To worry most people won’t ever ‘get it’

[OverTheRainbow88]

All the marches, Protests etc and people still don’t seem to understand!

Will they ever?

It's actually s sensory book. Each page has a different "feel" for the child. One mermaid has fluffy hair and you can feel the fluff. The next page says "this isn't my mermaid her clip is too bumpy" and then the child feels the plastic hair slide on the page and so on.
It's not racism. It's a kids book. There's about 6 different versions of it with a diffrerent mermaid and race on each front cover.

This. I’m black. This is not racist. This ridiculous competitive offence just undermines actual proper racism.

I agree with this poster, the OTT reaction over this is detracting from the real issues regarding racism and harming the “Black Lives Matter” cause.

Yes @Playmysong you’re right.

@FrogspawnSmoothie

I highly doubt it was intended as offensive, but I can see why people could argue that it is.

But for sure 99% of the people complaining about it will be white middle class women.

So middle class white women are only allowed to complain about things that directly affect them personally?

People keep going on about it not being intentional, as though that excuses it. If you step on someone's toe by mistake are you going to not apologise because it was unintentional?

Come on picsinred. Seriously? That article is nothing to do with race. Kids are sent home all the time from school due to what is perceived as inappropriate hair styles. And the article you reference comes under that banner. FWIW, I’ve never thought sending a child home for having green hair, a Mohican, shaved hair is valid - a child can still be engaged educationally whatever their hair style.

@LioneIRichTea
The OP isn't about the book, it's about the t-shirt!

"They are not doing very well at the moment, though. I couldn't find much on who the editorial staff are etc, but what info I could find shows a majority of white staff."

You've simply looked at their head office page and made a trite assumption based on that. You need to look harder before you dismiss their diversity efforts so casually.

Scratches head...🤔

@itsgettingweird

Except I'm just pointing out white people are outraged in black peoples behalf but not every black person is offended.

Something doesn't have to offend every single black person for it to be offensive. If that was the barometer, nothing would ever change.

[quote UmmH]@itsgettingweird
There are plenty of white people on here screaming at other white people they are stupid and don't get it.
Maybe, but there are also black people on here saying why it is problematic, so one black woman telling you she isn't personally offended doesn't really make any difference to the point.

@cologne4711
Also not sure why Tesco is in trouble - there are millions of these books and they are sold anywhere that sells books. I suppose they'll now all have to be pulped.
Tesco isn't in trouble over the books. The issue was their stocking of the t-shirt. But they've dealt with it by not ordering any more. I'm sure they continued to sell their existing stock, so no loss to them. As a PP said, it would have made more sense for the t-shirt to have the 'right' mermaid on it (as in 'that's my mermaid...')[/quote]
And does the Jamaican woman on here who also isn't offended not count?

I believe in education. Explain why some people may find something offensive. How some people may feel it sets back stereotypes years.

But education is entirely different to people screaming racism in a boom that hasn't change anything other than skin colour in a (probably misjudged) attempt to be inclusive.

I have a disabled son. I advocate for him. But I don't tell him how he should feel as I'm not disabled.

@FrogspawnSmoothie

I highly doubt it was intended as offensive, but I can see why people could argue that it is.

But for sure 99% of the people complaining about it will be white middle class women.

twitter.com/MarvinPoet/status/1292352019248885761 twitter.com/Rap6uk/status/1292083124831227904 twitter.com/Nadine_Writes/status/1292455137781456896

Hold up, that particular mermaid has brown skin and long, dark, straight hair.
Of course hair discrimination is real but mainly for black women with textured hair that is in natural or in protective/traditional styles right, this mermaid wouldn't fall into that group? (I'm assuming there are no relaxers or straighteners under the sea).
She has natural long, swishy, straight hair. She wouldn't be sent home from school, she wouldn't be called unprofessional. I don't think she signifies as black with natural textured hair?
It's not my place to tell people who should be offended by what. The history of black hair discrimination is long and real but I think because of that adults have added brown skin + fluffy and = anti-black racism.
The mermaid looks more likely to be Indian or similar to me.
Seeing 'too fluffy' and brown skin and then assuming mermaid of African descent is an assumption formed by racism isn't it?
If they had textured hair or an afro I'd see the problem more.
If that front cover was published in India Indian girls with brown skin and straight black hair would identify with that mermaid and I don't think anyone would see her as a Black mermaid.
It's hair texture/style that's key when talking about hair discrimination, and those with long dark straight hair aren't the ones on the receiving end so I think it's a bit of a mis-leap.
Though saying that of course I can see why people who have suffered hair discrimination object to this as there's so little representation of black people in children's books it seems a shame that a character that a young black girl could identify with because if skin tone and hair colour is associated with something negative with historically racist connotations.

@GreyGardens88

Insane that people are offended by this. I bet these bed wetters aren't offended by the use of "f**got" in fairytale of new york and happily sing along at xmas time

People who aren’t racist aren’t normally homophobes. Where as racists and homophobes are often good friends.

@SimonJT Indeed. Funny (in a sad way) to observe.

@FrogspawnSmoothie Still doesn't matter. If it's offensive, it offensive regardless of who's pointing it out. If EVERY single black person were to come out and say it's not offensive, then of course "da white SJWs" should hold their peace on that issue.

But this isn't the case, is it? Some black people find it offensive, some don't. Some women find some things offensive, some don't. Who do you want to listen to? It's your prerogative. But no need to shut down those who find it offensive because other's don't and you agree with the latter.

People who aren’t racist aren’t normally homophobes. Where as racists and homophobes are often good friend

I don't agree with this in most of Africa it's still illegal to be gay

OP, your aibu is 'to worry most people won't ever 'get it'?

YANBU. Exhibit A: this thread.

But I believe some (even on this thread) will 'get it' at some point. When you get it, you get it. It took me a while too.

[quote UmmH]@Staffy1
I would be interested to know how many people complaining about this actually are black. I would have thought the marches were about more important things and making a big issue of things that weren't even intended to cause offence undermines all the important stuff in my opinion.
If a black person complained would you accept that? If not, then what's your point? The BLM marches have nothing to do with this. A shopper pointed out the racist connotations to Tesco who have accepted it, apologised and cancelled further orders of the tshirts. No fuss. Dealt with. It doesn't undermine 'more important stuff'.

But also, how do we get to the point where violence and racism against black people is so extreme that people need to demonstrate against it? It often starts with negative stereotyping from a young age, which absolutely has to be nipped in the bud.[/quote]
@UmmH, The OP mentioned the marches, so I assume they think it has something to do with this.
And my point is, I am sick of seeing a bunch of woke people who aren't directly affected complaining about things like this on behalf of other people, a lot of whom haven't been offended by it at all. Also sick of people finding offence where none was intended. To me, that does undermine the more important stuff. There should be a fuss made about intentional racism, not someone trying to be inclusive and getting it wrong (in some people's opinions, not all, as can be seen by @itsgettingweird post above).

@Carycy

So the uk population demographic is this:

white 87.2%, black/African/Caribbean/black British 3%, Asian/Asian British: Indian 2.3%, Asian/Asian British: Pakistani 1.9%, mixed 2%, other 3.7% (2011 est.)

So 3 percent of the population. Yet someone suggested there should have been someone who was black in the production process of the book.

They cannot be everywhere. They are a very small percentage of the population. It there was a black person at every level in every profession in this country there would be some serious over promoting going on.

The absolute cuntiness of this comment astounds me , but sadly doesn't surprise me.

i get that this book was problematic. but i think it needs to be part of a broader discussion about the way we talk about female body parts. any of the pages of that book could be offensive. if the skin is too bumpy, that will be offensive to some. if the eyes aren't the right colour, that will be offensive. if the legs are too long/too short, the same. yes, it was in bad taste but i don't think any of those pictures/captions would've provoked the same backlash, even though they will inevitably cause offence to some.

i think tbh any book/children's resource that promotes commenting negatively on people's body parts/physical attributes (even if it's done in a humerous/not directly critical way) isn't healthy or in good taste, especially with all the social media and body image issues young people are already having to contend with.

@Pikachubaby

Bit of side question, but what’s with adding lots of random capitals in sentences and words? I’ve seen it before but not sure what it’s supposed to convey (I feel old!)

It's supposed to convey 'talking absolute crap', ridiculousness, etc.

This is my first time using that mode of writing too. That's how crappy I think those statements are, in the context.

Why is ‘fluffy’ being taken as an insult? Fluffy hair isn’t a negative characteristic imo.

Some people OP will never/ choose not to, get it unfortunately.