...to be boycotting this wool shop?

[ilovemargaretatwood8931]

Good afternoon, this is the first thread I've ever started- please be as blunt and honest as you like!

OK, so there's a lovely yarn and needlecraft shop near my home. I used to visit it infrequently and spend too much on nice wools and needles (sometime knitter/ crocheter). A few months ago, some golliwogs appeared in the window display. I find these to be racist and a relic of the past that really isn't appropriate for a public shop display today.

I complained (very politely) about the dolls, and the staff member I spoke to was not keen to talk about it, as she was not the manager/ owner. So I wrote a note to the shop managers/ owners about the dolls, it was brief and respectful. I followed this up by going in there again a few weeks later, and of course the display was still in pride of place. It's still there, many months later.

I understand and appreciate that the shop (I imagine) has the right to have these toys in the window if they wish. But I just don't want to buy stuff from them anymore. I don't want my money to be supporting this unpleasant display of racist knitting goods.

Am I being unreasonable to not give this shop my custom any more?
WWYD?

Boycott all you want. I wouldn't because I grew up when Gollys were JUST another doll or on the label of Robertsons jam. Would you also boycott the shop if it had a black doll advertising doll's clothes in the window?

Feckless- They were just another doll when I grew up, but I was never comfortable with them once I learned/perceived (as a child) that they are (by many, though not all people) seen as racist, but I do understand that they are dolls, it's the message they convey that I don't like.

But I'd certainly not boycott if there was a black doll with dolls clothes in the window. My DD owns a dolls of several different ethnicities. I'd never buy her a Golly though, as Golly's are not the same thing at all.

Sorry, should say ...owns dolls...

I just found this interesting thinking in terms of the Charlie Hebdo thing. Pictures offending people, dolls offending people. I think in terms of an image offending people but people having a right to offend if they wish they probably fall into the same category. Although I suspect the groups who would find both offensive would have a fairly large crossover.

I tend to fall into the camp that thinks that people have a right to offend as well as be offended. Not suggesting anybody should go all machine gunny on the wool shop. But perhaps best to simply withdraw your custom, it's not banned as an image and they have a right to display it if they wish, much as Charlie Hebdo had a right to publish the images they did.

Sorry, but those "well it was just x, y, or z when I grew up so it's fine with me" arguments are really disingenuous. Societies evolve. People need to as well.

I'm sorry, it's nothing like Charlie Hebdo. Golliwogs represent an era when black people were dehumanised, enslaved and regarded as inferior. That is not what Charlie Hebdo is about. They are very, very different things.

All the 'why does it matter?' comments illustrate exactly why it DOES matter .

OP you are definitely NBU.

moan, interesting points. I'll have a proper think about that as I drink my lunch... (cuppa soup, not )

Dawn, I think that's incredibly hypocritical. Basically what you're saying is that it offends you because of your perception of it so you have a right to object to it. Which is exactly what people who are offended by the Charlie Hebdo cartoons think too.

You're just saying that you believe that your offence is more valid and more important than someone elses and you believe you have a right to be offended by your associations with an image more than someone else does because you believe your reasons are more important and valid.

You are still being offended by your own perception of a visual representation which may not be shared by other people who do not hold the same associations or values as you when they view that image. It's exactly the same.

Moan No I am not. They are not the same thing. They're really not and to try to draw a comparison of any description is disingenuous. It doesn't matter how many times you try to explain it. It doesn't work. It has nothing to do with my perception. I would try reading the links on the earlier pages.
There is a huge difference, if you can't see that, it's unfortunate, but to compare a whole peoples, over hundreds of years to a religious icon is a bit of a stretch.

Societies evolve said Seneca

So they might - but it doesn't change the past, does it? Why should I suddenly find something distasteful, as you put it, when to me it really isn't?

"I'm sorry, it's nothing like Charlie Hebdo. Golliwogs represent an era when black people were dehumanised, enslaved and regarded as inferior. That is not what Charlie Hebdo is about. They are very, very different things."

I completely agree.

I find it sad, Feckless that you don't find racism distasteful.

If they are just knitted dolls in black or dark brown wool, I cannot see the problem with them. If you were in a southern African country, should they be outraged by a knitted doll with a pink face?

I've been looking in the UK for a black doll for a little girl I know who lives in South Africa. Can I find one at a price I'm prepared to pay? No.

Let me be clear, Feckless. I did not say they were distasteful. The brown and orange curtains in my house that were left by the previous owners are distasteful. These dolls, which are clearly meant to be negative caricatures of black people, are racist and therefore deeply offensive.

"If they are just knitted dolls in black or dark brown wool, I cannot see the problem with them. If you were in a southern African country, should they be outraged by a knitted doll with a pink face?"

But they aren't just dark coloured dolls. It's their physical features, expression and clothes which are stereotyping. It's the Western representation of Africanness as exotic, primitive 'other'. It's patronising and racist. There is obviously nothing wrong with an ordinary dark coloured doll, on the contrary.

They are not just dolls knitted in black or brown. They are a nasty caricature of black people, with large red lips and frizzy hair. Not the same as making a doll of a white person in pink wool, unless that doll was also mocking European features in a nasty, ugly way.

ELC have dolls of different races which I think are quite reasonable.

Buy online. It's way better.

For generic wools, there's Deramores.

www.deramores.com/

For stunning Shetland wool, there's Jamieson & Smiths:

www.shetlandwoolbrokers.co.uk/

Vintage knits designer, Susan Crawford runs these stunning retro-inspired yarns from Excelana:

www.susancrawfordshop.com/PBSCCatalog.asp?CatID=1401953

Blacker Yarns supports native and rare breed wools:

www.blackeryarns.co.uk/knitting-and-crochet-yarn-ranges

Rennies Yarns in Scotland, have a lovely colour range:

www.knitrennie.com/

Not a golly in sight.

I'm finding the determined 'who me?' racism on this thread utterly mind blowing.

joffrey i don't think the OP doesn't know where to buy wool elsewhere. plenty of people try to use local independent shops when they can, to support local businesses and crafts.

joffrey thank you so much! I will really look forward to browsing through these links. Thanks.

Good point too chopper, would love the naice local wool shop to keep going... (and be nicer!)

feckless it's of course up to you if you find these dolls distasteful or not and you can't make yourself find something distasteful if you just don't. However, can you appreciate that the story of these dolls is rooted in Colonialism and the oppression of black people? And that the way they are made, I.e. Their features are supposed to be an exaggeration or caricature of some black / African people's' physical features? Can you understand that the reduce 'blackness' to simplified and cliched physical features? And if you can, how would you feel if you were of African descent and your dc had to see these dolls which reduce black people to these simplistic 'primitive' features?

I didn't say I didn't find racism distasteful - I said I don't find Gollys distasteful. If you are going to have a pop Dawndonna then get it right.