Golliwogs, harmless old nostalgia ?
Discussion
Its strange how so many people (usually over sixty) rattle on about Golliwogs, someone posted on Facebook about it and was going on about the "PC Brigade" and "PC Gone mad" ?
I am not sure what to think other than its a bit dicey, best avoid it, let it perhaps fade into the past.
The post on Facebook was that the word "Wog" is ok because it stands for "Working on Government Service", see, no racist overtones there apart from it sounding a bit slave-ish, forgetting the bit about it being used since as a racial slur for decades.
Photos of their old Golliwogs were posted, see, no harm done, and there probably wasn't, but to me, and I am not overly pc its a cutesy symbol of old school racism for the sheer sake of it.
I am not sure what to think other than its a bit dicey, best avoid it, let it perhaps fade into the past.
The post on Facebook was that the word "Wog" is ok because it stands for "Working on Government Service", see, no racist overtones there apart from it sounding a bit slave-ish, forgetting the bit about it being used since as a racial slur for decades.
Photos of their old Golliwogs were posted, see, no harm done, and there probably wasn't, but to me, and I am not overly pc its a cutesy symbol of old school racism for the sheer sake of it.
I don't think it's particularly acceptable, it's an extreme caricature of black people, in the same way the Black and White Minstrels were. Both make me cringe, and I'm not particularly young (approaching 40) or left wing. I had Gollys as a kid, obviously bought for me by parents or grandparents, and I remember the collections of Golly badges on Robinsons Jam which were probably hangovers from the 50's.
Let it die, I say.
Let it die, I say.
J4CKO said:
Its strange how so many people (usually over sixty) rattle on about Golliwogs, someone posted on Facebook about it and was going on about the "PC Brigade" and "PC Gone mad" ?
I am not sure what to think other than its a bit dicey, best avoid it, let it perhaps fade into the past.
The post on Facebook was that the word "Wog" is ok because it stands for "Working on Government Service", see, no racist overtones there apart from it sounding a bit slave-ish, forgetting the bit about it being used since as a racial slur for decades.
Photos of their old Golliwogs were posted, see, no harm done, and there probably wasn't, but to me, and I am not overly pc its a cutesy symbol of old school racism for the sheer sake of it.
Usually argued by morons who don't understand what a racial slur is or that black people endured centuries of oppression. Usually argued along the lines of "Is Brit racist? No, it's just an abbreviation for 'British'!" That's usually about the best argument they have, because there aren't really any derogatory (don't try explaining that word to them) racist slurs for white people that are as offensive as 'wog' or 'I am not sure what to think other than its a bit dicey, best avoid it, let it perhaps fade into the past.
The post on Facebook was that the word "Wog" is ok because it stands for "Working on Government Service", see, no racist overtones there apart from it sounding a bit slave-ish, forgetting the bit about it being used since as a racial slur for decades.
Photos of their old Golliwogs were posted, see, no harm done, and there probably wasn't, but to me, and I am not overly pc its a cutesy symbol of old school racism for the sheer sake of it.
'These same people also fail to comprehend why 'blackface' is also racist
My only memory of these was the little toys I got from the marmalade, when I was a kid I had one and it was one of my favourite toys, I lost it and cried my eyes out for weeks. Never has or did occur to me that it might be racist, was just a little cuddly toy that happened to be black in the same way I had toys that were blue red yellow etc.
Arguing on that basis I don't see them as racist however that's only a small window onto a wider subject of which the concept itself is nowadays quite racist. All depends on your viewpoint, as with all things though you can't apply current standards to past history you can only apply them to the current day, nowadays there's no way they could be anything but racist.
Arguing on that basis I don't see them as racist however that's only a small window onto a wider subject of which the concept itself is nowadays quite racist. All depends on your viewpoint, as with all things though you can't apply current standards to past history you can only apply them to the current day, nowadays there's no way they could be anything but racist.
Nope,'fraid not.
Racism requires an element beyond imitation or mention.
"my mate Roy, he's about 6'3", black, plays a lot of Tennis" - not even close to racist.
Barbie (actual Barbie) has a new friend and that friend is black - not racist.
All the cast members of a new TV show are white (or black or Asian) - not necessarily racist.
All the nominees for the major awards at a major awards ceremony being white - not necessarily racist.
Taking one look at a black woman and not really fancying her, but quite liking her white mate - not necessarily racist.
Describing my actual mate from school as 'Big Black Rob' - not racist.
Yesterday I mentioned the name of a black man in a comment I made elsewhere online. I said he was a big girl's blouse for behaving as he has. No mention of his colour, no racial slur, no anything. He's behaved as he has and he happens to be black. Got called a racist.
We've gone far too far the other way. I think Donald Trump is a dangerous lunatic with horrendous views. I am entirely comfortable admitting that I admire hugely Stephen Fry and Alan Turing. Equally, would I use a person's colour or sexuality to describe them to a stranger? Of course, it's just another defining characteristic. The racist element actually comes in not mentioning it. Then you're making it an issue.
Have a think about it this way: there's no such thing as height-ism. If you were describing a person to someone they've never met, you might well mention the height of the stranger. No one would bat an eye because there's no 'ism' attached to height. Purely describing a person as black or Asian or white, for that matter, is just that, descriptive.
Of course, one must choose one's words with some care. Slurs should be avoided, there's no excuse for that, but mere use of race, gender, sexuality, disability or anything else which people seem to get their panties in a bunch about as a descriptive is about as far from race/sex etc -ism as baking a cake is from obesity.
Racism requires an element beyond imitation or mention.
"my mate Roy, he's about 6'3", black, plays a lot of Tennis" - not even close to racist.
Barbie (actual Barbie) has a new friend and that friend is black - not racist.
All the cast members of a new TV show are white (or black or Asian) - not necessarily racist.
All the nominees for the major awards at a major awards ceremony being white - not necessarily racist.
Taking one look at a black woman and not really fancying her, but quite liking her white mate - not necessarily racist.
Describing my actual mate from school as 'Big Black Rob' - not racist.
Yesterday I mentioned the name of a black man in a comment I made elsewhere online. I said he was a big girl's blouse for behaving as he has. No mention of his colour, no racial slur, no anything. He's behaved as he has and he happens to be black. Got called a racist.
We've gone far too far the other way. I think Donald Trump is a dangerous lunatic with horrendous views. I am entirely comfortable admitting that I admire hugely Stephen Fry and Alan Turing. Equally, would I use a person's colour or sexuality to describe them to a stranger? Of course, it's just another defining characteristic. The racist element actually comes in not mentioning it. Then you're making it an issue.
Have a think about it this way: there's no such thing as height-ism. If you were describing a person to someone they've never met, you might well mention the height of the stranger. No one would bat an eye because there's no 'ism' attached to height. Purely describing a person as black or Asian or white, for that matter, is just that, descriptive.
Of course, one must choose one's words with some care. Slurs should be avoided, there's no excuse for that, but mere use of race, gender, sexuality, disability or anything else which people seem to get their panties in a bunch about as a descriptive is about as far from race/sex etc -ism as baking a cake is from obesity.
I had a Golliwog as a child. Knitted by my Granny. Was she racist for knitting Gollis? Probably not, as she was blind and therefore couldn't tell the difference between people based on their appearance. All she needed was for someone to sort the wool into the right colours, and a 'talking pattern' on a cassette tape, and away she went.
What worries me, looking back to my 1970s childhood, was playground rhymes.
One I particularly remember, because remembering saying it now fills me with horror, went...
"Eenie, meenie, minee moh
Catch a n***er by the toe.
If he screams, pull his tail
Send him off to Cardiff Jail"
Now this was infant's school in about 1975. I doubt any of the kids saying this rhyme had any idea what they were really saying. But it came from somewhere. Older kids? Parents? Who the fk knows? But later it was altered.
From the use of derogatory words to describe black people, and comparing them with the devil (the tail reference), it changed from "n***er" to "monkey". So it was still disturbing, because we all knew the old version, and why the hell would you send a monkey to jail?
Then there was the age old answer to the question "Where's mum gone?" which was often "She's run off with a black man". Great. So mum running off with someone would be a bad thing, yet running off with a black man is somehow worse? Again, as people woke up to the racism in these sort of comments, it changed to "run off with the coal man" (Google it kids
) - so we've gone from one black faced man to another. There seemed to have been an obsession with connecting Afro-Caribbean immigration to bad things.
And all this against a background of me never having seen a real live non-white person until I was in my teens. Semi-rural South Wales in the 1970s, after all. Although my friend Elena was more brown than the rest of us due to her Mediterranean family background. It didn't help race relations in my village when the first Asian family to move in took over the local Post Office and shop, and some time later the brothers who co-owned the place were sent down for fraud.
All I can say for sure is that, despite the unpleasant, frankly awful rhymes, and the Golliwogs, I don't think I've been adversely affected into adulthood. But I'm glad to see the back of Golliwogs, and all the baggage they carry. There's no place in this world for pre-judging someone based on the colour of their skin or any other element of their ethnic background, and there really isn't a need for Golliwogs either. They are simply defunct.
What worries me, looking back to my 1970s childhood, was playground rhymes.
One I particularly remember, because remembering saying it now fills me with horror, went...
"Eenie, meenie, minee moh
Catch a n***er by the toe.
If he screams, pull his tail
Send him off to Cardiff Jail"
Now this was infant's school in about 1975. I doubt any of the kids saying this rhyme had any idea what they were really saying. But it came from somewhere. Older kids? Parents? Who the f
k knows? But later it was altered.From the use of derogatory words to describe black people, and comparing them with the devil (the tail reference), it changed from "n***er" to "monkey". So it was still disturbing, because we all knew the old version, and why the hell would you send a monkey to jail?
Then there was the age old answer to the question "Where's mum gone?" which was often "She's run off with a black man". Great. So mum running off with someone would be a bad thing, yet running off with a black man is somehow worse? Again, as people woke up to the racism in these sort of comments, it changed to "run off with the coal man" (Google it kids
) - so we've gone from one black faced man to another. There seemed to have been an obsession with connecting Afro-Caribbean immigration to bad things.And all this against a background of me never having seen a real live non-white person until I was in my teens. Semi-rural South Wales in the 1970s, after all. Although my friend Elena was more brown than the rest of us due to her Mediterranean family background. It didn't help race relations in my village when the first Asian family to move in took over the local Post Office and shop, and some time later the brothers who co-owned the place were sent down for fraud.
All I can say for sure is that, despite the unpleasant, frankly awful rhymes, and the Golliwogs, I don't think I've been adversely affected into adulthood. But I'm glad to see the back of Golliwogs, and all the baggage they carry. There's no place in this world for pre-judging someone based on the colour of their skin or any other element of their ethnic background, and there really isn't a need for Golliwogs either. They are simply defunct.
ferrariF50lover said:
Nope,'fraid not.
Racism requires an element beyond imitation or mention.
"my mate Roy, he's about 6'3", black, plays a lot of Tennis" - not even close to racist.
Barbie (actual Barbie) has a new friend and that friend is black - not racist.
All the cast members of a new TV show are white (or black or Asian) - not necessarily racist.
All the nominees for the major awards at a major awards ceremony being white - not necessarily racist.
Taking one look at a black woman and not really fancying her, but quite liking her white mate - not necessarily racist.
Describing my actual mate from school as 'Big Black Rob' - not racist.
Yesterday I mentioned the name of a black man in a comment I made elsewhere online. I said he was a big girl's blouse for behaving as he has. No mention of his colour, no racial slur, no anything. He's behaved as he has and he happens to be black. Got called a racist.
We've gone far too far the other way. I think Donald Trump is a dangerous lunatic with horrendous views. I am entirely comfortable admitting that I admire hugely Stephen Fry and Alan Turing. Equally, would I use a person's colour or sexuality to describe them to a stranger? Of course, it's just another defining characteristic. The racist element actually comes in not mentioning it. Then you're making it an issue.
Have a think about it this way: there's no such thing as height-ism. If you were describing a person to someone they've never met, you might well mention the height of the stranger. No one would bat an eye because there's no 'ism' attached to height. Purely describing a person as black or Asian or white, for that matter, is just that, descriptive.
Of course, one must choose one's words with some care. Slurs should be avoided, there's no excuse for that, but mere use of race, gender, sexuality, disability or anything else which people seem to get their panties in a bunch about as a descriptive is about as far from race/sex etc -ism as baking a cake is from obesity.
Yeah, a lot is about intent and if someone is a big black guy then that is what he is, I am a moderately large white guy, if you had to descibe someone you mention the things to identify them by, it is how you say it, "he is the black gentleman over there" is fine as it confers respect.Racism requires an element beyond imitation or mention.
"my mate Roy, he's about 6'3", black, plays a lot of Tennis" - not even close to racist.
Barbie (actual Barbie) has a new friend and that friend is black - not racist.
All the cast members of a new TV show are white (or black or Asian) - not necessarily racist.
All the nominees for the major awards at a major awards ceremony being white - not necessarily racist.
Taking one look at a black woman and not really fancying her, but quite liking her white mate - not necessarily racist.
Describing my actual mate from school as 'Big Black Rob' - not racist.
Yesterday I mentioned the name of a black man in a comment I made elsewhere online. I said he was a big girl's blouse for behaving as he has. No mention of his colour, no racial slur, no anything. He's behaved as he has and he happens to be black. Got called a racist.
We've gone far too far the other way. I think Donald Trump is a dangerous lunatic with horrendous views. I am entirely comfortable admitting that I admire hugely Stephen Fry and Alan Turing. Equally, would I use a person's colour or sexuality to describe them to a stranger? Of course, it's just another defining characteristic. The racist element actually comes in not mentioning it. Then you're making it an issue.
Have a think about it this way: there's no such thing as height-ism. If you were describing a person to someone they've never met, you might well mention the height of the stranger. No one would bat an eye because there's no 'ism' attached to height. Purely describing a person as black or Asian or white, for that matter, is just that, descriptive.
Of course, one must choose one's words with some care. Slurs should be avoided, there's no excuse for that, but mere use of race, gender, sexuality, disability or anything else which people seem to get their panties in a bunch about as a descriptive is about as far from race/sex etc -ism as baking a cake is from obesity.
I think the Golliwog is something that legitimatised racism and of course kids get attached to dolls and stuff, people get nostalgic but it doesn't really change where that came from and the overtones it has, take it on face value its a black doll but it is one that is different to a doll that just happens to be a black person.
I suppose the irony is I am saying let it fade into obscurity and here I am jabbering on about it
Love comes naturally. hate is learned
I loved my golly as a child still would do.
I had a yellow teddybear a brown one and a blue one
So was the yellow one Chinese the brown one asian and the blue one dead.
No they were not they were my stuffed bears. My first experiance of unconditional love? yes
I know many white people who would feel it racist to have a golly
I also know many coloured people who couldn't give a stuff about a golly.
And yes vica versa
Each to their own as long as its not a racist token
Yellowjack - who'd send a monkey to jail, do a search on monkeys and hartlepool
I loved my golly as a child still would do.
I had a yellow teddybear a brown one and a blue one
So was the yellow one Chinese the brown one asian and the blue one dead.
No they were not they were my stuffed bears. My first experiance of unconditional love? yes
I know many white people who would feel it racist to have a golly
I also know many coloured people who couldn't give a stuff about a golly.
And yes vica versa
Each to their own as long as its not a racist token
Yellowjack - who'd send a monkey to jail, do a search on monkeys and hartlepool
Edited by anothernameitist on Friday 29th January 11:15
MDMetal said:
My only memory of these was the little toys I got from the marmalade, when I was a kid I had one and it was one of my favourite toys, I lost it and cried my eyes out for weeks. Never has or did occur to me that it might be racist, was just a little cuddly toy that happened to be black in the same way I had toys that were blue red yellow etc.
Arguing on that basis I don't see them as racist however that's only a small window onto a wider subject of which the concept itself is nowadays quite racist. All depends on your viewpoint, as with all things though you can't apply current standards to past history you can only apply them to the current day, nowadays there's no way they could be anything but racist.
It never occurred to me as a child, or even before the professionally offended classes pointed to it, that a golliwog was anything like representative of reality any more than a teddy bear or a rag doll. It is a manufactured offence IMOArguing on that basis I don't see them as racist however that's only a small window onto a wider subject of which the concept itself is nowadays quite racist. All depends on your viewpoint, as with all things though you can't apply current standards to past history you can only apply them to the current day, nowadays there's no way they could be anything but racist.
anothernameitist said:
...Yellowjack - who'd send a monkey to jail, do a search on monkeys and hartlepool...
24 years in the British Army, so I've plenty of experience of dealing with Monkey Hangers. But hey, they're northern, which goes a long way to explaining the "why?"... (I'm safe, I think, because 'Northern' is not a 'race', right?
)J4CKO said:
Yeah, a lot is about intent and if someone is a big black guy then that is what he is, I am a moderately large white guy, if you had to descibe someone you mention the things to identify them by, it is how you say it, "he is the black gentleman over there" is fine as it confers respect.
I think the Golliwog is something that legitimatised racism and of course kids get attached to dolls and stuff, people get nostalgic but it doesn't really change where that came from and the overtones it has, take it on face value its a black doll but it is one that is different to a doll that just happens to be a black person.
I suppose the irony is I am saying let it fade into obscurity and here I am jabbering on about it
I'll beg your forgiveness for my ignorance, but how is it that the golliwog "legitimised racism"? I'm far too young to remember them being sold, so it's a genuine question.I think the Golliwog is something that legitimatised racism and of course kids get attached to dolls and stuff, people get nostalgic but it doesn't really change where that came from and the overtones it has, take it on face value its a black doll but it is one that is different to a doll that just happens to be a black person.
I suppose the irony is I am saying let it fade into obscurity and here I am jabbering on about it
Were they somehow marketed as inferior? Did they come with the slogan "you too can own a black man, just like our glorious slaver forefathers"?
Was the idea that they were the servants at the Teddybear's Picnic?
I figured they were little more than (slightly caricatured) depictions of black people. Although, if we're taking offence at that, I have a teddy bear which looks nothing like either a bear, nor my uncle Edward.
yellowjack said:
I had a Golliwog as a child. Knitted by my Granny. Was she racist for knitting Gollis? Probably not, as she was blind and therefore couldn't tell the difference between people based on their appearance. All she needed was for someone to sort the wool into the right colours, and a 'talking pattern' on a cassette tape, and away she went.
My granny used to knit. She only had one arm.... They would have looked a right pair together. 
ferrariF50lover said:
J4CKO said:
Yeah, a lot is about intent and if someone is a big black guy then that is what he is, I am a moderately large white guy, if you had to descibe someone you mention the things to identify them by, it is how you say it, "he is the black gentleman over there" is fine as it confers respect.
I think the Golliwog is something that legitimatised racism and of course kids get attached to dolls and stuff, people get nostalgic but it doesn't really change where that came from and the overtones it has, take it on face value its a black doll but it is one that is different to a doll that just happens to be a black person.
I suppose the irony is I am saying let it fade into obscurity and here I am jabbering on about it
I'll beg your forgiveness for my ignorance, but how is it that the golliwog "legitimised racism"? I'm far too young to remember them being sold, so it's a genuine question.I think the Golliwog is something that legitimatised racism and of course kids get attached to dolls and stuff, people get nostalgic but it doesn't really change where that came from and the overtones it has, take it on face value its a black doll but it is one that is different to a doll that just happens to be a black person.
I suppose the irony is I am saying let it fade into obscurity and here I am jabbering on about it
Were they somehow marketed as inferior? Did they come with the slogan "you too can own a black man, just like our glorious slaver forefathers"?
Was the idea that they were the servants at the Teddybear's Picnic?
I figured they were little more than (slightly caricatured) depictions of black people. Although, if we're taking offence at that, I have a teddy bear which looks nothing like either a bear, nor my uncle Edward.
"Slightly Caricatured", its that the caricature is based on negative stereotypes, and what it is called, it has "Wog" in the name that is the bit that seems to be objected to. I think those stereo types have otherwise largely gone otherwise.
Like I said, I am really not sure on this one, it doesnt offend me, just am slightly uncomfortable when people start saying the word Wog is ok on Facebook as it stands for "Working on Goverment Service", no it doesnt, I think Wog is probably not far off as bad as the N word really, but less people know it.
Weirdly, whenenever I heard "Wog" as a kid it seemed to be more directed at the Asian community, last used in the wild so to speak was my father in law who died aged 79 last year, hadnt heard it in ages.
I'm pretty sure I had one as a kid along with a raggedy andy. I don't think it ever crossed my mind that either were supposed to represent a group of real people any more than an elf or a leprechaun. So in that sense the golliwog was harmless. Obviously if someone had said "this toy represents Nigerians, so play a game in which the golliwog tries to scam your teddy bear", then there'd be an issue.
Golliwogs originated in the colonies to help the little ones understand, who were otherwise alarmed or frightened at the introduction of the local gardeners, nannies and maids etc.......that they were in fact friendly, jolly and caring.
I'm sorry if this tale of love ruins the fantasy of the 'professionally offended' around here where nazi old ladies knit racist effigies of hate....but it was a very early and very successful effort in race relations born out of good sentiment.
I'm sorry if this tale of love ruins the fantasy of the 'professionally offended' around here where nazi old ladies knit racist effigies of hate....but it was a very early and very successful effort in race relations born out of good sentiment.
I'm 65 years old, so I've witnessed the huge change in social attitudes over the past few decades.When I was young, what is now considered racism was more like naivety and not malicious. We hardly saw ethnic minorities in my town, and they were looked upon as a curiosity.
I do sometimes think the PC brigade have a huge chip on their shoulder. It's like they're always looking for something or somebody to point a finger at. Take the MOBO awards - if somebody intended to introduce a MOWO awards ceremony (admittedly from very slender content), all hell would be let loose. Yet arguing against such an event is in itself racist. It works both ways.
I do sometimes think the PC brigade have a huge chip on their shoulder. It's like they're always looking for something or somebody to point a finger at. Take the MOBO awards - if somebody intended to introduce a MOWO awards ceremony (admittedly from very slender content), all hell would be let loose. Yet arguing against such an event is in itself racist. It works both ways.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff