Thread: Dallas Cowboys cheerleader causes controversy by sporting blackface!

"Mr" wrote:

"happy" wrote:

Stereotypes themselves are not harmful. There are negative and non-negative stereotypes. Most often we think of stereotypes as negative.

Italians are great cooks. True or false, I don't know. But are Italians everywhere going to be upset if an Italian on TV is portrayed as a great cook?

Minnesota nice. Southern Hospitality.

Elderly people are a good source of history.

Again, any one of those can be completely and 100% false when applied to an individual level. But stereotyping is not in itself negative, it is just the perceived view and familiarity of a group, positive or negative, right or wrong.

Then there are stereotypes that blur the lines between positive and negative. Black QBs are great out of the pocket is one. Sure, it acknowledges a good trait (good on the run) but downplays another trait (pure passing).

And everyone is guilty of negative stereotyping. On this board alone, how many people link Wisconsin and bestiality? I know I'm guilty of that one.

Italian are better cooks, blacks are better athletes, Irish can hold their liquor, Asians are great at math.

Sure it sounds good for them, but what does it say about everyone else? Making one group up to be superior in one way may not be offensive to them, but what about those who are not that group?


And to Ultra, if it wasn't veterans day I'd fire a couple back at you. Maybe tomorrow.

Well, notice none of the positive stereotypes I listed started with "X is better than".

Italians are great cooks, Minnesota Nice, Southern Hospitality... I think those stereotypes say something about the group it mentions, its not saying "Italians are great cooks everyone else can't fry an egg".

Black are better athletes, that would be one I think blurs the lines between positive and negative. Anything starting with "X is better than" has obvious negative connotations.

Irish can hold their liquor. Again, blurs the lines between positive and negative. I think mostly negative though. I would hate to be known for that honestly.

Veterans care about our country is a stereotype. Find something negative in that one.

Who here is black and offended by this? Personally, I can't imagine anyone.

You should be flattered by this. Do you think that 50 years ago white people would have done something like this in good fun? White people shouldn’t have to walk on eggshells forever because of shit that happened long before we were even born.

If blacks can impersonate whites (Dave Chappell did it all the time), whites should be able to impersonate blacks.

"Mr" wrote:

"happy" wrote:

Stereotypes themselves are not harmful. There are negative and non-negative stereotypes. Most often we think of stereotypes as negative.

Italians are great cooks. True or false, I don't know. But are Italians everywhere going to be upset if an Italian on TV is portrayed as a great cook?

Minnesota nice. Southern Hospitality.

Elderly people are a good source of history.

Again, any one of those can be completely and 100% false when applied to an individual level. But stereotyping is not in itself negative, it is just the perceived view and familiarity of a group, positive or negative, right or wrong.

Then there are stereotypes that blur the lines between positive and negative. Black QBs are great out of the pocket is one. Sure, it acknowledges a good trait (good on the run) but downplays another trait (pure passing).

And everyone is guilty of negative stereotyping. On this board alone, how many people link Wisconsin and bestiality? I know I'm guilty of that one.

Italian are better cooks, blacks are better athletes, Irish can hold their liquor, Asians are great at math.

Sure it sounds good for them, but what does it say about everyone else? Making one group up to be superior in one way may not be offensive to them, but what about those who are not that group?


And to Ultra, if it wasn't veterans day I'd fire a couple back at you. Maybe tomorrow.

[img width=450 height=675]http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/1999/Dec-05-Sun-1999/photos/snyder.jpg[/img]

"PurplePackerEater" wrote:

Who here is black and offended by this? Personally, I can't imagine anyone.

You should be flattered by this. Do you think that 50 years ago white people would have done something like this in good fun? White people shouldn’t have to walk on eggshells forever because of pooh that happened long before we were even born.

If blacks can impersonate whites (Dave Chappell did it all the time), whites should be able to impersonate blacks.

I never of thought about it like that, good points.

BTW she is still damn hott who cares.

;D

Stereotypes are not bad - not all of them.

(Psychologist coming out in me - fair warning).

We operate under stereotypes all of the time, it simplifies our lives and can even make us safer (for best or worst).


It's a matter of learned responses - either through experience or through teaching.
These can be negative or positive...
Why do people not walk down dark alleys at night?
Something tells them that bad people often hang out in dark alleys late at night.
The types of people who hang out there can be a correct or incorrect/right or wrong stereotype.


People respond differently to different people in different situations all of the time.
If somebody is covered in tattoos and/or piercings, many people find them threatening.
This is a stereotype.
It could be true for the person or it could be false.
It can be useful for self-preservation (avoiding dangerous looking people is good for spreading one's genes long-term).


Most of the situations you could use the "no-shit sherlock" response in are based on stereotypes..

I worked 14+ hours today so my examples kind of suck, but bear with me.
A lot of the positive examples were also accurate (X being a good cook, etc.)

"vegasvike" wrote:

"BadlandsViking" wrote:

Why is it ok for african american's to say the N word if they are so offended by it?

Its not.
A lot of the people that are using that word are uneducated and igorant to the meaning and history of the word.
Just becuase you see dumbasses with their pants down past their knees and living up to all the stereotypes using it does not mean we all use it.
I for one, hate that word with a passion

Thank You. Ialso don't use the word and I get uncomfortable when I see rappers on stage screaming it out to a mostly white concert crowd. It makes me CRINGE when I hear a black person use it. It's a very subject that divides most groups. I'm not in the minority either. It's a touchy subject.

"ultravikingfan" wrote:

"Mr" wrote:

"happy" wrote:

"tarkenton10" wrote:

Aren't all stereotypes harmful,

Not all.

Which ones are not?

The rich kid Rutgers stereotypes is not harmful


It's true!

;D

If I were a rich kid I would take offense to this!!!! > ;D

Sorry I missed so many pages of this but a flat tire + virus on a relative's PC + hanging with my 7 year old brother...provided me with a rough day.

As for the Cheerleader pic, I just wanted to point out again that I'm not saying the she is racist or meant anything racist by it, however, it is all about context. Can you honestly say that if it wasn't clear that she was trying to be lil' wayne, that it wouldn't offend some people? As another person said, we are all people and being human is complex. Nothing is black or white and mostly everything is grey. How can some of you expect someone's feeling on a slight(no matter how small) not to be as complex? It's an emotional response. It's not black or white, it's going to cause a hodgepodge of reactions.

There was an interesting episode of Oprah( :) when Jay-Z came to her show. She had never had a rapper on as a rapper. She had Ludacris on with the cast of the movie Crash but not as a rapper as an actor. Jay-z and her discussed the use of the N-Word. She being from the south and having been thru "in your face racism" is appalled by it. She linked it back to being attacked but it. Jay-Z being from NYC has faced his fair share of racism but in a different form. He probably had never been called a Nigger by a person of a different race but that doesn't mean that he hasn't been subjected to underhanded racism (The new face of racism is this country). The use of the N - word by someone of his own race didn't bother him. He saw it as taking something negative and making something positive out of it. Other races have done this. Some Asian and Hispanic people refer to themselves as their derogatory word inside of their communities. It's not a behavior to inherent to black people.

I really enjoyed some of the responses in this chat and I will Pm most of the people to reach out to them about their responses(not trying to bog the thread down with +1s or
>
>). All in all it's a nice slice of the American point of view. Now if you want to know what offensive is, you should ask what Trinidadian thinks about Americans...just joking.

"NodakPaul" wrote:

"kevoncox" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

Interesting.

If she actually went in blackface, I would understand the complaints.
Blackface has a long theatrical history, and some fairly strong ties to a racist view (although there were actually African American actors who were very successful as blackface artists).

However, she didn't go in black face.
In face, it wasn't even close.
She wore black make up and went as a specific celebrity.
Anyone who refers to this as "blackface" needs to read up on the history of it.
This has nothing to do (IMHO) with racism or stereotypes, and everything to do with Halloween.

So if she said, I was going as a black person (not Lil' Wayne) would this still not be offensive?
I've read up plenty about blackface and it's history worldwide, however, my point was that there is still people who would identify that as black face. Just like some people see the confederate flag and attribute the hatred and bigotry that that era represented. Southern whites however, see the confederate flag as a symbol of their history and the family members they lost in the civil war. Same image, different meanings. Again, you should never tell someone what can and cannot offend them. You've never walked a day in their shoe.

I understand what you are saying about the confederate flag and the differing meanings associated with it, and I respect and agree with that.
This, however, is at least slightly different.


As I am sure you know, Blackface is theatrical makeup style that was used in the 1800's and early 1900's to portray a stereotypical black person.
It was noted by using no make up or white make up around the mouth to exaggerate the lips and usually included tousled hair and ragged clothing that mimicked the styles of high society at the time (i.e. top hat with the top punched out, etc).
Blackface actors and comedians used existing racism and stereotypes as staples in their routine, giving in to the "Oh Lordy Lordy Who's Gonna Help Us Blackies" type of rhetoric.
The routines made black people look uneducated and bumbling, and completely reliant on white society.
While the original intent was actually supposed to be satire and parody (much like Carrol O'Connor did with Archie Bunker), this intent was quickly lost on the masses, and it spiraled into a negative connotation of the descendants of African slaves in America.
Blackface is very offensive to many people, not just African Americans.

In that light, this is not even close to being a blackface routine.
First, she did not even come close to the makeup style that it gets its name from.
Did she have dark makeup on to change to color of her skin? Yes, but that is about as close as it gets to the theatrical genre.
She did not have the exaggerated features, mussed hair, or third gen clothes that have much more to do with the social stigma.
Saying that she was in blackface just because she wore dark makeup is the same as saying Bozo the Clown was a mime just because he wore white makeup on his face.

Second, she did not dress up to embody a social stereotype.
She was dressing up as a very specific person, who happened to be black.
You asked if I would think it was more offensive if she simply dressed up as an anonymous black person, and I would have to say yes.
Impersonating a celebrity is one thing.
Impersonating an entire culture is quite another.
When Frank Caliendo impersonates Charles Barkley, it is funny.
If he just dressed up as a black man and began telling jokes about the culture in general, it would not be.

Finally, I did not, nor would I ever, tell someone what can and cannot offend them.
It is a free country, people can be offended if they want to.
But if they are taking offense because of their own ignorance, then I will take every opportunity to educate them.
And I hope you don't interpret this as any kind of racist comment on my part.
I realize you don't know me, my family, or my situations in life, but I can guarantee you that I am solidly against racism and discrimination on all levels.
Unfortunately, overreaction to incidents like this does more to hurt the cause than it does to help it.
It reinforces negative sentiment among external cultures while promoting a self-defeating victimization role withing the African American society itself.

Thanks for this post, I found it enlightening.
1) Nothing you said struck me as racist. You don't have to agree with me for me to value your input.
2) Your point about what she dressed up as is a valid one. Now that it is known what she was going as will make it ok for some people. Not all. For instance, If you were to dress up in a historically accurate Nazi uniform as Hitler, some Jewish people may still be offended by it. Forget that I compared Lil' Wayne and his Coonish antics to Hitler, focus on the fact that it is offensive unless the explanation of who she was trying to be is made. Again if she just went as A black guy.....I would be pissed, the fact that she went as just Lil' Weezy, doesn't offend me. It's weird.

3) Your description of Blackface is accurate. However, what would black face look like today had the "artform" continue to evolve. My belief is that it would look similar to what this young lady has on(minus the $5 tanning lotion) Blackface has been frozen in time due to it's offensive nature. The portrayal of blacks by whites was how they saw them at that time. Wouldn't this be more likely to be what modern version of blackface would look like?

When it's all said and done, i rather enjoyed your post.

"kevoncox" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

"kevoncox" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

Interesting.

If she actually went in blackface, I would understand the complaints.
Blackface has a long theatrical history, and some fairly strong ties to a racist view (although there were actually African American actors who were very successful as blackface artists).

However, she didn't go in black face.
In face, it wasn't even close.
She wore black make up and went as a specific celebrity.
Anyone who refers to this as "blackface" needs to read up on the history of it.
This has nothing to do (IMHO) with racism or stereotypes, and everything to do with Halloween.

So if she said, I was going as a black person (not Lil' Wayne) would this still not be offensive?
I've read up plenty about blackface and it's history worldwide, however, my point was that there is still people who would identify that as black face. Just like some people see the confederate flag and attribute the hatred and bigotry that that era represented. Southern whites however, see the confederate flag as a symbol of their history and the family members they lost in the civil war. Same image, different meanings. Again, you should never tell someone what can and cannot offend them. You've never walked a day in their shoe.

I understand what you are saying about the confederate flag and the differing meanings associated with it, and I respect and agree with that.
This, however, is at least slightly different.


As I am sure you know, Blackface is theatrical makeup style that was used in the 1800's and early 1900's to portray a stereotypical black person.
It was noted by using no make up or white make up around the mouth to exaggerate the lips and usually included tousled hair and ragged clothing that mimicked the styles of high society at the time (i.e. top hat with the top punched out, etc).
Blackface actors and comedians used existing racism and stereotypes as staples in their routine, giving in to the "Oh Lordy Lordy Who's Gonna Help Us Blackies" type of rhetoric.
The routines made black people look uneducated and bumbling, and completely reliant on white society.
While the original intent was actually supposed to be satire and parody (much like Carrol O'Connor did with Archie Bunker), this intent was quickly lost on the masses, and it spiraled into a negative connotation of the descendants of African slaves in America.
Blackface is very offensive to many people, not just African Americans.

In that light, this is not even close to being a blackface routine.
First, she did not even come close to the makeup style that it gets its name from.
Did she have dark makeup on to change to color of her skin? Yes, but that is about as close as it gets to the theatrical genre.
She did not have the exaggerated features, mussed hair, or third gen clothes that have much more to do with the social stigma.
Saying that she was in blackface just because she wore dark makeup is the same as saying Bozo the Clown was a mime just because he wore white makeup on his face.

Second, she did not dress up to embody a social stereotype.
She was dressing up as a very specific person, who happened to be black.
You asked if I would think it was more offensive if she simply dressed up as an anonymous black person, and I would have to say yes.
Impersonating a celebrity is one thing.
Impersonating an entire culture is quite another.
When Frank Caliendo impersonates Charles Barkley, it is funny.
If he just dressed up as a black man and began telling jokes about the culture in general, it would not be.

Finally, I did not, nor would I ever, tell someone what can and cannot offend them.
It is a free country, people can be offended if they want to.
But if they are taking offense because of their own ignorance, then I will take every opportunity to educate them.
And I hope you don't interpret this as any kind of racist comment on my part.
I realize you don't know me, my family, or my situations in life, but I can guarantee you that I am solidly against racism and discrimination on all levels.
Unfortunately, overreaction to incidents like this does more to hurt the cause than it does to help it.
It reinforces negative sentiment among external cultures while promoting a self-defeating victimization role withing the African American society itself.

Thanks for this post, I found it enlightening.
1) Nothing you said struck me as racist. You don't have to agree with me for me to value your input.
2) Your point about what she dressed up as is a valid one. Now that it is known what she was going as will make it ok for some people. Not all. For instance, If you were to dress up in a historically accurate Nazi uniform as Hitler, some Jewish people may still be offended by it. Forget that I compared Lil' Wayne and his Coonish antics to Hitler, focus on the fact that it is offensive unless the explanation of who she was trying to be is made. Again if she just went as A black guy.....I would be pissed, the fact that she went as just Lil' Weezy, doesn't offend me. It's weird.

3) Your description of Blackface is accurate. However, what would black face look like today had the "artform" continue to evolve. My belief is that it would look similar to what this young lady has on(minus the $5 tanning lotion) Blackface has been frozen in time due to it's offensive nature. The portrayal of blacks by whites was how they saw them at that time. Wouldn't this be more likely to be what modern version of blackface would look like?

When it's all said and done, i rather enjoyed your post.

I think that trying to predict how something will evolve like your explanation of the black face is an act of futility.
I'd rather people just realize how much power you put into that word.
I know what it meant back in the day but the more you are offended by this word the more power you give it, and the more you give anyone who weilds it on you.
I really think that the best solution for that word is for as many people as possible should have a learned response; IGNORE the offensive word.
Let it fade into history!!
Until that happens in reality anyone has control over you all they have to do if they want to is use that word to get the response they know will come.
Imagine if you just ignored the word as hard as it may be but it would diminsh and defuse a person who is certainly not a pillar of society.
I am definitly not preaching I do not know how someone would feel being called such a name but I have some students that have said some really nasty thing and the fact that I remained calm and did not give them the satisfaction of their perceived response did suprise them.
And in many instances I felt the victor in that psychological struggle.