paddy Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I won't tell you the background to this, or my opinion, as it may sway the poll. Thinking mainly on the one on the left really. Just a simple question. Are the figures pictured here racist? I know the picture isn't the clearest but you get the idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santa_Rosa Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I'd say yeah. It's basically a Golliwog isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hycus-flange Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 **** the items in the picture, thats the first bit of sunlight ive seen for a month, goddam rainy summer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 no way is that racist. what makes it racist? nothing. its black, so what. even a gollywog in itself isn't racist, even though the name might have connotations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I'd say yeah. It's basically a Golliwog isn't it? So a doll with frizzy hair and a brown complexion is racist?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wol. Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Were they made by tribe people to make money for themselves ? dont know why that would matter tho, I could have them without thinking they were discriminating or poking fun at anybody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blunther Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 What's racist about them?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PompeyVillan Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Well, the actual figures themselves are not racist. They could be a playful caricature made by a mischievous artist. Say, a son models his mother, for a joke. However, our cultural interpretation of what they may represent leads them to be considered by some, to be racist. Within our society those images stimulate different reactions, which obviously varies from person to person. Some may feel that they represent racial stereotypes, which are derogatory. Others may see them as harmless fun. As inanimate objects, they are not inherently racist. It is what we interpret them, that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 28, 2009 VT Supporter Share Posted July 28, 2009 I voted "no". An inanimate object cannot in itself be "racist", only a person can. So, for example, a small child playing with a gollywog doll is harmless. But if an adult waves the gollywog doll at the child and says "This is a nigger, we hate them", that's racist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjw63 Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Of course they're not racist Are you training to be a journalist for the Socialist Workers Party? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastzombies Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I voted "no". An inanimate object cannot in itself be "racist", only a person can. So, for example, a small child playing with a gollywog doll is harmless. But if an adult waves the gollywog doll at the child and says "This is a nigger, we hate them", that's racist. bang on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santa_Rosa Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 However, our cultural interpretation of what they may represent leads them to be considered by some, to be racist. Within our society those images stimulate different reactions, which obviously varies from person to person. Some may feel that they represent racial stereotypes, which are derogatory. Others may see them as harmless fun. As inanimate objects, they are not inherently racist. It is the connote what is! Yep, that's where I was coming from. As for Gollywogs, they originally came about as caricatures of minstrels (a racist notion in itself) and were depicted as stupid, evil, thieving etc. Also the fact that variations on the name were adopted as racist phrases, Wogs in particular, means to me, they're racist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ricardomeister Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I agree with most on here...no way are they racist imo. I think you have to be highly over-sensitive to find racism in things like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sled Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Were they made by tribe people to make money for themselves ? That is a very interesting question! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Not racist to me but the owner should be arrested for crimes against taste .. assuming they are made from wood then a tree died in vain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santa_Rosa Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Of course they're not racist Are you training to be a journalist for the Socialist Workers Party? :-) no mate. But if an adult waves the gollywog doll at the child and says "This is a nigger, we hate them", that's racist. Basically though, that is where the creators of these caricatures were coming from and I'd say their existence set the civil rights movement back considerably be reinforcing negative stereotypes. "For as long as I can remember and I'm in my mid-40s, it has always been something people have used to poke fun at people like me," said Michael Eboda, publisher of The Power List of Britain's 100 most powerful black men and women. "There are some white people who've been trying to say that when we were all young it wasn't offensive. I just feel like saying: Maybe not to you. To me, it always has been. To use that term of a black person is an unequivocal insult. There's no other way of interpreting it, and it really makes me wonder how many other people use those terms in their private worlds." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dundeevilla Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Not racist, just ugly. WTF is it?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 28, 2009 Moderator Share Posted July 28, 2009 I voted no. Actually though, considering there are no white ones, no yellow ones, no paler brown ones, then clearly, the ethnic balance of the small wooden carved figures is totally non-pc. It is essential that all mantlepiece displays of little wooden figures conform to government policy (and they should all have ID cards, or face expulsion to the cupboard under the stairs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santa_Rosa Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I voted no. Actually though, considering there are no white ones, no yellow ones, no paler brown ones, then clearly, the ethnic balance of the small wooden carved figures is totally non-pc. It is essential that all mantlepiece displays of little wooden figures conform to government policy (and they should all have ID cards, or face expulsion to the cupboard under the stairs). Looks like I'm getting a bit of pasting here :nod: Someone else voted yes. Help me out here whoever you are! :cry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALL.IV.1 Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 If you found these in a house in africa would you assume the owners were racist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts