News Review into racism at Collingwood

Remove this Banner Ad

Cancel culture is more disturbing to me that a Carlton reawakening. The mindlessness of it is equal to a Trump rally.

It's also profoundly arrogant. It assumes that we've achieved such a level of enlightenment that we can sit in absolute and final judgment over all cultural artefacts, past and present.

Whatever doesn't meet 'the standard' will be disappeared, cast out from the human story.

Sometimes there seems to be something generational about it, with younger generations especially eager to see everything through the refined and near-perfect lens of the present, which is such a frighteningly small perspective on the world.

What the f*** becomes of art when humanity is too scared to look itself in the eye?

Agree with the arrogance. I bet many of those looking to demolish things would be aghast at Mao for demolishing so much of China's incredible antiquity.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

It’s not easy being green...

I loved Kermit as a child, and still do.
No street cred in this clip, would have thought it'd stand up to today's brutal standards of appropriateness though. Would have thought the right would be more concerned about it than the left. Having said that, I have absolutely no issue with the labels informing people of negative stereotypes being inadvertandtly pushed in a tv show or movie. I think it's a good talking point for parents who watch these shows with kids. We can get outraged by the labels - but media does often reinforce and teach prejudicial stereotypes. They shouldn't be removed just pointed out. Looking forward to seeing the editted clips when someone puts them on youtube, becasue I didn't imagine that the muppets would become in the firing line:

 
Last edited:
I loved The Muppet Show. I watched it at Grandma's, not being allowed to watch it at home, and that gave it some more magic.

Statler and Waldorf were early heroes of mine:

View attachment 1064185

Keen observers of the world, not easily impressed, few kind words to say about anything.

One article I read suggested that the Disney warning relates to a handful of specific things, such as a scene depicting Native Americans in crude stereotype, and another in which Johnny Cash performs in front of the Confederate Rag/Flag.

If they take some moments to talk about why some elements of the show were produced in ignorance, then I'm happy enough with that, because it's a much better approach than ditching something entirely for not according to more contemporary standards.
Statler and Waldorf where the original trolls!
 
And there is no way frogs are as dorky and pathetic as Kermit. It was a scandalous portrayal of one of the coolest amphibians - certainly cooler than newts.
And don't get me started on the two stereotypical grumpy-old white men in the balcony
 
Just had a chance to read all this:

a) Harry L is the star witness. (concerning)
b) the review was conducted by the type of people who want to change the name of Coon cheese despite it having no racial history at all.

Eddies head on a plate.
 
And don't get me started on the two stereotypical grumpy-old white men in the balcony
I'm making a movie set in Sudan during their civil war. It's a moving tale of a family who get seperated by war and overcome a heap of obstacles in their bid to reunite. I've done a lot of research and I want it to be accurate. Obviously, I don't want to feed negative stereotypes about violent black men, so all the violent scenes will be acted by white actors. Now, that won't by historically accurate, so what I'm going to do is paint the white actors skin with shoe polish. I think it'll be really well received.
 
Dumbest post in the history of big footy.
Ignorance beyond the absolute measure
Unfortunately you misunderstand. You are the one that is dumb and ignorant, when you are able to think for yourself happy to have a chat. Until then, your comments need to be forgotten lest you infect others with the idiocy.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Dickhead. Syd Jackson himself has openly admitted he lied about being racially vilified. He had no reason to justify hitting Adamson and cast a slur on his character to ensure he'd escape sanction.
In Jacksons defence the president of the footy club told him to say it and it wasn't really a slur to claim someone called you a racist name on the field back in those days. Racist language on the footy field was considered gamesmanship.
 
Last edited:
In Jacksons defence the president of the footy club told him to say it and it wasn't really a slur to claim someone called you a racist name on the field back in those days. Racist language on the footy field was considered gamesmanship.
Because blacks were racially abused on and off the field and were generally treated as lesser human beings, they were very susceptible to manipulation by powerful white people lacking in moral scruples. Getting Jackson to lie again today in the same circumstances simply would not happen. Indigenous people are in a much more secure position in society and sport and racial slurs on the football field are a thing of the past.
 

Seems Wilkinson... was okay with the black face routine at Wacky Wednesday 2013. Lent his jumper to Osborne to do it.

Now has had a change of heart.

Echoes what happened with Lumumba and that nick name.

Dangerous place for society when people can consent to things but then retract that consent at a later point

We’ve all done things are not proud of or regret... we just have to live with it

PS - not condoning the taste behind the black face outfit on mad Monday.
 

Seems Wilkinson... was okay with the black face routine at Wacky Wednesday 2013. Lent his jumper to Osborne to do it.

Now has had a change of heart.

Echoes what happened with Lumumba and that nick name.

Dangerous place for society when people can consent to things but then retract that consent at a later point

We’ve all done things are not proud of or regret... we just have to live with it

PS - not condoning the taste behind the black face outfit on mad Monday.
All part of cancel culture, digging up the past.
 
All part of cancel culture, digging up the past.
I recall in the 90's my friend's 15 year old son being turned away from a school social at which the students were to come in the guise of a famous person. He rather innocently went as his music hero, Bob Marley, not so difficult because he already had rasta style hair. However the skin colouring proved a problem. The school was ahead of the times objecting to the browned skin. Had he been alive, I am not sure Bob Marley would have cared. Perhaps the school should have been more specific by setting rules for the event.
 
I recall in the 90's my friend's 15 year old son being turned away from a school social at which the students were to come in the guise of a famous person. He rather innocently went as his music hero, Bob Marley, not so difficult because he already had rasta style hair. However the skin colouring proved a problem. The school was ahead of the times objecting to the browned skin. Had he been alive, I am not sure Bob Marley would have cared. Perhaps the school should have been more specific by setting rules for the event.

It’s called leadership. Whether it’s a school social or a football club... somebody needs to show leadership in these situations and intervene

With public speaking it’s often said that the speaker should pretend the audience is full of nannas and make sure their humour wouldn’t offend a grandma

Now there is also the PC test. Whereby a person should pretend the room is full of pitch fork waving activists.

Incredibly sterilising...

The proponents of PC speech think that they are being ‘progressive’. Reality is that they are a very conservative bunch. Reinventing the concept of blasphemy and flipping Victorian era attitudes, conduct and protocols so that they apply to a handful of chosen minorities
 
In Jacksons defence the president of the footy club told him to say it and it wasn't really a slur to claim someone called you a racist name on the field back in those days. Racist language on the footy field was considered gamesmanship.

Yeah, not sure Adamson saw it that way.
 
Yeah, not sure Adamson saw it that way.
You're right. According to this article about Jackson, Adamson was pissed off, but not with Jackson, with the administration that believed Jackson.

 
You're right. According to this article about Jackson, Adamson was pissed off, but not with Jackson, with the administration that believed Jackson.


Yeah, I’ve heard him say as much.
 
Yeah, I’ve heard him say as much.
I wonder if he was offended at the time or whether he became offended later when values changed and racial abuse began being viewed differently. I wouldn't have thought that anybody at the tie would have looked down on Adamson for it. But my view of that era must be a bit off the mark, as why else would it have been an effective defence?
 
I wonder if he was offended at the time or whether he became offended later when values changed and racial abuse began being viewed differently. I wouldn't have thought that anybody at the tie would have looked down on Adamson for it. But my view of that era must be a bit off the mark, as why else would it have been an effective defence?
No-one should be under the illusion that racial abuse was broadly acceptable at that time. Yes, it was a bit more widespread than now, but not in the mainstream, and the accusation against Adamson certainly did have people looking down on him. I would say the attitude shift you’re referring to was well under way by the 70s.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top