Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to be upset at racism accusation due to dd1's comment in town.

598 replies

PrincessScrumpy · 18/11/2011 09:59

dd1 is 3 and said loudly "look mummy that lady has a chocolate face." The woman heard and said " nice to see you training her to be racist already!" I was really shocked. dd didn't mean offence it was an observation that her skin colour was the same as chocolate. She's only met a few people from other races due to us living in the West Country but I've always explained skin colour in the same way as hair and eye colour being different.

She did say it once before about Tiger Woods on TV but I decided to ignore it and not make an issue. dd now is asking what racist is and I don't think a 3yo needs to know - they don't see colour as a issue or feel superior etc. Left me shaken and actally quite cross. I really think the lady was being oversensitive.

OP posts:
PavlovtheCat · 18/11/2011 11:00

she did not call the woman 'chocolate face' there was not a name-claiing situation. She said '...has a chocolate face'.

SardineQueen · 18/11/2011 11:02

So according to people on this thread, if their child saw a chinese person and said loudly "mummy that woman has funny slitty eyes" they would think it was just a child being cute?

This thread is odd.

pigletmania · 18/11/2011 11:03

Yanbu at all! Your dd is only 3 fgs a baby still, and was simply making an observation not being intentionally racist. The woman overreacted big time. I have eczema and young children do make comments about it, not nasty but out if curiosity. I tell them what it is and they are satisfied generally with the answer. Next time your dd makes that remark just explain that people have different colour skins, they from different countries. Show her famous people who have different skin tones.

OrmIrian · 18/11/2011 11:04

She might well have been shocked and dismayed but not had time to say or do anything. But then again, she may not.

Whatever the ins and outs, a discussion is now warranted.

worraliberty · 18/11/2011 11:04

It's not fine however for me to decide someone is being oversensitive about their colour, because I am white, I am in the majority and I will never know what it feels like to be on the receiving end of racisim

Wilson Where on earth do you live if you think being white means you will never know what it feels like to be on the receiving end of racism? Confused

I live on the border of East London/Essex and I and my 3 sons have frequently been on the receiving end of racism and we are white!

I can't believe there are still some people who think being white means no-one is racist towards you.

Tell that to my 19yr old son who was chased by a group of black teenagers, laughing and shouting "Get the white boy" before they beat the living shit out of him and stole his mobile phone and all his money Angry

Sorry but your attitude (and I'm not having a go here) sounds similar to some people who live in predominantly white areas like the OP does Confused

HeresTheThingBooyhoo · 18/11/2011 11:04

who said it was cute?? stop making stuff up to suit your argument.

Hullygully · 18/11/2011 11:04

Ver odd

Larry, you've changed your tune. So it's ok, indeed complimentary to call someone Chocolate Face, but not to ask them if English is their first language?

Interesting.

PavlovtheCat · 18/11/2011 11:04

Sardinequeen but 'funny slitty eyes' is not a description, it is a suggestion that there is something wrong with that. If the OP's DD said 'funny chocolate skin' or similar, that would be different.

ElaineReese · 18/11/2011 11:04

I am unconvinced about this 'time to react' thing. We already know that OP does not pick up on and address it when dd says black people look like chocolate. So why would she have done it this time either? She doesn't think a 3 year old 'needs to know' about racism, and that ignoring is the best policy.

So what on earth makes anyone think she was about to say anything before the other woman did?

Birdsgottafly · 18/11/2011 11:05

To be fair, the woman was accussing the OP of teaching her child to be racist, she did not direct the comment at the child.

By not correcting her when she made the comment about Tiger Woods, then the OP is allowing ignorance towards difference, or at least not explaining the difference.

I would wonder why the OP thought not to pick up on it, given that it is such an important issue (as is not using any sort of ignorant language towards anyone else who is 'different', from the main population).

Especially given that it is a mainly white population.

School cannot be reasponsible for all of our childrens education and life skills.

SardineQueen · 18/11/2011 11:06

She said she didn't have time to react
She does not once in her post say she was shocked or dismayed by what her DD had said
The first time she talks of shock was when the woman spoke to her

Which says to me that her DD said it and she stood by without any sign of recognition that what her DD had said was not on

OrmIrian · 18/11/2011 11:06

It's not cute because it caused offence. I can see that it would be racist if said by an adult who knows better. In this case it isn't. But it needs to stop.

GwendolineMaryLacey · 18/11/2011 11:06

So according to people on this thread, if their child saw a chinese person and said loudly "mummy that woman has funny slitty eyes" they would think it was just a child being cute?

Don't be ridiculous. But if my child said that and someone immediately jumped in and made comment I'd think hang on, wind your neck in for a moment and let me deal with this.

GwendolineMaryLacey · 18/11/2011 11:07

SQ, you weren't there, so you can't possibly comment on what the OP did or didn't do.

HeresTheThingBooyhoo · 18/11/2011 11:08

look children say what they say. from a young age tehy are being coached "yes darling a blue car. what colour is the car?" my 2.5 year old is learning colour and will point out the color of random things, like red shoes or green lorry. if a child is programmed to notice colour and gets a positive response for correctly identifying a colour then you can hardly be surprised when they do it with people too. it isn't racist. it is a child making an observation.

HeresTheThingBooyhoo · 18/11/2011 11:08

say what they see

SardineQueen · 18/11/2011 11:08

pavlov why is "'funny slitty eyes" a suggestion that something is wrong? There's nothing wrong with being funny, and slitty is descriptive Confused

No different to "chocolate face" at all. Both offensive, both can be said by a child in innocence.

whoopeecushion · 18/11/2011 11:08

SardineQueen - the slitty eyes example is different. Slitty eyes is an offensive way to describe someone and is an expression used by racist adults. I would think it would be odd for a 3yo to come out with that. Not at all similar to being compared with a favourite treat.

PavlovtheCat · 18/11/2011 11:09

I am interested in how many people feel comfortable calling brown skinned people 'black' actually.

I have several friends with dark skin and they actively dislike being called 'black' as they are not, they are varying shades of brown. So actually 'chocolate' is much more accurate than 'black', which has more often historically been used withinh a racist context than' chocolate'

larrygrylls · 18/11/2011 11:09

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

MollyTheMole · 18/11/2011 11:09

YANBU

I can understand why you ignored the Tiger Woods thing, tbh I think I would have done that with my DS (2.8) and treated it the same as swearing (ie. dont make a big deal and they wont say it again type thing and see if that works)

At 3 some kids are old enough to have the "we are all different" talk and understand it, but I know my DS just wouldnt. He was a little bit sweary and when Ive tried to say its not nice it just makes him do it more so Im back to ignoring it and so far so good. Not quite sure how I'll deal with the situation like this if it comes up though.......if hes anythin glike he is now I'll probably do the same as you with the Tiger Woods thing and ignore the first time....

The woman is BVU for not being a bit more understanding that a 3 year old might not know that what they are saying is offensive.

Hullygully · 18/11/2011 11:10

Can we just be clear here?

CHOCOLATE FACE IS OFFENSIVE

If it isn't, why aren't we all saying it everyday?

PavlovtheCat · 18/11/2011 11:10

because 'funny slitty eyes' suggests it is amusing, or not normal, or something to be laughed at. There is an emphasis on how it is perceived, not what is observed.

And agree, unlikely a child would say this, aged 3.

SardineQueen · 18/11/2011 11:10

None of us were there.

But most people seem to be very quick to decide that the offended woman was totally out of order.

And not prepared for a minute to consider that maybe she had a perfectly valid reason for saying what she did - ie the OPs failure to react. And given that in her OP she does not express any horror, regret or even surprise that her DD said what she said, it's hardly a leap.

slavetofilofax · 18/11/2011 11:11

Why are people going on about the Tiger Woods thing?

This child is three, OP said that at the time she made the Tiger Woods comment, he was on the news all the time because of his affair. It was ages ago! The dd was probably only two then, and whether the OP had said anything or not, it probably wouldn't have stopped her dd from making the same comparison again, especially if this is the first black person she has seen since.