Do you think Black History Month is a tad racist?

[johncocker]

How do you know?

 

just from past threads I remember you and suff,identifying your self as mixed race..I think even halibut too

[johncocker]

Why don't you go and check for yourself?

 

I have it has'nt:roll:

[boyfriday]

I think most of the people on this thread who claim to be black are what you now call mixed race,who probably have more white in them than black,so why do they identify with black and not white?

My kids are half Scottish, and even though I'm no longer married to their mother, it doesn't stop me helping them have an appreciation of Scottish culture and where a large number of their family come from.

 

No, we don't do Burns Night, but I would if they wanted to although I actively encourage their exploration of this part of who they are. Are they black? Mixed race? English, Scottish? Yorkshiremen? Probably a combination of all and not identifying exclusively with one.

[boyfriday]

just from past threads I remember you and suff,identifying your self as mixed race..I think even halibut too

Well you remember wrong on my part fella.

[shims]

I have it has'nt:roll:

So what way did you choose to check Black History Month?

[shims]

I think most of the people on this thread who claim to be black are what you now call mixed race,who probably have more white in them than black,so why do they identify with black and not white?

There would be little point in choosing to identify as white when society would identify you as non-white.

[shims]

Is it racist to have a white history month?

Been discussed already.

[boyfriday]

There would be little point in choosing to identify as white when society would identify you as non-white.

 

That's a good point, the majority population generally has little interest in the subtleties of race, colour and culture.

[johncocker]

There would be little point in choosing to identify as white when society would identify you as non-white.

 

so shoud'nt it be "nonwhite history month"

[Conrod]

You really don't know?

 

It's 'just a doll' to a small child. A small child will has no idea of the malicious connotations surrounding the caricature.

Caricature perhaps, but hardly malicious.

It was a portrayal which, at the time it was introduced, had no malice whatsoever. People did not then appreciate that society's views would soon evolve, so their actions in introducing a goliwog doll may have been misguided, naive, or without appropriate consideration, but they were quite normal for the time and to call it 'malicious' is drama-queening at the very least.