I wanted to ask them ‘So you’re saying that in the past those US comedians who did Blackface KNEW that they were being racist? Didn’t they just think they were being funny? Poking fun, having a good laugh about black people?’

Same thing, different time.

And when I say white people, I am talking about the former colonizing countries because in my country or in my mother tongue, when we say “white people”, we’re talking about our former “Masters”. They’re the ones who first call us savages and now try to assimilate us by all means. Even if a Norvegian or Croatian person has a fair complexion and is basically a white person, why would I distrust that person? There’s nothing in my history, the history that has been passed to me, which says that they did wrong to people and that I should be wary of them. So, most of the times, people don’t distrut all “white people” but only the ones they’re familiar with. When people express distrust against a targeted group of people, it’s usually based on historical/personal precedents or simple (unproven) prejudice.

First of all, black doesn’t equate Black American or African-American. I am black ie my skin color is black and I couldn’t care less about blackface because I am African. The racism people faced in my country from white people is different from what African-American dealt with. A clip with 5 white people passing off as the Jacksons 5 won’t offend me and I am black. So are the aboriginal people in Australia. They’re black too. Were they offended?

I like Harry Connick Jr because he put it in the context of an American viewpoint. However, expecting the other people on the show who are not American and who couldn’t care less about your racial issues (they have their own with the aboriginal people) to be as sad as the only representant of the great USA, can you spell “self-centered”?

That is exactly what Lisa has done in the original post when she (based on a sketchy online poll) states:

“Further, the majority of Australians are defending the minstrelsy….”

That just makes the person who finds funny ignorant and a bigot.

Clearly that’s not true, just as the fact that a few people of various ethnicities became doctors doesn’t mean that there’s no racism in Australia. I’m sure you have some black doctors, too. We sure do!

And note that none of those men is black – I know this may be hard to believe, but racism isn’t one big monolithic thing. Different ethnic groups have different stereotypes pointed at them, and racism affects them differently. Their personal experiences with racism – or lack of it – don’t really say anything about the experiences of a black person in Australia.

I agree that it was in bad taste because of Michael’s death, but that doesn’t mean that the blackface part wasn’t also in bad taste on its own. I also agree that Borat was offensive to an entire nation, but that doesn’t mean that this isn’t also offensive.

The fact that you even have to ask that is really sad. Yes. Yes it was wrong. Yes, she probably offended people who were too polite to point it out.

You seem to be exemplifying the “colorblind” sort of attitude that just doesn’t work. Racism won’t go away just because we all ignore the fact that race exists. Because guess what? It does, and you have to deal with that fact head-on.

Using that definition often turns into an excuse for non-white people to claim they’re not racist despite their obvious prejudices against other ethnicities.

> I just get eyerolls and sneers about my sense of humor. I don’t know what to do anymore.

Understand that people’s sense of humor and offense are different. What is offensive to one, is funny to another.

It always has been. It’s democracy, there is strength in numbers. The size of a group can determine it’s economic and social influence. Publicity can counter this, thus a hyperexposed group of one person may outrank unknown millions but you get the idea. The more presence a group has, the more there stance is known etc.