Do you worry about mking sure height and weight and face shape and body type are consistent? Why can we expect people to use their imagination about those, but not skon tone?
I know a little white boy who dressed as Oprah for black history month. Wpre his mom’s blazer and pearls. No one had the illusion shattered cuz his facial color was wrong. It was COSTUME. They use iconography, not verisimilitude.
This is crazy to me, sorry.
Are you telling me that if I dressed up like David Bowie (see my first contribution to this thread for a description of my costome), you wouldn’t be able to recognize me unless I whitened my skin? I’m 5’7". Would I have to add three inches to my height as well? Would I have to get a glass eye too?
I think if a character isn’t recognizable unless you slather on a bunch of make-up, that should tell you something. It should tell you either 1) the character isn’t interesting enough to cosplay or 2) you don’t understand that character very well. When I think of all the characters that I would want to cosplay (if I was inclined to do so), all of them can be simulated through props, movement and impersonation. If I can’t simulate a character through these means, then I have no business dressing up as anyone. IMHO.
A white person who shows up to a generic costume party dressed up as Harriet Tubman probably would be confusing. But a white person dressed up as Harriet Tubman at a costume party celebrating American historical figures probably would be instantly recognizable. All they would have to do is tie a kerchief on their head, put on a long mid-19th-century dress draped in a shawl, put on some black boots, and carry a lantern and a shotgun.
One of my historical heroes is Nikola Tesla. I probably wouldn’t attempt to dress up like Nikola just because I’d prefer to go as Harriet. But let’s say Harriet was already taken. So to look like Nikola, I’d get some styling gel to make my hair like this and I’d get a fake mustache and a cheap suit. And then I’d walk around carrying something like this. Sure, a lot of people may not instantly recognize me as Nikola, but they would be able to guess eventually if they asked the right questions. At any rate, I wouldn’t be dressing up for anyone else’s amusement but my own, so it wouldn’t matter to me if no one knew who I was.
That’s, like, your opinion, man.
Whatever, bro.
Just seems like a conundrum. Obviously you don’t make fun of someone for being black or whatever color.
Pretending they aren’t seems like it would be a little insulting too.
One of the current characters using the name “Spider-Man” is Miles Morales. He is half African-American and half Dominican.
So then green makeup for universals Frankenstein is just nonsense?
You could easily make Frankenstein recognized without it.
There’s no reason whatsoever for the makeup
No we use green makeup bc…he’s green
Who do you offend by painting someone green?
If I ever became famous, I would be upset if someone felt they had to darken their skin to represent me. Especially if they didn’t go through the trouble of getting all of my other physical traits exactly right. And I would be real upset if they went through the trouble of darkening their skin and they couldn’t even be bothered to get the skin tone right (still smh at black shoe polish for Michael Jackson).
I think it’s offensive because being black is a detriment in US society, and to pretend to a handicap that you can just take off is being a dick. Just like if your legs are just fine but you choose to move around in a wheelchair because you enjoy the ride.
If you’re pretending to be a specific person with a disability, like Franklin Roosevelt or Stephen Hawking I think you can get away with it, but if it’s not an instantly recognizable person I’d stay clear.
Same with blackface. If it’s the stereotypical minstrel show makeup always offensive, if it’s realistic offensive on the grounds of being a disability you can take off. Maybe OK if it’s an instantly recognizable specific black person, but risky.
Even already white people use white makeup for Dracula. Because he’s a lot whiter.
Like I said, i get that it isn’t usually necessary.
And given the history I can see why it’s offensive.
I don’t see the argument that it’s inherently offensive.
Or that simply wishing you could change your complexion for a better match is inherently racist.
I can see why you shouldn’t.
But this thread and some reading I’ve done has helped me get a better idea of it all.
I’m sure I can safely let my kids play Madden nfl and not have it be digital blackface.
Exactly. Gotta be the history.
Who do you offended painting your face white?
Frankenstein’s green color is a part of his signature. Green skin is special. Just like the bolt’s in his neck. Just like his blocky head.
In contrast, brown skin is not special. It is no one’s essence. Or signature. Or trademark.
Let’s go back to Michael Jackson. Skin color actually is a part of guy’s essence. Imagine if someone were to paint half of their face brown and the other half white. On the brown side, they’re wearing a half polyester butter-fly collared shirt with 70s designs. On the white side, they’ve got on a half white v-neck t-shirt with a half white button-down shirt. Add an afro on the brown side and silky shag cut on the white side. Voila! An awesome, non-offensive costume. In MJ’s case, neither brown or white skin is his signature. He’s represented by the combination of the two.
But if you want to look like 1984’s Michael Jackson? Leave the skin color out of the bit, since there are so many ways to look like 1984s Michael Jackson without having to go there. If someone doesn’t think he’d be recognizable as 1984s MJ without darkening their skin, they have no business trying to cosplay MJ. Because it means they don’t know anything else about the guy except that he’s black.
I’m puzzled what you mean by this. All fancy dress up is donning a costume. So unless you are arguing that all such dressing up is bad, this in itelf isn’t a reason to deprecate making skin color part of a costume.
I’m similarly puzzled by most of what SmartAleq has written, it seems fairly easy to point out many inconstencies.
I guess I get the impression that you guys are trying to back-fit some kind of abstract consistent theoretical principles into this. Whereas the actual reasons that we specifically deprecate blackface (and by extension now all complexion changes and certain other ways of changing appearance) are contingent - they are historical and social, because they are reminiscent of terrible things we have done in the past.
I mean, if a 5-year-old is innocently attempting to introduce complexion change to look like somebody he likes for Halloween, let’s say white kid wants to be Michael Jordan, I don’t think you can easily explain to a young kid that the reason not to do blackface is because complexion change is “rude” in the way SmartAleq suggests. Without historical or social context - i.e. to a logical 5-year-old - it’s surely not inherently any more rude to make yourself look like MJ by making yourself black vs any other way of changing your appearance to make yourself resemble some other person.
Idk if I can equate black to a handicap but I see what you mean.
I probably wouldn’t be professor X at my friend’s party who is indeed in an electric wheelchair. Knowing I’d be popping in and out of mine.
On the other hand he’d probably be cool with being professor X if we did an X-Men theme or something. As long as it wasn’t pushed on him.
What’s the objective difference- as opposed to the tainted-by-racist-history difference- between putting on a wig of a certain color and painting your skin a certain color? Or between opposite-sex makeup and opposite-race makeup?
Again, I’m not saying “go ahead and wear blackface”. But that’s because of historical associations. In a cultural vacuum, I don’t see how it would be different than any other form of dressing up as someone else.
(I have a somewhat embarrassing personal story that’s relevant: I was a very sheltered teenager that went to a high-school that was all-white and all-female. I was in the school play three years out of four.
Now, whenever we had a male part, we obviously had to have a girl do it. So the boy-girl would try to make herself as male-looking as possible, with her hair pulled back, and make-up stubble and such.
One year we did a play that had an explicitly black [and male] character. I would like to repeat that the other people at school were likely as sheltered as I was. So the black-white boy-girl braided her hair into something like cornrows, and had her skin dusted with brown makeup. I went around for days talking about how amazing it was that the makeup department was able to change this white girl into a black boy.
My point is, none of us thought the “pretend-black” any way different than “pretend-male”. Without the context of knowing about minstrel shows, it was just “be something you aren’t” as usual. There was no malice intended, no “being black is a just costume” or “being male is just a costume”. It just was.
Obviously, in retrospect, it’s a very uncomfortable memory. But that’s because of outside context I’m now privy to).
That’s where I’m at. Exactly.
Even my 10 year old, it’s hard to tell him he can’t make himself brown to be a certain character.
He’s fine with it, I don’t think he understands why exactly.
But he’s not trying to be an asshole when he wants to brown up to be agent J.
Im still not sure why my 5 year old is overtly racist though.
Who gives a shit? Is this an actual problem? Is painting faces white to offend Caucasians something done through our history?
I’ll hasten to add to my earlier comment - while it might be difficult to explain to the average 5-year-old why skin color in particular is just something we don’t do for Halloween costumes, most of the other things you mentioned your 5-year-old doing surely do violate consistent non-contingent principles that you can explain to a 5-year-old: we respect everyone, we don’t treat people differently because of the way they look or speak, etc.
I’m hoping the 5 year old grows out of it.
It seems to be just anything different.
Mom dyes her hair a different color, he’s pissed at her for days.
We of course don’t just let him do those things, and we explain to him. I was just illustrating some of what he has done that is baffling.
All I can think is he is currently uncomfortable with anything different.
A person’s skin color isn’t a costume. A black person isn’t a “white person covered in brown coloring”. A black person’s skin isn’t anything like a fancy dress. Or a costume. I don’t know why this is so hard to get.
First off, who is this “we”? I don’t “deprecate” all complexion changes or certain other ways of changing appearance. I think there is a huge difference between blackface (mocking the physical appearance of black people through gross exaggeration, like using black shoe polish to represent brown skin) and brownface (simulating a specific black person with some modicum of respect). I believe that brownface is often stupid because it’s gratuitous and crazy-looking. But I don’t think it’s racist like inherently blackface is.
I wouldn’t tell him it’s rude. I would tell him it’s unnecessary and a stupid waste of time and energy (and make-up). Like it would be stupid of him to try to shave his head and walk on stilts to look like Michael Jordan. He could do these things and also paint his skin and he’s still going to look like a five-year-old white kid. So what the fuck is the point of doing all of that? I would explain to him the purpose of dressing up isn’t to look exactly like a character, since no one can achieve that, even with the help of a professional make-up artist. I would explain to him the purpose of dressing up is to capture the meaningful elements of a character–the things that make that character stand out. MJ’s skin color makes him like 90% of all NBA players (made-up statistic). It isn’t his costume. His costume is his jersey and his basketball and his shoes. It’s his tongue hanging out of his mouth when he dunks. But it’s not his skin.
Again, I wouldn’t present it as “rudeness” to a five-year-old. I would simply explain to him that skin color is a sensitive subject and that in our society, we try not to bring it up in conversation (or costumes) unless it’s really important. Most five-year-olds don’t need any more explanation than that.
