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

30

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?

Aleksandar Stojadinovic

Posted 2019-09-19T22:25:33.733

Reputation: 403

Answers

45

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.

Bryan Krause

Posted 2019-09-19T22:25:33.733

Reputation: 3 303

1

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

– Philipp – 2019-09-20T19:07:11.597

37

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.

Almhm

Posted 2019-09-19T22:25:33.733

Reputation: 379

13+1 this is the kind of answer I was hoping to see. Very measured and neutral. Thank you for your perspective. – F1Krazy – 2019-09-20T10:48:01.270

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 – 2019-09-21T09:32:12.450

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 – 2019-09-22T04:24:44.517

6"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 – 2019-09-22T07:56:04.463

2"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 – 2019-10-28T00:48:57.863

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.

Gloweye

Posted 2019-09-19T22:25:33.733

Reputation: 229

7According 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 – 2019-09-20T11:29:36.640

Strongest term the Dutch wikipedia uses for that is "maybe", while the current day style of dress is definitely based on Moors from Spain. Oldest depiction lacks those specific clothes, and instead wore (normal) high-class clothes. – Gloweye – 2019-09-20T11:29:43.483

4According to The Guardian, the "sooty face" is the more contemporary attempt to make it not skin-color-based. – Fizz – 2019-09-20T11:33:01.170

1Well, 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 – 2019-09-20T12:25:22.250

And what is the source of the NL wiki claim? – Fizz – 2019-09-20T12:27:06.943

2

Note: All these sources are dutch. http://www.historien.nl/de-omstreden-zwarte-piet/ "current costume inspired by 16th century moor pages". Earlier costume was often turkish or indian. https://www.volkskrant.nl/columns-opinie/kom-je-aan-sint-of-piet-dan-kom-je-aan-integriteit-van-de-opvoeder~b7e58c6c/ "[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: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwarte_Piet

– Gloweye – 2019-09-20T12:51:51.847

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 – 2019-09-21T19:50:09.040

Well, of course it evolved after initial conception. Also, there's no single reason to admit that the orgin of Zwarte Piet was racist, no matter what you think about it now. And otherwise I'd like to see sources comparable to what I linked two comments up. The first known incarnations wore high class clothes. If you despise a group of people, you don't put them in high class clothes. – Gloweye – 2019-09-21T19:52:50.933

@Gloweye So how did it "evolve" into this without racism? And sure people do that. The "humor" then comes from the apparent disconnection between a supposedly lower-class person and the higher-class clothes in which they supposedly don't belong. The two quotes you provided say that it's related to race, not to chimneys... – tim – 2019-09-21T20:07:10.240

I don't know, I only looked at the origin. And while yes, plenty refers to race, none of those references appear racist even in the slightest. But if you disagree with me about Trundeau, please post your own answer and provide your sources. – Gloweye – 2019-09-21T20:09:26.947

1@tim your comment does not address this answer. It's a non-sequitur whose only purpose appears to be to post a link to a racist photo. Please, remove it. – grovkin – 2019-09-22T05:34:49.910

@grovkin Over half of this answer is borderline off-topic and only about justifying racist imagery like the one I linked. I am addressing this and pointing out that, contrary to what OP says, this is indeed racist. Great that you agree about that, but in that case you should also be interested in addressing the inaccuracies in OPs answer. Once those are corrected, I'm happy to remove my comment. – tim – 2019-09-22T07:44:09.197

It makes sense to compare cultural contexts. Therefore it is not off-topic. If you disagree, feel free to upvote other answers over mine. That's what you can do it for. You cannot, however, try to harass answers you don't agree with away. – Gloweye – 2019-09-22T07:46:34.303

0

"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.

Ray Butterworth

Posted 2019-09-19T22:25:33.733

Reputation: 2 170

-1

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.

jamesqf

Posted 2019-09-19T22:25:33.733

Reputation: 10 503

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 – 2019-09-21T09:35:06.523

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 – 2019-09-21T09:43:05.127

@DaveGremlin, yes, "including the millions of descendants of African slaves". Conk was a popular method of removing hair kinks. Consider how many people of African descent today wear wigs with straight or wavy hair. And look how many dye their hair brown, or even blonde. But no one finds this offensive to Europeans. Specifically, name an African-descent politician that was election shamed for looking non-African.

– Ray Butterworth – 2020-07-10T00:31:21.710

@RayButterworth - You need to look at the power relationships here. People at the bottom of the heap imitating those at the top is about aspiration; people at the top imitating those at the bottom is mockery. – Dave Gremlin – 2020-07-15T18:34:46.770

@DaveGremlin, so you're saying that Africans that imitate superficial European attributes consider themselves at the bottom and think that denying their natural appearance will magically make them better people? That sounds like far worse behaviour than dressing up as a famous fictional character. – Ray Butterworth – 2020-07-15T21:52:08.480

@Ray Butterworth: First, Aladdin is a Middle Eastern story, not African, so the character should look much more European (particularly southern European) than sub-Saharan African. Second, this all misses the point that there is absolutely nothing wrong with this, any more than say having a black actor playing Hamlet. It's just a problem with a small minority of messed-up but very vocal people trying to inflict their prejudices on the rest of the world. – jamesqf – 2020-07-17T00:26:51.987

I think we agree on most points, though obviously many other people don't. (E.g. at the moment your answer scores only "-1", even though 8 people (including myself) upvoted it.) It would be nice if ±votes rather than only the total were displayed for everyone. – Ray Butterworth – 2020-07-17T00:40:40.157

@RayButterworth Like I said before, it's about the power relationship. If you are in a group that, on average, has much less power, wealth and privilege, and you aspire to more of those, then you will use any ladder you can find to climb out of your hole. Imitating the habits and appearance of the powerful is one of those ways, but it is bad partly because it is largely ineffective, and partly because it re-enforces the exclusivity of the most powerful. – Dave Gremlin – 2020-07-19T12:58:36.030

@RayButterworth - On the other hand, a more powerful, privileged and wealthy group that mimics the underdog contributes to a culture that demeans those at the bottom, a culture that portrays those in the lower group as not worthy of being taken seriously. Whatever the intention of those using blackface, the effect is to invalidate those being represented as serious members of society, worthy of full inclusion. – Dave Gremlin – 2020-07-19T12:58:47.167

@Dave Gremlin: "a more powerful, privileged and wealthy group" is just an artificial construct, formed by the (inherently racist) process of lumping all white people together. There are LOTS of poor white people out here, and I assure you that privileged & wealthy white people are no more eager to welcome poor whites into their ranks than they are poor blacks. (And wealthy black people seem quite acceptable to most.) So if blackface is unacceptable, so should things like "The Beverly Hillbillies" be. – jamesqf – 2020-07-20T03:59:23.957

@jamesqf - I agree that there are lots of things that stereotype groups that should be unacceptable but that society in general does not sufficiently condemn. I also agree that there are individuals and sub-groups that don't fit into generalisations, such as poor, underpriveleged white people and rich, powerful black people. However, on average, a black person in Europe or the USA will not have the same opportunities or protections as an average white person. These countries DO have institutionalised racism and their political, social and economic systems are skewed against minorities – Dave Gremlin – 2020-07-20T09:36:48.233

@Dave Gremlin: I disagree that most such things should be unacceptable. They should be normal, and the minority of politically correctoids should stop trying to dictate other people's speech. As for equal opportunities &c, people are individuals, not averages. A lot of that "institutionalized racism" is the result of selection, e.g. the Black Lives Matter people getting up in arms about cops killing black people (and justifiably so) but apparently not giving a damn about cops - even black cops - killing white people. – jamesqf – 2020-07-21T03:40:00.773

@jamesqf - BLM is getting up in arms because of the asymmetry of the situation. Of course there have been white people killed by black cops, every murder is an outrage and every death is a tragedy. BLM isn't trying to deny that, it's pointing out the huge disparity and saying "Hey, you know that problem you have been ignoring and hoping would go away? Well it won't. Fix it!" As for it being unacceptable to demean and belittle a group of people; it's about manners, according dignity to others andbeing able to live together. We know what the alternative is. Should we continue this in chat? – Dave Gremlin – 2020-08-04T09:41:10.220

@Dave Gremlin: That's just my point. When you account for income and living patterns, that huge disparity really isn't so large at all. As I keep saying, it's not cops being racist, it's cops being cops. – jamesqf – 2020-08-05T16:29:37.267

@jamesqf I think that's absolutely incorrect – Dave Gremlin – 2020-08-05T16:40:26.027

@Dave Gremlin: You are of course entitled to your opinion. My experience says otherwise. – jamesqf – 2020-08-07T04:19:12.390

-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.

dolphin_of_france

Posted 2019-09-19T22:25:33.733

Reputation: 1 326

The picture is black and white. Most likely the paint is blue, not black. – JonathanReez – 2019-09-20T17:37:24.973

2@JonathanReez: odd that Trudeau didn't make that point... – dolphin_of_france – 2019-09-20T17:49:48.327

He probably couldn't prove it so chose the safe option – JonathanReez – 2019-09-20T17:55:29.067

The paint might have been blue if he were cosplaying the Genie, but he was clearly cosplaying Aladdin. – F1Krazy – 2019-09-20T20:18:54.470

@F1Krazy: It is possible.. You should have advised Trudeau to say that. – dolphin_of_france – 2019-09-20T20:21:56.847