Halloween and "cultural appropriation".

[Strathos]

As another poster brought up, their effect doesn't have an expiration date in the same way that black people have a lived experience that has continued to show their marginalization even in spite of an ostensibly black president being elected back to the Civil Rights Act, even back to the emancipation post Civil War.

White people still had control and were able to create a status quo where they maintained that by tricking black people into thinking they had rights, when they were given partial rights at best that are still being fought for in the sense of genuine equitable treatment versus biases that are not the same as outright prejudice, but are far more damaging because society treats the ideas as normal, because they're stereotypes, generalizing a common tactic for us to think "faster"

Irrelevant: minstrel shows were probably not run since about 100 years ago, that doesn't mean blackface has lost the impact of demeaning and insulting black people by the sense that it's a face you can just put on, when it's race, not something that should be regarded like a costume or anything to be made light of in regards to black people being expected to just "deal with it" when people treated them like a joke

Empathy, that one word seems horribly misunderstood by those who try to act like, "no I'm not racist," when they're playing into racist stereotypes and systemic biases without necessarily being aware of it because they benefit from the systemic racism as white people

But my point is that it can't be that way forever. 500 years from now, will blackface still be offensive? You can't say, since we don't know what changes society will go through.

 

[dzheremi]

But I'm talking about things that actually are in the past, or that eventually will be.

Forgive me for being dense, but won't everything eventually be in the past, since that's how time works? Does that mean everything is okay?

 

[Strathos]

Forgive me for being dense, but won't everything eventually be in the past, since that's how time works? Does that mean everything is okay?

Not now, but I'm saying we can't keep dredging these things up forever.

 

[Triumvirate]

Not now, but I'm saying we can't keep dredging these things up forever.

It depends on whether they are dealt with. Irish people in the US don't face the sort of bigotry they did 100-150 years ago and have far better representation, so the various green stereotypes of them....they're ignorant, but they're not really hurting Irish people in the US.

Jewish people on the other hand still face a greater risk of anti-Semitism even today, so anti-Semitic tropes and caricatures will have more of an effect on them - despite many of those tropes being older that some of the twee green silliness directed at the Irish.

I would be more concerned with Irish stereotypes etc being made by UK people given recent events and given that the UK still maintains control over part of Ireland, which is an unresolved colonial holdover.

There isn't really a set answer for 'how long' this should be problematic for, because it's kind of the wrong way of looking at it. It's not a matter of some amount of time passing. It depends on context and whether the underlying inequalities have actually been addressed. Some have. Some haven't, and so the concern over stereotypes and appropriation persist.

 

[Strathos]

It depends on whether they are dealt with. Irish people in the US don't face the sort of bigotry they did 100-150 years ago and have far better representation, so the various green stereotypes of them....they're ignorant, but they're not really hurting Irish people in the US.

Jewish people on the other hand still face a greater risk of anti-Semitism even today, so anti-Semitic tropes and caricatures will have more of an effect on them - despite many of those tropes being older that some of the twee green silliness directed at the Irish.

I would be more concerned with Irish stereotypes etc being made by UK people given recent events and given that the UK still maintains control over part of Ireland, which is an unresolved colonial holdover.

There isn't really a set answer for 'how long' this should be problematic for, because it's kind of the wrong way of looking at it. It's not a matter of some amount of time passing. It depends on context and whether the underlying inequalities have actually been addressed. Some have. Some haven't, and so the concern over stereotypes and appropriation persist.

My point is that if the cultural context changes, it's counterproductive to still make a huge deal out of things that were only offensive in the past.

 

[Triumvirate]

My point is that if the cultural context changes, it's counterproductive to still make a huge deal out of things that were only offensive in the past.

Changes, sure. That doesn't mean the discrimination overall has been resolved. And there is no reason to assume these things are only offensive in the past.

 

[Strathos]

Changes, sure. That doesn't mean the discrimination overall has been resolved. And there is no reason to assume these things are only offensive in the past.

But it's self-defeating to assume they will always be offensive in the future.

 

[Triumvirate]

But it's self-defeating to assume they will always be offensive in the future.

Where is that happening?

 

[muichimotsu]

But my point is that it can't be that way forever. 500 years from now, will blackface still be offensive? You can't say, since we don't know what changes society will go through.

That's an appeal to ignorance or whataboutism more specifically. The fact of the matter is that at present, it is a problem, this is dishonest attempts to deflect away from taking responsibility for something that is damaging, just not to you from the perspective of a white person (unless you aren't, but it sure sounds like you're white)

 

[muichimotsu]

What I'm about to describe is slightly off topic - it's not costumes and it's a different ethnic/demographic conflict, but it's been on my mind reading this thread.

At one point during the interminable faffing in this country over Brexit, Ireland managed to seriously inconvenience the UK's negotiating position - thanks to support from the other EU member states, Ireland essentially managed to boss around its former colonial power for a short while.

This meant that Irish/UK history inevitably ended up being discussed, and inbetween a lot of expressions of really bad anti-Irish prejudice that I'd long thought was gone, a lot of UK people were acting as if Irish people had no right to be upset at how Ireland was being talked about. 'That's all history!'

Well - there's literally a border in Ireland that wasn't always there, that's still demarcating part of that island as belonging to the UK. Why would people think that a major structural issue like that was just over and done with? For many, people pretend this because it is advantageous for their side of the argument to do so.

The notion of 'oh but all that's in the past now' should always be scrutinised, very closely. More and more I see it being used where that simply isn't true, and the consequences of historical events are still be worked out.

Sounds like historical negationism or revisionism, acting like it wasn't as bad without considering that the perspective for history is more often that of the majority group

 

[renniks]

No it isn't, the term has a meaning that you refuse to even consider is valid because of your own bias. Do you really think you know everything so well that nothing that you're unfamiliar with could possibly shake your worldview? That's not only arrogant, it's pitiable in how little you care about anything that would even create some kind of conflict

Where did I say I know everything?

 

[renniks]

White people can have internalized racism as much as black people do, the problem is societal norms and ideas that form stereotypes which negatively affect black and white people alike in terms of interactions, but black people especially in their lived experiences in a culture that marginalizes them.

Only American culture does not marginalize black people...we are a mix of every culture race and religion.

 

[Triumvirate]

Only American culture does not marginalize black people...we are a mix of every culture race and religion.

Just because they live in the US doesn't mean they aren't marginalised tho

 

[renniks]

We is society: don't be obtuse about this, look into the idea with some humility and maybe consider that you might be wrong. Otherwise you're showing how little you care about truth rather than just personally feeling right, a sure sign that critical thought tends to escape you except when you're inconvenienced and want to rationalize your own status and make defenses of the indefensible.

Truth? Oh you mean your truth? As opposed to actual reality. Your subtle insults are getting annoying, also. It's amusing how biased you are while claiming to be against bias.

 

[renniks]

Just because they live in the US doesn't mean they aren't marginalised tho

I'm just a marginalized redneck. People make fun of me all the time, but we apparently can't make fun of other cultures. I smell some serious bias here.

 

[renniks]

They can be, but that doesn't mean systemic bias is nonsense. The two statements here have nothing to do with each other.

Ok so this systemic racism is not related to people then I guess. It's just something that floats around in the atmosphere?

 

[Triumvirate]

I'm just a marginalized redneck. People make fun of me all the time, but we apparently can't make fun of other cultures. I smell some serious bias here.

Everyone should note that this has nothing to do what I just mentioned.

Rednecks tend to be white, and redneck states have disproportionate political clout due to structural oddities in the US like the electoral college. So, no, not really the same thing. Can't have double standards between two things that aren't the same! The term you are looking for is "false equivalence", though this applies to your argument specifically.

 

[Triumvirate]

Ok so this systemic racism is not related to people then I guess. It's just something that floats around in the atmosphere?

Of course it's related to people. But it's also related to social systems - the clue is in the name.

"Anyone of any race can be racist" - individual racism - is a separate matter to system level racism. The two things are not the same, ergo your argument is a nonsequitur.

 

[dzheremi]

"Anyone of any race can be racist" - individual racism - is a separate matter to system level racism.

Social systems aren't composed of individual people?

 

[Triumvirate]

Social systems aren't composed of individual people?

Systemic racism is coupled to the specific form and function of institutions of the state or society at large, which do not necessarily automatically favour everyone equally.

Individual racism is just discrimination between individuals. Harmful, sure. But not as harmful depending on form of it. Groups that lack institutional power due to underrepresentation or lingering bigoted attitudes within an institution will be far more impacted by systemic racism, and they cannot leverage systemic racism against other demographics - at most, only the much less powerful individual racism.