Quote:
Originally posted by librasoul22
[B]THESE PEOPLE KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING WAS WRONG. Viruous pointed it out, but you all are ignoring that for some reason.
1. They had recently held a seminar at UofT explaining why blackface was bad.
2. The men in question said they did not want another "Auburn incident" and lied about their fraternal membership to someone who questioned them.
THEY KNEW. PERIOD.
|
So, it's guilty until proven innocent?
I'm not, in any way, defending the use of blackface by anyone. What I am saying is that it is possible that these guys didn't realize they were offending.
I went back to the original article, to be sure I was remembering it correctly...
It was not one of the men in question, but the Chapter President who made the "Auburn" comment.
To quote the article...
"Jackson says he saw six people walking down the back stairwell of RT's with smudged faces. They weren't completely black, but he says they looked like they'd been wiped off."
Is it possible that the president saw the six men and took action to get them to wipe off the blackface because he knew it was wrong, but perhaps they didn't? (Before any asks, I know it's also possible they wiped it off to "destroy" evidence.)
Another quote...
"UT put on a sensitivity program for fraternities not long ago, explaining why painting faces black is so offensive. The Kappa Sigma fraternity was there. "In light of that, I am surprised this could happen," Rogers says."
But who attended the program. All Greeks? Chapter officers? Were the offending men at the program?
Did the information trickle down to the members?
We are generally critical when anyone is "convicted" by the media. Are we on the verge of doing the same thing here?
What these guys did is offensive. There's no doubt. The administration at UT is "appalled." They should be. They say they will take action. They should.
The question in my mind is whether the chapter members did it with malice or out of ignorance. To put it another way, are they bad people, or just dumber than a brick. In the instances (ie. Auburn)where there were others involved dressed as KKK members, there is no doubt in my mind that pre-meditation existed.
I've sat on juries. They tell you you must believe someone is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.
I think there is at least the possibilitiy that these guys didn't realize what they were doing. I don't know why I think that except for the seemingly open reply when the first man was challenged, "I'm impersonating Louis Armstrong." for some reason, that just doesn't seem malicious to me.
But, as I said earlier, I'm prone to give the benefit of the doubt until I know for sure about something or someone's intentions.