Is this impression of Serena Williams a form of blackface?

[polishgenius]

also you can't go anywhere in london without interacting with 'non white british people'

I haven't actually looked, but can you imagine how much shock and outrage there was at the Daily Mail to the news that no longer is London a city where the majority is 'White British'?

[Mr. E]

Why do those two have to be mutually exclusive? You already live in a world where the latter is a reality, btw.

Simply because of human nature. People are always going to get mad and voice issues and say things that society is going to dub "inappropriate." So we have to decide if those people are going to be keel-hauled of if they're going to be allowed to say those things

[Galactus]

Actually, its a pretty straightforward sociological phenomena. More people means more interactions and more possible configurations and scenarios. Ergo, more exposure to various situations.

I mean, if there are criticisms about a nation's collective sensitivity to issues of race, then on the flip side you must also allow that as a nation we have more collective exposure to various 'racial' scenarios.

Or we can drop talking about how America has a problem, I would be fine with that too.

Except that it doesen't. People interact with a relatively small number of people anyway, the total population of the country doesen't really matter much. (density does to some extent)

In other words, diversity in your local area probably matters, diversity in the rest of the US means nothing to you. The difference between a Londoner and a New Yorker in terms of diversity is probably rather negliglible: There might be a difference between say... Podunk, Arizona and Grimstoft, Yorkshire, though.

[Tears of Lys]

Serena should make fun of Wozniaki back by pointing to the grand slam trophies in her cupboard.

Success **is** the best revenge. Had to smile at Woz not making her point.

Has Serena W. made a comment on this?

[TerraPrime]

Why do those two have to be mutually exclusive? You already live in a world where the latter is a reality, btw.

I think you misunderstood.

When Mr. E says "free to speak," I gather that he doesn't mean legal prohibitions against speaking freely, but that socially, people should suffer no ill consequences as long as they are speaking honestly and truthfully.

At least, that's my take of what he's saying.

[BigFatCoward]

The example that I was referencing was about Chinese people who had not been overseas at all, but which aspired to the social status of the ruling class (British) by dressing like them. You can get examples on Chinese people wearing Japanese attire in areas where Japan occupied, too, and it'd be the same with regards to illustrating how someone can internalize racism and present it in a manner of mimicking appearance of the dominant group.

what if the british or japanese were just more dapper?

[str8 outta Old Town]

Actually, its a pretty straightforward sociological phenomena. More people means more interactions and more possible configurations and scenarios. Ergo, more exposure to various situations.

I mean, if there are criticisms about a nation's collective sensitivity to issues of race, then on the flip side you must also allow that as a nation we have more collective exposure to various 'racial' scenarios.

Or we can drop talking about how America has a problem, I would be fine with that too.

I don't think I agree with that, if by "interaction" you mean a face to face interaction in a non-transctional situation. One of the first things a foreigner notices is how segregated the US is compared to Europe. Basically for reasons of space, we don't have the room to hide from each other.

That's one of the things I wouldn't mind seeing brought up more often rather than people pissing their pants over whether or not something bears ressemblance to Al Jolson or not.

[Relic]

Simply because of human nature. People are always going to get mad and voice issues and say things that society is going to dub "inappropriate." So we have to decide if those people are going to be keel-hauled of if they're going to be allowed to say those things

Human nature? I'm not sure i buy that. I think it's totally within our power, as a people, to speak honestly while trying to be sensitive to those around us. Also, just because you have a right to speak freely doesn't always mean you should, Chances are your opinion isn't as enlightened or important as you might think so it's good to know when to stfu, imho.

[Thlayli]

My city is 38% white. Granted, my immediate neighborhood is mostly white, but there are a number of predominately black neighborhoods within four or five blocks. We built a concrete wall topped with razor wire and studded with machine gun nests to keep down on foot traffic. Otherwise, they'd be using those ginormous badonka donks to bust down our doors and steal our mayonnaise. They really like mayonnaise.

Anyway, one of my friends is a terrible driver. Just awful. Blows through stop signs, waits until the last minute to brake and never uses his turn signal. He is also Asian. Because there is a racial stereotype about Asian drivers, am I not allowed to make fun of him? Or only in certain situations like the darkened corner of a bar, or in the basement in hushed tones where we can converse without fear of judgment. Me, judged for being a racist and him for being a race traitor by tolerating my presence. Maybe texting.

A sane person might just forgo travelling with him, but he is really good at calculating gas mileage.

[Mr. E]

And honestly; what is wrong with being careful not to offend? Why do I need to feel that I can say whatever I want?

"Wrong" is the incorrect word, I think. The point I was making is that, apparently, it's impossible not to offend someone with the way the world is today; you can't be careful--you're going to offend somebody. So you have two choices--you don't care, or you severely limit yourself. And that brings in the second part of your question: why do you need to feel that you can say what you want. Because you're free. That's what it is. That's what it means. And even though severely limiting your speech is a choice you can make--are you truly free if you do so?

I get riled up about self-expression and speech more than any other civil rights issue, and it's entirely because it's the one true freedom we can have without civilization collapsing; meaning it has to be all the more protected. Language suppression, suppression of self-expression, cultural debasement of people who exercise free speech, no matter how distasteful it may appear (which, I remind everyone again, was not in this case), just gives me a sick feeling

Mr. E, you are a very level headed guy - and pretty much everyone in this thread is. I value your opinions. :)

Right back at you. :)

[TerraPrime]

what if the british or japanese were just more dapper?

Not sure about being dapper, but the British did have a very powerful weapon at their disposal.

[Galactus]

My city is 38% white. Granted, my immediate neighborhood is mostly white, but there are a number of predominately black neighborhoods within four or five blocks. We built a concrete wall topped with razor wire and studded with machine gun nests to keep down on foot traffic. Otherwise, they'd be using those ginormous badonka donks to bust down our doors and steal our mayonnaise. They really like mayonnaise.

Anyway, one of my friends is a terrible driver. Just awful. Blows through stop signs, waits until the last minute to brake and never uses his turn signal. He is also Asian. Because there is a racial stereotype about Asian drivers, am I not allowed to make fun of him? Or only in certain situations like the darkened corner of a bar, or in the basement in hushed tones where we can converse without fear of judgment. Me, judged for being a racist and him for being a race traitor by tolerating my presence. Maybe texting.

A sane person might just forgo travelling with him, but he is really good at calculating gas mileage.

Wait, there's an "asian drivers" stereotype?

Huh. The only one I know of related to driving is the one about SE europeans. (that they drive like crazy)

Not sure about being dapper, but the British did have a very powerful arsenal at their disposal.

But the Qing did have a rather cool looking flag.

[Tempra]

Or, yanno, imitating a pop-culture phenomenon =/= glorifying gang violence.

A pop-culture phenomenon that is banned at many schools because of the gang connection.

[BigFatCoward]

Not sure about being dapper, but the British did have a very powerful weapon at their disposal.

yep, you americans wasted all your money on stealth bombers and aircraft carriers and 'shock and awe'.

[Mr. E]

Chances are your opinion isn't as enlightened or important as you might think so it's good to know when to stfu, imho.

Nobody's opinion is as enlightened or important as we want to think it is. Every single person on this globe (well, maybe just in the West) thinks they're important, when maybe three of them are. So whose opinion should be voiced? If we're going to be ranked by importance or enlightenment? Should the 1% or royalty be the only ones who have free speech?

Not trying to twist your words, really, but when you start talking about anybody shutting up about anything--it brings up these conundrums.

[Elder Sister]

"Wrong" is the incorrect word, I think. The point I was making is that, apparently, it's impossible not to offend someone with the way the world is today; you can't be careful--you're going to offend somebody. So you have two choices--you don't care, or you severely limit yourself. And that brings in the second part of your question: why do you need to feel that you can say what you want. Because you're free. That's what it is. That's what it means. And even though severely limiting your speech is a choice you can make--are you truly free if you do so?

I get riled up about self-expression and speech more than any other civil rights issue, and it's entirely because it's the one true freedom we can have without civilization collapsing; meaning it has to be all the more protected. Language suppression, suppression of self-expression, cultural debasement of people who exercise free speech, no matter how distasteful it may appear (which, I remind everyone again, was not in this case), just gives me a sick feeling

Right back at you. :)

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. And some of you have kidded me about being from the South - I never take offense, because you're my internet buds. However, if you were doing it in a public venue when I wasn't present, and it could be perceived as a slam, I might feel differently.

I think the fact that this was so public, and that the girl who did it is the poster child for the Aryan ideal of beauty is a big part of it. And in the US at least, race is a hot button issue.

And until we're able to have honest discussions without being hyper critical and hyper sensitive, we won't be able to get past it. Kudos to you and TP and the others for wanting to continue to discuss. :)

[straits]

Nobody's opinion is as enlightened or important as we think it is. Every single person on this globe (well, maybe just in the West) thinks they're important, when maybe three of them are. So whose opinion should be voiced?

And when? Given that in a certain context, a phrase might be racist? Which arguably makes you racist, or 'ignorant' (i.e. you unrepentantly still aren't omniscient).

[Horselover Fat]

Huh. The only one I know of related to driving is the one about SE europeans. (that they drive like crazy)

More examples of cardinal direction in Europe-ism, for shame

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

How will the thread react?

Congratulating Addien on an extremely well-chosen topic?

[Thlayli]

Wait, there's an "asian drivers" stereotype?

Oh, fuck! I am perpetuating a racial stereotype merely by mentioning one! Sorry about that. I'd put my hareshirt on as penance, but I'm already wearing one.

Get it? A HARE shirt! I kill me.