More Blackface–William Jewel College

Filed Under Black/African American Issues, Blackface Parties, Education and Academia, Race and Racism, Uncategorized by Rachel

This time at William Jewel College:

A freshman at a local college is accused of wearing blackface and walking through a residence hall yelling racial slurs.

Last Wednesday night, one student at William Jewell College is accused of painting his face and hands black, and then jumping from doorways at Eaton Hall and shouting racial slurs for about 30 minutes, officials said. A total of seven students are believed to have been involved.

Dean of Students Rick Winslow said all those accused are white, male freshmen. Eaton Hall is an all-male, primarily freshmen residence hall, Winslow said.

I’m a little confused by the story because it mentions one student, and then says seven are involved.

Comments

16 Responses to “More Blackface–William Jewel College”

Volscho on February 7th, 2007 2:52 pm

Racism is re-emerging with a vengence in this country. All these examples are frightening. What “wages of whiteness” do these kids need to achieve? Is it bitterness over their misperception of affirmative action policies? Is the racist ritual serving as a scapegoat for their declining job prospects? Is the fact that white racial identity has sucked all the culture out of from under their euro ancestors leaving them with bland taste of whiteness in their mouths?
Angel H. on February 7th, 2007 5:49 pm

Or maybe they’re just assholes?
Tom on February 7th, 2007 8:49 pm

I think so too

as their class privilege erodes (with the decline of the american empire )they have the “insurance policy” of their white privilege and it becomes all the more important to them…there is a special place in hell where they may be haunted by the ghosts of 19th century blackface
df on February 9th, 2007 7:37 am

Original civil rights advocates wanted ALL groups to be able to be equally proud.

Deciding that white’s aren’t worth of the same pride that James brown had when he said ” Say it loud, I’m Black and I’M Proud”
is to be just as racist as the pre-civil rights society that
you claim to oppose.

Please read the Boston Globe editorial on Wed.
It advocated that Town meeting members, be decided on the basis of population — when the members were white and the increase or change in population was black. No mention was made of what happens if the population change occurs in the opposite directon — are the black members of town meeting boards , then required to resign if the percentage of white’s goes up ? or if the percentage of Latinos goes down but percentage of black’s goes up, do the Latino board members have to resign ?
Please comment on this article.
df on February 9th, 2007 7:40 am

Is it “white face” for someone who is black to dye their hair blond ?
and to wear green or blue colored contact lenses ?

Isn’t that stealing another groups identity for selfish purposes ?

One reason black face was wrong is it took away jobs from blacks who could have been in those roles in terms of the entertainment industry– all the money went to whites — so when you see a black person in an advertisement wearing blond hair then this is the modern equivalent of “black face” , what I term “white face” where the potential white actor who naturally has those attributes and would be qualified for that ad, is discriminated against and made a mockery of, by this “white face”

I hope you’ll be fair and high-minded and apply the same standard
to this injustice too.
Lyonside on February 9th, 2007 12:33 pm

DF: Do you really think that blackface/minstrelsy of Vaudeville and its ilk took QUALITY ROLES away from blacks? They were charicatures and buffoons, overall, and they reinforced racist stereotypes against blacks.

Now, I find it amusing that you associate blond hair exclusively with white people… god help the mixie with light brown or blonde hair (yes, it happens). Besides that, I don’t think you can compare hair COLOR with extreme skin makeup and buffoonery (yassa massa and so on). If a white person dyes their hair black for a role (if it’s not naturally black - also common), that is NOT blackface, so the comparison doesn’t work.

>where the potential white actor who naturally has those attributes and would be qualified for that ad, is discriminated against and made a mockery of, by this �white face�

Where, EVER, do you see this happening? There are so few minority representations in advertising, TV, movies, etc. that are NOT stereotypes that minority actors notoriously have a more difficult time. The DEFAULT for casting, if no race is specified, is still generally white. I don’t think many white actors are losing roles because an African-American woman dyed her HAIR blond.
Count 210 on February 9th, 2007 1:31 pm

DF,

�One reason black face was wrong is it took away jobs from blacks who could have been in those roles in terms of the entertainment industry.�

Putting aside for the moment your logic in formulating this opinion, the opening words in your statement are �One reason.� Not �the only reason,� �not the main reason,� �not the reason that subverts all others pertaining to such,� but you used �One reason.� All I can say is wow.

This logic is the equivalent of: �Doctor, doctor, this soldier is bleeding everywhere! He has a severe gunshot wound to his stomach, and a splinter in his right pinky.�

�Then let�s fix it! Quick bring me the tweezers.�

�But Doctor, what about the bullet hole?!?�

�You see that�s why I�m the Doctor and you�re the assistant, this SPLINTER is ONE reason this soldier is bleeding!!�

Now as for your analogy in regards to, �Is it �white face� for someone who is black to dye their hair blond? and to wear green or blue colored contact lenses?�

It would rather be more accurate to equate a black person dying one�s hair to blonde, with a white person �dying� their skin in a tanning booth. A black person wearing colored contacts could be equated to a white person getting collagen lip injections. So by these comparisons, you tell me?

In my opinion, logically creating a �white face� parallel would require a more malicious and extreme assumption that would deeply offend, mock, embarrass and generalize white people to the point of damage to their image and heritage. For the sake of taste, I will not expound any examples. However, I think we all know what others COULD express to �paint� any group of people a certain way. Once again your argument is flawed in its assumptions.
Sewere on February 9th, 2007 2:01 pm

Lyonside,

Again, much props to you ( )for taking the energy to respond to people who are more than happy to share their ignorance of black folk… people who if you scratch the surface enough have never lived and shared community with black folk but are all but willing to make pronouncements of us…. but they now enough because of what they see on TV… oh and what they probably never talk about with their one black friend from work.
Michael on February 10th, 2007 3:34 am

Lyonside said,
February 9, 2007 @ 12:33 pm

DF: Do you really think that blackface/minstrelsy of Vaudeville and its ilk took QUALITY ROLES away from blacks? They were charicatures and buffoons, overall, and they reinforced racist stereotypes against blacks.

Although I agree with your basic premise here, I would like to make a comment regarding Black actors in vaudeville and early films. While I regret the fact that they were limited in the roles they played I would say that the genius of some of these individuals showed through. Bill Bojangles” Robinson brought amazing talent and dignity to his roles. One of my favorites which I watched on the late night movies was the great Mantan Morelan . I would argue that many of the great comics in the early TV era borrowed from him. Obviously there were many more.

It is also true that black face denied many actors from getting jobs . This fact was used by many who objected to a non Asian playing the role of ” the engineer” in the play Ms Saigon . It was quite an issue when the play opened in London .
Lyonside on February 10th, 2007 7:39 pm

Michael: That is true, and I was actually thinking of mentioning black entertainers who actually donned blackface to make themselves “Acceptable” to white audiences… but I was thinking it would miss the point.

But yeah, there was real stage talent that developed (and not all vaudeville was blackface and vice versa, let’s make that clear - every group was fair game, and a lot of people on stage were making fun of their own groups (”Jewface” being one of them, which was popular with Jewish audiences (!).
Ann on February 10th, 2007 8:13 pm

Another aspect of so-called blackface, is that yes, it was started as racist caricature of black people. Many white performers during the early stages of minstrelsy earned much money at the expense of making fun of and stereotyping black citizens.

Black men who desired to break into vaudville/show business saw that there was money to be earned in minstrelsy, even though they knew that this type of racist entertainment degraded the image of black people.

But, even in this racist entertainment, black men were shut out of jobs they aspired to, because they had to resort to performing in a medium that made a mockery of black culture and black people, but, only if the black men under all the greasepaint were thought to be white men.

Knowing that many white audience members expected only white performers to perform minstrelsy, black performers had to be careful so as not to be found out to be “black-men-performing-as-white-men-performing-blackface-minstrelsy.”

Ironic isn’t it?

That on the one hand, black men had to stoop to performing a racist degrading form of entertainment just to survive, but, on the other hand, if found out to be a black man performing minstrelsy instead of a white man, the black performers would have been more than run out of town on a rail.

“This fact was used by many who objected to a non Asian playing the role of � the engineer� in the play Ms Saigon . It was quite an issue when the play opened in London .”

And as to a white actor playing an Asian role and having it cause an uproar, why not?

For decades white actors played roles that should have gone to black actors (i.e., Jeanne Crain, who played a light-skinned black woman in the movie “Pinky” and Susan Kohner, who played a light-skinned black woman in the movie, “Imitation of Life”.)

White actors have been getting away with murder playing roles that should have gone to a more qualified non-white actor.

So, a black or non-white qctor who gets angry at a white playing a role that can go to a qualified non-white, has just cause to be upset.
Blackface at William Jewell College and KKK costume at Macalester College at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture on February 11th, 2007 11:24 am

[...] The latest in the rash of racist incidents sweeping across college campuses come from William Jewell College in Liberty, Missouri (hat tip to Rachel) and Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota. [...]
Charlotte on February 11th, 2007 6:08 pm

I THINK YOU ALL HAVE MISSED THE POINT. Mariana and Daniel Pearl were about loving all people. That is why a Jewish Reporter ended up in a Muslim world in the first place. Mariane Pearl is Bi-Radial Spanish mixed with Black (not a black woman); married to a Jewish white man and her son is Multi Racial. Angelina has a multi cultural family. What is with you guys reverse prejudice is just as bad a prejudice.
Ann on February 11th, 2007 7:22 pm

“Another aspect of so-called blackface, is that yes, it was started as racist caricature of black people. Many white performers during the early stages of minstrelsy earned much money at the expense of making fun of and stereotyping black citizens.”

The above comment had its essence lost due to some of my comment being left out.

The paragraph should have read:

In addition to their racist caricatures that demeaned and stereotyped black Americans, white performers raked in money at the expense of making fun of and insulting black people with coon shows, watermelon-eating contests, and the slurring and exaggerating of black dialect.
Lyonside on February 11th, 2007 8:49 pm

PSSST, Charlotte, I think you posted in the wrong thread… I can’t find a comment here that talks about Marianne Pearle. But I would at some other point love to hear how being part black is not black, and why… Or why Jolie should be making her skin darker to play a role, if color DOESN’T matter…after all, it’s just acting. But this thread is not the place…
FireChicken on April 1st, 2009 4:23 am

I just ran across this article two year later after it was published and I still find it hilarious that William Jewell is still dealing with this reverse prejudice so many years later after I graduated from this fine institution. Black face paint. Oh no! Such an atrocity! Give me a break!!! Are you not above that? Where is your pride in yourselves as a person? What if i called you a nigger? Would you be less of a person? Of course not. I would just be ignorant.

Live you life to the fullest. You have everything avaiable to you and you worry about the most insignificant things that do not matter at the end of the day. Be proud of your person and not the color of your skin! It does not define you. What is inside of you does! Peace…The Fire Chicken