doulikefish Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 Its to celebrate that st nicholas freed the slaves and gave them a job helping him.Which is celebrated on the 05th of dec Off topic, but don't white people in Holland do something odd with black-face? Like a Christmas parade or something? An odd thing to do outright, but even stranger in a country that has a large number of black people. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 Off topic, but don't white people in Holland do something odd with black-face? Like a Christmas parade or something? An odd thing to do outright, but even stranger in a country that has a large number of black people.Black Pete I think his name is (like a wee pal of Santa). I think they've been trying to phase it out for a while now. But you know the Dutch, they're fucking mental. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 When was this picture? Timing matters in these kinds of things. For 20 years it's been quite clear to any reasonably intelligent person that blackface is not ok. Before that though, I think it was genuinely seem as harmless - and therefore difficult to be overly critical. It was 2001. It’s harmful to him because he portrays himself as the most progressive politician out there but I don’t know why it can’t be put down to a bit of ignorance. The modern day desire to slaughter people for their past worries me. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 17 minutes ago, MixuFixit said: 43 minutes ago, WATTOO said: No, it's just that I have a sense of perspective and live in the real world as opposed to buying in to the faux outrage and offence taking of the online brigade............. I also live in the real world and would get my head knocked off my shoulders by black people I know if I whacked on black face and big red lips and started singing Camptown Races. Once again it's all down to context, if you were blatantly mocking them because of their colour then you would probably deserve a right good punching, however if you were dressing up as a character from history who just happened to be black then I wouldn't imagine they would have a problem. I know most of you don't agree with me but I just feel we're treading a very dangerous line where everyone will end up afraid to do or say anything for fear of upsetting or offending someone and as Dons has just mentioned there's people mischief making who actively try and find something / anything on people just so they can set the dogs on them. We're actually not far from returning to the days of "WITCH" and before you know it some innocent punter will be burned at the stake, all very worrying................. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneteaminglasgow Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 Once again it's all down to context, if you were blatantly mocking them because of their colour then you would probably deserve a right good punching, however if you were dressing up as a character from history who just happened to be black then I wouldn't imagine they would have a problem. I know most of you don't agree with me but I just feel we're treading a very dangerous line where everyone will end up afraid to do or say anything for fear of upsetting or offending someone and as Dons has just mentioned there's people mischief making who actively try and find something / anything on people just so they can set the dogs on them. We're actually not far from returning to the days of "WITCH" and before you know it some innocent punter will be burned at the stake, all very worrying.................This might be peak yer da.Some going. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miguel Sanchez Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 Well it was a one off, we're all young once- oh Still, at least he wasn't directly aping the people he was dressing up a- oh Whoops. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 (edited) 33 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: It was 2001. It’s harmful to him because he portrays himself as the most progressive politician out there but I don’t know why it can’t be put down to a bit of ignorance. The modern day desire to slaughter people for their past worries me. I'm also queasy about digging up dirt on that US Supreme Court judge about when he was a drunk teenager at parties 40 years ago. He's a c**t though so I'm not too bothered. In one of the Trudeau pictures he was a 29 year old schoolteacher which is a bit dodgy. Edited September 19, 2019 by welshbairn 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 13 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said: This might be peak yer da. Some going. That's what I love about your type, anything you don't agree with or properly understand you file it under "yer da" so as to avoid any real discussion. Quality.............. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneteaminglasgow Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 That's what I love about your type, anything you don't agree with or properly understand you file it under "yer da" so as to avoid any real discussion. Quality..............Ok, please give me a detailed argument as to why blackface, historically used to ridicule black people and to perpetuate racist stereotypes, should be considered a bit of fun. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 3 minutes ago, welshbairn said: I'm also queasy about digging up dirt on that US Supreme Court judge about when he was a drunk teenager at parties 40 years ago. He's a c**t though so I'm not too bothered If I was to clarify, that was a case of rape so I'm not sure you could put that down to ignorance on his part! That was absolutely right to be investigated. In terms of blackface, I would say back in 2001 plenty of people would've been totally ignorant to the historical context/offence of the minstrels etc. It's clumsy, it's stupid but is it really worth destroying someone's career over? Saying that, it appears he's a serial offender so I may retract my sympathy yet. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: If I was to clarify, that was a case of rape so I'm not sure you could put that down to ignorance on his part! That was absolutely right to be investigated. In terms of blackface, I would say back in 2001 plenty of people would've been totally ignorant to the historical context/offence of the minstrels etc. It's clumsy, it's stupid but is it really worth destroying someone's career over? Saying that, it appears he's a serial offender so I may retract my sympathy yet. I worked with someone in the 1980s who used to be one of the Black and White Minstrels on the telly in the 70s, and it was considered well out of order then. He didn't see anything wrong with it though. Attempted rape is clearly a different issue but the evidence was so flimsy, she couldn't even remember where it happened, there were no witnesses and after all that time memories are unreliable. I've talked to friends about things that happened a couple of years ago and often our recollections are nearly opposite. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 21 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said: Ok, please give me a detailed argument as to why blackface, historically used to ridicule black people and to perpetuate racist stereotypes, should be considered a bit of fun. Who decided this about "black face" as you put it ??, it's only someone in that last decade or so that's decided that it's socially unacceptable. As an example, If I was in a school play and had "blacked up" in order to play a more authentic role, then I don't think in any way whatsoever could this be seen as racist or "ridiculing black people", however certain people appear to enjoy making mischief and as such are on a witch hunt to accuse everyone and anyone of being racist, bigoted, homophobic, etc etc. Sometimes there's no "hidden meaning" with things, sometimes people can do and say things in complete innocence / ignorance as opposed to being a wanton racist etc. Please note, I'm not referring to the the trudeau situation specifically, but more the general perception in today's society. The point is, where do we draw the line ? Should we be going after the Robertson family for having a golliwog on their jam jars ? What about the people who bought the Jam up until 2001, should they be vilified and treated as racists ?? As I say, where do we draw the line ?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 14 minutes ago, WATTOO said: Who decided this about "black face" as you put it ??, it's only someone in that last decade or so that's decided that it's socially unacceptable. As an example, If I was in a school play and had "blacked up" in order to play a more authentic role, then I don't think in any way whatsoever could this be seen as racist or "ridiculing black people", however certain people appear to enjoy making mischief and as such are on a witch hunt to accuse everyone and anyone of being racist, bigoted, homophobic, etc etc. Sometimes there's no "hidden meaning" with things, sometimes people can do and say things in complete innocence / ignorance as opposed to being a wanton racist etc. Please note, I'm not referring to the the trudeau situation specifically, but more the general perception in today's society. The point is, where do we draw the line ? Should we be going after the Robertson family for having a golliwog on their jam jars ? What about the people who bought the Jam up until 2001, should they be vilified and treated as racists ?? As I say, where do we draw the line ?? Every person who bought jam prior to 2001 was a racist. Even if it wasn’t Robertson’s jam. People who bought marmalade were racist too, and homophobic. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 3 minutes ago, Granny Danger said: Every person who bought jam prior to 2001 was a racist. Even if it wasn’t Robertson’s jam. People who bought marmalade were racist too, and homophobic. I used to be a golden shred man myself but now I'm more raspberry to blackcurrant jam, although generally only when I'm staying in a hotel. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 Here's an interesting piece from the BBC no less !! It just shows how attitudes have changed in such a short time, 'Not offensive' The changeover will start appearing on jars of Robertson's jams and Golden Shred marmalade from 1 September. But the Golly will continue to feature on the company's mincemeat until Christmas. Ms Knox denied it was because it was an offensive image. Golly is going into retirement "We sell 45 million jars of jam and marmalade each year and they have pretty much all got Golly on them. "We also sell 250,000 Golly badges to collectors and only get 10 letters a year from people who don't like the Golly. "Whereas we are concerned about those people and it's not our intention to be offensive with the Golly, we have to look at what our research says and what the sales say. "The feedback has consistently been that for the vast majority of people, the Golly is a positive thing that they like," she added. Originally called the Golliwog, the Golly first appeared on jars in 1910. The character became one of the UK's longest running consumer loyalty schemes. WATCH/LISTEN ON THIS STORY Emeritus Prof Stuart Hall, Britain's Open University "I am sure it had no.. racial overtones" More from Manchester See also: 12 Mar 00 | Business M&S drops St Michael 17 Jul 01 | Business Inland Revenue considers name change 27 Jun 01 | Business Bass hopes for name change Top Business stories now: WorldCom chiefs refuse to testify Buoyant eBay snaps up bills firm Digital TV woes hit Pace profits Bush vows action after scandals Merck 'exaggerated' revenue in accounts Congress pushes accounting reform Oil trade thaws US-Russian ties HIV: the drug firms' quest for a cure Links to more Business stories are at the foot of the page. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 Why can't we call black people coons anymore, like my Granddad, and Alf Garnett did? Political correctness gone mad, so what if black people don't like it, I don't mean any harm by it. Some of my best friends are coons. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 Trump has filed a lawsuit against the new york prosecutors that have suponead him for his tax returns. Im assuming nuking Iran ( or california) will be the next step to take the heat off 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 Who decided this about "black face" as you put it ??, it's only someone in that last decade or so that's decided that it's socially unacceptable. As an example, If I was in a school play and had "blacked up" in order to play a more authentic role, then I don't think in any way whatsoever could this be seen as racist or "ridiculing black people", however certain people appear to enjoy making mischief and as such are on a witch hunt to accuse everyone and anyone of being racist, bigoted, homophobic, etc etc. Sometimes there's no "hidden meaning" with things, sometimes people can do and say things in complete innocence / ignorance as opposed to being a wanton racist etc. Please note, I'm not referring to the the trudeau situation specifically, but more the general perception in today's society. The point is, where do we draw the line ? Should we be going after the Robertson family for having a golliwog on their jam jars ? What about the people who bought the Jam up until 2001, should they be vilified and treated as racists ?? As I say, where do we draw the line ??Academics who have studied these issues pointed it out, and society decided that they were right. It was one of the many racist tropes (see also fried chicken, big lips, rapey towards white women) used to keep black people down in America. As a result, it's been decided in Western culture to avoid it. Plays and Halloween parties will just have to take the hit.I'm with most folk on here, in the sense that I'd be tempted to give Trudeau the benefit of the doubt - unless something else emerges. (I vaguely remember my mum taking part in an al jolsen tribute float in the cumnock gala c1988. She absolutely loves Robertson's marmalade as well - and I think fought for some time for her right to enjoy the Golliwog figures. I'm currently trying to get her sacked from her voluntary role at the gaiety theatre but to no avail.) 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerthewitness Posted September 20, 2019 Share Posted September 20, 2019 22 hours ago, Dons_1988 said: It was 2001. Western society is conspicuously more racist in 2019. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.