TD_washingtonredskins Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 Just now, TryTheBeal! said: Yeah. One was in the 1920s and fit the popular culture of that time and one was in the 2000s and fit that era’s cultural norms. OK, makes sense. I suppose I'm out on my own there. I did say right off the bat that I'm probably ignorant about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted February 6, 2019 Author Share Posted February 6, 2019 https://www.washingtonpost.com/vanessa-tyson's-statement/cead9a33-ce09-4f11-a1c2-aa4f95a648e0_note.html?utm_term=.4d67833d4ba4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted February 6, 2019 Author Share Posted February 6, 2019 28 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said: But again...isn't there a difference between this: and this: I don't know why...but to me (admittedly as a white guy), they seem completely different in context. As a black man, they are very different. That first picture is just offensive and is mocking black people. Robert Downey's character was unaware of how bad it was as was everyone else except Brandon T. Jackson's character who kept berating him and telling him how bad it was. The entire joke is that Downey's character was an idiot. I feel a lot of people know that its different but have decided to play games to obfuscate the point. Its what racists have done since the Civil Rights movement ended. 13 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said: Yeah. One was in the 1920s and fit the popular culture of that time and one was in the 2000s and fit that era’s cultural norms. This makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 8 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said: OK, makes sense. I suppose I'm out on my own there. I did say right off the bat that I'm probably ignorant about it. I don't think you're on your own. One is intended to mock a race with exaggerated features, not unlike a caricature such as the old Cleveland Indians logo-- literal black makeup, etc. Nobody looks like that. The other is an actor trying to actually pass himself off or look like a black guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 So could one take the position that blackface standing next to a guy in a KKK garb is different from blackface dressing up as Michael Jackson or a rapper (Herring)? It's not hard to see the difference between minstrel blackface and satire/comedy in Tropic Thunder, but where does the line get drawn when it's not such an obvious distinction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 2 hours ago, Jumbo said: tshile, the perspective in your blazing saddles post seemed so alien to me (not pejoratively or insultingly at all) that besides it's intention to be slapstick comedy, the movie was to lambast and mock racists/racism, and other things identified with 'conservatism', and of course people overall, was obvious to "all of us" back when it came out... I believe it's alien to pretty much everyone. I made the decision not to post that over the weekend when I went through it because my thought was... my god they'll kill me on ES. I saw that post and decided against my better judgement. Now here we are. So a few quick things, as generally this is probably not interesting to anyone... 1) I don't 'get' movies, TV shows, and apparently commercials (The GoT dragon destroying the budlight people on the super bowl commercial as "them killing off the commericial series, as it needed to be" was completely lost on me until someone explained it to me at lunch yesterday...) I'm usually the last one to figure out the plot line, when it was obvious to others throughout. I have trouble connecting who was in what movie playing what character, or keeping track of directors and their tendencies. I feel like everyone around me is good at this, but i'm not. I usually keep quiet when movies/TV shows come up in conversation. 2) I'm super awkward with the racism/sexism stuff. I guess I've just been lucky to live a life where I wasn't exposed to any of it. Or maybe I just didn't know I was exposed to it, I didn't 'get it', I didn't recognize it when it was happening around me. I'm super afraid to comment on things because it's led to me being called a racist, or supporting a racist. Where plenty of people here see racism/sexism, I see people over reacting. I've grown tired of defending myself and the comments that usually come, so just stay away from it. I've also grown tired of being wrong, which I've been shown a few times, so again... I just stay away from it. So when a few years ago I found myself in a room full of white people telling me how awesome this movie is, and it opens up with a bunch of n-words being thrown around my gut reaction was "dear god get me out of here" And until this past weekend, every time I heard some white person tell me how awesome blazing saddles is all I could think was "oh god, I didn't know he was like that..." I am friends with and hang around some black people, and I've never heard any of them talk about blazing saddles. This weekend was the first time I heard a black person say the movie was awesome (and I was just reading comments/reviews online, from people claiming to be black, but it was enough to convince me of what the movie really was.) So yeah, super super ignorant on that one. I realized it this weekend. But prior to this weekend it was completely possible, and I even thought about (which is what led me to looking it up...), that I would post that movie in a thread like this and be like 'times were different' And I would have gotten killed here for it. Rightfully so, as I now understand. So i'm glad I didn't. On the other hand, not exactly glad I opened this whole conversation. Could be, probably should be, another item filed under 'Keep that one to yourself' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted February 6, 2019 Author Share Posted February 6, 2019 1 minute ago, bearrock said: So could one take the position that blackface standing next to a guy in a KKK garb is different from blackface dressing up as Michael Jackson or a rapper (Herring)? It's not hard to see the difference between minstrel blackface and satire/comedy in Tropic Thunder, but where does the line get drawn when it's not such an obvious distinction? This is why 99.9% of people shouldn't do blackface and leave it alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 Just now, BenningRoadSkin said: This is why 99.9% of people shouldn't do blackface and leave it alone. Wise advice for us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 Prolly a good time to move back to Virginia and run for office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 Just a reminder that, for the most part, Al Jolson was highly regarded within the black community during his lifetime. http://articles.latimes.com/2000/oct/20/entertainment/ca-39153 *ducks* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 8 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said: This is why 99.9% of people shouldn't do blackface and leave it alone. Its really not that hard! Also, lets package VA, FL and Stephen Miller in a trade to Russia for Vodka, potatoes (yes I know potatoes are made of Vodka) and a few picks if we can get them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 8 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said: This is why 99.9% of people shouldn't do blackface and leave it alone. I am in full agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 It shouldn't matter, but part of me is unsettled by the idea that only one party faces consequences for bad behavior and only one party demands better of its representatives. That really doesn't impact what I personally think about the Northam or Fairfax situations, but it just keeps pinging in the back of my mind. I suppose ultimately I'm glad that "my side" is the side of the good guys, but I also worry that my side can get very trigger happy in shooting its own. That said, I'm of the mind that Northam should resign. I've fallen behind on the Fairfax news so I'm not sure what is proven, what is probable, and what is credible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 7 minutes ago, Llevron said: Its really not that hard! Also, lets package VA, FL and Stephen Miller in a trade to Russia for Vodka, potatoes (yes I know potatoes are made of Vodka) and a few picks if we can get them. Is Grunfeld running Russia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 To be fair, a Republican in Florida did step down for something more recent, but overall I do get what you’re saying and worry about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 @tshile---i thought the first line ha ha funny, but the rest was serious enough not to just 'like' the post or use a laffy just to be brief/simplistic, i'm picking up a lot of self-concern in that post but not picking up that anyone's been reacting to you that negatively, nor is there a reason anyone should be that i've noticed it's interesting stuff you shared, worth knowing, and i don't think you need to be all that concerned about reactions to anything you're likely to post if only i could say that about soooo many others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 2 hours ago, Jumbo said: ..... that besides it's intention to be slapstick comedy, the movie was to lambast and mock racists/racism, and other things identified ... Adding to this, since Jumbo failed to mention it, Mel Brooks is known for his movies doing exactly all you said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 This entire conversation has been great. It’s the kind of non-judgmental conversation that should take place on a topic like this to make people more aware without crucifying people for not being more aware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 1 hour ago, Larry said: There's ways to avoid it. Northan resigns. Fairfax becomes Guv. (Blazing Saddles reference). Fairfax appoints a (well screened) LG. After LG is confirmed, Fairfax resigns. Governor doesn't appoint replacements for those positions the Legislature does. Oh and since Jumbo failed to mention it .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 I think that's a useful point. How the device is used matter. In a sense, it goes back to what I was talking about earlier when I referenced punching up versus punching down. Using humor to satirize or mock the bully or the monster (as Mel Brooks did when he took on Nazis) can be a positive. However, punching down to mock a weaker group with the purpose of just saying, "Look how stupid/less than us they are" is a different matter. Of course, this takes me to a very gray area because at my core I am very much opposed to censorship of ideas even though I also very strongly believe in respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 9 minutes ago, nonniey said: Governor doesn't appoint replacements for those positions the Legislature does. Oh and since Jumbo failed to mention it .... Psst...in Virginia they do. Edit..I take that back. You were speaking of the AG and not the new LT Gov in this case. Mea culpa. Edit edit...oops I was right anyways. The Gov shall fill the vacancy of the AG in Virginia by appointment until the next general election. https://ballotpedia.org/Attorney_General_of_Virginia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 I think the bigger point that comes out all of this is that white people, in general, are horrible at recognizing what racism looks like. On one hand you have the GOP/Conservatives who pretty much outright deny it still exists and/or can't/won't admit it's happening, not to mention push policies that continue to play into racial divides and inequities, on the other hand you have Democrats who while in their hearts certainly don't "hate minorities" still have shown a lack of ability to differentiate between "light hearted fun" and passive-aggressive racism. Another thing to keep in mind however, is that there is a difference between hate & ignorance. Sometimes the ignorance is behind the hate, but other times ignorance leads to stupid things that are not grounded in any actual hatred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 It's in the simple things. For example, my wife constantly gets asked where she's from. Before people even talk to her. How many white people get asked that regularly? Besides..the answer is San Francisco, ****es. 😁 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 9 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said: Psst...in Virginia they do. Edit..I take that back. You were speaking of the AG and not the new LT Gov in this case. Mea culpa. Edit edit...oops I was right anyways. The Gov shall fill the vacancy of the AG in Virginia by appointment until the next general election. https://ballotpedia.org/Attorney_General_of_Virginia Ah you caught it and edited. Yep we were both wrong/partially correct. He can appoint the AG (which has to then be approved by the legislature - what are the odds of that?). He cannot appoint the LT Gov. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 1 minute ago, nonniey said: Ah you caught it and edited. Yep we were both wrong/partially correct. He can appoint the AG (which has to then be approved by the legislature - what are the odds of that?). He cannot appoint the LT Gov. Um. No. https://ballotpedia.org/Lieutenant_Governor_of_Virginia Quote A vacancy in the lieutenant governor's office is filled by the governor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.