The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Hey, hey, blackface comedy > Comments

Hey, hey, blackface comedy : Comments

By Peter West, published 12/10/2009

Surely there should be some controls on TV shows that seem to be free to show us all up as racist and idiotic.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 15
  7. 16
  8. 17
  9. All
Methinks the author is overly sensitive to what other cultures might think. Have some pride in our own culture and stop cringing.

PM Mahatir in Malasia had them rolling on the floor in KL with his impressions of Australians, I'm sure you were outraged at that as well, have you written about that to the Malasian press?

Yes our press are in the mold of the British press, salivating for any kind of negative story, you don't have to jump every time the press notices something do you?

We saw off the Sol Trujillo accusations didn't we. Most Australians were outraged that he didn't see the joke in the way he was depicted here. His treatment was not acceptable by US standards, but it was by ours - even our PM mocked him.

If we have to scour the world every time we do anything to see if anyone might be offended, we might as well give up our sense of humour now.

So why wasn't there this outrage when the Chaser on our own ABC did Blackface?

Even Harry Connick, so sensitive and arrogant, has done Blackface, how soon we forget our own actions when finger wagging eh?

Is it because Harry had a hissy on TV, so suddenly we're so worried about what people think.

The American issue with slavery is theirs to be embarassed about - we were not a party to it, Australian aboriginals were never slaves.
Posted by odo, Monday, 12 October 2009 8:49:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What an absurd article. Americas long and continuing history of racism has nothing to do with us. If they consider us racist because of a silly TV sketch then that is their problem. Judging by the portion of their black population in prison they need to look at their own racism and not ours. Likewise with the Indians. Fortunately we don't have a class of untouchables here in Australia. A case of the pot calling the kettle black I would say.
The one great thing about Australian culture is its lack of political correctness.
Furthermore, any group of people that would judge an entire nation on the content of one small part of a TV show, is hardly the kind of group we should be concerned about offending.
Its time people grew up and stopped finding offence where none is intended. Painting your face black so you look like a black man is no more racist than wearing a kimono to appear Japanese or painting moko on your face to appear like a Maori. The author needs to stop being so sensitive.
Posted by Rhys Jones, Monday, 12 October 2009 9:06:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Americans were so upset by Robert Downey's
"Blackface," that they nominated him for an
Academy Award!

Let's get one thing straight. The Hey Hey skit
was not a "Blackface," skit. It was a 20 year old
re-enactment of the skit these guys did on the
Jackson five. It wasn't meant to demean anyone.

How else would they have portrayed the Jackson Five?
Not had the black faces - but carried placards that
read, "We're supposed to be the Jackson Five?"

Harry Connick Jr over-reacted.
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 12 October 2009 10:03:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Did the press get upset with Connick over his stereotyping of white people in his white face skit? Or his comments along the lines that it was OK because whites where his target not blacks? Jackson is a target because he was Jackson, not because of colour.
Posted by Daviy, Monday, 12 October 2009 10:09:19 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Reading many of the comments on this and other forums, attempting in high dudgeon to take deflect criticism back on America, I am reminded of the old saying, "a guilty conscience needs no accusing".

As for the weak excuse of claiming that they were interpreting the Jackson 5 - in what way did any of them look at all like any of the Jackson 5? The coal-black faces? The golliwog wigs? The 70s-style "Zip Coon" disco suits? The participants made no effort to mimic the Jackson 5, instead they took the lazily racist option of grossly caricaturing African Americans, a'la the Black & White Minstrels.

Any attempt to claim that racism wasn't a part of the whole shameful episode was blown away by the station's cutaway to a cartoon of "Where's Kamahl?" What connection at all was there with Kamahl, apart from their skin colour? "They're black! Kamahl's black! Get it? Get it?"

Like the "Paul Hogan Show"'s boorish sexism, "Hey Hey It's Saturday" is an embarrassing television anachronism that should be relegating to the dusty shelves of the cultural memory.

However, I don't agree that any controls are needed for such things as blackface, except common decency. Did no-one at Channel 9 stop to think for one minute whether blackface was simply acceptable today?
Posted by Clownfish, Monday, 12 October 2009 10:22:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So let me get this straight an Aussie of India heritage puts white make up on to lighten his face. He also wears a colourful suit and a wig, all so he can look like Jacko and react a skit he and a few friends did twenty years ago.

Why it's clear it's racist and all Aussies are evil and hate black people.

Get a life, and calm down this mock outrage is unbecoming.
Posted by Kenny, Monday, 12 October 2009 10:42:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I don't watch Hey, Hey its Saturday because it is not the type of humour that I enjoy. Nonetheless I think this issue only became a story because of a fellow called Harry Connick, whose name I had never previously heard.
If Australians don't like a particular form of humour they can turn off their TV.
The Americans would not have picked up on the issue except that one of their own, Harry Connick, took umbrage at what he thought was a racist joke.
Okay, Harry Connick then got HIS name splashed all over the US media and gained overnight fame. And, all that BAD publicity about racist Australia was then repeated here.

What has to be understood is that because of the huge number of black people of African descent, who were brought to the USA as slaves, is that the USA is a racist country and all the white people walk on egg shells not to give offense. Every year in the USA people get killed because of race. That doesn’t happen in Australia. Statistically only 6 percent of American blacks marry a white person. In Australia a great number of the population marry outside their race. I have a Chinese daughter-in-law.
My attitude to the fuss in the USA over a joke in Australia, is that the people taking umbrage are being, “A bit precious!”
Australian humour, in good or bad taste, should not be censored by USA history.
Posted by Country girl, Monday, 12 October 2009 10:47:52 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I personally saw the 'Hey Hey' sketch as being a send-up of racial prejudice, and black-face entertainment in particular, rather than an insult.
True to form, irony and satire is almost totally lost on Australian audiences, and indeed it seems elsewhere as well. For an American entertainer to criticize us is itself the very height of irony - the apology from Mr Summers was demeaning to him and an embarrassment to all of us. The very essence of 'Hey Hey', and Mr Summer's comparing, is that it/he never deliberately makes a fool of anyone.
I had a relative who used to take Norman Gunston seriously.
Posted by GYM-FISH, Monday, 12 October 2009 11:06:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I second GYM-FISH's comments. I saw the Hey, Hey skit as a parody of the minstrels (the white entertainers in the US in the past who portrayed blacks as lazy and worthless). It can only have the effect of diluting racism as it's effectively poking fun at itself - ie black-faced comedy.
Posted by RobP, Monday, 12 October 2009 11:16:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Try reading some international news: are you really proud that pretty much the rest of the world sees us as a bunch of racist dimwits, on account of a should-have-been-forgotten bogan variety show?

You know you've screwed up badly when Bill O'Reilly is about the only person willing to put in a good word for you.

Australians defending this indefensible embarrassment are like South Africans of the 70s and 80s, circling the wagons and loudly and blindly insisting that apartheid was a unique cultural feature of their country, and the rest of the world just didn't understand.
Posted by Clownfish, Monday, 12 October 2009 11:19:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The majority of comments in these posts confirm that many Australians are either ignorant or racist.

They are ignorant in that they don't know how racism works: 'I have a Chinese relative so I can't be racist' or 'This was only a joke so it can't be racist'. This is simply ignorant.

The other alternative is that the post authors don't care that they are participating in and therefore endorsing a practice that has demeaned and hurt minorities for decades. In this case, they are as racist as the original perpetrators.

Heaven help us.
Posted by Godo, Monday, 12 October 2009 11:34:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Whilst we ignore the hypocrisy and corruption of politicians and allow churches to run paedophile rings...while getting angry about a silly skit...how messed up are our priorities.
The poor guys who did it in a bit of fun now being accused of racism. How ironic! Taking the P*ss is an authentic part of Australian culture and it is rather important that we continue to do it. The fact that washed up US "entertainers" such as Harry Jnr don't understand or respect our culture is bad enough...the fact that some Australians don't get it is tragic.
All part of the "multi-culture" conundrum (conflicting values) I guess.
Posted by Ozandy, Monday, 12 October 2009 11:45:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I tend to agree with Clownfish on this issue. Yes, the incident has been blown up out of all proportion, but the fact remains that the 'blackface' skit on 'Hey Hey' was both racist and in very poor taste.

What is most interesting to me is the extent to which many Australians are in denial about it. Sure, it's not as damaging as beating up Indian students or selling 'white power' t-shirts in Alice Springs, but it's racism nonetheless.

Country girl, I don't live very far from you and there's not a day that passes when one of my customers doesn't make an offensively racist comment about Korean backpackers or "coons" etc. You must have very selective perception.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Monday, 12 October 2009 11:45:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
My question is, why is this ridiculous article being published by OLO? Does it really pass as "analysis"? All the author does is say "I hate Hey Hey", then give a history of American racism and finish with another jibe at "Hey Hey".

As for the substantive issue (about which the author really has nothing to say), I'm pretty well educated and I hadn't heard the term "blackface" as a description of what the black and white minstrels do until this furore broke out. I suspect few people here had. The idea of putting on make up like that doesn't have the same connotations in our culture that it does in American culture. The guys who put on that skit were guilty of poor entertainment, but racism? I think they would have been as surprised as anyone to hear themselves described that way.

They weren't meaning to ridicule people of African descent. They were trying to parody the Jackson 5, a group of coloured people. That's why the one playing Michael was wearing "whiteface".

I think before calling for censorship of racist outbursts on TV, we should look at whether the incident in question was an instance of racism. I believe it was not. Not every depiction of a black man by a white man will be racist. Not every depiction of a black man by an indian man will be racist. The potential is there, but all these guys did was mime and dance (badly) to a Jackson 5 song. They weren't suggesting that black men were inferior beings. They weren't suggesting they should be lynched or kept out of the company of white people. They were just mocking the Jackson 5.

Americans are looking at the skit in question through the prism of their own culture and, to some extent, of their own guilt. They are seeing something that isn't there. If one skit on a crap TV show is really going to do that much damage to our reputation, we probably have to look at wider issues of our standing in the world.
Posted by Nick Ferrett, Monday, 12 October 2009 12:38:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I can merely echo Clownfish & CJ Morgan's sentiments on this topic.

Anyone with an understanding of American history and culture would understand why Harry Connick Jnr was offended by Hey Hey's sketch. What I find particularly disturbing is the denial of freedom of speech being placed on Connick; not only is he entitled to an opinion on the B & W Minstrel skit, but he has a background which demands he speak out.

Fortunately for Australia, Connick Jnr is a regular visiting entertainer to our country and aware that the humour of Hey Hey is not indicative of all Australians (well I can hope he doesn't read OLO).

As for claiming that the Minstrel skit was an ironic statement - pullleeeeze! Hey Hey is about as ironic as a Rugby League club knees-up. Channel 9 also brought us Sam Newman in B & W minstrel makeup parodying Nicky Winmar.

For irony, I suggest the Chaser Team, Chris Lilley, Andrew Denton, John Clarke and many others understand the medium far better than the producers at Channel Nine.
Posted by Fractelle, Monday, 12 October 2009 12:58:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I usually don't reply to comments directed at me, but yes, I am aware that people in my own district do make racist comments about Korean backpackers, but that is no different than the racist comments that have sometimes been directed at my German born husband. But, the way the Korean backpackers are treated in Australia is a huge improvement on the way Mexican farm workers are treated in the USA.

My issue with this whole silly fuss is that I would not like to see censorship of any form of Australian humour,other than by Australians protesting by switching off their TV sets. Australians must stop cringing about what the rest of the world thinks of them.
Posted by Country girl, Monday, 12 October 2009 1:05:42 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Should I assume that Al Jolson's marvellous rendition of "Mammie" is now banned in the USA.
I agree with the comment the author of this piece should get a life. I also agree the actual skit was a good send up.
Posted by Foyle, Monday, 12 October 2009 1:22:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
the reason that so many australians haven't heard (claim not to have heard) of "blackface" is because australia is such a racist country....australia remains, and the vast response of "they was only joking" proves it to be one of the most racist countries in the world.

not by any means a small thing: prime time tv, huge ratings, children watching...racism modelled for all to learn from. then all the usual excuses, twists and turns...

the background of the performers and the judges is of no relevance whatsoever. it was a racist act, it must be condemned...my father was in a prisoner of war camp from 41-45..he went to war to fight racism not to make excuses for it...
Posted by E.Sykes, Monday, 12 October 2009 1:37:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Further to Ozandy's point, and as an addendum to my own earlier comment, I would suggest that the pedophilia regularly practiced by various members of the clergy currently (even daily) coming to light that Australians have more to worry about than a well-intentioned (albeit somewhat banal) comedy sketch. Pedophilia beats (alleged) racist jokes hands down as a cause for righteous indignation.
As for Mr Connick's unasked for views, I am old enough to remember the American entertainer Liberace's disgraceful use of Australian audiences as a contrived foil to 'prove' his anti-communist stance back in the McCarthy era. Mr Connick has gained much from this (alleged) 'anti-racist' outburst in the USA where it is now mandatory for entertainers to demonstrate anti-racism sentiments. As did Liberace before him, he has made his point at the expense of Australian followers without alienating any of his American fans.
Mr Sellick would serve the entertainment world better if he concentrated on his vocal technique, respected his audiences, and ceased butchering Sinatra standards.
Posted by GYM-FISH, Monday, 12 October 2009 1:50:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
oh..and country "that doesn't happen in australia" girl...read this and then have a really good look at yourself..

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26196697-5006784,00.html
Posted by E.Sykes, Monday, 12 October 2009 1:56:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"TV shows that seem to be free to show us all up as racist and idiotic."

Come on, lighten up. You must be living in another world if you haven't realised by now that the above quote is what Aussie humour is all about. If we are not racist, then we are the only country in the world who isn't.

David
Posted by VK3AUU, Monday, 12 October 2009 2:54:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As an American living in Australia, I understood immediately why Harry Connig Jr had the reaction he did to the blackface routine, but I don't expect Australians to understand, since they were not raised to innately comprehend the underlying meaning of blackface. For that reason, I don't think that the intention here was to be prejudiced. It was merely done in good fun as Australian's see it, and well they should. American TV and movies may have an effect on Australian culture, but overall, the two cultures are still vastly different.

Connig's reaction, given his heritage, was perfectly natural for him. His career could have been on the line with many Americans (where his bread is really buttered, after all) should he have done any differently. His father was a civil rights lawyer in Louisiana, and risked much fighting for the rights of the blacks in that state. He had no choice but to speak up, and he did so with dignity
Posted by Buttonbright, Monday, 12 October 2009 2:57:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This article was more of a history lesson than anything else. I found it interesting but ultimately irrelevant because it didn’t really engage in the more important questions surrounding the issue.

My initial reaction to this article is that Australians shouldn’t pay as much attention to the thoughts of our easily-offended neighbours over in the US. After all, this act was aired on an episode of an Australian TV show, for the entertainment of an Australian audience with Australian sensitivities and an Australian sense of humour. So why should we care if some Americans consider it offensive, mostly because they are viewing through the lens of a completely different national history to ours? I don’t believe the author sufficiently answered this question at all.

Like the author, I can understand why Harry Connick Junior was offended but unlike the author I can’t see why that should stop Hey Hey from airing such a skit. In an Australian context, in our unique Australian culture, there was absolutely nothing offensive, or racist about the skit. I think the fact that one of the performers was dark skinned himself (having an Indian background) makes this point even clearer
Posted by Trav, Monday, 12 October 2009 2:59:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Not only was there nothing offensive about it within the Australian context, but there is absolutely nothing inherently racist about the skit at all. It was only a group of middle aged men dressing up and imitating a music group and a legendary performer. Unless you are going to argue that imitation somehow automatically equals racism, then you’re on a road to nowhere with that argument. Again, the following point must be emphasized: The only reason Americans are offended is because their history colours (pardon the pun) their view of the event. So really the question at hand is: How much should we pander to the feelings of Americans, when filming an Australian television show for the entertainment of an Australian audience? My feeling is: Very little. Surely we need to be tolerant and understanding of each others cultures, rather than try to stamp each other’s cultures out and gag each other’s humour! In fact, this current outrage could even be an opportunity for the promotion of cross cultural understanding: Perhaps some people over in the US can learn that Aussies are, generally, a laid back type who don’t mind taking the piss out of themselves, and others.
Posted by Trav, Monday, 12 October 2009 3:00:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*are you really proud that pretty much the rest of the world sees us as a bunch of racist dimwits,*

Oh rubbish Clownfish. A few loudmouthed overseas commentators
perhaps, do not constitute much of the rest of the world.

Fact is that if you spend time in the US, or Japan, or China,
or in the Middle East, or India, you start to realise just
how relatively tolerant most Australians really are to
other races.

Humour is humour and laughing at ourselves is part of good
humour.

If you are so intolerant that you can't do that, switch
off your tv.
Posted by Yabby, Monday, 12 October 2009 3:16:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Some people go out of their way to be offended. Connick is one of those people, and as an American, he should be enormously offended by what his own country did to native Americans and African Americans. While most people have the good manners to act like guests in foreign countries, this twit showed just what an ignorant idiot he is. The lead of the silly skit was a lot darker skinned than Jackson was after he had finished with the drugs and skin operations.

Like all American performers who turn up in Australia, Connick is washed up in America - that's the only reason they come here. And people like Peter West give him credence!
Posted by Leigh, Monday, 12 October 2009 4:17:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh for heavans sake! Get a life!

Redfaces is show about bad talent, and getting dressed up to imitate Michael Jackson, Elvis Presley etc is just part of it all.

Me thinks that all those people who have their knickers in knot, should really get some counselling.
Posted by JamesH, Monday, 12 October 2009 4:45:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It's all well and good to say "stuff the Amercian's, this is Australian humour", but if Australia want's to play international diplomacy with the grownups, we are going to need to understand more than our own self-deprecating culture. Yes the skit was not intended to be racist, but the the props and costume caused it to be in the context of one of the panel judges. Yes other countries are racist, but that does not give Australia an excuse to be. Yes it was humour, so humor cannot be racist? Yes the actors were not white... so?

As some people keep repeating, it perhaps only became an issue because Connick raised it. If this really is the case, maybe the solution would be to not invite foreign guests because they simply don't understand Australian humour. Then we can carry on being a happy little international back water, confident in our self righteousness because nobody else is going to give a toss really.

Rex
Posted by RexMundi, Monday, 12 October 2009 4:53:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'Some people go out of their way to be offended.'
So very true.

As I said on the proper, more intelligent half of OLO, the racism here comes down to make-up and costume standards, and production values/expectations.

Sykes,

Yikes!

'oh..and country "that doesn't happen in australia" girl...read this and then have a really good look at yourself..'

BTW: Your father's life adds no weight to your argument. How often do you attempt to trade on it I wonder?

So your thesis is an attempt at impersonating Michael Jackson can lead to this?

Country Girl,

Don't listen to him. By the content of both your responses, it is clear who is more filled with hate, racial or otherwise. I'm just glad you're not plugging your flowers book for a change.

odo,

'Methinks the author is overly sensitive to what other cultures might think. Have some pride in our own culture and stop cringing.'
Yep.

CJ,

Hello CJ.

Yabby,

'Fact is that if you spend time in the US, or Japan, or China,
or in the Middle East, or India, you start to realise just
how relatively tolerant most Australians really are to
other races.'

I would have to agree.
Posted by Houellebecq, Monday, 12 October 2009 5:08:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree Harry is a burnt out git and a blatant opportunist ; he knows how easy it is to get a Nobel Peace Gong . Pity he's got to walk past 2 klm's the porn parlors to pick it up ; surely that would be too much for such a delicate chappie .
Posted by ShazBaz001, Monday, 12 October 2009 5:11:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Leigh> The lead of the silly skit was a lot darker skinned than Jackson was after he had finished with the drugs and skin operations.

So what, does this allow the world to be divided into white and non-white and give license to all non-white people to be as racist as they want?

Leigh> Like all American performers who turn up in Australia, Connick is washed up in America - that's the only reason they come here.

Classic. Attack the person and not the issue at hand. He may be a washed up performer in your opinion, but his opinion generated a lot of bad publicity for Australia in the USA.

Yabby> Fact is that if you spend time in the US, or Japan, or China,
or in the Middle East, or India, you start to realise just
how relatively tolerant most Australians really are to
other races.

So this makes it OK for Australia to be racist? Nothing like a toddler argument of "but he did it first waaaah". Could try a lead by example.

Rex
Posted by RexMundi, Monday, 12 October 2009 5:41:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
MICHAEL JACKSON WAS AN ECCENTRIC

He was regularly lampooned in the press as wacko Jacko,as such he was an obvious target of comedians. The whole world was in reality very fond of him I think, black and white people really sympathized with his craziness because we all know we live in a world that can make you crazy. And we admire the fact that he dared to be different, but we also liked to imitate him and laugh fondly at his strangeness.

I was at a comedy dinner one night and the comedian suddenly came through a door with a huge curly wig on and an obvious crutch in his 70's trousers and grabbed his crutch while making that loud whoop sound that Micael did regularly whilst on stage singing. The recognition by the audience was immediate and you couldn't help but laugh as the comedian burst into a Michael Jackson song.

I think this comedy routine was just that, a comedy routine to send up Micheal Jackson full stop.

Loosen up, if a black man like Charlie Pride or Kahmal came on stage with their face painted white and dressed like Elvis, a white audience would think it was hilarious. In fact I've aften seen black men impersonating women in movies dressed up in long blonde wigs, I didn't take it as anti-white or anti blonde women and I could have, I just didn't even see it as anything but funny.

I've also heard whites referred to as spooks in black comedys I likewise found that funny too.
Posted by sharkfin, Monday, 12 October 2009 6:15:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
At least Peter West doesn't work for a rival television network. If there is one thing more distasteful than racism, it is television networks exaggerating scandals about other networks for commercial reasons.
Posted by benk, Monday, 12 October 2009 6:44:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here, here benk.
I started a general topic on this and what seems to have been missed is that Harry's perspective/sensitivities in that he's from the deep south where this IS an issue.
To me had he not said something it could have come back and bit him.
Secondly he called it as he saw it so where's his crime?

To me I saw this as 'Hey Hey' as being insensitive over sight putting Harry in such a no win position, he chose a principled stance and good on him.

The argument about the academy awards black face was different context and different place. The attitudes between the deep south and LA are vastly different. Besides two wrongs don't make a right.

It is one thing for Greeks to call themselves wogs but it's another thing entirely If I, non Greek, did the same in a stand up.

Some argued that because it was a trashy show it doesn't matter ....an insult is an insult.

The cheap shot at Harry from a judge on idol about Hey hey was ignorant and boorish at best.
Posted by examinator, Monday, 12 October 2009 7:27:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Everyone who has posted a comment on this subject is racist, including me. What a joke, get a life and move on. David
Posted by VK3AUU, Monday, 12 October 2009 7:33:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Firstly I have never read a more garbled, irrelevant to the topic load of nonsense article here on OPINION. What a crock!

Secondly it is only racism when a WHITE or CAUCASIAN person does or says something that could be interpreted as having negative references to another ethnic group, isn't it?

So if I were to be verbally assaulted by someone of another race who called me an fat ugly old white c..t, that wouldn't be racist eh!

But if I then replied with the same words substituting 'black' for 'white' the insult would take on a whole new complexion (pardon that bad pun), wouldn't it!

Doesn't matter what your colour or creed, if you don't know you're living in not only one of the safest but one of the most tolerant countries in the world - either start your international travel career or go live elsewhere.

Penny to a Pound - you'll soon find some real issues to whinge about
Posted by divine_msn, Monday, 12 October 2009 7:54:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I really think peter that you need a new career choice as you obviously have to much time on your hands and, I just hope this dribble you wrote wasn't done during 'tax payer' funded time.

Remember, slavery, as you stated was during the 1500's, so he and others were well aware of the issues 20 years ago.

There may well be far reaching concequences of this 'over reaction', by someone who in fact did a simmilar skit some 20 years prior.

I can imagine judges of future shows like Aust idle and dancing with the stars will think twice before making comments on any coloured persons performance in fear of 'media backlash'.

You and your supporters have just dropped a potential 'bombshell', take a bow you fools!
Posted by rehctub, Monday, 12 October 2009 8:03:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I understand this skit was performed 20 years ago. I would ask people to remember a certain Logies night 30 years ago when Bert Newton said of Muhummad Ali "I like the boy!" with the great man standing right beside him.

We all gasped in nervous horror then relief when the situation was diffused.

Why could we all understand then that this caused offence even though the phrase meant nothing to Bert nor most other Australians. The quick, though untrue, response was to claim Bert had said 'Roy' not boy.

So why the different treatment of Mr Connick, is it because he is white? If it were a negro guest instead who had reacted as he did I'm sure the story being now being told in our media would have been different.

So the question needs to be asked, do we think if Muhummad Ali, or a more current example, Mike Tyson was the guest judge on the Red Faces segment, that the producers would have had second thoughts about asking these guys to perform?

My guess is they certainly would have, to claim otherwise is disingenuous.

Therefore doesn't it follow they were either racist, insensitve, or unthinking to have an american GUEST on and think everything would be okay.

Surely they are to blame, not Mr Connick nor the rest of the world reacting negatively
Posted by csteele, Monday, 12 October 2009 8:47:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I just posted a comment that is also pertinent to this discussion in the thread on this topic in the 'General' forum section:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3118#73754
Posted by CJ Morgan, Monday, 12 October 2009 8:52:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*So this makes it OK for Australia to be racist?*

Sorry Rexy, but it wasn't racist. Was any hatred of race expressed?

Yes it was a bit of a friendly dig at the Jacksons, who just happen
to be black, but anyone who has watched CNN or similar, and seen
how seriously they take every single fart let off by Michael,
would have to admit its over the top stuff.

Was it friendly? Yes. Was it based on humour? Yes.

Untwist your knickers Rexy, for no racism was involved.

If the Americans don't understand our humour on Australian tv,
that is their problem, not our problem, for it was screened here,
for a local audience
Posted by Yabby, Monday, 12 October 2009 9:59:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What I saw of this controversial show was in atrocious taste. I doubt the creators had any racist intent, just as The Chaser had no intent to cause distress with its awful kids' cancer ward skit. But both instances reveal terrible jugement. Now if we are honest with ourselves, all of us will admit that we too are occasionally capable of showing terrible judgement. The difference is, though, that mostly our lapses aren't for broadcast to the whole country and indeed, the whole world.

To me this says that people who create broadcast content need a test or filter on their judgements. Has it ever occurred to broadcasters to test their concepts beforehand, not just within the creating team but more widely? Certainly something like this is needed. The alternative is some kind of official censorship, and I would greatly regret it if dumb judgemental errors like that under discussion led that such an outcome in Australia. But nor can we afford to keep reconfirming the impression that at heart we're racists. Despite the persistence of a small racist troglodyte minority, It isn't true.
Posted by The Godless, Monday, 12 October 2009 10:34:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Seems the Indian Dr (he described himself as Indian) and his Multicultaural friends are quite racist. Why are we blaming everyday Australians when this has little to do with them?
Posted by ozzie, Monday, 12 October 2009 11:31:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
how easy is it to get the warm inner glow by attacking a tacky comedy skit. puff you chest, pat yourself on the back you have done your fight against racism you are all heroes.
where were you when the military were sent into indigenous communities?
where were you when the Cape York people had their native title rights shreded by the Wild Rivers Legislation?
How many of you have put your hand in your pocket and given money to the Close the Gap organisation?
Nothing worse than armchair heroes.......
Posted by slasher, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 8:01:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hear! Hear! Examinator!

<< I started a general topic on this and what seems to have been missed is that Harry's perspective/sensitivities in that he's from the deep south where this IS an issue.
To me had he not said something it could have come back and bit him.
Secondly he called it as he saw it so where's his crime? >>

Exactly.

What amazes me is the acrimony with which Connick is being vilified for speaking out. Some people really need to take a good hard look at THEIR values if they are so incensed by Harry's opinion of a tasteless act.

I also second the comment from Csteele, that had the guest on Hey Hey been Afro/American instead of white would the skit have still been shown? No-one from the anti-Connick contingent has answered this little conundrum.

We might like to kid ourselves that skin colour is no longer an issue, but we are not there yet, not by any level. Not when the colour of the current USA president's skin is still a huge issue for many American's. Anyone who has followed the reaction to Obama's election by most of the far right in the US, know that we are not a colour-blind world.
Posted by Fractelle, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 8:20:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Everybody knows that the unsophisticated Australian demographic that constitutes the program's audience is intrinsically racist - indeed, they're the same mob who voted for Pauline Hanson.
Situation normal - this is Australia."
Posted by CJ Morgan, Sunday, 11 October 2009 7:56:51 AM
Geez CJ not much of a future for Australia. Over 2 million Australians intrinsically racist. Perhaps their children will have to be taken away to eradicate this inherent,offensive trait.
Posted by blairbar, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 8:56:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good stuff slasher.
Posted by Houellebecq, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 12:02:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
blairbar: << Geez CJ not much of a future for Australia. Over 2 million Australians intrinsically racist. Perhaps their children will have to be taken away to eradicate this inherent,offensive trait. >>

Hi Blair,

While your quote was from the other thread in the General section, you make a good point. I wouldn't support removal of children from racist parents, but Australia's future would indeed be brighter if racists didn't have children in the first place - since kids undoubtedly pick up such ideas initially at home.

Australia would benefit by reducing its population growth, and those who are born here wouldn't be raised to be racists. An excellent outcome, in my opinion - if only it was possible!
Posted by CJ Morgan, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 12:40:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ah yes, the standard response of bullies and cads through the ages: "it was only a joke".

The pro-blackface mob also seem to be a little confused. "Oh, so only white people are racist?" they whine, then go on to argue that, because one of the participants was Indian, it therefore couldn't have been racist ... because only white people are racist?

Then, having defended their non-racism, they go on to blame the Indian participant and multiculturalism in general for spoiling good, clean, white folks' fun. Besides, all those wicked foreigners are way more racist than us!

As for those claiming it was just an impersonation of the Jackson 5, I ask again: in what way do coal-black faces, golliwog wigs and "Saturday Night Fever" disco suits resemble the Jackson 5?

Finally, no-one has yet explained the provenance of the Kamahl cartoon, other than skin colour. Which isn't racist?
Posted by Clownfish, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 12:44:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The question of whether Australia has racists in this country is irrelevant here. We're no different to any other country but I believe we have less racists than most countries.

The intention of the Hey Hey skit wasn't to offend black people but to make fools of themselves while immitating the Jackson Five, as they had done 20 years ago. The whole point of the Red Faces segment is for people to come on the show and make a spectacle of themselves and the only people who should be insulted are the contestants as they brace themselves for a lashing, and sometimes the embarrassing 'gong', from the judges.

There clearly was nothing racist about that skit. The Michael Jackson impersonator had a "whiteface" painted on, just like the other four wore the "blackface". Harry Connick Jr overreacted and acted the way he was 'expected' to act. It was simply a publicity stunt. He is a hypocrite and has worn the "blackface" himself during a film while impersonating a black preacher.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/entertainment/873091/harry-connick-jr-impersonated-black-preacher

It's ironic that Australia first gets branded 'racists' when a few Indians are bashed in this country, yet when Indians impersonate a black American group, Australia still has to wear that label for their actions.

During the bashings, there was no mention in the media that two of the perpetrators were of African descent. There is never any mention of the countless white Australians or other Australians that are bashed each day in Melbourne. Melbourne doesn't have a racial problem but instead a problem with drug abuse and violence.

My point is that it's become too easy to point the finger and yell out "RACISTS". Political correctness has gone overboard elsewhere and Australians have generally not allowed this to compromise their laid back attitude and their sense of humour. I hope this doesn't change because of something as trivial as a Red Faces skit.
Posted by Amelia Nosehart, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 2:26:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"He is a hypocrite and has worn the "blackface" himself during a film while impersonating a black preacher."

Nice try, but no cigar.

If you're familiar with American TV evangelists, you'll recognise the tan and pompadour hairdo straight away. He's not in blackface at all.
Posted by Clownfish, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 3:52:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I don't smoke ;)

He many not have worn black shoe polish and it's questionable whether it's a natural tan or he's wearing makeup to darken his face, but he is wearing a wig and he is dressed up in a black preacher's outfit and he is impoersonating a black person for a laugh.

If Harry Connick Jr did the MAD skit in this day and age, he would have had the same response from others as his was to the Jackson Jive skit. He did it during a time when Political Correctness wasn't rife. Likewise the Jackson Jive team did the skit 20 years ago and repeated it in the Hey Hey Reunion.

If Harry Connick Jr wasn't part of the show, no one would have made a fuss over it. Australia was the target audience and some yank made a big deal of it and blew it out of proportion... as yanks do!
Posted by Amelia Nosehart, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 5:29:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yabby> Sorry Rexy, but it wasn't racist. Was any hatred of race expressed?

No need to be sorry Yabbyy, you are right. The intent of the act was not racist. If I may quote:
Houellebecq> the racism here comes down to make-up and costume standards
(correct me if I I have interpreted your statement wrong Houellebecq)
RexMundi from my post 1653 12/Sep>the props and costume caused it to be in the context of one of the panel judges

So the end result is..... racist.

Yabby> Was it based on humour? Yes.
Untwist your knickers Rexy, for no racism was involved.

Come on dear old Yabbyy, does humour really negate racism? The original black and white minstrel were most definitely done for humour and they were racist.

Yabby>If the Americans don't understand our humour on Australian tv,
that is their problem, not our problem, for it was screened here,
for a local audience

How very introverted Yabbyy. If Australia wants to be anything more than an insular bit player in international affairs, we are going to have to understand more than our own culture. Maybe some people do like the idea of fortress Australia, but I personally think that we have more to offer the world.

ozzie> Seems the Indian Dr (he described himself as Indian) and his Multicultaural friends are quite racist. Why are we blaming everyday Australians when this has little to do with them?

Because everyday Australians are swarming into forums like this and especially international ones having a spray and trying to defend it. Nothing quite like watching an Australian with their back up telling the rest of the world they are to stupid to understand.

Amelia Nosehart> If Harry Connick Jr wasn't part of the show, no one would have made a fuss over it.

Yes, but he was and look at what happened. The producers should have thought about that.

Rex
Posted by RexMundi, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 7:04:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*If Australia wants to be anything more than an insular bit player in international affairs*

Hey get real! Australia has 22 million people, China 1200 million,
India 1000 million, America 300 million, Europe 450 million.

Keating was right, we are at the arse end of the world, even if its
a cute arse :)

This was simply a friendly dig at the Jacksons. Any high profile
people have to face that, especially if they can't get over their
own self importance. If Clowny was so ignorant that he did not
notice they were singing a Jackson song, well they wern't there
to have a dig at Barbara Streisand :)

If you think that we have to give up our sense of humour, our
tolerance and be 100 PC, because somebody somewhere might be
offended, well sorry old son, the rest of Australia is hardly
behind you.
Posted by Yabby, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 7:40:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What is wrong with having black skin and curly hair. It seems to me the people who thought there was something wrong with getting dressed up like that are the ones who are racist.
Posted by sharkfin, Wednesday, 14 October 2009 1:22:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Posted by Amelia Nosehart, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 2:26:13 PM

I agree with what you wrote.

Now let me see if someone imitates Elvis are they prejudice?

If some imitates the Bee Gees are they prejudice?

If someone takes the micky out of the queen are they prejudice?

Sure some of the above may be humourous, or humourless, in good taste and bad taste.

Maybe we should just ban humour and re-educate those who make attempts at humour, so that they can become humourless sour people.
Posted by JamesH, Wednesday, 14 October 2009 6:53:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So this is the sort of justification we get for labelling the skit as racist:

"the props and costume caused it to be in the context of one of the panel judges

So the end result is..... racist."

From Rex Mundi.

So, in other words:

Harry Connick Junior thought it was racist, therefore it was racist.

I'm sorry Rex, but you're going to have to do better than that, logic wise, before you convince anyone. There was nothing inherently racist about the skit itself. Racism is not determined by the thoughts of one individual.

Seriously people, don't get confused about the two issues at hand here:

1. Was the skit actually inherently racist? In other words, was there anything about it which demeaned another race, with intent, or made them out to be inferior to any other race?

2. Should we pander to the needs of Americans when making Australian television for an Australian audience?

In my view, number 2 is debateable, although I have already outlined my views above, persuasively I believe.

However, number 1 is a different question altogether. And I'm yet to see any response to it which answers in the affirmative and actually sounds reasonable or makes any kind of sense. Rex's attempt is just another example
Posted by Trav, Wednesday, 14 October 2009 7:32:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Trav>I'm sorry Rex

Why are you sorry? This is a forum for debate, I can cop decent criticism on the chin.

Trav>There was nothing inherently racist about the skit itself.
'Inherently', it's a weasel word. Ignorance is not an excuse; it just makes you look foolish.

Trav>don't get confused about the two issues….

I won't re-quote the whole lot and use my 350 words.
Your two points are intertwined by these three concepts
-Context: how will it play to another group with a different world-view
-Perception: How is it be evaluated in that context
-Consequence: What will be the actions set in play by that perception

A quick google search of foreign coverage produced:
>The international response to the skit has been scathing, with Australia portrayed as a racist backwater.
>WOW…racism is still prevalent!
> Out of Australia comes a public relations snafu that has the Americans wincing and writhing in pain while at the same time leaving most Australians stoked in ‘good old laugher.’ Let the racist overtones go on…

To be fair it was not all one sided, but these comments give you an idea.

So whilst a good majority of Australians see nothing racist in the skit, in the American context it was perceived as racist and had the consequence of making many US people and plenty of US media commentators think that Australians are buffoons that time left behind. Do you think that this was a particularly positive outcome for Australia? You can bang on all day about the skit not being ‘inherently’ racist, but that is how it was perceived by many people in a major allied western society.

Australian humour has depth, sarcasm and self-deprecation being two well refined comedic devices that can be fairly safely mined for a long time to come. We do not need to become humourless PC drones, but for the sake of raising our international profile above ‘buffoon’, is it not worth being a little more culturally aware and cutting loose a _tiny_ area of humour that probably belongs in the distant past?

Rex
Posted by RexMundi, Wednesday, 14 October 2009 2:55:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
REXMUNDI <for the sake of raising our international profile above buffoon, is it not worth being a little more culturally aware and cutting loose a tiny area of humour that probably belongs in the distant past>

The humour was an impersonation of the Jackson Five, more accurately Micheal Jackson,who was alive just recently not in the distant past. So how could this humour belong in the distant past.

<for the sake of raising our international profile above buffoon>

If the bloke down the road thinks you or I are a buffoon that is only his opinion. The only opinion that counts is your opinion of yourself.
Australian comedy has always taken the mickey out of public white celebraties and politicians why should Michael Jackson be given special treatment just because of his skin colour. Even the British Queen is regularly the butt of humour by Australian and British comedians, even when she is present in the audience.

I think Australia is way ahead of the people who think this should be banned because we have got over it and moved on. I think it is the people who reacted so stupidly to a mere send up of Michael Jacksons humorous traits who are still back in the past. Isn’t it time to move on.

This is a prime example of reverse racism trying to villianise the whites over slights that were never intended so that the other races can feel superior. It backfired because a few of the people involved in the impersonation weren’t white at all but from differing non-white racial backgrounds.
Posted by sharkfin, Wednesday, 14 October 2009 9:43:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*but that is how it was perceived by many people in a major allied western society.*

Rexy, you just don't get it.

It does not matter how it was perceived by many people overseas,
for Hey Hey is an Australian show, targeted at an Australian
audience, never designed to be sent around the world for
comment.

Our humour in our country is on our terms, if others don't
understand it, so be it.

As Sharkfin points out, be make jokes about the Queen, we
make jokes about all kinds of celebrities, so do the Americans.

FWIW, some years ago I spent time in the American deep South
and I was totally shocked at the open and real hatred and
racism expressed by everyday people, constantly.

If any American wanted to raise this as an issue with me,
I'd soon send them packing back into their own little
corner, for I've never experienced racism in Australia
as exists daily in the US.

I remind you that this "civilised" nation is full of fruitloops
buying guns, threatening to shoot their black president.

A friendly, joking sketch about the Jacksons, simply pales
into insignificance
Posted by Yabby, Wednesday, 14 October 2009 10:10:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"never designed to be sent around the world for comment."

You've obviously never heard of youtube, CNN, blogger or twitter, then?

You rubes just don't get it, do you? It has nothing to do with any supposed sacrosanctity of Michael Jackson (frankly, he was a loon) or his family. It has everything to do with the inappropriateness, in 2009, of appearing on a popular national television program in Blackface - a device which was only ever about the most hateful caricaturisation and ridicule of people of African descent.

"Blackface, in the narrow sense, is a style of theatrical makeup that originated in the United States, used to take on the appearance of certain archetypes of American racism, especially those of the 'happy-go-lucky darky on the plantation' or the 'dandified coon' ... Stereotypes embodied in the stock characters of blackface minstrelsy played a significant role in cementing and proliferating racist images, attitudes and perceptions worldwide." - wikipedia

Taking the mickey out of the high and mighty is one thing - and a very admirable Australian trait, if you ask me - but when the only joke you can make about someone is the colour of their skin (a point underlined by "Hey Hey's" jibe at Kamahl), then it's not satire, it's racism.
Posted by Clownfish, Thursday, 15 October 2009 8:52:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Clowny, sheesh, you were certainly not the smartest puppy in
the litter, you really weren't :)

So if the performers had used brown shoepolish instead of black,
would that make you feel better?

Fact is that if you are doing a skit about the Jacksons, apart from
singing Jackson songs, they happen to be dark skinned with Afro
look hairstyles, so performers are not going to put white shoe
polish on their faces. Given limited props, they clearly did a good
job with what they had on hand, red faces is about amateur slap
stick comedy after all.

There was no racism involved. If some users land up taking copyrighted
material and put it on utube, that is not what the
tv station intended, nor is it their responsibility to consider
that possibility.

If some Americans get their knickers in a knot, because black
faces were associated with racism in the USA, about 50 years ago,
then that is an American problem, not an Australian problem.

But if you would feel better about brown shoe polish then black,
then point taken, the performers chose the wrong colour. Big deal.
Posted by Yabby, Thursday, 15 October 2009 9:19:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Clownfish, why should Australians pussyfoot around American culture? Doesn't it make more sense to go about our business in the usual Aussie way and when Americans find it offensive, we educate them about our culture? This way they may learn that the entire world doesn't revolve around them and their history. "Blackface" means something in America. It means nothing in Australia. If we apologise for something we're not sorry about, they're always going to jump to conclusions when something like this happens... and it will keep happening because after all, Australian will always be and act as Australians.
Posted by Amelia Nosehart, Thursday, 15 October 2009 9:33:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If it didn't have such unfortunate repercussions for our society, all this denialism about Australian racism would be kind of amusing.

Yabby: << FWIW, some years ago I spent time in the American deep South and I was totally shocked at the open and real hatred and racism expressed by everyday people, constantly. >>

FWIW, back in the 1970s I spent time in WA's deep South - indeed, in the Katanning district near where Yabby lives - and I was shocked and appalled at the racism expressed by everyday people towards the local Aboriginal people.

For example, I worked for a while for an upstanding Baptist farmer, who also employed young Aboriginal men casually to cart hay. Despite being more experienced at that kind of work and twice as fit as I was, they were paid precisely half the hourly rate that I was. When I asked the farmer why that was, he seemed surprised and replied that it was because they were "boongs".

Having been raised in middle class Sydney, I had never encountered such attitudes and practices before. Anybody who thinks that racism isn't a deeply ingrained trait of Australian culture is having themselves on. Yes, there are undoubtedly societies that are more overtly racist than Australia latterly is - but that doesn't excuse our own lingering racism one iota.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Thursday, 15 October 2009 9:56:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm in the US right now and there is current outrage about a French fashion magazine apparantly having on it's cover a white model in blackface. They also mentioned and played a clip from Hey Hey.

The general expressions on a TV show I watched, captive in an airport lounge reflected all the American comentators opinion that the entire world should be sensitive to their feelings on this since they have struggled with civil rights and racism.(like the Americans are sensitive to everyone else's feelings and customs)

One of the talking heads then mentioned that on a recent movie, Tropic Thunder I believe it was, a white actor was in blackface, and did his co-hosts find that offensive? No was the response, because while it was "a bit silly", it was only "entertainment" and not meant to be deliberatly offensive.

Mind you I don't see how the fashion magazine, in French is offensive to Americans unless they try really hard to be offended, similarly to the Hey Hey skit.

Yes, I believe Australians have an average level of racism above the Americans, but below a lot of other countries, is it good? Well no, but we're aware of it and at least can admit it and try harder. Trying to beat it out of people is not going to work, it just runs underground then and becomes a seething hatred (like the deep South still has, that's where I am, and it is not far under the surface here).

I find all the finger wagging "I'm outraged and embarassed to be Australian" types tedious and wish you could all admit you're a part of the mix here instead of always standing outside nagging, pretending to be better. You types step in and out of Australian mainstream depending on how you find it today, oh being kind to tsunami victims, yes I'm Australian and proud, a racist comment, no I'm offended to be Australian. We are what we are, trying to improve and mature, but it takes time.
Posted by odo, Thursday, 15 October 2009 6:27:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes indeed CJ, 35 years ago WA was a different place to what it is
today, you are showing your age. I was talking of a few years back,
not a lifetime ago.

35 years ago, party telephones lines were still the norm, 32v power
plants were common on farms, as the grid was still on its way, colour
tv was a novelty for some, hardly common in the bush. People were
tribal in their thinking, if you had not lived in the town for
20 years, you were a "foreigner".

Just some years ago in the US, when I was there, (before NO got
flooded) they openly carried guns and commonly threatened to shoot
each other, many were in fact being shot. My taxi driver had lost
6 of his buddies in the last 8 months, commonly racial tension.

If you think what happens in Australia is serious, go for a trip
to the US deep south, you might wake up from your dreaming.

But then some of us know the truth CJ. For all your preaching
and pontificating, when a bloke like Ludwig made a friendly
gesture, you flipped your lid in hysteria and rudeness.

In your glass house, be careful about throwing stones.

You certainly don't seem to practise what you preach.
Posted by Yabby, Thursday, 15 October 2009 10:58:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Er Yabby, while 35 years might well be a lifetime for the Noongar people of your district, it's somewhat less for members of the dominant culture like you and me. Are you seriously claiming that racism against Aborigines no longer exists in rural Western Australia? If so, you are indeed in denial.

I expect that as the open expression of racist sentiment has become increasingly socially unacceptable and with the advent of the Racial Discrimination Act in the 1970s, racism has gone underground but is still very much present in your community - as indeed it is in the area where I live.

I bet if I was to have a few beers in the pub at Gnowangerup it wouldn't be very long at all before I encountered racist language or acts.

Incidentally, our very own racist 'blackface' comedian "King Billy Cokebottle" originally hailed from WA. I note that nobody at all has responded to my point that explicitly racist 'blackface' humour exists in contemporary Australian society. More denialism, I guess.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Friday, 16 October 2009 11:26:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ, what I am claiming is that all things considered, the races
get on extremely well.

Yes, there will always be the odd racist incident, be that whites
against blacks, or blacks against whites, it goes both ways.

The thing is it is still pleasant to see, how well, when you look
at the bigger picture, people of different races do get on, be
that socially, or in workplaces. Its simply not the big deal
that it was, 35 years, or a lifetime ago. Today people travel
more, are better informed through better communication, etc,
its generally made them more tolerant and broad minded, then
decades ago. Its certainly nowhere near the real hatred that
I experienced in the US deep south.

What there will always be to a degree, is a bit of tribalism,
which is seemingly part of our human nature. People are often
wary of those who think a bit differently then they do.

You yourself showed it on OLO, with your Ludwig case, not wanting
your family to associate with somebody who thinks a little
differently to yourself. That is hardly tolerant and very
much tribal. You are as guilty as others. In fact, you
are clearly far less tolerant then somebody like myself or
Ludwig.

So if you want to lecture about racism, I will lecture you on
your own display of tribalism
Posted by Yabby, Friday, 16 October 2009 1:02:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cheers Rex, that was a thoughtful and coherent response. You’ve clarified your previously blunt statements.

You didn’t give any serious argument at all to whether or not the actions themselves were racist (other than claiming that “inherent” is a weasel word, whatever that means), and you instead focused on the international coverage and the consequences of the skit in terms of international relations. As far as I can tell, you’re effectively only arguing about my second issue.

Therefore, you haven’t so much shown that the two issues are “intertwined”- rather, your argument, it seems, tries to show that my distinction was irrelevant because the second issue should overshadow the first. This is clearly where our area of disagreement lies.

You argue that we should be more culturally aware and sensitive. But, how far do you want to take this? I’m sure there is plenty of racial history in the world that I’m not aware of, and nor should I be held responsible for being aware of it. If I do something which is somehow considered racist by someone, somewhere, because of some past events of which I am not aware or do not completely realize the severity or implications of, should I be held responsible for the reaction and thus labeled a racist for doing such a thing? Clearly not. There is a limit to how culturally aware one can be. And this is why my distinction is important in this particular scenario.

The skit itself aired 20 years ago, and presumably no one mentioned any racial issues after the last time and before it was aired again, therefore it’s completely unreasonable of you or anyone else to hold the performers or the network responsible and label them as racist for repeating the same performance. I’m sure, if they had a crystal ball and could see the ensuing outrage, they’d drop the skit in an instant
Posted by Trav, Friday, 16 October 2009 4:25:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So let’s face it- it only became an issue because Connick Junior kicked up a fuss. With a different judge, this never would’ve been a problem. There’s two other things we must remember here: 1. The media just likes having things to talk about and 2. People are reactionary by nature. You’re carrying on as if the international image of Australia has dropped like a lead balloon as the rest of the world goes off like a frog in a sock. Hardly. A couple of news stories, a couple of easily offended people took offense, but they’ve already forgotten about it. The international perception of Australia has hardly taken the beating that many are making out.

I’ll grant that a little bit of foresight might be in order next time, as it might be a case of once bitten, twice shy for some of the network bosses. But in the final analysis, on the international stage we should be taking the current opportunity to foster tolerance towards each other and understand each other’s cultures rather than throw inaccurate labels at each other, which are only generated by misunderstandings. And as Australians here in this country, we should remain proud of ourselves and our sense of humour, rather than berating each other for an unfortunate event which no one could see coming
Posted by Trav, Friday, 16 October 2009 4:25:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ writes

'I bet if I was to have a few beers in the pub at Gnowangerup it wouldn't be very long at all before I encountered racist language or acts.'

I also bet if you had a drink in numerous WA communities you would be asked for a drink and if you refused would be called a white ... I doubt whether you would escape without being thumped despite your self righteous rants.
Posted by runner, Friday, 16 October 2009 5:22:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Aaah hahaha, this IS getting entertaining - even runner is boring it up CJ!! ( :>)

.
"You yourself [CJ Morgan] showed it on OLO, with your Ludwig case, not wanting
your family to associate with somebody who thinks a little
differently to yourself. That is hardly tolerant and very
much tribal. You are as guilty as others. In fact, you
are clearly far less tolerant then somebody like myself or
Ludwig.

So if you want to lecture about racism, I will lecture you on
your own display of tribalism."

Well said Yabby!

Racism is just one of many forms of intolerance. Another common form is shown abundantly on this forum by people who can't tolerate those who express different views and who can't respond without being narky. The king of this brigade is ol' CJ, by a country mile!

I find it just absolutely incredible that Mr Morgan can rabble on about racism while he so brazenly and abundantly expresses this other form of intolerance!!

Talk about the epitome of hypocrisy!
Posted by Ludwig, Friday, 16 October 2009 6:42:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hello Trav,

Trav>You didn’t give any serious argument at all to whether or not the actions themselves were racist

Not in that post, but to quote another from 12/Oct (pg 5... this has been going on for a while). I try not to just repeat the same statements and assume that participants have read all preceding posts.

RxMundi>Yes the skit was not intended to be racist, but the the props and costume caused it to be in the context of one of the panel judges

Trav>Therefore, you haven’t so much shown that the two issues are “intertwined”- rather, your argument, it seems, tries to show that my distinction was irrelevant because the second issue should overshadow the first. This is clearly where our area of disagreement lies.

Yes, and the reason why this thread has gone on for so long and why I have stopped posting (well except to agree with somebody in this instance). The two camps have deeper philosophical differences that are not going to be resolved on this thread.

I would also like to say that odo's post 15/Oct was a welcome voice of reason this late in an argument. Respect.

See yawl in another thread.

Rex
Posted by RexMundi, Friday, 16 October 2009 7:37:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
LOL aaah Runner - so funny but soooo accurate. You wouldn't want to be smoking a ciggie either ....

American experiences: Having spent a little time there in late 90s I also was a tad gob-smacked at the racism I encountered especially in rural Florida. Being an Australian I tend to treat people how I find them. If they exhibit rudeness, ignorance, bad manners, agressive or irrational behaviour then I react accordingly. Generally though if you treat people you meet with respect and courtesy that is what you will get back - at least initially. However, whilst enjoying the wonderful hospitality of 3 separate hosts, it was obvious in all cases that interaction with the 'coloured folk' was not deemed appropriate except on a needs only basis.

Washington DC and New York were more tolerant as was Miami - full of Hispanics but overall I felt I was in a far more 'racist' society than good old Oz. Maybe that's changed in 10 years but I doubt radically. And on another note: At that time you were hard pressed to find one of the dozens of news channels that reported on anything outside of the good ole USA - to the point I felt cut off from the rest of the world.

Last year spent few weeks in Fiji and observed how much the native Fijians LOVE the immigrant Indians NOT!! Racism at work huh!

So all you whiney little PC pussies - take a holiday somewhere outside your backyard and when you get home you'll appreciate what we've got.
Posted by divine_msn, Friday, 16 October 2009 8:46:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So racism's not an ongoing issue in Yabby's backyard? Not a lifetime, or half a lifetime, a few years back, but a couple of months ago:

<< Narrogin council moves to address racism

Posted Fri Jun 19, 2009 10:25am AEST

The West Australian town of Narrogin has moved to address racism in the region.

The town has drafted a reconciliation plan to recognise the region's Nyoongar heritage and promote Aboriginal culture.

The council will display more Aboriginal art, develop a cultural heritage building and fly the Aboriginal flag in the town.

The Town of Narrogin's Mike Solly says the council is also developing a program to deal with racism in schools.

Mr Solly is hoping the initiatives will help to resolve some of the racial issues in the town. >>

http://tiny.cc/ZWa7a

Yes, things are improving, but there's obviously still very significant problems with racism in your neighbourhood - so why you aren't you aware of them?

As they say, there's none so blind as he who will not see.

It also seems that Hell hath no fury like a Ludwig scorned in obsession. While it's probably unsurprising that a couple of childless middle-aged singleton men are oblivious to social etiquette, I'm sure that any normal person would appreciate why I wouldn't want a holiday with my kids disturbed by a surprise visit from a raving frootloop with whom I've been arguing online.

Yes, I'm very selective about the company that I choose to keep - but that has nothing whatsoever to do with racism or whatever Yabby means by 'tribalism'. It's far more to do with taste and an admittedly low tolerance for idiots of any persuasion.

Why doesn't anybody want to talk about "King Billy Cokebottle"?
Posted by CJ Morgan, Friday, 16 October 2009 9:50:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*and fly the Aboriginal flag in the town.*

Wow CJ, there must be huge racial problems, if the town of
Narrogin is going to do that :)

Fact is CJ, racism is based on tribalism and intolerance and
the little performance that we had from you, was based on
tribalism and intolerance, with the parameters being a little
different.

IMHO all your shouting about racism is more about self
aggrandisement then anything else.

As we saw, when the crunch came, you are seemingly as intolerant
as any racist.

Shame on you CJ. You should practise what you preach.
Posted by Yabby, Saturday, 17 October 2009 8:41:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"...It's probably unsurprising that a couple of childless middle-aged singleton men are oblivious to social etiquette..."

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaa haaaaaaaa hahahahahahahahaha haaaaaaaaaaa hahahahaahaaaaaa

CJ's prattling on about social etiquette!! !! !! !!

This is great. The entertainment value of OLO just gets better and better, thanks to our resident king of intolerance!!
Posted by Ludwig, Saturday, 17 October 2009 9:33:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Why doesn't anybody want to talk about "King Billy Cokebottle"?

Because he is a black fella taking the piss out of his own kind, but hey, that's fine....for some reason it just can't be the other way round. Talk about bias.

This country has simply gone 'PC mad'.
Posted by rehctub, Sunday, 18 October 2009 7:14:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I guess if Yabby can't or won't see the racism that exists in his own neighbourhood, then there's no way that he'd be capable of understanding why 'blackface' comedy is intrinsically racist. Fortunately there seem to be more enlightened people than him in his district who are taking practical steps to address racism, rather than pretending it doesn't exist like he does.

Raving frootloop: << Aaaaaaaaaaaaaa haaaaaaaa hahahahahahahahaha haaaaaaaaaaa hahahahaahaaaaaa >>

I think any normal person would understand why I wouldn't want such a person anywhere near my family. It's not "tribal" or racist to not want one's personal space invaded by a blithering idiot - a misanthropic one who doesn't like children at that.

rehctub - "King Billy Cokebottle" is a white Australian "taking the piss" out of Aboriginal people while made up in blackface. That's why he's relevant to this discussion.

<< King Billy Cokebottle (real name Louis Beers) is an Australian comedian. He is controversial because he is a white person who puts on blackface to make jokes about Aboriginal Australians. >>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Billy_Cokebottle

It's quite fascinating the lengths that some of you will go to deny the bleeding obvious.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Sunday, 18 October 2009 7:34:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I see it as handing to a racist symbolism that can be used as a weapon. Hardly anyone here even heard this term blackface. I am a great believer in reclaiming steroetypes so we do not need all this religous sermonising about tabboos for ever and a day. Reminds a little of fascism when extreme right and left seem to merge.

There was a horrid quote in an American show about aboriginals and we never jumped all over the US about it. In fact channel nine wore responsbility for airing it rather than the US for making it. US media had the choice to show it or not. They chose more to take a moral highground over another country as they have an industry that churns out offensive material called Hollywood. Even UNICEF has used blackface in a campaign with non racist intent. Also not sure anyone asked Africans. Seems different response from Europeans people of African descent. US issue and I agree it can be called cultural imperialism on the part of the US.

Australians are great at seeing things in context and detecting intent. Not sure we should change from that. One of our better traits imo.
Posted by TheMissus, Sunday, 18 October 2009 8:24:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ, I have never denied, that odd racist incidents take place
everywhere. But I have the intelligence to stand back and look
at the big picture and note that it that sense, its not a problem.

Besides, the world is full of self promoting types like yourself,
who are trying to score a few personal brownie points out of this
issue, by screaming hysterically.

Meantime your lack of tolerance is noted, which makes you much
the same as your average racist, even if you refuse to admit it.

So keep peddling your wares, but I certainly won't be taking
you seriously, for your hypocrisy is well and truly noted.
Posted by Yabby, Sunday, 18 October 2009 1:57:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yabby: << CJ, I have never denied, that odd racist incidents take place everywhere >>

Yes, but you do seem blissfully ignorant of some apparently quite serious acts of racism that occur in your own backyard today. Actually, from what you've written here I think you've redefined racism for yourself to the point that you don't actually know what it is.

Here's a clue: it means attributing entire groups of people innate traits (usually negative), which are typically signified by the colour of those people's skin. 'Blackface' is intrinsically racist because it typically involves people who are not "black" colouring their skins to lampoon or otherwise put down "black" people.

As I've said, while the unfortunate Hey Hey skit is therefore also intrinsically racist, it wasn't in my view a particularly egregious example of overt racism. Rather, it was more the kind of dumb racism that is expressed unintentionally.

I think that the consequent debate has served a useful dual purpose: on the one hand demonstrating that such offensive crap is no longer acceptable in polite society, and on the other clearly showing that our society still has a long way to go in ridding ourselves of racist ideas and behaviour.

I find Yabby's snarky insinuations that my resistance to racism at OLO is driven somehow by "self promotion" or "aggrandisement" quite amusing, really - since all it does is cause me grief. However, racism can only persist where good people don't speak out against it wherever it raises its ugly head.

That's how we've made the progress we have, but evidently we still have some way to go.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Sunday, 18 October 2009 5:57:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*you do seem blissfully ignorant of some apparently quite serious acts of racism that occur in your own backyard today*

CJ, you don't have the foggiest clue, as to what I am aware of
or not aware of, for I have never detailed it, preferring to
look at the big picture, rather then get bogged down in detail.

Quite frankly, you have no idea what happens in this part of the
world, so quit the grandstanding.

Racism is a part of intolerance and we know all about your record
on that one. If I have become one thing, it is intolerant of
the intolerant, like yourself.

*since all it does is cause me grief.*

Quit the bulldust CJ. You love all that virtuous preaching.

In fact, now that the truth is out, you remind me of one of those
born again tv envangelists, who tries to gain respect and
adulation with his sermons, next thing we find out he's been
screwing the maid out the back :)
Posted by Yabby, Sunday, 18 October 2009 10:19:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh heavens. There was no racism. From our cultural perspective there is nothing to connect a bit of make-up to re-inforcing a negative racial stereotype. That is really stretching the imagination. It does however offend the capitalist bully. Rich people get all tut tut whenever there is anything that may impede some trade deal or a new bank scam. Nobody gave a dam for eg when SlumDog millionaire was pulling in all those awards at the Oscars. Meanwhile the subjects of the movie were rioting, only slightly offended they were called dogs!

Not racist, cultural differences always make the capitalist pig sit uncomfortable with the person they may actually hate but would never offend in case it causes a loss of income. Trade is a great way to remove racism however at great expense to culture and many basic humans rights, you know like being able to think for oneself.

PLease read.
http://www.uark.edu/depts/comminfo/cambridge/apology.html
Posted by TheMissus, Monday, 19 October 2009 8:54:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Harry has exploited our generosity to improve his image.

The real crime that night was not throwing him onto the street, for assuming Aussies are as stupid as his bible bashing countrymen/women.

The USA has excelled itself in putting to bed any hint of racism. It was $381 [in 1809 prices] to buy a slave. Today, 2 centuries later, it's a mere $300 [in todays prices]. The USA has made humans cheaper, more available and forced the trade underground.

Now they have a Black President. Forget that the Supremacist killing at the Holocaust museum is justified by his election. Best we just ignore the reality that he's labelled a "Visual aid for white supremacist recruiting".

In fact, Change has been imminent - more whites purchased firearms with the express aim of "protecting my family from non-whites and fagg's", than since pre-CRM. White Supremecy web sites crashed, and crashed, and crashed again following the election result. My - surely there was some viral marketing trick at play, or these horrid "racist" black hating White Supremacists had run an underground conspiracy campaign, luring people with fear and ignorance??

Um, no. It was the calm, calculated and "free speech" loving whites who decided if a black was President, a race war was needed. Their motivation? "Something must have gone wrong".

But, Harry's from the South - and whites down there are oh so clever and progressive. Fortunately concepts such as the "hanging tree" are almost as distant a memory as the final lynchings that Harry's folks - if not a young Harry himself went to for entertainment - 1970.

On September 21st, 2007, white students in Jena Louisiana had enough of these "ex-slaves" sitting on their school lawn under their 'white man' tree. So, nooses and Confederate flags appeared on the tree in question. The principle supported this action.

At the time observers noted Louisiana was overdue for a civil rights movement.

I guess we'd best not mention it's uneducated blacks stopping bullets in the M. East so Harry can continue his plastic lifestyle.

Harry - piss off.

http://www.wtnrradio.com/story.php?story=253
Posted by Firesnake, Thursday, 22 October 2009 3:32:27 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ was prattling on about social etiquette.

Ahhhh hahahahaha!!

That's still very amusing several days later!!

Yabby, I don't know how you can think that a word that Morgan writes is worth repsonding to.

I mean, how can someone who is so intolerant of those who don't share his views, and so willing to attack the person instead of the debating the subject, possibly have an inkling of credence when it comes to debating matters of racism or any other form of intolerance?

"Oh heavens. There was no racism."

Right on TheMissus.

It is very telling actually that the likes of Morgan find something like this skit objectionable and racist. Given this, it is no wonder that they are so ready to brand those who desire strong border-control and an end to onshore sylum-seeking, a reduction in immigration and the like, as racist.

It seems to me that people who are intolerant of humour of the sort of the subject of this thread are much more intolerant than those who they brand as racist.
Posted by Ludwig, Friday, 23 October 2009 3:12:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It's quite telling that the only comment that Ludwig's made in 3 days - while we've had several new articles and innumerable comments in this forum about asylum seekers - is the above snark directed at me.

Like I've said, Hell hath no fury like a Ludwig scorned.

Get help, Russell.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Friday, 23 October 2009 11:02:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig

The definition of racism is to offend a white man.

I recall the banning of Christmas issue due to Muslim sensibilities. This caused an outcry and deepened resentment toward Muslims. Except it was never the muslims that were offended. It was the white man who must speak on their behalf because they are too stupid to speak for themselves apparently. I find them quite able to myself, many far better than those self appointed spokespeople. So Christmas offended the white man but this created division between mainstream and muslims.

This repeats all through history. the messengers of malice create the problem then change sides when it starts to be come apparent they were caught out. They are members of the Registered Society of Bullies and fit the bully profile very well indeed. Look at perfect I am boss they yell while treading on their co-workers head.

I blame these spokepersons for the division in society, and politicians for exploiting it, rather than exposing it. Universities for breeding it instead of becoming enlightened on the subject. You will never get a sorry though.
Posted by TheMissus, Saturday, 24 October 2009 1:46:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Actually I do know why Yabby is bothering with you CJ. It is because your arguments are so easy to dismantle, and it is fun to watch you get flustered and start playing the man instead of the ball when your loopy excuse for logic is shown to be fundamentally flawed.

Incidentally it is so nice that you to have bothered to check my user index to see whether I'd posted in the last three days. I'm touched (:>)

I also note that you have made no attempt to address the subject-relevant comments in my last post.

.
"The definition of racism is to offend a white man"

TheMissus, one of the definitions is, but I reckon there are many definitions for many different people.

The trouble is, racism is one of those extremely vague and ill-defined terms that means very different things to different people.

For instance, for CJ Morgan to brand people as racist because they want to see an end to the haphazard arrivals of onshore asylum seekers, even though they have made it abundantly clear that they want to improve and increase Australia's refugee program, is just completely outside of my definition, to the extent that I can't imagine how he could think that way. But he and several others do... and copiously express it.

Of course the other possibility is that he and his ilk just use the racist slur in a totally disingenuous manner in order to attack those with whom they disagree. Indeed, this has been one of the main downsides of the whole racism debate.

The slur of racism has had a huge consequence, most notably in the population stabilisation debate, where it effectively killed off debate for a couple of decades. This will be shown to be one of the gravest miscarriages of commonsense, in the near future when our population outgrows our ability to comfortably support it, and our social and economic structure comes tumbling down.

Those who use the word 'racist' and other similar terms in a very loose sense have got a lot to answer for.
Posted by Ludwig, Sunday, 25 October 2009 9:27:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig, the CJ case is actually quite an interesting case, for
here we have a man who claims to love fellow human beings, who
broke into cold sweats of hysteria, when you mentioned that you
could say g'day. Something is fishy lol. I would guess that
perhaps CJ has something to hide, which he does not want other
OLO posters to know about, that was the reason for the panic.
But IMHO he tried to cover it up, by trying to make you look
bad. As an impartial observer, I was quite shocked.

As to CJ's asylum seeker stance, its the same stuff he parrots
over and over. When the rationality is challenged, he has
no answers, other then name calling.

Fact is that none of the posters on OLO that I can think of,
have suggested that no refugees come to Australia. Many have
agreed that the number could be increased.

What most Australians seem to want is an orderly system, where
we agree on a set number, then have them screened before they
turn up here.

Now if there had been problems in Indonesia or NZ and people
sailed here as a first point of call, people might be understanding,
but your average Joe is no fool and when they see all this country
hopping, etc, they know that they are being hoodwinked and frankly
it pisses them off, which is quite understandable.

CJs mob are in fact the problem, not the solution. For they are
giving people hope of a life in Australia, so they risk their
lives and money. If we took no boats, they would not bother.
Nobody is going to risk that kind of money, if there is nil
chance of success.
Posted by Yabby, Sunday, 25 October 2009 1:42:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How odd it is that, with several active threads current on OLO about asylum seekers, you twats choose to post snarky comments at me on this unrelated thread instead of participating in proper discussions about the topic that most divides us. Could it be that it's not just me arguing for compassion and decency in those discussions?

Ludwig, you don't seem to know what racism is - further, I don't think I've ever said you're racist. Rather, I've said I think you're misanthropic. My contempt for you derives from your propensity to get into bed with any foul racist or xenophobic bigot who supports your crusade to prevent asylum seekers reaching Australia by boat, with never the slightest criticism of the often blatantly bigoted shite that they post here.

Mind you, given that you hail from Townsville, it wouldn't be all that surprising if you're one of those closet racists like Yabby, who can't see the overt bigotry in the community in which you live. "King Billy Cokebottle" lives in Townsville and is apparently still quite popular among the North's underbelly. Are you a fan?

Yabby - give up on trying to paint me as intolerant. You don't know what tolerance means. In this case, I'm very happy that the mentally ill are able to live in the community and are free to express whatever loopy ideas they wish. That doesn't mean that we need to welcome them into our family holidays.

Tolerance doesn't mean liking people or wanting to spend time with them. It means acknowledging their right to be as they are - which is apparently a big ask for some.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Sunday, 25 October 2009 8:21:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear oh dear CJ. You were doing reasonably well there for a bit. But you had to go and make a laughing stock of yourself with:

"Mind you, given that you hail from Townsville, it wouldn't be all that surprising if you're one of those closet racists..."

Well.... you are good at (inadvertent) humour!

Silly boy. There was just a touch of almost adult comment, then you slipped straight back into your normal kindergarten level diatribe.

No I don't think you have actually ever called me racist. You've called me all manner of other things, some of which you know are blatantly untrue and defamatory, including 'misanthrope'.

So you think that it is fair and reasonable to hate my guts because you associate me with some posters that you think are racist eh, even though I've never agreed with any obviously racist commentary?

Isn't that 'logic' just a tad wonky?

It has become patently obvious that you hate my guts simply because I disagree with you, over the asylum seeker issue in particular, and because I have dared to push the point regarding the hard questions, because you couldn't answer them and kept skipping around them!

" 'King Billy Cokebottle' lives in Townsville"

Really? That's news to me. I've heard of him, from years ago. I thought he hailed from WA. Haven't heard anything about him for a long time.
Posted by Ludwig, Monday, 26 October 2009 11:31:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ, the attempt at strawman arguments simply is not working for
you, I'm afraid. So quit the attempt at diversionary tactics.

The fact that you are intolerant, we know from your actions on
OLO. Its all very well pontificating, but our actions matter
and we know the truth about you now, so the rest is hot air.

You seemingly don't have a sense of humour either.

If you had not wanted to say g'day to Ludwig, you could have said
it in a polite way, not invent all this crap about "stalking"
and such nonsense. For you to rush to that kind of hysteria,
I can only assume that you have something to hide.
Posted by Yabby, Monday, 26 October 2009 12:21:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig, I don't "hate your guts", nor any other part of you for that matter. If I feel any emotion towards you, it's probably more pity than anything else, because I think you're mentally unbalanced at the moment. That's why I've suggested you seek help.

I also think you're misanthropic, because you show no evidence of compassion towards people less fortunate than yourself, nor indeed of common social mores. Such misanthropy is frequently displayed by extreme green nutters, particularly those who live alone and spend the bulk of their time immersed in the minutiae of such activities as field botany. There's nothing defamatory about any of that - rather, it's simply my considered opinion.

Yabby - what strawman argument? I genuinely think that Ludwig is mentally unbalanced, and that's why I interpreted his inappropriate behaviour the way that I did. He's free to be as deranged as he likes, as far as I'm concerned - but that doesn't mean that I (nor anyone else) am obliged to have him interrupt my holiday with my kids, particularly given the acrimonious nature of our online exchanges at the time, not to mention his expressed antipathy towards children.

I think that you're peeved because I've clearly demonstrated your closet racism in this thread. Your accusation that I'm intolerant is laughable, and is clearly motivated by some warped desire to get your own back.

Unlike you socially maladjusted obsessives, I've got nothing to hide. That's one of the reasons I post under my real name while you hide behind anonymity. That, as much as anything, is why I regard you both with piteous contempt.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Monday, 26 October 2009 9:57:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It's so easy for people who are not the targets of racism to snort things like, "Pfft there is NO racism" or to insist that the targets have some sort of defective sense of humour.

Although some Aboriginal people might have learned to just endure the *innocent* jocularity of racists - others are not going to just take it without comment.

For example, Jirra Lulla Harvey:

<"In the 121 years between Henry Melville’s first Australian minstrel and Chauvel’s Jedda there have been countless white actors who have played Aboriginal characters by smearing Blackface across their skin and misrepresenting our languages, songs, dances and traditions.

There is a history of Blackface in Australia. It is a hurtful and degrading history that denied our right to self representation and helped to create the racial stereotypes that plague our nation today.

I am Australian, I like a good laugh. I am Aboriginal and carry the scars of this history. To revive Blackface is not funny.">

http://eurasian-sensation.blogspot.com/2009/10/aboriginal-perspective-on-blackface.html

(Good on you CJ)
Posted by Pynchme, Wednesday, 28 October 2009 11:50:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Ludwig, I don't 'hate your guts' ..."

Really! Well that IS news to me Ceej. Wow, my mind boggles: how do you treat people that you really do hate then?? ?? ??

That extraordinary crapulous about stalking, repeated a whole bunch of times, that you spouted as a result of me extending a friendly invitation to come and meet me in the real world was really something to behold. It has got to be the whackiest stuff I've ever encountered on this forum. If that wasn't 'hate my guts' stuff, then what is?

Keep trying to convince yourself that I'm misanthropic. If someone who wants this country to greatly improve its input into global refugee issues, to double our refugee intake and to stop the terribly emotive, dangerous and haphazard people-smuggling route into Australian waters falls within your definition of misanthropic, then...what can I say....you are just extremely weird!

I suggest that you stop deluding yourself and just admit that I'm one of the least misanthropic contributors to this forum and that you...in your hatred of me...have used this term (and many others), over and over again, in order to belittle and slander me.

Have a nice day.
Posted by Ludwig, Thursday, 29 October 2009 8:19:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Whatever, Russell. Get help - and take some transcripts of your posts with you to show your counsellor.

I'm going fishing for a few days. If you post anything on topic I'll respond when I get back.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Thursday, 29 October 2009 8:54:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Stupidity is your only excuse on this one CJ, so we'll have to
leave it as that excuse.

Not a hint in any of his posts that he is irrational. What he does
occasionally is to mix humour and emotion, expressed through a
keyboard. That is common as chips on the net, I've seen it many
times before. You are seemingly too straight laced and lack the
intelligence to understand it. That is your problem, not his
problem.

Its time that you apologised CJ, for your accusations were indeed
an insult and had no grounds.

Or perhaps you really are simply too stupid to understand this
issue. Given your reaction, that is highly likely.
Posted by Yabby, Thursday, 29 October 2009 10:42:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 15
  7. 16
  8. 17
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy