To think Black Out nights in theatre ARE important

The Times - 2*
Daily Mail - 1*
Telegraph - 3*
Sunday Times - 2*

I think those nine ratings constitutes mixed reviews.

Still, as turgid and patronising as the play seems to be, Kit Harrington gets naked, so maybe I’ll see it after all.

The reviews have been mixed. I wouldn’t be surprised if it closed early.

Try again.

Do the people objecting to a safe space for black people, also object to safe spaces for women?

This is why some black women feel left out of feminism. White women can't even acknowledge racism. Like it doesn't exist.

Tried to delete

Black people are vulnerable to white people. That's the point. Still vulnerable. It is not always safe to be black around white people.

Bloody hell.

The history of South Africa, and really good analysis of that history, is freely available almost everywhere.

It would be worth researching a bit before posting about the country.

A similar situation happens in Europe with Germany and Eastern Europe. There is a lot of racism against Polish, Ukrainian, Lithuanian people etc. Does it mean that they can't be successful? No, some will make careers for themselves and do well. But jokes about Polish car thieves told on national TV by well known presenters are happening.

But they are all white? So, in Germany (following on from your example) there will be class, immigrant, migrant, colour and religious problems, with the larger resident group looking down on, blocking, or being racist against the newer incoming groups or existing groups of different colour, class or creed.

In any country where there is a majority of sameness - that group will have the privilege surely.

I mean, every country in the world will have that play out including in Black majority countries. The majority group will have the privillage. In Germany they will be White. In Ghana they will be Black.

No kidding!

The end of apartheid happened some time ago yet successive government's haven't addressed the economic problems of the country.

There is wealth disparity but the there can't be accusations is systemic racism in a country which is majority black Athe point is a lot of south Africans are now wanting a much more class based perspective in wealth inequality. There is also a feeling if all South Africans viewed themselves as a common people then it would be helpful in leaving the past behind

This is an outrageously under-informed post. And surely it’s not that hard to grasp that a system that had at various points restricted access to political, social and economic status on racial grounds, removed the Black right to vote or sit in parliament, had rules about what races were allowed to have sexual relationships with one another, and caused some of the largest scale mass evictions in history to the ‘homelands’, and which was only dismantled in the 1990s, is going to take a long time to recover from?

I won’t comment on your ‘friend’s bias.

I really think you need to read up on South African history

I was talking to a cousin o of mine ('white') from South Africa about the concept of white privilege and he basically said in South Africa the term has morphed into the politics of resentment. SA is a country where all the cabinet are black and all the major inistitutions , judiciary, police etc. are dominated by people of colour. In theory there is certainly no white privilege in SA in the sense people here want to define it. This is a nation that is 80% poc.

However there are many that cling onto a philosophy akin to white privilege to excuse the large amounts of poverty, crime and unemployment within the country. In general it appears many of the white people are more economically wealthy and the wealth can't be explained by government policy or racial dominance as apartheid ended many years ago. White privilege which did exist 50 years ago has morphed into resentment.

Why would there be any need for a "white only" audience?
What would be the reasoning behind it, why would it be of benefit?

Woulld never be allowed.

Excellent answer. Top notch conversational skills. Not.

If YOU had “bothered to read” the fucking thread you’d see I was on it earlier.

Of course I’ve read the thread. In parts it’s been thought provoking from both sides but mainly just a bun fight.

Your hostile reply is a perfect example of why there’s never any useful outcome to controversial issues like this. All that ever happens is people get aggro with anyone who dares question their view.

I was asking a genuine question - as I explained earlier I’m very open to the idea that I’m missing something. As I also explained earlier I’m autistic and sometimes see things as black and white (no pun intended!). It’s helpful listening to views because I miss nuance sometimes.

But never mind, you carry on being irrationally aggro at someone who was just trying to be part of the discussion, and genuinely asking a question to try and understand a different viewpoint.

Fucking hell 🙄

Well I guess that’s part of the bigger question isn’t it?

Why DO black people feel unable to watch a play with white people in the room?

No.
That's not what I asked.
Why answer a question with yet another question?
Have you even bothered to read the thread?

Well I guess that’s part of the bigger question isn’t it?

Why DO black people feel unable to watch a play with white people in the room?

And that’s where I struggle with this a bit.

I’m all in favour for initiatives to reach audience that might face barriers - but in this case they’ve asked other groups (ie/white people) not to attend.

I said this earlier - there are often showings aimed towards neurodivergent people. The showings are promoted to be inclusive but at no point are other groups asked NOT to attend. Thats where I think these showings marketed to black people are different - they’ve specifically asked other groups not to come along, which is why several posters have said it feels divisive. Because it is.

I think nights encouraging black audiences are brilliant and there should be more initiatives. But not if they’re framed like this.

So back to the original question - why are white people specifically being told to stay away? Slavery is relevant to many groups but black people in the U.K. don’t have a recent history with it that would make it directly personal and relevant (compared to Jewish people and the Holocaust, for example). The play explores biracial relationships so while it’s really important to reach black people, surely there’s space for white people in the room too - particularly given the fact the play directly addresses biracial interaction?

The only reason that I can see for white people being told not to attend to create a “safe space” - is because somehow all white people are being viewed as colonial aggressors and shouldn’t be involved in conversations about slavery. That’s certainly the undertone.

And again for emphasis, great to encourage black peoples to attend with dedicated nights. Just don’t tell other groups to stay away.

The arrogance of it!
Why are you so bothered at people who are black maybe wanting to watch a play without white people around?
Why does it bother you so much?

The play is about slavery. Racism does not stem from slavery! It may well be a huge factor in it but it exists whether there was slavery or not. The whole premise of the inlcusion or exclusion here is that the people they think they're excluding have not suffered slavery in their family history. You cannot tell that from looking at someone. Most black people in the world are not descended from the American slaves so not all black people have slaves in their ancestry by a large majority. Also some white people have slaves in their ancestry. There are also many people in this country who are not black and not white either. Someone of Indian descent or Arab descent for example? They may be descended from slave holders or not as well. Are they allowed in or not? What about mixed heritage people? Who judges their background? The arrogance of it! The whole premise makes no damn sense.

This drives me mad. People get abuse in the street for all kinds of reasons; because of any factor that makes them different. This can be age, sex, sexual orientation, race, disability, religion, looks (being both good looking or the opposite can get you the wrong kind of attention) and class. Being very tall can get abuse shouted at you or being very small. Limping, lisping, not speaking English (or Welsh) as your first language, your school uniform, your work uniform, your social culture, football club, music culture, being a Goth, tattoos, short skirt, headscarf or no headscarf, your politics, not being very bright, being too bright in the wrong place, being in the wrong place at the wrong time, having parents that don't look after you, having parents who look after you in an area where that's odd, being sexually promiscuous, being an apostate to your religion, standing up to bullies, giving evidence to the police/courts, joining the police, being a teacher off the premises confronted with kids from your school, having been in prison...

The list goes on and on. Priviledge is meaningless, unless you want to make yourself feel better by claiming you have it.