What is wrong with Justin Trudeau (or anyone) masquerading as Aladdin?Does the talent or luck of Egypt's political leaders explain why Egypt hasn't experienced a 1917 like the one experienced by the Russian Empire?How do elections determine who is “leading” or “elected” with partial results?What is the political motivation that makes US never invade Canada?What was the rationale for Jim Prentice calling an early election?What are the arguments made in favor of a minority government over majority government and vice versa?What are the main arguments against White Nationalism?In the US why is nationalism equated with racism?Are racist attitudes correlated with income?Why are Justin Trudeau and Benjamin Netanyahu meeting with Bollywood actors?What is Canada's case for applying tariffs on US dairy?

How can I say that this matrix is invertible?

Solve the equation exponential radical

Two voices for a solo singer written in a sheet music

Is Fairphone violating the GPL with its newest Fairphone 3?

Is it possible to trap yourself in the Nether?

Why is a living creature being frozen in carbonite in “The Mandalorian” so common when it seemed so risky in “The Empire Strikes Back?”

Will a falling rod stay in contact with the frictionless floor?

Adding "dot com" to the end of a sentence?

extract nth pattern from a file

Can I use Siri to remember a parking spot?

Why should interrupts be short in a well configured system?

Hammering under water?

Is it true that almost everyone who starts a PhD and sticks around long enough can get one?

How to block a window with plywood for big wall to project a movie?

How can I add this arrows and numbers inside a table?

In academic writing why do some recommend to avoid "announcing" the topic?

Is there a guide/reference for possible character hairstyles in D&D Forgotten Realms universe?

In C#, is there a way to enforce behavior coupling in interface methods or is the fact that I am trying to do that a design smell?

Could a Falcon Heavy really put six GPS Block III satellites in orbit?

Is there any conceivable way to "turn off" a star?

How did the USSR track Gagarin's Vostok-1 orbital flight? Was tracking capability an issue in the choice of orbit?

Which FIDE rule forbids pressing the clock before taking captured pieces off the board?

Is it possible to remove the trash icon from the dock on macOS Catalina?

Repeating elements in the story of Eliezer



What is wrong with Justin Trudeau (or anyone) masquerading as Aladdin?


Does the talent or luck of Egypt's political leaders explain why Egypt hasn't experienced a 1917 like the one experienced by the Russian Empire?How do elections determine who is “leading” or “elected” with partial results?What is the political motivation that makes US never invade Canada?What was the rationale for Jim Prentice calling an early election?What are the arguments made in favor of a minority government over majority government and vice versa?What are the main arguments against White Nationalism?In the US why is nationalism equated with racism?Are racist attitudes correlated with income?Why are Justin Trudeau and Benjamin Netanyahu meeting with Bollywood actors?What is Canada's case for applying tariffs on US dairy?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;

.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;








27


















I live in a part of world where people of color represent a small minority of the population, and TBH the issue of racism is non-existent in my surrounding (or severely understated, I can't judge). Hence, my understanding is limited.



I'm trying to understand what's wrong with costuming yourself as a fictional character? What exactly in the affair with the Canadian Prime minister's past is disrespectful? I've been to masquerades from childhood to college, it didn't come to me that masking as an Indian (and coloring yourself red) or Bruce Lee can be offending or racist? I will likely be in such a situation in the future, should I avoid such disguises?










share|improve this question































    27


















    I live in a part of world where people of color represent a small minority of the population, and TBH the issue of racism is non-existent in my surrounding (or severely understated, I can't judge). Hence, my understanding is limited.



    I'm trying to understand what's wrong with costuming yourself as a fictional character? What exactly in the affair with the Canadian Prime minister's past is disrespectful? I've been to masquerades from childhood to college, it didn't come to me that masking as an Indian (and coloring yourself red) or Bruce Lee can be offending or racist? I will likely be in such a situation in the future, should I avoid such disguises?










    share|improve this question



























      27













      27









      27








      I live in a part of world where people of color represent a small minority of the population, and TBH the issue of racism is non-existent in my surrounding (or severely understated, I can't judge). Hence, my understanding is limited.



      I'm trying to understand what's wrong with costuming yourself as a fictional character? What exactly in the affair with the Canadian Prime minister's past is disrespectful? I've been to masquerades from childhood to college, it didn't come to me that masking as an Indian (and coloring yourself red) or Bruce Lee can be offending or racist? I will likely be in such a situation in the future, should I avoid such disguises?










      share|improve this question














      I live in a part of world where people of color represent a small minority of the population, and TBH the issue of racism is non-existent in my surrounding (or severely understated, I can't judge). Hence, my understanding is limited.



      I'm trying to understand what's wrong with costuming yourself as a fictional character? What exactly in the affair with the Canadian Prime minister's past is disrespectful? I've been to masquerades from childhood to college, it didn't come to me that masking as an Indian (and coloring yourself red) or Bruce Lee can be offending or racist? I will likely be in such a situation in the future, should I avoid such disguises?







      canada racism






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Sep 19 at 22:25









      Aleksandar StojadinovicAleksandar Stojadinovic

      3732 silver badges6 bronze badges




      3732 silver badges6 bronze badges























          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          42



















          Blackface has a history of being a method for expressing racial caricatures and stereotypes. It was intended to be humorous to white audiences and demeaning towards the black people being depicted.



          In a more modern context, using blackface demonstrates an ignorance of history and insensitivity even when not deployed with an intent to caricature. It also invokes the privilege of using a skin color when it is convenient, when others are discriminated against daily for having that same skin color.



          Reactions to blackface are not universal, but in the US and Canada it is considered very disrespectful.






          share|improve this answer






















          • 1





            Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation about the history and effect of "blackfacing" has been moved to chat.

            – Philipp
            Sep 20 at 19:07



















          32



















          Preface: As an Arab I don't particularly see any problem with his costume. I've put on white makeup before as part of a vampire costume. But blackface wasn't really a thing in Arab culture the way it was in the West. I was more amused by the fact that he looks like a fake tan addict than offended by any kind of cultural...insensitivity?



          Blackface was a big deal in the West and the echoes of that still resonate today, which is why people shun costumes where they'd have to colour their skin black. It has negative connotations, which has an impact on this situation and why people are outraged by it. Also, he's coloured himself a lot darker than most Arabs in that photo which is possibly contributing to it. Other than that it's a pretty accurate costume and it doesn't really have any exaggerated stereotype features which were part of the blackface skits.



          Part of the reason for the outrage is that Trudeau is the Prime Minister of a fairly liberal country and is leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, and so this is scandalous because of who he is and the causes he champions. "He should have known better" is something that is getting thrown around a fair bit. Whether that is a fair statement or not I will leave to people who were in Canada in the late 1990s/early 2000s. Appropriate behaviour varies massively by time and region.



          I would suggest avoiding these kinds of costumes as people can be quite sensitive about them.



          Final personal note: I wrote this comment since someone wanted to know what an actual Arab thought of the situation. I'm not going to bandy around terms like SJW and culture of outrage, it's not particularly helpful to debate. However I do think it's sad that a lot of cultural appreciation is branded appropriation. If I want to dress up as a white superhero or a Western supernatural creature (like a vampire, or a Norse god etc) it is acceptable. I don't see why the reverse can't be done. As an Arab, raised in the Middle East, I don't feel any less privileged than the average white European. I can completely understand the reasons for outrage around anything that evokes blackface when put against the backdrop of slavery, racism and the skits that used to be performed. But one has to draw the line somewhere. If a person dresses up in a costume and makes themselves up to match it with no intention of causing offence but merely taking the role of a specific, fictional character, I don't see why it's an issue.






          share|improve this answer






















          • 11





            +1 this is the kind of answer I was hoping to see. Very measured and neutral. Thank you for your perspective.

            – F1Krazy
            Sep 20 at 10:48






          • 1





            -1 The sentence "I can completely understand the reasons for outrage around anything that evokes blackface when put against the backdrop of slavery, racism and the skits that used to be performed" is completely undermined by the rest of the answer

            – Dave Gremlin
            Sep 21 at 9:32











          • I am not sure that cultural appropriate is what's considered to be the problem here. The very idea that cultural appropriation is an offense is extremely new and hasn't been tested by time yet. As late as in-a-Sopranos-episode it was used an an example of an absurd thinking rather than as a culturally accepted norm. The distaste for "blackface" is much older.

            – grovkin
            Sep 22 at 4:24







          • 3





            "Blackface was a big deal in the West" - it was only a big deal in the USA. In Europe, it was no problem (although people are now trying to make it a problem).

            – Sjoerd
            Sep 22 at 7:56












          • "blackface" has been an issue in the UK for decades. The BBC ran a bizarre light entertainment show - "The Black and White Minstrell Show" from 1958 - 1978, with ever-growing protests against it from c. 1967 onwards. It has been wildly socially unacceptable for all my adult life.

            – Duke Bouvier
            Oct 28 at 0:48


















          12



















          This is heavily dependent on cultural context



          Being Canadian and therefore living close to the USA, is in this case the context.



          During the early 19xx years, racism was very normal, and one of the ways this was expressed was with Blackface, which was often used similar to how clown makeup is used to day. It wasn't flattering. Therefore, his activities remind everyone of that racist time. I don't believe he's actually racist, but the association is still there and politically.. unfortunate for him.



          Why is this a big deal now and not 20 years ago?



          Basically, because there's a lot more communication due to social media and the internet. For centuries, until some 5-ish years ago, where I live, the Netherlands, we had something which is physically the same as blackface (Zwarte Piet), but it had grown from a totally different orgin - it didn't refer to skin color, instead being based on how they'd look like after crawling to a chimney - in an age where the primary means of heating in your home was with a fire in a hearth. Chimney sweepers just became black from the soot.



          However, now people are considering it racist, because they're applying USA cultural standards to our own historical culture. So the context is changing, and in the USA cultural context, it indeed looks racist.



          I'm making this example mostly because you seem to come from another culture where racism isn't prevalent.






          share|improve this answer




















          • 7





            According to Wikipedia "Zwarte Piet is black because he is a Moor from Spain", but also "between 80 and 88% of the Dutch public did not perceive Zwarte Piet as racist".

            – Fizz
            Sep 20 at 11:29






          • 4





            According to The Guardian, the "sooty face" is the more contemporary attempt to make it not skin-color-based.

            – Fizz
            Sep 20 at 11:33






          • 1





            Well, the guardian doesn't cite a source, while the dutch wikipedia version does. That makes the wikipedia more trustworthy. And while that's right now an attempt to distance from the perceived racism, actual chimney sweepers would get a lot dirtier than that.

            – Gloweye
            Sep 20 at 12:25






          • 2





            Note: All these sources are dutch. historien.nl/de-omstreden-zwarte-piet "current costume inspired by 16th century moor pages". Earlier costume was often turkish or indian. volkskrant.nl/columns-opinie/… "[physical characteristics] are similar to moorish heraldic representation". Those are the only two links to moorish orgins in the under the "Looks" header. All of these quotes are my translations, slightly paraphrased for conciseness. NL wiki article: nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwarte_Piet

            – Gloweye
            Sep 20 at 12:51






          • 2





            -1 this does not resemble a person coming out of a chimney; chimneys don't give people bad wigs and red lips. Also, racism is still prevalent in the 20xx years. Cultural context does matter, but looking at the context of Zwarte Piet, all sources seem to point to the fact that it's a caricaturistic depiction of a black person originating during dutch colonialism.

            – tim
            Sep 21 at 19:50


















          1



















          "What is wrong with Justin Trudeau (or anyone) masquerading as Aladdin?"



          There's nothing inherently wrong with it.



          The problem is that some people seem to be incapable of seeing the difference between:



          • Dressing up as a caricature of an African-American, and acting out the associated stereotypes.

          • Dressing up as a specific public figure, whether it be Barack Obama, Bill Cosby, or Michael Jackson, and acting like that person.

          The first activity is highly inappropriate and blatantly racist.



          There really isn't anything wrong with the second activity. But whenever a white person does it, certain groups of people take it upon themselves to "defend" people that they think can't defend themselves and they treat the event as if it were the first type of activity.



          Trudeau didn't dress up as a caricature of an Arab and make fun of Arab stereotypes. He dressed up as a specific famous fictional person that just happened to be Arabic.



          It wasn't Trudeau that was in the wrong.
          It is his accusers themselves that are the racists.



          They certainly don't seem to be complaining about celebrities that use "cultural appropriation" and the pop magazines that praise them:
          8 Asian Celebs Who Went Blonde And Nailed It.
          They would never attack Mel Brown for wearing a blonde wig on AGT.
          But should a straight white male ever imitate a specific non-white person, watch them jump.






          share|improve this answer
































            -2



















            What you really need to ask is who is it that considers it to be wrong? In my observation, it's only a very small minority of the terminally politically correct. Most people simply don't see anything wrong with it, and indeed, have probably done something similar.



            Unfortunately, some small fraction of the media know they can use incidents like this for their own profit, by turning into a story with fake outrage &c. The inexplicable part, to me, is why people like Trudeau don't just tell the reporters to go jump in a lake, instead of apologizing.






            share|improve this answer




















            • 1





              --1 " Most people simply don't see anything wrong with it, and indeed, have probably done something similar" - including the millions of descendants of African slaves?

              – Dave Gremlin
              Sep 21 at 9:35






            • 2





              @DaveGremlin I’m not sure millions of descendants of African slaves will see this as offensive. Some might but not all. There’s some truth to this answer whether you agree with it or not.

              – NuWin
              Sep 21 at 9:43


















            -4



















            It is wrong on a number of level



            1. black face is offensive, particularly in former slaving countries (which includes Canada)


            2. Aladdin isn't black. Even the fictional Aladdin isn't from africa.


            3. Trudeau was dressing up as Aladdin, where Aladdin for some reason decided to put on a black face.






            share|improve this answer

























            • The picture is black and white. Most likely the paint is blue, not black.

              – JonathanReez Supports Monica
              Sep 20 at 17:37






            • 2





              @JonathanReez: odd that Trudeau didn't make that point...

              – dolphin_of_france
              Sep 20 at 17:49











            • He probably couldn't prove it so chose the safe option

              – JonathanReez Supports Monica
              Sep 20 at 17:55











            • The paint might have been blue if he were cosplaying the Genie, but he was clearly cosplaying Aladdin.

              – F1Krazy
              Sep 20 at 20:18











            • @F1Krazy: It is possible.. You should have advised Trudeau to say that.

              – dolphin_of_france
              Sep 20 at 20:21











            protected by yannis Sep 20 at 12:59



            Thank you for your interest in this question.
            Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



            Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?














            6 Answers
            6






            active

            oldest

            votes








            6 Answers
            6






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            42



















            Blackface has a history of being a method for expressing racial caricatures and stereotypes. It was intended to be humorous to white audiences and demeaning towards the black people being depicted.



            In a more modern context, using blackface demonstrates an ignorance of history and insensitivity even when not deployed with an intent to caricature. It also invokes the privilege of using a skin color when it is convenient, when others are discriminated against daily for having that same skin color.



            Reactions to blackface are not universal, but in the US and Canada it is considered very disrespectful.






            share|improve this answer






















            • 1





              Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation about the history and effect of "blackfacing" has been moved to chat.

              – Philipp
              Sep 20 at 19:07
















            42



















            Blackface has a history of being a method for expressing racial caricatures and stereotypes. It was intended to be humorous to white audiences and demeaning towards the black people being depicted.



            In a more modern context, using blackface demonstrates an ignorance of history and insensitivity even when not deployed with an intent to caricature. It also invokes the privilege of using a skin color when it is convenient, when others are discriminated against daily for having that same skin color.



            Reactions to blackface are not universal, but in the US and Canada it is considered very disrespectful.






            share|improve this answer






















            • 1





              Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation about the history and effect of "blackfacing" has been moved to chat.

              – Philipp
              Sep 20 at 19:07














            42















            42











            42









            Blackface has a history of being a method for expressing racial caricatures and stereotypes. It was intended to be humorous to white audiences and demeaning towards the black people being depicted.



            In a more modern context, using blackface demonstrates an ignorance of history and insensitivity even when not deployed with an intent to caricature. It also invokes the privilege of using a skin color when it is convenient, when others are discriminated against daily for having that same skin color.



            Reactions to blackface are not universal, but in the US and Canada it is considered very disrespectful.






            share|improve this answer
















            Blackface has a history of being a method for expressing racial caricatures and stereotypes. It was intended to be humorous to white audiences and demeaning towards the black people being depicted.



            In a more modern context, using blackface demonstrates an ignorance of history and insensitivity even when not deployed with an intent to caricature. It also invokes the privilege of using a skin color when it is convenient, when others are discriminated against daily for having that same skin color.



            Reactions to blackface are not universal, but in the US and Canada it is considered very disrespectful.







            share|improve this answer















            share|improve this answer




            share|improve this answer








            edited Sep 20 at 13:45

























            answered Sep 19 at 22:42









            Bryan KrauseBryan Krause

            1,91411 silver badges17 bronze badges




            1,91411 silver badges17 bronze badges










            • 1





              Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation about the history and effect of "blackfacing" has been moved to chat.

              – Philipp
              Sep 20 at 19:07













            • 1





              Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation about the history and effect of "blackfacing" has been moved to chat.

              – Philipp
              Sep 20 at 19:07








            1




            1





            Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation about the history and effect of "blackfacing" has been moved to chat.

            – Philipp
            Sep 20 at 19:07






            Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation about the history and effect of "blackfacing" has been moved to chat.

            – Philipp
            Sep 20 at 19:07














            32



















            Preface: As an Arab I don't particularly see any problem with his costume. I've put on white makeup before as part of a vampire costume. But blackface wasn't really a thing in Arab culture the way it was in the West. I was more amused by the fact that he looks like a fake tan addict than offended by any kind of cultural...insensitivity?



            Blackface was a big deal in the West and the echoes of that still resonate today, which is why people shun costumes where they'd have to colour their skin black. It has negative connotations, which has an impact on this situation and why people are outraged by it. Also, he's coloured himself a lot darker than most Arabs in that photo which is possibly contributing to it. Other than that it's a pretty accurate costume and it doesn't really have any exaggerated stereotype features which were part of the blackface skits.



            Part of the reason for the outrage is that Trudeau is the Prime Minister of a fairly liberal country and is leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, and so this is scandalous because of who he is and the causes he champions. "He should have known better" is something that is getting thrown around a fair bit. Whether that is a fair statement or not I will leave to people who were in Canada in the late 1990s/early 2000s. Appropriate behaviour varies massively by time and region.



            I would suggest avoiding these kinds of costumes as people can be quite sensitive about them.



            Final personal note: I wrote this comment since someone wanted to know what an actual Arab thought of the situation. I'm not going to bandy around terms like SJW and culture of outrage, it's not particularly helpful to debate. However I do think it's sad that a lot of cultural appreciation is branded appropriation. If I want to dress up as a white superhero or a Western supernatural creature (like a vampire, or a Norse god etc) it is acceptable. I don't see why the reverse can't be done. As an Arab, raised in the Middle East, I don't feel any less privileged than the average white European. I can completely understand the reasons for outrage around anything that evokes blackface when put against the backdrop of slavery, racism and the skits that used to be performed. But one has to draw the line somewhere. If a person dresses up in a costume and makes themselves up to match it with no intention of causing offence but merely taking the role of a specific, fictional character, I don't see why it's an issue.






            share|improve this answer






















            • 11





              +1 this is the kind of answer I was hoping to see. Very measured and neutral. Thank you for your perspective.

              – F1Krazy
              Sep 20 at 10:48






            • 1





              -1 The sentence "I can completely understand the reasons for outrage around anything that evokes blackface when put against the backdrop of slavery, racism and the skits that used to be performed" is completely undermined by the rest of the answer

              – Dave Gremlin
              Sep 21 at 9:32











            • I am not sure that cultural appropriate is what's considered to be the problem here. The very idea that cultural appropriation is an offense is extremely new and hasn't been tested by time yet. As late as in-a-Sopranos-episode it was used an an example of an absurd thinking rather than as a culturally accepted norm. The distaste for "blackface" is much older.

              – grovkin
              Sep 22 at 4:24







            • 3





              "Blackface was a big deal in the West" - it was only a big deal in the USA. In Europe, it was no problem (although people are now trying to make it a problem).

              – Sjoerd
              Sep 22 at 7:56












            • "blackface" has been an issue in the UK for decades. The BBC ran a bizarre light entertainment show - "The Black and White Minstrell Show" from 1958 - 1978, with ever-growing protests against it from c. 1967 onwards. It has been wildly socially unacceptable for all my adult life.

              – Duke Bouvier
              Oct 28 at 0:48















            32



















            Preface: As an Arab I don't particularly see any problem with his costume. I've put on white makeup before as part of a vampire costume. But blackface wasn't really a thing in Arab culture the way it was in the West. I was more amused by the fact that he looks like a fake tan addict than offended by any kind of cultural...insensitivity?



            Blackface was a big deal in the West and the echoes of that still resonate today, which is why people shun costumes where they'd have to colour their skin black. It has negative connotations, which has an impact on this situation and why people are outraged by it. Also, he's coloured himself a lot darker than most Arabs in that photo which is possibly contributing to it. Other than that it's a pretty accurate costume and it doesn't really have any exaggerated stereotype features which were part of the blackface skits.



            Part of the reason for the outrage is that Trudeau is the Prime Minister of a fairly liberal country and is leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, and so this is scandalous because of who he is and the causes he champions. "He should have known better" is something that is getting thrown around a fair bit. Whether that is a fair statement or not I will leave to people who were in Canada in the late 1990s/early 2000s. Appropriate behaviour varies massively by time and region.



            I would suggest avoiding these kinds of costumes as people can be quite sensitive about them.



            Final personal note: I wrote this comment since someone wanted to know what an actual Arab thought of the situation. I'm not going to bandy around terms like SJW and culture of outrage, it's not particularly helpful to debate. However I do think it's sad that a lot of cultural appreciation is branded appropriation. If I want to dress up as a white superhero or a Western supernatural creature (like a vampire, or a Norse god etc) it is acceptable. I don't see why the reverse can't be done. As an Arab, raised in the Middle East, I don't feel any less privileged than the average white European. I can completely understand the reasons for outrage around anything that evokes blackface when put against the backdrop of slavery, racism and the skits that used to be performed. But one has to draw the line somewhere. If a person dresses up in a costume and makes themselves up to match it with no intention of causing offence but merely taking the role of a specific, fictional character, I don't see why it's an issue.






            share|improve this answer






















            • 11





              +1 this is the kind of answer I was hoping to see. Very measured and neutral. Thank you for your perspective.

              – F1Krazy
              Sep 20 at 10:48






            • 1





              -1 The sentence "I can completely understand the reasons for outrage around anything that evokes blackface when put against the backdrop of slavery, racism and the skits that used to be performed" is completely undermined by the rest of the answer

              – Dave Gremlin
              Sep 21 at 9:32











            • I am not sure that cultural appropriate is what's considered to be the problem here. The very idea that cultural appropriation is an offense is extremely new and hasn't been tested by time yet. As late as in-a-Sopranos-episode it was used an an example of an absurd thinking rather than as a culturally accepted norm. The distaste for "blackface" is much older.

              – grovkin
              Sep 22 at 4:24







            • 3





              "Blackface was a big deal in the West" - it was only a big deal in the USA. In Europe, it was no problem (although people are now trying to make it a problem).

              – Sjoerd
              Sep 22 at 7:56












            • "blackface" has been an issue in the UK for decades. The BBC ran a bizarre light entertainment show - "The Black and White Minstrell Show" from 1958 - 1978, with ever-growing protests against it from c. 1967 onwards. It has been wildly socially unacceptable for all my adult life.

              – Duke Bouvier
              Oct 28 at 0:48













            32















            32











            32









            Preface: As an Arab I don't particularly see any problem with his costume. I've put on white makeup before as part of a vampire costume. But blackface wasn't really a thing in Arab culture the way it was in the West. I was more amused by the fact that he looks like a fake tan addict than offended by any kind of cultural...insensitivity?



            Blackface was a big deal in the West and the echoes of that still resonate today, which is why people shun costumes where they'd have to colour their skin black. It has negative connotations, which has an impact on this situation and why people are outraged by it. Also, he's coloured himself a lot darker than most Arabs in that photo which is possibly contributing to it. Other than that it's a pretty accurate costume and it doesn't really have any exaggerated stereotype features which were part of the blackface skits.



            Part of the reason for the outrage is that Trudeau is the Prime Minister of a fairly liberal country and is leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, and so this is scandalous because of who he is and the causes he champions. "He should have known better" is something that is getting thrown around a fair bit. Whether that is a fair statement or not I will leave to people who were in Canada in the late 1990s/early 2000s. Appropriate behaviour varies massively by time and region.



            I would suggest avoiding these kinds of costumes as people can be quite sensitive about them.



            Final personal note: I wrote this comment since someone wanted to know what an actual Arab thought of the situation. I'm not going to bandy around terms like SJW and culture of outrage, it's not particularly helpful to debate. However I do think it's sad that a lot of cultural appreciation is branded appropriation. If I want to dress up as a white superhero or a Western supernatural creature (like a vampire, or a Norse god etc) it is acceptable. I don't see why the reverse can't be done. As an Arab, raised in the Middle East, I don't feel any less privileged than the average white European. I can completely understand the reasons for outrage around anything that evokes blackface when put against the backdrop of slavery, racism and the skits that used to be performed. But one has to draw the line somewhere. If a person dresses up in a costume and makes themselves up to match it with no intention of causing offence but merely taking the role of a specific, fictional character, I don't see why it's an issue.






            share|improve this answer
















            Preface: As an Arab I don't particularly see any problem with his costume. I've put on white makeup before as part of a vampire costume. But blackface wasn't really a thing in Arab culture the way it was in the West. I was more amused by the fact that he looks like a fake tan addict than offended by any kind of cultural...insensitivity?



            Blackface was a big deal in the West and the echoes of that still resonate today, which is why people shun costumes where they'd have to colour their skin black. It has negative connotations, which has an impact on this situation and why people are outraged by it. Also, he's coloured himself a lot darker than most Arabs in that photo which is possibly contributing to it. Other than that it's a pretty accurate costume and it doesn't really have any exaggerated stereotype features which were part of the blackface skits.



            Part of the reason for the outrage is that Trudeau is the Prime Minister of a fairly liberal country and is leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, and so this is scandalous because of who he is and the causes he champions. "He should have known better" is something that is getting thrown around a fair bit. Whether that is a fair statement or not I will leave to people who were in Canada in the late 1990s/early 2000s. Appropriate behaviour varies massively by time and region.



            I would suggest avoiding these kinds of costumes as people can be quite sensitive about them.



            Final personal note: I wrote this comment since someone wanted to know what an actual Arab thought of the situation. I'm not going to bandy around terms like SJW and culture of outrage, it's not particularly helpful to debate. However I do think it's sad that a lot of cultural appreciation is branded appropriation. If I want to dress up as a white superhero or a Western supernatural creature (like a vampire, or a Norse god etc) it is acceptable. I don't see why the reverse can't be done. As an Arab, raised in the Middle East, I don't feel any less privileged than the average white European. I can completely understand the reasons for outrage around anything that evokes blackface when put against the backdrop of slavery, racism and the skits that used to be performed. But one has to draw the line somewhere. If a person dresses up in a costume and makes themselves up to match it with no intention of causing offence but merely taking the role of a specific, fictional character, I don't see why it's an issue.







            share|improve this answer















            share|improve this answer




            share|improve this answer








            edited Oct 26 at 20:37









            Ren Eh Daycart

            11910 bronze badges




            11910 bronze badges










            answered Sep 20 at 10:45









            AlmhmAlmhm

            3291 silver badge4 bronze badges




            3291 silver badge4 bronze badges










            • 11





              +1 this is the kind of answer I was hoping to see. Very measured and neutral. Thank you for your perspective.

              – F1Krazy
              Sep 20 at 10:48






            • 1





              -1 The sentence "I can completely understand the reasons for outrage around anything that evokes blackface when put against the backdrop of slavery, racism and the skits that used to be performed" is completely undermined by the rest of the answer

              – Dave Gremlin
              Sep 21 at 9:32











            • I am not sure that cultural appropriate is what's considered to be the problem here. The very idea that cultural appropriation is an offense is extremely new and hasn't been tested by time yet. As late as in-a-Sopranos-episode it was used an an example of an absurd thinking rather than as a culturally accepted norm. The distaste for "blackface" is much older.

              – grovkin
              Sep 22 at 4:24







            • 3





              "Blackface was a big deal in the West" - it was only a big deal in the USA. In Europe, it was no problem (although people are now trying to make it a problem).

              – Sjoerd
              Sep 22 at 7:56












            • "blackface" has been an issue in the UK for decades. The BBC ran a bizarre light entertainment show - "The Black and White Minstrell Show" from 1958 - 1978, with ever-growing protests against it from c. 1967 onwards. It has been wildly socially unacceptable for all my adult life.

              – Duke Bouvier
              Oct 28 at 0:48












            • 11





              +1 this is the kind of answer I was hoping to see. Very measured and neutral. Thank you for your perspective.

              – F1Krazy
              Sep 20 at 10:48






            • 1





              -1 The sentence "I can completely understand the reasons for outrage around anything that evokes blackface when put against the backdrop of slavery, racism and the skits that used to be performed" is completely undermined by the rest of the answer

              – Dave Gremlin
              Sep 21 at 9:32











            • I am not sure that cultural appropriate is what's considered to be the problem here. The very idea that cultural appropriation is an offense is extremely new and hasn't been tested by time yet. As late as in-a-Sopranos-episode it was used an an example of an absurd thinking rather than as a culturally accepted norm. The distaste for "blackface" is much older.

              – grovkin
              Sep 22 at 4:24







            • 3





              "Blackface was a big deal in the West" - it was only a big deal in the USA. In Europe, it was no problem (although people are now trying to make it a problem).

              – Sjoerd
              Sep 22 at 7:56












            • "blackface" has been an issue in the UK for decades. The BBC ran a bizarre light entertainment show - "The Black and White Minstrell Show" from 1958 - 1978, with ever-growing protests against it from c. 1967 onwards. It has been wildly socially unacceptable for all my adult life.

              – Duke Bouvier
              Oct 28 at 0:48







            11




            11





            +1 this is the kind of answer I was hoping to see. Very measured and neutral. Thank you for your perspective.

            – F1Krazy
            Sep 20 at 10:48





            +1 this is the kind of answer I was hoping to see. Very measured and neutral. Thank you for your perspective.

            – F1Krazy
            Sep 20 at 10:48




            1




            1





            -1 The sentence "I can completely understand the reasons for outrage around anything that evokes blackface when put against the backdrop of slavery, racism and the skits that used to be performed" is completely undermined by the rest of the answer

            – Dave Gremlin
            Sep 21 at 9:32





            -1 The sentence "I can completely understand the reasons for outrage around anything that evokes blackface when put against the backdrop of slavery, racism and the skits that used to be performed" is completely undermined by the rest of the answer

            – Dave Gremlin
            Sep 21 at 9:32













            I am not sure that cultural appropriate is what's considered to be the problem here. The very idea that cultural appropriation is an offense is extremely new and hasn't been tested by time yet. As late as in-a-Sopranos-episode it was used an an example of an absurd thinking rather than as a culturally accepted norm. The distaste for "blackface" is much older.

            – grovkin
            Sep 22 at 4:24






            I am not sure that cultural appropriate is what's considered to be the problem here. The very idea that cultural appropriation is an offense is extremely new and hasn't been tested by time yet. As late as in-a-Sopranos-episode it was used an an example of an absurd thinking rather than as a culturally accepted norm. The distaste for "blackface" is much older.

            – grovkin
            Sep 22 at 4:24





            3




            3





            "Blackface was a big deal in the West" - it was only a big deal in the USA. In Europe, it was no problem (although people are now trying to make it a problem).

            – Sjoerd
            Sep 22 at 7:56






            "Blackface was a big deal in the West" - it was only a big deal in the USA. In Europe, it was no problem (although people are now trying to make it a problem).

            – Sjoerd
            Sep 22 at 7:56














            "blackface" has been an issue in the UK for decades. The BBC ran a bizarre light entertainment show - "The Black and White Minstrell Show" from 1958 - 1978, with ever-growing protests against it from c. 1967 onwards. It has been wildly socially unacceptable for all my adult life.

            – Duke Bouvier
            Oct 28 at 0:48





            "blackface" has been an issue in the UK for decades. The BBC ran a bizarre light entertainment show - "The Black and White Minstrell Show" from 1958 - 1978, with ever-growing protests against it from c. 1967 onwards. It has been wildly socially unacceptable for all my adult life.

            – Duke Bouvier
            Oct 28 at 0:48











            12



















            This is heavily dependent on cultural context



            Being Canadian and therefore living close to the USA, is in this case the context.



            During the early 19xx years, racism was very normal, and one of the ways this was expressed was with Blackface, which was often used similar to how clown makeup is used to day. It wasn't flattering. Therefore, his activities remind everyone of that racist time. I don't believe he's actually racist, but the association is still there and politically.. unfortunate for him.



            Why is this a big deal now and not 20 years ago?



            Basically, because there's a lot more communication due to social media and the internet. For centuries, until some 5-ish years ago, where I live, the Netherlands, we had something which is physically the same as blackface (Zwarte Piet), but it had grown from a totally different orgin - it didn't refer to skin color, instead being based on how they'd look like after crawling to a chimney - in an age where the primary means of heating in your home was with a fire in a hearth. Chimney sweepers just became black from the soot.



            However, now people are considering it racist, because they're applying USA cultural standards to our own historical culture. So the context is changing, and in the USA cultural context, it indeed looks racist.



            I'm making this example mostly because you seem to come from another culture where racism isn't prevalent.






            share|improve this answer




















            • 7





              According to Wikipedia "Zwarte Piet is black because he is a Moor from Spain", but also "between 80 and 88% of the Dutch public did not perceive Zwarte Piet as racist".

              – Fizz
              Sep 20 at 11:29






            • 4





              According to The Guardian, the "sooty face" is the more contemporary attempt to make it not skin-color-based.

              – Fizz
              Sep 20 at 11:33






            • 1





              Well, the guardian doesn't cite a source, while the dutch wikipedia version does. That makes the wikipedia more trustworthy. And while that's right now an attempt to distance from the perceived racism, actual chimney sweepers would get a lot dirtier than that.

              – Gloweye
              Sep 20 at 12:25






            • 2





              Note: All these sources are dutch. historien.nl/de-omstreden-zwarte-piet "current costume inspired by 16th century moor pages". Earlier costume was often turkish or indian. volkskrant.nl/columns-opinie/… "[physical characteristics] are similar to moorish heraldic representation". Those are the only two links to moorish orgins in the under the "Looks" header. All of these quotes are my translations, slightly paraphrased for conciseness. NL wiki article: nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwarte_Piet

              – Gloweye
              Sep 20 at 12:51






            • 2





              -1 this does not resemble a person coming out of a chimney; chimneys don't give people bad wigs and red lips. Also, racism is still prevalent in the 20xx years. Cultural context does matter, but looking at the context of Zwarte Piet, all sources seem to point to the fact that it's a caricaturistic depiction of a black person originating during dutch colonialism.

              – tim
              Sep 21 at 19:50















            12



















            This is heavily dependent on cultural context



            Being Canadian and therefore living close to the USA, is in this case the context.



            During the early 19xx years, racism was very normal, and one of the ways this was expressed was with Blackface, which was often used similar to how clown makeup is used to day. It wasn't flattering. Therefore, his activities remind everyone of that racist time. I don't believe he's actually racist, but the association is still there and politically.. unfortunate for him.



            Why is this a big deal now and not 20 years ago?



            Basically, because there's a lot more communication due to social media and the internet. For centuries, until some 5-ish years ago, where I live, the Netherlands, we had something which is physically the same as blackface (Zwarte Piet), but it had grown from a totally different orgin - it didn't refer to skin color, instead being based on how they'd look like after crawling to a chimney - in an age where the primary means of heating in your home was with a fire in a hearth. Chimney sweepers just became black from the soot.



            However, now people are considering it racist, because they're applying USA cultural standards to our own historical culture. So the context is changing, and in the USA cultural context, it indeed looks racist.



            I'm making this example mostly because you seem to come from another culture where racism isn't prevalent.






            share|improve this answer




















            • 7





              According to Wikipedia "Zwarte Piet is black because he is a Moor from Spain", but also "between 80 and 88% of the Dutch public did not perceive Zwarte Piet as racist".

              – Fizz
              Sep 20 at 11:29






            • 4





              According to The Guardian, the "sooty face" is the more contemporary attempt to make it not skin-color-based.

              – Fizz
              Sep 20 at 11:33






            • 1





              Well, the guardian doesn't cite a source, while the dutch wikipedia version does. That makes the wikipedia more trustworthy. And while that's right now an attempt to distance from the perceived racism, actual chimney sweepers would get a lot dirtier than that.

              – Gloweye
              Sep 20 at 12:25






            • 2





              Note: All these sources are dutch. historien.nl/de-omstreden-zwarte-piet "current costume inspired by 16th century moor pages". Earlier costume was often turkish or indian. volkskrant.nl/columns-opinie/… "[physical characteristics] are similar to moorish heraldic representation". Those are the only two links to moorish orgins in the under the "Looks" header. All of these quotes are my translations, slightly paraphrased for conciseness. NL wiki article: nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwarte_Piet

              – Gloweye
              Sep 20 at 12:51






            • 2





              -1 this does not resemble a person coming out of a chimney; chimneys don't give people bad wigs and red lips. Also, racism is still prevalent in the 20xx years. Cultural context does matter, but looking at the context of Zwarte Piet, all sources seem to point to the fact that it's a caricaturistic depiction of a black person originating during dutch colonialism.

              – tim
              Sep 21 at 19:50













            12















            12











            12









            This is heavily dependent on cultural context



            Being Canadian and therefore living close to the USA, is in this case the context.



            During the early 19xx years, racism was very normal, and one of the ways this was expressed was with Blackface, which was often used similar to how clown makeup is used to day. It wasn't flattering. Therefore, his activities remind everyone of that racist time. I don't believe he's actually racist, but the association is still there and politically.. unfortunate for him.



            Why is this a big deal now and not 20 years ago?



            Basically, because there's a lot more communication due to social media and the internet. For centuries, until some 5-ish years ago, where I live, the Netherlands, we had something which is physically the same as blackface (Zwarte Piet), but it had grown from a totally different orgin - it didn't refer to skin color, instead being based on how they'd look like after crawling to a chimney - in an age where the primary means of heating in your home was with a fire in a hearth. Chimney sweepers just became black from the soot.



            However, now people are considering it racist, because they're applying USA cultural standards to our own historical culture. So the context is changing, and in the USA cultural context, it indeed looks racist.



            I'm making this example mostly because you seem to come from another culture where racism isn't prevalent.






            share|improve this answer














            This is heavily dependent on cultural context



            Being Canadian and therefore living close to the USA, is in this case the context.



            During the early 19xx years, racism was very normal, and one of the ways this was expressed was with Blackface, which was often used similar to how clown makeup is used to day. It wasn't flattering. Therefore, his activities remind everyone of that racist time. I don't believe he's actually racist, but the association is still there and politically.. unfortunate for him.



            Why is this a big deal now and not 20 years ago?



            Basically, because there's a lot more communication due to social media and the internet. For centuries, until some 5-ish years ago, where I live, the Netherlands, we had something which is physically the same as blackface (Zwarte Piet), but it had grown from a totally different orgin - it didn't refer to skin color, instead being based on how they'd look like after crawling to a chimney - in an age where the primary means of heating in your home was with a fire in a hearth. Chimney sweepers just became black from the soot.



            However, now people are considering it racist, because they're applying USA cultural standards to our own historical culture. So the context is changing, and in the USA cultural context, it indeed looks racist.



            I'm making this example mostly because you seem to come from another culture where racism isn't prevalent.







            share|improve this answer













            share|improve this answer




            share|improve this answer










            answered Sep 20 at 10:11









            GloweyeGloweye

            2291 silver badge5 bronze badges




            2291 silver badge5 bronze badges










            • 7





              According to Wikipedia "Zwarte Piet is black because he is a Moor from Spain", but also "between 80 and 88% of the Dutch public did not perceive Zwarte Piet as racist".

              – Fizz
              Sep 20 at 11:29






            • 4





              According to The Guardian, the "sooty face" is the more contemporary attempt to make it not skin-color-based.

              – Fizz
              Sep 20 at 11:33






            • 1





              Well, the guardian doesn't cite a source, while the dutch wikipedia version does. That makes the wikipedia more trustworthy. And while that's right now an attempt to distance from the perceived racism, actual chimney sweepers would get a lot dirtier than that.

              – Gloweye
              Sep 20 at 12:25






            • 2





              Note: All these sources are dutch. historien.nl/de-omstreden-zwarte-piet "current costume inspired by 16th century moor pages". Earlier costume was often turkish or indian. volkskrant.nl/columns-opinie/… "[physical characteristics] are similar to moorish heraldic representation". Those are the only two links to moorish orgins in the under the "Looks" header. All of these quotes are my translations, slightly paraphrased for conciseness. NL wiki article: nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwarte_Piet

              – Gloweye
              Sep 20 at 12:51






            • 2





              -1 this does not resemble a person coming out of a chimney; chimneys don't give people bad wigs and red lips. Also, racism is still prevalent in the 20xx years. Cultural context does matter, but looking at the context of Zwarte Piet, all sources seem to point to the fact that it's a caricaturistic depiction of a black person originating during dutch colonialism.

              – tim
              Sep 21 at 19:50












            • 7





              According to Wikipedia "Zwarte Piet is black because he is a Moor from Spain", but also "between 80 and 88% of the Dutch public did not perceive Zwarte Piet as racist".

              – Fizz
              Sep 20 at 11:29






            • 4





              According to The Guardian, the "sooty face" is the more contemporary attempt to make it not skin-color-based.

              – Fizz
              Sep 20 at 11:33






            • 1





              Well, the guardian doesn't cite a source, while the dutch wikipedia version does. That makes the wikipedia more trustworthy. And while that's right now an attempt to distance from the perceived racism, actual chimney sweepers would get a lot dirtier than that.

              – Gloweye
              Sep 20 at 12:25






            • 2





              Note: All these sources are dutch. historien.nl/de-omstreden-zwarte-piet "current costume inspired by 16th century moor pages". Earlier costume was often turkish or indian. volkskrant.nl/columns-opinie/… "[physical characteristics] are similar to moorish heraldic representation". Those are the only two links to moorish orgins in the under the "Looks" header. All of these quotes are my translations, slightly paraphrased for conciseness. NL wiki article: nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwarte_Piet

              – Gloweye
              Sep 20 at 12:51






            • 2





              -1 this does not resemble a person coming out of a chimney; chimneys don't give people bad wigs and red lips. Also, racism is still prevalent in the 20xx years. Cultural context does matter, but looking at the context of Zwarte Piet, all sources seem to point to the fact that it's a caricaturistic depiction of a black person originating during dutch colonialism.

              – tim
              Sep 21 at 19:50







            7




            7





            According to Wikipedia "Zwarte Piet is black because he is a Moor from Spain", but also "between 80 and 88% of the Dutch public did not perceive Zwarte Piet as racist".

            – Fizz
            Sep 20 at 11:29





            According to Wikipedia "Zwarte Piet is black because he is a Moor from Spain", but also "between 80 and 88% of the Dutch public did not perceive Zwarte Piet as racist".

            – Fizz
            Sep 20 at 11:29




            4




            4





            According to The Guardian, the "sooty face" is the more contemporary attempt to make it not skin-color-based.

            – Fizz
            Sep 20 at 11:33





            According to The Guardian, the "sooty face" is the more contemporary attempt to make it not skin-color-based.

            – Fizz
            Sep 20 at 11:33




            1




            1





            Well, the guardian doesn't cite a source, while the dutch wikipedia version does. That makes the wikipedia more trustworthy. And while that's right now an attempt to distance from the perceived racism, actual chimney sweepers would get a lot dirtier than that.

            – Gloweye
            Sep 20 at 12:25





            Well, the guardian doesn't cite a source, while the dutch wikipedia version does. That makes the wikipedia more trustworthy. And while that's right now an attempt to distance from the perceived racism, actual chimney sweepers would get a lot dirtier than that.

            – Gloweye
            Sep 20 at 12:25




            2




            2





            Note: All these sources are dutch. historien.nl/de-omstreden-zwarte-piet "current costume inspired by 16th century moor pages". Earlier costume was often turkish or indian. volkskrant.nl/columns-opinie/… "[physical characteristics] are similar to moorish heraldic representation". Those are the only two links to moorish orgins in the under the "Looks" header. All of these quotes are my translations, slightly paraphrased for conciseness. NL wiki article: nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwarte_Piet

            – Gloweye
            Sep 20 at 12:51





            Note: All these sources are dutch. historien.nl/de-omstreden-zwarte-piet "current costume inspired by 16th century moor pages". Earlier costume was often turkish or indian. volkskrant.nl/columns-opinie/… "[physical characteristics] are similar to moorish heraldic representation". Those are the only two links to moorish orgins in the under the "Looks" header. All of these quotes are my translations, slightly paraphrased for conciseness. NL wiki article: nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwarte_Piet

            – Gloweye
            Sep 20 at 12:51




            2




            2





            -1 this does not resemble a person coming out of a chimney; chimneys don't give people bad wigs and red lips. Also, racism is still prevalent in the 20xx years. Cultural context does matter, but looking at the context of Zwarte Piet, all sources seem to point to the fact that it's a caricaturistic depiction of a black person originating during dutch colonialism.

            – tim
            Sep 21 at 19:50





            -1 this does not resemble a person coming out of a chimney; chimneys don't give people bad wigs and red lips. Also, racism is still prevalent in the 20xx years. Cultural context does matter, but looking at the context of Zwarte Piet, all sources seem to point to the fact that it's a caricaturistic depiction of a black person originating during dutch colonialism.

            – tim
            Sep 21 at 19:50











            1



















            "What is wrong with Justin Trudeau (or anyone) masquerading as Aladdin?"



            There's nothing inherently wrong with it.



            The problem is that some people seem to be incapable of seeing the difference between:



            • Dressing up as a caricature of an African-American, and acting out the associated stereotypes.

            • Dressing up as a specific public figure, whether it be Barack Obama, Bill Cosby, or Michael Jackson, and acting like that person.

            The first activity is highly inappropriate and blatantly racist.



            There really isn't anything wrong with the second activity. But whenever a white person does it, certain groups of people take it upon themselves to "defend" people that they think can't defend themselves and they treat the event as if it were the first type of activity.



            Trudeau didn't dress up as a caricature of an Arab and make fun of Arab stereotypes. He dressed up as a specific famous fictional person that just happened to be Arabic.



            It wasn't Trudeau that was in the wrong.
            It is his accusers themselves that are the racists.



            They certainly don't seem to be complaining about celebrities that use "cultural appropriation" and the pop magazines that praise them:
            8 Asian Celebs Who Went Blonde And Nailed It.
            They would never attack Mel Brown for wearing a blonde wig on AGT.
            But should a straight white male ever imitate a specific non-white person, watch them jump.






            share|improve this answer





























              1



















              "What is wrong with Justin Trudeau (or anyone) masquerading as Aladdin?"



              There's nothing inherently wrong with it.



              The problem is that some people seem to be incapable of seeing the difference between:



              • Dressing up as a caricature of an African-American, and acting out the associated stereotypes.

              • Dressing up as a specific public figure, whether it be Barack Obama, Bill Cosby, or Michael Jackson, and acting like that person.

              The first activity is highly inappropriate and blatantly racist.



              There really isn't anything wrong with the second activity. But whenever a white person does it, certain groups of people take it upon themselves to "defend" people that they think can't defend themselves and they treat the event as if it were the first type of activity.



              Trudeau didn't dress up as a caricature of an Arab and make fun of Arab stereotypes. He dressed up as a specific famous fictional person that just happened to be Arabic.



              It wasn't Trudeau that was in the wrong.
              It is his accusers themselves that are the racists.



              They certainly don't seem to be complaining about celebrities that use "cultural appropriation" and the pop magazines that praise them:
              8 Asian Celebs Who Went Blonde And Nailed It.
              They would never attack Mel Brown for wearing a blonde wig on AGT.
              But should a straight white male ever imitate a specific non-white person, watch them jump.






              share|improve this answer



























                1















                1











                1









                "What is wrong with Justin Trudeau (or anyone) masquerading as Aladdin?"



                There's nothing inherently wrong with it.



                The problem is that some people seem to be incapable of seeing the difference between:



                • Dressing up as a caricature of an African-American, and acting out the associated stereotypes.

                • Dressing up as a specific public figure, whether it be Barack Obama, Bill Cosby, or Michael Jackson, and acting like that person.

                The first activity is highly inappropriate and blatantly racist.



                There really isn't anything wrong with the second activity. But whenever a white person does it, certain groups of people take it upon themselves to "defend" people that they think can't defend themselves and they treat the event as if it were the first type of activity.



                Trudeau didn't dress up as a caricature of an Arab and make fun of Arab stereotypes. He dressed up as a specific famous fictional person that just happened to be Arabic.



                It wasn't Trudeau that was in the wrong.
                It is his accusers themselves that are the racists.



                They certainly don't seem to be complaining about celebrities that use "cultural appropriation" and the pop magazines that praise them:
                8 Asian Celebs Who Went Blonde And Nailed It.
                They would never attack Mel Brown for wearing a blonde wig on AGT.
                But should a straight white male ever imitate a specific non-white person, watch them jump.






                share|improve this answer














                "What is wrong with Justin Trudeau (or anyone) masquerading as Aladdin?"



                There's nothing inherently wrong with it.



                The problem is that some people seem to be incapable of seeing the difference between:



                • Dressing up as a caricature of an African-American, and acting out the associated stereotypes.

                • Dressing up as a specific public figure, whether it be Barack Obama, Bill Cosby, or Michael Jackson, and acting like that person.

                The first activity is highly inappropriate and blatantly racist.



                There really isn't anything wrong with the second activity. But whenever a white person does it, certain groups of people take it upon themselves to "defend" people that they think can't defend themselves and they treat the event as if it were the first type of activity.



                Trudeau didn't dress up as a caricature of an Arab and make fun of Arab stereotypes. He dressed up as a specific famous fictional person that just happened to be Arabic.



                It wasn't Trudeau that was in the wrong.
                It is his accusers themselves that are the racists.



                They certainly don't seem to be complaining about celebrities that use "cultural appropriation" and the pop magazines that praise them:
                8 Asian Celebs Who Went Blonde And Nailed It.
                They would never attack Mel Brown for wearing a blonde wig on AGT.
                But should a straight white male ever imitate a specific non-white person, watch them jump.







                share|improve this answer













                share|improve this answer




                share|improve this answer










                answered Oct 27 at 3:59









                Ray ButterworthRay Butterworth

                9141 gold badge2 silver badges10 bronze badges




                9141 gold badge2 silver badges10 bronze badges
























                    -2



















                    What you really need to ask is who is it that considers it to be wrong? In my observation, it's only a very small minority of the terminally politically correct. Most people simply don't see anything wrong with it, and indeed, have probably done something similar.



                    Unfortunately, some small fraction of the media know they can use incidents like this for their own profit, by turning into a story with fake outrage &c. The inexplicable part, to me, is why people like Trudeau don't just tell the reporters to go jump in a lake, instead of apologizing.






                    share|improve this answer




















                    • 1





                      --1 " Most people simply don't see anything wrong with it, and indeed, have probably done something similar" - including the millions of descendants of African slaves?

                      – Dave Gremlin
                      Sep 21 at 9:35






                    • 2





                      @DaveGremlin I’m not sure millions of descendants of African slaves will see this as offensive. Some might but not all. There’s some truth to this answer whether you agree with it or not.

                      – NuWin
                      Sep 21 at 9:43















                    -2



















                    What you really need to ask is who is it that considers it to be wrong? In my observation, it's only a very small minority of the terminally politically correct. Most people simply don't see anything wrong with it, and indeed, have probably done something similar.



                    Unfortunately, some small fraction of the media know they can use incidents like this for their own profit, by turning into a story with fake outrage &c. The inexplicable part, to me, is why people like Trudeau don't just tell the reporters to go jump in a lake, instead of apologizing.






                    share|improve this answer




















                    • 1





                      --1 " Most people simply don't see anything wrong with it, and indeed, have probably done something similar" - including the millions of descendants of African slaves?

                      – Dave Gremlin
                      Sep 21 at 9:35






                    • 2





                      @DaveGremlin I’m not sure millions of descendants of African slaves will see this as offensive. Some might but not all. There’s some truth to this answer whether you agree with it or not.

                      – NuWin
                      Sep 21 at 9:43













                    -2















                    -2











                    -2









                    What you really need to ask is who is it that considers it to be wrong? In my observation, it's only a very small minority of the terminally politically correct. Most people simply don't see anything wrong with it, and indeed, have probably done something similar.



                    Unfortunately, some small fraction of the media know they can use incidents like this for their own profit, by turning into a story with fake outrage &c. The inexplicable part, to me, is why people like Trudeau don't just tell the reporters to go jump in a lake, instead of apologizing.






                    share|improve this answer














                    What you really need to ask is who is it that considers it to be wrong? In my observation, it's only a very small minority of the terminally politically correct. Most people simply don't see anything wrong with it, and indeed, have probably done something similar.



                    Unfortunately, some small fraction of the media know they can use incidents like this for their own profit, by turning into a story with fake outrage &c. The inexplicable part, to me, is why people like Trudeau don't just tell the reporters to go jump in a lake, instead of apologizing.







                    share|improve this answer













                    share|improve this answer




                    share|improve this answer










                    answered Sep 20 at 16:54









                    jamesqfjamesqf

                    4,9451 gold badge11 silver badges19 bronze badges




                    4,9451 gold badge11 silver badges19 bronze badges










                    • 1





                      --1 " Most people simply don't see anything wrong with it, and indeed, have probably done something similar" - including the millions of descendants of African slaves?

                      – Dave Gremlin
                      Sep 21 at 9:35






                    • 2





                      @DaveGremlin I’m not sure millions of descendants of African slaves will see this as offensive. Some might but not all. There’s some truth to this answer whether you agree with it or not.

                      – NuWin
                      Sep 21 at 9:43












                    • 1





                      --1 " Most people simply don't see anything wrong with it, and indeed, have probably done something similar" - including the millions of descendants of African slaves?

                      – Dave Gremlin
                      Sep 21 at 9:35






                    • 2





                      @DaveGremlin I’m not sure millions of descendants of African slaves will see this as offensive. Some might but not all. There’s some truth to this answer whether you agree with it or not.

                      – NuWin
                      Sep 21 at 9:43







                    1




                    1





                    --1 " Most people simply don't see anything wrong with it, and indeed, have probably done something similar" - including the millions of descendants of African slaves?

                    – Dave Gremlin
                    Sep 21 at 9:35





                    --1 " Most people simply don't see anything wrong with it, and indeed, have probably done something similar" - including the millions of descendants of African slaves?

                    – Dave Gremlin
                    Sep 21 at 9:35




                    2




                    2





                    @DaveGremlin I’m not sure millions of descendants of African slaves will see this as offensive. Some might but not all. There’s some truth to this answer whether you agree with it or not.

                    – NuWin
                    Sep 21 at 9:43





                    @DaveGremlin I’m not sure millions of descendants of African slaves will see this as offensive. Some might but not all. There’s some truth to this answer whether you agree with it or not.

                    – NuWin
                    Sep 21 at 9:43











                    -4



















                    It is wrong on a number of level



                    1. black face is offensive, particularly in former slaving countries (which includes Canada)


                    2. Aladdin isn't black. Even the fictional Aladdin isn't from africa.


                    3. Trudeau was dressing up as Aladdin, where Aladdin for some reason decided to put on a black face.






                    share|improve this answer

























                    • The picture is black and white. Most likely the paint is blue, not black.

                      – JonathanReez Supports Monica
                      Sep 20 at 17:37






                    • 2





                      @JonathanReez: odd that Trudeau didn't make that point...

                      – dolphin_of_france
                      Sep 20 at 17:49











                    • He probably couldn't prove it so chose the safe option

                      – JonathanReez Supports Monica
                      Sep 20 at 17:55











                    • The paint might have been blue if he were cosplaying the Genie, but he was clearly cosplaying Aladdin.

                      – F1Krazy
                      Sep 20 at 20:18











                    • @F1Krazy: It is possible.. You should have advised Trudeau to say that.

                      – dolphin_of_france
                      Sep 20 at 20:21















                    -4



















                    It is wrong on a number of level



                    1. black face is offensive, particularly in former slaving countries (which includes Canada)


                    2. Aladdin isn't black. Even the fictional Aladdin isn't from africa.


                    3. Trudeau was dressing up as Aladdin, where Aladdin for some reason decided to put on a black face.






                    share|improve this answer

























                    • The picture is black and white. Most likely the paint is blue, not black.

                      – JonathanReez Supports Monica
                      Sep 20 at 17:37






                    • 2





                      @JonathanReez: odd that Trudeau didn't make that point...

                      – dolphin_of_france
                      Sep 20 at 17:49











                    • He probably couldn't prove it so chose the safe option

                      – JonathanReez Supports Monica
                      Sep 20 at 17:55











                    • The paint might have been blue if he were cosplaying the Genie, but he was clearly cosplaying Aladdin.

                      – F1Krazy
                      Sep 20 at 20:18











                    • @F1Krazy: It is possible.. You should have advised Trudeau to say that.

                      – dolphin_of_france
                      Sep 20 at 20:21













                    -4















                    -4











                    -4









                    It is wrong on a number of level



                    1. black face is offensive, particularly in former slaving countries (which includes Canada)


                    2. Aladdin isn't black. Even the fictional Aladdin isn't from africa.


                    3. Trudeau was dressing up as Aladdin, where Aladdin for some reason decided to put on a black face.






                    share|improve this answer














                    It is wrong on a number of level



                    1. black face is offensive, particularly in former slaving countries (which includes Canada)


                    2. Aladdin isn't black. Even the fictional Aladdin isn't from africa.


                    3. Trudeau was dressing up as Aladdin, where Aladdin for some reason decided to put on a black face.







                    share|improve this answer













                    share|improve this answer




                    share|improve this answer










                    answered Sep 20 at 15:21









                    dolphin_of_francedolphin_of_france

                    1,3062 silver badges9 bronze badges




                    1,3062 silver badges9 bronze badges















                    • The picture is black and white. Most likely the paint is blue, not black.

                      – JonathanReez Supports Monica
                      Sep 20 at 17:37






                    • 2





                      @JonathanReez: odd that Trudeau didn't make that point...

                      – dolphin_of_france
                      Sep 20 at 17:49











                    • He probably couldn't prove it so chose the safe option

                      – JonathanReez Supports Monica
                      Sep 20 at 17:55











                    • The paint might have been blue if he were cosplaying the Genie, but he was clearly cosplaying Aladdin.

                      – F1Krazy
                      Sep 20 at 20:18











                    • @F1Krazy: It is possible.. You should have advised Trudeau to say that.

                      – dolphin_of_france
                      Sep 20 at 20:21

















                    • The picture is black and white. Most likely the paint is blue, not black.

                      – JonathanReez Supports Monica
                      Sep 20 at 17:37






                    • 2





                      @JonathanReez: odd that Trudeau didn't make that point...

                      – dolphin_of_france
                      Sep 20 at 17:49











                    • He probably couldn't prove it so chose the safe option

                      – JonathanReez Supports Monica
                      Sep 20 at 17:55











                    • The paint might have been blue if he were cosplaying the Genie, but he was clearly cosplaying Aladdin.

                      – F1Krazy
                      Sep 20 at 20:18











                    • @F1Krazy: It is possible.. You should have advised Trudeau to say that.

                      – dolphin_of_france
                      Sep 20 at 20:21
















                    The picture is black and white. Most likely the paint is blue, not black.

                    – JonathanReez Supports Monica
                    Sep 20 at 17:37





                    The picture is black and white. Most likely the paint is blue, not black.

                    – JonathanReez Supports Monica
                    Sep 20 at 17:37




                    2




                    2





                    @JonathanReez: odd that Trudeau didn't make that point...

                    – dolphin_of_france
                    Sep 20 at 17:49





                    @JonathanReez: odd that Trudeau didn't make that point...

                    – dolphin_of_france
                    Sep 20 at 17:49













                    He probably couldn't prove it so chose the safe option

                    – JonathanReez Supports Monica
                    Sep 20 at 17:55





                    He probably couldn't prove it so chose the safe option

                    – JonathanReez Supports Monica
                    Sep 20 at 17:55













                    The paint might have been blue if he were cosplaying the Genie, but he was clearly cosplaying Aladdin.

                    – F1Krazy
                    Sep 20 at 20:18





                    The paint might have been blue if he were cosplaying the Genie, but he was clearly cosplaying Aladdin.

                    – F1Krazy
                    Sep 20 at 20:18













                    @F1Krazy: It is possible.. You should have advised Trudeau to say that.

                    – dolphin_of_france
                    Sep 20 at 20:21





                    @F1Krazy: It is possible.. You should have advised Trudeau to say that.

                    – dolphin_of_france
                    Sep 20 at 20:21





                    protected by yannis Sep 20 at 12:59



                    Thank you for your interest in this question.
                    Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



                    Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?



                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Tamil (spriik) Luke uk diar | Nawigatjuun

                    Align equal signs while including text over equalitiesAMS align: left aligned text/math plus multicolumn alignmentMultiple alignmentsAligning equations in multiple placesNumbering and aligning an equation with multiple columnsHow to align one equation with another multline equationUsing \ in environments inside the begintabularxNumber equations and preserving alignment of equal signsHow can I align equations to the left and to the right?Double equation alignment problem within align enviromentAligned within align: Why are they right-aligned?

                    Where does the image of a data connector as a sharp metal spike originate from?Where does the concept of infected people turning into zombies only after death originate from?Where does the motif of a reanimated human head originate?Where did the notion that Dragons could speak originate?Where does the archetypal image of the 'Grey' alien come from?Where did the suffix '-Man' originate?Where does the notion of being injured or killed by an illusion originate?Where did the term “sophont” originate?Where does the trope of magic spells being driven by advanced technology originate from?Where did the term “the living impaired” originate?