Do you think Black History Month is a tad racist?

[VideoPro]

This reminds me of that thread we had a while back, where white, middle aged blokes were whining because they felt excluded from an event/youth club/support group aimed at female teenage muslims.

[Frank Sidney]

Explain something Frank - every month apart from Black History Month we get history with a predominantly white focus - with me so far?

 

So then we have a little bit of black history, to balance things up a tiny bit - still with me?

 

 

Where's the racism there?

 

MOBO's - most modern chart music has its roots in the blues/R and B/ gospel traditions. Mostly genres with a large preponderance of black people yes?

 

Is the MOBO's a black only event? No

Are white artists welcome and celebrated too? Yes

 

Where's the racism there?

 

White history, as you call it, I'll call it history, is mostly made up of white people for an obvious reason. This is because the country is mostly populated by white people. The vast majority of historical figures are white. Black people are not excluded from history. The fact is that there aren't many black people in British history.

 

So in conclusion history is taught in this country. It educates on historical facts, events and people. The fact that most of these include mostly white participants is not racist, its being factual.

 

One can only justify black history, the mobo's and the like if its accepted that if the word black is changed to the word white. Which would not be acceptable...

[Chris_Sleeps]

Proper history should be taught in schools; so many kids dont know that their Royal navy defeated the combined French and Spanish fleets in the battle of Trafalgar

How fitting - you've combined the two topics.

 

Foreign fighters who did Britain proud

 

So we learn that Bellerophon had 10 black soldiers on board, including Samuel Marlow, 24, a former Jamaican slave, working as a wardroom steward

[boyfriday]

I'm sorry if I misunderstood your support for the above. What did you mean then? So you don't have a problem with white only awards and beauty contests...

 

Double standards Mr Friday...double standards...

 

I wasn't offering my support for black only ones, so not quite sure how you arrive at the conclusion it's a double standard.

 

Do you think the Dubai Caledonian Society is 'racist'?

 

http://www.dubaicaledoniansociety.com/

 

or the British ExPats Association (Spain)?

 

http://www.ukgovabusesexpats.co.uk/

[Chris_Sleeps]

So in conclusion history is taught in this country. It educates on historical facts, events and people. The fact that most of these include mostly white participants is not racist, its being factual.

So using your own logic, if we teach historical facts, events and people who were mostly black participants; then we're being factual and it isn't racist.

[Halibut]

White history, as you call it, I'll call it history, is mostly made up of white people for an obvious reason. This is because the country is mostly populated by white people. The vast majority of historical figures are white. Black people are not excluded from history. The fact is that there aren't many black people in British history.

 

So, as I said, it's mostly taught from a white perspective.

 

So in conclusion history is taught in this country. It educates on historical facts, events and people. The fact that most of these include mostly white participants is not racist, its being factual.

 

Yes, as I said history is taught from an almost wholly white perspective.

 

One can only justify black history, the mobo's and the like if its accepted that if the word black is changed to the word white. Which would not be acceptable.

 

Your premise that black history month is only acceptable if we call everything else white just doesn't make any kind of sense.

 

Why? You accept that for eleven months of the year history is taught from a largely white perspective, yes?

 

So if we focus on black history for one month a year, what shall we call it - hmmm, it's about history from a black perspective...err, we could call it 'black history'...how long does it go on? Errr, a month. I know - let's call it 'black history month'.

 

I still honestly can't understand what you're objecting to.

[boyfriday]

White history, as you call it, I'll call it history, is mostly made up of white people for an obvious reason. This is because the country is mostly populated by white people. The vast majority of historical figures are white. Black people are not excluded from history. The fact is that there aren't many black people in British history.

 

So in conclusion history is taught in this country. It educates on historical facts, events and people. The fact that most of these include mostly white participants is not racist, its being factual.

 

One can only justify black history, the mobo's and the like if its accepted that if the word black is changed to the word white. Which would not be acceptable...

 

 

You're falling into the trap of the gobfrothers Frank, and i know you're brighter than that Of course British (white) history should be the pre eminent one in this country, but that shouldn't be to the exclusion of encouraging the study of other cultures and history should it? This thread quite adequately demonstrates why such events are necessary-because quite simply most people know bugger all about black history. Nobody's proclaiming they should do, after all participation is entirely voluntary, but for those who do have a thirst for knowledge highlighting black history in this way may well be useful.

 

And why this obsession with the MOBO awards? (Whites participate and have won awards, Amy Winehouse being a notable example), or indeed replacing the word 'black' with 'white'? Don't you have anything more grievous to spit your dummy out over?

 

The reason use of the word 'black' is permissible in this context is illustrated in the the first paragraph of your own post..dummy! The default is consideration of white culture in this country. Consideration of anything else perhaps needs a little more of an imaginative approach.

[Frank Sidney]

So using your own logic, if we teach historical facts, events and people who were mostly black participants; then we're being factual and it isn't racist.

 

Yes. I don't have a problem at all. I think there is room for black history as part of the normal school history lesson. If its relevant to the nation as an whole. If Oliver Cromwell was black, that's fine by me...

[Frank Sidney]

You're falling into the trap of the gobfrothers Frank, and i know you're brighter than that Of course British (white) history should be the pre eminent one in this country, but that shouldn't be to the exclusion of encouraging the study of other cultures and history should it? This thread quite adequately demonstrates why such events are necessary-because quite simply most people know bugger all about black history. Nobody's proclaiming they should do, after all participation is entirely voluntary, but for those who do have a thirst for knowledge highlighting black history in this way may well be useful.

 

And why this obsession with the MOBO awards? (Whites participate and have won awards, Amy Winehouse being a notable example), or indeed replacing the word 'black' with 'white'? Don't you have anything more grievous to spit your dummy out over?

 

The reason use of the word 'black' is permissible in this context is illustrated in the the first paragraph of your own post..dummy! The default is consideration of white culture in this country. Consideration of anything else perhaps needs a little more of an imaginative approach.

 

Mmmm, I don't like it when you start to talk sense...I've nowt to moan at...

[Frank Sidney]

So, as I said, it's mostly taught from a white perspective.

 

 

 

Yes, as I said history is taught from an almost wholly white perspective.

 

 

 

Your premise that black history month is only acceptable if we call everything else white just doesn't make any kind of sense.

 

Why? You accept that for eleven months of the year history is taught from a largely white perspective, yes?

 

So if we focus on black history for one month a year, what shall we call it - hmmm, it's about history from a black perspective...err, we could call it 'black history'...how long does it go on? Errr, a month. I know - let's call it 'black history month'.

 

I still honestly can't understand what you're objecting to.

 

Neither can I. I'll withdraw gracefully....

 

That was written in haste so I'll clarify. Although, in principle, I feel its a tad wrong. I don't object to others participating or the idea in general. That would be a bit mean..