Racist or not?

[claw3]

At our local train station at the weekend with ds 12, he was looking at news stand, while i was getting train tickets.

Anyhow at news stand there was a section which had black magazines ie black hair, black beauty, black music etc, etc. Ds asked me why do black people have their own mags and would it be racist if white people had their own magazines ie white hair, white beauty etc etc.

Your thoughts, would it??

most magazines are full of white models, black models are rarely used.

Well, the situation you describe, "white hair - white beauty" already exists. Magazines are pretty much all full of white models, and aimed at a white audience. Just flick through any fashion mag, and you'll see that it's true. So mags are already racist, I'm afraid.

I think white people do already- they just don't label it as such. This is a really old debate by the way- sorry to sound dismissive, but I am surprised you haven't come across it before.

Read this.

black hair is very different from caucasian hair. and in caucasian, i include people from india. this classification was imparted to me by an experienced hairdresser. so in the case of hair, it isnt racist at all
asain bridal magazines, could be construedas being racist, but it is to do witha different culture, rather than a different colour.

All the other magazines are effectively "white" magazines! With a foot note about makeup for what they seem to call euphemistically "darker skins" if you're lucky. And also black people who have afro type hair need special products and styling, so of course there is a market for special magazines about it.

agree with penthe and stitch. bet the asian bridal magazines have more interesting dresses, not just hundreds of shades of white and cream bodices with meringue skirts

this sounds like the angry letter a local resident sent my daughter when she ran a series of events for black history month at the local youth club

we live in a v white area

still working on ways of stating the bleeding obvious in our reply . . .

It's all to do with whether you're the majority or minority in the mainstream media.

If you are a group that are under-represented in mainstream media you can have your own media, if you are the majority then it is considered racist to exculde minorities.

Haven't read the link (won't load on my PC) but was there any negative connotations? Doesn't seem like it. Racism surely needs to carry a negative implication / vibe whatever to be that, although of course that can be hidden deeply. Is it any different than an Asian food store, for example? Was there a label on the vcover stating ;white woman are barred from buying and sharing the ideas contained within'- of course not.

Multi cultural doesn't mean uni cultural, just where we all get the same level of respect and opportunity, IYSWIM.

White fashion is the mainstream so exclusive mags woulod be seen as alientaing a minority which is where that issue would lie then I think; bit like if there's a mag for people with VI (visual impairment) that would be OK but if a mag came out statimng 'not for VI' it would be wrong. Am I making sense? P{rob not (in my defense small screeching baby clawing at me)

I think most magazines will have some black models in them. If the black magazines are ALL black with NO whites allowed then it's as racist as a magazine while said "no blacks allowed"

You won't get much agreement on here since many believe it's impossible for a non white person to be racist.

Course I'd be ok with black only or white only magazines if the point of the magazine was appearance and not about morals, intelligence etc because of course there IS a difference in appearance. But that would be ok only if it worked both ways which it doesn't

Totally true, what a lot of people are saying that most mags are aimed at white people.

But to actually name a mag white whatever, would this be considered racist?

This sounds like a GCSE sociology question. Is this a joke

Not everything to do with race is racist.

Endless adverts for sunscreen aimed at pale skinned people are not racist.

Magazines are pragmatic because they are commercial. Hair care and style in 'mainstream' mags rarely cover african hair. So these mags cater for a specific interest area.

That's all.

It would be racist if a mainstream mag had a specific 'no black / asian hair or features' policy.

Does any white person here feel opressed or discriminated against because there is a magazine aimed specifically at black issues? (which they could of course freely buy!)

Blu - Totally agree, the term 'white' or 'black' are just stating facts.

I told ds that i wouldnt consider it racist. For him to see it divided into catergories, kinda undermines what i have always told him, that people are people, no matter what colour they are.

But racism is not so straightforward as what is stated on the packet, if you like, claw3. Magazines in the UK don't need to say 'for whites' because it is implied. And what is implicit is what's at stake here.

Agree that mainstream magazines are essentially magazines for 'whites' in all but name.

The other magazines for asians, blacks etc are magazines for a niche market. Nothing racist about that.

totalchaos: "bet the asian bridal magazines have more interesting dresses, not just hundreds of shades of white and cream bodices with meringue skirts". Not being from UK, it is easy to flick through a bridal magazine and come to the conclusion that it is de rigueur for British brides to do the strapless thing. It does not generally suit more petite slim line figures who would be better showcased in a different style. I got my wedding dress made-to-measure in my own design.

Penthesileia - Do you think that who mags are aimed at, is to do with race or are mags just catering for the larger audience?

I think it would be racist for a magazine to declare that it was for a white market. Black/Asian magazines are there purely because these markets are not adequately catered for by the mainstream.

Of course there is an element of 'catering for the larger audience'. I don't deny that. (But even that is 'racist' to a certain extent; as that Indie article demonstrated, UK consumers are 'turned off' by black faces in magazines, and don't buy the product.)

BUT... Let's take Vogue, for example. If you asked someone what Vogue was "about", they'd say 'beauty and fashion'. They wouldn't say 'white beauty and fashion'. Thus - implicitly - people believe that generic, typical, definitive 'beauty and fashion' is white, or dictated by white norms. And people who fall outside this norm are thus considered not beautiful or fashionable. DYSWIM?

Saadia - So would it be considered ok then for a magazine to declare that it was a white market only, in another Country where white is the minority?

Just playing devils advocate

claw as long as there were no derogatory artciles etc why on earth not?

Presumably it would contain info on make up suited to white skin, fair hair etc (and there are brands that specialise in black beauty here- Iman, Afrofresh Uk etc).

After all beuaty mags are basically a marketing exercise: identify demographic, approoach companies targeting demographic, write editorials to appeal to demographic- job do0ne