The final blow to the whole, horrible thing is when the host, after asking the contestants what kinds of doctors they became, says, "lotta color on this show!"

...ugh.

Without disagreeing with anything you've said about the show itself, I wish you hadn''t framed the argument with "This is why black people don’t trust white people." "Black people" don't do any one thing as a monolith, and making those kinds of generalizations about a massively heterogeneous population has a similar historic resonance, even if it's nothing like the kind of crap that that TV show represents. It isn't even that I disagree with the empirical statement that many black people do distrust white people or that they are justified in doing so, it's just that I think it's wise and important to remember that they do it as individuals, not as members of a collectivity that it's possible to make generalizations about. A statement like "this is why Kanye West said Bush hates black people" or something, for example, wouldn't have the (however unintended) implication that black people act and think as a group. and recognizing that black people think all sorts of things, just like any kind of people, is at least as important (and sometimes much harder than) observing that (when they do) black people have justification to be skeptical of white liberalism, or whatever.

I am certainly not going to defend the use of blackface on this show -- it's appalling -- but a site host "thesocietypages.org" should at least discuss the fact that this show took place in an Australian context and not an American one. Blackface minstrily is an American tradition; if you want to say something smart about this incident, it would be interesting to look at how blackface came to be imported to Australia, and how it was understood in a place that does not have a tradition of enslaved people of African descent, and never had a a national re-evaluation of racial attitudes of the sort the U.S. had in the wake of the civil rights movement.

On a related note, white people are not a culturally homogenous mass. Would it be appropriate to lump African-Americans and black Africans together into a single category for assessing trustworthiness -- if, say, people were point out that Kenya's government is unstable, and thus we shouldn't elect someone of Kenyan descent to office here in the U.S.? If not, why lump white Australians with whites elsewhere?

I saw this up on "Stuff white people do." It was great timing, because it primed me to notice that there was a lot of blackface going on at the "zombie pub crawl" in Minneapolis on Saturday.

Essentially, on the night of the zombie crawl a lot of people dress up as zombies and walk around the city drunk yelling "brains! brains! brains!" The variety of costumes is generally kind of cool: you have your classic zombies, your futuristic sci-fi zombies, your historical figure zombies, your steampunk zombies, etc.

However, you also apparently have your blackface zombies. In the space of an hour at one pub I saw three people in blackface. One person was a 70s disco dancer, another was a gangster, and the third was (I think) Morpheus from The Matrix. I spent a long time staring at them trying to figure out if the face paint was supposed to be rotted skin or if it was really blackface. But honestly, there was red lipstick. On men. And two of the three were already playing on racial stereotypes.

How on earth did they think that was OK? It's amazing what kind of shit will come out when something (such as Halloween) comes along to lift social sanctions for a short while. I see your point about people of color not knowing what kind of white person they're dealing with. Even if somebody acts perfectly civilized most of the time, they STILL might be the sort of person to bust out with something racist the second they get an excuse.

American Cultural Imperialism at work again - if it's bad in the US it must be the same everywhere.

This was a stupid and tasteless act, but putting on blackface doesn't have the same connotations everywhere in the world that it does in the US.

I think this is offensive in a US specific way. I don't think that there are the same connotations that blackface is always derogatory with this in other countries where the population is predominantly Caucasian.

There was a very interesting clip on NPR (on Harry Sharer's show, I think) where one of the dancers was lightly defending the act and said something to the effect of "I'm Indian, how can I be racist?" So, not all the dancers were white. But what is interesting is that he thought that because he was also a person of color, he couldn't do something racist.

Just because one has experienced racism or oppression, doesn't mean they can't turn around and dish it out just as bad.

Australia is not so isolated from the rest of the world that we're not aware of the long history of racism in America, which included blackface. We've certainly done a fantastic job of adopting American culture in our media and entertainment. It's therefore very disingenuous to now turn around and say that blackface doesn't have the same racist connotations in our country. Of course it does, just as walking around in a Nazi uniform would have the same racist connotations. It's not such a hard thing to acknowledge that a mistake was made and people got offended, even if there was no offense intended. I don't understand the defensiveness and excuse making that's going on over this.

Can I ask a question, as a non-American? Is there any (acceptable) way for a white person to act as a black character, either in a 'straight' tribute (I agree a 'take-off' by a white person is racist) or simply because the character in question is black and there is no black actor available (I'm thinking of school plays here, in small town New Zealand). Is it all racist, or just the 'making fun' angle?

And I also agree with comments above that some actions may have different connotations in different countries, dependant upon that country's history, etc.

Alia: Thanks for that. I didn't want to come across as offensive, just wanted some clarification.

The *knowledge* that something is offensive is one point, though; the instinctive 'shrivel' from an offensive concept is another. While I'm sure Americans know that 'fanny' means 'vulva' in antipodean slang I doubt they will have the same (internal) reaction upon hearing the word. That's what I meant; while the rest of world may (and arguably should) know that something is offensive to America and Americans, that doesn't mean that the action/phrase has the same *connotations* to a non-American; connotations that are born of cultural background and shared assumptions, knowledge, experiences, etc. That doesn't mean that actions such as blackface are/or should be 'right' or even more acceptable in other countries; I'm not arguing that, just saying that connotations will always be different.

I can only attest personally to a decades-old tradition of blackface mocking Australia's Indigenous peoples, being as I'm only decades old; but it's certainly there, back to even kids in school revues blacking up to sing "My Boomerang Won't Come Back". And the important of the black-and-white minstrel tradition was huge.

I've heard some people elsewhere trying to claim that Australia has no tradition of slavery at all! It's amazing how quickly history is forgotten - helped along the way by long periods of government decrying and silencing what they dubbed the "black armband view of history". When I was a kid, Rolf Harris was still being cheered for singing a deathbed song telling his off-sider to "let me abos go loose, Lou/they're of no further use". We in Australia really want to forget.

Fewer black people in Australia doesn't make it "not offensive", it just means that it directly hurts fewer people. Since when was the size of the minority a criterion for social justice and inclusion amongst progressive folk?

I was very disappointed when Julia Gillard joined in the "Can't you take a joke?" defence. I thought she was better than that.

Hey, Hey it’s offensive in Australia too

>>Steel yourself; maybe skip it if you’re not up to being reminded, again, of white racism against blacks.

Perhaps it's your framing of the content and how, bless his heart, Harry Connick Jr., "did what he could to try to make it clear that the performance was not acceptable," that makes it unacceptable. My question to you is what, exactly, makes this bad? Is people wearing makeup that depicts them as another race entirely and in and of itself 'wrong'? really? was my friend going to a halloween party as aunt Jemaima wrong because she was in blackface? Are we really not allowed to portray ourselves as anything other than our own race? is that equality? maybe you're up in arms because this is something to get up in arms about. perhaps no act of racism was committed.

As an Australian, I am saddened by the level of ignorance in my country. When I criticised this "act" on the blogs, I was attacked and told that I was a "stupid bitch" and should "let the door bang me on the arse on the way out". My comment? "Australia- I quit"

And why shouldn't I quit? We are only 18 months post "The Apology" and it is just so meaningless. I take the point that this was an Australian context, but what does the context matter? Is it okay to invoke painful images because the "context" is different?

And to all those people who say "lighten up"... I think you actually mean that, but it's nothing to do with laughing is it?

Suzanne, you're embarrassing yourself. Assuming you hail from any country that ever colonized any other, you don't know the history of your own country/culture, and that's a very cute little excuse, but it's a load of crap.

Equality? Really? Your friend should have been but wasn't called out for dressing up as Aunt Jemima. Complete non-event. And you're framing this nothing as somehow similar to actual inequalities visited by white people on others over the last 500 years or so? Why is it than whenever a white person wants to do something s/he should know damned well is offensive, the least suggestion that it IS offensive means the white person is being oppressed?

You sound like a four-year-old stomping your foot because there are one hundred pieces of candy and you only got ninety-eight of them. Educate yourself.

Yes, the act itself was racist and to say it wasn't is ridiculous. African Americans are right to take offence at it - it is a disgusting example of racism.

However, go and have a read of some of the comments about this skit and Australia in general that are now flooding the web. All Australians are racist, all Australians are stupid, all Australians are loud and uncouth, all Australians are criminals etc etc. Hey, you know what it's called when you take the actions of a few people and judge every member of their race by said actions? Racism.

The globalisation of originally US-specific taboos (and whether it is rational to expect that the world will always know where the line really is and that the US gets to draw them - especially when there is still plenty of racism in the US itself) and the double standard at play for racism against African Americans vs racism against white Australians are two aspects of this incident I would have expected this (normally comprehensive) blog to have covered.

Regarding the author's statement that 'the majority of Australians are defending' the skit - the poll you reference was run by the website of a tabloid paper owned by Murdoch's News Corp. It's a right wing slanted tabloid and the poll responses are from the type of people who read right wing slanted tabloids. You can pretty much expect that many of them wouldn't think the skit was racist.

The news sources I tend to read have a left wing bias and their polls show the opposite reaction - rather than the 'majority' being OK with it, my experience is that there is a pretty strict divide along political right-left lines between those OK with it and those not.

For the record - I am not OK with it, I think it was ignorant and reprehensible. However, I am also not OK with being branded a racist because some people who live on the same landmass as I do are racists.

It is worth noting that the majority of the performers in that sketch weren't white, which makes your headline a little misleading. It was in the poorest of taste, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth mentioning the ethnicity of the people involved.

Hi, de-lurking here to say that I have lived in Australia for 20 years now, and one thing I have noticed is that Australians tend to get very very defensive when racism is pointed out to them. There was a reaction of anger from most people at the idea that anyone would point out to them the utter UTTER offensiveness of that "skit" and trying to talk to many of them would just make them jump up and down about "Political correctness" as if those of us who could clearly see how very wrong this was were just trying to score points. I raise my children here, and it's actually quite upsetting. I feel as though we as a society are doing something wrong here, that so many people refuse to admit that Australians are ever racist - how can we deal with the very obvious problems we have here if even to mention it gets you howled down every time? My feeling is that racist attitudes flourish best when they are never examined or talked about - but here its all just "Hey, we're Aussies, we just love a joke maaaaaaate"

Oh, and I don't buy this idea that "Minstrels are a totally US concept we have no idea of that stuff here" I know many older Australians who grew up watching "The Black and White Minstel Show" in the 60's. It was a BBC production, so they know about it in Britain, my mother remembers it as a child in Ireland - basically all over the western world it is known about and only the very very ignorant or backward or racist would think it was acceptable today. I have asked Australian people who think its all just a big joke - which would you rather be? So racist that you actually think thats OK, or so backward you had *no idea* there was anything wrong with it? I just get eyerolls and sneers about my sense of humour. I don't know what to do anymore.

Blackface isn't in the entire history of western civilization. It is something american.

Check out a lot of the criticism of the blackface/white model fashion spread in French Vogue.

To Clarify, I didn't mean to make a sweeping "western world" comment, what I should have said was the English speaking world in particular, as we share so many aspects of our culture - for example, growing up in Ireland, I saw and experienced so much of English culture that I feel very at home with it and understand most of the nuances , and I believe Australians to be similarly influenced by US culture. Of course there will be differences, but the African-American struggle for civil rights in the US is not really a little-known story outside of the US, and I would certainly expect TV producers to know enough about it not to put something like that on TV here.

Did anyone else notice that "Michael Jackson" seemed to be in "White Face"?

It makes me wonder what would have happened if the same group wore the same outfits and skipped the Black Face. Or if black people had done the same routine.

I think part of the reason they did Black Face was to show the contrast between Michael's white skin and his brothers. Without it, the act would have been less effective. But that doesn't give them enough reason to do it.

I think this more of an act of ignorance, not an act of hate. In HR, they call these "teachable moments."

This reminds me a little of South Park Episode 408, "Chef Goes Nanners." At the end, chef realizes that the children never understood why the flag is offensive.

Of course, any South Park reference brings us back to the "danger of irony." I'll let everyone else take it from here.

I don't claim to be the smartest person when it comes to questions of race or privilege, but I am aussie and I do think there are more complexities here than some of you are stating. I didn't watch that show, I think it is idiotic, and yes it wasn't funny and yes it was tasteless and yes someone with more brains should have stopped it before it got to the actual taping stage.

But, that skit was first done twenty years ago by the same guys who did it that night. I don't think it would have been conceived of now. Also, there were at least two people of colour on that stage (I have heard varying accounts). They were all medical students twenty years ago and now every one of them is a specialist. In their time in our (apparently horribly racist) country they have obviously done very well whatever colour they are. They have not experienced enough racism themselves to have been so touchy they refused to do the skit, either then or now. Maybe that is a good point for Oz.

To be honest, the first thing that occurred to me on seeing the skit after the furore started was how offensive it was to the Jackson family, to be making fun of Michael by changing his face from black in the first skit to white in this one, and to be imitating him at all so soon after his death. I dunno.

And my next thought is that when the Borat movie came out, I heard a lot of people saying the Kazakhstanis should lighten up and have a sense of humour about their country being portrayed as full of poor inbred prostitutes and wifebeaters. Apparently it was ok for the white englishman to portray a whole country in such terms as long as they were white too?

And my last thought is that people all over the world are doing amazing things for other people regardless of their race or religion, and other people are still being murdered brutally for their race or religion or just because they don't have as much power as the next guy, and yet this stupid skit gets all the media attention? It's a crazy world.

These people are truly despicable and disgusting.

Peachmeister, an Aussie is trying to defend the racist blackface skit. So, you're saying that because these 4 fellows from 20 years ago are doctors now, so we should excuse them for performing a very racist, ignorant skit from 20 years ago? Bitch please.

And my next thought is that when the Borat movie came out, I heard a lot of people saying the Kazakhstanis should lighten up and have a sense of humour about their country being portrayed as full of poor inbred prostitutes and wifebeaters. Apparently it was ok for the white englishman to portray a whole country in such terms as long as they were white too?

And there were a LOT of people who were offended by Borat and they boycotted the movie. By the way, there was a lot of controversy over BRUNO, too. Stop trying to slump a certain group of people as one voice, one opinion for the general public.

OK, you American people have to stop thinking what anything offensing in your country should be in the rest of the world. The same goes for whatever behavior you find acceptable as per your rules and yu expect the rest of the world to abide by in the name of democracy or globalization.

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"?

Oh, btw, the reason I don't trust white people is because we don't have the same values. By example, in my culture, you don't go out and run your mouth telling all your personal business to perfect strangers. For white people, it means being nice, agreeable. They call that being friendly, when we call that being shameless. Different places, different cultures...

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.

Hadn't realised this was on this website!
I'm a person of colour from Australia, I was angry with the way the mainstream media was handling this. Most did take the 'we're not American, this is Australian humour' defence route.

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.

exactly....not worth it 9 times out of 10...

Let's be honest, the only reason HCJ did that was so that he could save for in the u.s. career wise. You know very well that if there weren't cameras around he'd be chuckling it u. 

It's better not to trust a single 1 and be safe