"Blackface" in Millburn causes snowflakes to melt

Gilgul said:

LOST said:
How can a girl play M.L. King? He was male.

It is interesting. I strongly doubt any school would have a boy portray a woman. 

FWIW: Clinton elementary school's play last year did include some boys playing girls. 

phenixrising said:

"kids today "need to know their history a little better," notably with respect to black face and minstrelsy."

Not to rain on the parade, but good luck on that one.

We not capable of even teaching current very basic civics. Most Americans can't name the three branches of the Fed government. Two thirds of Trump supporters believe Obama is a Muslim. Most Republicans doubt Obama's citizenship.

We can't even explain the basics.

Which brings up the problem of Trump. He's asserting powers that are constitutionally dangerous. How can the balance of powers among the three branches and their checks and balances be explained and understood when most Americans can't even name the branches?

Which is why I laugh when I see the self-serving teacher union commercials. Yeah, great we've done in educating the populace.

shoshannah said:

bub said:

My son played the bus driver in the Rosa Parks segment and was also the organist at the King wedding, so there was no temptation to use makeup on him.  I just looked at an old photo album and none of the kids, including the King characters, wore makeup.

He's grown up now and very decent, gentle and tolerant.   

@bub You repeatedly reference some kind of play in 1st grade. This incident occurred in the 4th grade wax museum in Millburn. Did you read the article?

I just read the article and it said it was a 5th grade student.

drummerboy said:

Idiocy, if you ask me. And reactions like this set race relations backwards.

And you know me. I see racism sitting behind practically everything. But not here.

You see racism sitting behind practically everything -- on your terms. When the terms shift to those of others, who bear the business end of it, it's not a prompt to ask yourself why their terms may differ from yours. It's "idiocy."

Or maybe you did question yourself, and that was the most thoughtful thing you could come up with.

I read the article, thanks.  The Millburn elementary schools have been doing programs honoring civil rights figures for decades.  It may be that they decided to shift it up from a 1st grade thing to a higher grade thing or perhaps the "wax museum" thing is for all grades now, I don't know.   There was definitely no black face in my daughter or son's time though. 

shoshannah said:

bub said:

My son played the bus driver in the Rosa Parks segment and was also the organist at the King wedding, so there was no temptation to use makeup on him.  I just looked at an old photo album and none of the kids, including the King characters, wore makeup.

He's grown up now and very decent, gentle and tolerant.   

@bub You repeatedly reference some kind of play in 1st grade. This incident occurred in the 4th grade wax museum in Millburn. Did you read the article?

There was never a "wax museum" event in my daughters Millburn elementary school and she only 3 years out. So it is school by school.

ridski said:

shoshannah said:

bub said:

My son played the bus driver in the Rosa Parks segment and was also the organist at the King wedding, so there was no temptation to use makeup on him.  I just looked at an old photo album and none of the kids, including the King characters, wore makeup.

He's grown up now and very decent, gentle and tolerant.   

@bub You repeatedly reference some kind of play in 1st grade. This incident occurred in the 4th grade wax museum in Millburn. Did you read the article?

I just read the article and it said it was a 5th grade student.

Thank you. Typo, actually. Fixed it. Point was, definitely not first grade.

Valid point.  The older they are, the more aware they are or should be.  I hadn't heard a thing about this til this thread btw.  When you're kids aren't in the system anymore,  you're not really in the loop anymore either.       

shoshannah said:

ridski said:

shoshannah said:

bub said:

My son played the bus driver in the Rosa Parks segment and was also the organist at the King wedding, so there was no temptation to use makeup on him.  I just looked at an old photo album and none of the kids, including the King characters, wore makeup.

He's grown up now and very decent, gentle and tolerant.   

@bub You repeatedly reference some kind of play in 1st grade. This incident occurred in the 4th grade wax museum in Millburn. Did you read the article?

I just read the article and it said it was a 5th grade student.

Thank you. Typo, actually. Fixed it. Point was, definitely not first grade.

DaveSchmidt said:

drummerboy said:

Idiocy, if you ask me. And reactions like this set race relations backwards.

And you know me. I see racism sitting behind practically everything. But not here.

You see racism sitting behind practically everything -- on your terms. When the terms shift to those of others, who bear the business end of it, it's not a prompt to ask yourself why their terms may differ from yours. It's "idiocy."

Or maybe you did question yourself, and that was the most thoughtful thing you could come up with.

I agree with this.  I don't think the OP here is helping his cause.  It plays into the hands of the people who are saying PC is "out of control."  I don't think this particular case is the worst case of ignorance we've ever seen regarding race.  But I also don't think it's nothing, either.

The older I get, the more I've come to the conclusion that it's not my place to tell people when they should or shouldn't take offense.  Particularly as a white person regarding issues of racism.  I think it's more important for white people to listen than to talk when it comes to what is or isn't offensive to black people.

DaveSchmidt said:

drummerboy said:

Idiocy, if you ask me. And reactions like this set race relations backwards.

And you know me. I see racism sitting behind practically everything. But not here.

You see racism sitting behind practically everything -- on your terms. When the terms shift to those of others, who bear the business end of it, it's not a prompt to ask yourself why their terms may differ from yours. It's "idiocy."

Or maybe you did question yourself, and that was the most thoughtful thing you could come up with.

Exactly right.  OP feels that if its OK with him, because he is the ultimate knower of "all things racist",  then surely everyone else is being ridiculous.   Sometimes white people need to stay the eff out if they don't get it.

This is spot on. The mother of the only black child in this Millburn 5th grade class is a close friend of mine. She and her husband are smart, kind, sensitive people. And I don't mean "snowflake" sensitive in the derogatory way the this term represents. Knowing not to use black (or brown?) face should be a slam dunk at this point in history and in this progressive part of the country. No one is blaming or shaming the child. The parents? The school officials? They should have known better. The intent of this costume choice? Almost certainly not to offend.

But that doesn't make it ok to ignore. It needs to be taken gently but seriously. We need to be reminded that it's not always us. It's about civility. And the younger we teach our children and families, the more quickly we can leave history behind and move towards a better future for all of us.

Ps, I am white and I've finally learned to listen to my other than white friends and not tell them when they are allowed to be offended.

ml1 said:

DaveSchmidt said:

drummerboy said:

Idiocy, if you ask me. And reactions like this set race relations backwards.

And you know me. I see racism sitting behind practically everything. But not here.

You see racism sitting behind practically everything -- on your terms. When the terms shift to those of others, who bear the business end of it, it's not a prompt to ask yourself why their terms may differ from yours. It's "idiocy."

Or maybe you did question yourself, and that was the most thoughtful thing you could come up with.

I agree with this.  I don't think the OP here is helping his cause.  It plays into the hands of the people who are saying PC is "out of control."  I don't think this particular case is the worst case of ignorance we've ever seen regarding race.  But I also don't think it's nothing, either.

The older I get, the more I've come to the conclusion that it's not my place to tell people when they should or shouldn't take offense.  Particularly as a white person regarding issues of racism.  I think it's more important for white people to listen than to talk when it comes to what is or isn't offensive to black people.

exactly.

And, for the record, because of discrimination against women, there are more political and historical figures that are men. Therefore, it's more common for some girls to play the role of these male historical figures. My niece was just recently very proud to play Ben Franklin.

Gilgul said:

LOST said:

How can a girl play M.L. King? He was male.

It is interesting. I strongly doubt any school would have a boy portray a woman. 

Really? You don't think all boys schools put on plays with women characters?

Civility, yes.  Empathy yes.  The under-appreciated virtue of listening (about all things) yes.  But when you start with this strident stuff about how white people have to shut the f up etc., you've lost me and, I think, lost period.  It may make you feel good but it gets you nowhere. If you come to my door and say "I want to explain why something that may have gone over your head but hurt my feelings because of my background" I'm all ears.  If you come to me and say "shut the f up you have no right to speak because of your white privilege", I will smile and close the door.  Like minded people can sit around and have a circle jerk about how right they are but if you want to persuade someone who disagrees, or who is on the fence, or who is oblivious,  you have to better than strident sloganeering.

You will never convince me that I am not entitled to express an opinion about something.

You can express anything you please.   However be aware that what you express and how you express it will determine how it is received.    When you make all-knowing forecasts  about setting the  civil rights movement backwards and that people are wrong to be offended, then you have crossed a line.   As a white male, or as anyone in fact, you don't get to decide that people should not have been offended in this case.  You just don't.   What you can always do is share share an opinion about it and maybe ask about the things you don't understand, and why some found it offensive.  That is a different scenario altogether. 

bub said:

Steering blacks away was certainly a common practice in white communities throughout this country.  I doubt Maplewood, which was once as blue blood and exclusive as a suburb gets, was immune from this.  A lot harder to get away with now.

The AA population of MSH is small - around 3% per a 2015 report I saw - but I'd guess that's three times the number it was when I moved here.  3% is more than 600 people.  Not a lot but not exotic.   


The biggest  barrier to moving here is money.  It's very expensive.  And any talk of  white-black tension that might arise from a growing black population is academic.  If the current trends continue, Millburn is going to be a majority Asian community in the not too distant future.    

It was not immune. In fact, it was a big problem. That's why the South Orange Maplewood Community Coalition on Race was formed.

I don't think you're talking about me because i posted pretty measured, not "all knowing" comments on this. I shared an opinion and - shock of shocks in the MOL context - conceded a point.   I couldn't agree more that "how you express it" goes a long way towards how your thoughts are received.  For example, saying white people have to shut the f up is generally not well received by those being told to shut the f up. 

African-Americans are people.  Apart from their uniquely painful experience and consciousness,  they can also be wrong, dishonest, illogical, self-righteous etc. - just like everyone else.  They can also disagree with each other and sometimes do.  Nobody has a monopoly on the truth.    

boomie said:

You can express anything you please.   However be aware that what you express and how you express it will determine how it is received.    When you make all-knowing forecasts  about setting the  civil rights movement backwards and that people are wrong to be offended, then you have crossed a line.   As a white male, or as anyone in fact, you don't get to decide that people should not have been offended in this case.  You just don't.   What you can always do is share share an opinion about it and maybe ask about the things you don't understand, and why some found it offensive.  That is a different scenario altogether. 

Not you, I thought I made it clear my points were about the OP.

When I was in elementary / middle school, we played historical figures. Our costumes deemed who we were, not our skin color. If a Latino or Black kid played Ben Franklin, no one thought to color his skin white. We knew it was supposed to be Ben by the costume and more importantly, the words said. There is no rational excuse for ANYONE to paint faces a different hue to play a historical figure and I still don't get why others simply just don't GET this. 

Fast forward: if the lesson isn't taught now, let's check the IG and Snapchat (or whatever will be used in the future) of some of these students to see how they portray themselves for Black History Month or just for the fun of it. I've seen HS and college kids in blackface on IG and I'm sure you have too. Some of them from our towns. The lesson needs to be taught that this isn't cool, it has a history, there's no need for it and to please cease and desist. 

Once again, these incidents will crop up again and again ( in SOMA also, as we have seen ) until there are some basic understandings that stem from a comfortability and familiarity with those we call "others". One would hope that we all reach a place where we can put ourselves in  another's shoes, and then make informed decisions about whether we would or would not find something offensive. 

When we can all put ourselves in another shoe's, this place will be called heaven.  We should not hold our collective breath waiting for that day.

annielou said:

Once again, these incidents will crop up again and again ( in SOMA also, as we have seen ) until there are some basic understandings that stem from a comfortability and familiarity with those we call "others". One would hope that we all reach a place where we can put ourselves in  another's shoes, and then make informed decisions about whether we would or would not find something offensive. 

bub said:

If you come to me and say "shut the f up you have no right to speak because of your white privilege", I will smile and close the door. 
 

My chuckle for the day:

Arrive at bub's with an FU and a muzzle, and get a smile at the door. But arrive with a warm greeting and The Watchtower, and ...

May 12, 2017, bub said: Strangers come to my door and ring my bell to pitch causes, religions, home improvement projects. Sometimes I hide (Jehovah's Witnesses).

Funny Dave, I really was going to say the "f  you" visitor gets the same treatment as the Watchtower people.  If you're jumping down my throat, I'm not interested.  If you're selling crazy, I'm equally disinterested. 

can I ask a question? Is merely putting on dark makeup so that you look like a black person simply offensive in and of itself? That apparently appears to be the position of some/many of the people upset with this.

In my mind, "blackface" and "dark makeup" are not the same thing. Blackface historically has had grossly oversize red or white lips, googly eyes, sometimes a shaggy wig.

Are the two photos below equal in their offensiveness?

Why do you say the following?

There is no rational excuse for ANYONE to paint faces a different hue to play a historical figure and I still don't get why others simply just don't GET this.

kibbegirl said:

When I was in elementary / middle school, we played historical figures. Our costumes deemed who we were, not our skin color. If a Latino or Black kid played Ben Franklin, no one thought to color his skin white. We knew it was supposed to be Ben by the costume and more importantly, the words said. There is no rational excuse for ANYONE to paint faces a different hue to play a historical figure and I still don't get why others simply just don't GET this. 

Fast forward: if the lesson isn't taught now, let's check the IG and Snapchat (or whatever will be used in the future) of some of these students to see how they portray themselves for Black History Month or just for the fun of it. I've seen HS and college kids in blackface on IG and I'm sure you have too. Some of them from our towns. The lesson needs to be taught that this isn't cool, it has a history, there's no need for it and to please cease and desist. 

From a 2017 perspective, the two photos are not that far apart on the offensive scale. In their respective time periods they were pretty standard portrayals. But back then no one asked if they were offensive because no one cared that they were. Did anyone back then ask Black people how they felt about Al Jolson? Did anyone poll the Black actors who could have played Othello if they were offended because they didn't get the gig? 

I don't think that answers my question though.

As an aside, the Met had been using dark makeup for Othello until 2015.

http://www.npr.org/sections/th...

annielou said:

From a 2017 perspective, the two photos are not that far apart on the offensive scale. In their respective time periods they were pretty standard portrayals. But back then no one asked if they were offensive because no one cared that they were. Did anyone back then ask Black people how they felt about Al Jolson? Did anyone poll the Black actors who could have played Othello if they were offended because they didn't get the gig? 

I think most people reading this thread get it.  It doesn't offend you.  But do you think white people should be the arbiters of what is offensive to people of color?

drummerboy said:

can I ask a question? Is merely putting on dark makeup so that you look like a black person simply offensive in and of itself? That apparently appears to be the position of some/many of the people upset with this.

In my mind, "blackface" and "dark makeup" are not the same thing. Blackface historically has had grossly oversize red or white lips, googly eyes, sometimes a shaggy wig.

Are the two photos below equal in their offensiveness?

Why do you say the following?

There is no rational excuse for ANYONE to paint faces a different hue to play a historical figure and I still don't get why others simply just don't GET this.
You say it as if it's a self-evident truth. I can assure you, it's not.

kibbegirl said:

When I was in elementary / middle school, we played historical figures. Our costumes deemed who we were, not our skin color. If a Latino or Black kid played Ben Franklin, no one thought to color his skin white. We knew it was supposed to be Ben by the costume and more importantly, the words said. There is no rational excuse for ANYONE to paint faces a different hue to play a historical figure and I still don't get why others simply just don't GET this. 

Fast forward: if the lesson isn't taught now, let's check the IG and Snapchat (or whatever will be used in the future) of some of these students to see how they portray themselves for Black History Month or just for the fun of it. I've seen HS and college kids in blackface on IG and I'm sure you have too. Some of them from our towns. The lesson needs to be taught that this isn't cool, it has a history, there's no need for it and to please cease and desist. 

Why is this so complex to so many? Just don't do it. Don't darken your face. Why? Because America has an ugly, sorted history of demeaning and belittling entire populations in an attempt to subjugate them based on racial prejudice. So, don't do it- period. There needn't be a discussion about the shades of nuance between naïveté and ignorance- just don't do it. 

I think a great deal of this has to do with sometimes well-meaning people struggling with the parameters of privilege and simply refusing to accept the idea that their behavior should be constrained based on the feelings or rights of people they do not consider to be true equals. 

This really sums it up, and there did not have to be an extensive discussion beyond this.

flimbro said:

Why is this so complex to so many? Just don't do it. 

I say this all the time. The privileged among us behave as though they are center stage in some grand theater called life, and everyone else is some bit player or audience member cheering them on.