>>102871891Well not so much all of a sudden but from the historical context of minstrel shows. Which themselves are can be a complicated. Certainly a lot of mockery, but then we have people like Al Jolson who would perform in black face but seemed to have a genuine love of the culture which, thanks to racial tensions in America, was largely kept separate. He had a large number of African American friends, loved spending time in those communities, especially for the music, and helped open doors for African American artists which otherwise would likely have not opened for people of those skin shades. By modern eyes he's looked on with disapproval as the "Mammy" guy.
I think largely it is that what was normal for that day and age, and even when it was actually more open and accepting for that time than many would have been in American, by modern standards even their kindest moments are looked down on with disdain. It's so rare to find an African American role that isn't as a housekeeper or railway porter, and always with that distinctive flair of, "Yussah, I's just a po' unedicated man."
Last big instance I can remember was Ted Danson during a roast of Whoopi Goldberg back in the 90s. Those two were such scamps back then. Course nowadays it extends to actors of one race playing a roll intended for a different race and when this is considered okay in general or an outrage on /co/. Way I figure the logic is that it's okay to change gender or race if those people were traditionally marginalized. This is an act of inclusion, adding more rolls in to largely underrepresented people, and thus a good thing. If it goes the other way and a white person plays a non-white roll then that just harkens back to an era when certain people weren't allowed on stage and thus portrayed, often mockingly, by white actors.
Course if you go back far enough in theater we're back were women weren't allowed on stage and men in dresses was therefore fine.
