It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Golliwoggs: How are they offensive?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 07:29 AM
link   
Hello People,

I'd like to talk about Golliwogg's and how anyone sane person could find them offensive.

Firstly a Golliwogg may be Black but its simply a doll for crying out loud! Anyone who finds them offensive are, in my opinion, very ignorant and down right stupid.

For a little history lesson that I'm sure most UK members will remember:

Robertsons Jam used the Golliwogg figure as its mascot from 1910 till 1983, every Jam bottle also had a token which could be collected by children and when they had enough they could use it in exchange for a golliwogg doll.


British jam manufacturer James Robertson & Sons used a golliwog called Golly as its mascot from 1910, after John Robertson apparently saw children playing with golliwog dolls in America. Robertson's started producing promotional Golliwog badges in the 1920s, which could be obtained in exchange for tokens gained from their products.


Source

At this point can I just point out that these were English children collecting the badges and I presume the majority of them were white.

Fast forward in time, not too long ago a shop keeper in the UK was arrested after having golliwogg dolls in his shop window. A member of the public had found it offensive and reported him to the police.

Connecting the two here; how can anyone find a golliwog doll offensive? Remember these are dolls that white children used to play with, so how can selling them to the public for other kids to play with be racist?

I really don't understand this way of thinking and I would love to speak to a black person who did find them offensive to try and understand their way of thinking.

My Mother is a keen artist and a very good one at that who used to regulary enter painting competitions.

She had an idea to paint a large picture full of Golliwoggs but paint each one a different colour. Then she was going to paint a can of lager in each golliwoggs hand. She wanted to entitle the picture "Culture"

Do you see the point she was getting at? That regardless of someones skin colour were all human at the end of the day and all capable of mistakes. Theres good and bad in every walk of life.

She hasn't painted the picture by the way for fear of causing uproar spouting from the mouths of the PC crew and do-gooders.

The same people who think a black doll is racist.

Let me point out again;white people are buying black coloured dolls - surely thats the opposite of racism!

Racism would be a father telling his son who wanted a golliwogg that "your not having that little black ******* in the house!"

Has the world gone mad?

[edit on 20/8/09 by Death_Kron]

[edit on 20/8/09 by Death_Kron]




posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


I don't believe they're racist either but you are wrong in your definition. The singling out of an ethnicity, skin colour or other background characteristic is racist whether used positively or negatively.

In addition, the term "golliwog" itself has many negative connotations to members of the black community in the UK as it was often used as an insult (sometimes just shortened to "wog").

I hate PC facism but to really understand the issue you need to take into account the context and historical background.

Part of the reason art exists is to "challenge" perception, your mother should do the painting. I don't think the can of lager thing is a wise choice though as not everyone drinks lager nor do they drink it from cans. She would be better off looking for another characteristic to emphasis, imho.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 07:50 AM
link   
the doll itself isn't offensive, the offense is in the fact that the image the doll is based on is predominantly used by racists to depict black people as sub human.

it's the symbolism associated with the doll which is offensive. now this may not be the same symbolism you attach to the image, but the meaning attached to a symbol is changeable and the offensive meaning is widely held enough to make it widely accepted.



[edit on 20/8/09 by pieman]



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 07:52 AM
link   
Hate to spoil the party, but can I point out one interesting fact:

What do golliwoggs have to do with general conspiracies?



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by phoenix103
 



I don't believe they're racist either but you are wrong in your definition. The singling out of an ethnicity, skin colour or other background characteristic is racist whether used positively or negatively.


Are you sure about that? I don't think you can be racist in a good way, according to the web its definition is:


a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others. discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion


I know about the term "golliwog" and could maybe see how that could be offensive but were talking about a doll here.


Part of the reason art exists is to "challenge" perception, your mother should do the painting. I don't think the can of lager thing is a wise choice though as not everyone drinks lager nor do they drink it from cans. She would be better off looking for another characteristic to emphasis, imho.


Thanks I'll tell her. She chose the lager to emphasize the fact that anyone of any race can do something wrong in an attempt to break common stereotypical assumptions i.e. all young black lads carry knifes, all white girl are binge drinkers etc



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by infinite
 


Good question! How about the suggestion that PCism is a conspiracy to rob us of our freedom of speech and thought? Certainly seems like it at times..



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 07:55 AM
link   
reply to post by infinite
 


the general thought control experiment conspiracy that is called political correctness.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron

Are you sure about that? I don't think you can be racist in a good way, according to the web its definition is...


Sure but the distinction based on skin colour alone is racist. If these dolls existed in all colours there wouldn't be a problem.


Originally posted by Death_Kron
I know about the term "golliwog" and could maybe see how that could be offensive but were talking about a doll here.


Think of it like this, back in the days where some white people (NF etc) would be calling someone a wog or other terms giving them a damned good kicking or worse, would the fact that a doll shared the name be relevant or would you remember the broken bones and emotional trauma? Personally, I know which would stick with me!



Originally posted by Death_Kron
Thanks I'll tell her. She chose the lager to emphasize the fact that anyone of any race can do something wrong in an attempt to break common stereotypical assumptions i.e. all young black lads carry knifes, all white girl are binge drinkers etc


Interesting! Well i don't think anyone should fear expressing themselves even if it leaves them open to negative comments by the small minded robots who are everywhere these days!



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by phoenix103
reply to post by infinite
 


Good question! How about the suggestion that PCism is a conspiracy to rob us of our freedom of speech and thought? Certainly seems like it at times..


Bingo, you got it in one.

Theres been alot of threads recently about coloured people.

There also been alot of threads that have contained lots of political correctness/do-gooders etc

I thought this thread bridge the gap between the two qutie nicely.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:00 AM
link   
I appreciate why golliwogs are deemed offensive. They're based on a negative stereotype of black people that was encouraged by anti-Abolitionists in the 18th Century. I don't really care that they're banned in the UK...it's not like the world's gonna miss them.

The only point I wanted to make here, is that until I was told, I never had a clue golliwogs represented anything more than a black stuffed toy. It shows an object can't be inherently racist until it's associated with racism.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


Likewise.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:10 AM
link   
I think it's ridiculous

In my opinion, blacks are one step away from carrying on like the jews with their 'anti-semite' nonsense every time they're caught out

It's the same tactic: play the victim, play the 'race' card (although jews are not a race, Judaism is a religion and I will brook no argument over that: it's my opinion and I think it's valid) and try to make 'whites' (and non-jews) feel 'guilty' every minute of their lives

It's sour grapes from the black community, imo. They tell themselves 'whites' have everything and this leads to their believing 'whites' should have to suffer because blacks are black.

The PC brigade have gone along with it, because it fits right in with their 'destroy white culture' agenda (of which the abomination known as 'multiculturalism' is just a part).

What are non-blacks supposed to do .. pretend blacks are not blacks ? Seems that way.

Look, it's not the 'fault' of white's that they're white. And they should not be required to apologise for it to appease non-whites.

What about 'white' dolls ? Do whites leap around playing victim about those ?

Then why the fuss about 'black' dolls ?

Why don't people accept who and what they are without trying to make someone else 'pay for it' ?

When I was young, there were double-dolls. They looked pretty much like a normal doll, but it you pulled up the skirt, there was another doll underneath that. And it you up-ended the doll, the first doll vanished beneath the skirt. They were made by joining two dolls together at the waist. One end was black, the other white. So you could play with the black dolly or the white one. They were very popular. Are they 'banned' and non-PC also ? Why? Are there not black and white people on the planet ? Or are we supposed to pretend blacks don't exist .. and if anyone creates anything representative of blacks, then will blacks claim to be offended ?

What colour dolls do kids play with in Africa ? Relevant question



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron

Originally posted by phoenix103
reply to post by infinite
 


Good question! How about the suggestion that PCism is a conspiracy to rob us of our freedom of speech and thought? Certainly seems like it at times..


Bingo, you got it in one.

Theres been alot of threads recently about coloured people.

There also been alot of threads that have contained lots of political correctness/do-gooders etc

I thought this thread bridge the gap between the two qutie nicely.


here's another thread that is going to have some PC dogooders. (or at least 1 , me
)

I have a problem with th fact that you still use the 70s term for black people. "coloured" which has implications to colour. And implies that they white is normal, and everyone else is "coloured" from white. I realise that you probably didn't mean it like that, but that's what that means these days. If you wanna say black person, then say black person.

As for the term gollywog, it's been pointed out that it is an offensive term. And that's all there is to it. It's racism. Pure and simple. I can't speak for black people, but even I feel uncomfortable seeing stuff like that. It's needless in this day and age, where we should get to the point that there is only 1 race. The human race. And skin colour or cultural differences are that and that alone. Diffeerences in human kind. Not seperate races.

[edit on 20/8/2009 by Acidtastic]



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:12 AM
link   
This (extensive ) thread covers most of the angles and points one could hope to raise or hear in this argument.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Acidtastic
 



I have a problem with th fact that you still use the 70s term for black people. "coloured" which has implications to colour. And implies that they white is normal, and everyone else is "coloured" from white. I realise that you probably didn't mean it like that, but that's what that means these days. If you wanna say black person, then say black person


I hate this way of thinking! Anyone who isn't white is technically coloured in comparision, its as simple as that. I don't mean that in a racist manner and I'm not really sure how someone could interpret it as such, I don't mean you specifically I mean anyone.

Let me ask you a question; what do you call the opposite of a white board?


As for the term gollywog, it's been pointed out that it is an offensive term. And that's all there is to it. It's racism. Pure and simple. I can't speak for black people, but even I feel uncomfortable seeing stuff like that. It's needless in this day and age, where we should get to the point that there is only 1 race. The human race. And skin colour or cultural differences are that and that alone. Diffeerences in human kind. Not seperate races.


The term maybe racist but the doll is just a doll!

[edit on 20/8/09 by Death_Kron]

[edit on 20/8/09 by Death_Kron]



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by St Vaast
 
How lucky we are that you 'will brook no argument.' You run a crooked path in that post.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:24 AM
link   
For heaven's sakes .. I have a doll with an elongated, pointy chin, a hook nose, warts, a hunchback and wearing rags. It's a little 'witch' from Pendle Hill in the UK. It rides a broomstick.

Does that mean all those with elongated chins and warts are going to ban witch dolls ? Because it's the same thing . . people could rightly claim that witches were discriminated against. What about Scots dolls with their little kilts and Tam'o'shanters ? The Scots were discriminated against. Should Scots ban Scots dolls ?

And as far as it now being 'non-PC' to refer to negroes as 'coloured' when in fact THE PC term currently is 'black' .. then I take offence at that and always have. I think the term 'black people' is offensive, whereas 'negro' is the correct term and I do not understand the great taboo about it. I'm Caucasian. It's a fact. Others are negro and that's a fact. Still others are asiatic.

'Black' DOES stipulate and emphasise skin colour, whereas 'negro' does not. And isn't differentiation between skin colours the very thing PC speech claims to want to eradicate ?



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:31 AM
link   
In fact, I believe it's time for 'whites' to kick up a stink about Barbie dolls.

They stereotype white women, portray them as superficial sex-toys who want only to dress up and look vapid.

If I see one negro child playing with a Barbie doll now, I'm going to write to the PC Thought & Speech Police and complain loud and long about racism and discrimination. Whites have been discriminated against long enough.

I want all those offensive Barbie dolls OFF the shelves. Anyone selling Barbie dolls should be reported and arrested, as the shop-owner who innocently displayed a Golliwog was.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Personally, I think the doll is harmless. There may have been an agenda to the doll a long, long time ago but I doubt any child would attribute any racist notion to the doll at all. I had one when I was a kid and I treasured it.

IRM



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by St Vaast
 


You hit the nail on the head mate, theyre simply toys why can't the PC brigade see that. I understand the racial stigma that some may attribute or associate them with but seriously its a bloody doll.

It's good to see someone as against political correctness as I am!

Like I said white kids playing with black dolls doesn't seem that racist to me.



new topics




 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join