Red-faced over Blackface: Vogue Thailand fails with model channeling Grace Jones in blackface

[onthesoi]

Don't see the problem with a Thai dressing up to look like and in tribute of Grace Jones, did the Vogue campaign even use the term blackface?

[Bluespunk]

2 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

Don't see the problem with a Thai dressing up to look like and in tribute of Grace Jones, did the Vogue campaign even use the term blackface?

Read the whole thread and you'll see why there are problems.

[Thakkar]

21 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Blacking up in order to perceive Black people to be simpletons and mocking them is indeed offensive and racist and unacceptable , its part of history that is no longer acceptable , we have all moved on from that .

    People dressing up as famous singers , really isnt portraying them in a negative light , quite the opposite actually .

 

All here seem to agree that there was no ill intention. I further agree that this portrayal was *meant* as an homage.

 

It is however still offensive to many people, and rightly so, regardless of intent.

 

Let's say tiny Bhutan was never touched by the evils of Nazism in an way or form. Let's say most people in Bhutan have only rudimentary or no knowledge of the evils of Nazism. 

 

If I were a Bhutanese making and selling swastika branded hummus, I would at worst be guilty of cluelessness. People in Israel, Belgium, America on the other hand might be appalled.

 

Befuddled, I'd ask why. Once I understood, I could do one of two things:

1. continue selling under the swastika brand and just laugh at those silly Israeli/European "snowflakes"

2. Acknowledge my ignorance, apologize and change my brand

 

Which of these would be the decent thing to do?

 

Ignorance is a legitimate defense. Knowing and not acting on the basis that "this does not apply here" is callousness towards genuine race-based atrocities perpetrated by one group of humans towards another.

Edited June 1, 2017 by Thakkar

[onthesoi]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

Read the whole thread and you'll see why there are problems.

I read it already ...can you quote Vogue using the term "blackface".

Edited June 1, 2017 by onthesoi

[Bluespunk]

3 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

I read it already ...can you quote Vogue using the term "blackface".

It's not a term they used, it's the physical reality of what they did!

[sanemax]

12 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Oh and by the way, it was pulled because it was racist. They may not have used the word but that was the reason...

The advert was pulled because of pressure from U.S Human rights groups, who said that the advertisement reminded people off the way Black people were portrayed in the USA in the 1900's

 

[onthesoi]

4 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

It's not a term they used, it's the physical reality of what they did!

The reality is a Thai model dressed up as Grace Jones in a completely innocent, non derogatory fashion.

 

The reaction is unfounded...

[Bluespunk]

Just now, onthesoi said:

The reality is a Thai model dressed up as Grace Jones in a completely innocent, non derogatory fashion.

 

The reaction is unfounded...

Nope.

[Bluespunk]

4 minutes ago, sanemax said:

The advert was pulled because of pressure from U.S Human rights groups, who said that the advertisement reminded people off the way Black people were portrayed in the USA in the 1900's

 

I.E. in a racist manner.

[onthesoi]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

Nope.

Where is your evidence, quotes photos etc that the intention or manner was racist?

 

If your worried about racism you could look no further than your relentless Thai bashing on these boards.

 

....even your fake concern for non existent blackface references could be considered just more Thai bashing, for eg I see you didn't comment on my post asking why its ok for Robert Downey Jr. to paint his face black?

[sanemax]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

I.E. in a racist manner.

Yes, USA racist because of their depictions of Blacks in the 1900"s  

Thailand not racist for showing their appreciation of Black musicians  in 2017

I was going to say "surely you can see the difference"

But, quite clearly, you cannot

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, onthesoi said:

Where is your evidence, quotes photos etc that the intention or manner was racist?

 

If your worried about racism you could look no further than your relentless Thai bashing on these boards.

 

....even your fake concern for non existent blackface references could be considered just more Thai bashing, for eg I see you didn't comment on my post asking why its ok for Robert Downey Jr. to paint his face black?

For someone who has said they have read the thread you don't seem to have taken much in.

 

At no point have I said the vogue campaign was intentionally racist.

 

You flatter yourself if you think I read all your posts.

 

Oh but to answer your 'question' I don't think it's ok...

 

Again with the Thai bashing BS,

 

Sigh...

[wakeupplease]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

More stories from not reading the thread beyond the post you jump on...already covered this.

 

Why not read on a bit...

After that comment why bother as then you start telling yourself here we go more fiction

 

But if you did sorry I missed it

Keep well

[Bluespunk]

4 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Yes, USA racist because of their depictions of Blacks in the 1900"s  

Thailand not racist for showing their appreciation of Black musicians  in 2017

I was going to say "surely you can see the difference"

But, quite clearly, you cannot

Using 'blackface' is using a tradition rooted in hate.

 

At no point did I say vogue meant to do this, but it is what they did.

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, wakeupplease said:

After that comment why bother as then you start telling yourself here we go more fiction

 

But if you did sorry I missed it

Keep well

I always do...

[teatree]

5 minutes ago, sanemax said:

The advert was pulled because of pressure from U.S Human rights groups, who said that the advertisement reminded people off the way Black people were portrayed in the USA in the 1900's

 

Some people just can't seem to accept that we live in a different era now and are unable to leave the baggage from the earlier era behind. 

 

Blackface (the derogatory portrayal of black people by whites as simple buffoons) has quite rightly been cast into the rubbish bin of history.  It has been nearly 40 years since the Black and White Minstrel show ended in the UK, even longer for similar shows in the US.

 

As long as there is no ill intent (as is the case with the Thai model dressing up as Grace Jones) and people just want to look like a particular celebrity, then I honestly cannot see why the race of the person dressing up matters.

[starky]

7 hours ago, sanemax said:

Grace Jones . Offensive ?

That is the KO on this topic IMO. Great post.

[sanemax]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

Using 'blackface' is using a tradition rooted in hate.

 

In the USA

These Asians darkening themselves is nothing to do with American traditions

[Bluespunk]

Just now, sanemax said:

In the USA

These Asians darkening themselves is nothing to do with American traditions

The tradition is rooted in hate.

 

To use that tradition is to pay homage to that hate.

 

Intentionally or not, that is what happened.

 

Hate knows no boundaries.

[teatree]

4 minutes ago, starky said:

That is the KO on this topic IMO. Great post.

As a white person of ginger heritage (my grandmother was a ginge and most clowns are ginger) I find this pic offensive and demand that all clowns are banned immediately.

[onthesoi]

9 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

At no point have I said the vogue campaign was intentionally racist.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Using 'blackface' is using a tradition rooted in hate.

 

As you admit the Vogue campaign wasn't being intentionally racist it must follow they were not practising 'blackface' which in is in your own words "a tradition rooted in hate."

 

 

9 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Again with the Thai bashing BS,

 

Sigh...

 

Yes, you are a relentless Thai basher....enough irony in this thread to fill a scrap yard!

 

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, onthesoi said:

 

As you admit the Vogue campaign wasn't being intentionally racist it must follow they were not practising 'blackface' which in is in your own words "a tradition rooted in hate."

 

 

 

Yes, you are a relentless Thai basher....enough irony in this thread to fill a scrap yard!

 

Yawn...to your second point.

 

The ad campaign was wrong because it used 'blackface', intentionally or not it payed homage to the hate that lies behind the tradition.

 

They need to be more aware in future and pull this campaign.

Edited June 1, 2017 by Bluespunk

[onthesoi]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

Yawn...

 

If facts are making you tired maybe its time for a lie down....

Edited June 1, 2017 by onthesoi

[teatree]

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

The tradition is rooted in hate.

 

To use that tradition is to pay homage to that hate.

 

Intentionally or not, that is what happened.

 

Hate knows no boundaries.

I tell you what also has no boundaries, the offense taken by oversensitive PC minded forum posters.

[Bluespunk]

Just now, onthesoi said:

 

If facts are making you tired maybe its time for a lie down....

Again you might to read the whole post...

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, teatree said:

I tell you what also has no boundaries, the offense taken by oversensitive PC minded forum posters.

Recognising the hate that lies behind a racist tradition isn't PC.

 

It's the right thing to do.

 

I haven't taken offence, so don't worry yourself.

[sanemax]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

The tradition is rooted in hate.

 

To use that tradition is to pay homage to that hate.

 

Intentionally or not, that is what happened.

 

Hate knows no boundaries.

Ok, so, you are saying that the Thai woman dressing up as Grace Jones was done to pay homage to American racist attitudes form 50 years ago ?

   Nothing to do with paying homage to Grace Jones, the iconic signer, it was done for racist reasons . 

  OK, I disagree though

 

[teatree]

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Recognising the hate that lies behind a racist tradition isn't PC.

 

It's the right thing to do.

 

I haven't taken offence, so don't worry yourself.

No hate behind the ad.  Just a homage to a celebrity who happens to be black.

[wakeupplease]

#HuaweixVogue #HuaweiP10.”

 

#huaweixVogue-RacialAbuse nice new add for the phone maybe not now

 

Racial abuse in many country's is illegal with stiff penalties for those who carry it out as should be.

 

Here it happens every day with poor old farang and tourists being abused by the two tier charging system. so get upset and complain as they should.

 

This case is borderline and maybe a storm in a teacup, but locals should learn the meaning of racial abuse as they practice it every day and it makes them look BAD.

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, sanemax said:

Ok, so, you are saying that the Thai woman dressing up as Grace Jones was done to pay homage to American racist attitudes form 50 years ago ?

   Nothing to do with paying homage to Grace Jones, the iconic signer, it was done for racist reasons . 

  OK, I disagree though

 

At no point have I said it was done for racist reasons.

 

I have all along said I thought it was unintentional.

 

That doesn't change the fact it was racist.

 

And yet again, it was not the dressing up that was the problem, but the ''blackface''.

 

Pay homage to Grace Jones by all means, but the 'blackface' is unnecessary.