And People Thought Blatant Racism Didn't Exist Anymore

[Kung Fu]

H&Ms recent ad. All the other kids in the ad have different animals on their sweaters while the black kid gets the monkey.

No matter how advanced you get whether it be in your "social" values or technology there will be people out there that just won't like the skin colour of others.

 

[mecca]

No matter how advanced you get whether it be in your "social" values or technology there will be people out there that just won't like the skin colour of others.

As long as the racist elite are in power.

 

[Vytas]

People will still gonna buy this tho...Blacks too...

 

[Kung Fu]

As long as the racist elite are in power.

We can't always blame the elite. Some people just don't like the way you look and the elite don't always have something to do with that.

 

[mecca]

We can't always blame the elite. Some people just don't like the way you look and the elite don't always have something to do with that.

That's true but racism would be minimized if the elite were gone... they help to perpetuate it. They created racism to justify slavery. If we take them down we can have a society that's not based on racism... there would still be racist people, they just wouldn't have any power.

 

[rainerann]

I really expected something more blatant like a direct reference to someone being inferior based on race. I think this is a completely blown out of proportion and as usual, it gathers the clique together to ooh and aah about how racism still exists because calling people racist is a great way to win arguments by people who have none otherwise.

The reality is that a monkey is a common animal to use for children's clothing. If a white boy had worn this sweater and a black mother had put it on her child, no one would be saying anything because monkeys are often used in clothing for tiny people. There is a reason for this. It is because tiny people behave like monkeys and climb all over the place.

My son was like 14 months old when he could climb out of his crib. He was about 18 months old when he started climbing over baby gates. A monkey was an appropriate nickname for him. I used to tell him that he was like a little monkey.

So I really think this is blown out of proportion. There is no reason to suggest that the boy wearing the sweater has anything to do with race and isn't wearing a sweater with a reference to a monkey because of his age, but some people will see racism everywhere.

Even if you could relate this ad to former stereotypes like the mammy or the uncle in early advertisements, you would still be stretching it. Finally, at the end of the day, this is far from blatant racism.

As a mother of young children living in the year 2018, I feel perfectly comfortable with my son wearing the exact same sweatshirt as the boy in the ad. If I didn't feel this way, that would be racist. Racism is defined as seeing a boy who is black wearing this sweater and thinking that this means that only black people should wear this sweater.

As a result of evolving beyond this thinking to the point where an advertising campaign for children's clothing includes black and white children, I find it hard to see this as "blatant" racism. Add this to the fact that consumers frequently see different races in clothing ads and we don't determine that a certain design belongs to a specific race anymore. This is just common knowledge. A little black boy wearing a sweater does not mean that sweater can only be worn by black people. If someone said something like this, that would be an example of "blatant" racism.

The subject of racism in response to this ad is really based on a delusion and we should try to balance out our opinion towards things like this with reality.

 

[Kung Fu]

I really expected something more blatant like a direct reference to someone being inferior based on race. I think this is a completely blown out of proportion and as usual, it gathers the clique together to ooh and aah about how racism still exists because calling people racist is a great way to win arguments by people who have none otherwise.

The reality is that a monkey is a common animal to use for children's clothing. If a white boy had worn this sweater and a black mother had put it on her child, no one would be saying anything because monkeys are often used in clothing for tiny people. There is a reason for this. It is because tiny people behave like monkeys and climb all over the place.

My son was like 14 months old when he could climb out of his crib. He was about 18 months old when he started climbing over baby gates. A monkey was an appropriate nickname for him. I used to tell him that he was like a little monkey.

So I really think this is blown out of proportion. There is no reason to suggest that the boy wearing the sweater has anything to do with race and isn't wearing a sweater with a reference to a monkey because of his age, but some people will see racism everywhere.

Even if you could relate this ad to former stereotypes like the mammy or the uncle in early advertisements, you would still be stretching it. Finally, at the end of the day, this is far from blatant racism.

As a mother of young children living in the year 2018, I feel perfectly comfortable with my son wearing the exact same sweatshirt as the boy in the ad. If I didn't feel this way, that would be racist. Racism is defined as seeing a boy who is black wearing this sweater and thinking that this means that only black people should wear this sweater.

As a result of evolving beyond this thinking to the point where an advertising campaign for children's clothing includes black and white children, I find it hard to see this as "blatant" racism. Add this to the fact that consumers frequently see different races in clothing ads and we don't determine that a certain design belongs to a specific race anymore. This is just common knowledge. A little black boy wearing a sweater does not mean that sweater can only be worn by black people. If someone said something like this, that would be an example of "blatant" racism.

The subject of racism in response to this ad is really based on a delusion and we should try to balance out our opinion towards things like this with reality.

The racist is trying to tell everyone else this isn't racist. That's rich.

 

[Orwell's mentor]

I really expected something more blatant like a direct reference to someone being inferior based on race. I think this is a completely blown out of proportion and as usual, it gathers the clique together to ooh and aah about how racism still exists because calling people racist is a great way to win arguments by people who have none otherwise.

The reality is that a monkey is a common animal to use for children's clothing. If a white boy had worn this sweater and a black mother had put it on her child, no one would be saying anything because monkeys are often used in clothing for tiny people. There is a reason for this. It is because tiny people behave like monkeys and climb all over the place.

My son was like 14 months old when he could climb out of his crib. He was about 18 months old when he started climbing over baby gates. A monkey was an appropriate nickname for him. I used to tell him that he was like a little monkey.

So I really think this is blown out of proportion. There is no reason to suggest that the boy wearing the sweater has anything to do with race and isn't wearing a sweater with a reference to a monkey because of his age, but some people will see racism everywhere.

Even if you could relate this ad to former stereotypes like the mammy or the uncle in early advertisements, you would still be stretching it. Finally, at the end of the day, this is far from blatant racism.

As a mother of young children living in the year 2018, I feel perfectly comfortable with my son wearing the exact same sweatshirt as the boy in the ad. If I didn't feel this way, that would be racist. Racism is defined as seeing a boy who is black wearing this sweater and thinking that this means that only black people should wear this sweater.

As a result of evolving beyond this thinking to the point where an advertising campaign for children's clothing includes black and white children, I find it hard to see this as "blatant" racism. Add this to the fact that consumers frequently see different races in clothing ads and we don't determine that a certain design belongs to a specific race anymore. This is just common knowledge. A little black boy wearing a sweater does not mean that sweater can only be worn by black people. If someone said something like this, that would be an example of "blatant" racism.

The subject of racism in response to this ad is really based on a delusion and we should try to balance out our opinion towards things like this with reality.

How and where did you arrive at this assessment, Rainerann? Are you Black/African-American? Have you spoken to any Blacks about the derogatory monkey reference? You state this is all being blown out of proportion, and you apply your personal examples and consider them to be the truth, which I find confounding. American history illustrates otherwise: The Coon Caricature: Blacks as Monkeys.

 

[Kung Fu]

How and where did you arrive at this assessment, Rainerann? Are you Black/African-American? Have you spoken to any Blacks about the derogatory monkey reference? You state this is all being blown out of proportion, and you apply your personal examples and consider them to be the truth, which I find confounding. American history illustrates otherwise: The Coon Caricature: Blacks as Monkeys.

All the other kids had illustrations of different animals but "coincidentally" the only black kid was labelled as "the coolest monkey in the jungle".

 

[Vytas]

So I really think this is blown out of proportion. There is no reason to suggest that the boy wearing the sweater has anything to do with race and isn't wearing a sweater with a reference to a monkey because of his age, but some people will see racism everywhere.

Calling black people monkeys is actually very popular insult...The only thing that sweater was missing is banana, would that be enough to make a connection? I heard that insult before many times because i used to be NBA fan...
Sacramento kings wanted their players to wear this, but players resisted...

 

[Lisa]

What about the parents that let their child be in the ad?

 

[Kung Fu]

I love how any thread discussing racism there are certain white people there trying to deflect and or change the subject. I guess once a colonialist always a colonialist.

 

[rainerann]

Calling black people monkeys is actually very popular insult...The only thing that sweater was missing is banana, would that be enough to make a connection? I heard that insult before many times because i used to be NBA fan...

I understand why the association is made to racism. However, the ad is making a very vague connection to this association. The connection that people are referring to is just not there and as a consumer who lives in a world that is post civil rights, my experience and education teaches me that I can have my child wear this sweater even though it is modeled by a black child.

The point I am making is that this thread is not about someone who was caught calling black people monkeys or about someone who called black people monkeys during some kind of rally or about anyone using this reference in the way it was used at some point in history. It is like people are saying that black children cannot be compared to monkeys for climbing around the way all children do because this was used as a derogatory term towards black people in the past.

What I see as a mother and consumer of this clothing is a cute, clean, healthy looking little boy wearing a sweater comparing him to a monkey. I visualize a cute, clean, healthy little boy trying to climb onto an entertainment stand with a mother dropping her dishes in the sink to go rescue him. I see cute little children playing on a jungle gym at the park. I don't see a connection or a claim that black people are monkeys. I see children are monkeys because of the way they climb around. This isn't a grown man being compared to a monkey. This is a small toddler who has just learned to walk and is being chased around by parents because of this.

Monkeys were common on clothing for my son and daughter. It isn't even a gender bias thing. Although, in my experience, my daughter was a lot more mellow than my son, but this isn't always the case. So clothing for children this age commonly uses monkeys as a character.

Therefore, this is anything but blatant racism. This is vague and requires more evidence to suggest that this ad intended to present a racist message.

 

[Lisa]

I love how any thread discussing racism there are certain white people there trying to deflect and or change the subject. I guess once a colonialist always a colonialist.

I think its a valid point...what do you have to say about the parents that let their child be in the ad? Do they hate their own race then?

 

[Ambuler]

I'm half black.

I also think it's blown way out of proportion. Rainerann's race is irrelevant as she made an excellent point.

 

[Etagloc]

Only with racism is this approach taken. And when people take that approach, it shows they don't really care.

"Shut up and don't talk about racism" is never going to make it go away. The people who promote that approach either are delusional enough to think that will work..... or they don't actually want it to go away.

Racism yes was part of justifying the Atlantic slave trade. However there is a global picture.

It was used to justify colonialism and today it is used to justify neocolonialism.

For example, I saw a movie depicting Muslims in the Middle East as savages. It might just have been a movie showing on TV.... but there are geopolitical reasons for why racism has been cultivated for 500 years and why the movie made such a terrible depiction.

The movie can't show Muslims as being doctors, lawyers, loving family members..... it has to show them as dehumanized savages.

This is the core of the racism. It has to dehumanize people and make them appear to be less human. When it is internalized, the colonized subject feels themselves to be less than human. Again, I am reciting themes from Frantz Fanon and Paulo Freire- I am not making the stuff up.

If the media depicted Middle Eastern Muslims the same as it depicts Europeans..... then there's no way the US would be able to get its people to support bombing Middle Easterners. The only exception with Europeans though is Russians. The US public is psychologically prepared for war against Russia..... but bombing Western European countries would be unthinkable.... whereas the US can randomly declare war on Muslim countries for no particular reason (coughcoughIraq) and the US public will support it.

Racism is there for geopolitical reasons.

And the people who try to silence the ones who talk about are complicit with its perpetuation as well the crimes it is associated with.

 

[rainerann]

How and where did you arrive at this assessment, Rainerann? Are you Black/African-American? Have you spoken to any Blacks about the derogatory monkey reference? You state this is all being blown out of proportion, and you apply your personal examples and consider them to be the truth, which I find confounding. American history illustrates otherwise: The Coon Caricature: Blacks as Monkeys.

Well, what I think you are saying right here is that black children should be discriminated and not treated like other children who get to wear clothing with references to monkeys. I don't think that black children should receive this discrimination or become burdened by labels used in the past.

So for me, this is about black children and white children having equality and not be distinguished according to color when they are modeling clothing that is common for children of this age. Do you have children? Have you ever shopped in the toddler section? Do you not know that monkeys are a very common character in children's clothing because when they learn to walk and move around, they climb all over things like monkeys.

“I have a dream that one day little black boys and girls will be holding hands with little white boys and girls.” (Martin Luther King Jr.)

I like to believe I live in the world Martin Luther King was talking about and make this my reality by not discriminating what children can wear because of their race.

 

[Kung Fu]

I'm half black.

I also think it's blown way out of proportion. Rainerann's race is irrelevant as she made an excellent point.

Is this your second account, Rainerann?

 

[Etagloc]

I also think it's blown way out of proportion.

In and of itself, I think this particular thing is not all that big..... not as big as, say...... what happened in Libya.

But understood as a symptom of a much larger system it can be instructive.

 

[Kung Fu]

Well, what I think you are saying right here is that black children should be discriminated and not treated like other children who get to wear clothing with references to monkeys. I don't think that black children should receive this discrimination or become burdened by labels used in the past.

So for me, this is about black children and white children having equality and not be distinguished according to color when they are modeling clothing that is common for children of this age. Do you have children? Have you ever shopped in the toddler section? Do you not know that monkeys are a very common character in children's clothing because when they learn to walk and move around, they climb all over things like monkeys.

“I have a dream that one day little black boys and girls will be holding hands with little white boys and girls.” (Martin Luther King Jr.)

I like to believe I live in the world Martin Luther King was talking about and make this my reality by not discriminating what children can wear because of their race.

I'm not surprised you don't find this racist considering your racist remarks and stereotypical statements towards Mexicans.