To bin the old-fashioned racist doll? *title tweaked by MNHQ*

[MrsBonnie]

Please excuse the offensive term.

My daughter was gifted a very old doll from my husband’s great aunt. Said aunt is in her 80s now and said that the doll held special memories and she wanted DD to have it.

I don’t want to have the doll in the house, but don’t want to offend the aunt by saying we don’t want it. She does come round from time to time, so there’s a risk she’d enquire after it if she was round. WWYD?

I think they have always been racist, but not always considered so.
Even though my parents collected these for us as children, I remember my father buying me a black doll when I was 2/3, little did I know at the time it was in response to the "River of Blood" speech.
Dad told me that all my dolls were the same no matter what colour their skin and they are best friends. I got one of those lilly white ones with white hair, a brunette and a black doll.
I'm sure if they had different types he'd have got those too.
He'd have been mortified to have been considered racist as he was the opposite.

@Tissueboxcover

Maybe MN could edit the title to just "Old fashioned racist doll"?

I would hide it and only bring it out only if asked if aunt visits.
Destroy it when you are able.

I don't think you will be able to convince an 80 year old lady without causing upset. Others may disagree.

Does your daughter know about it? How old is she?
I did have a sharp intake of breath when I saw your title.

Hi there, We're going to take this suggestion and change the title now, thanks!

It's an unreasonable & overly emotional response to just bin it IMO. Playing with a gollywog isn't going to make your daughter grow up to be a hardcore racist.

We should be able to talk about these things, so that society doesn't allow it to happen again, or continue.

DS1 is now 42 - when he was one a friend's mum posted him a golliwog as a gift. Even 42 years ago I gasped when I opened the package.

Just bin the bloody thing.

Perhaps the thread should be deleted in it's entirety

Why?

@Devilesko
There is a world of difference between a black doll and a golliwog, your dad sounds great to me

Don’t put the damn thing in a bin or a box, burn it. It’s a hateful object, the words golly and wog have caused pain and distress to countless black kids in this country over the years. For every person claiming they didn’t know it was used as a racist slur and to illustrate racist views I can guarantee there were fifty more people who knew full well it was.

Like the Black and White Minstrel Show , gollywogs and the Robinson figures were deliberately designed to be offensive caricatures. To add further insult they were then marketed to children who were unaware of the implications of the images, the well documented history of such negative images portraying black people , and the real racism behind them. They have no place in 21century Britain.

These threads crop up on MN all the time. The responses are predictable. We tend to see a collection of the following sorts of posts:

1. "My mum/gran/auntie had a collection of these dolls. She loved them and was the least racist person ever. Maybe they are racist now but they weren't back then."

(Your relative may have been a very nice person and may have been ignorant of the racism inherent in these dolls. That doesn't erase the fact that they were always racist caricatures.)

1. "I had a doll like this when I was a child and I loved it! I had no idea it was racist."

(You were a child. If no one explained how problematic the doll was, of course you didn't know. But you're not a child anymore. The doll was racist then and it's racist now. Childhood ignorance is no excuse for adult attitudes.)

1. "It's PC gone mad!"

(No commentary necessary for such an asinine perspective.)

1. And then there are the wide-eyed, disingenuous posters with their faux naif reactions. "Whatever do you mean, racist?"

(An eyeroll is the only reaction I can muster in response to such nonsense.)

For anyone who genuinely is ignorant of the issues involved, here is an article from 2012 that explains some of them:

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/sep/21/golliwogs-vile-throwback-tory-mps

You can click on report on the top bar of your first post and ask for the thread to be deleted op citing it uses racist / derogatory language. But tbh I think it would be useful to educate.

And the accepted term these days is Golly Dolly rather than w*g, which is racist.

@MrsBonnie

Sorry *@Tissueboxcover* I do know it’s an offensive doll and hope that that’s clear in my post.

No need to apologise - it was 100% obvious and Tissue was virtue signalling.

It is untrue to say that these dolls were always meant to be offensive.

Back in the 1950's it was just a doll.

we had no idea it was a negative representation of a black person. I was 4 or 5 years old.

However I don't think anything excuses the B & W Minstrals........I hated them even as a child I could see it wasn't ok.

But a doll is an object of love to a child. Not the same thing at all.

I have a collection of the robertsons jam figurines. My mum collected them for me while she was pregnant with me. She died 2 years later. They are one of the very, very few items I have left of her.

They are kept in a box, in the attic.

I'd hate to think anyone would consider me racist for keeping them. But, if I'm honest, I'd rather be considered a racist (which I am not), than get rid of something so precious to me.

I'm sad that these golly figurines are amongst the few items left by my mum, but I can't change that.

I hope people understand my dilemma and why I have kept them, albeit hidden away.

Its difficult. On one hand, I think that racism should always be challenged. But on the other hand it seems unlikely this old lady intends this as anything other than a kind gesture and she is probably quite oblivious to the implications of this doll. Is there anything really to be gained by discussing it with her at this stage of her life? I wonder if the fact that she us giving away things that are precious to her implies that she feels her life us coming to an end?
I was reading about the history of the character recently and there is no doubt that it was always racist, no matter how many small children loved their toys. It probably is something that a very elderly lady would have difficulty understanding at this time in her life though and she probably would be upset if you either returned it to her or threw it away. I don't think it would really achieve anything to do that.
So on balance I also vote for the "store it safely somewhere because its very old and delicate" approach. In years to come you can either use it as a conversation starter with your children or quietly dispose of it, but for the time being I think I would put it out of the way and ignore it. I like the PPs suggestion of putting a note in with it explaining where it came from and why you have stored it, partly in case anyone else does find it, and partly because if you do choose to use it as an educational item at some point, the letter would make a good starting point for the conversation.

Just don’t accept it. Say that you understand it holds wonderful memories of childhood for your aunt but sadly the doll is now considered a racist artefact and it’s not something you could give to your daughter.

I think the truth is always easier than a lie. No one is at fault. Your aunt die offering or you for declining. Time has moved on and lots of things are unacceptable now.

It’s interesting that, according to that fount of all wisdom, Wikipedia, these toys were considered highly collectible in the Caribbean. I really wouldn’t have expected that.

From the article I linked above:

Perhaps it would be useful to discuss the tradition of dehumanising racist caricature to which these dolls belong. The English-American author Florence Upton invented the golliwog in a series of picture books produced at the onset of the Jim Crow laws, which mandated racial segregation in the American South. She described the character as "a horrid sight, the blackest gnome". He was clothed in the same apparel as the black-faced minstrels then prevalent in Europe and North America. He had thick lips, unruly black hair, and his hands and feet were paws.

The golliwog, like many related stereotypes of "primitive" black people ("picaninnies", minstrels, "mammies" and so on), quickly found a commercial market, producing a flood of cartoons and advertising imagery. It was taken up as a symbol by Hamleys, Harrods, Trebor and Robertson's jam. This imagery was consistent with a tendency to represent black people through the prism of biological racism. For example, the colonial exhibitions through which European states celebrated their global power featured "human zoos" and "negro villages".

The most insidious feature of these images is that they were intended for consumption by children, part of their socialisation into the adult world of race relations. It is because of this that many apologists for those racist images find it convenient to lapse into sentimental fugue state, in which history is obliterated. Yet, there is always time to grow up. Children may be understandably oblivious to this vile tradition, but adults – and Robert Goodwill MP is well into his 50s – have no such excuse.

This is a bit of a tangent.. My partner has a few toys from childhood one is a knitted black doll. It's not one of those it's just a black doll. His mum is very politically active and used to take him to womad and do loads of community stuff as a kid I think. I think the doll came from a stall at womad. When I first saw it I was like wtf is that but then realised there's a difference.

It is important to have races represented in toys. My niece's are mixed race and I've notice still most of her dolls and little people figures a white. Perhaps refuse the doll and make sure your daughter sees things and has toys which show lots of races.

@viques

**Don’t put the damn thing in a bin or a box, burn it. It’s a hateful object, the words golly and wog have caused pain and distress to countless black kids in this country over the years. For every person claiming they didn’t know it was used as a racist slur and to illustrate racist views I can guarantee there were fifty more people who knew full well it was.

Like the Black and White Minstrel Show , gollywogs and the Robinson figures were deliberately designed to be offensive caricatures. To add further insult they were then marketed to children who were unaware of the implications of the images, the well documented history of such negative images portraying black people , and the real racism behind them. They have no place in 21century Britain.

THIS

Nobody living in the real world can honestly believe that these are ok. Nobody.

Bin.

I can't believe the amount of people who justify stuff like this with "it wasn't racist at the time".

At the time, the dolls were created in an image intended to oppress black people. Black people were oppressed. Just because that wasn't your intention or motive, doesn't mean that the people on the other side weren't hurt by the collective action or inaction you were a part of.

It reminds me of the arguments for keeping the statue of Colston, that his actions "shouldn't be judged by today's standards". Thing is, I'm pretty sure if you asked the thousands of black people he stole and murdered AT THE TIME, they wouldn't have been fans.

@VinylDetective

It’s interesting that, according to that fount of all wisdom, Wikipedia, these toys were considered highly collectible in the Caribbean. I really wouldn’t have expected that.

Why? It was a British colony

Why? It was a British colony

With a black population of over 90%. You’re not even slightly confused so why the silly face?

My mum bought my children a brand new one a few years ago. She absolutely insisted they aren't racist and gets all offended that anyone would very suggest they might be. My mum's really racist and also gets really offended if anyone dares suggest she might be.

I put the gollywog in the bin.

@updownroundandround

I'm very interested in the posters who have stated that the 'golliwog' badge/dolls were 'always' racist.

I remember them from my youth and can honestly say that none of the people I knew that had collected tokens etc and collected them were in any way racist or viewed any ethnic minority as 'less than' themselves.

I don't dispute for a second that they are offensive/ racist today.

My grandmother collected them, and her best friend was a woman of colour. Neither of them gave the dolls a seconds thought. Certainly neither of them viewed them as offensive in any way.

I had one knitted for me as a child (by my Gran's best friend), and it was my favourite toy for years, but I never once thought it derogitory or racist in any way, and didn't even connect the dolls appearance with anyone of colour, any more than I would connect Barbie's appearance with myself, as a child, I simply accepted the toy as a toy.

No-one I knew, at the time, thought the dolls were racist. They were simply a 'collectable' (of which there were many others e.g 'Tony the Tiger' etc) available at the time.

It needs to be recognized that back then, most people were indeed 'ignorant' of the effect things like the dolls/badges may have had on people of colour, and that, generally speaking, there was no actual 'intent' to upset/ marginalize anyone.
(This was also the time when there were x-ray machines in kids shoe shops ffs, so we were also happy to potentially give our kids radiation/ cancer to see if their shoes fitted properly )

Certainly this was the case in my own family, and I'm hoping this was the case with many, many families, all of whom would be horrified looking back at what was accepted as 'normal'.

I'm thankful that times have changed, and hopefully everyone is far more 'aware' of how actions/ depictions can offend others.

Of course they were always racist. This ‘othering’ of non-white people was just completely accepted in white society, along with the many offensive stereotypes ascribed to people of colour. It was never not racist, and never not wrong. Happily, society is changing, but slowly, and unevenly.