Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
Blackface is something which has its own sordid history. We know why that's offensive.
"Redface" has no such history. I don't think portraying the physical characteristics of another race is per se offensive. We need to all be a little less touchy about things. The action the natives are bringing is apparently a "discrimination" action. Who was discriminated against? Did they have a sign at the door which read "People of native ancestry not welcome!" No. Of course not.
|
American Indians would disagree with you. Putting on red facial paint, or "war paint" may not have the same history as blackface, but American Indians have, as a people, been abused, slaughtered, lied to, practically enslaved, forced off their land, forced to abandon their heritage, and forced to live in poverty throughout history.
Treating a race of people as if they are a Halloween costume is more than ignorant immaturity.
You should know better than to play word games with the name of the action. If the "discrimination action" definition includes that of their complaint, such as the creation of a hostile environment, then they were in face "discriminated against" by the technical definition.
Threaded Mode
