Pardon my ignorance, but why is fried chicken supposed to be a “black” thing? As fas as i know “Colonel” Sanders was white. Ditto for waterwelon. Another question: do balck people 9in Texas) have fun on LBJ’s birthday?
Yeah, just like I assume 1+1 = 2.
Huh. What on earth are you talking about? These kids’ conduct – conduct-- in dressing “gangsta,” in drinking forties and eating chicken, all on MLK Day, was an “overt act” and an “express(ion)” to others. They DID these things, not just thought about them.
Besides, I never made the claim that racism had to be accompanied by an act (though it’s probably pretty harmless racism if it never manifest itself in an act, sort of like the murder that never killed – ever see * American Psycho *?) and even if I had, it would not have made any sense in the context of this argument because these kids did commit an “act.” Are we seriously arguing over what it means to “do” something, and are you really confused about what the answer is?
How can I be wrong on point that I’ve never made. I’ve said that white kids wearing gangsta apparel, drinking forties and eating chicken is not per se racist. On this I am right. Period. Click the link, acquaint yourself with the accepted definitions of racism and tell me what about these kids’s mere conduct is “racist.”*On this I am right. Period. I also said that I thought that they probably held racist attitudes (d’ya see that, racist attitudes, i.e. thoughts – we might be close to the same page after all), and that those attitudes will most likely manifest themselves in per se racist conduct. I can infer their attitudes from their conduct given its context (and I could be wrong in my inference), but the conduct in and of itself is not racist. Now, had they hanged a black man, or not given him a job . . .
*aside from Aunt Jemima. I’ll give you that.
And so begins the deuling of the dictionaries…
In the South it is traditionally a food eaten by poor people.
I always thought that learning usually happens after making a mistake and correcting it, regardless what level of education you’re in, or what job you hold, etc. I’m pretty sure that some of these kids will have learned something from this and choose not to do it again in the future, and that is a far better solution than any type of reprimand or expulsion. If someone actually got injured by their actions, then bring the hammer down on them, but this falls under the “ignorant and stupid” column. Maybe an essay “What I have learned from this incident” assigned to each student that attended that party would be the appropriate “punishment” since they will probably be ridiculed for quite some time ahead by the public.
that’ll be news to the nouvea southern restaurants “steaking” their reputations on it.
enter witty “too cool for school” commentator to mock the use of reference materials :rolleyes:
Some of the freshest material around. I’ll just bet you used to make fun of the kids that voluntarily answered questions in class. I can see it now, “who needs your facts, and definitions, man. I’m splittin.” Glad to know knwoledge is at such a premium for you.
I hate it when life imitates The Boondocks.
I’m pretty much with Weirddave on this one. There’s no reason to believe they set out to “mock black people”. It’s certainly possible, of course. But judging by the images it looks like a party with the theme, “stereotypes about blacks”.
Imagine if you happened to wind up at the party. You look around and see how people are dressed and ask, “What is this? A let’s-mock-black-people-party?” Do you really expect anyone to say, “Yes”? Highly unlikely (although, of course, possible). Most likely someone would tell you that no, they weren’t mocking anyone, they were simply mocking stereotypes. You wouldn’t have to believe them, of course, but it’s a plausible explanation.
I honestly don’t think that’s any more offensive than, for example, a “stereotypes about whites” party where people dress and act like upperclass WASPS and dance terribly or something. At worst, it’s really lame, tacky, and the beer sucks. At best, it’s silly, lame, and the beer sucks.
(They could always have a party with real beer, like Guinness. Maybe even have an Irish theme. Talk with silly Irish accents, pretend to get into lots of fights. Y’know, poke fun at Irish stereotypes. They could hold it on St. Patrick’s Day. If they’d done that, would anyone give a rat’s ass?)
Traditionally; until reconstruction when there were many more poor people. Remember Scarlet returning to Tara? 
Never mind, Mother told me not to post in the pit.
I don’t really see the distinction. Are we to believe thay were striking a blow against the sterotypes by perpetuating them?
Oh, I’m pretty calm, and I know and like the game of spades (hearts too), and know it is in fact popular with black folk. I just wasn’t sure if those guys were kidding or not when they made the big sign reading “Spades,” given the two or more connotations to the word.
It seems to me you’re splitting the hairs mighty fine. How do you know when a party is “about blacks” and when it is “about stereotypes about blacks”? I ask this in all seriousness. Let’s have a slave party! Let’s all put on blackface and act like “The Jazz Singer”! Those are black stereotypes, right? Whether it’s “mocking” – I don’t know how as a 20 year old white kid you dress up like Aunt Jemima or The Snizzle and go to a party and then say you’re not “mocking,” you are – but are you mocking blacks or just stereotypes about blacks? There is no discernable difference in appearance or in effect. At best, you’re talking about a very, very fine line. When you have a party on MLK Day and do it, the line isn’t fine at all. How do I know the intent was to obnoxiously use racial stereotypes to mock the only holiday honoring a black man our country observes? Because if it walks like a duck and looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I’m entitled to conclude it’s a duck.
Ironically, Martin Luther King, Jr. would probably be more disconcerted about the influence of the hip-hop/gangsta culture being mocked here and less about the fact that some white kids in Texas were mocking it.
Only if they went around pronouncing it OYCCHHH-reh.
Probably not. I am of the mind, however, that the only way to eliminate stereotypes is to mock them, because in so doing you’re mocking the attitudes and beliefs of people who hold these stereotypes as valid. Dave Chappelle has made a career out of doing this, and doing a damn good job of it too. DO I think these kids were doing that? No, I don’t know that that was their intent either. However, I’m of a mind with Buttonjockey on this one. On things to get upset or offended about, this rates somewhere below mismatched socks. I could be as Irish as Paddy’s pig and if you wanna celebrate March 17th by dressing Irish and drinking whiskey and pretending to beat you wife, have at it. I’d think it’s pretty stupid to do, but so what? Still firmly in the middle of the “meh” scale.
Years ago my high school had some kind of Spirit Week, where every day was represented by a different set of stupid costumes: reverse role day, 1930s day, hillbilly day, etc. I submit that it is possible in theory to hold a costume party without necessarily having cruel intent.
I doubt that is the case here, though. I only lament that it always seems to run one way, that is, the inevitable hue and cry when white people imitate black people. Black comedians can be as divisive as they want about “white people go like this, but black people go like this!” and nobody bats an eye. If we’re gonna be outraged about stuff like this, let’s be outraged about all of it.
They should have had pancakes…hmm Aunt Jemima and pancakes, with a bit of butter…I just got back from lunch but now I’m hungry again. Drat.
The danger in that is that it is very difficult to tell when you are mocking the stereotype of a given group, and when you are mocking the given group and using stereotype as the vehicle to do it. That line is so fine that any degree of judgment would dictate you stay away from it.
Dave Chappelle can get away with it, because Dave Chappelle is black. And a comedian.
To me, it’s the same argument people make for throwing around words like “nigger” – let’s just use the heck out of it, that will deprive it of it’s power! And that sounds okay in theory. The problem is that a person who says it to “deprive it of its power” sounds a lot like the person who says it as an epithet. And if observers can’t tell the difference, there’s no indication, much less guarantee, that you’re doing any good. IOW, does embracing stereotype explode it, or further it? I submit that it furthers it unless done under circumstances that make it extremely clear that you’re mocking the stereotype and not the group. Those circumstances are rare, and do not include a “black” party thrown by white kids, IMO, much less one thrown on MLK day.