Ramón Rodríguez Verdejo (AKA Monchi)

[charlatan]

Written as a white, middle aged bloke obviously, so my views on racism aren't particularly worth reading

That you seem to have bought some sexist, ageist and racist thinking here is problematic. None of those things are a bar to reason.

It's wrong to claim blacking up (or whiting up) is necessarily racist.

Obviously it can be done with a racist motivation, but equally it can be done with no such motivation which is sometimes obvious to many but not all depending on familiarity with the context. Moreover some observers lack the understanding that it isn't racist to do something without any racist motivation (even something as wrong as murdering someone of another race) and others cynically choose to disregard a likely innocent motivation to claim the moral high ground or undermine traditions.

But then it gets complicated where someone thinks of doing something for innocent reasons, but realises it might be misconstrued. At this point they usually conclude that it isn't worth the hassle or that they don't wish to offend, but are they necessarily being racist if they go ahead with it? And if not, is it reasonable of an observer to assume they probably are racist? And is that good enough to condemn them? If the answer to the last two is yes, then some innocent customs end up going out of the window and any value they held is lost (personally I'm not seeing much value in any that involve blacking up, but others will have markedly different interests, traditions and perspectives).

[FatSam]

I can’t pretend to know anything about Spanish religious traditions, but isn’t it (like most things), all about context? Is the intention of dressing up as Balthazar to honour, or to ridicule him? I suppose
Algy’s Dwight Yorke story is basically illustrating the same point. The most important thing would seem to be how black people feel about it.

[Sunny Villa]

Written as a white, middle aged bloke obviously, so my views on racism aren't particularly worth reading

That you seem to have bought some sexist, ageist and racist thinking here is problematic. None of those things are a bar to reason.

It's wrong to claim blacking up (or whiting up) is necessarily racist.

Obviously it can be done with a racist motivation, but equally it can be done with no such motivation which is sometimes obvious to many but not all depending on familiarity with the context. Moreover some observers lack the understanding that it isn't racist to do something without any racist motivation (even something as wrong as murdering someone of another race) and others cynically choose to disregard a likely innocent motivation to claim the moral high ground or undermine traditions.

But then it gets complicated where someone thinks of doing something for innocent reasons, but realises it might be misconstrued. At this point they usually conclude that it isn't worth the hassle or that they don't wish to offend, but are they necessarily being racist if they go ahead with it? And if not, is it reasonable of an observer to assume they probably are racist? And is that good enough to condemn them? If the answer to the last two is yes, then some innocent customs end up going out of the window and any value they held is lost (personally I'm not seeing much value in any that involve blacking up, but others will have markedly different interests, traditions and perspectives).

Good lord ..(if that's allowed)

Up the Villa ...
That's with the Churchillian two fingers .

Not being rude .

[edgysatsuma89]

Written as a white, middle aged bloke obviously, so my views on racism aren't particularly worth reading

That you seem to have bought some sexist, ageist and racist thinking here is problematic. None of those things are a bar to reason.

It's wrong to claim blacking up (or whiting up) is necessarily racist.

Obviously it can be done with a racist motivation, but equally it can be done with no such motivation which is sometimes obvious to many but not all depending on familiarity with the context. Moreover some observers lack the understanding that it isn't racist to do something without any racist motivation (even something as wrong as murdering someone of another race) and others cynically choose to disregard a likely innocent motivation to claim the moral high ground or undermine traditions.

But then it gets complicated where someone thinks of doing something for innocent reasons, but realises it might be misconstrued. At this point they usually conclude that it isn't worth the hassle or that they don't wish to offend, but are they necessarily being racist if they go ahead with it? And if not, is it reasonable of an observer to assume they probably are racist? And is that good enough to condemn them? If the answer to the last two is yes, then some innocent customs end up going out of the window and any value they held is lost (personally I'm not seeing much value in any that involve blacking up, but others will have markedly different interests, traditions and perspectives).

Well that wasn't odd...

What Risso said was fine.

[Toronto Villa]

That’s a lot of words that haven’t amounted to much.

[LeeB]

That’s a lot of words that haven’t amounted to much.

It's a lot of bollocks, that's what is.

[purpletrousers]

Written as a white, middle aged bloke obviously, so my views on racism aren't particularly worth reading

That you seem to have bought some sexist, ageist and racist thinking here is problematic. None of those things are a bar to reason.

It's wrong to claim blacking up (or whiting up) is necessarily racist.

Obviously it can be done with a racist motivation, but equally it can be done with no such motivation which is sometimes obvious to many but not all depending on familiarity with the context. Moreover some observers lack the understanding that it isn't racist to do something without any racist motivation (even something as wrong as murdering someone of another race) and others cynically choose to disregard a likely innocent motivation to claim the moral high ground or undermine traditions.

But then it gets complicated where someone thinks of doing something for innocent reasons, but realises it might be misconstrued. At this point they usually conclude that it isn't worth the hassle or that they don't wish to offend, but are they necessarily being racist if they go ahead with it? And if not, is it reasonable of an observer to assume they probably are racist? And is that good enough to condemn them? If the answer to the last two is yes, then some innocent customs end up going out of the window and any value they held is lost (personally I'm not seeing much value in any that involve blacking up, but others will have markedly different interests, traditions and perspectives).

By the miracles of the wind blowing the Wi-Fi from my parents caravan two down, your correspondent on location in Pembrokeshire reporting in.

Having had to go back to see the offending post by Risso, well, as Edgy Sats said, there simply isn’t one.

So Charlatan the main thing I take issue with you here is the binary nature of your idea of racism. The feel (my reading of course) is you are either a raging racist or could never in a month of Sundays be accused of being anything near racist. I’d suggest this is inherently unhelpful.

I always think of the Akala video, it’s been a year or two since I watched so I just did, again. I think it’s almost like going to the dentist annually for me to re-watch it. I just googled my profile name and the link to try to find where I posted it before to save me (and you) the re-hashing, forgive me the pomposity of quoting myself from the Tyrone thread a few years back. I’ll chuck in a segment of another nearby post that someone had replied to that I happened to see, just referencing the most important thing, that Risso refers to, being the importance of change for the better (and the conditions from which change arises).

The more we all own our everyday racism/prejudices of every kind and generally stop pointing fingers at each other*, the less chances my little ones will have of having to face hassles in life for being mixed race. I’ve probably also cited before my experience of gaining an Indian (now my legal) name through Buddhist ordination in 2014. Taking the then gf to Liverpool away, Gormley statues on Cosby beach of course, but having to make a complicated request on a Beatles tour booking, it was an eye opener for me to have to even entertain the idea that having (for the first time) a foreign sounding name might mean I get treated differently. 

*owning my own tendency to call people out, which I guess I’m even doing here [sweating smiling emoji]

Agreed. “Othering” is very seductive and makes it feel easier to be who we are, to not own our* shadow/less pleasant bits. There is unconscious/everyday racism in all of us.

I was struck with that “Liam Neeson says he's 'not racist' after controversial interview”. If he’d have started from acknowledging we all have our concious or unconscious prejudices he might have got his good intentions taken more seriously.

I always recommend this (3.5mins) video to folk on everyday racism by Akala (Musician/writer/all rounder, was West Ham/Wimbledon youth) 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2015/mar/18/everyday-racism-what-should-we-do

Have seen it really affect a training group atmosphere as collective pennies drop.

*edit: individual and collective

One thing I try to remember when I’m in Uganda and having to find the right/realistic balance with homophobia (including potentially effectively state/foreign sponsored hatred & violence) is that it was still illegal in the UK in 1967 and still labelled an illness in my life time 1973/1987. I’m not sure there is a clear point here beyond a need to retain some perspective and create the best conditions and opportunity to change, literally  opportunity for some people to think, sometimes for the first time, beyond the hatred and prejudice they’ve learned/assumed.

[LeeB]

Put much better than I could muster Mr Trousers

[Scott Nielsen]

Written as a white, middle aged bloke obviously, so my views on racism aren't particularly worth reading

That you seem to have bought some sexist, ageist and racist thinking here is problematic. None of those things are a bar to reason.

Well that wasn't odd...

What Risso said was fine.

Considering Charlatan's posting history, I suspect he means that just because Risso is "a white, middle aged bloke", he is not precluded from having a worthwhile view on racism.

[LeeB]

Written as a white, middle aged bloke obviously, so my views on racism aren't particularly worth reading

That you seem to have bought some sexist, ageist and racist thinking here is problematic. None of those things are a bar to reason.

Well that wasn't odd...

What Risso said was fine.

Considering Charlatan's posting history, I suspect he means that just because Risso is "a white, middle aged bloke", he is not precluded from having a worthwhile view on racism.

Yes, but Risso is savvy enough to understand that because he's not the target of racism it's not his call to say what is and what isn't offensive

[purpletrousers]

Both interesting points SN & LeeB. Aware also of my own potential to be accused of being ‘stale, male & pale’, though the lack of dullness in my life might preclude the stale, I might aspire to a bit more dullness on the surface at least.

The question of who who gets a call to say something is offensive or not is fascinating too. What I do know is I’m proud the Holte turned on the guy calling Dwight Gale on loan to Newcastle a West Brom Monkey or Gorilla or whatever it was. I think there was more history of deep unpleasantness than I was aware but it’s was just brilliant that the mainly white crowd around him was having absolutely none of it, and he was challenged in every way. 

However we are still in the realm of conscious/volitional racism. Just as Akala catches himself being racist towards someone who looks just like him. The video is only 3.5mins if you’ve never seen it, I’d argue is essential watching to touch base with terms of reference almost. I’m not a fan of the feel of micro-aggressions, but seem very willing with his help to own my own ‘everyday racism’.

So my point is I am racist. We are all racist. To varying levels and degrees of awareness. Start from there and we can get somewhere. The assertion around its not racist if it wasn’t meant to be nasty is not very helpful, and fails to take into account structural racism that shapes all of us however unconscious.
The idea of innocent customs (gollywog toys anyone?) or ‘innocent motivations’ for even crimes (I think that’s a bit unfortunate taking about that next to murder). Just thinking about stop and search frequencies, the athletes that had a horrific experience because of their nice car and colour of their skin; the idea of profiling (of course socio-economic, migrational variables etc). There’s just a lot in that post that never mind the black and white right and wrong, doesn’t seem massively helpful, or in my tradition’s ethical language, ‘skilful’.


Just for the sake of completeness I thought I’d dig out the Liam Neeson story, blimey it’s still a bit shocking to read today and I can make more sense of my previous comment. https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-47133868.amp

[Drummond]

That video link won't work for me however, might it be this, from a Frankie Boyle election special from 2015?

[Risso]

Yes, but Risso is savvy enough to understand that because he's not the target of racism it's not his call to say what is and what isn't offensive

Exactly what I was getting at, thanks mate.

[LeeB]

Both interesting points SN & LeeB. Aware also of my own potential to be accused of being ‘stale, male & pale’, though the lack of dullness in my life might preclude the stale, I might aspire to a bit more dullness on the surface at least.

The question of who who gets a call to say something is offensive or not is fascinating too. What I do know is I’m proud the Holte turned on the guy calling Dwight Gale on loan to Newcastle a West Brom Monkey or Gorilla or whatever it was. I think there was more history of deep unpleasantness than I was aware but it’s was just brilliant that the mainly white crowd around him was having absolutely none of it, and he was challenged in every way. 

However we are still in the realm of conscious/volitional racism. Just as Akala catches himself being racist towards someone who looks just like him. The video is only 3.5mins if you’ve never seen it, I’d argue is essential watching to touch base with terms of reference almost. I’m not a fan of the feel of micro-aggressions, but seem very willing with his help to own my own ‘everyday racism’.

So my point is I am racist. We are all racist. To varying levels and degrees of awareness. Start from there and we can get somewhere. The assertion around its not racist if it wasn’t meant to be nasty is not very helpful, and fails to take into account structural racism that shapes all of us however unconscious.
The idea of innocent customs (gollywog toys anyone?) or ‘innocent motivations’ for even crimes (I think that’s a bit unfortunate taking about that next to murder). Just thinking about stop and search frequencies, the athletes that had a horrific experience because of their nice car and colour of their skin; the idea of profiling (of course socio-economic, migrational variables etc). There’s just a lot in that post that never mind the black and white right and wrong, doesn’t seem massively helpful, or in my tradition’s ethical language, ‘skilful’.


Just for the sake of completeness I thought I’d dig out the Liam Neeson story, blimey it’s still a bit shocking to read today and I can make more sense of my previous comment. https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-47133868.amp

I fully agree with this, and I also think a lot of people don't really understand the term, like they think racism is only when it's something directly aggressive or nasty.

You have to work at it, challenge your own prejudices. Maybe it's not 'racism' in the classic sense but the habit of 'othering' and then subconciously applying it in your head, I think the same kind of thinking produces mysogyny too.

I've tried to teach my kids in the basic sense that people are not better or worse because they're black, white, mixed race, male or female, they're only representative of themselves and not a group. Except for Blues fans.

[Dave]

So my point is I am racist. We are all racist. To varying levels and degrees of awareness. Start from there and we can get somewhere. The assertion around its not racist if it wasn’t meant to be nasty is not very helpful, and fails to take into account structural racism that shapes all of us however unconscious.

Avenue Q got it right twenty years ago, Everyone's A Little Bit Racist

(warning, contains Sesame Street style puppets singing. And having just rewatched it for the first time in ages, there's probably a few lines that are a bit uncomfortable, even if it is tongue-in-cheek)