Menestras del Negro

[Me Myself]

https://www.google.com/search?q=men...9%2F04%2Flas-menestras-del-negro.html;300;225

Thats a very famous place of eating in Guayaquil Ecuador.

The translation of the name would be something like

Menestras del negro= beans,lentils,grains of the black (man)

The word negro literally means black and in another context it would simply mean black, but in this one it is understood as a black person.

The logo of course is a black person as if from some tribe or similar. A pretty recognisable way of representing a black person while emphasising it's race. (Caricaturized, as logos tend to be)

In your opinion, is this offensive to black people? If so, why?

 

[oldbadger]

https://www.google.com/search?q=men...9%2F04%2Flas-menestras-del-negro.html;300;225

Thats a very famous place of eating in Guayaquil Ecuador.

The translation of the name would be something like

Menestras del negro= beans,lentils,grains of the black (man)

The word negro literally means black and in another context it would simply mean black, but in this one it is understood as a black person.

The logo of course is a black person as if from some tribe or similar. A pretty recognisable way of representing a black person while emphasising it's race. (Caricaturized, as logos tend to be)

In your opinion, is this offensive to black people? If so, why?

I don't know. I probably do make mistakes about such things, and so if I am in doubt I leave out words that might be upsetting to any.

Over here, in the UK, we have a word for citizens of the USA, and we (amongst ourselves) don't think that this word is offensive, but I have never seen it written on this site....... so I'll bet that it is offensive to USA citizens.

So if it's in doubt....... leave it out!! . :yes:

 

[Me Myself]

I don't know. I probably do make mistakes about such things, and so if I am in doubt I leave out words that might be upsetting to any.

Over here, in the UK, we have a word for citizens of the USA, and we (amongst ourselves) don't think that this word is offensive, but I have never seen it written on this site....... so I'll bet that it is offensive to USA citizens.

So if it's in doubt....... leave it out!! . :yes:

I am not following.

I am in a debate forum, I find the subject similar to the thing with the resskins of sometng something that are a sports team in US.

Menestras del Negro has a logo which is a caricature of a black tribe person, so I am asking what are people's opinion on it.

 

[oldbadger]

.

I am not following.

Not following? You asked:- In your opinion, is this offensive to black people?

I answered:- If in doubt, leave it out.

I am in a debate forum

Good for you!
But which part of 'If in any doubt, leave it out' did you have difficulty in understanding?

 

[apophenia]

Over here, in the UK, we have a word for citizens of the USA, and we (amongst ourselves) don't think that this word is offensive, but I have never seen it written on this site....... so I'll bet that it is offensive to USA citizens.

So if it's in doubt....... leave it out!! . :yes:

Out of respect for your attitude I won't say it, even though I don't think it is offensive to anyone, but do you mean Noisy Wank ? The Perpetually Cranky ?

 

[apophenia]

https://www.google.com/search?q=menestras+del+negro&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=76dhUsWSKpOv4AOQwYHIDA#facrc=_&imgrc=1hzSzqti0qh8GM%3A%3BV_B1ejWqcJJmsM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252F4.bp.blogspot.com%252F_7m0NN3A-910%252FSffZATM5QiI%252FAAAAAAAAAAk%252F8Ep0LwNIXNY%252Fs320%252Fecuador-food-300x225.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Femprendedoresecuatorianos.blogspot.com%252F2009%252F04%252Flas-menestras-del-negro.html%3B300%3B225

Thats a very famous place of eating in Guayaquil Ecuador.

The translation of the name would be something like

Menestras del negro= beans,lentils,grains of the black (man)

The word negro literally means black and in another context it would simply mean black, but in this one it is understood as a black person.

The logo of course is a black person as if from some tribe or similar. A pretty recognisable way of representing a black person while emphasising it's race. (Caricaturized, as logos tend to be)

In your opinion, is this offensive to black people? If so, why?

I would expect that many American black people would find the graphic offensive, because it is clearly derived from the days of 'blackface' in theatre and movies, when colored people were portrayed as foolish clown figures. I would be uncomfortable with it myself, for that same reason.

 

[Falvlun]

Whoa. I would say their image of the black man is pretty racist.

Without that caricature, I would say it was fine.

 

[Me Myself]

I would expect that many American black people would find the graphic offensive, because it is clearly derived from the days of 'blackface' in theatre and movies, when colored people were portrayed as foolish clown figures. I would be uncomfortable with it myself, for that same reason.

Whoa. I would say their image of the black man is pretty racist.

Without that caricature, I would say it was fine.

Would you be surprised to hear the name comes from one of the owners, who was called by his friends "el negro" ? Well, that was the original owner, but the logo has been such since it's start.

Would you say the black original owner was being racist by allowing such logo? Did so with a grudge and against his will? Maybe he hates his race?

 

[Me Myself]

Seriously, was the black owner racist for wanting that logo?

Are you sure you dont want to think maybe its just a cartoon and the offense is put by others, not by the cartoonist nor the one that comisdioned it?

Maybe we are just wired to pretend that must be racist?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

https://www.google.com/search?q=men...9%2F04%2Flas-menestras-del-negro.html;300;225

Thats a very famous place of eating in Guayaquil Ecuador.

The translation of the name would be something like

Menestras del negro= beans,lentils,grains of the black (man)

The word negro literally means black and in another context it would simply mean black, but in this one it is understood as a black person.

The logo of course is a black person as if from some tribe or similar. A pretty recognisable way of representing a black person while emphasising it's race. (Caricaturized, as logos tend to be)

In your opinion, is this offensive to black people? If so, why?

It can be. I'm not familiar with the racial implications of the culture and therefore remain ignorant if this has any subtexts that goes beyond the simple representation of what appears to be a cultural food and the race that is normally associated with the culture.

For example is it offensive for a mexican resturant to have a drawing of a mexican girl/man or have mexican style architecture along with the tacos/burritos/chalupas ect? Or what about a Japanese man/woman with a Japanese resturant?

Now if its a returant called "beaners" that has a racially charged picture of a hispanic individual and the theme of the resturant is bean based food like bean-burritos and refried beans then yes its racist and offensive. However without actually knowing that "beaners" is a racist term for hispanics we wouldn't know that it was racist. I could have assumed that it was mexican food with a basis in bean-style cuisine.

 

[Me Myself]

An image such as that one, cannot be racist.

It would be racist to thi all black people are smiling tribesman, but it isot racist to make a cartoon about a smiling black tribesman. There is nothing racist about it actually.

Its only racist if you choose to believe that the artist or/and the restaurant says all black people are tribesmen.

 

[Falvlun]

Would you be surprised to hear the name comes from one of the owners, who was called by his friends "el negro" ? Well, that was the original owner, but the logo has been such since it's start.

Would you say the black original owner was being racist by allowing such logo? Did so with a grudge and against his will? Maybe he hates his race?

The concept of what is racist evolves over time. At the time of the original owner, this may have been a common and normal representation of a black man, and he might therefore have thought nothing of it.

But times change. Now, blackface theatre is considered to be distasteful. "Negro" has gone out of fashion. The Jim Crow laws are a thing of the past. Hence, the immediate, visceral response I had to that image-- it looks like something from the 1950s. Pretty characteristic racist stuff.

I don't think the owner hated his race. He was merely a man of his time.

 

[dust1n]

I am not following.

I am in a debate forum, I find the subject similar to the thing with the resskins of sometng something that are a sports team in US.

Menestras del Negro has a logo which is a caricature of a black tribe person, so I am asking what are people's opinion on it.

The subject would be similar if an Indian started the Redskins.


And the food looks alright.

 

[Me Myself]

The concept of what is racist evolves over time. At the time of the original owner, this may have been a common and normal representation of a black man, and he might therefore have thought nothing of it.

But times change. Now, blackface theatre is considered to be distasteful. "Negro" has gone out of fashion. The Jim Crow laws are a thing of the past. Hence, the immediate, visceral response I had to that image-- it looks like something from the 1950s. Pretty characteristic racist stuff.

I don't think the owner hated his race. He was merely a man of his time.

I wonder how many years old you think he has. They are both around thirty, maybe a bit less.

I never knew anything about blackface theatwr and they likely didnt either.

Its just an exageration of some features of the race, just like with other cartoons of people of other races, and honestly, just like ANY cartoon, sufdenly making cartoons about non whites and exagerating their most prominent features became wrong, while it is the norm in any other form of caricature.

In other words, we "sanctified" something in order to "not be racist" which is honestly ridiculous.

A single character cannot be a form of racism. Very much less can an image of the face of a cartoon ( which barely becomes 3d enough to say its a character anyways)

 

[Me Myself]

The subject would be similar if an Indian started the Redskins.


And the food looks alright.

Yeah that.

Actually, I was going to post about it on the random meaningless thread because sometng enterteining happened to me there. I was on a mall where that place was one of the food places in line. I was looking at their stuff with curiosity as I had eaten there n other times when the person there started saying

"We have * this kinda meat * this kinda meat* this kinda meat* would you like * this kinda meat*? "

Me: * chuckle* " thanks, I am a veg" I say as I keep looking

She says: we also have lettuce!

I thought it was pretty funny that the place is called menestras (something like "grains" ) and the only non meat stuff she imagined to say was lettuce . They have tasty eggs, rice, patacones de verde, avocado, lentils, beans... And she goes "lettuce" xD

Anyways, Before posting about that I noticed the place should be as controversial as the Redskins because they also portray a race by the exageration of features and tribal stuff of how they were before ey were invaded.

 

[dust1n]

Anyways, Before posting about that I noticed the place should be as controversial as the Redskins because they also portray a race by the exageration of features and tribal stuff of how they were before ey were invaded.

Well it's not, presumably because the Spanish, while they did kill many indigenous peoples in South America, and instigated all sorts of forms of slavery in the past, they didn't have the same sort of media depictions that black people have been given in USA. I imagine general Ecuadorians haven't been harping on indignious people in the media and with pictures of them that depict them as incompetent, or lazy, or etc, for like ever. Jeez, Ecuador abolished slavery 14 years before the USA did, and 600,000 people had to die. What... it was something like a century after America did so, Ecuador won their independence from colonization. Yet slavery was abolished three times as quickly, without a war almost entirely built on the economics of that subject.

 

[Me Myself]

Well it's not, presumably because the Spanish, while they did kill many indigenous peoples in South America, and instigated all sorts of forms of slavery in the past, they didn't have the same sort of media depictions that black people have been given in USA. I imagine general Ecuadorians haven't been harping on indignious people in the media and with pictures of them that depict them as incompetent, or lazy, or etc, for like ever. Jeez, Ecuador abolished slavery 14 years before the USA did, and 600,000 people had to die. What... it was something like a century after America did so, Ecuador won their independence from colonization. Yet slavery was abolished three times as quickly, without a war almost entirely built on the economics of that subject.

Sounds like you know way more about ecuadorian history than I do

We do have some racial jokes here and there in comedy. Different stereotypes of race are used, but they arent particularly worst or better than other stereotypes.

In a popular comedy show called "not life not direct" (trasnlated of course) there was a black character that was a sort of genie with vry marked "black" accent and a big afro. Other actor (which is black in real life, no paint or anything) regularly played as the big black guy that raped people (never oair of course, and alwasy men) . Of course you had stereotypes of blondes, of rich people ( which are gay and weak and spoiled),of politicians, of cops, etc. It simply wasnt personal, just cheap two bucks humour.

So sure, we have had all types of stereotypes going around on cheap comedy. We just either laugh or change channel if we find it boring. I personally never liked ecuadorian TV, then again I would fit a lot of the stereotypes of the gay weak affeminate rich person of the show.

Actually, I d say if anyone got it half bad on those comedies were gay people.

 

[Curious George]

Reminds me of Sambo's and many people did take offense.

I don't think I would boycott the restaurant nor would I boycott a Redskins game. I personally do not find either term offensive. However, I certainly understand and respect why some people do.

 

[apophenia]

Would you be surprised to hear the name comes from one of the owners, who was called by his friends "el negro" ? Well, that was the original owner, but the logo has been such since it's start.

Would you say the black original owner was being racist by allowing such logo? Did so with a grudge and against his will? Maybe he hates his race?



Seriously, was the black owner racist for wanting that logo?

Are you sure you dont want to think maybe its just a cartoon and the offense is put by others, not by the cartoonist nor the one that comisdioned it?

Maybe we are just wired to pretend that must be racist?

Whoa !
This has a 'bait and switch' feel to it.
The OP asked ...

In your opinion, is this offensive to black people? If so, why?

I answered that it would probably be offensive to black Americans because the logo is stylistically of the 'blackface' form.

Now you are responding with ...

Are you sure you dont want to think maybe its just a cartoon and the offense is put by others, not by the cartoonist nor the one that comisdioned it?

That is two different issues.

Sure, there are racial caricatures of all races. We have lots of Italian 'Luigis' and 'Marios' selling pasta and fronting video games, and eskimos selling icecream, and whatever.

But you asked if this might be offensive and why, and you got a reasonable answer - the image is clearly of the form that made blacks in America look foolish and inferior during the time of 'blackface' theatre, a time when most black movie actors played waiters with huge eyes for comic relief, because blacks were not to be taken seriously - whether the artist was a racist or not.

I cannot and do not believe that you don't get that.

That, as you have pointed out, does not mean that the restaurant owner intended a racist slur.

But that is not what the OP asked. So it seems you are setting us up for some righteous indignation here. I feel like you are 'having a loan of me' to make your point.

 

[Falvlun]

I wonder how many years old you think he has. They are both around thirty, maybe a bit less.

That does surprise me, as the image is so stereotypical of an earlier time period.

If I'm reading this correctly, it appears that the restaurant was first opened in 1998.

Menestras del Negro abre su primer local ubicado en Roca y Av. 6 de Diciembre, en octubre de 1998.

(source)

I never knew anything about blackface theatwr and they likely didnt either.

Ignorance doesn't make a particular word or characterization un-racist. It just means the person didn't know that it was racist.

However, as dust1n mentioned, this might be a cultural thing. Most Americans, due to our history, will likely find such an image distasteful and racist. Ecuadorians might not have the same visceral (or programmed) response.

What constitutes a racist depiction may not necessarily be universal.

Its just an exageration of some features of the race, just like with other cartoons of people of other races, and honestly, just like ANY cartoon, sufdenly making cartoons about non whites and exagerating their most prominent features became wrong, while it is the norm in any other form of caricature.

There are cartoons with black people in it that do not strike me as racist. Or at least, they do not utilize imagery from a very racist time in our nation's history, that has symbolically become heavily associated with racism.

In other words, we "sanctified" something in order to "not be racist" which is honestly ridiculous.

Nope. We neither sanctified, nor is it ridiculous to realize that some depictions are racist.

A single character cannot be a form of racism. Very much less can an image of the face of a cartoon ( which barely becomes 3d enough to say its a character anyways)

Now this is ridiculous. There is nothing barring a depiction from being racist.

Here is a website linking to images from the Ferris State Jim Crow Museum. It might be informative for you to peruse these in order to better understand why these depictions are racist, and particularly, why an American would think so.

Anti-Black Imagery