Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drunks

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Caucasian Seattle Model Paints Herself Black for Local Fashion Shoot

Posted by on Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 4:06 PM

A 23-year old model named Amanda has gone, uh, "full black" for a 7-page fashion spread in the current issue of DList Magazine.

The spread is called "Goddess Adornment". It's featured on page 62 of DList (online, click up to 62 of 84 pages here). Some interesting commentary, and the lead image of the spread right here, on Facebook.

Just wow. Really, just wow...


Comments (230) RSS

Newest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
What a shitshow these comments are - your costume was 10x worse than this model's UNINTENTIONAL "blackface" (no other themes/stereotypes besides she was painted a color) You actually planned that costume out and thought it was a good idea. And for some reason it seems that you're trying to claim the photo was doctored? Screenshots seem to show otherwise. I generally enjoy reading the majority of what you write here... but that photo is so hypocritical and lame.
Posted by Conrad McMasters on September 25, 2013 at 8:11 PM · Report this
Funny how Stranger writers are so quick to criticize others for hypocrisy/racism/whatever -- but when one of their own gets called out, they all just clam up.

The lesson? Blackface is TOTALLY OK if Kelly O and her buddy do it. But if anybody else does a fashion shoot that might even hint at blackface, they're a total racist.
Posted by ian on September 25, 2013 at 9:27 AM · Report this
Hahahahahahabahaha the Stranger is always such a retarded shit-show!
Posted by Slog = Retarded Shit Show on September 25, 2013 at 8:10 AM · Report this
Check out what the model posted...Talk about an idiot...…
Posted by JTM89 on September 24, 2013 at 10:02 AM · Report this
Check out what the model posted...Talk about an idiot...…
Posted by JTM89 on September 24, 2013 at 9:59 AM · Report this
snoopy 225
@224-Caucasian Seattle Model Paints Herself Black for Local Fashion Shoot
I'd rather be happy than right.
Posted by snoopy on September 23, 2013 at 10:27 PM · Report this
@223 you are fooling yourself if you believe that The Stranger views ethics as something that applies to them. Good luck getting an apology from Kelly-O - the rules which she gleefully condemns others for simply don't apply to her.
Posted by fetish on September 23, 2013 at 2:05 PM · Report this
What'd I miss?

The only real sins committed here are:

a) Thoughtlessly using the full weight of a professional media outlet to put one lone individual under the microscope for what a is, in context, very minor offense of being slightly tone deaf. Minor sin.

b) Doing the above without giving that individual or other involved the opportunity to explain themselves before posting creating a one sided "discussion." Minor sin.

c) The tone-trolling and cherry picking innocent turns of phrase to cast them as racist - not only is it an intellectually dishonest manipulative tactic and poor argumentation it's a deflection ploy that betrays the very motives for wanting a "discussion" in the first place. Major sin.

d) Doing all this while the entire time knowingly having at one time in the recent participated in the very racially tone-deaf problem you wished to highlight - and then refusing to discuss that. Minor sin.

e) And then finally worst of all, in terms of journalistic integrity, lying that the photos in question are faked and THEN scrubbing the internet of the very photos that implicated you. VERY MAJOR SIN.

Now all that said: nobody here (other than a hand full of the out-right usual racist trolls) is a bad person or an evil racist. Not Kelly-O. Not Amanda. Nobody is perfect.

But what The Stranger has done is far wore for the integrity and reputation of local journalism than anything in that magazine spread. It may seem small. But things like this can get out of control way to quickly to be taken so glibly by the staff of The Stranger.

Yet ALL of it could be reconciled by one simple real apology and some sort of policy on the use of SLOG as a weaponized tool to shame individuals. We all learn. We all move on. We all win.

Posted by tkc on September 23, 2013 at 12:15 PM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 222
Kelly O got shy all of a sudden.

Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 23, 2013 at 10:18 AM · Report this
"Part of me doesn't even want to react, because this girl wants that attention."

She's a model. They aren't well known for NOT wanting attention.
Posted by LORD ZOD on September 23, 2013 at 8:42 AM · Report this
undead ayn rand 220
Eesh, I just saw that. What a shitty idea. I just met a neighbor that seemed cool, until I saw a photo of them in a blackface halloween costume and lost all respect. Now all I see is a tone-deaf idiot whenever I run into them, no matter how nice they act outside of that one year's "outfit".
Posted by undead ayn rand on September 23, 2013 at 8:24 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 219
I was away for the weekend, so I didn't see the picture of Kelly O with her friend doing black face. Kelly, your hypocrisy is off the charts.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 23, 2013 at 7:49 AM · Report this
undead ayn rand 218
@213: "then it really shouldn't be considered an apology"

It's not. It's tone-trolling.
Posted by undead ayn rand on September 22, 2013 at 3:39 PM · Report this
Posted by igsaaigwarc on September 22, 2013 at 1:34 PM · Report this
Y'all remember those crazy Victoria Liss crusades? On one of them, Dan Savage + the whole Stranger krew not only jumped on the bandwagon, they built the damn party bus witch-burning attack on someone who didn't give her a tip? and *surprise*... they GOT THE WRONG PERSON (again! not Victoria's first time at misplacing blame, although that one didn't lead to JAIL TIME ughhhhh how miserable can a person get)

I used to be a huge fan of The Stranger but have come to realize that certain parts of the "seattle scene" is so sad in all of its impetus, unnecessary and quite frankly illegal attacks on people they subjectively play abysmal moral/ art/ thought police on.... they do this like they're playing games with people's lives, livelihoods, respect and character. and they show absolutely ZERO remorse or human empathy when they SO OBVIOUSLY GOT IT WRONG. I've seen it happen countless times. To be brutally honest, it's pathetic.

the stranger is getting chock full of prime litigation material, but i would gather on a much larger scale.

The deafening silence from The Stranger's Editors, Publishers, and others associated only tell us their implicit condonance of this type of ill-placed witch-burning mentality. If they had a backbone they would issue a real apology, like when the whole Victoria Liss scandal went down.

Get with it, people.
And expect to see much more of the same of this crap.
The tide keeps growing.………
( lynch mob is THEIR words too! what's the difference here? )

The Stranger: the PNW's response to Fox News witch-burning crusades, in quite a nepotistic way

Posted by i got slog'd and all i got was a ruined career on September 22, 2013 at 1:30 PM · Report this
reverend dr dj riz 215
made me look
Posted by reverend dr dj riz on September 22, 2013 at 12:40 AM · Report this
Will in Seattle 214
Pictorially more artistic edition of D-List than usual, actually.
Posted by Will in Seattle on September 21, 2013 at 8:19 PM · Report this
Yeah, but, like you said, when you're apology/explanation is followed immediately with "but it wouldn't matter if I'd done it right because you're all a bunch of doody heads who wouldn't have gotten it anyway" then it really shouldn't be considered an apology.

"I'll repeat myself one more time for your benefit: Intent is irrelevant." "

Which has been one of the most ridiculous statements in this conversation. This has been one of the most facepalm-y conversations on Slog that I've seen which is kinda saying a lot.
Posted by bassplayerguy on September 21, 2013 at 1:59 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 212
@211 To be fair to Kelly O, which is more than she, or comte, ever was to the model, Kelly O did try exactly that @115. The problem was that about an hour earlier, @111, Kelly O went with the "why are you burning me at the stake" victim routine. And she didn't really apologize. So, it made the whole comment seem like a half-assed denial of what she actually did.

Plus, as comte had said, @114, "I have stated this repeatedly, but since you seem to be particularly slow (or willfully obtuse, take your pick), I'll repeat myself one more time for your benefit: Intent is irrelevant."

Follow that post with "My objective was never to personally attack anyone."

And, well, as comte so lovingly put it @206, Kelly O's comment "is just chock-full of "OHMYGAWDWEDIDN"TMEANTHIS" back-peddling."
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 21, 2013 at 12:24 PM · Report this
"I have perspective, compassion and reason flowing out of me like wine out of a hogshead;"



@204: I thought her response was well measured and thought out. I've been pretty indifferent to the conversation (there's been good points made by both sides and extreme douchiness by both sides) but if those photos of Kelly are legit then, damn. Unlike the photo shoot which has the possibility of provoking images of black face minstrel shows but obviously wasn't intended to be a representation of any culture/race, that's honest to goodness black face. It's sad b/c a simple apology along the lines of "Ok, I admit that the headline misrepresented the situation and what I really wanted to do was provoke and honest discussion" would've successfully curbed the heated emotions. And it's not just that her photos were bad but the attempts to scrub them from the internet is REALLY bad, IMO.
Posted by bassplayerguy on September 21, 2013 at 11:32 AM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 210
@206 Nobody here has accused you of defending the model. Everybody here has accused you of attacking the model.

I suspect you've been drunk since Tuesday.
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 21, 2013 at 12:59 AM · Report this
This is the best thread eva'!

Give Comte another bottle of Cote du Rhone why don't you. The "compassion progressives" are going to be wiping egg of their faces for a loooooong time. Kelly O's minstreling debut will hopefully be mounted next to Erica Barnett's wine bottle at Stranger HQ, along with Comte's broken heart.
Posted by Kelly Oh My! on September 21, 2013 at 12:16 AM · Report this
Incredible! COMTE the commentator that was so vocal before, now is "too busy" to read the actual explantation and the thought process behind the photoshoot he was so ready to pass judgment on without getting the facts. Maybe he would learn that racial connotations were not any part of the actual shoot and maybe just maybe they were trying to present the jewelry in a visual way with a contrast of colors and present the model in a deco black statue fashion. You are familiar with art so you do know this right?? You did receive a master in Arts right? Or should we get proof of that??

Piece of Shit:
(1) a stupid, low-life, self-righteous human being who makes life a living hell for themselves and others.
Posted by Top Conservative Cat on September 20, 2013 at 11:04 PM · Report this
I find it funny how COMTE could make sound judgment on the intentions of the photoshoot in question without any kind if investigated reporting and make sound diagnosis of the commentators of this forum based on text alone like some sort of literately mind reader doctor, but as soon the image of Kelly O surfaces in a MORE offensive/racist example of blackface which are obviously not photoshopped he now needs "proof" to verify the authenticity of the photos. What happened to the gun slinging go for the throat culturally sensitive COMTE? Is Kelly O secretly giving you bee jays??
Posted by Top Conservative Cat on September 20, 2013 at 10:25 PM · Report this

Fuck off, wanker. I didn't say there weren't legit - I only posited the very real fact that image manipulation is an extremely easy thing to accomplish on the Internet these days, so one cannot take any image one sees at full face-value (and it's not like I'm going to take YOUR SORRY ASS as a credible source). You KNOW this is true; if you claim otherwise then you don't have a fucking leg to stand on here and I'll knock you over like a drunken E-3 on their third day of shore-leave.

So, what did I JUST SAY? IF these are indeed pictures of Kelly O standing next to some white chick doing a blackface impersonation of - I believe Flava-Flav - THEN I DO. NOT. CONDONE. THEM. GAWD, How many fucking versions of THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE do you need to hear from me before the message seeps through your fucking Neanderthal-thick skulls? I'm not here to defend Kelly O, or Ms Shepherd (which most of you seem to be falling all over yourselves to do), or ANYBODY ELSE who condones, participates in, or supports, these types of images! After all this time, all these posts, HAVE I NOT MADE MY POSITION UNFUCKINGAMBIGOUSLY CLEAR? YES, I FUCKING HAVE. Now, if you're either too stupid, too obstinate, too contrarian, too - whatever to receive my meaning -

- FUCK OFF, YOU PACK OF KNUCKLE-DRAGGING, LOW-GRADE MORONS. May your genetic spawn reject you for the biological aberrations you've become.

And I don't have time right now to read Ms Chakos' response, which I'll bet dollars to donut holes is just chock-full of "OHMYGAWDWEDIDN"TMEANTHIS" back-peddling, because I'm packing to fly to Los Angeles tomorrow morning for a brief vacay that, it is my fervent hope, will temporarily cleanse myself from the stench of all you fucking mouth-breathing racist-apologists.

And YES, I HAVE been drinking. Fucking sue me, douche-nozzles.
Posted by COMTE on September 20, 2013 at 10:18 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 205
@201 Also, how about that the GIS cache leads to a MySpace with the same user name as the Wordpress owned by the artist tagged in the Facebook photo? The profile is now private, but it still exists, and had the name of the artist attached. Is that proof enough for you? What proof would you like that they weren't photoshopped?
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 20, 2013 at 9:34 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 204
@201 Because I have perspective, compassion and reason flowing out of me

You might want to get that checked out. Because, apparently it's flowing so fast you have none left. Nor any intelligence. Or logic.

Also, what do you think about Ms Chakos' response to the controversy? Or are you still going to avoid naming anybody but the model?
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 20, 2013 at 9:23 PM · Report this

Rank hypocrisy. There are worse things than being a complete hypocrite, however. Being an unprincipled pompous sanctimonious windbag, for instance.

"If" those photos are real? So your STILL willing to extend far more consideration for Kelly-O that you didn't for the model.

Of course they are real, you fool. I remember seeing them back in 2007.

They are just as real as the model spread. And at least the people that posted the original photo spread had the integrity to not try to scrub them from the Internet like Kelly-O has clearly done here. Do you people have no integrity? Why are you not demanding more from Kelly-O here? SHE'S the one with the media responsibilities here. She's not evil. Or a bad person. That's the point. She did something stupid and was holding another person to standards she won't hold herself. Just like YOU.

What the fuck is wrong with you? Are you completely incapable of admitting when you're wrong? Kelly-O got busted. And she and you have learned nothing from this idiotic sensless witch hunt. Unbelievable.
Posted by tkc on September 20, 2013 at 9:22 PM · Report this
"Because I have perspective, compassion and reason flowing out of me"

You need a humility plug inserted somewhere fast.
Posted by Aren't you self-righteous on September 20, 2013 at 9:07 PM · Report this
Also @174:

Tell that to the people of color who have to endure scores of these "insignificant" slights every single day and then get back to me about how "disproportionate" they are. Or, you can stay safe and cuddly in your little warm bubble of white privilege. Your choice. Because I have perspective, compassion and reason flowing out of me like wine out of a hogshead; just not for clueless people who've never spent so much as a single second walking in the shoes of those who aren't in a position to invoke that privilege.

If these photos of Kelly turn out to be true ( and the fact they've been pulled from various sources does not, as yet, prove anything conclusive), then yeah, she's probably got a whole world of self-righteous vituperance coming her way - and I can't say it would be undeserved.

But that doesn't change my position one iota. I'm not here to defend anyone who makes these kinds of poor choices, I can only hope they learn from their mistakes and strive to be better.

Posted by COMTE on September 20, 2013 at 7:44 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 200
@196 I'm glad she took full ownership of the editorial.

I'm not going to say whether I agree with the end product, but it takes guts to say "I did this" once you know it's a controversy. Guts that Kelly O doesn't have.

Thank you Ms Chakos for trying to aim the gun of Internet outrage on yourself.
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 20, 2013 at 7:40 PM · Report this
undead ayn rand 199
@178: Ah, that was actually the person? She should have registered. Usually when I see a thread concerning race with a dozen or so anon posts in a block I assume it's the usual loony going wild.
Posted by undead ayn rand on September 20, 2013 at 6:48 PM · Report this
@197 where's your condemnation for a Stanger reporter being chummy with her minstreling friend?
Posted by Kelly Oh my on September 20, 2013 at 4:53 PM · Report this

You're welcome to give it your best shot. If I had anything to hide, I wouldn't be using my own name here.
Posted by COMTE on September 20, 2013 at 4:47 PM · Report this
This is a response from Jenascia Chakos, the Fashion Director of DList Magazine.…
Posted by Jrock_206 on September 20, 2013 at 4:01 PM · Report this
This is a response from Jenascia Chakos, the Fashion Director of DList Magazine.…
Posted by jaimestar on September 20, 2013 at 3:57 PM · Report this
@193 - if that's true somebody with a dog in this fight and more vindictive than me should send those photo links and shit to Bethany, the editor with a link to this thread. So it doesn't get "lost."
Posted by tkc on September 20, 2013 at 3:09 PM · Report this
It's telling that this was all in the name of "discussion," right?

And when it turns out Kelly-O has participated in an even more tone-deaf, even more racist depiction of blackface suddenly... no discussion.

Instead we get claims that the photos are fake. And behind the scenes somebody hurrying to scrub the images from the internet. That kind of cowardly action is a pretty sound indictment.

Where is COMTE? Why isn't he eloquently demanding that there be "consequences" for the self proclaimed victim in this other racist travesty, Kelly-O?

Everybody so eager to pillory one model suddenly vacates the premises when the tables are turned. Suddenly all those people who had torches and pitch forks are willing to consider mitigating factors, context, or that the photos in question might be fakes. So where there once was a mighty rush to judge now there is silence.

Where was all this thoughtful silent contemplation at the start of this thread? Where are the apologies?

Yeah. That's what I thought. Self righteous hypocrites.
Posted by tkc on September 20, 2013 at 3:07 PM · Report this
@189 funny thing(?) is... the stranger main page has a "MOST COMMENTED" section.... this article is certainly not listed/ promoted anywhere, although there are much less commented-on, and older articles showing on their main page, right now.

i knew this was gonna get stooopid when i started reading it a few days ago. and it's only gotten stoopider

@178- what did 177 post? looks like thestranger is already playing comment police
Posted by uhhhhhh on September 20, 2013 at 2:54 PM · Report this
derrickito 191
Posted by derrickito on September 20, 2013 at 2:30 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 190
@189 The myspace photo is also taken down but you can find the google cache in images, and the link from google leads you to a Myspace ID which is tied to a crap artist who is tagged in the Facebook screen capture. That artist also has ties to The Stranger, and was featured in The Stranger all the way back to 2003 (when she was 28), and has had art published as covers on The Stranger. Simple math means that this artist was a tender, young, 34 when she did the Flava Flav blackface thing.


I agree with tkc in that the whole point of the thread is that pillorying people without research is wrong. I don't agree that pillorying is always wrong. I will ridicule the hell out of anybody who says something retarded like gays, abortions, and drugs caused the Colorado flooding.

But, Kelly O frothed up an internet mob, created a clickbait megapost, and ended up tying both Kelly O and The Stranger to some girl who did blackface for a Halloween party.

I hope it was worth it...
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 20, 2013 at 2:18 PM · Report this
derrickito 189
but what about the ad revenue from the page views! so important.

next we need another thread about bikes!
Posted by derrickito on September 20, 2013 at 2:00 PM · Report this
They took down the Flickr page, too? That looks really bad. Jesus. Talk about exactly the wrong way to handle this. The Stranger has comported itself in the worst way possible. But it's not too late.

Look. Nobody should be fired. Nobody should be pilloried.That's the entire god damned point. Just stop being sanctimonious dicks and thinking public shaming is a positive response to everything every chance you get - ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU THINK YOU'RE RIGHT.

All that needs to happen is for The Stranger and Kelly-O to acknowledge they made a mistake and apologize - it would be best if whole thread was deleted.

It was thoughtless stupid post that was only ever going to go one way: Bad. Either bad for some poor model or bad for The Stranger.

Chalk it up to a lesson learned and move the fuck on. And maybe, just MAYBE, The Stranger will be more circumspect in the future and acknowledge it's privileges and responsibility to fair and decent to individual people out here in it's own home town and not hide behind this "I wanted a discussion" canard and pretend YOU'RE the victim. Well. Here is the discussion, right here. How'd that go?

Just be thoughtful with your power.
Posted by tkc on September 20, 2013 at 1:16 PM · Report this
Kelly O is pulling a Deion Sanders and trying to backpedal her way out of this shit show. Covering her tracks by deleting photos in hopes people will believe they were photoshopped. Please just apologize... You will be forgiven. Time to face the music....*sad violin music*
Posted by Top Conservative Cat on September 20, 2013 at 12:45 PM · Report this
Oh my Kelly O, you sure have had a busy morning calling friends to get rid of your minstreling lark from the web. Scrub scrub scrub.

Ready to apologize to Amanda?
Posted by You need to scrub harder sugartits on September 20, 2013 at 12:14 PM · Report this
derrickito 185
i got a shot of it too
Posted by derrickito on September 20, 2013 at 12:07 PM · Report this
aaaand the Flickr page is down now! Hahaha. Fortunately someone screen shotted it:

The more you run, the more guilty you look.

Posted by tehschkott on September 20, 2013 at 12:06 PM · Report this
I hope the model sues you for defamation.
Posted by Sue baby sue! They will settle out of court so fast! on September 20, 2013 at 12:02 PM · Report this
If those photos are faked - as Kelly-O accuses - then why did the original Facebook pull it and why are they available on google and flickr identically? Whose Facebook account was that?

See. This whole thing was destined to get ugly. And the entire post should have never been made. I hope everybody has indeed learned a lesson here.

To borrow a phrase:
Just wow. Really, just wow...
Posted by tkc on September 20, 2013 at 11:56 AM · Report this
Posted by Rojo on September 20, 2013 at 11:52 AM · Report this
180 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
Kelly O should be fired for stupidity and hypocrisy.
Posted by Fire Kelly O today - such stupidity is not allowed here on September 20, 2013 at 11:48 AM · Report this
@177 Hi.

Just word of friendly advice.

It's always tempting to go on an internet forum that is about you to defend yourself by gong on the offensive. Totally understandable (Kelly-O should have contacted you in the first place). I know. I know.

But take it from me, on an unmoderated forum like this one with all the trolls and where people are encouraged to be as thoughtless and reactionary as possible, it usually ends up worse for the subject. So I'd resist the temptation to post and take the high road.

As you can see Kelly-O may have hung herself here and it's best to let these things play themselves out.
Posted by tkc on September 20, 2013 at 11:45 AM · Report this
177 Comment Pulled (Duplicate) Comment Policy
I think at this point Kelly O's credibility is completely shot. Her only stance now is accusing the photo as being photoshoped when it obviously is not. She should take what little dignity she has left and own up to the photo, maybe even a simple apology but no she does not. This helps paint the picture of the type of disgusting human being Kelly O really is and reveal her true motives behind the article (if I can even call it an article). Her opinion and insight on any subject matter will now forever be tainted because of this. Wow what a turn of events... Pure comedy...
Posted by Top Conservative Cat on September 20, 2013 at 11:30 AM · Report this
Well, well, well. Karma is a bitch, isn't it?

If those photos are real it loos like Kelly-O really did fuck up on this one.

What do you think of that COMTE? Are you going to speak out so vociferously against Kelly-O now? There she is literally beaming in photo with black face. No art director or publication to hide behind there.

Personally, since Kelly-O is not the one in blackface there, I think people should cut her some slack. But it's interesting she isn't willing to the same for this model.

In fact if those photos are real she absolutely owes that girl an apology.
Posted by tkc on September 20, 2013 at 11:25 AM · Report this
@104 COMTE

You clearly must have exited the womb fully enlightened. The rest of us had to make mistakes as we went along.

If I scoured your past and found something untoward and put on the internet for eternal public pillorying that would be okay with you- sauce on the goose?

The internet is eternal. It is any easy thing for something this simple and to haunt a young person at the beginning of a career for ever.

This isn't a member of congress or a billionaire. This isn't even a Cosmo or major magazine spread. It's ONE completely powerless individual in a tiny insignificant local publication.

The stirring though melodramatic speeches you've been making here are thoroughly disproportionate to the crime committed by this model. And you are totally deluded as the effect on racism you think you have just bitching about this one girl from the comfort of your chair. You are utterly lacking in perspective, compassion, and reason.
Posted by tkc on September 20, 2013 at 11:19 AM · Report this
Boo hoo, Kelly O. Grow a thicker skin. I can handle your blatant, inaccurate can't take what your dishing?

-The model in the picture.
Posted by thatmodelamanda on September 20, 2013 at 11:10 AM · Report this
derrickito 172
doctored eh? i don't think so.

look, it's still on lauren's flickr, same person as on facebook.…

and it also comes up in searches as on a myspace page.…

quick, grab a screenshot before she asks her friends to take them down
Posted by derrickito on September 20, 2013 at 10:57 AM · Report this
171 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
This is so delicious! Haw haw there is nothing that I like more than seeing some hypocritic sanctimonious PC Thought Police asshole "journalist" being forced to eat their own nanny-shit.
Posted by Eat your PC nanny shit you sanctimonious cow on September 20, 2013 at 10:05 AM · Report this

Apparently, not listening to people is your specialty, as you seem (not) to do it with pretty much everyone...
Posted by COMTE on September 20, 2013 at 9:58 AM · Report this
derrickito 168
kelly0: "The photos published in Dlist, are very upsetting to people I know personally."

how do those people that you know feel about you blackfacing it up for a laugh?
Posted by derrickito on September 20, 2013 at 9:51 AM · Report this
derrickito 167
that picture hasn't been doctored at all. you got served your own pile of steamy shit.

also, that's not blackface, that's body paint. body paint to highlight jewelry. a far cry from your picture there that is obviously making fun of black people for your humor.
Posted by derrickito on September 20, 2013 at 9:46 AM · Report this
Well I guess this means Kelly O won't be slogging about race ever again unless she can get her minstreling photo removed from the web. Kind of like trying to scrub Erica Barnett's shoplifting charge.
Posted by Kelly Oh My on September 20, 2013 at 9:28 AM · Report this
165 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
Well, that's some fantastic photo wizardry. Look forward to meeting you in person someday, Rogelio.

I'm done feeding you trolls. Enjoy your bonfire. I hope it keeps you warm.
Posted by Kelly O on September 20, 2013 at 8:13 AM · Report this
@161 so I guess Kelly O yucking it up so happily and proudly with her minstreling friend isn't racist. Got it.

Do as I say, not as I do.
Posted by Kelly Oh My on September 20, 2013 at 7:56 AM · Report this
Funny thing is, while it's arguable that the model is not doing blackface, she is most certainly is not minstreling, Kelly O's bestest Facebook friend, the one she is yucking it up with so happily and proudly, is most definitely doing minstreling, far more offensive than what this model has done.

The hypocrisy is effing astounding. This will haunt her like Erica Barnett's wine thievery.
Posted by Kelly Oh My on September 20, 2013 at 7:50 AM · Report this
undead ayn rand 161
@4: Pretty much. Apparently it gave racist troll in 152-160 enough jerkoff material for years.
Posted by undead ayn rand on September 20, 2013 at 7:43 AM · Report this
160 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
Kelly O where did you go? You disappeared! Why on Earth?

And just when this conversation was getting really good too...
Posted by Lets have an honest conversation about race on September 20, 2013 at 6:33 AM · Report this
Hey Kelly-O, get ready to have your snatch sued off!
Posted by You gonna git SUED on September 20, 2013 at 6:24 AM · Report this
Kelly O'Neil must have some serious frenemies who saved that Facebook page of her yucking it up with her minstrel friend. I mean, Kelly O has obviously deleted the photo to hide it, so who on earth took a screen grab and put it up for all to see?
Posted by Kelly Oh My on September 19, 2013 at 10:15 PM · Report this
156 Comment Pulled (Duplicate) Comment Policy
155 Comment Pulled (Duplicate) Comment Policy
And how cute, in the now deleted Facebook page, Kelly O asks her best friend in blackface for a copy of the photo. Presumably to hang in her cubicle at work while she attacks models.
Posted by Dumb dumb moron now trying to hide her past. on September 19, 2013 at 9:36 PM · Report this
Well fuck me Kelly O, you really screwed the pooch with your own personal black face moment now didn't you?
Posted by Fuck-a-duck, the hypocrisy is fucking jaw dropping on September 19, 2013 at 9:28 PM · Report this
Kelly O is awfully silent all of a sudden.... *crickets* lol
Posted by Top Conservative Cat on September 19, 2013 at 9:22 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 151
@149 YOU have a very very hard time answering my question of why have you specifically called out, and repeatedly called out the model but lump everybody else in "all." Your incapacity to comprehend that question tells me that you are not to be listened to.

@150 They sure as fuck are more responsible for it. But Kelly O didn't even mention them, and said, in the fucking headline, the model did it all by herself. The model is not like Kelly O's friend, Tara Turner, who did it all by herself, nor like Kelly O for posing with her (see @142). There were people directing and publishing this photo shoot.

Are you one of the friends that Kelly O knows personally who was offended by the photo shoot? Is there a reason you seem so intent on pillorying the model?
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 19, 2013 at 9:14 PM · Report this

I think the general gist is, in 21st century America, EVERYONE should know at least a few basic things that are offensive. Blackface is one of them.

Now its possible her photographer or agent put her up to this, and if so, they are MORE responsible for perpetuating this, but she said yes to it. I dont care if she is in her 20s, some things you should know not to do by the time you reach 18 (to be honest, I would say 12, but we all know its America, and many parents purposefully keep their kids ignorant in hopes theyll grow up as bigoted as mommy and daddy).
Posted by araucania on September 19, 2013 at 7:29 PM · Report this

I'm not the one claiming to have "diagnosed" anyone, that's just your pathetic attempt to put words in my mouth that I've never said.


I guess understanding basic colloquial English must be really hard for you if you're having that much trouble comprehending the simple phrase "ALL the people involved." You must be a great disappointment to your parents.
Posted by COMTE on September 19, 2013 at 6:25 PM · Report this
That's fantastically funny.

So let's have a new conversation, Kelly O. Why is it okay for you to get down with black-face for a drunk Halloween party, but it's SLOG rage worthy if this model does it for art? Let's have a conversation centered on racism with that as the centerpiece.
Posted by tehschkott on September 19, 2013 at 6:22 PM · Report this
That's fantastically funny.

So let's have a new conversation, Kelly O. Why is it okay for you to get down with black-face for a drunk Halloween party, but it's SLOG rage worthy if this model does it for art?
Posted by tehschkott on September 19, 2013 at 6:19 PM · Report this
146 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
TheMisanthrope 145
@142 Oof.
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 19, 2013 at 5:02 PM · Report this
Rojo 144
The Facebook content "is currently unavailable" but it was just a link to what is shown in that screenshot.
Posted by Rojo on September 19, 2013 at 4:53 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 143
@139 I think you're having problems understanding why I'm asking why you have specifically called out only the model. You say (and have repeated) "but, I've said everybody should be held responsible" yet you have SPECIFICALLY called out the model. You so far haven't answered why you have chosen to specifically call out the model, but lump everybody else into the nebulous "all."
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 19, 2013 at 4:44 PM · Report this
Rojo 142…

So I guess blackface is wrong no matter what and we should shovel our loathing and displeasure at this model for doing it, but black-face is totally okay as long as your best friend gets in it as Flava Flav so you can play Bridgett Nielsen for Halloween.
Posted by Rojo on September 19, 2013 at 4:18 PM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 141
That last post should directed at 139.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 19, 2013 at 4:18 PM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 140
127, yet you keep diagnosing people you've never met. You should change your name to Bill Frist. You seem to believe you know he motivations behind the photo shoot without having spoken with anyone involved. Comte, master mind reader.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 19, 2013 at 3:36 PM · Report this

Clearly, your eyes are going - otherwise, you would have noted the numerous times I've stated "ALL of them should be held accountable". The only reason that I can fathom your continuing to ask this same question over-and-over again is because your brain is patently incapable of processing the answer I keep giving to it.


Don't be obtuse. I simply noted that some people have shown an abject lack of empathy with the victims of racial discrimination, which they clearly have, based on the tone of their responses to people of color both here and on Ms Shepherd's FB page. I further noted this behavior bears a striking resemblance to one of the primary symptoms of certain personality disorders, which it does. This isn't a diagnosis, which by definition, requires an examination of a patient; it is merely an observation, a comparison of exhibited behavior with known symptomatologies (and my facetious comment @124 being a variation on the old "if it walks like a duck..." simile, the humorous effect of which appears to have been wasted on the egregiously humorless among you-all). But, if you feel uncomfortable being compared to a clinical Narcissist, then I would suggest that's YOUR issue to resolve, and not mine.
Posted by COMTE on September 19, 2013 at 3:04 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 138
Also, Kelly O. Stop using the term "witch" when you're referring to my comments. It has sexist connotations that are not used in this thread. Those are your words, not mine. Also, "bitch" or "silly daft bitch" is the words of the unregistered troll, not any of the other commenters. If you could refrain from using that word as well.
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 19, 2013 at 2:47 PM · Report this
Torch mobs for Tolerance!
Posted by Torch mobs for Tolerance! SO PWOGWESSIVE on September 19, 2013 at 2:17 PM · Report this
So funny that you're attempting to pull this "burn the witch" shit, since that is EXACTLY what you did to the model. Daft bitch.
Posted by Slogmatic Slogma Religion on September 19, 2013 at 1:08 PM · Report this
Go police your own thoughtcrimes you nanny-ass bitch.
Posted by Seattle PC Progressive Nanny-Town USA POLICE on September 19, 2013 at 12:58 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 134
@126 My summation

"Hey, look what racist thing this crazy white model has done! Isn't it sick?"

"Hey, don't blame this on the model."

"I'm totally not attacking the model. I'm just trying to have a conversation about this racist thing a model did."

"Yes you were. You were attacking model. And, you're being an ass."

"Racist Model!!!! And, I'm not being an ass. Nor am I attacking anybody!"

"What about art director? And you're totally being an ass."

"But...racism. Lets have real conversation. I was totally not attacking anybody. Stop attacking meeee!!!!"
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 19, 2013 at 12:55 PM · Report this
@130 I'm an unregistered troll WHO HAPPENS TO BE RIGHT.
Posted by Waaah I'm unwegisturd waaaah waaaah waaaah on September 19, 2013 at 12:54 PM · Report this
" It's just reinforcing an idea about "tribal Africa" that's racist."

HAHAHAHAHA WOW JUST WOW. How fucking naive are you?

It is obvious you never actually read any local news from any black African country if you think they are not "tribal" any more.
Posted by IOL DOT CO DOT ZA on September 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 131
126, You're not a witch. You seem immature, like a mean, gossipy, high school girl talking about others you don't even know behind their backs. You can't be bothered to get your facts straight first. Then when called on it, you play the victim.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 19, 2013 at 12:50 PM · Report this
#129 - and you are a nameless, unregistered troll.
Posted by Kelly O on September 19, 2013 at 12:49 PM · Report this
But you ARE a silly daft bitch, you silly daft bitch.
Posted by Slog's Social Justice Mob Needs Fresh Blood on September 19, 2013 at 12:45 PM · Report this
For those who are saying that no one is this color, that's silly. They could've gotten a black model. And yes, there are models who are pretty damn close to that color- see the first model in this link:…

But really? You're going to blame it on the model? WTF does she have to do with anything? She showed up for work so she'd get to eat that week. Sure, she could've turned it down, but modeling is extremely competitive and you don't want to have a reputation for being difficult to work with, which is what turning down a job gets you.

Also, those of you who are saying that this color black isn't a real skin tone, so it clearly isn't appropriating a race: really? Vaudeville performers used shoe polish when they did black face. I would think that using a less skin-tonish black actually references that kind of appropriation more than using a realistic tone.

And the problem with this shoot is not that it's mocking black people, because that's not what it's doing. It's just reinforcing an idea about "tribal Africa" that's racist. The very dark skin color, the choice of jewelry, the fact that she's nude aside from the jewelry- in combination, those are choices that reference the idea of primitive African tribes.
Posted by alguna_rubia on September 19, 2013 at 12:35 PM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 127
124, And you feel you're qualified to make psychiatric diagnoses from Google searching a book, and without an in person meeting? Who was the doctor in the senate who thought he could diagnose Teri Schivo's mental state? Are you like him?
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 19, 2013 at 12:34 PM · Report this
Here's a summation of this comment thread, that I am turning into a screenplay:

"@53 - What? You silly, African American. We haven't the time to hear you now, we're too busy! We're busy burning a witch, and then we're going to lynch-mob a fashion model, and tie her to a whipping post!"

"But wait, are you sure she's a witch?"

"Dear boy, don't be ABSURD! Of course she's a witch! She wrote a bad headline, that was easily taken literally. And we DEMAND the literal version be taken seriously! She also used the phrase "Just, wow." Can't you believe the wickedness of her soul? We must burn her, and punish her for these wicked ways. First we'll ask her several times, if she went to college. Then we'll call her "an asshole" and a "silly daft bitch." Then we'll ask her if she went to college AGAIN! Then we will buuuuurrrrrrn her! Oh, it will be glorious!"

"And what about this Comte fellow?"

"Well, since he seems to sympathize and agree with the witch, we'd better burn him too. You can never be too careful, and we must make them both pay for the wrath they have wrought!"

"Indeed! Now pass me those matches. Don't be niggardly with them, we must start a good fire."

"@53 - Are you trying to say something? By God! We already told you, we're too busy right now. Maybe we will hear your case some other time! Now scurry off, and be silent. We've got more important things to do than to listen to you!"

Posted by Kelly O on September 19, 2013 at 12:24 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 125
@123 if you saw a play where the actors were asked to do morally questionable things, would you focus on singling out the actors, or would you mention and name the director and/or playwright?
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 19, 2013 at 11:53 AM · Report this

I just paraphrased the descriptions out of a book, but as they say, if the behavior fits the diagnosis...
Posted by COMTE on September 19, 2013 at 11:41 AM · Report this

I know a lot of struggling actors, but I can't think of a single one of them who would accept a job requiring them to do what Ms Shepherd was asked to do.

But then, maybe actors are just more culturally aware than models, is all. In fact, a local theatre company just did a production that addressed the very issue of which you speak. You might have found it interesting, perhaps even thought-provoking, had you seen it.
Posted by COMTE on September 19, 2013 at 11:38 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 122
114,Comte, diagnosing them with all those psychological conditions without ever having met or spoken a word with anyone involved, but there can be no other explanation! You're the magic psychiatrist!
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 19, 2013 at 11:25 AM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 121
@118 Nobody is saying Kelly O shouldn't be questioning the intent of the photo shoot. Everybody is saying Kell O shouldn't have singled out the model.

Kelly O is acting like we're attacking her without good cause. That is playing the victim. Kelly O pilloried the model. Kelly O was the one who attacked the girl. Kelly O was the one who chose not to attack the magazine, the art director, or anybody else involved.

Nobody is saying the conversation shouldn't be had, but it was an Internet mob that Kelly O frothing up targeted solely at the model, complete with links to the model's professional page and the model's Facebook account. Kelly O not owning that is playing the victim.

Again, nobody is saying the conversation is turribull. We're saying it shouldn't have been so targeted solely at the model. Which Kelly O accomplished with the headline, the links, and the lack of mentioning anybody else involved. Kelly O's diverting attention away from that without so much as an apology to the model, that's playing the victim.
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 19, 2013 at 11:23 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 120
115, Your idea of a discussion doesn't involve the people of whom you're speaking? No need to include them in the conversation? No need to be informed about what you speak? Just throw our accusations of racism behind their backs? Calling someone racist isn't a personal attack? A model was an easy target I guess.

You did go to college, right. You do know that definition of niggardly is in no way related to a racist slur? But someone should lose their job for using it in it's proper context?

Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 19, 2013 at 11:16 AM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 119
@111, @115 Your halo, it's crumbling.

You linked to the model's professional modeling page, which had absolutely no information about the photo shoot except, possibly, to show that this model was white.

You linked to the model's Facebook page and labeled it "interesting commentary."

You said "a Seattle model painted herself" and then named rhe model without mentioning the art director Jenascia Chakos.

You provided no insight other than "really wow."

This is not "opening a discussion." This is pillorying an individual. This is holding a model hostage in a light, making sure she is permanently linked to this photo shoot, making sure your post is permanently linked to her professional sites, and her sites only. You don't even link to Dlist magazine, any of its editors, nor the art director of the shoot.

Then you have the nerve to play the victim? "My objective was never to personally attack anyone." Well, gee, I'm sure that makes the named model feel SO much better.

What makes you pathetic is your steadfast refusal to own up to your mistake. Your continual self-victimization is pathetic, and a bit sociopathic.

Oh, and this tone deaf conversation is your fault. You started by pillorying a girl who's a mere cog, and...then add nothing beyond that. That's wrong. And you know it.

COMTE @114 you have never actually named anybody else in the photo shoot. But you have named the model specifically on several occasions. That's specific. Don't play coy with your "I've said everybody else was wrong too." Bullshit. You have specifically named and singled out the model, and have continued to name the model, even in this post without mentioning anybody else's name. That's wrong, and you know it (or else you wouldn't be so defensive about it).
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 19, 2013 at 11:09 AM · Report this

"Acting Like a Victim" = a defense to bigotry and abuse that abusers make to deflect their own accountability.

"My husband beats me!" > "Stop acting like a victim!"

"These people are discriminatory and intolerant towards me because of my skin colo" > "Stop acting like a victim"

Its not acting if you are being victimized, and asking someone to stop complaining is really asking them to allow the abuse to continue.
Posted by araucania on September 19, 2013 at 10:57 AM · Report this
@111 - This is weak, and fails to address your mistake. Just own it. Everyone posts something in haste and doesn't think it through. Acting like the victim is a bad look. You leveled the attack, chose the target, and chose your words.

Comte- You need to stop applying the middle-class privilege of choice in economic matters as a universal. It is not.

I spoke to a friend who used to do a lot of commercial modeling (and happens to be a woman of color) about this- she said that to her it felt a little like 'slut-shaming'. She said that lots of people, especially other women, take a dim view of modeling in general and look for opportunities to attack (her assessment, not mine). She personally took heat from people for: being too revealing, modeling white-oriented fashions, wearing too stereotypically 'black' fashions, being a token, working for designers who were insensitive, etc. Essentially it is a no-win, once you start applying absurd standards. We should probably boycott The Stranger, given where some of the ad revenue comes from, right?
Posted by Chris Jury on September 19, 2013 at 10:49 AM · Report this
Shut the fuck up and own your stupid mistake you silly daft bitch.
Posted by Good goin, douche on September 19, 2013 at 10:45 AM · Report this
You're right, that it was a poorly written headline. And it wasn't investigative reporting. You're absolutely right, on that.

You can think that's pathetic. You can think I'm pathetic. You can also think that "niggardly" is a perfectly great word to use in 2013.

My objective was never to personally attack anyone. You are projecting that motive on to me. The photos published in Dlist, are very upsetting to people I know personally. I thought there was reason to open a discussion about why the photo shoot was tone deaf.

I thought wrong, as evidenced by the tone deaf comments in this thread. What a waste of everybody's time.
Posted by Kelly O on September 19, 2013 at 10:06 AM · Report this

Please see my response to @28 in comment #35, my response to @66 in comment #91, and my response to @96 in comment #98. Or do you really need to have the meaning of "ALL the people involved in this shoot" explained to you, because I'd be more than happy to dumb it down even further, if that'll help your comprehension deficiency.


I am fully aware of the meaning of the word, and I do not think the D.C. Mayor should have resigned over his use of it. "Niggardly" and "n****r" are not the same word, and in fact do not even share the same linguistic etymology. Both have very different meanings, and while I can imagine someone associating the former as an unfavorable depiction of the latter, the truth is "niggardly" is not racially or culturally specific; anyone can be niggardly, regardless of the color of their skin (and in fact, the most cogent examples, Ebenezer Scrooge being perhaps the archetype, are generally white, for what I would think would be obvious reasons), but only black people are called "n****r", short of some puerile schoolyard epithet.


I have stated this repeatedly, but since you seem to be particularly slow (or willfully obtuse, take your pick), I'll repeat myself one more time for your benefit: Intent is irrelevant. This is 2013 for fuck's sake, we, none of us lives in a cultural vacuum. Anyone in this day-and-age who thinks it's acceptable to paint a person of one race in the general skin-tone of another race in a manner that members of that race have historically and consistently found demeaning and dehumanizing (and before we go down the side-track again, I'm quite certain Minstrel make-up wasn't designed to be ethnologically accurate, either), should really have their head examined.

Seriously, anyone with even the smallest amount of compassion should have absolutely no trouble figuring this out. If they can't, I am forced to conclude they're either an unabashed racist, or else lack even the most rudimentary ability to express empathetic behavior, a trait frequently associated with acute psychological dysfunctions such as Narcissistic Personality Disorder and Antisocial Personality Disorder, wherein the subject does not consider the pain they may cause others, and simply doesn't care about thoughts and feelings that conflict with their own, to the point that, when confronted with their abusive behavior, will make up excuses and attempt to convince others that THEY are the one with the problem, and that they're wrong to feel the way they do. That would appear to describe roughly half the responses on this thread.


I'm NOT "defining sexist or homophobic behavior", I'm using the definition that victims of racist behavior have already created for themselves. Go back and read some of the comments on Ms Shepherd's Face Book cover photo page (third link in the OP): there's a quite striking difference of opinion regarding the images between those self-identifying as black or a person of color and those who don't; similar differences have appeared in this thread as well. In short: people of color have unanimously objected (some mildly, some more strongly) to these images; I agree with their objections. I did not "define" the terms for them, they defined the terms for ME, as it should be.


In which case she should be prepared to accept ownership for her participation. People make difficult choices of conscience over commerce every day; she chose the latter over the former and now she's reaping the (apparently) unanticipated whirlwind; why do you think she should be held to a lower standard than anyone else?
Posted by COMTE on September 19, 2013 at 10:00 AM · Report this
@111 that's delusional. I believe the kindest term for making this post is "reckless".

What did you think the outcome of this post was going to be? What type of response do you believe the subjects (model, "art director") deserve?
Posted by fetish on September 19, 2013 at 9:55 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 112
111, No, the saddest, most pathetic thing is you didn't even bother to do some actual journalism, and speak to the model. You blamed her completely, you claimed she painted herself, and created the concept of the photo shoot without as mush as picking up a phone and speaking to someone at Dlist. You just pointed your finger accused her of being a racist, then directed people to her Facebook page.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 19, 2013 at 9:46 AM · Report this
The saddest and most pathetic part of this whole thread is in all your passionate fervor to 'burn the witch' (that's me) for posting this "the wrong" way, to tsk-tsk-tsk, and shame-shame on me, you're completely ignoring @53.

You're not listening to @53, and you couldn't begin to ever care about how @53 feels. This is sad, frustrating, and very telling.

But hey, keep on attacking me, if it makes you feel righteous. Burn, baby, burn!

I will politely ask you to refrain from using terms like "lynch mob" and more recently "whipping post" to describe my intentions towards this model.

Those are your words, not mine.
Posted by Kelly O on September 19, 2013 at 8:50 AM · Report this
The model is just a laborer. What's she supposed to do, say no to the gig? It's not like a vast majority of models/actors/etc aren't hurting for money. For personal and professional reasons, they should basically never say no.
Posted by fetish on September 19, 2013 at 7:44 AM · Report this
Matt from Denver 109
@ 104, I'm not a race relations expert. Neither are you. Neither, it seems, is any other white commenter here. That was the whole point of my original comment.

Just as we straight white males have little place defining what's sexist or homophobic, we also have little place defining what's racist. Sure, speak out when something we already know is racist happens, but this is too far off the mark for a white person to say. You're being very articulate in your knee-jerk reaction, but boil it down and that's all it is.
Posted by Matt from Denver on September 19, 2013 at 5:34 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 108
Comte, also, why are you uncomfortable answering my question? Do you think they had racist intent with this photo shoot? Were they trying to make her look like person of another race? It's a given that people are offended. Just about anything offends someone, but why are you avoiding answering the questions?
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 19, 2013 at 5:01 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 107
Comte, So only certain people who can decide if this is okay? It doesn't matter the intent, or that the magazine wasn't going for a racial look in any way?

Again this reminds of when a Washington DC mayoral aide used the word niggardly, and he was forced to resign. Following your logic, it didn't matter that the word actually means miserly, and he was speaking at a meeting pertaining to city spending. He should have known that certain people who have endured centuries of repression would be offended. A word with similar spelling to another that has a racist history is off limits. The actual definition of words don't matter, just that certain people will be offended. We must never accidentally offend anyone!
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 19, 2013 at 3:52 AM · Report this
The headline says "Model Paints Herself Black..."
Is it verified that she painted herself? Wouldn't someone else have done it and wouldn't it have been someone else who came up with the idea for the shoot? This was written to humiliate the girl and didn't even strive for accuracy.
Posted by thetruthhurts on September 18, 2013 at 11:35 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 105
@104 And yet you haven't made a single mention of Jenascia Chakos. Why don't you pillory the people responsible for this? Why are you so fucking focused on the model? Why is the model the one responsible for the whole shoot? You say that she should have been aware of the controversy, but that's fucking dumb. If it wasn't this model, it would be another. Jenascia Chakos is the one who selected the what and the why of the shoot, but you have, so far, not mentioned her by name (though you've mentioned the model's name several times). Jenascia Chakos is the one who decided to paint a model black and adorn her in pseudo-native-american or neo-tribal jewelry. But, you ignore her.

Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 18, 2013 at 11:28 PM · Report this

You know, sometimes you actually make some sort of lucid, common-sensical statement that I can get behind, even if begrudgingly on occasion. This last one however, makes no fucking sense whatsoever. I guess that's probably because heretofore, nobody was aware of the fact that you were an expert on matters such as this.

But, please Mr. Race Relations Expert, pray elucidate me: do you wish to take the position that the great harm despots, tyrants and madmen do to an entire group of people does NOT derive directly from the the fact that individuals ALLOW them to do so by neglect, or lack of action on their part? How the fuck else do you think they get away with it? Have you forgotten the context of Niemiller's famous poem? This is how it starts. This is how it ALWAYS starts. Despotism, Facism, call it what you will - no form of tyranny over a race, a culture, or a nation can start without the willing, benign sloth of individuals who can't be bothered to speak out when an injustice, no matter how small or superficially innocent-looking, is committed. History has proven this axiom too many times to count. We still see it happening every day. And every time it starts with one person telling another "there's no slight intended here. I personally am not upset over what's being done to you, so what right do you have to be upset?" The condescending complacency at the heart of such prejudice propagates itself like dandelions on a golf course until, given enough time and inattention, the lush green has been thoroughly supplanted by the putrid yellow, at which point generally the only course of action left to restore the verdancy of the turf is to annihilate the infestation out of existence, and re-seed the entire course; half-measures are no longer an option.

People can chose this path or not, it's completely in their power, but just as you don't excuse the lax parent who leaves a gun out in the open for their child to pick up and shoot - after all, it wasn't their intention the child fire the gun at another child - why should ANY person who willingly participates in the perpetuation of gross, offensive stereotypes - and that's what this was, despite all the backpeddling apologias to the contrary - be let off the hook because they said "that wasn't my intent!" How does that old saying go? "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions", perhaps you've heard of that? Well, there's more than just a grain of truth buried in that aphorism.

When it comes down to it, I didn't MAKE Ms Shepherd a "whipping post", that's a position she willingly took on for herself. She just wasn't astute enough to recognize it at the time she agreed to take this job, is the only difference. But, I see absolutely no reason she should be allowed a free pass, simply because her complicity doesn't measure up to your or someone else's capricious and arbitrary scale of fault. She did what she did, she's been called out on it, and if her punishment amounts to a few days or weeks of simple public excoriation and ridicule, then "sauce for the goose", as they say.
Posted by COMTE on September 18, 2013 at 11:06 PM · Report this
Matt from Denver 103
@ Comte, if you can't perceive the difference between everything you listed in your response to me and the African American experience, then you've just topped your remarks about tipping for sheer Comte-doesn't-know-what-he's-talking-about-ism. Yes, that's a thing.
Posted by Matt from Denver on September 18, 2013 at 9:57 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 102
@100 Or, at least the correct target...

Kelly O dropped like 15 stories in my esteem of her with this post.

Let's not forget that Kelly O's first link is also to the model's modelmayham page, which is completely unrelated to the incident, outside of the fact that it proves she is indeed a model for hire.

But, nowhere, anywhere, does Kelly O mention Jenascia Chakos, the art director of the shoot, who needs to be tied to this discussion far more than the model. And, she's only been mentioned by me so far. Kelly O hasn't mentioned her name. Comte seems die hard to rally behind Kelly O in pillorying the model.

There's a lot of value that could be gleaned from this photo shoot, and the discussion of models as objects, blackface vs black paint, racism in modeling, cultural appropriation, and whether Chakos' decisions and choice of model were indeed racist or art or racist art.

The model has nothing to do with any of that discussion. She is here just to do what she was hired to do. She could object, and lose out on her money and a photo spread in a magazing. But, it was Jenascia Chakos' decision to do the shoot, and we should treat it in that manner.
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 18, 2013 at 8:48 PM · Report this
Sean Kinney 101
Whoah. I mean, just whoah now.
Posted by Sean Kinney http:// on September 18, 2013 at 7:59 PM · Report this
@98 The weight of centuries of racism is not the fault of this model.

She is not the proper or adequate outlet or proxy for you vent your frustrations.

Let me diabuse you of the idea that your internet outrage that cant get enough of accomplishes anything. As much as you or Kelly-o want this model to be your racist whipping post all that energy is wasted.

That makes YOU part of the problem. Outrage shot gunned out into the ether of the Internet accomplishes nothing. It makes you feel righteous and powerful for about three minutes. If that's your goal, have at it. It's pathetic, however.

The things missing here are a little reason and compassion. How about more of THAT than useless outrage.
Posted by tkc on September 18, 2013 at 6:41 PM · Report this
"Just wow. Really, just wow..."

Don't you think that phrase has been played out? Is there anyone who hears it anymore, especially coming from a writer who used to review porn movies for this publication, who believes the person is genuinely shocked? I don't. It comes across as an attempt to shame someone, in this case a 23 year old model. Linking to her facebook page was unnecessary. And it does seem catty.
Posted by thetruthhurts on September 18, 2013 at 5:55 PM · Report this

See, here's the thing: it doesn't fucking matter what I think, or what you think, or what the people who created and participated in this thought at the time they made it. What MATTERS is that some people, people who have endured literally CENTURIES of cultural co-modification, racial prejudice, abuse, abduction, enslavement and mockery at the hands of the dominant culture find the piece offensive. They have a RIGHT to be offended and to express outrage, disdain, shock, disappointment - whatever, at seeing themselves once again portrayed in this manner, REGARDLESS of the alleged intent of the creators. THEY see it as mockery and racial stereotyping and have said so, both here and elsewhere, and we have no right to tell them their outrage is misplaced, or inconsequential, or out-of-scale, it's THEIR RIGHT to feel and to express their outrage, regardless of whether any of the rest of us agree with them or not - and I personally happen to agree with them very much. So, why is this such a difficult concept for people like you to grasp?


If you'd bothered to read what I've written, you'd note that I'm holding ALL of the participants equally responsible. But, I don't buy the model's "I had nothing to do with it!" attempt to portray herself as an unwitting victim in all this: she willingly participated, when she could just as easily have expressed discomfort, disgust, or outrage herself, which you would think any "reasonable person" would do when asked to engage in an activity like this, but she didn't. In fact, she didn't seem to consider for even a second that doing this might create controversy, some of which, as the most visible objectification of the stereotype, would be focused directly back on her. How ANYONE in this day-and-age, after decades of messaging telling people that such cultural appropriation and mockery, regardless of stated intent, is demeaning, insulting, disrespectful, and just plain WRONG, can even think they could possibly be excused for this for ANY reason, whether it be aesthetic/artistic or otherwise, is simply incomprehensible to me.

And the fact is you DO either support this or you DON'T. If the latter, then you have an obligation speak out against it. As the Older Generation used to say: "You're either part of the problem or part of the solution." NOT speaking up is tacit approval, period.

And yes I fervently believe we DO in fact need "more outrage"; because that is an unambiguous means of expressing to others that what they've done is unacceptable and will not be tolerated in an equitable society.

People need to get it through their thick skulls that culpability isn't defined based on how much "power" one has, because individually none of us has all that much, despite what most think. Rather, it is our reluctance to speak out when we see wrong being done, however large or small, our complacency, our inability to understand that great acts of cruelty spring from many smaller such acts, that sends a silent signal of approval to those who would perpetuate greater wrong. This is what empowers them. US. We do it. We GIVE them the power to hurt others, because our silence communicates that we're too scared, too cowardly, or simply too cynical (or worse, that we actually agree with what they're doing) to take back from them what they should never have been given in the first place.
Posted by COMTE on September 18, 2013 at 5:53 PM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 97
I emailed Dlist, and linked to this post. Maybe they will contact Kelly O, since she couldn't be bothered to get the facts before accusing a model of racism.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 18, 2013 at 4:23 PM · Report this

I doubt few reasonable people question whether blackface is offensive. Or that the fashion industry exploits or appropriates other cultures.

What we should be able to have a reasonable discussion about is if THIS instance qualifies as blackface (and it's by no means the worst form of the offense by any stretch) with out unfairly singling out one person (the model) for the internet shame brigade (c'mon - linking to her Facebook page, really?)

AND having that discussion with out this "You're Either For US Or Against Us" bullshit. I'm not defending this artistic choice. I'm refusing to pillory one poor schlub over not much.

Seems like you're okay with the full weight of a media outlet unleashing on one insignificant powerless individual via their Facebook account - for a very minor offense. I have a huge problem with that.

The very LEAST Kelly-O could have done is made this a fair discussion by inviting or talking to the participants of the shoot. She didn't. Which make NOT a discussion but an internet firing squad.

And then popping into the discussion with this Pee Wee Herman "I know You Are" nonsense or to cherry pick a word or two from a reply and scuttling off again, does not lend this any credibility as platform reasonable "discussion.' Its a bully pulpit for Kelly-O to drum up some outrage.

And do we really need more of that? Is that going to help anything at all? Does this post make The Stranger or anything any better? Fuck no. It does not. It's bullshit we need a lot less of. Go after people that actually have some power that actually hurt people for fuck sake.

She and you are both asking this model, alone, to reflect and bear the consequences on her privilege. It's ironic Kelly-O is unwilling to do likewise.

There are no perfect people in this world, you know.
Posted by tkc on September 18, 2013 at 3:42 PM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 95
COMPT, Do you honestly think they were going for a mocking, racist stereotype with this photo shoot? Were they setting out to paint the model as a woman of African decent in an unflattering way? Do you think it's absolutely not possible that they were showing off the jewelry, you know, the subject of the spread, in an artful way, trying to make it stand out? In your mind they just wanted to show their contempt of people of color?
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 18, 2013 at 3:26 PM · Report this
Kelly O, either address the relevant issue of why you're targeting the model and not the art director or photographer, or step out of the comments. You're not doing yourself any favors here.

For everyone not seeing the implications of this photo shoot, go read #91 again.
Posted by clashfan on September 18, 2013 at 2:55 PM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 93
84, Also, you could had done this crazy new thing called "journalism". Maybe contacted the magazine, interviewed all the people involved, but hey that would have taken time and effort. I guess it was easier to point your finger and make uninformed accusations.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 18, 2013 at 2:54 PM · Report this
Kelly O, when are you moving to one if Seattle's fine black-majority neighborhoods? BTW I hear tell that Dominic has faith in his heart that violent crime is down.
Posted by Hypocritical Slogma of lies and omissions on September 18, 2013 at 2:51 PM · Report this

Not being a black woman I wouldn't presume to speak on their behalf - why don't go you ASK one and see what THEY think? Or would that be too uncomfortable? You DO know some black women you could ask, don't you?

But regardless, based on a couple of recent examples, it would appear that black people in blackface is just as controversial as is white people in blackface.

And it should be pointed out this is not the first time this issue has come up in the fashion industry, so one would think people who work in that industry would be at least minimally cognizant of how such displays have been received in the past.

So, given all this context it would appear that the identity or race of the model in question is irrelevant. Cultural appropriation and the perpetuation of stereotypes is wrong regardless of the intent of the purveyors. This is the 21st Century after all, people shouldn't have to be told (or reminded) that such representations are likely to offend those being depicted; we should KNOW this stuff by now. And the fact that, by all appearances (pun intended) so many of us DON'T just shows how far we still have yet to go in this area of human relations.

@60, 62 & 64:

Really? That's the best excuse/rationalization/justification you can muster? "People aren't a uniform color, therefore painting someone a uniform color isn't racist?" Man, you-all are really scraping the bottom of the proverbial barrel with that one.


If the model was too clueless to not have even the barest inkling of how people might respond to her being painted full-on black and then photographed in a manner that evokes stereotypical depictions of black people, then she SHOULD be on the short-end of the criticism stick (as should everyone else involved in the decision to create and run this spread); if nothing else, maybe she's learned a little something about the importance of anticipating the consequences of ones actions before engaging in them, yes?


I would suggest that the difference between this and the Tyra Banks shoot is that: 1.) historically white people have not been the object of oppression, ridicule and mockery by other races, they have historically been the ones doing the mocking, so it's difficult to quantify any actual harm done to white people as a result of this particular instance; and 2.) she was clearly depicting specific individuals as they actually appear in real-life, and not attempting to create an overly broad, generalized depiction of an entire group of people, which is the essence of a stereotype.

Furthermore, I would suggest that, regardless of her intent, it doesn't negate the possibility that some people might have been offended by her depiction nevertheless. Context does matter, but not everyone is going to view the images in the same racial/cultural/political/aesthetic sense as others, which is entirely the point here. Claiming that a certain image cannot, by its very nature be offensive, is simply an attempt to deny that any sort of context exists, or that the image must therefore lie outside of any established context, which is of course pure nonsense. Everything has context to someone, and its the context we bring to our perception of certain images that is going to dictate whether we're offended by it or not. The people in this thread telling others they have no right to be offended by the D-List images is just an attempt to deny or devalue the context the offended bring with them, and that's wrong, no matter what.
Posted by COMTE on September 18, 2013 at 2:50 PM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 90
84, It's more the factually inaccurate way you presented it. The model did not paint herself black. A makeup artist did. She did not create the concept of the photo shoot. An art director did. She did not choose to publish the spread, an editor did. Yet you decided to blame the it all on the model. A model is an easy target I guess. You feel free to call others racist, yet you run away when someone calls you something unflattering.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 18, 2013 at 2:41 PM · Report this
@84- it isn't that you committed a hate crime, it is that you placed the onus for the purported/implied offense onto the party who had the least to do with making it happen and gained the least by it. It was silly, cheap, and childish.

It feels like, among the rational folks commenting (weeding out the rabid, the trolls, etc.) we'd like the Stranger staff in general to up their game, especially as it relates to SLOG. If you're just driving traffic it doesn't much matter, but these troll baiting, juvenile posts get old after a while for regular readers. You have a job that many people do for free, so perhaps it is worth your time to do it well.
Posted by Chris Jury on September 18, 2013 at 2:24 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 88
@84 What question? There was no questioning done in your post. Stop lying.
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 18, 2013 at 2:17 PM · Report this
@85 What case are you resting?

That you wanted to stir up outrage and anger? That you are using the most uncharitable reading in the thread possible? That you cherry picking single words out of comments as rhetorical cudgels and gotchas in the most intellectually dishonest way possible?

And now YOU'RE the victim here just because somebody called you exactly what you are in this thread, an asshole.

Don't act like an asshole and I won't call you an asshole. You want to have a discussion that act like you want a discussion.
Posted by tkc on September 18, 2013 at 1:47 PM · Report this
@81 is this your "I know you are, but what am I " routine?

Are you denying it?

I'm not going to waste my time scouring the archives. But you probably know what I'm talking about. You used to do that shit regularly.

Your claim of "wanting a discussion" is bullshit as you so amply have demonstrated with your childish responses in this thread. And the thread itself. You are no more 'ideologically pure' than this model or anybody else and are in no position to say you wanted a "discussion." Look how you're comporting yourself in this thread and tell me you want a discussion.
Posted by tkc on September 18, 2013 at 1:39 PM · Report this
and comment @83. I rest my case. Keep getting drunk on own your hate. Goodbye, and good luck.
Posted by Kelly O on September 18, 2013 at 1:34 PM · Report this
Also, @77 - you seem to be the one full of hate. It might serve you well, if you stopped projecting it on to others.

I have not promoted that "I hate" anyone. Questioning the aesthetics of a poorly executed photo shoot, in a free local publication, does not equal a hate crime, no matter how desperately you want this to be true.
Posted by Kelly O on September 18, 2013 at 1:32 PM · Report this

Oh for fuck sake. Parsing out that comment and singling out one word - lynching - is about an uncharitable a reading as you can get.

You ARE a fucking asshole.
Posted by tkc on September 18, 2013 at 1:26 PM · Report this
" I'm thinking of the photos and videos you used to post of handicapped people and fat people for the LULZ "

Wow. You're really grasping at straws now. And "LULZ" ?

I did take this picture of Lindy West. Maybe you LULZ'd at it, with the same confusion?…

Posted by Kelly O on September 18, 2013 at 1:24 PM · Report this
81 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
80 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
More people in Seattle are sick of your PC Police shit than you can possibly realize.
Posted by Wow just wow like totally like wow maaaaaaaan wow on September 18, 2013 at 1:15 PM · Report this
Larry Mizell, Jr. 78
things are looking blacker, but black is lookin whiter.
Posted by Larry Mizell, Jr. on September 18, 2013 at 1:15 PM · Report this
@31 Oh. You wanted a discussion? Is that like Fox News is "just asking the questions?"

If I take you at your word then the question is what kind of "discussion?"

You honestly believe the way you framed this post engenders any kind of productive discussion? Pretty low hanging fruit, after all.

You single out ONE person - a pretty white girl model already prepackaged for easy hater-aid as is - and then you infer with the paraphrase from Tropic Thunder ("going full black.") that she's mocking black people.

You don't call her, call the magazine, art director or ANYBODY to even attempt to get context or provide any perspective than "have at 'er, everybody."

What kind of discussion did you want? It's hard to assume any sort of good faith. You don't really have that great of track record here, after all (I'm thinking of the photos and videos you used to post of handicapped people and fat people for the LULZ).

The most powerful emotion online is hate. That's a fact. I don't about you, but I'm tired of hate and I'm tired of being angry.

And yes the possibility of this girl getting harassed or death threats or who knows for what was a fairly innocent mistake is very real. That shit happen all the time. And you have a responsibility seeing as YOU have all the power as the media outlet.
Posted by tkc on September 18, 2013 at 1:14 PM · Report this
Isn't there like only one black writer (music writer) at the Stranger?
I'm deliberately not including Mudede, his shit absolutely does not count.
Posted by Forcibly Dismantle Slog's White Privilege on September 18, 2013 at 1:11 PM · Report this
Isn't there like only one black writer (music writer) at the Stranger?
I'm deliberately not including Mudede, his shit absolutely does not count.
Posted by Dismante Slog's White Privilege by force if needed on September 18, 2013 at 1:08 PM · Report this
74 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
TheMisanthrope 73
@69 Just because Rotten Tomatoes didn't use the race comments as the pull quotes doesn't mean they weren't in the rest of the article. I'm not saying that everybody cried racist. But a lot did.
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 18, 2013 at 11:59 AM · Report this
If you ask me and no one ever will, The Stranger should avoid all things Black until they learn how to shut up and let grown folks talk!
Posted by Nunya Binness on September 18, 2013 at 11:28 AM · Report this
Puty 71
I liked what @5 said about using a not-remotely-anyone's-skin-colour colour.
Posted by Puty on September 18, 2013 at 11:03 AM · Report this
Wow- Kelly O must really hate that model.

Posted by Chris Jury on September 18, 2013 at 10:59 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 69
67, On Rotten Tomatoes, I see 2 or 3 mentions (out of hundreds of reviews) of racism about the White Chicks movie, but mostly it is panned for being stupid, not racist.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 18, 2013 at 10:50 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 68
65, So it's okay for Tyra Banks in the above example posted at 60 to make her self look like Cindy Crawford, but if Crawford made herself look like Banks, that would be wrong?

Again, the model in this photo spread doesn't look like a person any race, nor an exaggerated stereotype emulation of a person of any race.

Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 18, 2013 at 10:43 AM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 67
@61 Grace Jones was the best thing about Vamp.

@60 Tyra was imitating specific people in a photo shoot all about Tyra, probably as dictated by Tyra. She wasn't putting a white model out of work with her photo shoot. That photo shoot is far more analogous to the people who got offended when white nerds painted themselves black to represent Geordi LaForge at a con.

@62 If I recall, there were many MANY critics who thought that movie was racist at the time.
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 18, 2013 at 10:41 AM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 66
@57 Your statement that you are a woman, thus you would never encourage anybody to attack another person is really fucking hilarious. That's more willfully idiotic than "just wow. Really, just wow."

And, since you're doing selective targeting, and selective reading, the model, in the Facebook post, also stated "this wasn't my idea." She was self-promoting her work as a model, but yet you blamed her for everything. Besides, you're playing coy with your cop to wanting Facebook to be part of the conversation. You could have just did a quick copy & paste to highlight. Instead, you painted it as "interesting commentary."

And, lynching is a form of extraditious execution conducted generally by a mob in order to punish an alleged transgressor. In this case, you're executing a model by ruining her career and painting her (heh) as an insensitive racist.

Lets face it, Kelly O. While you may have had mere clickbait intentions, you a) demonized a model who had little to do with the art direction of the shoot, b) frothed up a mob, c) provided absolutely no intelligent commentary in the post, and d) did absolutely no research beyond "this exists." Shame on you.
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 18, 2013 at 10:32 AM · Report this
blip 65
You cannot extract painting a white person black from the context of history. This photo shoot did not occur in a cultural vaccuum. It occured in a culture where white people have painted themselves black to mock a marginalized minority. This is not the same thing as black people painting themselves white because there was never a time in our culture's history where 1) white people were oppressed by black people and 2) black people painted themselves white to make fun of white people as an oppressed minority. Ignorance of your culture's history here is only an excuse if you don't give a shit about racism.
Posted by blip on September 18, 2013 at 10:26 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 64
63, You're inferring racial subtext where none exists. No race is a completely monotone black color. They would have needed to paint a person of any race (People come in shades of beige to brown, not an absolute black.) to achieve the look they were going for. It was done merely to make the jewelry stand out, not to emulate a race.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 18, 2013 at 10:14 AM · Report this
Sean Kinney 63
@62: You are missing the point, I think. It is about a Black human as a subject, painted or not. [Realism in fashion is a tenuous claim]. The model as art object, sex object, manikin, yes, we get that, but yet good luck neatly extricating those attributes from its underlying racial subtext.
Posted by Sean Kinney http:// on September 18, 2013 at 9:59 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 62
60, and don't forget this movie:…

Besides, the the makeup in this photo shoot was not a racial thing. No human being is that color, nor are people completely one shade. Lips, eyelids, palms etc. vary in color on an individual of any race.

It wasn't about race.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 18, 2013 at 9:40 AM · Report this
Sean Kinney 61
Grace Jones rocks the Raggedy Ann motif:…
Posted by Sean Kinney http:// on September 18, 2013 at 9:38 AM · Report this
I am so incredibly tired of the double standard. Why is this not acceptable art, but this is......…

Posted by moonme on September 18, 2013 at 9:28 AM · Report this
@comte; here is a a better link for you so you can understand what I was suggesting. Obviously, you need it very clearly spelled out: (…)

Now, please answer the question I originally posed. If it were a black woman that painted herself to match the darkness represented in the spread, is that acceptable?
What if no one knew who the model was or her race?
Posted by nador on September 18, 2013 at 9:09 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 58
57, You did set up the post in a way that blames the model. She wasn't the art director, the makeup artist or the photographer. You said she painted herself. She didn't. A team of people created and produced the concept, but you place all blame with the model, rather than the magazine's editorial staff, and then you direct people to the model's Facebook page.

As for the "Just wow" comment, what would you say if you weren't a college educated journalist?
Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 18, 2013 at 8:41 AM · Report this
@49/50 - I didn't include a link in hopes that anyone would "attack" this woman. I am a woman, that was never my (aggressive) intention. I included it, so some of her commentary, posted to public social media, was part of the conversation.

For instance, she states:
"any other color would distract from the jewelry"

Lastly, your choice of words is interesting. Lynch mob? LYNCHING? Seriously?

Those are your words, not mine.

Posted by Kelly O on September 18, 2013 at 8:09 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 56
So do you think they were really trying to mock and offend people of color (I've never seen anyone who is literally black, nor have I seen anyone who is literally white. Even albinos have a faint pinkish hue with bluish veins below the skin.) Or do you think perhaps the use of a black not seen in the human population was an artistic choice to show off the fashion?

This reminds me of the of the Washington DC mayoral aide who was forced to resign when he used the word, "niggardly" at a staff meeting about city finances. People got offended, but only the ones who didn't know that the word is synonymous with "miserly", (the meeting was about spending) and has absolutely nothing to do with race. Luckily they realized their idiocy, and rehired him.

Posted by Rob in Baltimore on September 18, 2013 at 7:40 AM · Report this

Your logic is curious. So any nonewhite person can render a racist concept against blacks as "not racist" so long as they arent white? Really? That logic is as flawed as it is defending bigotry.

Also, considering that this is the internet, I seriously doubt tke (or you for that matter) are anything more than white men/women defending racist implications of other white men/women guised as art.
Posted by araucania on September 18, 2013 at 4:48 AM · Report this

tkc doesn't claim to be black, he claims to be non-white. And I think that's credible, given his comment history.
Posted by robotslave on September 18, 2013 at 1:15 AM · Report this

Funny how when something racist happens, every jonnycomelately to the internet will claim to be x-background and not be offended by it.

"Well, I dont know about you, but Im Asian and dont find people walking holding their eye corners and making stereotypical chinese language sounds to be racist...see, Im 'one of them' and I dont find it you white guys and girls out there, its totally ok to be as racist as you want!"

I cant find a SINGLE African American or African migrant descended person Ive mentioned/linked this two (including family thats more than a dozen) that did NOT find this offensive. So spar us the faux identity-disclaimer bit, willya?

LOL, right on man. Im sure some of his/her BEST friends are black, and they would never say something like this is offensive! If anything, its racist to call this blatant bigoted bullshit 'racist', its 'reverse racist'!

Posted by araucania on September 18, 2013 at 1:07 AM · Report this

Since the model and the owners and managers of the magazine are white, it follows logically that whites ought to be allowed to weigh in on this no, no?

But yeah definitely hispanics, asians, native americans, and pacific islanders can't have any basis for an opinion here, so they all ought to be barred from commenting, right?
Posted by robotslave on September 18, 2013 at 12:53 AM · Report this

You're absolutely right when you say that discussing a publicly published magazine feature isn't a hate crime.

And your critics are absolutely right when they say that simply discussing what you've seen in a magazine (rather than interviewing the people involved and publishing their opinions or perspectives, or searching out and presenting extra relevant factual information) isn't journalism, it's gossip.

Of course, some of us come to SLOG mostly for the gossip, so for that superficial fraction of your audience, this is all entirely acceptable.
Posted by robotslave on September 18, 2013 at 12:42 AM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 50
@31 Also, "Wow. Just wow." is not intelligent discourse. Or discourse at all. It's petty and it's clickwhoring, and it's also kind of lynch mobby. Directing people to the model's Facebook page is further amplifying this into lynchmobbery. You seem to have learned clickwhoring traits from Goldy by providing the minorest of commentary, combined with blame language, and Voila! It's a lynch mob of click bait!
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 17, 2013 at 11:56 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 49
Why has nobody, including Kelly O, mentioned that the art director was Jenascia Chakos (who apparently was also a model on cycle 2 of ANTM).

Kelly O wrote that the model "painted herself black." Oh, and I imagine she took her own photos, and got them published in her own magazine, right? That's fucking bullshit.

Shame on you, Kelly O. As if you've never art directed a photo shoot before. Sure, a model could refuse, but it probably wasn't her idea or her choice. And, as art director, if it was the model's inane idea, it's your job to say "that's fucking racist." Blame Chakos. Blame Dlist. But to say that this was the model's decision is bullshit. And you should be ashamed.
Posted by TheMisanthrope on September 17, 2013 at 11:32 PM · Report this
MacCrocodile 48
@35 - I am so sorry. Please extend my sincerest apologies to that very specific subset of humanity, whom the model is quite obviously mocking.

New rule: Any time the color black is to be used in any context, please consult with non-European people. If someone could determine who their leader is, that'd be really convenient.
Posted by MacCrocodile on September 17, 2013 at 11:01 PM · Report this
Sandiai 47
It's stunning... and also culturally insensitive. I don't have a strong emotional reaction, admittedly, but I defer to the opinions of my Black friends on issues such as these, since they're the ones being harmed, not I.

As a treat, here's one of my favorite models, Alek Wek:…
Posted by Sandiai on September 17, 2013 at 10:16 PM · Report this
You people have a lot of time on your hands, don't you?
Posted by CodyTheRodeoStar on September 17, 2013 at 9:47 PM · Report this

Yes. Yes you do. In fact, I would suggest you do us ALL a favor and stop as of right this second.

Also, shit, or get off the fucking pot, cowboy.
Posted by COMTE on September 17, 2013 at 9:38 PM · Report this
Sargon Bighorn 44
Very cool.
Posted by Sargon Bighorn on September 17, 2013 at 9:13 PM · Report this
Y 43
Fucking hell. I need to stop reading the comments to any "Is this racist?" article the Stranger posts. All the handwringing, self-flagellating simps really come out of the woodwork to win their gold medals in the Offended Olympics whenever Slog posts boring shit like this. If Slog replaced all these red herring outragebait posts with stories related to real discrimination, bigotry, and racial violence in the world, the things it could accomplish! The coverage of Russia is a really good start, but the world's a lot bigger and shittier than Russia. Stop diluting the horrors of the world by crying wolf over piss-poor horror simulations, you thin-skinned babies, and get to the real shit.
Posted by Y on September 17, 2013 at 8:54 PM · Report this
That Facebook thread (and this one, too) is so cringeworthy. The people of color who so VERY gently said, "hey, this looks like blackface, have you considered that issue and how it might be offensive?" are immediately caricatured as "raging," racist against white people, and BLAH and blah and blah.

It's so, so painful.
Posted by siduri on September 17, 2013 at 8:11 PM · Report this
Art Director is wishing he picked navy blue instead.... Which, really, let's be honest - would have looked SO much better!
Posted by absolut_platinum on September 17, 2013 at 8:02 PM · Report this
Supreme Ruler Of The Universe 40
With blackface, she looks like Garret Morris:…

But if you don't like that foto spread, how about her video:

Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe on September 17, 2013 at 7:41 PM · Report this

If the images in which the person is presented depicted them in guises reminiscent of out-dated cultural stereotypes (as those in the D-List spread clearly do), then yes, most likely they would.


That's about as logical as saying people who've never molested children shouldn't have an opinion about pederasty, or people who've never been in the service shouldn't express an opinion about U.S. military intervention, or that people with IQ's over 100 should refrain from objecting when stupid, albeit naive or otherwise clueless people say and do stupid, clueless things.
Posted by COMTE on September 17, 2013 at 7:30 PM · Report this
Lew Siffer 38
Posted by Lew Siffer on September 17, 2013 at 7:27 PM · Report this
Matt from Denver 37
I think all the white commenters should shut the fuck up about this. What do you say?
Posted by Matt from Denver on September 17, 2013 at 7:12 PM · Report this
she looks amazing and beautiful, so who cares what color she is? if she was painted red would it be offensive to native americans? or yellow to asians? i wasn't aware races had trademarks on skin... i don't think she's trying to be "black face" at all. kudos to everyone involved for a lovely photo shoot.
Posted by tikaspice on September 17, 2013 at 7:05 PM · Report this

Please tell that to members of the Jarawa or Sentinelese tribeswho inhabit the Andaman Island chain located in the Bay of Bengal south of Myanmar, an indigenous people of Indian origin, with such a dark skin-tone they actually lighten themselves with ash and clay.

Besides which, your point is irrelevant, as there is simply no reason why the creators of this spread HAD to use a white woman, when it would have been just as easy to body paint a black woman the same color (or darken her in post-editing), if they wanted to avoid controversy.


No, I purposefully AVOIDED making that overt comparison - and left it to numbskulls like yourself to do that FOR me. So, setting aside your hyperbolic and completely off-the-chart suppositions for a moment, I believe she's getting exactly what she should have anticipated getting: a whirlwind of scorn, derision and mockery for not being smart enough to have thought through the quite obvious consequences of her actions.

But hey, if being an apologist for overt racism is your thing, I suggest you go back to watching your collection of "Amos & Andy shorts, and listening to your Al Jolson Minstrel 78's; heck, it's all just a little joke, right? Nothing to get worked up over, because in our post-racial era, things like blackface have absolutely no effect on their former objects of ridicule, right?
Posted by COMTE on September 17, 2013 at 6:58 PM · Report this
The image on the right of page 69 of 84. Topless. Tribal. Not trying to "flay or threaten" anyone involved, but this is an extremely evocative image of a tribal African woman…
Posted by Kelly O on September 17, 2013 at 6:55 PM · Report this
NotSean 33
My goodness.

Black skin is not black culture.
It is a human physical characteristic.

This glamorous woman, painted black, modeling beautiful jewels, should not be insulting to anyone other than some other model who might have been a better choice (so says she).

Posted by NotSean on September 17, 2013 at 6:51 PM · Report this
blip 32
@27, That was my thought, too. The overall styling appears to be deliberately evocative of deco-era "tribal." It's hard to believe this was not intentional, though I hate to see the model take the blame when she's the least responsible for it.
Posted by blip on September 17, 2013 at 6:40 PM · Report this
No one's being flayed alive. No one's threatening anyone with death, and no one is a "Nazi"

It's a free local magazine. And discussing it isn't some sort of hate crime.
Posted by Kelly O on September 17, 2013 at 6:37 PM · Report this
The righteousness of the internet I understand and, well, it's somewhat forgivable. It's easy to do and gives people the feeling they are in fact fighting injustice. Though of course rarely are they.

But I won't forgive is The Stranger for constantly indulging in this petty bullshit.

Aren't staff writers supposed to be professional journalists?

Before whipping up an outrage mob, maybe, you know, call this Amanda person or the art-director of the magazine. Actually write a STORY with some perspective.

Maybe they had the worst intentions and are white supremacist members of StormFront. Maybe the magazine did it for the hype and is sacrificing this models career as a Judas Goat.

Or maybe it's something completely innocent though a bit tone deaf.

We'll never know because now the wheels of internet justice are in motion to flay this person alive for page hits.

And don't we feel so good about ourselves for being right?
Posted by tkc on September 17, 2013 at 6:25 PM · Report this
care bear 29
Unless you're a super model, it's not actually a very glamorous or easy or high paying job. I really wouldn't blame the model for this one. She just showed up to work.
Posted by care bear on September 17, 2013 at 6:16 PM · Report this
MacCrocodile 28
@21 - Actually, no, there are no human beings, except burn victims, whose skin is that literal shade of black. It is an effect that can only be achieved with makeup.

Can we at all make the distinction between the color black and the ethnic category black? Or are all instances of the actual color black about people of African heritage?
Posted by MacCrocodile on September 17, 2013 at 6:15 PM · Report this
The tribal nature of the styling can't be ignored, black is not just a color in this piece.
Posted by LukeJoe on September 17, 2013 at 6:10 PM · Report this

Probably would make a stronger case if you hadn't selected a gimp suit with large see-through patches.

But in any case, wearing head-to-toe latex or spandex isn't at all the same as having ones SKIN colored to, uh, you know, look like someone else's SKIN color. So, really D+ for poor use of analogy.

Or would anyone defending this out there care to argue that there aren't any black fashion models with a dark enough skin-tone to match what's depicted in this spread?

Go ahead, I dare you...
Posted by COMTE on September 17, 2013 at 6:00 PM · Report this
@24 did you just compare her to a Nazi? For fuck sake.

So what kind of consequences do you have mind? A beating? Death threats? Or just never working as a model again? Because that's the kind of mindless bullshit justice that results from these internet hate-a-thons.

Lets just shotgun our wrath at whomever is even tangentially related to this crime against humanity. Don't forget the make-up person and gaffer! Look up their names, too.

None of you for a second ever thought to just try, TRY, to maybe, just once, in your mad rush to be a self righteous mob, to give somebody the benefit doubt? Seriously?

How big an offense is this, really? In the scope of egregious fatal racist shit that goes down every day. THIS is the hill you want to plant your flag? Well. Until the next petty outrage.

We have massive institutional racism in this country but this, THIS is what we need get all GRRRRAR about. Y'all might want to check out this before your so certain of yourselves:…
Posted by tkc on September 17, 2013 at 5:57 PM · Report this

And if the model (who is in fact white, BTW) had half-a brain, she might have anticipated just a teensy bit of controversy over allowing herself to be depicted painted a deep shade of EBONY from head-to-toe, and quite possibly have declined the shoot, both out of consideration for how actual black people might be reasonably expected to respond, as well as for how such a response might affect her career.

Actions have consequences, regardless of whose (not so) brilliant idea this might have been in the first place. "I was just doing what the director told me" or its innumerable variants (he says, risking invocation of Godwin's Law) has long been discredited as an excuse or justification for such actions.
Posted by COMTE on September 17, 2013 at 5:43 PM · Report this
@5 @9 and others. I curious what the implications would be if the model was African-American but still painted up to be as unnaturally black as possible, as is the case with Amanda. Would there still be an outcry? How about just putting on one of these Zentai suits (…)
Posted by nador on September 17, 2013 at 5:39 PM · Report this
@12 Um. You assume I'm white?
Posted by tkc on September 17, 2013 at 5:26 PM · Report this
seattlestew 21
It's just a shame that there aren't women whose skin is actually black who could model these overpriced baubles. Oh, wait....
Posted by seattlestew on September 17, 2013 at 5:24 PM · Report this
Shibari-san 20 She black faces too.
Posted by Shibari-san on September 17, 2013 at 5:21 PM · Report this
Lew Siffer 19
Ah, I see, only the Wayans can do that, as comedy. Anyone who is offended by this is a butthurt piece of shit.
Posted by Lew Siffer on September 17, 2013 at 5:16 PM · Report this
I think this will clear up any jaded opinions...…
Posted by Billy the Fridge on September 17, 2013 at 5:05 PM · Report this
The fashion director at DList has a child who is half black. I'm sure if she thought the shoot would be viewed as racist, she wouldn't have even considered proposing the idea.
Posted by Chali2Na on September 17, 2013 at 5:02 PM · Report this
michael strangeways 16
And, that being said, I think the look is more "inanimate Deco statue" than deliberate "let's paint her up to look like a black woman".

Of course, it would probably have behooved them to HIRE an actual Model of Color to do this shoot and they would have avoided any issues.

And, I'm also assuming someone has checked to make sure Amanda herself isn't a person of color...right?
Posted by michael strangeways on September 17, 2013 at 5:00 PM · Report this
michael strangeways 15
Why are you accusatory towards the MODEL??!? The photographer and photo editor at the magazine created the shot/look of the photos!
Posted by michael strangeways on September 17, 2013 at 4:56 PM · Report this
Funny, the model defends her choice to do the shoot on her FB page by declaring that she was "a blank canvas". Aren't "blank canvases" typically white?
Posted by COMTE on September 17, 2013 at 4:53 PM · Report this
seatackled 13

I'm sure @10 is black, or at least has some really good black friends.
Posted by seatackled on September 17, 2013 at 4:50 PM · Report this

Wow, thanks white guy for telling us ignorant black people what we should and should not be offended by! Just because YOU see it as artistic, doesnt mean other see it that way. Its offensive. by your argument, minstrel shows are 'artistic' expressions.

...Talk about white priviledge gone into overdrive...jeebus!
Posted by araucania on September 17, 2013 at 4:46 PM · Report this
Still not cool. If anything should have been learned from the Miley controversy, its that black people and black culture are not props, fads, or artistic statements. We are PEOPLE. Do not use our humanity as an attention-getter for your own mediums.
Posted by araucania on September 17, 2013 at 4:44 PM · Report this
@2 is right. I think this an artistic choice more about contrast than race or skin.

I think it's time to be a little less knee-jerk and rigid here. Ideologically proscriptive rules on art are not exactly a recipe for positive change or rational perspective.

But I doubt that will stop the shitstorm of righteous sanctimony and internet mob outrage that Kelly is attempting to whip up.

Sorry, Amanda. We really know nothing about you. But your career is about to be ruined by the unstoppable forces of Social Media Justice. Start typing up those apologies (that are really just an admission of your guilt and never good enough) now.
Posted by tkc on September 17, 2013 at 4:43 PM · Report this
MacCrocodile 9
@5 - Red? Are you serious? That would be exactly as racist, since the same word is sometimes used to indicate a racial group, regardless of the actual color of their skin. Exactly as racist.

A chalky white might also have worked, but we wouldn't want white people to think we're appropriating their culture. White people get a kick out of that.
Posted by MacCrocodile on September 17, 2013 at 4:43 PM · Report this
black paint does not equal black face. this is not an issue.
Posted by nothanks on September 17, 2013 at 4:41 PM · Report this
Posted by Joe Szilagyi on September 17, 2013 at 4:40 PM · Report this
Banna 6
Forget that nonsense, models are paid to look the way the art directors want them to. Instead, check out page 13; apparently the "new flavor of Belltown" is a pile of yellow dog shit on a plate.
Posted by Banna on September 17, 2013 at 4:38 PM · Report this
Since they're seemingly not trying to emulate any naturally occurring skin tone (or caricature one for that matter), I wonder if they could have avoided any controversy at all by going with an extremely dark, extremely unsaturated color (blue, red, etc.) rather than just 'black' for the makeup. Would still make for an awesome visual statement (these shots are excellent).
Posted by algorhythm99 on September 17, 2013 at 4:37 PM · Report this
kittenalarm 4
Part of me doesn't even want to react, because this girl wants that attention. Meh. She's stupid for taking the assignment, DList is stupid for publishing it. It's like when you were in school and the teacher said "I don't want to hear a peep out of you" and this girl and that mag are saying "Peep". We know better by now and this is just some attention whorin'.
Posted by kittenalarm on September 17, 2013 at 4:36 PM · Report this
I'm more offended by the Executive Director's unreadable quarterly Editor's Letter.
Posted by Chali2Na on September 17, 2013 at 4:31 PM · Report this
mike in oly 2
Loved these shots. I did not get the impression at all from the photos that they were trying to portray the model as a member of another 'race'. Looked to me like they were just trying to make a striking visual statement that made the jewelry stand out. Gorgeous job!!
Posted by mike in oly on September 17, 2013 at 4:29 PM · Report this
Controversial makeup aside, this is a pretty good fashion editorial. Above the bar for the D-list.
Posted by Anarchy Group Rules on September 17, 2013 at 4:25 PM · Report this

Add a comment


Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy