Serena Williams - Disgraceful

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
Papas1982 said:
I’m sorry, but a facial expression or trait is not a racist stereotype.

If it had contained for example chains I would agree as it would have depicted historical mistreatment.

But a common physical trait, nah not for me. Would be the same if it had shown a black women next to a white women, with one having more “booty” than the other.
Click to expand...
Is that because all black women look the same! Awful comment mate,
Which common traits has he used for the Portugese man or Japanese/Haitain woman?
 
If you defend this then either you have no knowledge of the use of racial stereotyping throughout history or you don’t see a problem with its use. If it’s the former I’d suggest you read more, the latter then your obvious personal viewpoints significantly cloud your judgement
 
I didn’t say all did I?
The same as if I saw a joke depicting a Scot with ginger hair I wouldn’t be appalled.
Or a joke depicting an American high schooler with his jumper tucked over his shoulders.
Or an Italian eating pasta with a bushy mistache.....

Re the umpire and Osaki, I’d imagine IF they were the focal point of his drawing he would have tried too mock some physical appearance of theirs.
 
therod said:
If you defend this then either you have no knowledge of the use of racial stereotyping throughout history or you don’t see a problem with its use. If it’s the former I’d suggest you read more, the latter then your obvious personal viewpoints significantly cloud your judgement
Click to expand...

I can genuinely say, in my limited life experience in which I’ve witnessed plenty of racism. I’ve never seen a person bullied due to their lip size......
 
Papas1982 said:
I didn’t say all did I?
The same as if I saw a joke depicting a Scot with ginger hair I wouldn’t be appalled.
Or a joke depicting an American high schooler with his jumper tucked over his shoulders.
Or an Italian eating pasta with a bushy mistache.....

Re the umpire and Osaki, I’d imagine IF they were the focal point of his drawing he would have tried too mock some physical appearance of theirs.
Click to expand...
No it’s not the same, the historical context is entirely different. If you can’t see that this discussion is pointless
 
Can you point me in the direction of when a black persons lips size has been used to desciminate agsint their entire race?

If you can, I’ll happily hold my hands up.

I’m not for a second denying that racial stereotypes exist, or that races have been mistreated simply due to their race. I’m just saying I’ve not seen the above used for it before. I’m happy to be elnlightened.
 
Scrotie McBoogerballs said:
The trouble is, as I see it, is that the professionally offended will jump on anything to be offended at.
Click to expand...
And those who are bigots use the professionally offended line to avoid debate and to excuse any type of behaviour they disagree with.
 
therod said:
No it’s not the same, the historical context is entirely different. If you can’t see that this discussion is pointless
Click to expand...
Can’t reply to your previous link. I presume it’s been removed due to its content.

As it was, I managed to view it. Genuinely I’d heard most of the phrases, but as they were all from quite some time ago I didn’t know of the origins and would simply label them all under racist nicknames.

The caricatures in the link are still imo somewhat different and the main descriptions still appeared mainly on personality traits albeit beciase of their colour. But I will acknowledge that I can now at least understand why some with a better knowledge of the subject will be offended by it.
 
I removed a link because it was perhaps too racially sensitive IMO.
Suffice to say, racial caricatures have been used throughout history to stereotype, undermine different racial groups & justify racist policy etc, think the images used in nazi Germany re Jews or the Jim Crow era in the states. There is a reason why the black and white minstrel show is no longer in tv. There is a reason why jim Davidson isn’t on tv anymore. To hide behind the ‘professionally offended’ line, is lazy at best, sinister at worst
 
pauldj42 said:
And those who are bigots use the professionally offended line to avoid debate and to excuse any type of behaviour they disagree with.
Click to expand...

I’d say that’s equally as closed minded. It’s not always so clear cut.

Especially on social media, it’s always a case of your for or agaisnt something. There seems to be no middle ground.

Imo, just because someone is offended it doesn’t mean something offensive was said, of course that doesn’t give people the right to spout what ever they want and hide behind that.
 
therod said:
I removed a link because it was perhaps too racially sensitive IMO.
Suffice to say, racial caricatures have been used throughout history to stereotype, undermine different racial groups & justify racist policy etc, think the images used in nazi Germany re Jews or the Jim Crow era in the states. There is a reason why the black and white minstrel show is no longer in tv. There is a reason why jim Davidson isn’t on tv anymore. To hide behind the ‘professionally offended’ line, is lazy at best, sinister at worst
Click to expand...

Tbf, I wouldn’t be able to counter any of that as my historical knowledge of racism is clearly inferior to yours. I don’t even know who Jim Crow is......

I agree professionally offended is an easy out, but I also think that some (not in this case) are quick to take offence when it’s nit justified.
 
Papas1982 said:
I’d say that’s equally as closed minded. It’s not always so clear cut.

Especially on social media, it’s always a case of your for or agaisnt something. There seems to be no middle ground.

Imo, just because someone is offended it doesn’t mean something offensive was said, of course that doesn’t give people the right to spout what ever they want and hide behind that.
Click to expand...
That’s just it mate, Equality and Diversity, Equal Opportunities etc, from day one educate you that “It’s impact not intent”
 
I’ve had me tea & I’m off me soap box now. 3 take aways for me;
-scroatie is a bigger troll than cabbie ever was, just a bit cleverer with it.
-as a stand-alone the cartoon maybe ambiguous re sexism, not racism imo. But I’ll concede this is open to interpretation
-except when you frame it with historical use of racial stereotyping in cartoons, that the fella has got previous & the journos at the paper have links to Steve Bannon. That removes all ambiguity IMO.
 
It might have been racist if Williams wasn’t so muscular..
 
fundy said:
why is Naomi Osaka white with blonde hair?
Click to expand...
Her hair was blonde in the final.
I’d also say that she isn’t white, certainly a paler tone has been used, but she doesn’t appear as white as the umpire. At best it’s beciase of poor research and he based it on a skin colour he presumed.
 
therod said:
It depends how far the rabbit hole you want to go 🤣🤣 it’s no coincidence that her ‘blondness’ has been magnified
Click to expand...

Bit like all caricatures .. they exaggerate things
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top