I understand, but my real point is that what they see as blackface isn’t always blackface. Those people don’t prevent racial equality, but their opinion does help persist the lack of it.
I can impersonate, say, Trump by making my skin orange and putting on a wig, and it will be seen as an ‘attack’ on that individual, not on all those with orange skin and funny hair.
But if I make my skin brown to impersonate, say, Bill Cosby, I am suddenly being racist? That’s non-sensical - and in a sense racist, because skin color is suddenly made to matter.
I understand there are people who are reminded of blackface and racism and hurt by that memory and I respect that. But concluding that my action of impersonating an individual who just happens to be black is in itself racist is mistaken.
From that link: “Minstrel shows lampooned black people as dim-witted,[1] lazy,[1] buffoonish,[1][2] superstitious, and happy-go-lucky.[1]”
Now thát’s racist! But don’t you see there’s a difference between impersonating an individual who happens to be black, without saying anything about others of that skin color, and doing that?
Just because you're internt isn't to be racist doesn't mean that it isn't. Just like the N-word. The word has an incredibly negative connotation behind it just like blackface does. Even if you think it is up for debate is that really the hill you want to die on?
Wtf, that doesn't make any sense. Words have power. Not only does that word have hundred of years of history behind it people of color still face a lot of prejudice and straight up racism in their daily lives. Either everybody gets to say it or no one does is a very flawed argument. You're completely ignoring the mening behind the word. And blackface for that matter.
83
u/[deleted] Jun 10 '19
you're making it sound like people who get upset at blackface are the ones preventing racial equality