To think Black Out nights in theatre ARE important

[PenguinLord]

I know there was a theatre that did it last year and a thread about it- but there is a West End venue this year which will host two or three black out nights (where "all-black-identifying audiences" are invited) of the Slave Play. I had mixed feelings, but after having read a few articles on it, I actually agree with the concept- for the record I am very much white.

Spokesperson for the PM criticised black out nights saying "“The prime minister is a big supporter of the arts and he believes that the arts should be inclusive".

But let's face it, theatre experience is far from inclusive or accessible. Having 2 out of a few dozen nights will not really make a difference, nor excludes people who are not black to attend literally 80 if not more other performances. I was in theatre this week, and had a good look around. 98% of the audience were white. There were a few Asian people and 1 (one) black person- in the audience of around 300.

I suppose Id be far less likely to attend an event where I would stick out like a very sore thumb, is it really such a big deal to have two performances where people who dont usually feel theatre is an inclusive space can feel welcome, surrounded by people that belong to the same community?

There are times when white people do provide an unsafe space to black people. This is not an act of segregation, it is about providing a safe space to those who the show is actually about and even then, you can go if you want to.
To segregate, one of power would have to stop someone else of less power, doing something that everyone else can do. Literally exactly not what is happening here!

Still not related to white privilege.

I don't think anyone is arguing in favour of segregating spaces in general. The whole point is that it may be appropriate because if the particular subject matter.

As for the question of whether white people may make a space "unsafe"...I think it's more about the concept of psychological safety in this particular instance.

@valensiwalensi

I just don't get the idea that having a certain skin colour gives some general societal privelege. Possibly historically but not now.

You really need to do some research into it before offering your opinion again.

You very clearly don't get what white privilege is on a systemic level, and your posts show it.

It absolutely goes on now.

Maybe go away and read up on what white privilege actually means?

The fact that you are too ignorant to "get it" doesn't negate the fact that it's real.

I am not saying this is a win/win because there is nothing for someone else to lose. White peoples lose nothing by deciding not to go to this event on these specific nights, if you feel like you do, then you can go.

There have been Jewish shows that have been provided for a Jew specific audience, someone linked up thread. If you don’t think it’s necessary then don’t go. Surely, you can understand why some Jewish would like to go and would feel that that would be a safe space?

Nobody is saying that only blacks can understand the pain of slavery. But surely, if I told you as a non Jewish person that I understand the holocaust completely and don’t understand why you think it something personal to you, that resonates with you in a different way, you would think I was a twit? Surely, if I said that the Jewish experience is not unique to Jewish people and we should move past it, you would think I was quite anti-Semitic?

Yes, 4. I don’t think that’s many.

And me too.

Incredibly divisive and patronising. Mumsnet is full of white virtue-signalling ‘right on’ women who like to infantilise people of colour, but anyone with the ability to think critically would see what a slippery slope this is, and how dangerous. Black people aren’t a different species, with special black fragility which means they can’t breathe the same air as white people while watching something in the dark, with lights off FFS.

It’s such bigotry of low expectations. And it’s racist. You can’t just say people can’t or shouldn’t go to something because of their skin colour, or any other immutable characteristic. Where the hell does that lead? Where does it ever end?

How have we gone so far backwards in such a short space of time - bringing back segregation and calling it progressive? It’s never been a better time to be black in the UK - a very inconvenient truth for those who want constant division. Something we’re not allowed to comment on, let alone celebrate.

The recent play was specifically about the black American experience too, not the British one.

Have just seen someone above talk about ‘psychological safety’. What arrant nonsense and infantilisation. Jeez, some people have had their brains turned to mush by the desire to virtue-signal.

Any being allowed is the issue here

If the country is bad enough we allow people to settle here to escape, how can anyone sit with a straight face and say it’s acceptable to house other asylum seekers there.

And that’s not even getting into the most ridiculous part which is we’d pay more per person to have them in Rwanda compared to housing them here and processing their claim.

And yet these nights are always a roaring success……

How is it racist or infantilising towards black people to sat that, they, rather than white people, are best placed to decide whether Black Out nights are appropriate or not?

It's completely ridiculous. Anyone of an6 colour can go any night. If they choose not to then so be it.

@WomensRightsRenegade That really is complete bollocks, you know.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege

I did read this to try and gain some insight into white privilege but I do think that ars some omissions to the concept which undemines it

Privelege is present within all societies and within all ethnicities. We have the white oppression of the British Raj counterbalanced by a caste system which effectively entrenched privelege within one ethnicity.

We limit white privilege to Western societies and that in a way negates privelege (often unearned) in some African countries e.g. Zimbabwe under the rule of Mugabe.

The definition of whiteness becomes opaque and in order to define whiteness there are obvious complexities. The idea of skin colour giving hidden advantages would do a great disservice to Jews in 30s Europe for example.

If we start to dismiss certain kinds of whiteness from being white (what is the difference between being white and deemed white) then I think we ultimately get back to class and background being the ultimate deteminator of privilege.

The privilege that white people are deemed to have stands relative to the ethnicity of the non white person. Where is the white privilege when comparing white people to Japanese people for instance.

A lot of Spanish people are non white but their descendants would probably be viewed as propagators of white privelege due to the colonisation of South America.

We have such blurring of the definitions of white and non white the theory creeks at the seams.

White privilege in this context is like male privilege in gender politics. It means you have an advantage because society is set up for you. It means you are in a position to make room for parts of the community without losing anything yourself.

How do you define white? Does white extend to all descendents of colonist European nations because you have to include a whole range of skin tones?

So what’s the alternative? People moan when they are put in barracks, shipping containers etc so to ease the strain we process somewhere who has the capacity to house them.
We also pay France to help and that fails.

@StormingNorman

But society is set up for the priveleged per se and there are many factors to privelege other than skin tone

The alternative is for the tories to pull their finger out and process claims efficiently. We take 8x longer than any other comparable nation to process asylum claims.

I think the term 'white privilege' is a sloganistic term to try and embrace the social historical of colonisation. As colonisation was embarked on by the majority of European nations then you have to extend white to of European descent as some colonizing nations weren't white (e.g. Spanish). You therefore have to expand white to white and those deemed white and it seems quite an arbitary.

What I think is meant is a privilege bestowed on any peoples that have historically benfitted from an oppressive relation with another race and that is a lot more complex than simply being 'white'.

Asylum applications are up over 400% from 2017. They obviously haven’t put money towards recruitment.
Even labour were mulling off shore processing