Jump to content
You can join Shetlink with your Facebook, Google or Twitter accounts. Post in the forums, customise your activity stream and more.... ×

Gibber

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    811

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Gibber

  1. Gibber
    Look out Darwin http://bigthink.com/devil-in-the-data/the-trouble-with-darwin
  2. Gibber
    Northlink?
  3. Gibber
    Not long I would think, because there will always be some people who think that the colour of something can cause offence.
  4. Gibber
    And yet, I find myself wondering why some folk don't. So gollywog has taken on an offensive element (for some reason) not present in the initial object. If that were the case then I would say an object with that name can take on the new offensive connotations of the language used to name it. Especially in this case where the doll is a caricature of a black man and the name gollywog is an insult directed at black people.
  5. Gibber
    But can you explain it anyway?
  6. Gibber
    But why on top of a black person you're using as a table. Can't you see that looks bad?
  7. Gibber
    A gollywog is a caricature of a black person. Calling a black person a gollywog is ascribing this caricature verbally. If the gollywog doll isn't offensive then calling a black person the name gollywog isn't offensive, right? If anything all the innocent positive childhood nostalgia I keep hearing being subjectively attached to these dolls would be conveyed verbally and it would be a compliment of the highest order. If I'm twisting the point then explain the differnce between the doll and the name of the doll. If you can I'll gladly give it a rest.
  8. Gibber
    So wog is an offensive term for a black person (even if the meaning has changed as meanings of words often do) and calling a black person a wog would be bad. Would calling a black person a gollywog be bad? Would calling a black person a gollynig**r be bad?
  9. Gibber
    So why are you assuming it means Afro Caribbean people now? Nobody has mentioned any connection between wog and afro caribbean as yet. Could it be you do know that this is a derogatory term for dark skinned people and are just pretending it has another less offensive usage?
  10. Gibber
    Does he know what a wog is?
  11. Gibber
    I take issue with those arguing that all historical negative racial connotations associated with an object don't actually exist. That's the core issue for me and it isn't necessarily discriminatory to argue the point that these symbols aren't attached. In the case of gollywogs on sale I would criticise the selling of a racist symbol more than the way somebody complained about it (within reason of course). If like Madmandy you don't see how dolls can ever have any negative racial connotations then the defence of a local Isles shopkeeper from a 'coloured' man from the mainland, deluded enough to think that gollywogs are offensive due to the racist connotations that historians, many lay-people and the BNP mistakenly attribute to them, would be paramount.
  12. Gibber
    Its the usual bit of business which to me expresses the aforesaid insular and defensive attitude.
  13. Gibber
    From as's account the original complainant was 'threatened' more by the abusive reactions of Shetlanders living up to their stereotype. Your ire here is a case in point that when these stereotypes are arguably true, you can't recognise as such and laugh at yourself but become more defensive and insular. with attitude of 'what right does he have to come up here and tell us what we can and can't sell in our shops?' He has that right of complaint just as Mrs Leask has the right to sell dolls loaded with racist symbology. Not being 'fae Shetland' or, of course, not being white doesn't deny him that right.
  14. Gibber
    Perhaps we should abandon Trout's tasteful, inclusive, nuanced and subtle Swiftian satire and instead have an Up Helly AA skit where a crowd of gap toothed carrot crunching barefoot hick yokels in Fair Isle jumpers stare baffled and confused at a well dressed black person reading The Financial Times. The payoff being that when the stereotype islanders finally get over the miracle of the printed word and the 'funny coloured uncan man', the black person knowingly asides to the audience in a broad Shetland accent, 'whit's wrang wee dis folk, dere no right'
  15. Gibber
    Are you saying you are aware of the racist connotations of golliwogs?
  16. Gibber
    I'm not saying that everyone should be offended by the same things. The twisted opposite of this that GR is saying; that nobody can be offended by gollywogs on sale until he is aware of a significant fuss being made by someone with the type of character he personally approves is also not what should be taken from this. If you're going to hide your porn stash when the vicar comes round wouldn't the equivalent be the shopkeeper keeping her gollywogs from public view and selling them on request to... 1 Those either unoffended by the dolls and/or ignorant of the racial symbolism and 2 People wishing to signify their racist views with a known racist symbol? That way, those like yourself who are ignorant to the racist connotations can get your weekly gollywog shopping done, racists can have their iconographic based freedoms of expression protected (phew!), the passing Shetland public of whatever hue won't have to see them in the shop unless they choose to and tourists won't be standing open mouthed at gollywogs on sale thinking that Shetland is populated by yokel carrot crunchers. And of course Mrs Leask will still be able to sell them.
  17. Gibber
    GR To jump to the conclusion that nobody is offended by golliwogs on sale in Shetland because you are unaware of any complaints (or fuss as you put it) is wilful ignorance. It's supposition to think that a genuine case of upset at an object historically loaded with racist meaning can only be verified by your knowledge of, or public awareness of complaint(s). You have the complaint of LS and you also have as's post above as evidence of offence as well as a number of people here taking issue who may not be personally upset. You've tried to dismiss LS's upset by criticising his character and along with that you've also generalised 'coloured' people as a group who if they share what you regard as LS's negative character traits, we [non-coloured Shetlanders, I assume], can do without them. What's wrong with you?
  18. Gibber
    Is there corroboration anywhere? It might put to bed some of the views being expressed here.
  19. Gibber
    Not true, I gave examples that account for being offended and choosing not to announce it. To say "....if those [coloured people] who are in any way of character like this one [Lemn Sissay], we can well do without both them and their extremist opinions." and then to say that not voicing the offence caused by gollywogs is a sign only of not being offended is dumbed down enough already thanks.
  20. Gibber
    Me, me, me, me, me. What about me!? Er...But it's anecdotal to the rest of us though. If you're now a solipsist, then does that mean I'm not real? Don't answer that, I've got stuff I have to do tomorrow which requires both a mind that exists and corporeal body extended in space, (driving daughter to a birthday party, gotta get a loaf too, and a pint of milk......)
  21. Gibber
    SP, I salute you. Kicking myself for missing that one.
  22. Gibber
    You seem to be proving you still don't think there are/were racial associations with golliwogs.
  23. Gibber
    No, but ask yourself why the BNP has chosen to use them. Or ask somebody else.
  24. Gibber
    Yes, I used the word anecdotal, because as's account was anecdotal. I even alluded to the fact that being anecdotal it may not be true, "If as's evidence is untrue..." Would it be too personal to suggest you have the popcorn and you're letting it do your thinking for you? only joking
  25. Gibber
    BNP merchandising site. http://www.buyexcalibur.co.uk/index.php?searchStr=golly&act=viewCat&Submit=Go
×
×
  • Create New...