Nor, apparently, can you make any joke even remotely involving monkeys if there is any connection to a black person, whereas the same joke towards a white person draws no controversy or even attention. People have been making fun of other people by comparing them to monkeys pretty much forever, and it’s usually harmless - but if there’s a black individual involved in any way, all of a sudden the racism police come swooping in with ZOMGBLACKPEOPLEMONKEYSBLACKPEOPLEMONKEYSBLACKPEOPLEMONKEYSBLACKPEOPLEMONKEYSZOMG. If they are trying to protest the idea of someone comparing black people to monkeys in an unfavorable way, they’re doing it all wrong, because all they’re doing is reinforcing a connection (usually of their own making) between black people and monkeys.
If you were to say, “George Bush was as stubborn as a gorilla in trying to get support for the war,” that’s fine. (I seem to recall lots of people calling him a chimp.) But if you were to say “Barack Obama is as stubborn as a gorilla in trying to push his healthcare bill through” or whatever - ZOMGRACISMBLACKPEOPLEMONKEYS. Just what message is being sent here when people only react to the black-monkey comparison and never to the white-monkey comparison?
So Australians are not only racially insensitive, but they are willfully ignorant as well?
IME it is never acceptable for a white person to use the n-word; I have been around black folk my entire life, I have a brother that is black, and were I to use that word with him, I would lose a great deal. Do Ausies have any interaction with blacks (be they Carribean, British, French, Brazilian, African) other than through pop culture? I have, and I can guaran-damn-tee you that most are well aware of what a minstrel show is, and it’s not something that is viewed as humorous, regardless of intent.
Jeez. Golliwoggs are racist and offensive, based on something racist and offensive (minstrel shows), from a long era when offensive racism was encouraged/rewarded/tolerated/common by offensive racists who are sentimentally endeared by old offensive racism. If you want to “reclaim” Golliwogs then be my guest (there’s no law against it), but don’t take a hissy fit when you are “mistaken” for an racist who’s being friggin offensive.
A line of “reasoning” so tenuous that you quite make my point for me. Why don’t you just go ahead and say that a drawing of a black person that is not photographically accurate is offensive? Hell, why stop there? Why not just say any representation of anyone who may be black in which they are not perfectly beauteous in every way is racist?
Heck I’m white, it’s not me you are damaging. Why do I care? Go ahead and argue that blacks need “special” protection. It’s a subtle but insidious form of racism that you are peddling.
IME most people outside the States have severe difficulty getting to grips with why “the n word” is so incredibly taboo for you. We’ve had several threads on the topic. You may well not be willfully ignorant, but I suspect you are somewhat insular if you think that what you say is some sort of universal truth.
The views of Aboriginal Australians are not generally held in especially high regard by most non-Aboriginal Australians, unfortunately.
It’s also vitally important to stress that the only thing Aborigines and African-Americans have in common is dark skin. Culturally they have no similarities, and more imporantly, Aborigines are not as “engaged” with “mainstream” Australian Society as African-Americans are in the US.
I didn’t see the Hey, Hey sketch (not a fan of the show), but I will add some weight to the other Australian posters saying that Blackface is not automatically “racist” in Australia, and nor are Golliwog dolls. I had one as a kid, and I’d have no problem getting one for any of my own hypothetical children.
Tenuous my arse, Golliwogs are a prominent part of the west’s rich history of “darky” icons. Describing/comparing/relating it to “a drawing of a black person that is not photographically accurate” is lame, thin and disingenuous. Playing ignorant and crying about “special protection” for blacks is humouress though, kinda like a hissy fit.
AT the very, very least someone’s head should roll for allowing it on a show where they have an American as a guest.
I can accept that it isn’t seen as racist in Australia, but not understanding the well documented issues with blackface in western culture (taking, for example, the long “banned” or edited cartoons of the first half of the 20th century) is simply wilful ignorance and most of the defence of this act seems to embrace that ignorance.
Thats exactly what King Billy Cokebottle has been doing for 30 years, he’s not well known in cities, but he is very well known in small rural towns, so I’d argue that he is in the public consciousness.
Out of curiousity, in your experience, are these white people or black people that have the difficulty coming to grips with why it’s a taboo word for Americans?
Perhaps you are correct that I am insular; my main point is that a white person cannot decide what is racially offensive for a black person.
The Kamahl comment was racist. Unless there’s some connection other than skin colour between him and MJ that I don’t know about - what was the point of that?
Apart from that, I didn’t think it was racist. They didn’t look like they were doing it to “try to make black people look like buffoons” - they were just crap dancers. They’re middle-aged medics, after all, not actual real entertainers, of course it looked like shit.
I’m seeing an awful lot of arrogance and cultural imperialism in Connick’s attitude, frankly, that given that there’s baggage in America over blackface being used to denigrate black people, that this ought to be at the forefront of the minds of people producing a show for a non-US audience on the other side of the world. Minus that baggage, it’s just dressups.
Whereas I just see wilful ignorance in that sort of attitude.
I’m not American, yet I am very aware of such things. So are my friends, co-workers and family members. Using ignorance as a defence isn’t really something to be proud of.
“As an Australian, I can tell you, I have never heard of a “minstrel show” before.”
Dont click on this if you dont want to see info about the B+W minstrel show in Australasia.
Probably an age thing. Click on the photographs section.
There was a big hullaballoo a few years back when Sam Newman a fairly famous shockjock type public figure painted his face black as a ‘joke’ on the same TV channel and got a similar public reaction, so the idea this is unprecedented and no-one could see it coming is a bit of a reach in my view.
A friend of mine even wonders if it was done to generate controversy. I doubt it myself, but the idea that Australia is ‘unfamiliar’ with these issues is a reach in my view. It has a long tradition of similar ‘humour’, its just a wee bit less far down the track sensitivity wise as far as I’m concerned.
My thoughts exactly. It’s also entirely possible they had no idea Connick Jr. was even going to be on the show (it wouldn’t surprise me if they just grabbed whichever celeb was in town that day). I mean, if it had been a British celebrity on the show, I doubt anyone outside Australia would even have been aware the show was on.
I think it’s fair to say your average Australian would describe a Black & White Minstrel Show as being “Quaint” rather than “Racist”. Simply, we just don’t have the same racial issues that the US does and that’s something people on these boards often forget (or choose to overlook).
Which is really the heart of the matter. It’s an Australian show, intended for an Australian audience, and but for the American guest, it’s really of no consequence to anyone in America.
Between you and me, putting on an act that is extremely offensive to Americans when you have an American guest judging it is a bloody stupid idea and someone should get into trouble over it.
There is no doubt about it, he was classy, so was the host, everybody was mature about the incident and we all get to discuss this racial issue and the differing racial sensibilities of Yanks versus Aussies.
Well, when the kids doll is “a product of the blackface minstrel tradition” described as having “classic “darkie” iconography” dressed in “all traditional minstrel attire” then yeah, it might be. Link
It’s not just Wikipedia either, your own media describes the dolls as "a children’s literary character from the 19th century inspired by American blackface minstrels. Link
Both links I’ve posted also mention that the doll is not exactly free of controversy in Australia, so it’s not like this is a new idea I’m putting forward. I mean, come on, the name of the doll is even used as a racial slur (wog). Does somebody actually have to embroider “nigger” or "abo’ on the thing before it becomes racist?