Double standard?
 

I don't consider this a double standard. I consider it a single standard, as follows:

When there's a several-hundred-year history of Group X abusing, killing, and enslaving Group Y, and throughout much of that history Group X used a tool called "YFace" to ridicule, insult, and belittle members of Group Y, and after centuries of painful struggle Group Y has achieved a measure of equality with Group X....THEN, it is offensive to revive that tool for your own amusement without consideration for its meaning to others.

That's the standard that's being applied here, to everyone, across the board. If you want to call it a double standard, go right ahead, but I don't see where one group is being held to a higher standard than another. Nobody, of any race, should use the emblems of their fellow students' oppression for entertainment.

Yes, the incident with the noose was even MORE offensive...it was probably the most offensive costume imaginable. But the fact that this costume wasn't the MOST offensive possible costume doesn't mean that students and faculty at UT are wrong to be upset.

Ivy

I have to agree w/ Ivy here...

I know that's right, IvySpice!

That's easy. Because at fraternity parties, women want to look cute and attractive. Smearing paint all over our faces just isn't very pretty...and it's terrible for the complexion (as I found out when I was in high school & painted my face green as part of my witch costume...)

(sorry if I'm going off topic - just wanted to inject a little humor here..)

Re: Double standard?
 

I am not sure its the same thing in the eyes of the person doing it. Its the whole concept of blackface that is getting people's goats here.

When I hear, These guys dressed up as blackfaces and then see the context as a racist situation I have one kind of thought and its similar to the one expressed here.

However, if someone came up to me and said: Dude it was cool this guy won the costume party last night for looking exactly like Louis Artmstrong, he darkened his face, had the rap down, wore the clothes. My reaction would be different.

Also, without the alabama incident, people probably wouldn't have noticed anywhere near as much. would anyone be willing to concede that point?

Also, there is some indication that when someone reaches celebrity status they kind of lose their color, white or black, and aren't really considered the same way.

I remember that when the movie Bodyguard came out they interviewed people to see if they had a problem with the interracial relationship depicted. And people didn't have a problem because it was Whitney Houston and Kevin Costner.

Of course because a racial component has been brought into the argument it might be one of those times when a rational discussion can't really be had . . .

Hey, I thought it was because we women are just too smart to do dumb, offensive stuff like that... ;)

Re: Re: Double standard?
 

James, it really doesn't matter how you try to reword it, soften it, or perceive the other person's intentions. If someone is sporting blackface, they are sporting blackface. And whether or not it offends YOU really is moot. Unless, of course, you are black. Or unless you understand the true significance of blackface PERIOD, which you don't seem to.

And celebrities and/or their complexion and/or how the public views them really have no place in this discussion because all of that is irrelevant to the issue.

The issue is a guy at Tennessee put on blackface. The end. Whether he was doing it to be cute, to pay homage, or any other reason really doesn't matter. The fact is that it is ALWAYS offensive. Point blank.

btw, VERY well said, IvySpice.

Re: Re: Re: Double standard?
 

Another question that may enter into the discussion... Even though you may be offended by this fellas actions what right does anyone have to PENALIZE his organization or him? Since when is being offensive (especially in this case since it was probably unintentional) a crime or something that deserves some sort of retribution?

To be honest I really have problems when there are people calling for action against someone in a case like this where the injury isn't even intentional.

Maybe Alpha Phi Alpha and other groups on campus might see this as a call to help to better educate the community on matters such as this.

Not to defend Micheal Jackson, but he claims that he lightened his skinned due to a medical condition called vitaligo (which is when spots of the skin loses pigmentation).

In regards to a black person, are you inferring that by putting on white(I mean literally the color white) paint on their face? I'm confused....

My whole point is if I wanted to dress up as Britney Spears ;) why would I have to put on a very light flesh tone make-up? Wouldn't my tasteless outfit be enough? :D

*lol*

Kudos to Ivy for the post!

I agree with Ivyspice and Librasoul on this one. There is no excuse for blackface. Blackface is a symbol of oppression. White actors did not use black face to portray strong, powerful black men and women. White actors who used black face to portray black people as goofy, slow...well you understand what I'm trying to say. Those that use blackface are not respecting others. It's offensive and insulting. How dare anyone condone such behaviour. I would be ashamed an offended if any of my sisters did this or thought it was okay. I would be ashamed if any of the fraternity members on my campus though that this behaviour was acceptable and I am ashamed that anyone here can justify this behaviour.

Waaaaiiiiitttt . . .

Also, to put this in context. Isn't a a "blackface" a specific reference to a specific type of make-up arrangment that was popular in entertainment at one time.

I seem to remember seeing shows like that decades ago in my youth.

Its kind of important to understand both the historical fact that we are referencing and what it meant in the context of those times.

Hi everyone,

I thought i should chime because i am a student at the University of Tennessee and I was actually present at the event. This was not a case of one person dressing in black face but several members dressed in black face. According to the Kappa Sigs they were dressed this way for a skit. A member of the Black Student Association was driving by and saw one of the members dressed in black face. She spoke to the member and ask why he was dressed this way. The guy stated that they were just having fun. When she ask what fraternity he was a member of he originally replied that he was a member of Alpha Phi Alpha. This took place at a private party so members of the BSA were not able to go and speak to members about this, however, because the party was at a club and because of the quick thinking of the BSA the president got a camera and had the manger of the club photograph the members in black face. THERE ARE PICTURES!!!!! The president and tresurer of Kappa Sig later came downstairs and spoke to several members of the BSA saying they were just having fun and really didn't want it to be made a big deal. They also stated that they didn't want it to turn into another "Auburn incident". This has truly affected the campus. Black students are hurt by the constant acts of insensitivity and this is just the latest. What is most upsetting is the continued public attitude by Kappa Sig that they were only having fun and everyone is making too big a deal. If they would have the character to simply admit that they were wrong things would be different. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes Just giving you the opinion of someone on campus .


P.S. I think most people have the biggest problem with the disrespecful/non chalant attitude the Kappa Sigs are taking. By saying they were members of Alpha Phi Alpha and then stating they were just having fun and didn't want it to turn into another Auburn incident shows that they had knowledge of those previous acts.

I agree with IvySpice and Librasoul on this topic.

I wonder what the heck the guys were thinking. How is dressing up in blackface fun especially since it hurts and insults people? I don't understand people sometimes.

Blackface was a form of make up arrangment that was used to POKE FUN at black people. Therefore it is insulting, and oppressive, and this behaviour is NOT acceptable.

Yes, it was used as entertainment....in minstrels. And it certainly was not entertaining to anyone other than white people who found humilitation and degradation of black people to be funny.

Do you wonder where "Jim Crow" comes from?

Check the history...

Minstrelsy

And before this even starts, yes, towards the end Blacks did participate in their own minstrel shows. But if you read carefully, it was because the white audiences demanded it. Blacks were attempting to garner some sort of profit in the market (sad, isn't it?)

This whole concept is very meaningful with regards to what is wrong with society today.