Latest on MJJC
- Latest Michael Jackson News
- Click Here to Join Our Community
- Follow us on X
- Wanna talk Michael? Come join the chat rooms
- The Michael Jackson Chart Watch
- Become an MJJC Patron
- Join the Premium Member Group and Get Lot's of Extra's
- Major Love Prayer - Worldwide Monthly Prayer Every 25th
- MJJC Exclusive Q&A - We talk to the family and those in and around Michael
- Join us in the Chat Rooms
- Find us on Facebook
Harry Connick, Jr. upset over MJ and Jackson 5 "racist" stage act
- Thread starter HeavenCanWaitx3
- Start date
starlightdancer
Proud Member
Disgusting. Can't believe we are in 2009 and stuff like this still happens on TV :angry:
144000
Proud Member
no one is ever 'unaware' of what they are doing. that's where the phrase 'feign ignorance' comes from. everybody likes to think of themselves as intelligent. so those guys were intelligent there. you can't just suddenly not be intelligent, when it's convenient. everybody here knew something was off..even if they are not aware of the history behind the act. people know when they are making fun of someone, at someone's expense. that's why the great comedians can so be appreciated today, because they are talented enough to make people laugh without hurting anybody. and those great comedians, today, are extremely rare. these guys are not among the great comedians.
yes, progress has been made, but race is still a hot button issue. in america, the sports media, for example still defines an athlete who is black as 'athletic' but not intelligent. this act in this video helps continue the perpetuation of that kind of thinking. subtlty is not subtle. if anything, it's more blunt, because it allows people to think nothing is wrong. it's not the wolf that will get you. it's the little foxes. they don't look as threatening as the wolf. you know the wolf is dangerous. but the fox is so little and cute, you can forget that it still has teeth. and the little fox is popularly used in media, today. the little fox is the subtle offence. the wolf is the obvious offence. the media is counting on the little fox, so people can 'forget' or be 'ignorant' of the situation, so it can continue. they know they can't use the wolf, these days. and the subtlety is designed to make the blunt calling out of it, embarrassing and bad. so if you use a blunt term such as 'racist' to describe something 'subtle', you look like a bully. you become the bad guy. and that's what the media is hoping for.
Last edited:
Pitcorthie
Proud Member
Saw this on the news earlier,they must of known they would cause offence!
indranee
Proud Member
what's interesting is that Mike brought up the aborigines' situation in Australia in the fake rabbi tapes... he talked about compensation and pride and an apology... the situation there was obviously on his mind...
indranee
Proud Member
I'm sorry, but if one kid -- even ONE kid -- in this world does not know about slavery, she or he needs to be taught. it's one of the blackest marks in WORLD history. it should be on everyone's top reading list in grammar school.
not knowing history compels us to repeat it, or reduce it to skits like this.
I felt even worse after I found out the the lead in the skit is originally from India. HE should know better! horrific.
indranee
Proud Member
god, this is so stupid. construed? construed?? does he even know the MEANING of that word?!
THE HELL YES IT WAS CONSTRUED THAT WAY!!
for fucks sakes!!! :angry:
A. Sizzle
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 387
- Points
- 0
I agree for the most part. That "convenient intelligence" part is a good point. And your right that most people knew something was off.
At the same time though, I think people are more apt to be sensitive to a situation if they DO know the history behind something. Just because people know something is wrong, doesn't mean they know how wrong it is. For example, they may have thought what they were doing was a bit inappropriate but I don't think they thought they would get international media attention for it
Thetruthbetold
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,417
- Points
- 0
Every radio station in NYC are pissed off... We came a long way so it is what it is I really not going to talk about this cause what I have to say might course me to get banned. I'm just say its comedy get over it right?
144000
Proud Member
well..i guess we have to agree to disagree on that. someone thought it was worth posting. i mean...someone might think cheating on ur wife is no big thing...or..at least they'll say it is no big thing, but inside, they know it's a big thing. u mean to tell me, these guys had all that time to grow up, and they never gained enough knowledge to be worldy enough to know some things are deeper wrongs than others? i beg to differ. to me, their expressions said it all. they knew. they had sheepish grins. they thought they could get away with it, but they knew there was a risk they would not. like i said, there is this running gag going on in the media that is subtle, that is designed to separate people in to classes. it's been going on a long time now. it's hard to believe that if you have been around a little while you don't notice it. we would think that race jokes have gone out of style, but we know different. they've never stopped. i find it hard to believe that these guys don't notice what's going on in the media for a few years, now. it may be 'subtle', but it's obvious. and the host of the show....i'm sure he knows there is such a thing as the internet. so do those guys for that matter. and i'm sure, all of them have been on it, once in a while. so everybody is aware of the world. nobody can be THAT regional, with the internet around. maybe before so, they could, but not now.
i'm not from Britain, for example, but due to the internet, i know to ask people about their customs, when going there.
Last edited:
A. Sizzle
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 387
- Points
- 0
I agree with the bolded part... a lot. I don't think the media will ever stop doing that. I also agree to disagree. Nice talking to ya!!
rockstar
Proud Member
that was so mean why? did they do that :mat; that wasn't funny at all :mat:
Billie_Jean09
Proud Member
I saw it on the news and thought it was in bad taste too. Insulting. :-(
Exactly how is that supposed to be funny? :-(
Exactly how is that supposed to be funny? :-(
earthlyme
Proud Member
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,066
- Points
- 63
I took History of Jazz last spring and we spent a lot of time studying about this. Its very sad. Even though they might not have known, They could've done some research and done something else. But who am I to judge, I just hope they dont do it again.
000cozzie000
Proud Member
Um... did you even read my post? I myself commented on my ignorance on the subject, and that I didn't realise how racist "blackface" was until now. I didn't realise there was a whole history behind it. So what exactly are you "taken aback" by? :mello:
FedoraHatGirl2058
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 2,794
- Points
- 0
Agree
man who wouldnt??? we are all the same, blacks, whites, indians wtf was that?? it was stupid, low and a total step back in society with that little excuse "oh we didnt know it was offensive" oh come on..., and what about the Michael with the white pale face painted, wtf was that??? all i have to say is they are stupid OLD MEN, grown ups!!! they are fried heads and very ugly as well, nothing like Michael or the Jacksons, no excuse, I know people like that are always there, they are like a desease, like a cancer, its difficult to kill them all, but dem i will do it if i could, as a favor to the human race... :evil:
LauraLovesMJ
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 490
- Points
- 0
Maybe not, but everybody and their brother knew who the Jackson 5 were, and what they looked like. They were all light to medium brown. So why the need for "blackface"? To me it seemed like an attempt to insult them because they were black. They looked like they were literally wearing black shoe polish, and the guy playing Michael looked like he was wearing white shoe polish. The extremes just weren't funny to me. *shrug*
000cozzie000
Proud Member
Goodbye Michael
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 237
- Points
- 0
This is all so true.
Australia does not have the same history as the US so most average Australians, although they are aware of slavery and racism, have no idea about the imagery of "blackface".
if an aussie wore an afro wig it wouldn't be deemed offensive, if a white american portrays a black american in a movie role and darkens their skin a bit it is not deemed offensive, but "blackface" was a way of dehumanising blacks even more than they already were in past.....this is what most aussies wouldn't know. there is a difference between having a bit of fun and bringing back a painful thing from the past.
If i went to a halloween party dressed in a white sheet as a ghost it would not be offensive, if i wore a sheet and added a pointed hat it would be downright disgusting. The sheet in itself is not offensive, just like an afro wig is not, but add a kkk hat, or in this case a "gollywog" wig and blackface and it totally changes the tune and message.
I think that is where the confusion lies. It's ok to have a sense of humour about things, and with only a limited knowlege of another countries history a lot of australians would not understand the hurt behind the image portayed in that skit, even though i'm sure it wasn't meant to be racist, that's how it became.
I remember when Ali was in Australia and was joking with Bert Newton, and Bert said "I like the boy" and Ali looked at him, and Burt was like "what". He isn't racist, but not being from the US didn't realise the pain behind the term "boy" when directed at a black man. This was what slave traders use to call their slaves.
My point is that the entire world doesn't always know everything that may cause someone else harm. The producers should have known better. What was ok 20 years ago is not ok now. But average aussies who are saying it was not racist are saying that because they don't understand the seriousness of the pain behind the "blackface" image. Not dressing up as a black person, but "BLACKFACE". that is what aussies don't understand because it's not our painful history, but believe me we have our own.
I also understand why HCJ was offended. He comes from a place where this insult originated, the deep south, he was offended because he knows what that image means.
Other Americans are offended because they too know what it means.
Ignorance is not a defence in a lot of things, but we also don't understand the history of every one elses countries, races etc. So we can't expect everyone to know everything about everyone. Sometimes ignorance can't be avoided, but education can always help. This has hopefully educated people.
You know i was trying to explain why this image was so offensive to my parents. They thought it was just a bunch of idiots dressed as the jacksons. I was trying to explain that it was about the "gollywog" image, it has been used in the past to degrade....but even when trying to explain it to them i didn't even know of the term blackface until i read it here. There is even a name for this type of bullying. So i am ignorant in a way as well. The average austrlian who may not know too much about anything outside our walls, will perhaps understand the connotations of that particular image and it's direct link to racism now.
144000
Proud Member
Originally Posted by A. Sizzle 
I'm not saying that anyone should or shouldn't comment on it because of their race. I hope I didn't come off like that. Its just that these sort of things mean different things to different people depending on race. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, regardless of race.
Today, 11:04 PM #79 000cozzie000
Who is It
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Geelong, Australia
Posts: 1,291
My Mood:
Re: Harry Connick, Jr. upset over MJ and Jackson 5 "racist" stage act
Quote:
Originally Posted by A. Sizzle
As a Black American, I feel the need to comment on this performance.
I watched the video and I did not see racism. I saw ignorance and insensitivity. The fact that their faces were painted did not bother me, it was the fact that the faces were tar black that bothered me. It wasn't that they were dancing around that bothered me, it was the fact that the dance moves were horrible.
The point is, the performance was very reminiscent of minstrel shows done in the 1800s and even the 1900s that showed Blacks in an overly stereotypical and degrading way. I understand that they may have been just trying to be humorous, but it wasn't. I'm not sure how blacks are viewed in Australia, but in America, we've fought tirelessly to move away from blacks being portrayed as stupid, inferior, ignorant people.
If they were going to do a real MJ tribute and wanted to dress up and have afros and make themselves look black, they could've done it in a tasteful manner. Robert Downey Jr. played a white actor playing a black man in the the movie Tropic Thunder. It was not offensive, yet it was hilarious. There is a way to be edgy without being offensive.
If you do not understand why someone may find this offensive, I understand. At the same time, I ask you to read this post which I have quoted.
Black face and minstrel shows were done at a time when race relations in the U.S. were horrible and blacks were seen as inferior. To see this type of stuff still being done is upsetting, yet understandable. Some people really just DON'T KNOW.
Quote quote quote QUOTE!!!
Exactly what I was trying to say.
........................................................................................
well...i guess when MJ said 'we're all the same, well the blood inside of me is inside of you'...and everybody at the MSG went wild...i guess not everybody at MSG KNEW that phrase is true, but they were pretending to know, because they were cheering.
it's not just the history..it's the image being portrayed in that performance. you can say that the history starts right there with the stereotypical portrayal taken to extreme. there doesn't have to be a history for you to see that. everybody else here sees it.
i guess what i'm trying to say, is the spirit inside of everybody is basically the same, and can feel the same deep hurt about things. but your statement, A.Sizzle, about people seeing things differently depending on their race, throws that song lyric out the window. or..your speech gives you away, that we all know it all, after all. but then...maybe that's just my mind a wanderin. perhaps, then, what you say is not true. perhaps not everyone is entitled to their opinion, depending on their race. and, according to you, Harry should have not been offended, since he is not black.
nice talking to you too.
I'm not saying that anyone should or shouldn't comment on it because of their race. I hope I didn't come off like that. Its just that these sort of things mean different things to different people depending on race. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, regardless of race.
Who is It
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Geelong, Australia
Posts: 1,291
My Mood:
Quote:
Originally Posted by A. Sizzle
As a Black American, I feel the need to comment on this performance.
I watched the video and I did not see racism. I saw ignorance and insensitivity. The fact that their faces were painted did not bother me, it was the fact that the faces were tar black that bothered me. It wasn't that they were dancing around that bothered me, it was the fact that the dance moves were horrible.
The point is, the performance was very reminiscent of minstrel shows done in the 1800s and even the 1900s that showed Blacks in an overly stereotypical and degrading way. I understand that they may have been just trying to be humorous, but it wasn't. I'm not sure how blacks are viewed in Australia, but in America, we've fought tirelessly to move away from blacks being portrayed as stupid, inferior, ignorant people.
If they were going to do a real MJ tribute and wanted to dress up and have afros and make themselves look black, they could've done it in a tasteful manner. Robert Downey Jr. played a white actor playing a black man in the the movie Tropic Thunder. It was not offensive, yet it was hilarious. There is a way to be edgy without being offensive.
If you do not understand why someone may find this offensive, I understand. At the same time, I ask you to read this post which I have quoted.
Black face and minstrel shows were done at a time when race relations in the U.S. were horrible and blacks were seen as inferior. To see this type of stuff still being done is upsetting, yet understandable. Some people really just DON'T KNOW.
Quote quote quote QUOTE!!!
Exactly what I was trying to say.
........................................................................................
well...i guess when MJ said 'we're all the same, well the blood inside of me is inside of you'...and everybody at the MSG went wild...i guess not everybody at MSG KNEW that phrase is true, but they were pretending to know, because they were cheering.
it's not just the history..it's the image being portrayed in that performance. you can say that the history starts right there with the stereotypical portrayal taken to extreme. there doesn't have to be a history for you to see that. everybody else here sees it.
i guess what i'm trying to say, is the spirit inside of everybody is basically the same, and can feel the same deep hurt about things. but your statement, A.Sizzle, about people seeing things differently depending on their race, throws that song lyric out the window. or..your speech gives you away, that we all know it all, after all. but then...maybe that's just my mind a wanderin. perhaps, then, what you say is not true. perhaps not everyone is entitled to their opinion, depending on their race. and, according to you, Harry should have not been offended, since he is not black.
nice talking to you too.
Last edited:
babybugz1
Proud Member
It was ignorance but I have a feeling if Michael was still here nobody(the general public) would have complain
DuranDuran
Proud Member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 12,883
- Points
- 113
Sounds like a Nazi. Killing people won't solve anything.
Dimity
Proud Member
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2011
- Messages
- 1,061
- Points
- 0
I had a similar discussion about humour with my niece recently. There will always be a range of opinions because everyone has a different perspective. The problem (like most problems in life) arises out of the fact that everyone finds it hard to see the world from another person's perspective.
Here is the example I discussed with my niece. There is currently a beer advertisement on South Australian television that I and my daughter find offensive. It exploits (see how I use an emotive verb) and makes fun of disabilities by using the standard form of advertising fund-raising events in order to sell beer. It is the "sediment imbalance awareness campaign". One's attention is drawn to the advertisement because it looks like a fund-raising event for a disabled group that we should feel compassion for, and yet it is suggesting that we should all help Aussie yobbos move around more after drinking beer instead of lazing around in deck chairs for hours.
I hate the advertisement because I think it is exploitative, disrespectful to the efforts of real charity groups, and insensitive to the fact that there are real people out there with disabilities who rely upon such fund-raising events for support.
My niece argued strongly that it was funny, and that the advertisement effectively promoted the beer in question, so that the advertisement was "good" not "bad". I maintained that it was in "very poor taste".
I and my daughter were offended because my son is disabled. My niece was not offended by the ad because her boyfriend developed the advertising campaign. I did not realize that fact when I lashed out vehemently criticized the advertisement.
So there we had a situation where I was offended by the ad (because of my historical and personal perspective) yet she was offended by my reaction to it because of her personal perspective. Who is right? Neither and both. It's all about perspective, and in most cases, never the twain shall meet.
As for the Hey Hey it's Saturday skit...
I can understand why Americans would be offended by this skit. It is offensive because of their history and their perspective. A poll run in Australia after the show indicated that 80 percent of Australians did not find the skit offensive. That is not because Aussies are any more or less racist than Americans. That is because Australians do not share the same history or perspective as Americans. If colour is not associated in one's mind with slavery or derogoratory notions, but rather is seen simply as a colour, then to paint one's face brown or black means nothing more than an attempt to look like the person one is imitating--like wearing a blonde wig to imitate our Prime Minister. From an Aussie perspective therefore, painting one's face black was probably not intended as an insult.
On the other hand, it was stupid and insensitive to not have realized that the skit would insult some people because of their perspective. Also, having an American judge on the show, and knowing how such things can reach a global audience (and thus offend many more people) made it even more stupid and insensitive.
But humour tends to be like that. It often offends twenty percent while eighty percent laugh their heads off.
Here is the example I discussed with my niece. There is currently a beer advertisement on South Australian television that I and my daughter find offensive. It exploits (see how I use an emotive verb) and makes fun of disabilities by using the standard form of advertising fund-raising events in order to sell beer. It is the "sediment imbalance awareness campaign". One's attention is drawn to the advertisement because it looks like a fund-raising event for a disabled group that we should feel compassion for, and yet it is suggesting that we should all help Aussie yobbos move around more after drinking beer instead of lazing around in deck chairs for hours.
I hate the advertisement because I think it is exploitative, disrespectful to the efforts of real charity groups, and insensitive to the fact that there are real people out there with disabilities who rely upon such fund-raising events for support.
My niece argued strongly that it was funny, and that the advertisement effectively promoted the beer in question, so that the advertisement was "good" not "bad". I maintained that it was in "very poor taste".
I and my daughter were offended because my son is disabled. My niece was not offended by the ad because her boyfriend developed the advertising campaign. I did not realize that fact when I lashed out vehemently criticized the advertisement.
So there we had a situation where I was offended by the ad (because of my historical and personal perspective) yet she was offended by my reaction to it because of her personal perspective. Who is right? Neither and both. It's all about perspective, and in most cases, never the twain shall meet.
As for the Hey Hey it's Saturday skit...
I can understand why Americans would be offended by this skit. It is offensive because of their history and their perspective. A poll run in Australia after the show indicated that 80 percent of Australians did not find the skit offensive. That is not because Aussies are any more or less racist than Americans. That is because Australians do not share the same history or perspective as Americans. If colour is not associated in one's mind with slavery or derogoratory notions, but rather is seen simply as a colour, then to paint one's face brown or black means nothing more than an attempt to look like the person one is imitating--like wearing a blonde wig to imitate our Prime Minister. From an Aussie perspective therefore, painting one's face black was probably not intended as an insult.
On the other hand, it was stupid and insensitive to not have realized that the skit would insult some people because of their perspective. Also, having an American judge on the show, and knowing how such things can reach a global audience (and thus offend many more people) made it even more stupid and insensitive.
But humour tends to be like that. It often offends twenty percent while eighty percent laugh their heads off.
Naytobes
Proud Member
Was there this much talk about this skit when the same blokes did the same skit 20 years ago on the same show?
starlightdancer
Proud Member
You live around my way
Cool. And yes, many people are pissed off about. Even Howard Stern was blasting those guys.
Goodbye Michael
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 237
- Points
- 0
nope
20 years ago you could do and say anything and no one would blink an eye
**sorry, was suppose to quote naytobes
20 years ago you could do and say anything and no one would blink an eye
**sorry, was suppose to quote naytobes
Last edited:
144000
Proud Member
that's interesting. i'm offended by the beer ad, myself, and i haven't even seen it. as far as ur neice is concerned, it would be interesting how she saw it, if she broke up with her boyfriend.
i'm just wondering if anybody ever really saw a black person who looks like what those guys were portraying. it was very dramatic portrayal, to put it kindly.
so...the reason why i am convinced that the perspectives are really the same is because..well...let me use just one line...
Jay Leno gets a lot of laughs at jokes that don't seem funny. not just because they may or may not offend someone, but, just because.....they're just not funny. even if they were not offensive..they just...didn't seem like they came from a person with the talent to make people laugh. yet..they laughed all the time. yet..the show was declining greatly in ratings, and went off the air. and now the network says they are in trouble. so...the question is..did those audiences really find the stuff funny...or...were they just laughing because of the hate in their hearts?
then i think of the uprise of so many nations' people that are fighting for freedom(americans may call it 'democracy') they don't like oppression, though their governments may be oppressing them. reminds me a lot of the freedom americans, brits and some others enjoy. that's why it seems to me that the basic things we all feel are the same, no matter what the country or the color.
Last edited:
FedoraHatGirl2058
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 2,794
- Points
- 0
its not like im gonna literally do it:bugeyed... God...
DuranDuran
Proud Member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 12,883
- Points
- 113
There wasn't a "world wide web" 20 years ago, so it wouldn't have been heard of outside of Australia.