Lenny Bruce was very tame compared to most comics that came after him.
Carter couldn't negotiate because a certain presidential candidate was making deals with them behind his back.
Offensive Jackson Five act
- Thread starter Batty
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
Lenny Bruce was very tame compared to most comics that came after him.
Carter couldn't negotiate because a certain presidential candidate was making deals with them behind his back.
Captain Britain
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 3,596
- Reaction score
- 6
I totally agree that Tom & Jerry shorts from the 30's that would be considered racist now - and Song of the South - should be released on DVD, as long as the racism is put into context with a proper introduction telling people in general - and children in particular - why they were acceptable at the time. Obviously they shouldn't (and wouldn't) be released without the racist elements being ringfenced.
The Australian show was just offensive garbage - maybe Australia is the new Kazakhstan, because this seemed like something Borat would have found funny.
The Australian show was just offensive garbage - maybe Australia is the new Kazakhstan, because this seemed like something Borat would have found funny.
Mesa
Super Freak
I would probably agree. The airing of this skit, regardless of where it was aired, does seem ignorant if it was thought there wouldn't be any offended audience member. Probably weren't expecting a global audience though.
Bannister
Super Freak
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2005
- Messages
- 12,753
- Reaction score
- 0
You just release it with a warning sticker that makes note of it. In the case of Disney, I am surprised they have not released Song of the South as part of their Disney Treasures collection, since that stuff appeals more to adults anyway.
galactiboy
OT Preferist
Disney did a very nice job with their Micky Black and White series where in the 2nd set they had cartoons that were "from the vault"; which had not been released in a long time primarily for their inappropriate content.
They had them in a separate part of the collection, and even a brief introduction discussing the past and present implications. I thought it was well done and the majority of the cartoons had minor portions that were the reason they were "vaulted": for instance in one cartoon Mickey was carrying presents and one of them was a "blackface" balloon. Although on the other extreme "Mickeys' Man Friday" is crazy racist
And as for this thing, I think a lot of it has been blown out of proportion. Its clear that the cultural heritage and interpretation of "black face" is not the same in Australia as it is in the United States. Best thing out of this is to look at it as a teachable moment and not start getting all Ethnocentric on one another
They had them in a separate part of the collection, and even a brief introduction discussing the past and present implications. I thought it was well done and the majority of the cartoons had minor portions that were the reason they were "vaulted": for instance in one cartoon Mickey was carrying presents and one of them was a "blackface" balloon. Although on the other extreme "Mickeys' Man Friday" is crazy racist
And as for this thing, I think a lot of it has been blown out of proportion. Its clear that the cultural heritage and interpretation of "black face" is not the same in Australia as it is in the United States. Best thing out of this is to look at it as a teachable moment and not start getting all Ethnocentric on one another
There is a little snippet to this effect at the beginning of the Popeye DVD set.
otto
Freaked Out
Being Australian i find this offensive, DONT PUT ALL YOUR EGGS IN ONE BASKET. There are unfortunately racist people everywhere in the world,not just AUSTRALIA!!
Fritz
My muse is a fickle b**ch
Have any of you ever watched the Dean Martin Roasts?
Of course there are. I live in the south U.S., where you can't throw a rock without hitting a redneck with a rebel flag on his truck or white-hating minority. The potential problem comes from people thinking that something is not racist when it appears to be to most people.
If the argument is that "most Australians" don't find it offensive and therefore that it isn't offensive, then that might say something about "most Australians."
Frankly, the fact that most Americans might not have issue with midget tossing and wrestling (as discussed in another thread) might say something about Americans. Honestly, it bothers me that I'm not more bothered by it, because I should be. But, we don't have a shameful history of midget hating that pervades our collective unconscious, even if this history exists (it probably does). The same probably explains why Australians might not find the Jackson skit offensive. But that doesn't make the skit any less offensive in an objective sense.
xenoviper
Super Freak
xenoviper
Super Freak
I dont know i think the main reason that most Aussies dont find that Jackson5 skit that offensive is probably because in Australia we dont have that many African-Australian that much.
That is kind of my point. It might be offensive, but you might not think so if no one is there to tell you as much and to make you think about it. Similar to the Spanish basketball team doing the offensive Asian eyes. Maybe they don't have a lot of exposure to Asians there, so no one--not a single basketball player, or the photographer, or the marketing guys, or the coach, or anyone else involved with taking and distributing that picture--thought that it might offend some people. But offensive it is.
creecher
Such is Life - Ned Kelly
There's a big difference between a photo shoot and a comedy skit. That particular skit segment of the show being called Red Faces. It's supposed to be embarrassing. People saying the skit was crap, shows up their lack of knowledge about what their talking about and why they even bothered to post the obvious. They lack context. If the people in the skit didn't blacken their faces who would've associate it with the Jackson 5?
You brought up Tropical Thunder earlier. If the argument is that "most Americans" don't find it offensive and therefore that it isn't offensive, then that might say something about "most Americans." That not only Americans, but most people are hypocrites. They change their views constantly. Nothing wrong with that. What annoys me is why we have to observe one view, only to become to scared to defy that one politically correct view or be ostracised by mainstream society.
Certain things are offensive and everyone knows it to be the case, such as a bad odour. It's political correctness that aims to sterilise and neuter, and is blind to cultural differences. They're differences because of culture. When political correctness seeks to overlook geographical boundaries and dictate what is right and wrong, in a cultural sense, on a global scale, it oversteps it's boundaries and itself becomes offensive, to the culture concerned.
In other words, mind your own business and concern yourselves with your own backyard.
The point is. No matter what people say and do, someone is able to take offense to just about anything you care to mention. Big deal. Who cares? Should we care? Conversation on this board happens because people don't agree to everything and anything. Otherwise posts would consist of "yep yep", "that's right", and "I agree".
Political correctness, as a concept, is pre-ordained to fail. Equality is a noble cause, but until we become genetically engineered hermaphrodites, or even more than that, it's never going to happen. On the surface, maybe, in the public eye, but behind closed doors and in our minds we'll know it to be a sham.
When there is intent to offend, then there may be cause to take offense. These skits and fashion shoots don't fit that bill. Controversial, perhaps. Offensive, I think that's taking it too far.
devilof76
Super Freak
Awesome post creecher.
LordAzrael
Origins Kurgan Crusader
If it had been done about any other black entertainer but Michael Jackson then it might be "racist" - but put in proper context of him having started out as a dark skin and by his death ending up white I don't think it is.
I understand and respect your opinion, but I do not agree.
First, on the issue of is it OK to criticize something happening beyond your borders where cultural differences affect behavior. As I've said before, I think it is fair game. Just as the U.S. has the right to be criticized for the crap that we sometimes do (our populace, our politicians, our wacky media pundits), so does anyone else. To take your argument to an extreme--what of female genital mutilation in parts of Africa? In some places, this is acceptable behavior following societal norms. Does that make it OK? What of public beheadings in Saudi Arabia, and people having their hands cut off for stealing? I believe it is in Uzbekistan where abductions and rape are socially acceptable in some more rural areas. Was the Tienanmen Square incident something we should have turned a blind eye to?
Again, these are extreme cases, but the same logic applies. If what people do in their "own backyard" is their business, then oppression and even genocide would be acceptable, which they aren't of course, because there are generally "universal" norms of accepted behavior that these actions violate.
Secondly, regarding motivation, I don't believe these guys were intentionally trying to offend or hurt people. However, they were motivated by an intention to ridicule and mock, and offense is the unintended consequence. Is it OK to ridicule if you don't mean to harm those you are ridiculing?
Third, you are making sensitivity out to be a straw man when you say that all opinions will be "neutered" if people aren't allowed to say whatever outrageous or offensive thing that they want to. People can still have colorful opinions and heated debates without resorting to base, offensive actions targeting race or ethnicity.
Finally, I don't think that it is hypocritical to make a nuanced distinction between comedic satire and purely offensive behavior. There is a fine line here, but I personally think that I know satire (i.e. South Park) when I see it, versus pure, unacceptable prejudice (i.e. Michael Richards' rant).
Let me note that I'm by no means advocating equality in a broad sense. Equal freedom from scorn and ridicule? Sure. But part of life is understanding that some people are more gifted, or work harder than others, and get "more" because of it. Your comment about knowing that equality is a sham is fair in this context, but not in the context of suggesting that people do not deserve to be treated equally because of their race.
