|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 6, 2021 16:19:28 GMT
In same place as the 400 years of racial oppression that black people imposed on white people in the U.S. Context is very important. can I punish you for your great great grandfather's mistakes? Didn't think so. So not being allowed to do black face is punishment? Yikes. White people be crazy.
|
|
|
|
Post by shaggypoo on Apr 6, 2021 16:23:17 GMT
can I punish you for your great great grandfather's mistakes? Didn't think so. So not being allowed to do black face is punishment? Yikes. White people be crazy. no but doing Whiteface unabashed with no recourse, is. |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 6, 2021 16:36:04 GMT
So not being allowed to do black face is punishment? Yikes. White people be crazy. no but doing Whiteface unabashed with no recourse, is. Is it though? Plus, as I said, there was backlash when the movie came out. So you're arguing just to argue.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 6, 2021 16:38:29 GMT
I understand that "blackface" is offensive to some and on a more egregious level than "whiteface" because of a history of slavery, racism, segregation and Jim Crow.
And "White Chicks" was definitely offensive to preppy white schoolgirls. Lol.
But my point here, and as a political commentary on "blackface", is that people do not have a right not to be offended.
Gotta disagree there. People absolutely do have a right to be offended. No one has a right to tell someone else what is and isn't offensive to them. That's a bit arrogant. We don't get to decide for others how they should feel about something.
That is actually a completely separate issue. And while I agree for the most part that anything goes in comedy, particularly lampoons, that does not negate people's right to feel offended by something. The two are not intertwined. I can absolutely believe in no politically correct ban on free speech and still be offended by blackface.
Let me clarify in terms of rights protected by government. Of course it's a free speech right to express offense. But you cannot limit the free speech rights of others to protect yourself from being offended.
|
|
|
|
Post by shaggypoo on Apr 6, 2021 16:38:56 GMT
no but doing Whiteface unabashed with no recourse, is. Is it though? Plus, as I said, there was backlash when the movie came out. So you're arguing just to argue. sorry my explanation was incomplete and should end with, "...whilst simultaneously vilifying whites for doing the same, and in some cases ruining their career." Lol |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 6, 2021 16:40:32 GMT
Gotta disagree there. People absolutely do have a right to be offended. No one has a right to tell someone else what is and isn't offensive to them. That's a bit arrogant. We don't get to decide for others how they should feel about something.
That is actually a completely separate issue. And while I agree for the most part that anything goes in comedy, particularly lampoons, that does not negate people's right to feel offended by something. The two are not intertwined. I can absolutely believe in no politically correct ban on free speech and still be offended by blackface.
Let me clarify in terms of rights protected by government. Of course it's a free speech right to express offense. But you cannot limit the free speech rights of others to protect yourself from being offended. Actually, according to the Constitution, only Congress can't limit free speech. In any case, what laws are being passed to limit a studio's right to produce a lampoon?
|
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 6, 2021 16:41:52 GMT
Is it though? Plus, as I said, there was backlash when the movie came out. So you're arguing just to argue. sorry my explanation was incomplete and should end with, "...whilst simultaneously vilifying whites for doing the same, and in some cases ruining their career." Lol So what white-actor-doing-black-face's career would you like to see resurrected?
|
|
|
|
Post by shaggypoo on Apr 6, 2021 17:21:23 GMT
sorry my explanation was incomplete and should end with, "...whilst simultaneously vilifying whites for doing the same, and in some cases ruining their career." Lol So what white-actor-doing-black-face's career would you like to see resurrected? c Thomas Howell |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 6, 2021 18:32:11 GMT
So what white-actor-doing-black-face's career would you like to see resurrected? c Thomas Howell He's had steady work since Soul Man. His career is fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Apr 6, 2021 19:57:08 GMT
Why or why not if "blackface" is clearly forbidden?
If, IF, white face was done all the time and for the purpose of demeaning white people as if they were buffoons for laughing at, then yes it would be demeaning. Whats your point?
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 6, 2021 20:11:09 GMT
Why or why not if "blackface" is clearly forbidden?
If, IF, white face was done all the time and for the purpose of demeaning white people as if they were buffoons for laughing at, then yes it would be demeaning. Whats your point? The "Karen" stereotype is a form of whiteface. Caricatures of "whiteness" are done all the time.
Media has eliminated "blackface" to protect the sensibilities of black people. My point is that's bullshit.
Do blackface. Do whiteface. No group is above critique.
I would just like a rational explanation why "blackface" is taboo?
And yes, I know that black people have endured much more oppression than any other minority and that includes queer folks. I don't give a fuck. In a nation which prizes free speech, blackface is an acceptable form of satire.
|
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 6, 2021 20:18:58 GMT
So you don't really want a rational explanation then if hundreds of years of oppression isn't enough for.
You just want someone to say to you, "Go ahead and do black face with impunity."
You clearly understand why it's taboo. You just refuse to accept it. That's your issue to work out, not society's.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stammerhead on Apr 6, 2021 21:59:19 GMT
Is making fun of English people acceptable in this day and age?
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 7, 2021 2:39:15 GMT
Let me clarify in terms of rights protected by government. Of course it's a free speech right to express offense. But you cannot limit the free speech rights of others to protect yourself from being offended. Actually, according to the Constitution, only Congress can't limit free speech. In any case, what laws are being passed to limit a studio's right to produce a lampoon? I see, so you're a conservative and a strict Constitutional constructionist. Sure, the Constitution says only Congress can make laws. The founders would also be against all the agencies of the Executive branch which in effect regulate and make de facto law.
And it has been upheld in the courts time and time again that State Legislatures and County Sheriffs cannot override the federal Bill of Rights. A strict Constitutional constructionist like yourself would have Mississippi blacks sitting at the back of the bus.
So of course there are no laws requiring that film studios can't use blackface. But there is overwhelming social pressure against offending the sensibilities of black folks. I'm against that. Let everyone be offended. It will force them to think.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 7, 2021 2:44:38 GMT
So you don't really want a rational explanation then if hundreds of years of oppression isn't enough for. You just want someone to say to you, "Go ahead and do black face with impunity." You clearly understand why it's taboo. You just refuse to accept it. That's your issue to work out, not society's. No, that's absurd. I'm gay and gay people suffered plenty of oppression. I still do not want to ban homophobic stereotypes. And I see them in the media constantly. Even what the media tries to portray as positive images of gay men is usually an offensive stereotype.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 7, 2021 2:49:25 GMT
Is there a reason why the OP pic from "White Chicks" was removed?  There was something for me to click and that led me to... 403. That’s an error. Your client does not have permission to get URL /proxy/vozWaBceL-Ys_BoPTpqSgVjKa6UDZtlv5brx60caDkYza298MgwjLS86X27p1EeZgbIw71Fi4kVWFF4wR9iV3xDNK_jpcxNxiTHUEODsFtaNO2j7 from this server. (Client IP address: 81.104.253.76) Forbidden That’s all we know. When I first copied and pasted it the image displayed for hours.
If I had known it was copyrighted and not for use on other sites I would have chosen another image and there are many.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 7, 2021 2:53:11 GMT
It’s so offensive that the picture in the OP was completely removed.  Is there a reason why the OP pic from "White Chicks" was removed? It wasn't removed. You posted a broken link and the OP is exactly how you left it. Guess what that means? Yup, that's right...
Operator error.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 7, 2021 2:58:40 GMT
Gotta disagree there. People absolutely do have a right to be offended. No one has a right to tell someone else what is and isn't offensive to them. That's a bit arrogant. We don't get to decide for others how they should feel about something.
That is actually a completely separate issue. And while I agree for the most part that anything goes in comedy, particularly lampoons, that does not negate people's right to feel offended by something. The two are not intertwined. I can absolutely believe in no politically correct ban on free speech and still be offended by blackface.
Let me clarify in terms of rights protected by government. Of course it's a free speech right to express offense. But you cannot limit the free speech rights of others to protect yourself from being offended. Your phrasing got you snagged up here, GB. The Bill of No Rights, Article II states: "You do not have the right to never be offended." May you never again run into that snag. And please, hold your applause.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 7, 2021 3:04:00 GMT
Is there a reason why the OP pic from "White Chicks" was removed? It wasn't removed. You posted a broken link and the OP is exactly how you left it. Guess what that means? Yup, that's right...
Operator error.
Yeah, I figured that out yesterday. But it did post at first and stayed up for hours.
If I had know it was copyrighted and not available, I would have chosen one of another thousands of the same "White Chicks" pics which are available. I can't be arsed at this point to find another one.
|
|
|
|
Post by kls on Apr 7, 2021 3:06:39 GMT
The reason why "white face" isn't considered anywhere near as offensive is because of the history of the black race and the reason black face was a thing in the first place. As far as I can tell, most white people aren't bothered much by "white face." I wouldn't care. Probably because like you said there is no negative history associated with it. Kind of would be a 'huh, that's odd' thing for me.
|
|
