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??

but will now fuck off (Promise).

don't have any more to contribute I suspect, now that we are going down the "ganging up" route.

Wouldn't like to be accused of bullying.

You know Claw I think you are deliberately being obtuse.

If one had 'white hair' or 'western bride' magazine in India that would be normal, because the magazine is being marketed so as to be easily picked out by its target audience.

In England, where the majority is white, it's daft, and also the magazine companys would lose out a whole load of money if their current non white audience would decide not to buy the magazines. I'd most definitely not buy white hair, as I said before it sounds aimed at little old ladies!

Black Hair and black beauty is not racist, because it is saying (in manageable sound bites) magazine catering for the beauty needs of black women. If it said that would you construe it as racist?

Oh Friar - Oh come on, im only playing toughen up a bit!

But claw your summing up posts do suggest that you have not read, or have diliberately misunderstood the replies you have received.

Of course someone from a minority can be racist. But the existence of a magazine to deal with a minority issue is not racist. Even if it has Black in the title

You keep making the huge leaop that because it exists it therfore must be racist which it is not.

Fuzzy - The question wasnt are 'black' titles racist. The question was if magazines were to title magazines aimed at white people, 'white' whatever, would that be racist.

Fuzzy - Me, obtuse!! Wouldnt be a debate if we were all agreeing with each other now, would it? That would be called a agreeate, or is there no such word DOH me be obtuse again LOL

But the question 'are white titles offensive' was designed to infer that titles including black are therefore racist. Which they are not . They are designed for a specific minority and identify themselves as such.
Identifying their market in the title is not inherently racist - how ever often you say it it simply isn't.

Pagwatch - At no point have i said that magazines with 'black' in them are racist.

I said its pointless, to suggest that unless a title has black in it, black readers wouldnt know it was aimed at them.

I asked whether if magazines had white in them, that would be racist. Most seem to think magazine with the title white in them would be racist.

In england having titles with 'white' in them would be daft, I don't think they'd be racist personally, but utterly pointless and alienate a lot of readers.

Black hair needs to be called black hair, because black beauty products are not mainstream, I've never ever come across weaves, and relaxer (is that what its called?) in tescos, or waitrose, has anyone else? It's more specialised it has smaller target audience, which is why it's called that because most people who are not black would not be interested in buying such a magazine as it would not cater for them.

And as black womens beauty products are not widely catered for, it does not follow that a magazine called simply 'hair' will reach its target audience....there'd also be copy right issues as there is already a magazine called 'hair' which caters for oh wait caucasian hair!!!!

Read this Claw3 its very good.

this

Ping - Agree, lovely titles, Divas, Amina, Eve, Snoop, The Voice, all aimed at minorities. Not a mention of the black whatsoever. There really isnt a need for black to be in the title. Exactly in the same way there isnt any need for white to be in the title.

Claw, if you were in India and all the mags were called, I dont know, Lovely or Fluffy or Woman and they had predominantly Indian models, articles, hair and make up aimed at Indian women with few articles for white western women, would it be ok for you to see a mag aimed at you, a white western woman called White Womans Beauty, or whatever? A small circulation, niche magazine that Indian women would have little interest in as theyare already catered for, and the title is purely trying to show that it is aimed directly at you and others like you.

OK, now this will lead nicely on to a debate about the MOBO awards..........

For the love of God, claw3, why are you so offended by the word 'black'? DEAL WITH IT.

Morespam - I dont know any Country that has magazines entitled 'white' anything do you?

Why do you think that is?

Mrsmattie - why are you so offended by the word 'white' deal with it.

Why do you object to magazines having "Black" in the title?

I think this thread does raise interesting questions about how to deal with people who are either not capable of or simply not willing to listen to reason. Reminds me of the nutty MIL thread.

I'm not. I am white, FGS. I just cannot for the life of me understand what your half witted argument is.

Losing the will to live with this thread.

Right, wine o'clock it is, then...

200 posts down the line and I'm still struggling to see what the point of all this is.

Newsagents and record shop owners - and their suppliers - have always liked easy categorisation. In the 50s, black music was "black and tan"; in the 60s it was "race" music (and, throughout that period, had a separate chart in the US!); the reason being so that record shops could buy what their customers wanted and then group it so that their shop didn't end the day looking like Primark, with stock all over the floor. The categories were offensive and chosen by white suppliers, admittedly - but the reasoning was very clear - give the punters what they want, and suck up the minority's cash rather than let it slip away.

Calling magazines "black" has the same effect. Calling magazines "white", however, would be meaningless, because they cater for a white mainstream. Unless, of course, the implication of "white" is that the magazine is targeted at white supremacists or is forbidden to blacks, in which case the word "white" is meaningful, but racist.

So, yes, in practice, magazines with "white" in the title probably would be racist - but that's not a point of principle, it's an indictment of how society is, so doesn't answer your son's highly principled question.

Still no answer on Jewish Chronicle or Irish Times, claw3 - 3rd time lucky?

And yes, of course non-whites can be racist - but what has that got to do with the world of hair-care publishing?

Well said@ManIFeelLike...

lol at "wine o'clock"!

Saadia - Because there is no need to keep labelling things as black or white things.

Claw3 - out of interest, which countries have you been to to research this issue?

Wales and the isle of wight don't count, I'm afraid.

@ManIFeelLike...