On 3 Oct 2017 at 11:38am Not again wrote:
Newell Fister is ranting on Facebook about Bonfire boys blacking up and how offensive it is. Typical Southover mong
On 3 Oct 2017 at 12:54pm Tylos Rubio wrote:
Funny, on the thread that got deleted on the Lewes page, his wife was one of the more vocal suggesting it wasn't racist at all and how because it's traditional it's ok. Typical Borough mong.
Although I think she's banned from Borough the same way he is.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 1:06pm Mong wrote:
And the News@Ten Lewes is .....MONG.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 1:08pm Earl of Lewess wrote:
Historically, the 'blacking up' was done to make locals unrecognizable to the Customs and Excise men; not to imitate 'people of colour'. People need to understand the context first.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 1:30pm A Person wrote:
Er... not if they're dressed as Zulus, Earl of Lewess???
On 3 Oct 2017 at 2:10pm Hyperion wrote:
Yeah, there's a world of difference between rubbing charcoal on your face to escape identification and turning up in full Black and White Minstrel gear as the Borough lot do every year. Sure it was a tradition once but it's no longer socially acceptable and hasn't been since the 1970's. The blacked up Zulus should have been consigned to history decades ago.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 2:30pm I think we knew that … wrote:
Thanks EOL, you'll be enlightening us to the origins of Bonfire Night next…
On 3 Oct 2017 at 2:34pm Hazelnuts wrote:
To be fair to Newell and Angela they were both defending the 'tradition' of Zulu blackface. But still trying to claim it wasn't racist. Classic position of 'white privilege' if you ask me...
On 3 Oct 2017 at 3:25pm jean wrote:
For the record, The Fishers have never been members of Borough. Angela was supporting an open debate on the matter of blacking up, not claiming it wasn't racist. They were both arguing that blacking up does not in itself incite racial hatred. Facts people.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 3:38pm Billy wrote:
If the Black and White Minstrels are no more because of race sensitivities, then blacking up as Zulus must also be no more.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 4:17pm Landporter wrote:
Well fancy someone getting offended on behalf of someone else. Suppose this Fisher character has a snuggle blanket and a num num.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 4:54pm Lateral thinker wrote:
@ Billy.... er, why must blacking up and dressing as a Zulu 'be no more'?
The Zulus (or any other black race/tribe/culture) are not being ridiculed by, nor degraded by, the Bonfire Society who wear that outfit and black their faces. In fact one might say the Zulu race is being actively 'promoted' as a distinct, and different, culture outside our own, given the time and effort put into making the costumes.
Likewise, your logic would suggest portraying Ancient Greeks, Romans, Vikings, American Civil War protagonists, American Indians, WW2 folk etc (in fact, dressing as anyone other than a resident of Lewes from some period or other) is also "no longer acceptable" as it must seen as a slur on that group of people. Why is dressing as a Zulu so intolerable, while dressing as an American Indian, or a Viking not worthy of challenge?
Yes, if those wearing the Zulu (or any other costume) were behaving in a way that belittled the culture/group they portray I would agree with you, but the Zulus (and others) I have seen in Bonfire processions some to be very respectful of the people/period they stray, and do not treat their subjects as objects of derision or ridicule, nor are they trying to say middle-class whites form Eats Sussex are inane way superior to the culture/people/period they portray in their costumes.
What a narrow minded approach you seem to be advocating. Bonfire is about tolerance of, and respect for, others views, not bigotry.
The Black and White Minstrel Show was axed, I believe, because it fell victim to the view that it portrayed the black minstrels as second class citizens (which they probably were in America at the time the original African-american minstrels were about), however a more enlightened view today might have been that, with a redirected sense of purpose, the show could actually have promoted that stage of American history, and shown that the black folk were just as capable of entertaining people as were the whites, and indeed, given many genres of popular music can be traced back to the period of slavery and oppression, that modern music actually owes much to African-americans.
Far too may people these days seem willing/keen to take offence on the part of other groups, and of trying to impose their own wishes on others who do not share their own, narrow, viewpoint.
Whether you agree with the Fisters or not, surely, unless the Zulu costumes are being worn as a joke, or those wearing them parody the Zulu race, then "blacking up" is not a racist or disrespectful act... supporting an open debate on the rights or wrongs of dressing as a Zulu can only be a good thing, otherwise we all risk being forced to accept that Billy's view (as held may many other too I fear) is the only view of the act of portraying Zulus.
Some people need to get off their high horses and get out a bit more....
Me, I'll wear smugglers stripes on the 4th ...or is that also considered social unacceptable as it is somehow disrespectful of those who smuggled contraband for a living?
On 3 Oct 2017 at 5:05pm Citizen Kane wrote:
Newell, you have posted the same very long post on other threads and you are convincing no one.
Do you really think that Bonfire doesn't 'parody' Zulus? Please go away look in a book, google Zulu, take a look what they actually look like. Borough Zulus are a racist parody of the worst kind. Jet black face paint and bones through their noses, the only thing to be thankful for is that they no longer wear 'fuzzy' wigs. I'm afraid your ignorance speaks volumes.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 5:35pm Newell wrote:
This is my first post to this thread
On 3 Oct 2017 at 5:39pm Tom Pain wrote:
Citizen Kane is after Pedro's mantle of patron saint of political correctness,he knows that nothing is too petty to score right on browny points. Hint-- bonfires,torches global warming, attaboy get too it.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 5:40pm Earl of Lewess wrote:
@I think we knew that - you'd be surprised by the number of people who don't.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 5:57pm Billy wrote:
You don't have to be a racist to commit an act of racial discrimination.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 6:11pm Bonfire Boy wrote:
You don't have to be involved in Bonfire to be an expert on Bonfire.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 6:13pm Zulu warrior wrote:
Not really bothered, to be honest mate.
Each to their own eh?
On 3 Oct 2017 at 6:16pm Zulu chief wrote:
Isandlwana replay anyone? LOL
On 3 Oct 2017 at 7:30pm Gary wrote:
I don't have Facebook but I have heard there is some lively debate.
Just to add my thoughts to this, I have watched bonfire night for many years in Lewes and have never seen anyone dress up as a racist.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 7:49pm lord lewes wrote:
only a well off jumped up nob could accuse all white people as privileged, , thats whats wrong with the world, silly little people with way too much time on there hands, was this much fuss made by the same whiny little people about the gypsy caravan being burnt? no they fukin did not, now how racist do you feel now? or was that not racist because they were portrayed as white?
On 3 Oct 2017 at 7:52pm It ain't half hot mum wrote:
The point the Borough traditionalists seem determined to miss is that although their intentions might be entirely innocent, the world has moved on and the connotations of a white guy dressed up in black face are, in general society, that he's a racist. Like it or not Lewes Bonfire has a global audience these days, social media has had that effect as Borough well know (They even have a social media officer would you believe it). Bonfire also has a long queue of people who want to do away with it and they will grab any opportunity they can to constrain what goes on.
By processing dressed like the a throwback to something Jim Davidson might have found funny in the 70's, they are providing sackfuls of ammo to those people who want to shut it all down and putting the whole thing at risk for everyone else. You mighty not be racists and you might not be specifically offending anyone (Although social media would suggest you are in fact offending quite a few people) but you're making it easier for those that would see the end of Bonfire achieve their goal.
If you have to ask why blackface is seen as racist but white people dressing up as Vikings, ancient Greeks and so on is ok then you probably are a bit racist or at least, massively naive. Protip, dressing in a Mongolian Warrior costume isn't racist, dressing as a Mongolian Warrior and drawing slanty eyes on your face is racist. Really sad that people need that explaining to them in 2017.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 7:55pm @lord lewes wrote:
Er... There was a load of fuss made about the caravan, the entire committee of the society that did it got arrested and faced a trial, wherein the judge decided that as being a traveller was a lifestyle choice and not a race per se, it wasn't racist so they weren't charged. You'll notice that nobody has done anything similar since though. That's literally the worst example you could have picked.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 8:01pm lord lewes wrote:
are you kidding me? your very user name is a reference to one of most racist programs of the 70s, or did you not know they blacked out their faces, so does that make you racist or naive?
On 3 Oct 2017 at 8:04pm It ain't half hot mum wrote:
Yeah, that was kinda the point. I guess they taught understanding subtlety and nuance the same day they taught capitalisation at your school, a day you clearly missed.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 8:15pm lord lewes wrote:
The courts have said that Romany Gypsies and Irish Travellers are protected against race discrimination because they’re ethnic groups under the Equality Act. so if the judge found people not guilty was that white privilege or just a racist judge?
On 3 Oct 2017 at 8:24pm lord lewes wrote:
your right i did miss that lesson, its because i was on your wife
On 3 Oct 2017 at 8:24pm Earl of Lewess wrote:
Oh dear, this is all getting very silly (and Lord Lewes, you're letting your fellow aristocrats down by not spelling programme correctly). We clearly have too much time in our hands.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 8:24pm Seriously? wrote:
@Lateral Thinker How do you "promote" a race? I think you mean "celebrate". It's not a corporate marketing campaign. Also you say that you have seen "some" of the people dressed as zulus behaving respectfully, inferring then that others do indeed behave disrespectfully. Plus, you really think no one cares if people dress up as native Americans? Are you blind to the acres of accumulated column inches on the subject of cultural appropriation and the pitfalls thereof? Whatever you make of that debate (in all likelihood that it's the bleating of PC gone mad lefties), it's astonishing that you think no one would even bat an eyelid in this day and age. And before I am accused of being said terrible lefty, I would add that I think we should consider others' feelings and do our best not to offend (who wouldn't prefer a more harmonious world) but that I also believe over sensitivity has led to the rise of trump and brexit - one extreme begets another, after all. The far left and the far right are catalysts for one another.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 9:08pm let's play nice wrote:
my gosh there are some angry people. "lord lewes" as condescending a comment you may of speculated "it ain't half hot mum made". you should refrain from this sort of derogatory comment about a man's wife, its just not cricket. you should apologize old chap, And it would show good will if "it ain't half hot mum" would expect your mea culpa,
On 3 Oct 2017 at 9:12pm let's play nice wrote:
you may want to google the meaning of mea culpa. not meaning to be condescending.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 9:32pm Trina wrote:
Lalalalalalalala Fingers in my ear !!!
On 3 Oct 2017 at 9:38pm Good Grief wrote:
Have you seen this guy's LinkedIn page? It is madness. He used to be a teacher - seriously?
He quotes "To be honest I think I was just given this as a sop to try to persuade me to accept a compromise agreement, as I was being such a pain in the backside by actually challenging the way I was being treated. I treated it with the disdain it deserved."
On 3 Oct 2017 at 9:39pm Spirit of Old Lewed wrote:
The zulu costumes are bonfire tradition. Are we going to let a bunch of hand wringing, lefty liberal, politically correct, sandal wearing, hybrid car driving, chinless outsiders stop us?
B0llocks we are. We wunt be druv.
On 3 Oct 2017 at 10:30pm Devils advocate wrote:
Are we to understand then, if a black person tries to bleach their skin to make it lighter (as they do - eg. Michael Jackson) that they are being racist? If a Zulu paints his face white is he a racist, Or if a Japanese person appropriates western culture by wearing a suit and tie, are they also a racist? Or if not, is the fact that they are not considered so, actually racist in itself?
Thee is a big difference between gollywogs and the black and white minstrels that some people have brought up and what LBBS Zulus do, and it is a pretty weak argument to claim it is the same.
Has anyone checked with actual Zulus what they feel about this before getting offended on their behalf? Maybe ask some of the Zulu Tradition group who are joining LBBS on bonfire night what they think.
On 4 Oct 2017 at 12:25am So… wrote:
If a Bonfire Society chose the uniform of the Einsatzgruppen as it's pioneers then I guess people would be outraged
However, a society has as their pioneers The mongols, the Nazis of their day. The only difference is time frame…
Weird isn't it
On 4 Oct 2017 at 2:08pm Hazelnuts wrote:
It would be interesting if all the white people commenting here saying it isn't racist tried blacking up and marching through NottingHill Carnival dressed as Zulus. I don't think the arguments of tradition or Bonfire being about tolerance made above in this thread would really stack up.