Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Is it racist for a white person to paint their face black/brown for fancy dress?


Bjornebye
 Share

Is it racist?   

63 members have voted

  1. 1. Is it racist?

    • Yes
      25
    • No
      38


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Go on, then.  What are the non-racist reasons for flying the battle flag of a confederacy that existed, first and last, for the preservation of the enslavement of black people?

Maybe you just like to think about the Dukes of Hazzard and cool rock riffs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Go on, then.  What are the non-racist reasons for flying the battle flag of a confederacy that existed, first and last, for the preservation of the enslavement of black people?

He/she might find it aesthetically pleasing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/01/lewes-bonfire-festival-racism-row-controversy-blackface-child-photo?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

One of Britain’s biggest bonfire festivals has been plunged into a fresh racism row after a child was blacked up for a costume contest before a parade through Lewes.

 

The boy, believed to be aged five or six, was taking part in a pre-bonfire night event with his mother, who is a member of the Lewes borough bonfire society. For decades, the society has paraded through the East Sussex town in Zulu-style costumes and has been widely criticised for allowing blackface.

 

Campaigners said they were shocked at how the child was made up after a bitter dispute last year resulted in the society pledging to end the practice. The Lewes bonfire parade attracts up to 60,000 spectators and the town’s bonfire societies have about 6,000 members, who are part of an intense and sometimes insular culture.

 

A picture of the blacked-up child has been displayed in a photography shop in the high street in recent days and posted on Facebook, causing anger in the town, with some accusing the bonfire society of provocation, while diehard bonfire enthusiasts claim anti-racism campaigners are trying to wreck their traditions.

 

A spokeswoman for the activist group Bonfire Against Racism, expressing concerns that people may black up at the parade on Monday, said: “To dress a child in total blackface is manipulative – both of the child and the potential audience. It feels like a deliberately provocative act.”

 

Mick Symes, a member of the society’s committee, said the boy’s costume was against guidelines it drew up last year stating that less than half of any facial makeup should be black. The guidelines did not extend to wearing black body stockings.

 

“I profusely apologise. We slipped up and once is once too many. As a society we made quite robust changes last year and reinforced them at committee meetings in the run-up to bonfire,” he said.

 

Last year, the leader of a Yorkshire-based Zulu dance troupe originally from Durban in South Africa, which had been invited to join the procession, insisted it would not come unless blackface was dropped.

 

After delicate negotiations, the society agreed and said it would remove skulls, nose rings and dead monkeys from its costumes, which the troupe leader, Thanda Gumede, said were a “gross misrepresentation and unacceptable stereotype of Zulu and black people at large”.

 

Gumede had been booked to perform again in Lewes this year, but has cancelled in protest. He said he was upset that the child had been allowed to compete, and at others’ reactions.

“Online I saw people defending it and saying he was just carrying on a tradition. The reason I am upset is that as a black person I face a lot of racism. My greatest fear is that people get away with it and nothing is done,” Gumede said.

 

After making a stand last year, he said: “I didn’t expect I would be in a position where I would have to deal with blackface again.”

 

After the society had paraded through Lewes with a giant tableau of Kim Jong-un clinging on to the Empire State Building during the 2017 parade, its members gathered for a bonfire prayer and the society’s chairman ceremoniously placed a tin of “Zulux” paint on to the bonfire, to symbolise the end of blacking up.

 

Regarding the latest incident, Symes said when he saw the boy’s costume, he thought “oh, no. Not again.” Symes said he was at the contest, but the boy’s mother arrived early, there was no one else around and the boy’s face was partially covered by a beaded veil, obscuring the blackface. “It was one of those things where communication wasn’t as good as it should have been,” he said.

 

Some of the adults taking part in the warm-up competition held two weeks ago covered parts of their faces in white and red paint, as well as black, as per the society’s new policy, but campaigners argue this is still essentially blackface. Other Lewes bonfire societies dress as Native Americans, Vikings, Roman legionaries, Genghis Khan’s Mongol warriors, and monks.

 

A resident, who asked not to be named after his family was attacked for speaking out last year, said: “Bonfire is so locally entrenched that people who on any other day would say blackface is unacceptable are prepared to make an exception and say it is not racist, even though their black neighbours are saying it is offensive.

 

“There’s an expression in the bonfire societies, ‘We wun’t be druv’ [We will not be driven] and it is happening again now.”

 

Bonfire Against Racism said: “As Thanda explained last year, Zulu tradition includes a long history of body and face painting, but blackface is separate to this. Blackface is an offensive western caricature, as too are the nose bones, shrunken heads and skulls used in borough bonfire costumes.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I don't think the individual might be seeing the act as racist I believe the racist element comes from the time when there where no black actors in Hollywood and actors would instead "black up". 

 

My point is whether or not you believe you are being racist or not the point is some people will be offended by it so therefore don't do it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Bonfire Against Racism? Is this really a thing?

Bonfire is a big thing in Lewes and racism is a big thing in Sussex generally.  I think it's a local group who want to preserve the good bits of local tradition without encouraging the shit bits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kloppite said:

While I don't think the individual might be seeing the act as racist I believe the racist element comes from the time when there where no black actors in Hollywood and actors would instead "black up". 

 

My point is whether or not you believe you are being racist or not the point is some people will be offended by it so therefore don't do it.

Ah, so if people are offended by something people should stop doing it? That’d not end well, mate. The question was whether or not it is racist, and the answer is that it isn’t inherently racist. Now, some people are offended by it, just like a minority are offended by the confederate flag, but that shouldn’t stop the 75% of people, including 55% of black people, doing what they want. Intention, connotation, and context is always important. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Ah, so if people are offended by something people should stop doing it? That’d not end well, mate. The question was whether or not it is racist, and the answer is that it isn’t inherently racist. Now, some people are offended by it, just like a minority are offended by the confederate flag, but that shouldn’t stop the 75% of people, including 55% of black people, doing what they want. Intention, connotation, and context is always important. 

I don't see why it would "not end well" if people decided to stop acting like dicks to other people.  There is no reason to go to a fancy dress in blackface, so why do it?

 

As for the Confederate flag, it's not a question of "a minority being offended".  It's the knowledge that anyone - especially in the USA - who flies that flag does so with the intention of asserting white supremacy.  Like the Swastika, it is an inherently racist symbol.  (Actually, you could argue that the battle flag of the slave states is even more inherently racist than the Swastika, which predated the Nazis.)  Private individuals should be free to fly it, but other people should be free to call them out for being racist cunts.

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...