RoseMorninStar wrote:
That it took place DURING school hours just blows my mind. Just awful.
I got to wondering the other day... I understand what is wrong with 'Blackface' which is a demeaning caricature of someone of another race, creed, etc.. (What the staff at the school did was the same but 'Brownface' /degrading & making fun at the expense of another race of people.) The people from the beauty shop who dressed up as Michael Jackson in different stages of his life, I find that less.. sinister/cruel making that situation hazy, to me anyway. Intention matters, but one cannot always know what another's intention is. It got me to wondering about gender swapping for costume/role playing, is that also a form of 'blackface'? If not, what makes that different? I ask in all sincerity.
I had a much longer post written up but I think by the time I got to the end I think I had sort of distilled down my thoughts so I just left the end.
Especially as we begin to accept (what many other societies have accepted throughout time) that sometimes gender is not as simple as sex, that there are sometimes more than two neatly divided categories, that sometimes one may feel compelled to cross some imaginary dividing line and take on a role that would not traditionally have been theirs. It is something that many cultures recognized, sometimes even celebrated. So even if one do not fall into this category, to merely present as another gender whether in earnesty or only in 'costume', it does not carry that same singular stigma of blackface.
Ultimately I would say when minority Americans tell us how something affects them, we should do them the very great honour of simply believing them and not engaging in hurtful behaviors, rather than telling them why it shouldn't be hurtful, why
this time it isn't racist, why
this example was okay.
(I know that wasn't what you were doing, again, I cut off the whole first half of the post)Just as we expect men to believe us when we as women tell them how something affects us negatively, rather than them trying to explain to us why we shouldn't feel that way.
Always brings to mind the Planet of the Apes movie (I forget which title, now) where we get the "An ape may say 'no' to a human, but a human may never again say 'no' to an ape." The reason didn't matter, the intent was not the issue, the history simply cannot be erased because it is inconvenient to the present.
Notice that it never even pretended that certain apes could not specifically hate humans, or that specific humans could not deeply feel for an identify with the situation of the apes. It just didn't matter to the particular issue - there are things that the oppressors (even former oppressors) can't do that the oppressed may. And no matter how 'unfair' the oppressors think this duality is, it isn't as unfair as the situation that brought it about.