Ok, I’m probably going to get banned for that last one, but eh, I don’t really care. The posters in this thread really ought to be ashamed of themselves. I got no problem going out on this note.
That’s another warning. You will stop this behavior immediately or your posting privileges may be revoked.
I don’t want to appear to mock this position by over-simplifying it, but I understand the argument goes that only if they are in a society where there is an inherent structural inequality which works against white people. In our current society, where white people benefit from structural privilege, they cannot be the victims of racism as you describe.
I guess - it looks like there is an etymological connection, but it’s unlikely that these things sprang into existence fully-formed - some of them seem to incorporate much older elements of folklore and tradition.
Some of this (not all, I’m sure) will be attributable to long winter nights, frugal washing facilities and poor domestic lighting.
Agreed, but the key word here is superficial.
This is Great Debates… it’s meant to be about more than opinions (that’s what IMHO is for). You can have an opinion but you need to back it up with evidence, which you’re clearly unable to do. Evidence in this context can be direct observation of people who engage in Morris dancing in the UK (since the thread is about whether Morris dancing in the UK is racist or not).
I live in Scotland, born in England, educated in the USA. I have darker skin than the usual Brit (my father was often mistaken for being Indian and my Grandmother was even darker, but we have no discernable non-Brit ancestors for 7-18 generations.
Blackface appeared in acceptable British TV until quite recently (It was in The Goodies in the very late 1970s or early 80s and also in Jeeves & Wooster in the mid-1990s, however with some context in that instance).
I don’t think many people are going to argue that Blackface isn’t considered racist in most contexts nowadays - but “Blackface” is generally understood to have a pretty specific definition and “minstrel show” connotations. I don’t think the average punter would consider Morris Dancers to meet the definiton of “Blackface (Racist)”, if that makes sense, because it’s missing the key element of parodying/lampooning/mocking black people - at least as far as anyone can tell at present.
Now that is ridiculous. Have you never heard of playing devil’s advocate, or even of just questioning a subject to discern what really is the case.
I am certainly not racist in negative terms but feel quite happy asking complex questions about race and ethnic identity.
It was an earnest question, regardless of how it might have been perceived. Just painting your face (any colour), without intent to be racist, isn’t racist.
I don’t think we can really pursue that line of discussion any more though.
BrightNShiny, you have been very eager to label me a racist in this thread. I really am not. I may be ignorant on many fronts, and it may well be that in my ignorance, I have tacitly supported things that are unacceptable (by not opposing them).
If you (or anyone, for that matter) think this is the case, then demonstrate it to me. Show me the error of my ways, but understand that what seems self-evident to you, may not be to me.
Evidence will convince me. Assertion that something is obvious, because it seems obvious to you, probably will not.
Personally, I don’t think “cultural heritage” is a good enough reason to keep racist practices alive. And the presence of racism in society affects everyone, we’re not islands here.
And “freedom of speech” is not absolute. Especially in Europe.
This is essentially the same “Racial isn’t racist” excuse that some genuine racists use. and it’s bullshit - racialist is racist - uneven power structures even today, and historic abuse, have made it so…
I do (with the greasepaint, that is - I’d have no objection to a White Othello played straight up.
There is no part of British history post-Roman conquestwhere Blacks could be said to definitely never have been.
You do understand the difference in power relationships between a Black person playing White, and a White person playing Black, right?
Nor was that Guinevere in Whiteface.
Given the Japanese claim to racial superiority culturally, intellectually and facially over the Caucasians, perhaps we should take umbrage at their Noh plays -
Well, not all Morris dancing is parodying/lampooning/mocking black people, but the blackface Morris dancing is clearly parodying/lampooning/mocking black people.
Just because this type of blackface (might) pre-dates minstrel shows doesn’t mean its not also parodying/lampooning/mocking black people; it is.
Does it? I’m not being facetious here - I just don’t understand how, for example, the Japanese treatment of Koreans in Japan affects, to any significant degree, people who aren’t Japanese or Korean.
(I’m not defending the treatment of Koreans by the Japanese, by the way - far from it - just using it as an example of racism which doesn’t seem to have anything to do with people elsewhere, if that makes sense).
I wasn’t thinking so much in the legal/American sense of the term so much as how labelling everything as “racist” has a chilling effect on discussions on the topic, ultimately to everyone’s detriment.
You realise that Japanese are as pale as most “Caucasians”, right?
And Denzel Washington playing Don Pedro (it has been that long? Agh I’m ancient!). I’m reasonably sure most of the ladies who have played Madame Butterfly or the young ladies in the Mikado weren’t Japanese either.
I would rather use the first to discuss how much is or is not his color an important element in the character of Don Pedro than rend my clothes over Brannagh not choosing a Spaniard (or an Italian, or… you know, someone who has the looks I’d expect of a Middle Ages Don Pedro of Aragon), but the reply from Americans who think anything related to race is racist is “that’s because your people have never been oppressed”. AFAICT, it’s one of those cases where the majority of the noise comes from those who have no interest in listening.
I think being reluctant to call out actual racism for that reason is even more detrimental, myself.
What a mish-mash of ideas.
There is a distinct difference between racism (use of language or action that is based on the exercise of power or control of one group over another and may or may not have the intent of harming the other group) and racialism (treatment of different cultural groups differently according to their real needs.)
Under the latter heading come assistance to racial and ethnic groups for their group history of being denied entry to education or opportunity. Different criteria for certain diseases that have an ethnic bias (sickle cell anaemia in Mediterranean and Afro-Caribbean people, diabetes in people from the sub continent, alcohol related diseases from people of oriental origin). Recognition of behaviours based on ethnic or cultural background that should be tolerated in a just society. and so on.
Recognition of Race, Culture, ethnic identity etc is different from racism.
In a tolerant society there must be compromise, and sometimes freedom of action and freedom of speech are more important than avoidance of racism and certainly of racialism.
I see little problem with Othello being in black face , else historical accuracy and the thrust of the play is l;ost if Othello is not obviously the Moor, and we cannot require that the actor be ethnically correct- that would be ridiculous and racist. Wat next, pretend Shylock was a committed Christian and non-Semitic?
As to people of colour playing characters in British history when it is obviously anachronistic, I find that rather wonderful and quite enjoy the discomfort it causes racists, but it is the other side of the Othello coin.
I can understand where you’re coming from - I just think if people call “Racism!” over comparatively benign things (such as Morris Dancers), it lessens its impact when it’s used against things that really are the bad, negatively-affects-particular-people type of racism.
Is it though? Can you show your workings for this conclusion?
What’s wrong with a noble Black Spaniard? It wasn’t that long after the Reconquista, after all.
A better question would be to wonder how he could be the brother of Keanu 
(Or Duke of Aragon, in a post-Reconquista Spain).