Tenn. K-Sigs "saved" by free speech. AMAZING!!! - Page 2

xp2k · #16 12-17-2002, 03:47 PM

"Oh Liberty! Liberty! What crimes are committed in your name!"

-Madame Roland

teke4life · #17 12-17-2002, 05:00 PM

xp2k,
you have a valid point, its a shame you have to belittle my argument as "dumb" in order to assert it. you're analogy to dressing as a celebrity to dressing as an aborted fetus is falacious, however. personifying an aborted fetus or a rape victim, is in fact tasteless and abhorent. the jackson five, while a bit bubble-gum, are not in itself tasteless or abhorent. the attempt of my argument was to merely point out that there is a difference between dressing up as a black celebrity and coming to the party as step-n-fetchit, or in "traditional" black face.
i owned one of those red leather jackets with all the zippers that michael jackson popularized in the 80's. was it wrong of me to do so? no, becausei was emulating him, not belittling. thats where the difference lies, in the intent and the disctretion.

xp2k · #18 12-17-2002, 05:37 PM

TKE4Life

You should not take offense to my comment about YOUR argument being "dumb" because THIS is not YOUR argument. THIS is a nationwide argument.

Incedents like this and how they are protected by the First Amendment have been argued and discussed for decades, if not centuries, and I doubt that any answer will come about on Greekchat.

Like I said, I am TOTALLY for freedom of speech, just not its abuse.

And...

If you thought hard enough, you would also find the logic in my argument about rape victims, etc.

You find "personifying an aborted fetus or a rape victim....tasteless and abhorent".

Well, believe it or not, myself and many other minorities find black/red/yellow face equally as tasteless and abhorent. Just because you cannot identify with or empathize with this fact does not make it not the case.

TKE4Life, owning one of those red jackets is fine and sporting a single white glove is perfectly fine by me. Michael Jackson has many impersonators, you see them on tv and in magazines (better yet TABLOIDS) all the time.

But why do we not see these peoples' and others admiring blues artists and motown in black face on broadcast television?

Xp2k

Kevin · #19 12-17-2002, 05:45 PM

There's a significant difference between speach that hurts us emotionally and causes us *emotional* trauma vs. the age-old example of yelling fire in a crowded theater.

There is a difference between being offended and physically assaulted.

Flag burning is Constitutional and legal... If that's what the High Court would rule then I don't think they'd find much room to say that wearing blackface was any worse.

Although I'm personally appalled by the actions, I think it's up to Kappa Sigma to adequately handle the situation. Not UT.

teke4life · #20 12-17-2002, 10:05 PM

xp2k,
sorry to come off as offended, i thought you were referrinmg specifically to my post. my other question, what about when comedians darken their faces to impersonate black celebrities, for instance, the man show impersonating carl malone, or snl impersontating jesse jackson? what about eddie murphy impersonating a white character? are these racial offensive, and likewise unacceptable?
i've never heard any public outcry or legal actions against these forms of comedy. what determines what is exceptable? secondly, were these groups sentured because they were greek? these aren't retorical questions. i think it is really important to think about what determines if something is acceptable, and why.

starang21 · #21 12-26-2002, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by S_A_I

I love my state and school and can't believe anyone would go by a stereotype to judge us . . .

kinda like those guys who did the jackson 5 imitation? can't believe that either.

mount · #22 04-26-2003, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by hoosier
Only at UTennessee would it take six Kappa Sigs in blackface to imitate the Jackson 5.

This is a state where your wealth is measured by the number of rusty cars up on blocks in your yard.

my family must be very poor then...we only have one rusty car up on blocks...

#23 04-26-2003, 03:52 PM

Let's say there's a movie about Holocaust victims/survivors (Schindler's List), the World Trade Center tragedy (World Trade Center Documentary/America 911), or a victim/survivor of an abortion (Hellraiser: Inferno).

Schindler's List and Hellraiser: Inferno are both movies in which ACTORS and ACTRESSES PORTRAY those victims. The World Trade Center Documentary/America 911 actually used real, true life victims and survivors in the movie. Are these movies, such as academy award winning movie Schindler's List, still offensive since actors and actresses portray victims and survivors? And don't tell me this is different from a fraternity portraying black people.

starang21 · #24 04-26-2003, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by scpiano211
Let's say there's a movie about Holocaust victims/survivors (Schindler's List), the World Trade Center tragedy (World Trade Center Documentary/America 911), or a victim/survivor of an abortion (Hellraiser: Inferno).

Schindler's List and Hellraiser: Inferno are both movies in which ACTORS and ACTRESSES PORTRAY those victims. The World Trade Center Documentary/America 911 actually used real, true life victims and survivors in the movie. Are these movies, such as academy award winning movie Schindler's List, still offensive since actors and actresses portray victims and survivors? And don't tell me this is different from a fraternity portraying black people.

first of all, the last post before today was the day after CHRISTMAS!! this ish is over and done with. now back to the original question....

if you truly believe that they have every right to throw on black face....why not roll into the nearest African American Cultural Center with full black face on and try and walk about 20 steps. then count the number of seconds it takes for you to have your ass handed to you on a silver platter. if you can't do it out in the open, maybe it's not right behind closed doors either. people really have big balls when they can hide behind something.

James · #25 04-26-2003, 04:44 PM

LOL . . . I don't think your reply is quite within the context of this thread. . . there are probably plenty of things that if done at certain times and places have a stab at legitamacy whereas at other times might get you killed.

Quote:

Originally posted by starang21
first of all, the last post before today was the day after CHRISTMAS!! this ish is over and done with. now back to the original question....

if you truly believe that they have every right to throw on black face....why not roll into the nearest African American Cultural Center with full black face on and try and walk about 20 steps. then count the number of seconds it takes for you to have your ass handed to you on a silver platter. if you can't do it out in the open, maybe it's not right behind closed doors either. people really have big balls when they can hide behind something.

starang21 · #26 04-26-2003, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by James
LOL . . . I don't think your reply is quite within the context of this thread. . . there are probably plenty of things that if done at certain times and places have a stab at legitamacy whereas at other times might get you killed.

so as long as it's behind closed doors and no one see it, does that make it right?

James · #27 04-26-2003, 06:02 PM

You are still not responding to her point. Her point, which goes alon with the thread, is that its generally accepted to portray distasteful topics in a communication medium. She is talking aout TV and Film here.

Quote:

Originally posted by starang21
so as long as it's behind closed doors and no one see it, does that make it right?

starang21 · #28 04-26-2003, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by James
You are still not responding to her point. Her point, which goes alon with the thread, is that its generally accepted to portray distasteful topics in a communication medium. She is talking aout TV and Film here.

and she's trying to say that since it's ok for TV and Film to portray offensive images....that means it's the same exact things as a frat boy dressing up in black face and portraying that offensive image. i already responded to that. her point has NOTHING to do with this thread. because a movie portraying abortion/ portraying the holocaust/ or a documentary is on a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT page vs. mocking a group of people. what's so hard to see about that? are you honestly naive enough to believe dressing up in blackface is actually a way to honor black folks? yea right.

#29 04-26-2003, 07:20 PM

How is it offensive? I mean my great-great-great-uncle, his brother, and mother all survived the Holocaust and could not even watch the movie Schindler's List because of the graphic nature was so offensive to them. So does this mean that we should destroy Schindler's List because it offends a certain population of Jews? The same could go for the abortion movie and WTC documentary movie.

starang21 · #30 04-26-2003, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by scpiano211
How is it offensive? I mean my great-great-great-uncle, his brother, and mother all survived the Holocaust and could not even watch the movie Schindler's List because of the graphic nature was so offensive to them. So does this mean that we should destroy Schindler's List because it offends a certain population of Jews? The same could go for the abortion movie and WTC documentary movie.

are you kidding me? how the hell is Schindler's list the same thing as blackface? one is a documentary, the other is used to mock. it isn't rocket science....the two are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!! i'm almost positive blackface is offensive to more than a CERTAIN population of black people.