nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Blackface

Mrcaramelchoc

I couldn't see any other thread about this.

https://news.sky.com/story/little-britain-removed-from-iplayer-and-netflix-after-blackface-criticism-12003558

In a nut shell comedians are having to apologise for black facing themselves in their sketches over the years.jimmy fallon apologising for a sketch he did on snl 20 years ago.
Its absolutely pathetic and a world gone mad.
Little Britain is one of them.that is comedy gold and having to apologise for some sketches now is a disgrace.
Its like erasing bits of history just because it offends a certain section.
There's isnt a race on the planet that hasn't had the piss taken out of it.
A load of bollox.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Better Than Christ

murpho999 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JBXtVrGmaI

No doubt the film "True Identity" where Lenny Henry goes whiteface will also be banned and removed from You Tube and other services?

He's actually white and has been blacking up for years. And nobody says a word about it. Typical, one rule for them and another for the rest of us.

Ush1

Dave Chappelle had a skit on Chappelle show where he was a white news reader. Was funny like.

Sebastian Dangerfield

buried wrote: »

I think the lesson may be that it's not actually that funny. And if someone like Justin Trudeau found it funny, then maybe best to take that as an example to not emulate the lame silly twit.

I once played Blackie Connors in a school Christmas play based on Glenroe, complete with make up on my face for the effect of dirt. The headmaster wasn't mad on nativity (or travellers, it seems).

Hangdogroad

Is there any footage of Brendan O Carroll in blackface floating around? Asking for a friend.

ancapailldorcha

Hangdogroad wrote: »

Is there any footage of Brendan O Carroll in blackface floating around? Asking for a friend.

He did do a racist impression of a Chinese man in the Mrs Brown's Boys movie for one of his characters.

Get Real

Paddygreen wrote: »

We have to reform the world to be a nicer and more progressive thinking place guys. It is about time Fr Ted was banned, there is b****face in that and its clips are consistently used by racists.

If this is a genuine post and opinion I have to respectfully disagree.

The irony being that these episodes you refer to were in themselves being progressive at the time. Representative of the rapidly changing Irish society. Just because there's laughing, doesn't mean the people portrayed are the butt of the joke.

The Donegal priest, and how people from other backgrounds are now as Irish as the Irish themselves. How it's new, and it's funny, but isn't it great.

The fact Ted is concerned about being percieved as racist, because in fact, he is not. The old lady going mad, using the usual tired phrases "taking our jobs" and how quickly she resumes normal conversation. This actually indicating that she is on a ridiculous bandwagon, and in fact, her unfounded fears, don't affect her life at all.

The integration with the Chinese, the breaking of barriers, although initially awkward. Pretty representative of the time. When you consider it was less than 10 years that we went from almost no diversity, to an influx of people from abroad in the 90s.

This was typical of the country at the time. An innocent curiosity, an awkwardness, and a few nutters with irrational, and hilarious fear. Look at us now, all working with colleagues of different nationalities, and at a point where nationality isn't even a "thing" or isn't the first thought people generally think.

After a while, we stopped thinking of "the polish lad" or "the Chinese fella" as the main description. Now we think of my friend Lukas, who has a 6 year old in the primary school down the road and likes Liverpool. We acknowledge their nationality obviously, but subconsciously, over time, it no longer defines what we percieved them as.

Engaging in controlling tactics of banning things is dangerous, and something "liberals" usually oppose. It's not a good thing to justify censorship because this time it suits a certain agenda.

Gregor Samsa

Get Real wrote: »

If this is a genuine post and opinion I have to respectfully disagree.

It's not.

PsychoPete

murpho999 wrote: »

I don't see how comedians playing black characters in their show is racist.

So are we saying now that in the future we can't have a white comedian impersonate or characterise a famous black person in a humorous manner and it automatically means it's rascist?

That's not right and it's not the definition of racism as far as I am concerned.

I dont see the problem with it if the intent behind it is correct and it isnt preaching hate towards black people

B.A._Baracus

PsychoPete wrote: »

I dont see the problem with it if the intent behind it is correct and it isnt preaching hate towards black people

That's the thing... many people who did black face on TV or movies over the years did so to get a laugh. Like Jimmy Fallon, he wasnt being racist when he did it. He was just trying to get a laugh.

That said no excuse for it now. As how could it ever be seen with good intent? Or at least what people could ever perceive as good internet?

it has negative reactions today. It's like using your fingers to squint your eyes and then say "me so sworry' -
It's just easier to not do these things than face any backlash.

topper75

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

That's the thing... many people who did black face on TV or movies over the years did so to get a laugh. Like Jimmy Fallon, he wasnt being racist when he did it. He was just trying to get a laugh.

That said no excuse for it now. As how could it ever be seen with good intent? Or at least what people could ever perceive as good internet?

it has negative reactions today. It's like using your fingers to squint your eyes and then say "me so sworry' -
It's just easier to not do these things than face any backlash.

What a cheek you have taking that username.

Pure vile hatred.

El_Duderino 09

kowloon wrote: »

One of the jam brands had them too, and then there's the Gollybar.

Isn't this an example of exactly the kind of thing that black people are talking about? From gollybars to blacking up, black people were saying it's not on but "who listens to black people, amiright?"

It's not a coincidence that Floyd/BLM have momentum and are actually making people listen to their concerns, and these changes are happening. Black people didn't become concerned about blackface in the last week, lots of people just heard (or cared) about it in the last week be abuse they were forced to actually listen for the first time.

There are similar Irish jokes which persist in the UK for example. I would day that's different for one main reason - Irish people aren't systematically discriminated against in the UK anymore. If black oeople were also not systematically discriminated against, then these things wouldn't be a problem either.

It's grand to say that racist comedy of 20 years ago was grand 20 years ago. But it was only grand because they didn't have to consider what black people thought because considering what black people think has only become normal in recent years and come into sharp focus in the last week. Isn't that the point? It's not that it wasn't racist 20 years ago, it just didn't matter if it was racist 20 years ago.

BPKS

"When I was young, PC meant a Police Constable. Nowadays I cant seem to tell the difference."

Lyrics from a song released in 1994. Thankfully the guy he wrote it wasn't around for long to see the way the world would turn out.

El_Duderino 09

BPKS wrote: »

"When I was young, PC meant a Police Constable. Nowadays I cant seem to tell the difference."

Lyrics from a song released in 1994. Thankfully the guy he wrote it wasn't around for long to see the way the world would turn out.

Yeah some people will resist change no matter how sensible it is. That's just the way. Whether they Complain about PC gone mad or if they just don't like having to consider other people, they'll find a way to give out about it.

I wonder how many of the changes that guy was Complaining about that you'd completely agree with and wouldn't dream of changing back?

B.A._Baracus

topper75 wrote: »

What a cheek you have taking that username.

Pure vile hatred.

:pac:

I like the a-team. I like Mr T. But you won't see me go to a Halloween party dressed as him

Look, I can tell you're of the stance of do what you want right?
Then ok, let's dig into that. Say I get a t-shirt printed up that has a nice big ol' hard dick on it. The front say. I mean BIG :pac:

Then I go down the shops or into the city centre. I'll have mothers and fathers coming up to me and saying "do you mind, do ye? Why you wearing that? My child is looking at you" - but hey in doing what I want, right?

Maybe I go one step further and on the back I have "John's 30th birthday party" - so I say how it was just a laugh. Do you think that's gonna change anything?

... Could it be that if I did all that. I was only wearing it to get a reaction from people. Which is dickish. But when anyone questions me I hide behind the ah sure doing what I want / stop being offended so easily / whatever excuse.

Maybe the better call is just not to wear it outside John's birthday party right? Maybe I should use some common sense right?

ChelseaRentBoy

shaveAbullock wrote: »

When either the left or right become extreme they start to look very similar.

That's it in a nutshell. Two extremes with no grey areas. Twats the lot of them.

topper75

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Look, I can tell you're of the stance of do what you want right?
...

I'll declare my opinion so for what it is worth. You were almost there:

You can do what you want so long as you don't meaningfully cause offence.

I know the Wayans brothers weren't meaningfully causing offence at people with white skin or European heritage. They were doing it for entertainment purposes only. As with the Little Britain sketches.

Clamping down on this is nonsensical.

A penis on a t-shirt on a public street with kids is plainly inappropriate so I'm sorry to say kind of fails as an analogy (I appreciate your difficulty in finding an analogy).

ChikiChiki

The world is once again losing the plot with some of our most sensitive souls triggered by an incident of police brutality in the states. Protests over that incident were just but this additional stuff is pure nonsense.

I'm not a fan of having to revert back through history. Make the changes today and going forward.

jammiedodgers

Funny they had no problem with it only 46 days ago.

https://twitter.com/scottygb/status/1270463056393445387

B.A._Baracus

topper75 wrote: »

I'll declare my opinion so for what it is worth. You were almost there:

You can do what you want so long as you don't meaningfully cause offence.

I know the Wayans brothers weren't meaningfully causing offence at people with white skin or European heritage. They were doing it for entertainment purposes only. As with the Little Britain sketches.

Clamping down on this is nonsensical.

A penis on a t-shirt on a public street with kids is plainly inappropriate so I'm sorry to say kind of fails as an analogy (I appreciate your difficulty in finding an analogy).

Ah here. You know it's the same. Split hairs if you want. IE: Doing something that's going to cause a negative reaction. There for, why even do it. It's not like anyone of us is 6 years old.

But you used the term meaningfully yeah? But you're looking at this thread. You're replying in this thread. If you dawned the black face next Halloween you know people are gonna take offense. How many exactly can be up for debate. But you do. It's just one of those things.

you couldn't hide behind I didn't meaningfully cause offense - you did tho. As you're aware of those negative implications.

Look I ain't PC. a large part of me is to hell what people think. F*ck people. Life is a rat race. However don't go out looking for a reaction. Don't be a dick for the sake of being a dick.
So why dawn black face?

Get Real

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

It's not.

I'm slightly embarrassed now ðŸ˜‚ but I suppose my overall point stands, misdirected at the poster.

eviltwin

It’s getting ridiculous. I’ve seen one person in a Facebook group I’m in calling for a boycott of David Walliams books now because of it. It seems to be driven almost exclusively by white people desperate to appear pc and not offend.

I always liked little Britain because it slagged everyone equally - gay, working class, men, women etc.

Chris_Heilong

This is a part of the sensitive victim culture, One day people will stop being offended by such a silly things, just having black face was never the problem in itself, it was the depiction of black people that the people in Black face preformed that was the problem and until the time that some mostly whites stops the infantilization of Black people living in first world countries and start seeing them in the same light as any other race I feel we will be stuck in this easily offended racially divided world.

Hector Savage

Ironic, this scene really takes the piss out of the "liberal" who thinks he's for equality but is just a condescending dick head ...

and now this is banned ... crazy, Orwellian times indeed ..

Badly Drunk Boy

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

I remember my brother dressing up as B.A. Baracus for halloween in 1980 or '81. He got a mask in Hector Grey's, and wore a length of gold xmas tinsel as the bling. I pity the fool now.

The A-Team only started in 1983 but I'll forgive you because you're a Laibach fan.

BPKS

I see HBO Max have removed Gone with the Wind in order to 'add discussion of its historical context'.

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn about those PC do-gooders.

topper75

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

So why dawn black face?

You don it because the character you have chosen to pretend to be has a black face. Simple.

Now you dress up as a black character by donning blackface makeup, and start acting all stupid and foolish as a sendup of a stereotype, that changes things.

See the difference?

The first one is absolutely fine because you are not meaningfully causing offence.

El_Duderino 09

jammiedodgers wrote: »

Funny they had no problem with it only 46 days ago.

https://twitter.com/scottygb/status/1270463056393445387

Yeah that makes sense. The Floyd/BLM movement didn't have so much momentum 46 days ago.

It's really onky in the last couple of weeks that these issues have actually started changing.

Mister Vain

The worst type of censorship is self censorship.

1800_Ladladlad

There are many people who went "black" and "white" for comedic reasons who show no racist traits. Like snoop Dogg below which I thought nothing of but I highly doubt he would get the same treatment. Its the double standards that are irritating

img

murpho999

BPKS wrote: »

I see HBO Max have removed Gone with the Wind in order to 'add discussion of its historical context'.

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn about those PC do-gooders.

In a way I get this as the film does portray black people as slaves who are happy with their lot and promotes the idea that slavery was ok.

I think that's different to shows where people black up to portray black characters.

It's all about the intent in my opinion.

Either way I don't think Gone With The Wind should be banned as we can't just deny that bad things happened and erase history.

I think they should be available for people to see how attitudes were wrong then and different now.