Racism in Southern America..

[sh#t waffle]

I don't really have too strong an opinion on Little Britain/Bo Selecta, and certainly agree that cancel culture is in danger of becoming ridiculous (see the attempt to shame Robert Downey Jr for doing blackface in Tropic Thunder, without bothering to look at the actual character and what it was taking the piss out of).

 

However, I do remember thinking at the time that Little Britain sailed too close to the wind. A lot of comedy I love takes risks on race-related issues (Always Sunny, the original UK Office etc), but I didn't think Little Britain was funny enough or sensitive enough with it; it always felt like it was punching down, and that the blackface/funny foreign accent was the joke. 

[ZonkoVille77]

David Walliams is an epic cunt. One of the biggest dickheads to ever walk the planet.

 

That is all. 

[VladimirIlyich]

3 minutes ago, ZonkoVille77 said:

David Walliams is an epic cunt. One of the biggest dickheads to ever walk the planet.

 

That is all. 

Looks like a smug cunt but that is all I can say about him given I've never seen anything he's been in. Gives off a smug vibe.

[Section_31]

He used to be boss in Games World in the 90s before he made it big, he paid his fame dues that fella to be fair. 

[Neil G]

White people doing blackface is racist and offensive due to its historical usage. That’s been well established for a long time. It doesn’t need a complaint for a broadcaster to take action on this.

 

No white person has the right to tell black people they shouldn’t find it offensive. Feel free to disagree any of you.

[VladimirIlyich]

3 minutes ago, Neil G said:

White people doing blackface is racist and offensive due to its historical usage. That’s been well established for a long time. It doesn’t need a complaint for a broadcaster to take action on this.

 

No white person has the right to tell black people they shouldn’t find it offensive. Feel free to disagree any of you.

I'm already convinced. Those Black and White Minstrel shows on the BBC in the 60s and 70s used to scare the fuck out of me.

[Bjornebye]

I personally wouldn't be offended by a black person whitening up for humour purposes. I doubt I'd find it funny but I wouldn't be arsed. That said, if people find that sort of thing offensive then its clearly racist so it needs fucking off. Bo Selecta and Little Britain were fucking shite anyway. 

[johnsusername]

Does this mean Trans World Sport is going to have to change its name as well? 

[BeefStroganoff]

Next up...civil war.

[Bjornebye]

1 minute ago, johnsusername said:

Does this mean Trans World Sport is going to have to change its name as well? 

 

 

 

 

[VladimirIlyich]

11 minutes ago, johnsusername said:

Does this mean Trans World Sport is going to have to change its name as well? 

It was a carry over from the old Eastern Bloc countries,pretty accurate really.

[SasaS]

Gone With the Wind gone again.

I guess next comes bleeping and re-editing

[Rick Sanchez C-137]

Blackface generally probably is best avoided, but had plenty of mates black up for Halloween to go as Samuel L Jackson and John Travolta from pulp fiction. I don't see the harm in that personally, it's just like any other costume. The humour doesn't come from the colour, it's playin a character. Not mocking anyone.

 

However I'm a white mcwhiterson so it's possible I wouldn't grasp why something like that would be offensive. Maybe, given the wide opportunity for abuse, its better to just not black up, regardless of how harmless your intentions.

[Neil G]

For anybody who thinks pulling Little Britain is an overreaction and who doesn’t understand why blackface is such a big deal: it originated as a way to portray demeaning and dehumanising stereotypes of black people to white audiences in the 19th century, when black people’s voices were still excluded from society post-slavery.

 

For the Scousers on here, imagine if the only representation there had ever been of Liverpool in popular culture was decade after decade of Harry Enfield’s scousers with added jokes about Thatcher impoverishing the city and digs about Hillsborough. Then you’ll start to get the picture.

 

I liked Little Britain at the time, but was unaware of the history of blackface despite having a vague awareness that it was offensive. Looking back on the show now it’s fucking horrific.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

34 minutes ago, johnsusername said:

Does this mean Trans World Sport is going to have to change its name as well? 

Rico cancelled that ages ago.

[Rick Sanchez C-137]

3 minutes ago, Neil G said:

For anybody who thinks pulling Little Britain is an overreaction and who doesn’t understand why blackface is such a big deal: it originated as a way to portray demeaning and dehumanising stereotypes of black people to white audiences in the 19th century, when black people’s voices were still excluded from society post-slavery.

 

For the Scousers on here, imagine if the only representation there had ever been of Liverpool in popular culture was decade after decade of Harry Enfield’s scousers with added jokes about Thatcher impoverishing the city and digs about Hillsborough. Then you’ll start to get the picture.

 

I liked Little Britain at the time, but was unaware of the history of blackface despite having a vague awareness that it was offensive. Looking back on the show now it’s fucking horrific.

 

Yea, i think its misuse over the years and the opportunity for misuse are the problem. There are contexts in which no one would be offended, but it would be hard to walk that line.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

17 minutes ago, SasaS said:

I guess next comes bleeping and re-editing

I was gutted a few years ago to see one of my favourite gags being edited out of a repeat of The Young Ones.

 

A copper wearing dark glasses arrested a white bloke ringing the doorbell (to tell the lads that they'd won a Ford Tippex in a cornflakes competition) saying "Gotcha, Mr nig-nog, darkie, chocolate drop! That's white man's electricity you're stealing!"

 

It's obviously a joke about racism, rather than a racist joke, so why edit it?

[Captain Turdseye]

2 minutes ago, Neil G said:

I liked Little Britain at the time, but was unaware of the history of blackface despite having a vague awareness that it was offensive. Looking back on the show now it’s fucking horrific.

I liked it at the time too and you’re right, looking back at it is horrific. Not only for the blacking up, but also every other sketch. How did we ever find any of it funny? It’s two men dressed up as women doing really, really shit catchphrases. 

[VladimirIlyich]

4 minutes ago, Neil G said:

For anybody who thinks pulling Little Britain is an overreaction and who doesn’t understand why blackface is such a big deal: it originated as a way to portray demeaning and dehumanising stereotypes of black people to white audiences in the 19th century, when black people’s voices were still excluded from society post-slavery.

 

For the Scousers on here, imagine if the only representation there had ever been of Liverpool in popular culture was decade after decade of Harry Enfield’s scousers with added jokes about Thatcher impoverishing the city and digs about Hillsborough. Then you’ll start to get the picture.

 

I liked Little Britain at the time, but was unaware of the history of blackface despite having a vague awareness that it was offensive. Looking back on the show now it’s fucking horrific.

It seems obvious when Blackface seems to almost always evoke a 'bad person' and reinforce the white=good,black=bad cultural perception. I've generally always felt uneasy about it too,as have many others I imagine.

[Bellflower]

26 minutes ago, SasaS said:

Gone With the Wind gone again.

I guess next comes bleeping and re-editing

They'll have hell of a job with Zulu.......

[Neil G]

4 minutes ago, Aw Geez said:

 

Yea, i think its misuse over the years and the opportunity for misuse are the problem. There are contexts in which no one would be offended, but it would be hard to walk that line.

What are those contexts? The only one I can think of is at a private gathering between friends where black people have actively indicated they’re ok with it and understand there’s no malice involved. Anything in public is liable to offend people.

 

There are obviously lots of instances where people unaware of the history do it for a laugh and genuinely have no intention to offend, but that doesn’t stop it being offensive.

[Section_31]

6 minutes ago, Neil G said:

For anybody who thinks pulling Little Britain is an overreaction and who doesn’t understand why blackface is such a big deal: it originated as a way to portray demeaning and dehumanising stereotypes of black people to white audiences in the 19th century, when black people’s voices were still excluded from society post-slavery.

 

For the Scousers on here, imagine if the only representation there had ever been of Liverpool in popular culture was decade after decade of Harry Enfield’s scousers with added jokes about Thatcher impoverishing the city and digs about Hillsborough. Then you’ll start to get the picture.

 

I liked Little Britain at the time, but was unaware of the history of blackface despite having a vague awareness that it was offensive. Looking back on the show now it’s fucking horrific.

I agree with that but one of the problems with stuff like this is that it provides ammo to people who want to derail the discussion.

 

You get an issue, an image of a white copper choking a black man. And everyone who's not a cunt, right around the world, says "that's fucking not on, something needs to change, people need to be brought to justice, discussions need to be had." And I think that was genuinely happening.

 

But what you'll get now is the Ian Dales, the Nick Ferrerris and all those other cunts getting column inches out of stuff like this. It distracts from the debate and gives shitbirds inroads in which to cultivate sympathy for an 'alternative' view.

 

Also, it just smacks once again of the classic 'simple solutions to complex problems'. Just like building walls and banging pots and pans.

 

Let's have a real debate about the fact the prime minister called people picanninies with watermelon smiles, or that prince Philip has got a list of racist outrages as long as my arm, or the fact the ancestral wealth of some in the house of lords who stood in silence for george floyd was actually probably built on slavery. Let's look at the fact we tolerate outrageous columns and radio shows from people like farage and hopkins. Let's look at how we can expand things like stop funding hate, where we can hit the likes of the Daily Mail in the pocket.

[Rick Sanchez C-137]

2 minutes ago, Neil G said:

What are those contexts? The only one I can think of is at a private gathering between friends where black people have actively indicated they’re ok with it and understand there’s no malice involved. Anything in public is liable to offend people.

 

There are obviously lots of instances where people unaware of the history do it for a laugh and genuinely have no intention to offend, but that doesn’t stop it being offensive.

 

I don't see how dressing up as you favourite movie character would be more offensive if you darkened your skin rather than wearing a wig or a fat suit etc. Physical characteristics. Again, historical context could trigger people but just the dressing up by itself, I'm not sure what part is offensive.

 

I'm not saying people aren't allowed to be, i'd like someone to explain it to me tbh.

[Neil G]

2 hours ago, Captain Turdseye said:

I liked it at the time too and you’re right, looking back at it is horrific. Not only for the blacking up, but also every other sketch. How did we ever find any of it funny? It’s two men dressed up as women doing really, really shit catchphrases. 

Yep, every other sketch involved taking the piss out of a marginalised group: black, Asian, gay, disabled, mentally ill, trans, poor working class. It was widely seen as harmless at the time because there was no obvious malicious intent, and Britain had genuinely become a more tolerant and inclusive society under New Labour so it was ok to have a joke about it.

 

It was the period of “ironic bigotry”: using discriminatory language and stereotypes with the intention of making the people using them the object of the joke, but in doing so normalising and legitimising the language. Little Britain was arguably the worst offender, but The Office, Ali G, Catherine Tate, The Inbetweeners etc all did it too. You could see it reflected on here at the time, people routinely used words like spaz, mong, homophobic slurs and the like, while actively challenging genuine bigotry when it surfaced. I was guilty of it myself on occasion. Fortunately it’s not part of forum culture any more.

[BeefStroganoff]

8 minutes ago, Neil G said:

 

For the Scousers on here, imagine if the only representation there had ever been of Liverpool in popular culture was decade after decade of Harry Enfield’s scousers with added jokes about Thatcher impoverishing the city and digs about Hillsborough. Then you’ll start to get the picture.

 

We have and continue to do so. I've been branded everything associated with the stereotype, Ive had the finger pointed at me in the past simply because of my background, its part and parcel of life. I don't like it but You cannot change how people feel about others, its an illusion.

 

Every culture has those who despise other cultures. What i don't understand here is the revisionism. Is this going to teach us? Will this make us better? No of course not, what it will do is divide things further though.

 

I saw the Athletic, straight off the back of this political bomb, advertise opportunities for BAME applicants only. I mean is this helpful? Does this make it an achievement that those of a different skin colour have to be given special treatment in order to progress? Reverse racism is still racism. Stopping other of different skin colour (yes thats skin colour) whether you are hindu, white, asian from applying for a job is still discrimination. And what does that say about the Athletic? Where they inherently racist before this?

 

Still no one gets it do they? Because most of the time people are thinking reactively rather than sensibly. I watched some of the George Floyd funeral. I would have had more respect for them had they done it in a quiet, private manner. But they made a spectacle of it, invited celebs and politicians and put it on TV, they made the man, who had a criminal history, a saint in the eyes of the world. Yes, no one should die the way he did and the police will be punished to the full extent of the law, but again, we are back to the bending of the truth to suit narratives. Meanwhile everyone ignores other people who lost their lives in this matter in the last few weeks.

 

People like Keir Starmer do stuff like 'bend the knee' and post it on twitter. What is this pandering? This just gives those protesters the thumbs up they want.

 

We've been lying to each other for so long through social media and the mass media about stuff we don't fully understand and about things that are inherent and can't be changed that we no longer know what the truth is. The whole thing is f**cked.