independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Wed 12th Dec 2018 1:18am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > H & M ad stumbles and falls
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 9 of 10 <12345678910>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #240 posted 01/25/18 8:33am

jjhunsecker

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

jjhunsecker said:

His goal- which I said from the very beginning- is to say, when a white conservative is caught using racial slurs, "Well you can't complain, you were Ok with Bill Maher saying it". As if there is no difference in context or intent or circumstances, and people can't or shouldn't discern the differences.

that a total falshood i demand you post a retraction....

You're as transparent as cellophane...We all know EXACTLY what your end game was

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #241 posted 01/25/18 8:35am

jjhunsecker

avatar

OldFriends4Sale said:

SuperFurryAnimal said:

I don't even know those words. What they mean. I lived a sheltered life. Dego, kike, guinea I would not know what people meant racially speaking but I know they are racial slurs. I think, I never heard dego.

Dego Guinea & Wop (Wog is used a lot in Europe & Australia toward Medit people ie Greeks Sicilians Italians)

WOP ie Without Papers ie illegal criminal snuck over

.

Dego ie Greasy Swarthy Italian/Sicilian representing the underbelly of society materialistic and violent loud overly sexual etc, Italians & Sicilians at times will use this one toward each other like 'nigga'

.

Guinea is almost like calling an Italian a 'nigger', not white, lower spectrum of the European race etc

.

.

.

KIKE is directed at Jewish/Hebrew people

... Michael Jackson used that term in one of his latter album songs

I mainly hear my Italian-American friends using these words, usually as jokes or as internal criticism

[Edited 1/25/18 8:36am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #242 posted 01/25/18 8:47am

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

2elijah said:

jjhunsecker said: Exactly. He’s mad because he wants to be able to control your opinion, over something he has absolutely has no understanding of, because he wants his view to be right, when it’s sctually not. Words have different meanings by the context in which they are used, including historical racist terms. He can’t let go that he has no power of authority to force his views down your throat, which is why he keeps bringing up the Maher situation, because he wants to accuse you of embracing specific racial slurs, becsuse you didn’t agree with his point of view, so when he finds the opportunity, he throws it in your face and call you a hypocrite. That’s why he whines about hypocrisy in our view, regarding the Black child wearing a sweater with a monkey on it, becsuse he can’t have his way with controlling our views, whenever these types of discussions come up. I agree with you on both matters. [Edited 1/25/18 4:52am]

His goal- which I said from the very beginning- is to say, when a white conservative is caught using racial slurs, "Well you can't complain, you were Ok with Bill Maher saying it". As if there is no difference in context or intent or circumstances, and people can't or shouldn't discern the differences.

Which is 110% true. You use racial slurs but in a way to not offend? What I believe is so what if you do. You don't owe anyone an apology.

Trump turns from 'humbling' grief to midterm fire and furry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #243 posted 01/25/18 8:52am

2elijah

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:



jjhunsecker said:




2elijah said:


jjhunsecker said: Exactly. He’s mad because he wants to be able to control your opinion, over something he has absolutely has no understanding of, because he wants his view to be right, when it’s sctually not. Words have different meanings by the context in which they are used, including historical racist terms. He can’t let go that he has no power of authority to force his views down your throat, which is why he keeps bringing up the Maher situation, because he wants to accuse you of embracing specific racial slurs, becsuse you didn’t agree with his point of view, so when he finds the opportunity, he throws it in your face and call you a hypocrite. That’s why he whines about hypocrisy in our view, regarding the Black child wearing a sweater with a monkey on it, becsuse he can’t have his way with controlling our views, whenever these types of discussions come up. I agree with you on both matters. [Edited 1/25/18 4:52am]

His goal- which I said from the very beginning- is to say, when a white conservative is caught using racial slurs, "Well you can't complain, you were Ok with Bill Maher saying it". As if there is no difference in context or intent or circumstances, and people can't or shouldn't discern the differences.





that a total falshood i demand you post a retraction....


No it’s not because that’s what you told some AA orgers who didn’t agree with you on the Bill Maher situation, which is why you’re still obsessed with bringing it up on every, single thread, regarding race, that JJ and other Black orgers pparticipated in, who didn’t agree with you. You threadjack these threads with the same whining everytime. falloff

You’re doing that on this very thread, lol, and calling us hypocrites. You need to get over the fact that we just don’t agree with you. That’s never going to change. It’s not that difficult for you to comprehend that, but you are just making it a problem for yourself. So you may as well try to find some balance and peace peace’ and stop losing sleep over what you will never be able to change. comfort
[Edited 1/25/18 8:54am]
FEARLESS
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #244 posted 01/25/18 11:30am

poppys

OnlyNDaUsa said:

jjhunsecker said:

It's a word with many meanings and and usages, depending on the context and WHO is saying it, and WHY

so then in context there is nothing wrong with the photo


IF there was only ONE context, there would be nothing wrong with the photo. That is NOT the case.


  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #245 posted 01/25/18 12:37pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

poppys said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

so then in context there is nothing wrong with the photo


IF there was only ONE context, there would be nothing wrong with the photo. That is NOT the case.


see now you are starting to think a little.

Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #246 posted 01/25/18 1:47pm

poppys

2elijah said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

that a total falshood i demand you post a retraction.... bored bored2

No it’s not because that’s what you told some AA orgers who didn’t agree with you on the Bill Maher situation, which is why you’re still obsessed with bringing it up on every, single thread, regarding race, that JJ and other Black orgers participated in, who didn’t agree with you. You threadjack these threads with the same whining everytime. falloff You’re doing that on this very thread, lol, and calling us hypocrites. You need to get over the fact that we just don’t agree with you. That’s never going to change. It’s not that difficult for you to comprehend that, but you are just making it a problem for yourself. So you may as well try to find some balance and peace peace’ and stop losing sleep over what you will never be able to change. comfort

true dat

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #247 posted 01/25/18 2:55pm

Dasein

jjhunsecker said:

SuperFurryAnimal said:
JJ has said before he uses racial slurs among friends. Almost everyone will have to agree to disagree. I understand context matters but the words themselves do not change from slurs or curse words to magically being kind words like peace, love. With that said people have the freedom to use whatever curse word they want and sound as ignorant as they want. It's all up to the individual.
I have a VERY diverse group of family and friends, and we generally have a very politically incorrect senses of humor. So yes, race and ethnicity are grist for the mill, along with lots of other things. Nobody is insulted because we all love each other and know what is in the hearts of each other. Now if an "outsider " made some sort of slur in our presence, THAT is a whole different matter!


Exactly.

Within my Black social and familial network is enough room for calling each other "nigga." And,
Black Americans expropriating the word "nigger" from racist whites to jazz it up by turning it into
a term of endearment or colloquialism while any white who utters the word is justifiably condem-
ned is one of the greatest examples of irony in history. An outsider would be horrified to hear
the language my Black friends and my brothers use to refer to each other and themselves. But,
I know that in order to be in my network, you cannot harbor any racism in your heart, so using
ethnicity and gender and sexuality and faith and any other human category we implement is
then fodder for a raucous and irreverent sense of humor and justified within that network.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #248 posted 01/25/18 5:05pm

free2bFreeda2

Dasein said:

What do you think about the word "monkey" in the context of white European football fans
throwing bananas out onto the pitch at Black players?
Are these images just harmless fun ? sad

Question is what do YOU think?
what is your pov regarding the monkey acting euro-fans throwing bansnas?
rolleyes
one would think that they were. acting more like monkies than the best circus trained?
I mean they.were the ones throwing bananas in simian-like ways.
not to mention the spot on multi-simian imitations.
how. do YOU think/feel/conclude on their meanness.
federal judge says, "there is evidence." : https://www.yahoo.com/new...itics.html
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #249 posted 01/25/18 7:13pm

Dasein

free2bFreeda2 said:

Dasein said:
What do you think about the word "monkey" in the context of white European football fans throwing bananas out onto the pitch at Black players? Are these images just harmless fun ? sad
Question is what do YOU think? what is your pov regarding the monkey acting euro-fans throwing bansnas? rolleyes one would think that they were. acting more like monkies than the best circus trained? I mean they.were the ones throwing bananas in simian-like ways. not to mention the spot on multi-simian imitations. how. do YOU think/feel/conclude on their meanness.


First of all, if you've read all of my posts in this thread with a modicum of understanding, you would
be able to know how I feel about H&M's ad and people throwing bananas at Black footballers, so,
clearly you did not. I would suggest that you do so before you come at me, Freeda.

Secondly, if you're gonna quote me, can you at least make sure it's something that I actually said
while making sure to place my quotes in their proper context? So, the reason why I asked Scott:

What do you think about the word "monkey" in the context of white European football fans
throwing bananas out onto the pitch at Black players?


Was because his argument seemed to make the point that the word "monkey" directed towards
Black people being perceived as racist by Black people (and those living in Europe) had no warrant.
Yet, if Scott recognized that Europeans do refer to Black footballers derogatorily as monkeys then
he could not act as if the indignation Black people have towards H&M's ad was unjustified. My ori-
ginal post never included the clause "Are these images just harmless fun?" That was JJ's quote,
not mine. Don't ever just read one of my posts alone and think it necessarily captures my thoughts
on the topic exhaustively.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #250 posted 01/25/18 7:48pm

free2bFreeda2

Dasein said:



free2bFreeda2 said:


Dasein said:
What do you think about the word "monkey" in the context of white European football fans throwing bananas out onto the pitch at Black players? Are these images just harmless fun ? sad

Question is what do YOU think? what is your pov regarding the monkey acting euro-fans throwing bansnas? rolleyes one would think that they were. acting more like monkies than the best circus trained? I mean they.were the ones throwing bananas in simian-like ways. not to mention the spot on multi-simian imitations. how. do YOU think/feel/conclude on their meanness.


First of all, if you've read all of my posts in this thread with a modicum of understanding, you would
be able to know how I feel about H&M's ad and people throwing bananas at Black footballers, so,
clearly you did not. I would suggest that you do so before you come at me, Freeda.

Secondly, if you're gonna quote me, can you at least make sure it's something that I actually said
while making sure to place my quotes in their proper context? So, the reason why I asked Scott:

What do you think about the word "monkey" in the context of white European football fans
throwing bananas out onto the pitch at Black players?


Was because his argument seemed to make the point that the word "monkey" directed towards
Black people being perceived as racist by Black people (and those living in Europe) had no warrant.
Yet, if Scott recognized that Europeans do refer to Black footballers derogatorily as monkeys then
he could not act as if the indignation Black people have towards H&M's ad was unjustified. My ori-
ginal post never included the clause "Are these images just harmless fun?" That was JJ's quote,
not mine. Don't ever just read one of my posts alone and think it necessarily captures my thoughts
on the topic exhaustively.


So what do you think?
federal judge says, "there is evidence." : https://www.yahoo.com/new...itics.html
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #251 posted 01/25/18 8:08pm

Dasein

free2bFreeda2 said:

Dasein said:



Was because his argument seemed to make the point that the word "monkey" directed towards
Black people being perceived as racist by Black people (and those living in Europe) had no warrant.
Yet, if Scott recognized that Europeans do refer to Black footballers derogatorily as monkeys then
he could not act as if the indignation Black people have towards H&M's ad was unjustified. My ori-
ginal post never included the clause "Are these images just harmless fun?" That was JJ's quote,
not mine. Don't ever just read one of my posts alone and think it necessarily captures my thoughts
on the topic exhaustively.

So what do you think?


What don't you understand from my posts that prompts you to ask me what I think? Why would I
be arguing against Toejam's claims that the indignation Black people and others feel against H&M
are unjustified if I had no problem with the ad and had no problem with white people throwing ba-
nanas at Black football players? Who was the first one in this thread to mention that we couldn't
argue that H&M merely made a careless mistake by using the word "monkey" because of white
Europeans throwing bananas at Black football players?

It was me, Freeda, so I don't get why you're asking me what I think . . . eek

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #252 posted 01/26/18 6:59am

DiminutiveRock
er

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

poppys said:


IF there was only ONE context, there would be nothing wrong with the photo. That is NOT the case.


see now you are starting to think a little.


Something you might try doing once in a while. And stop derailing the topic.

"'Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.'' - Thomas Jefferson
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #253 posted 01/26/18 8:08am

OldFriends4Sal
e

avatar

moderator

free2bFreeda2 said:

Dasein said:



Was because his argument seemed to make the point that the word "monkey" directed towards
Black people being perceived as racist by Black people (and those living in Europe) had no warrant.
Yet, if Scott recognized that Europeans do refer to Black footballers derogatorily as monkeys then
he could not act as if the indignation Black people have towards H&M's ad was unjustified. My ori-
ginal post never included the clause "Are these images just harmless fun?" That was JJ's quote,
not mine. Don't ever just read one of my posts alone and think it necessarily captures my thoughts
on the topic exhaustively.

So what do you think?

seriously free2bFreeda2? confuse

#IDEFINEME #ALBUMSSTILLMATTER

A Liar Shall Not Tarry In My Presence

What's the matter with your life
Is poverty bringing U down?
Is the mailman jerking U 'round?
Did he put your million dollar check
In someone else's box?
Tell me, what's the m
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #254 posted 01/26/18 8:22am

jjhunsecker

avatar

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

see now you are starting to think a little.


Something you might try doing once in a while. And stop derailing the topic.

He just repeats the same talking points ad nauseum ...

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #255 posted 01/26/18 8:59am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

We still don't know any of his sources.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #256 posted 01/26/18 9:52am

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

I don't care if this JJ guy uses racial slurs with his buddies. Sources? He said he does dude.
Trump turns from 'humbling' grief to midterm fire and furry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #257 posted 01/26/18 10:11am

jjhunsecker

avatar

SuperFurryAnimal said:

I don't care if this JJ guy uses racial slurs with his buddies. Sources? He said he does dude.


I believe he was referring to Only, not me.

As for using "racial slurs ", I and my friends and family have a very politically incorrect sense of humor. One that mocks the absurdity of bigotry through the mockery of its stupidity and ignorance.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #258 posted 01/26/18 10:27am

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

SuperFurryAnimal said:
I don't care if this JJ guy uses racial slurs with his buddies. Sources? He said he does dude.
I believe he was referring to Only, not me. As for using "racial slurs ", I and my friends and family have a very politically incorrect sense of humor. One that mocks the absurdity of bigotry through the mockery of its stupidity and ignorance.

Good for you. lol

Trump turns from 'humbling' grief to midterm fire and furry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #259 posted 01/26/18 11:06am

DiminutiveRock
er

avatar

SuperFurryAnimal said:

jjhunsecker said:

SuperFurryAnimal said: I believe he was referring to Only, not me. As for using "racial slurs ", I and my friends and family have a very politically incorrect sense of humor. One that mocks the absurdity of bigotry through the mockery of its stupidity and ignorance.

Good for you. lol

can't say the same, can you? lol

"'Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.'' - Thomas Jefferson
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #260 posted 01/27/18 11:12am

free2bFreeda2

imo, the following was/is a noble gesture.
🤔
H&M ISSUES UNEQUIVOCAL APOLOGY FOR POORLY JUDGED PRODUCT AND IMAGE
To all customers, staff, media, stakeholders, partners, suppliers, friends and critics. We would like to put on record our position in relation to the image and promotion of a children’s sweater, and the ensuing response and criticism. Our position is simple and unequivocal – we have got this wrong and we are deeply sorry.
: https://about.hm.com/en/m...rly-judged

9 JAN, 2018
federal judge says, "there is evidence." : https://www.yahoo.com/new...itics.html
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #261 posted 01/27/18 8:43pm

poppys

poppys said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

so then in context there is nothing wrong with the photo


IF there was only ONE context, there would be nothing wrong with the photo. That is NOT the case.


OnlyNDaUsa said:

see now you are starting to think a little.

jjhunsecker said:

DiminutiveRocker said:


Something you might try doing once in a while. And stop derailing the topic.

He just repeats the same talking points ad nauseum ...

hey thanks guys

SNIP - Race Bait: [Please do not presume to know the 'race' of any particular members unless they tell you

-OF4$

[Edited 1/27/18 22:23pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #262 posted 01/27/18 11:13pm

free2bFreeda2

poppys said:


poppys said:





OnlyNDaUsa said:



so then in context there is nothing wrong with the photo




IF there was only ONE context, there would be nothing wrong with the photo. That is NOT the case.





OnlyNDaUsa said:



see now you are starting to think a little.





jjhunsecker said:




DiminutiveRocker said:




Something you might try doing once in a while. And stop derailing the topic.




He just repeats the same talking points ad nauseum ...



hey thanks guys

SNIP -Race Bait....<br />


[Edited 1/27/18 22:23pm]


SNIP -rant
rolleyes
[Edited 1/27/18 23:15pm]
federal judge says, "there is evidence." : https://www.yahoo.com/new...itics.html
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #263 posted 02/02/18 9:09am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

free2bFreeda2 said:

poppys said:

hey thanks guys

General overview of the thread so far - Race Bait -SNIP


[Edited 1/27/18 22:23pm]

SNIP - Race Bait Rant

negative race and gender-based statement...

Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #264 posted 02/02/18 10:38am

poppys

OnlyNDaUsa said:

free2bFreeda2 said:

SNIP -rant

negative race and gender-based statement...

Since when are you the new forum police? This is getting comical. Ever heard of freedom of speech?

Freeda's statement is describing a negative problem many men have. It makes sense. She is not being negative in a vacuum.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #265 posted 02/02/18 10:46am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

poppys said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

negative race and gender-based statement...

Since when are you the new forum police? This is getting comical. Ever heard of freedom of speech?

Freeda's statement is describing a negative problem many men have. It makes sense. She is not being negative in a vacuum.

a bit for an ironic reply

Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #266 posted 02/02/18 11:55am

free2bFreeda2

Comparing Black People to Monkeys has a Long, Dark Simian History

: https://www.huffingtonpos...45322.html
¤
In the history of European ciultures, the comparison of humans to apes and monkeys was disparaging from its very beginning.

When Plato - by quoting Heraclitus - declared apes ugly in relation to humans and men apish in relation to gods, this was cold comfort for the apes. It transcendentally disconnected them from their human co-primates. The Fathers of the Church went one step further: Saint Gregory of Nazianzus and Saint Isidore of Seville compared pagans to monkeys.

In the Middle Ages, Christian discourse recognised simians as devilish figures and representatives of lustful and sinful behaviour. As women were subject to an analogous defamation, things proceeded as one would expect. In the 11th century, Cardinal Peter Damian gave an account of a monkey that was the lover of a countess from Liguria. The jealous simian killed her husband and fathered her child.

Hotbed of monsters
Several centuries later in 1633, John Donne in his Metempsychosis even let one of Adam’s daughters be seduced by an ape in a sexual affair. She eagerly reciprocated and became helplessly hooked.

From then on, the sexist manifestation of simianisation was intimately intertwined with its racist dimension. Already Jean Bodin, doyen of the theory of sovereignty, had ascribed the sexual intercourse of animals and humans to Africa south of the Sahara. He characterised the region as a hotbed of monsters, arising from the sexual union of humans and animals.

The history of a narrative by Antonio de Torquemada shows how in this process Africans became demonised and the demons racialised. In the story’s first version (1570), a Portuguese woman was exiled to Africa where she was raped by an ape and had his babies.

A good century onwards the story had entered the realm of Europe’s great philosophical thought when John Locke in his 1689 essay Concerning Human Understanding, declared that “women have conceived by drills”. His intellectual contemporaries knew well that the stage for this transgressing love-and-rape-story was Africa because, according to the wisdom of the time, drills lived in Guinea.

In the following centuries, simianisation would enter into different sciences and humanities. Anthropology, archaeology, biology, ethnology, geology, medicine, philosophy, and, not least, theology were some of the fields.

King Kong’s reel racism
Literature, arts and everyday entertainment also seized on the issue. It popularised its repellent combination of sexist and racist representations. The climax was the hugely successful classic of Hollywood’s horror factory, King Kong.

At the time of King Kong’s production the public in the US was riveted by a rape trial. The Scottsboro Boys were nine black teenagers accused of having raped two young white women. In 1935 a picture story by the Japanese artist Lin Shi Khan and the lithographer Toni Perez was published. ‘Scottsboro Alabama’ carried a foreword by Michael Gold, editor of the communist journal New Masses.


AdChoices

Published by the

Comparing Black People to Monkeys has a Long, Dark Simian History

By The Conversation Africa
Wulf D. Hund, University of Hamburg and Charles W Mills, Northwestern University

This article is a foundation essay. These are longer than usual and take a wider look at a key issue affecting society.

In the history of European cultures, the comparison of humans to apes and monkeys was disparaging from its very beginning.

When Plato - by quoting Heraclitus - declared apes ugly in relation to humans and men apish in relation to gods, this was cold comfort for the apes. It transcendentally disconnected them from their human co-primates. The Fathers of the Church went one step further: Saint Gregory of Nazianzus and Saint Isidore of Seville compared pagans to monkeys.

In the Middle Ages, Christian discourse recognised simians as devilish figures and representatives of lustful and sinful behaviour. As women were subject to an analogous defamation, things proceeded as one would expect. In the 11th century, Cardinal Peter Damian gave an account of a monkey that was the lover of a countess from Liguria. The jealous simian killed her husband and fathered her child.

Hotbed of monsters
Several centuries later in 1633, John Donne in his Metempsychosis even let one of Adam’s daughters be seduced by an ape in a sexual affair. She eagerly reciprocated and became helplessly hooked.

From then on, the sexist manifestation of simianisation was intimately intertwined with its racist dimension. Already Jean Bodin, doyen of the theory of sovereignty, had ascribed the sexual intercourse of animals and humans to Africa south of the Sahara. He characterised the region as a hotbed of monsters, arising from the sexual union of humans and animals.

The history of a narrative by Antonio de Torquemada shows how in this process Africans became demonised and the demons racialised. In the story’s first version (1570), a Portuguese woman was exiled to Africa where she was raped by an ape and had his babies.

A good century onwards the story had entered the realm of Europe’s great philosophical thought when John Locke in his 1689 essay Concerning Human Understanding, declared that “women have conceived by drills”. His intellectual contemporaries knew well that the stage for this transgressing love-and-rape-story was Africa because, according to the wisdom of the time, drills lived in Guinea.

In the following centuries, simianisation would enter into different sciences and humanities. Anthropology, archaeology, biology, ethnology, geology, medicine, philosophy, and, not least, theology were some of the fields.

King Kong’s reel racism
Literature, arts and everyday entertainment also seized on the issue. It popularised its repellent combination of sexist and racist representations. The climax was the hugely successful classic of Hollywood’s horror factory, King Kong.

At the time of King Kong’s production the public in the US was riveted by a rape trial. The Scottsboro Boys were nine black teenagers accused of having raped two young white women. In 1935 a picture story by the Japanese artist Lin Shi Khan and the lithographer Toni Perez was published. ‘Scottsboro Alabama’ carried a foreword by Michael Gold, editor of the communist journal New Masses.

One of the 56 images showed the group of the accused young men beside a newspaper with the headline “Guilty Rape”. The rest of the picture was filled with a monstrous black simian figure baring its teeth and dragging off a helpless white girl.

The artists fully understood the interplay of racist ideology, reactionary reporting and southern injustice. They recognised that the white public had been thoroughly conditioned by the dehumanising violence of animal comparisons and simianised representations, as in the reel racism of King Kong.

Labelled with disease
Animalisation and even bacterialisation are widespread elements of racist dehumanisation. They are closely related to the labelling of others with the language of contamination and disease. Images that put men on a level with rats carrying epidemic plagues were part of the ideological escort of anti-Jewish and anti-Chinese racism.

Africa is labelled as a contagious continent incubating pestilences of all sorts in hot muggy jungles, spread by reckless and sexually unrestrained people. AIDS in particular is said to have its origin in the careless dealings of Africans with simians, which they eat or whose blood they use as an aphrodisiac.

This is just the latest chapter in a long and ugly line of stereotypes directed against different people like the Irish or Japanese, and Africans and African Americans in particular. To throw bananas in front of black sportspeople is a common racist provocation even today.

Why are blacks abused?
What explains this disastrous association of black people defamed as simian? A combination of factors might be the cause:

the prevalence of a variety of great apes in Africa, closest in size to humans. The Asian great ape population is more limited, while in the Americas one finds monkeys, but no apes;


the extent of the aesthetic “distance” between whites and blacks, their greater degree from a white perspective of physical “otherness” (deviant not merely in skin colour and hair texture but facial features) as compared to other “nonwhite” races;


the higher esteem generally accorded by Europeans to Asian as against African civilisations; and


above all the psychic impact of hundreds of years of racial slavery in modernity, which stamped ‘Negroes’ as permanent sub-persons, natural slaves, in global consciousness.

Large scale chattel slavery required reducing people to objects. Precisely because of that it also required the most thorough and systematic kind of dehumanisation in the theorisation of that reality.

The origin of species
Long before post-Darwinian “scientific racism” begins to develop, then, one can find blacks being depicted as closer to apes on the Great Chain of Being. Take mid-19th century America in circles in which polygenesis (separate origins for the races) was taken seriously. Leading scientists of the day Josiah C. Nott and George R. Gliddon, in their 1854 Types of Mankind, documented what they saw as objective racial hierarchies with illustrations comparing blacks to chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans.

As Stephen Jay Gould comments, the book was not a fringe document, but the leading American text on racial differences.
Darwin’s revolutionary 1859 work, On the Origin of Species, did not discredit scientific racism but only its polygenetic variants. Social Darwinism, triumphantly monogenetic, would become the new racial orthodoxy. Global white domination was being taken as proof of the evolutionary superiority of the white race.

If it now had to be conceded that we were all related to the apes, it could nonetheless be insisted that blacks’ consanguinity was much closer - perhaps a straightforward identity.

Tarzan = white skin
Popular culture played a crucial role in disseminating these beliefs. The average American layperson would be unlikely to have been reading scientific journals. But they were certainly reading H. Rider Haggard (author of King Solomon’s Mines and She) and Edgar Rice Burroughs (creator of Tarzan). They were going weekly to the movies, including the genre of “jungle movies”. They were following daily comic strips like The Phantom - Africa’s white supercop, the Ghost-who-walks.

Africa and Africans occupied a special place in the white imaginary, marked by the most shameless misrepresentations. Burroughs would become one of the bestselling authors of the 20th century. Not just in his numerous books, but in the movies made of them and the various cartoon strip and comic spin-offs, of his most famous creation, Tarzan of the Apes.

Tarzan would embed in the Western mind the indelible image of a white man ruling a black continent. “Tar-zan” = “white skin” in Ape, the impressively polyglot Burroughs informs us. It is a world in which the black humans are bestial, simian, while the actual apes are near-human.

Burroughs’s work was unprecedented in the degree of its success, but not at all unusual for the period. Rather, it consolidated a Manichean iconography pervasive throughout the colonial Western world in the first half of the 20th century and lingering still today. In this conflict between light and dark, white European persons rule simian black under-persons.

Lumumba’s announcement
The Belgian cartoonist Hergé’s Tintin series, for example, includes the infamous Tintin au Congo book, which likewise depicts Africans as inferior apelike creatures.

Unsurprisingly, “macaques” (monkeys) was one of the racist terms used by whites in the Belgian Congo for blacks, as was “macacos” in Portuguese Africa. In his 1960 Independence Day speech, Congolese leader Patrice Lumumba blasted the oppressive legacy of Belgian colonialism (to the astonishment and outrage of the Belgian king and his coterie, who had expected grateful deference from the natives). He is reputed to have concluded:

Nous ne sommes plus vos macaques! (We are no longer your monkeys)

The story seems to be apocryphal - no documentation has been found for it - but its widespread circulation testifies to the decolonial aspiration of millions of Africans. Alas, within less than a year, Lumumba would be dead, assassinated with the connivance of Western agencies, and the country turned over to neocolonial rule.

Racist cross-class alliances
The use of simianisation as a racist slur against black people is not yet over, as shown by the furor in South Africa sparked by Penny Sparrow, a white woman, complaining about black New Year’s revelers:

From now [on] I shall address the blacks of South Africa as monkeys as I see the cute little wild monkeys do the same, pick and drop litter.

Sparrow’s public outburst indicates the deep entrenchment of racial prejudices and stereotypes.

This does not stop at class boundaries. The internet has overflowed with ape comparisons ever since Barack and Michelle Obama moved into the White House. Even a social-liberal newspaper, like the Belgian De Morgen, has deemed it kind of funny to simianise the First Couple.
🤔

Cross-class alliances against declassed others are a hallmark of racism.

Theodore W. Allen once defined it as “the social death of racial oppression”, that is:

... the reduction of all members of the oppressed group to one undifferentiated social status, beneath that of any member of the oppressor group.

Animalisation remains a malicious and effective instrument of such a form of desocialisation and dehumanisation. Simianisation is a version of this strategy, which historically manifested a lethal combination of sexism and racism.
👁
many try to justify the use of the word "monkey" as being overly sensitive when the term is used towards blacks. The say "hey I call my kids monkeys"
however it seems their kids nor they themselves are not black.

[Edited 2/2/18 12:10pm]
[Edited 2/2/18 12:12pm]
federal judge says, "there is evidence." : https://www.yahoo.com/new...itics.html
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #267 posted 02/02/18 12:04pm

OldFriends4Sal
e

avatar

moderator

SO WHAT IS THE FINAL OUTCOME OF THE AD?

#IDEFINEME #ALBUMSSTILLMATTER

A Liar Shall Not Tarry In My Presence

What's the matter with your life
Is poverty bringing U down?
Is the mailman jerking U 'round?
Did he put your million dollar check
In someone else's box?
Tell me, what's the m
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #268 posted 02/02/18 12:38pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Now old news.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #269 posted 02/02/18 12:43pm

free2bFreeda2

OldFriends4Sale said:



SO WHAT IS THE FINAL OUTCOME OF THE AD?


H&M is regrouping for a number of reasons. The insulting ad seems to have been a catalyst.
H&M's Biggest Profit Drop in Six Years Puts CEO Under Pressure
January 28 2019
: https://www.businessoffas...r-pressure
[Edited 2/2/18 12:46pm]
federal judge says, "there is evidence." : https://www.yahoo.com/new...itics.html
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 9 of 10 <12345678910>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > H & M ad stumbles and falls