Jump to content

Gollywogs - is this guy for real?.


Kavi Ugl
 Share

Recommended Posts

GR, it's not about banning particular words or things, it's about challenging the underlying attitudes in society that make certain things or words prejudicial. It's about challenging our own attitudes and privilege. We've been fairly successful in the last several decades at eliminating the more overt racism, bigotry and sexism that pervades our society, but that's not enough. Now we need to challenge the more subtle attitudes and prejudices that we're all guilty of.

 

A lot of racism, sexism and bigotry is entirely unconscious. We don't even realise we're doing it and the only way we're going to recognise it, is if, when people point it out to us, we pay attention.

 

This is where Affirmative Action has a role to play (I hate the phrase "positive discrimination", all discrimination is bad). A good example is in the debate about the lack of minorities and women in the boardroom. I doubt that many (or even any) of the current straight, white, male directors actually ever thought "I don't want any blacks/gays/women on my board", yet despite legislation being passed decades ago to address discrimination in public life and the workplace, minorities and women continue to be under-represented.

 

This isn't because there are no minorities or women to fill these positions, it's because the current incumbents are letting their unconscious prejudice and unexamined privilege affect their hiring decisions. Straight, white males tend to hire other straight, white, males. As long as we fail to tackle these unconscious prejudices, then legislation is the only way forward. Only once women and minorities are properly represented in the boardrooms will the problem disappear because they will be properly involved in making future hiring and firing decisions.

 

Tackling the obvious racism, sexism and bigotry in our society was the easy bit, because it was so obvious. Now we have to tackle the underlying assumptions and attitudes that once made the overt stuff acceptable.

 

This is the hard bit, and we have a long way to go. The first step of this is paying attention when someone points it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

first we ban certain words, then we ban words put together in a certain way, then we ban books, how very enlightened of you folks.

 

fact is why should anyone dictate what is offensive or not, just grow a thicker skin, get a grip toughen up.

 

As we were all told as bairns sticks and stones will break your bones but mere words will never hurt you.

 

At the same time as we are being told we are racist we are also being told we are backward, now who is being offensive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ AT: Not necessarily disagreeing with any of that, although I would note that while having a place in certain circumstances, "Affirmative action" these days in some quarters is teetering on the edge of becoming as big a problem as the discrimination it was designed to help address. In organisations of a certain size, appointments aren't always made on the basis of "best candidate for the position", but as "2nd, 3rd whatever best for the position, but being as they're an Asian lesbian in a wheelchair we gotta take them to make the staff demographic numbers look better".

 

On topic though, where the "Golly" debate is concerned though, I have been trying to pay attention to what the "problem" is, and I'm struggling with it. Fair enough, I may not have seen or read the right things, but while I get that some portion of the population are alleging the doll and name is "offensive" to them, I'm yet to gather from anywhere how and why this is so.

 

Hence, I'm stuck in the here and now coming to a conclusion that its something handy for some to utilise as a means to keep on plugging an agenda, rather than a legitimate greivance in and of itself. Which in itself plays in to the general attitude society gives in the present, that as soon as some minority group mentions anything on the discriminatory card, that its immediately declared taboo unquestionably.

 

I have no problem with efforts to change attitudes and suppress genuine discriminatory behaviour, but only if those attitudes and behaviours are backed up with a reasonable level of proof that discrimination occurs because of them, and not just because some element within some minority says it does but aren't required to back it up with anything other than just their say so. Thats the tail wagging the dog, and IMHO the majority being discriminated against by a small minority, just because they have been allowed to get their hands on strings they can pull. That just makes them as bad as the people they are supposedly complaining about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As we were all told as bairns sticks and stones will break your bones but mere words will never hurt you.

Ahh, the motto of bullies over the centuries.

 

You've never been seriously bullied, Dratsy, have you? Subjected to year upon year of soul destroying psychological torment. If you had, you might be capable of showing even a tiny bit of empathy. But there's not a trace, nothing. You might be capable of appreciating the fact that that trite little aphorism was complete and utter bollox the day it was coined and it remains so today.

 

Sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ooh, which shop selling them? I want one!

 

Ah yes, the marmalade jars. Back in those days, you didn't have promotions that lasted only a few weeks but those promotions went on and on and on and on and on and on for yonks, if not decades! This Lincolnshire Yellow Belly has fond memories of collecting them (Mind you, I got a tad fed up with the amount of marmalade we had to eat in order to get them). I had a lovely likkle collection which can only mean one thing ...

 

:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: wanders off to eBay to see how much said collections are going for and ooh, I'll have to bid - mmm, now let me think - sax player or not?

 

Signing the petition - NOPE!

 

Ponders setting up an in favour off petition - now there's a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gollywogs are offensive to some because of the history of them, look it up, research well and you will understand why this is so.

 

The term golly, wog and or gollywog is considered offensive by some because of this history and because the terms have been hijacked by racist nuts and used as a term meant to be highly offensive.

 

 

There are some people in the world who are offended at nonsense however, if you know anything about this subject then you will be able to understand (even if you don't agree) why some people are offended.

 

Personally I love gollies and I own some but I totally accept why some people and groups still get upset about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

The term golly, wog and or gollywog is considered offensive by some because of this history and because the terms have been hijacked by racist nuts and used as a term meant to be highly offensive. ...

Then should it not then perhaps be the case that society should embrace the golliwogs and nick 'em back in the same manner that was done regarding the English flag which had also been hijacked by racists? A few years ago you couldn't display an England flag in your window to show you were supporting the England football team and if in social housing, your Landlord could request you removed offending article. I have vague recollections of some campaign during (I think?) the last World Cup and the Local Authorities backed down, accepting that not everyone in society was a racist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GR, you are a straight, white, European male, just like me. We are part of the most privileged group on the planet. We don't get to decide what is discrimination and what is not.

I PROTEST! How dare you say "We are part of the most privileged group on the planet". By doing so, you are promoting the inequalities between the sexes. However, I must agree on your last point - us superior women definitely must have the last word. ;-) :twisted:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ AT: Not necessarily disagreeing with any of that, although I would note that while having a place in certain circumstances, "Affirmative action" these days in some quarters is teetering on the edge of becoming as big a problem as the discrimination it was designed to help address. In organisations of a certain size, appointments aren't always made on the basis of "best candidate for the position", but as "2nd, 3rd whatever best for the position, but being as they're an Asian lesbian in a wheelchair we gotta take them to make the staff demographic numbers look better".

See, I've heard this a lot when this subject has come up, but I have never actually been presented with a credible example of this ever happening, not one. Of course I'm completely open to examining any examples you may wish to provide... (But nothing from the Daily Heil or the Sun though, I don't rate anything published in those rags as evidence.)

 

On topic though, where the "Golly" debate is concerned though, I have been trying to pay attention to what the "problem" is, and I'm struggling with it. Fair enough, I may not have seen or read the right things, but while I get that some portion of the population are alleging the doll and name is "offensive" to them, I'm yet to gather from anywhere how and why this is so.

The doll represents a stereotypical caricature of black people of the type I thought we had consigned to the dustbin of history along with "The Black and White Minstrel Show" and Jim Davidson's "Chalky" character.

 

Hence, I'm stuck in the here and now coming to a conclusion that its something handy for some to utilise as a means to keep on plugging an agenda, rather than a legitimate greivance in and of itself. Which in itself plays in to the general attitude society gives in the present, that as soon as some minority group mentions anything on the discriminatory card, that its immediately declared taboo unquestionably.

Like "Baa, baa black sheep"?

 

Of course, that's an example of the PC Brigade being laughed off the stage as soon as it was proposed. But I agree that there were certain elements of the so-called "loony left" that went completely overboard in trying to wipe out every conceivable piece of possible racism from our culture, and when they started trying to go back into the past to rewrite children's fairy tales and classic literature to conform with modern language and attitudes, it was a step too far.

 

However, I don't think this is such a case. The Golliwog, while part of our history, is clearly racist, and deserves to be consigned to the history books. I'm actually surprised that it has reappeared. I honestly never thought I would see such a thing again outside of an antique shop.

 

I have no problem with efforts to change attitudes and suppress genuine discriminatory behaviour, but only if those attitudes and behaviours are backed up with a reasonable level of proof that discrimination occurs because of them, and not just because some element within some minority says it does but aren't required to back it up with anything other than just their say so. Thats the tail wagging the dog, and IMHO the majority being discriminated against by a small minority, just because they have been allowed to get their hands on strings they can pull. That just makes them as bad as the people they are supposedly complaining about.

This is where I disagree with you. We are the privileged class, the party in power, so to speak. We are the majority that society is biased towards by default. We don't get to decide when other people are offended. We don't get to tell others to "suck it up", to "just grow a thicker skin, get a grip toughen up."(As Dratsy's drivel puts it). We are not the people being offended here, it is not our place to judge.

 

For far too long minorities have been ignored, told to shut up or been actively persecuted for daring to voice a complaint about how society treats them. We are finally addressing these things. But the first thing that involves is listening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

GR, you are a straight, white, European male, just like me. We are part of the most privileged group on the planet. We don't get to decide what is discrimination and what is not.

I PROTEST! How dare you say "We are part of the most privileged group on the planet". By doing so, you are promoting the inequalities between the sexes. However, I must agree on your last point - us superior women definitely must have the last word. ;-) :twisted:

 

Actually, I was just pointing out the existence of sexism. Women have just as much grievance against us privileged white males as minorities do. ;-)

 

Just take a look across the pond at the insanity that's coming out of the US Rethuglican Party for all the examples you could ever need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

first we ban certain words, then we ban words put together in a certain way, then we ban books, how very enlightened of you folks.

 

fact is why should anyone dictate what is offensive or not, just grow a thicker skin, get a grip toughen up.

 

As we were all told as bairns sticks and stones will break your bones but mere words will never hurt you.

 

At the same time as we are being told we are racist we are also being told we are backward, now who is being offensive?

You have still not clarified your postings about blatant and actual. Firstly, any racism, is against the law, because it is used as a means of segregation and discrimination. As with your other posts on these forum, you show a particular hate for things, I may contradict what AT has said and may suggest that folk who have been subject to some sort of verbal, long term abuse, may indeed replicate that in life, although privately or in a manner where they think no body knows them. Imagine if a shop keeper were like that.

 

In your quote above, you are being offensive. Using the word dictate with this is a poor attempt of veiling over the serious nature that racism, or any form of bullying takes. With your attitude, I am afraid you may appear backwards, you have, in relationship with single mothers and folk who are elderly and unable to look after them selves shown this to be the case.

 

The doll question is the history and what it represents, I mean, would you give your child a KKK doll to play with? What folk have done, is judged, using their own values. Racism (actual or blatant) has caused deaths, it isolates communities, and many types of communities have their own bigots, as we can see by the complaint raised with the name calling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

der is shop on Onst selling peeire trowie dolls – trows!!! Wha da hell said dat you coud caa aa wis groilick hill folk trows??? Dat is surely as racist as you can get - bit is ony o you complainin aboot dat or writin tae da ‘News’ or settin up a petition – na wan tae hell, you ir just a shoor o hypocrites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

GR, you are a straight, white, European male, just like me. We are part of the most privileged group on the planet. We don't get to decide what is discrimination and what is not.

I PROTEST! How dare you say "We are part of the most privileged group on the planet". By doing so, you are promoting the inequalities between the sexes. However, I must agree on your last point - us superior women definitely must have the last word. ;-) :twisted:

 

Actually, I was just pointing out the existence of sexism. Women have just as much grievance against us privileged white males as minorities do. ;-)

 

JUST 'pointing out'? Well, as a so-called non-privileged white woman, I beg to differ and as I felt it was sexist, then in line with the PC (Or should that be WPC or is that being sexist by accepting by genderising roles?) Brigade, I hereby demand an apology forthwith! Besides, you obviously forgot that us women with brains wired to multi-task aka why men don't iron, MUST have the last word! ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...