H&M mother has said for people to 'get over it'

[WomanEmpire]

Apparently she has said on Facebook it's people 'crying wolf' and to 'get over it'

Wdyt?

I personally think H&M are counting their lucky stars and have sort of preyed on her, (this is very presumptuous, so I am prepared to be shot down) knowing that perhaps as someone who is native Nigerian and moved to Sweden (I think relatively recently, but again pull me up on this if I'm incorrect) might not be quite as aware of the racism that incurs in the US/UK, as those who live in these countries and wouldn't think to second guess in a shoot, because you'd trust such a popular retailer to not have racist slurs put on a jumper and modelled by a child, who could quite possibly still be called this by those idiots. Because I still can't believe that NO ONE along the process picked up on this.

I'm not saying racism doesn't occur in other countries but I have experience of those two countries.

Ridiculous. It's like saying a black child cannot wear black

No. It's not like that at all. It is saying that a black model should not be put in a jumper which has a slogan calling him a monkey, when monkey is a known racist term used against black people.

That is what it is 'like' saying.

It is saying that a black model should not be put in a jumper which has a slogan calling him a monkey, when monkey is a known racist term used against black people.

Many women find being referred to as birds or chicks disrespectful or otherwise offensive. Would that make a generic slogan saying something like "early bird catches the worm" objectionable if worn by a woman.

@JAPAB are you intentionally being facetious? You know fine that it’s not the same thing at all. I wouldn’t wear a top that referred to women as birds or chicks though, mostly because they’d be tacky as hell.

Another racist apologist

Many women find being referred to as birds or chicks disrespectful or otherwise offensive.

It's patronising and stupid, but it's not in the same league as using 'monkey' as a race-based insult. As has been said a million times on this thread, there's a specific meaning behind the monkey insult, and it's most often used in an extremely aggressive, hostile context (like street abuse and football chants).

A closer female equivalent to this would be a woman wearing a t-shirt saying best bitch in show. Bitch, referring to a woman, is uniformly negative and generally used as a direct, deliberate insult. If I saw a woman walking down the street wearing this, I wouldn't say anything. Maybe she's reclaiming the word. Maybe she thinks it's hilarious and attention-grabbing. Her choice, anyway. But if I saw it in an advert, I'd think it was bullshit.

And then, if I complained about this ad, I'd expect to hear a lot of misogyny-apologist crap, like 'they said she was the BEST bitch, it's a POSITIVE message, why are you whining', and 'oh, so we should BAN ALL MENTION OF DOGS in case a woman takes offense', and 'the t-shirt doesn't say women are dogs, that's just what you think, so you're the misogynist'.

Another brilliant post Tsondoku. I must say I'm relieved this thread is fizzling after 18 pages despite some hairy moments earlier on in it, looks like the racists and apologists have moved onto another topic now this one is a few days out of date.

Tsundoku "bitch" when applied to humans is inherently pejoprative. There is no neutal way to refer to someone as a bitch. Certainly not "best bitch in show" anyway.

Coolest monkey, cheeky monkey, early bird etc do not have this inherent pejorative meaning.

So in both the coolest monkey and early bird examples you have a neutral slogan. But put one on a black child and some say that that is objectionable because "monkey is a known racist term used against black people". I am just trying to work out the "rules". Why would similar reasoning not apply when a neutral phrase refering to a generic person as a bird, is applied to a woman.

It's patronising and stupid, but it's not in the same league as using 'monkey' as a race-based insult.

Do you mean by this that applying one neutral phrase to a black child is worse than applying another neutral phrase to a woman, because those who have used these terms non-neutrally have used them in a lot worse ways against black people?

'I am just trying to work out the rules' - read: I am trying to prove there are no logical rules and you're all being daft.

Stop desperately trying to set up crap comparisons - it doesn't help!

JAPAB you honestly can't be this stupid, it's been spelled out over and over. You're being obtuse on purpose for reasons known only to yourself.

Goady fuckery

JAPAB
I have ignored you, both on this thread and on the last thread. I am now bored with your continuous setting up of various logical fallacies in order to somehow justify what has happened. I shall explain:
Said advert was racist.
That's it. Doesn't matter what you think, what you try to argue, it's racist.
Should you support the theory that it doesn't matter, that we should ignore it, we should live and let live, you are by extension racist.
They are the rules. It's really quite simple.

JPAB is like this on most threads, just ignore.

I am just trying to work out the rules' - read: I am trying to prove there are no logical rules and you're all being daft.

Actually I do think there are "rules" to what makes something racist. Although I have been upfront about not seeing this ad as racist, nor agreeing with "guilty by association" style arguments. Such as the 'you shouldn't put the coolest monkey slogan on a black child because racists have used monkeys racisty' that I initially responded to. But there are "rules" or criteria or whatever you want to call it.

JPAB is like this on most threads, just ignore.

Yep, doesn't surprise me in the slightest. GF and best not to feed it.

Should you support the theory that it doesn't matter, that we should ignore it, we should live and let live, you are by extension racist

Exactly this but didn't want to come out and shout racist fucker
True though, if you don't see a problem, think there's nothing wrong with it, even though you know why it's racist, then want everyone to ignore it, make up ridiculous comparisons, then you yourself are racist.
No ifs and buts.

Actually I do think there are "rules" to what makes something racist. Although I have been upfront about not seeing this ad as racist, nor agreeing with "guilty by association" style arguments
The first part of your statement requires you to do some reading on logical fallacies.
The second part of your statement makes you a racist. Every single time.

DreamyMcDreamy True though, if you don't see a problem, think there's nothing wrong with it, even though you know why it's racist

You think the people who say they do not see the racism here are lying?

Gilead which logical fallacies do you think I have commuted?

Almost all of them, JAPAB!

I am black and according to previous posters this makes me allowed to have an opinion - and I think the whole thing is ridiculous and not racist in the slightest.

So there.

And to say "oh dear, the poor mother is just so unaware and WRONG" is very patronising indeed. What, just because she doesn't agree with you?

heron98. you are entitled to your opinion. I disagree with you as do many, but you are entitled to it. Dismissing others opinions when they have explained their reasoning seems quite rude to me also. But each to their own.

What, just because she doesn't agree with you?
Because she a) doesn't agree with the majority. b) doesn't agree with the (empirical) evidence and c) is likely to be considering her child's career before supporting a stance that may well finish it.
You are obviously entitled to your opinion, however the majority of folk concerned with this, worldwide; disagree with you.

so there

So there?

Is that like saying 'fact' at the end of a sentence?

heron you are obviously entitled to your opinion

And others are entitled to theirs

So there

No

Dont like it

Prefer fact...i think it sounds more mature

So there
Lolz, are we resorting to being 5 years old?

Obvs all entitled to an opinion, but you can't argue with history and what that advert's message with the black and white boy in widely different hoodies eluded to.
Fact.
So there.
Gavel

Oh shit

dreamy out facted me with the gavel

Naughty dreamy