Hyde Park 29th May 12pm

I may be one of them. If it was you that repeatedly suggested taking this to the Black MNers board. I 'explained' why too. I expect that having tried to explain denuded my post of meaning!

My point is really simple. Yes. Stripped of all context, it could easily be seen as racism. But in context, a context all present were aware of, it was, at best, ill judged with hindsight.

My question is does context ever matter? Had the TRAs worn camo kit we wouldn't be here. But they didn't, and we are!

As has been explained, that is because he was referencing both the Manchester crowd and the man excusercising for them on a TV interview - and added pampers.

Explaining that isn't saying it cannot be seen as racist. It is simply explaining why he did that. Supplying the direct reference points.

Again, it's the people he was taking the piss out of that wore all back, a black curly wig as a disguise. Have you taken them to task?

@SamphirethePogoingStickerist there are multiple comments here saying it looks nothing like blackface and that Wendi and I are racist to even suggest it.

The white nappy makes it clear that it is black skin being represented.

What do you want? Yes, I can see that someone wearing an all black body suit including mask could look like they were being racist. I haven't said otherwise. I don't think anyone here has said otherwise. I've just said, like others have said, that racism wasn't the reason Mr Menno was dressed up like that.

But you seem to take 'explanation' to mean something else, ignoring, refuting and being racist.

I have also asked if you, personally, have taken the TRAs at Manchester to task for doing the same? Nobody seems to want to do that though!

I agree the TRAs were threatening.
Can you not see how this looks like blackface whatever you say the intention was?

You're making that up as you go along now. Just as you are overstating / misrepresenting some of what has been said here.

Explaining the reasons he did what he did is not doubling down and refusing to see anything.

I saw the original TRAs .in Manchester as threatening. I saw Mr Menno ridiculing them.

When it was suggested he was being racist I too explained the root of his appearance, piss taking M/TRAs. I didn't expect to be told "So what? It's still racist because the USUAL MN whitewash" etc etc.

I thought it was possible to be able to discuss it and see that whilst offence may have been caused it was not offered, not deliberate.

But no, any explanation, discussion, lack of immediate contrition is labelled racist and that is that.

OK. You have made your point. You have explained that it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks or says. I get it. We do not agree. Could you accept that we won't agree and move on? Or is that not good enough?

He even created a large mouth area so it looks like the classic blackface.

He didn't do it deliberately so it looked like "classic blackface", that's a huge reach. He did it so he could speak easily. Unless you have some other evidence that he's a massive racist? The "Black Pampers" thing was supported by plenty of the people on our side who are now condemning KJK, btw.

If the comedian had dressed like those protestors we would not be here. He even created a large mouth area so it looks like the classic blackface.

It may not have been deliberate blackface, but I am amazed that no one thought this look combined with the title black pampers would be seen as racist.
And if women had held their hands up and said fine,it was not the intention but we can see how it looks and will delete the pictures and video, fine. Instead nearly everyone has doubled down and insisted there is nothing wrong with the back pampers name and image.

At risk of boring you to tears, has anyone gone out of to Twitter to take those TRAs to task for their sartorial choices?

No? Just here then!

I don't believe that Mr Menno was doing blackface. It was based on the TRAs and the idiot who spoke to Piers Morgan. I understand that some black people found it offensive and I can see why (especially with the amount of bad faith stirring going on) but I don't think it was deliberate. Just my opinion.

And in Britain there is a large black feminist movement that operates almost totally separately from the one this board talks about. They don't engage in or excuse blackface. They are separate for good reasons.

Wendi totally agree. Every time I point out racism i am told I am racist.
You would think women who argue so strongly that words meanings matter might apply this principle more widely. They don't.

I'm not saying all white people are victims. I'm saying I'm going to challenge misogynistic slurs as and when they occur. It has zero to do with race, for me. Having a special word for middle aged women who don't accept shit from people is misogyny. We all know full well it's not mostly used for racists in the U.K. The race spin its been given in America is a recent addition. Nice try though.

Maybe so. Going to continue to challenge misogyny, on the feminist board, though. Hope that clears things up.

You've missed a few references to things that have happened in the real world.

Alison Bailey's tribunal for example.

How is a man wearing a black balaclava and a black hoodie racist?

I put it to the posters above that THEY are the real racists here!