opinions as 'you just call everyone racist'
Well, it would help combat the problem if we only called the actual racists, racists...hey Chris?
And that's part of the sjw issue. Wood for the trees and all thay. Actual issues are overlooked over the latest crap sjw quest.
This. The bookie should've known better though.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0381707/
This was on TV last week, how come there is no massive outcry to the obvious racism in this film, or does it only work one way?
This was on TV last week, how come there is no massive outcry to the obvious racism in this film, or does it only work one way?
Historical context.
How long does historical context last?
And why is it OK for two black men to stereotype a sub-class of white women? (Dumb blondes).