Well, she and others are free to dress up in blackface. Others are free to call them out for being insensitive. If the person works in public relations and is a public face of a company then the company has a right to remove them from that position. I don't always agree that is what should be done, but I leave it to the company to decide. There was some outrage when Kimmel did it. I agree that it was understood why he was doing it, and that he also had a history with his Karl Malone caricature so that it wasn't the same thing. My overall philosophy is this. If a significant portion of a race finds it offensive, then don't do it. Even if you don't intend offense with what you're doing. Coming from a different race will mean you don't have the same understanding and experiences that people of the offended race will have. So respecting their different experiences is the right thing to do. It is even better if people try learn where their offense comes from and delves into that.
Sure. One can draw a distinction between two types of anti-social behavior. (1) Engaging in behavior that is harmful to society irrespective of how people emotionally react to the act of you doing so, (2) Engaging in behavior that is harmful because of the emotional reaction people have towards you doing so. One should be sensitive to both if they want to get along with others. But I think the idea that people should not do something exclusively because people find it offensive is problematic and, fundamentally, anti-liberal. If someone wants to dress up as Diana Ross for Halloween and they are not black, I don't think that should be considered off limits because some people conflate that with the historical practice of "blackface" in minstrel shows.
I think it would be anti-liberal to forbid anyone to do dressing up however they would like even if it offends people. That doesn't make it anti-liberal for people to be offended by what they do, and take action to remove them as the face of a company whose business is based on publicity. I think it is okay to offend in order to make a larger statement. I don't think when people create something they should worry about whether it will offend or not. They should make it how they wish. People are allowed to be offended, though. If someone wants to dress up as Diana Ross but doesn't use blackface makeup as part of the costume, I don't have a problem with it. What I do have a problem with are people of a race that has engaged in racial oppression telling people of a historically oppressed race what they are allowed to be offended and not offended by. That is offensive.
And its kind of Racist. However republicans will defend their guy to the end even if he is saying racist stuff.
Kimmel is a comedian, his job is to make humor; in this case, he poked fun specifically at Karl Malone, who is black as per Al Roker, blackface = non-blacks playing black characters, just to magnifying the worst stereotypes about black people it is as racist as Ron DiSantis reminding voters not to "monkey this up" by electing his black opponent, Gillum
I haven't watched the clip . But the reaction that a question like this is awful and offensive .... is why trump got elected in the first place . If you go for the overt , mocking black-face yes it is offensive . But the jimmy kimmel clip isn't bad . It all boils down to the individual and the purpose behind the costume .
It's ironic how eager you are to be offended in a case regarding no violence whatsoever, yet you'll never comment on situations like this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/spor...h-track-field-athlete-before-killing-himself/ 7% of black males commit 60% of fatal violent crime in the US. Why not do something with your life by addressing toxic masculinity within the culture? Ignoring these stats is a crime itself and accurately describes the strained relations between cops and african americans.
I actually do volunteer my time with urban youth to help kids make educational choices and have had the pleasure of working with Obama's My Brother's Keeper effort. My interactions have shown me how much violence comes from both socio-economic status and prejudiced attitudes. I might suggest that before you tell me to do something with my life, you actually know what my life is instead of showing yourself to be a POS.
I was a little put off by the reaction to Kelly's comments because she was actually raising the question of whether and why it was considered racist. I understand that her tone and the way she phrased her comments clearly communicated a view that she didn't think it should be considered racist. But, for people to learn and to understand why one race may view a particular act as particularly offensive, it doesn't seem to be a bad thing to raise the discussion. And I get that people feel like her not knowing or not being sensitive was an offense in and of itself, but my guess is that a bunch of folks are equally ignorant. And so, having it brought into the light isn't such a bad thing. If she dressed up in black face, yes. Her questioning it though at least reaffirmed how important the issue is to some people. Long way of saying I think firing her for it was an overreaction and likely a welcome opportunity for NBC. But, heck, I read Sweet Lou's list of questions and understand the point that it shouldn't be an excuse to mask a racist view with a question. Here, it looked like she really was ignorant.
I agree that something that brings the topic up for legitimate discussion is good. I actually love the idea. If in her research she asked for a perspective on the difference of doing it as a generic black character and a specific character who just happened to be of African descent. Honestly, rather than people taking sides I would rather it had come down to a rational discussion of issues and why there is sensitivity around the issue. I think there could have been had she handled it differently.
M Kelly and NBC are negotiating for her exit from the network. Here’s a rundown of some of Kelly’s race-related gaffes in recent years, before the blackface incident in 2013, she was embroiled in the white Jesus controversy slammed Obama for wanting to diversify communities in 2015, when the DoJ investigators said they'd uncovered racist communications between officers at the Ferguson Police Department, including depictions of the Obamas as monkeys, Kelly downplayed their significance, saying that racist emails were commonplace across organizations
Yes. I see that. I am not explaining myself well right now but she seemed to be truly befuddled and seemed to have no idea she might be offending people. That doesn't make her ignorance ok, but it just seems (at least to me) more ignorant than malicious.
Your views on here repeatedly show you making excuses for violent tendencies and behavior. It's easy to play the blame the white man for everything game, but I am holding you to a higher standard and pointing out real causes. Other communities are poor, none are close to these disproportionate levels of violent crime. You should be honored to have someone speak to you so candidly instead of acting sly and PC.
I have no problem speaking to a racist such as yourself. You can try to hide your bias under the self-delusion that you are merely being anti-PC, but the truth is that you are attaching falsehoods to color. I don't blame white people for the condition of African Americans in this country, I blame their forefathers who utilized slavery to build this nation. I blame those who emancipated but did not take the next step to educate and help acclimate a group of people who had known nothing but slavery. When you think about most African American living in ghettos - their family history is nothing but poverty because it's generation after generation of being raised in hopelessness all the way back to the 1800's. It's easy for you to have your privilege little life and type on your keyboard with your soft fingers sit there and claim that the problem with poor violent blacks is that they are black - that their predicament has nothing to do with what happened hundreds of years ago and all they had to do was realize at 8 years old if they worked hard they might have a shot at some kind of semblance of a decent life. That's a comfortable and cowardly way out so that you don't have to carry around any kind of "white guilt" isn't it? Because all of this isn't about address a problem, it's about you being able to justify your hatred of blacks by being able to look down on them. Because deep down inside, you don't like blacks and it's obvious for all of us to see - so just be true and stop trying to act like it's anything else.
I agree. Like I said... it wasn't a 10 on the scale of racism. It was more like a 3 or 4 and based mostly on ignorance. I honestly don't believe she or tons of people who do racist things do it out of maliciousness.
Hatred of blacks because I pointed out the facts? A statistic that can be addressed by looking in the mirror - if your ego allows you? You've taken the easy route out by playing the evil racist hateful white man card. There are poor all over the world, people who have been oppressed by their own race in addition to colonial whites, and none come close to this violence rate. Stop making excuses for violent crime... if you actually want the situation to get better.
It is a fact that most murders are committed by males. Why don't you look in the mirror and do something to fix that male culture of murder? Almost all the rapes are committed by males. Why don't you look in the mirror and fix that male rape culture? Most white collar corruption is perpetrated by males. Why don't you look in the mirror and fix that corrupt male culture? The statistics back up everything that I said. Take a look in the mirror, man. I think someone else had already posted something like that to you before.
