|
EvilJoven posted:The poo poo eating grin Indian logo is actually pretty loving insulting looking. You are the only person that has brought up the Blackhawks; no one in the thread has claimed it's offensive, at least not recently, and I don't think it's been a target the same way the Indians or the Redskins has been. At most, I've seen it proposed that the logo be changed. EDIT: And it's not like if you've dressed up as some kind of Native American warrior for Halloween, you are Officially and Forever Tainted by Horrible Racism. It's just not a very considerate thing for people who have no First Nations heritage to do. PT6A fucked around with this message at 04:11 on Nov 1, 2016 |
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:56 |
|
|
Odobenidae posted:Nobody mentioned the blackhawks before you showed up, and you're still the only person who has. Please explain to us why dressing up as a native american for halloween isn't racist. Wait, wait. I asked why it was racist. No one has told me why except that...well, I assume people think it's distasteful, which I can understand. Why is it racist though?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
Well, for one thing, the "components" of such a costume often have significance in the culture they're taken from which is ignored when it's turned into a costume. For another thing, it's taking the identity of a group which has been historically oppressed and, in a very real way, was at risk of having its identity forcibly destroyed, and using it for trivial entertainment. Those are some reasons why it's racist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
Should I explain why blackface is racist? Can somebody please tell me why it's racist? I'm just asking questions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
Odobenidae posted:Should I explain why blackface is racist? Can somebody please tell me why it's racist? I'm just asking questions. "But you see, the Netherlands doesn't have the same history of racism as the US and therefore Zwarte Piet is fine and furthermore *faaarrrtt*"
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:To expand a bit, based on my own limited understanding. Dressing up as a caricature of an identifiable minority is a problem because it dehumanizes people belonging to that group and helps reinforce/normalize the negative stereotypes that created or are associated with that caricature in the first place. I definitely agree with that. I just think there's a line between racially insensitive people and racists. The former is wearing a pocahottie costume to a party or buying a ticket to a Cleveland Indians game. Thoughtless and ignorant but not a sweeping belief about a race. The latter is believing natives are lesser people. I don't think it's a great progression to put the insensitive people in the same basket as the racists, it dilutes their heinousness.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:39
|
|
|
I say we stop pussy footing around the issue and get to banning any costume that can be interpreted to be discriminatory. Natives of course. Vikings for the same reasons. Witches are incredibly offensive for a costume subject as well. We are trivializing single women being burned alive. Medieval knights are a symbol of a terrible crusade and hundreds of thousands and deaths and rapes. Pirates represent terrible historical crimes. Police. dont even get me started on the police state! Cant dress up as a nun or pope or egyptian or whatever either. Basically any time you are dressed as any group of humans, think again. Wait, so whats left? I guess I can be three hole punch jim. patonthebach fucked around with this message at 04:49 on Nov 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
It's perfectly okay to dress up as a homeless person though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:I definitely agree with that. I just think there's a line between racially insensitive people and racists. The former is wearing a pocahottie costume to a party or buying a ticket to a Cleveland Indians game. Thoughtless and ignorant but not a sweeping belief about a race. The latter is believing natives are lesser people. This is my thinking as well. God forbid there be some nuance in distasteful topics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:I definitely agree with that. I just think there's a line between racially insensitive people and racists. It's because racism is something that people do, not something that people are. If you do something that's racist, it doesn't mean that you are A Racist. It doesn't mean you're a white supremacist. But just because an action isn't really that bad, and doesn't, for example, outright deny the personhood of people of colour, doesn't mean that it's not racist. It would also be pretty good if white people stopped taking the accusation of doing a racist thing as the very worst thing that could ever happen, or the most insulting accusation they've ever heard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
Imagine how racist it would be if your costume was "sexy black person" and the outfit was a grass skirt, tooth necklace, and fake bone to put through your nose, plus a little plastic spear to wave at people. Dressing up as a racial stereotype as a Halloween costume goes beyond mere racial insensitivity and straight into "perpetuating racist stereotypes and unequal social relationships of racial inequality" territory, and frankly this has been an issue for enough years at this point that I don't think it can be brushed off as just the actions of oblivious white people. Maybe instead of getting offended when people of colour tell us we're being offensive or insensitive, we should actually listen to what they're saying and take it on board. Or in other words, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPDpcYEdiOg
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:52
|
|
|
IF all things were equal - if race relations were truly fair and equitable - seeing comical representations of various ethnicities in culture would probably be weird but at least somewhat tolerable, like telling a dirty joke in front of your grandma. But of course we know that isn't the case - things are most decidedly unequal. Therefore, start from the assumption that race relations in North America consists of (up to this very day) 500 years of varying degrees of oppression ranging from "we're taking your land" to "we're exterminating your entire nation" and work out from there as to why you might think various racialised groups take umbrage with white people appropriating their, often deeply sacred, symbols and cultural identities for the sake of meaningless past times and party favours. First Nations peoples of North America remain clearly and explicitly the subaltern. They have no voice save for the voice white culture manufactures and then speaks for them on their behalf. Consider that the overwhelming majority of white North Americans will never actually even lay eyes on an Indigenous person, and rather that their only interactions with First Nations peoples comes in the form of caricatures and parodies of them created by whites for whites. Just like Hollywood invented an Indian that didn't exist and then paid white actors to portray them, so too are Rez Royalty Halloween costumes and sports logos (even the seemingly more easily defended Blackhawk logo) symbols of white dominance over racialised minorities. We have no interest in actually allowing First Nations to have voice and power of their own. The symbols - in a vacuum - might seem innocuous or even downright innocent, but nothing exists in a vacuum and context is absolutely everything. Context in this case being centuries of slow and steady genocide and extermination, leading to a pushing to the absolute margins of society. Then, we recreate them in an image appealing to us - tamed, stripped of any referent to our shared histories of violence, and are then brought back to the center as commodity to give us something to cheer for on a Friday night. This isn't about being offended. This isn't about bullshit strawmen about white guilt or SJWs. That's such a loving canard. This is about recognising the deeply institutionalized systems of oppression that lay at the absolute beating heart of North American society that feeds injustice and inequity to this very day. Anyone here ever even been to a reservation? Do you think it is a coincidence that our country has been constructed in such a way that relieves you from witnessing those uncomfortable truths? If you think capitalism is rapidly in the process of driving us off the cliff then why are you resisting this facet of it? It is the very same beast as the one you all rally against in this thread every day.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:06
|
|
|
It's almost like it's a false equivalency to compare a Viking costume to a First Nations costume because we don't have a extensive history of systematic discrimination and forced cultural assimilation with Vikings Mind blowing stuff right there
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:08
|
|
|
In 1878 the bison population of Saskatchewan finally collapsed. First Nations went from having one of the richest, healthiest diets in history (they were historically some of the tallest people in the world at the time - on average an inch and a half taller than the Europeans coming into the territory) to - six months later - starving to death en masse. By the summer of 1879 - I saw the reports in papers from the time myself - First Nations were reduced to geographical landmarks. "Lost horses found near the place where the Indians starved." That starvation, of course, being the deliberate, explicit policy enacted and enforced for decades by Canada's politicians at the time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
Here's a friendly reminder that we are only two generations removed from the height of the residential school era and many of the victims of that era are still alive. Their children and grandchildren still feel the effects of this legacy today (if they weren't in residential school themselves, the last one closed only 20 years ago after all)
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:16
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:In 1878 the bison population of Saskatchewan finally collapsed. First Nations went from having one of the richest, healthiest diets in history (they were historically some of the tallest people in the world at the time - on average an inch and a half taller than the Europeans coming into the territory) to - six months later - starving to death en masse. By the summer of 1879 - I saw the reports in papers from the time myself - First Nations were reduced to geographical landmarks. "Lost horses found near the place where the Indians starved." That starvation, of course, being the deliberate, explicit policy enacted and enforced for decades by Canada's politicians at the time. Sounds like the Canadians were being REALLY racially insensitive, if only there was some sort of word to describe that without making a bunch of lily white desk jockeys feel uncomfortable...
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
Just to further that - I know people my age who attended residential schools (albeit after the band assumed control) - Gordon's and Lebret, and have heard them tell stories of widespread rape and violence that they grew up hearing about from older family members. Look up William Peniston Starr and the related term "Starr babies". This is living history. This isn't the loving Norman conquest.Odobenidae posted:Sounds like the Canadians were being REALLY racially insensitive, if only there was some sort of word to describe that without making a bunch of lily white desk jockeys feel uncomfortable... I know this one... Father of Confederation????
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
Close! "Racist" is what we were looking for. Sadly there's not enough nuance in your argument for it to count, try being an insufferable pedant next time and see if your luck can pull you through. Would you care to know that the racially insensitive deserve our compassion? They don't want to be lumped in with the "real racists" and I think it's about time someone stood up and said something about it! They're only a little racist! Not even enough for a full racism!
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:29
|
|
|
.
Legit Businessman fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Sep 9, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
To be clear, First Nations peoples are defending the last vestiges of their cultures we tried for centuries to eradicate from being overrun. You're defending the right to wear something funny once a year or not have the logo of your favourite sports team changed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
This thread is the worst sometimes. Usually when I'm posting! So anyway about 6 months ago we did a drink thing in Ottawa when bunny was still around. It as actually fun. Anyone from ottawa want to do round 2? I promise drinks and minimal actual politics chat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:To be clear, First Nations peoples are defending the last vestiges of their cultures we tried for centuries to eradicate from being overrun. You're defending the right to wear something funny once a year or not have the logo of your favourite sports team changed. I'm not sure if this is directed at me, but I fear you've gotten off track, my friend. Who would disagree that residential schools were a heinous thing? Obviously indigenous people have been oppressed and mistreated by the Canadian government. I wouldn't defend wearing an "indian" costume. I think it's distasteful. Frankly, it's surprising to me to hear that they are popular enough that costume shops carry them. I just don't think it's an inherently racist act. I guess we're talking about semantics. I mean, we must be, because we seem to agree on the matters of substance.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:43
|
|
|
Oh I'm definitely getting offtrack, though the post you are quoting does - in broad strokes - respond to the costume controversy. Let me refocus - and lay my claim here: I would suggest that what you call distasteful in fact carries enough baggage (as my original post more closely responds to) that it is no longer a matter of taste and is, in fact, a matter of being cognizant (or not) of what these cultural signifiers carry in terms of connotative meaning. Again, my original post speaks more to this, but we don't get to pretend these things are happening in a vacuum. Anyway, I appreciate the honest response. I find petty sniping and snappy quips awfully tiresome. e. I guess you can still call that distasteful, but distasteful to me suggests wearing white to a wedding, swearing in church, or pissing on the toilet seat. What this is is on another level entirely. And racism here isn't wearing a hood and burning crosses. These explicit, individual acts of racism are indeed very rare in today's society. However, if "solving racism" just involves getting the hoods and burning crosses out of the way, why is poverty and social strife still so racialised in the modern world? Surely if we are no longer lynching blacks that must mean equality is coming? Obviously this isn't the case. So it becomes, then, that accusations of racism today point more directly to the "soft" racism of institutionalised, structural racial inequality - more an analysis of the reasons why the exact same resume is twice as likely to get a callback with a "white" name on the top compared to a "black" name and less about "Coloreds Only" water fountains. Taken in this context, ridiculously petty things such as Halloween costumes are in fact fairly troubling for their status as racial symbol. Again, referencing here my original post on the topics. Stickarts fucked around with this message at 06:00 on Nov 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:51
|
|
|
Tsyni posted:I assume people think it's distasteful, which I can understand. Tsyni posted:This is my thinking as well. God forbid there be some nuance in distasteful topics. Tsyni posted:I think it's distasteful. You keep saying that but never explain your reasoning and I'm very confused. Why do you find wearing an "indian" costume distasteful if not because it's a racist act? You don't care for the first nation aesthetic or style? Too gaudy? Not gaudy enough? Or do you think it is "racially insensitive" but that using "Racist" is simply a bridge too far when describing an equivalent to blackface?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 06:12
|
|
|
Odobenidae posted:You keep saying that but never explain your reasoning and I'm very confused. I realize you're a bit jazzed up here, but please believe me when I tell you that I have a habit of being understated. Perhaps a bad habit? I think it's distasteful, or pretty lovely, for pretty much every reason that's been discussed. Why I don't think it's racist is because it's likely that most people who would wear the costume aren't wearing it to symbolize their racist feelings, or their feeling that their race is better than that of indigenous people. If someone told me that indigenous people were inferior to white people I would say that is definitely wrong. If someone told me that they were going to dress up as an indigenous person for halloween I would say...eh, maybe you shouldn't because of Canada's attempts to suppress indigenous culture, and so on. Anyway, like I said, I think this is purely semantics. I am sorry I won't call it racist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 07:37
|
|
|
The point, if it isn't clear, is that there is much, much, much more to "racism" than holding overtly racist beliefs, to the point that thinking otherwise is being ridiculously reductive and overlooking the actual machinations of power that keep many people economically and socially oppressed along racial lines.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
Tsyni posted:Why I don't think it's racist is because it's likely that most people who would wear the costume aren't wearing it to symbolize their racist feelings, or their feeling that their race is better than that of indigenous people. I really don't think it matters if the person wearing it has good intentions or not, the effect is still the same. If the guy jumping around on a stage with his face covered in shoe polish feels deep down inside that all races should be equal, his actions show the exact opposite. Tsyni posted:I think it's distasteful, or pretty lovely, for pretty much every reason that's been discussed. Okay, so it's "distasteful" because it enforces and proliferates the desired effect of decades of systemic oppression committed against Native Americans? More commonly known as racism? Ergo, wearing an "indian" costume for halloween would be racist? Why did you bring this up in the first place? You knew about the many terrible things that our country has done to Native Americans, and you knew that wearing their culture as a costume was morally "wrong" for a bunch of nebulous reasons you hint at while dancing carefully around the term "racism". What is your point?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 08:59
|
|
|
The only benefit to not calling it "racist" is to not offend bigots. You call them "racially insensitive", they call themselves "race realists". Being a semantic pedant is only helping them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 09:01
|
|
|
Odobenidae posted:Why did you bring this up in the first place? You knew about the many terrible things that our country has done to Native Americans, and you knew that wearing their culture as a costume was morally "wrong" for a bunch of nebulous reasons you hint at while dancing carefully around the term "racism". What is your point? I brought it up because I was uncertain about the topic and wanted to debate and discuss it. I feel bad because I don't think we're getting anywhere, and I'm sure these continued posts are just a pain, really. I don't think it does a disservice to anyone to say they were/are culturally oppressed without using racism as a blanket term. I conceded that it was a semantics issue. I'm not trying to wave a dictionary at anyone, I was just looking for more insight into people's reaction to this issue. Please just PM me if you want to keep talking about it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 09:31
|
|
|
Tsyni posted:I brought it up because I was uncertain about the topic and wanted to debate and discuss it. I feel bad because I don't think we're getting anywhere, and I'm sure these continued posts are just a pain, really. You seem to be confused about what the concept of racism actually is. Go to wikipedia, search "racism" then read literally the first sentence. That should clear things up for you about whether or not cultural oppression counts as racism
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 10:08
|
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:You seem to be confused about what the concept of racism actually is. Go to wikipedia, search "racism" then read literally the first sentence. That should clear things up for you about whether or not cultural oppression counts as racism That cleared it all up. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:This thread is the worst sometimes. Usually when I'm posting! I might be down for that!
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 13:21
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:This thread is the worst sometimes. Usually when I'm posting! Sure I'll hop on the doxx train  actually on second thought I think I'm going to go stand in front of a real train
Somebody fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Sep 9, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 13:24
|
|
|
That must be one hell of a sentence. I didn't think it would be this deflating to be outdone by Wikipedia.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 13:41
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:That must be one hell of a sentence. I didn't think it would be this deflating to be outdone by Wikipedia. Wikipedia posted:Racism is a product of the complex interaction in a given society of a race-based worldview with prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination. Pretty good imo
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 13:46
|
|
|
Wikipedia: it's good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
It's totally cool to dress as Sexy Pochahontas as long as indigenous women aren't disproportionately victims of sexualized violence and their murders and disappearances are investigated with the same rigour that white women's are. Oh wait. poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
Can I still dress up as a sexy bison next year?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 14:29
|
|
|
Halloween is over, let's move on to a new depressing topic.quote:Surveillance of La Presse reporter a 'serious attack on freedom of the press in Canada' What a shock, Bill C-51 has contributed to a cultural shift in Canadian policing (lol as if they weren't like this before) where police feel entitled to any information at any time, regardless of source or constitutional protections. If only we had elected a government that promised to undo this bill and reverse the erosion of privacy and free speech it allows and represents. Oh but the police say it's okay because this was an extraordinary situation and definitely not the new norm, trust the police, they wouldn't lie to you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 14:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:56 |
|
|
Yeah and the FBI just wanted that one iphone the once I totally swear dood. So um.... what has the government done since being elected?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 14:47
|
|