scpiano.. I don't know about your argument here. I personally don't see how the two things are in the same boat.

The examples you are providing are documentaries. Yes, they were created to make money but they are based on events that actually occured. The purpose was two-fold. To make money is of course tops.. but the second purpose was to inform. I think the second purpose, informing people of the horrible things that have happened in our past serves a legitimate purpose.

Something tells me that the fellas that did this didn't have that same legitimate purpose in mind:D

Now I'll maintain the argument that I had a few months ago when this thread originally came up. It's horrible what they did, I think that KS should do something about it. But as far as a PUBLIC institution deciding what statements are acceptable for an organization to make... that's a road I'd rather not see taken.

Well guess what? I AM going to tell you that it is different. WAY different. Here's why:

People that died in the WTC, rape victims, nor Jews have ever been protrayed in minstrels (which, if you study history, is the origination of blackface) as a way to degrade and further oppress them.

If a movie or documentary is made about rape victims, WTC vcitims, or Jews in the Holocaust, it is just that: a movie.

But if you go to a party, would you not be offended if someone showed up in a "costume" made to portray these images?

You are trying to compare apples and oranges, and it just doesn't hold water.

I really don't think the fraternity really meant to mock black people. I believe they were just portraying the Jackson 5. I mean in a predominately caucasion group it's going to be hard to find 5 black people within the same chapter.

We all have our own opinions and if it was a costume party then it was just that. So let's not get in a major heated argument and let's respect others opinions.

The history behind blackface says it all. Whether someone intended to offend or not is not the issue. It is an ignorant thing to do.

Also, no one is disrespecting your opinion, just disagreeing.

Re: Only at Tennessee
 

Just when I thought you couldnt sound more like a jackass - you topped yourself. You know, I thought you were always kind of weird for just posting about chapters closing and getting in trouble - but now you have to add making fun of states to your list. Dude get a life.

Re: Re: Only at Tennessee
 

It wasn't that bad lol . . of course I am not from TN . .. Hoosier just posts from the AFA listserv I think . . or some such organization.

scpiano211,

I think that you haven't realized when you have come across an impossible argument. The reaction to black face is emotional, visceral, any logical counter argument that you make is lost in the out pouring of emotion . . . Ever try and argue with an angry person before lol?

I would say that if (hypothetically) I went to a Halloween party, and I saw someone dressed as a Holocaust survivor (wearing those striped pajamas that are very recognizable), I would find that to be pretty outrageous and offensive, and wonder "what is that person thinking?". I would bet that it would elicit a pretty visceral reaction from people, too.

Similarly, if some dressed up as a WTC survivor and they were in business clothes and were kind of dusty and covered in blood, I would find that pretty tacky and disrespectful as well. The thing is, I don't think anyone would dare to dress as a Holocaust Survivor or a WTC Centre survivor as they know that it would be taken as "amusing".

I don't find movies about these things offensive, as they're reporting a piece of our history so that we can learn from it.
As the saying goes, "Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it".

Yeah I know it's an impossible argument, hehehe. At least someone else has a sense of humor about it James :-). I just feel this country has become too sensitive of a population and we have our own society becoming like a big brother over what everyone thinks and feels. If you don't agree with the majority then you're condemned as unpatriotic or some other name calling. I have never felt that I needed to agree with the majority to make sure I didn't receive a "dreaded" name from society. Heaven forbid! A name! hehehe

My thing is this: This was a Halloween party, and yes these guys made a poor decision to go as the Jackson 5 because they should have known that some would consider it being in blackface, but yet it was not uncommon to see African American men on campus dress up as every white pop band or Bill Clinton (in the day) etc and no problems ever came up because everyone realized it was a costume party.

Although we covered this ground 4 months ago:D ...

It's very propable that many, if not most black folks have no idea as to the historical significance of blackface (as many white and otherwise people don't know either).

Does that make it "less bad"? I don't think so.

Especially for these guys who are in the process of recieving a college education.

The leaders of tommorow. Makes ya proud.

I am a student at UT right now and I have never seen this. I assume you graduated quite a while ago because I have been here for awhile and this is not the case, at least it hasn't been in the last four years. In fact a group of African-American males did portray N'sync in a talent competition just a few weeks before this incident occured and they managed to do it WITHOUT painting their faces. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

The fact is that these guys knew they were in the wrong because when they were confronted they said, "Don't make this into an Auburn" they had knowledge that this was not the best thing to do. There was also a meeting at the beginning of the semester in which the Dean of Students told ALL members of IFC that this was NOT ACCEPTABLE because of the Auburn incident and they STILL chose to do it. I have no sympathy for them.


And by the way the person who said that KS should handle it and not UT. That did happen. The KS national office has officially suspended their chapter.

The funny thing is that this same discussion occurs everytime a blackface incident occurs.

WHITEface is DIFFERENT than BLACKface in this way: HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE. And INTENTIONS do not MATTER. The act in and of itself is OFFENSIVE to many people. If you want details, please pm me or check the plethora of threads regarding pasts incidents of blackface.

ktsnake, how many black people have you ever met? Because to say that "many" or "most" don't know the history is a gross overgeneralization. Maybe you get around though, and have actually encountered 12% of the population of the United States. I don't know.

scpiano, James - Way to evade the argument. Discounting an argument by calling it "emotional" sort of implies that an emotional reaction to blackface is not rational.

Also, scpiano:

I just feel this country has become too sensitive of a population

Really? So when people dress up in blackface we should just ignore them? Why not ignore the history and legacy of blackface as well? I mean gawd, it was so long ago! Can't people just get over it?

Those who forget history are, indeed, doomed to repeat it. That's why we have morons running around in blackface now.

Some things never change
 

scpiano:
I think one important fact that you are missing is that you do agree with the majority. Many people feel that this act was totally innocent, and that most of us are over reacting. It is the minority voice that is screaming, "This is not acceptable behavior!" When people dress up as other races in films and TV, it is only acceptable IF it is done purely for entertainment or education and w/o malicious intent to degrade and insult a group of people. I am not convinced that this was the intent of these young men. Since none of us truly know what their intent was, I am shocked that so many people are blindly standing behind them. As for SNL, I will not defend their sketches, b/c they often can be offensive. I've seen them mock characters and portray images that could be considered offensive to every imaginable group of people. So I guess they are simply an exception.

What I find interesting is that everyone is so proud of the diversity of America; the great "Melting Pot". Yet they are not willing to be more sensitive to the concerns and feelings of members of another race. I'm not syaing you don't have the right to be offensive (1st Amendment gives us all that). But why in this "great nation" are we not more understanding and tolerant of the past and present feelings of all of America's citizens?

Marie

Re: Some things never change
 

the minority voice is the one of dissent? of course, it's because the minority is being the one degraded. the majority isn't being poked fun at, the majority is the one poking the fun. of course you're not going to be offended, you're part of the majority. but i can sit there and guarantee to you that the MAJORITY of the MINORITY is offended, and personally....their opinions are the only ones in this matter that counts. and i'm pretty sure you can figure out what i'm talking about here.