vickster
Legendary Member
Possibly, or my speed reading on phone more likely
Getting rid of a golliwog doll.
- Thread starter Rusty Nails
- Start date
- Status
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
gbb
Squire
- Location
- Peterborough
No, because then there'd be a double negative.
I may be wrong, but it seems quite clear to me
marzjennings
Legendary Member
- Location
- Houston, Texas, USA
I have never known anyone buy a golliwog with a racist thought in their head. My first toy was a golliwog and I am certain my mother was not grooming me for the KKK. It was a comforter and I never related it to a person. I doubt if Robertsons based an empire on being bigots and its strange that ths subject has only arisen since we have become politically correct. For me common sense beats political correctness anytime. Sell the golliwog for charity and let someone cherish it for a few more years.
Now lets talk about Barbie. How sexist is that?
Don't confuse what we thought a thing a was with what it actually portrayed, a racist caricature of a race of people that resembled American minstrels; white men who blacked up to perform songs in a manner that was itself a racist caricature.
Because we were completely ignorant of facts back in the day, doesn't make the doll any less racist. And this subject has been around since the inception of this character and subsequent dolls. The only difference today is that those with objections are actually heard and we, hopefully, learn and adjust.
Generally I find common sense often implies ignorance and political correctness implies informed and accurate reasoning. Hence things like brexit.
This doll needs to handed to a museum for free or just destroyed.
MontyVeda
a short-tempered ill-controlled small-minded troll
- Location
- Lancaster... the little city.
I'm currently wondering which charity shop to donate my Micheal Jackson LPs to... there's no place for him in my collection anymore.
Nigeyy
Legendary Member
- Location
- Massachusetts, USA
I remember Robertson's jam fondly and also was puzzled over the banning of their (in)famous golliwog. So much so that at the time I sought out a well known black student activist (well, in the student community he was well known and I was as student at the time) and asked for his opinion. His response really affected how I've subsequently thought; he gave me an eye opening insight into how other (and sometimes ignored) segments of the population look at things and can be marginalized.
What one person finds offensive, another doesn't.... but it really is interesting how usually the people who don't find it offensive are not the object of contention (my litmus test is to think would people think the same if it was something that demeaned *their* race, religion, children or pets!). I admit there are sometimes vague lines to be drawn about this, and you can get carried away (I mean after all, just because *you* find something offensive doesn't mean it is). However, all said and done, I'm happy Robertson's golliwog has met its demise as I do believe it is a racist and anachronistic symbol. And of course it's there in the name. Yes, it's just a doll but it does hold symbolic relevance.
Anyway, here's the the thought: why not explain just as you have done, and see if someone will pay you to destroy it (with proceeds going to a charity they name)?
What one person finds offensive, another doesn't.... but it really is interesting how usually the people who don't find it offensive are not the object of contention (my litmus test is to think would people think the same if it was something that demeaned *their* race, religion, children or pets!). I admit there are sometimes vague lines to be drawn about this, and you can get carried away (I mean after all, just because *you* find something offensive doesn't mean it is). However, all said and done, I'm happy Robertson's golliwog has met its demise as I do believe it is a racist and anachronistic symbol. And of course it's there in the name. Yes, it's just a doll but it does hold symbolic relevance.
Anyway, here's the the thought: why not explain just as you have done, and see if someone will pay you to destroy it (with proceeds going to a charity they name)?
Last edited:
There is a guy who collects gollie memorobilia for his museum of black british history. I think i saw him on antiques roadshow
nickyboy
Norven Mankey
- Location
- You want hills? We got hills
Everyone who says "I don't find a Golliwog racist, my parents weren't racists to give me one" needs to read this and think hard
It's not about how the white person feels about the caricature of a person of colour, it's how the person of colour feels.
I'm sure I had a Golliwog badge when I was a kid. I wasn't a racist then and I'm not one now. But there is no way on earth I'd wear one now because I know how offensive it is to people of colour
Kempstonian
Has the memory of a goldfish
- Location
- Bedford
That just about sums it up for me (except the bit about owning one - I didn't). Gollys weren't perceived as racist years ago and I never heard anyone complain that they were. However, we live in different times now and all sorts of things are thought of differently. That's just how it is.
"people of colour" is also offensive.
- Location
- London
is it considered so?
I thought that at least until recently it was approved in some quarters.
Always sounded damn awkward to me and I have a preference for single words with few syllables.
Also tended to make me think folk might be trying a bit too hard - and might be racist after all.
What's the currently today approved word, though fear it will change soon whatever it is?
On the core topic, despite the fact that I too collected the Robertsons tucked in golliwogs (fact they were tucked in rather than nailed down shows that we are talking a different age) and had the badges and models (pottery then plastic) and it didn't turn me racist I fully understand why they had to go.
Worse are those grotesque old metal moneybox things you sometimes used to see around - though those were well before the 60s.
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
Spot on.
Some posters on here remind me of the outwardly homophobic bully in The Naked Civil Servant who was a suppressed homosexual.
- Location
- Somewhere wet & hilly in NW England.
- Location
- London
glad you agree pale rider - reassures me that my antennae aren't wonky and shot - whenever anyone used that phrase it always made me think that they were broadcasting (possibly with a hidden smirk) how awfully correct they were being - fitting in with the bleedin zeitgeist or in-crowd or whatever. I much prefer folk who might make the odd social political faux-pas but are clearly good and honest in their intent.
mudsticks
Obviously an Aubergine
I don't think it is..
At least it is routinely used as a description of themselves, by the poc who I follow on other social media.
I know its tricky, because 'coloured' is considered offensive AFAIK.
But given that they are the ones who have been systematically discriminated against (and far worse crimes) by us white folks, I think it's the least we can do to follow their lead in language usage.
Not a reparation by any means, but again something symbolic perhaps?
'Political correctness' in speech or writing, when used as a criticism seems mainly to be called by people from groups who have always had the privilege of dictating the language of description, about others.
If in doubt I find it's best to refer to the person, or groups themselves, to find out, as I'm not them.
And yes we will make honest mistakes, slip ups and faux pas.
Their experience is not mine, so if in doubt I ask...
And then listen if someone is willing* to answer.
If you're genuinely after education, and want to learn, rather than on a wind up mission, then that will be apparent.
* but we're not necessarily owed a reply, if the person is not in the mood for educating us.
- Status
