Racist 'GollyDolly' on display in The Doll Store.

by really? x 2 Fri Jul 01, 2011 09:49

Its mad that these dolls are still around but i think its equally mad that someone would be offended enough to write a letter to them. I usually commend RAR for their great work but this is surely not somethin that warrents a press release is it

by Not Adolescent. Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:49

When I was a kid I had a "Gollywog."
I had no concept of it being racist.

Only adults put meanings on dolls.

What next?

Barbi being a racist representative of a pure Aryan?
Some people should grow up.

by Tara Fri Jul 01, 2011 15:26

The display of the dolls is not inherently racist. These dolls existed, and were an embodiment of racism, but does that mean they should be forever hidden away? I don't think so. As long as the shop's owners are not endorsing the dolls as tools of racism, then the display of the dolls can only be at most, a representation of a history that should not be denied, as well as one that should not be repeated.

by Kimberly Jacob Fri Jul 01, 2011 17:05

If you were black, and had the insult Gollywog thrown at you, then you would have a conception of how racist it is.

As for saying such representations "should not be repeated", that's the whole point of the protest being made here, surely? That these things belong only in museums as evidence of past bigotry, not on sale in shops.

And judging by the report of their demo that was up here recently, RAR aren't letting their opposition to a racist shop display prevent them from opposing other more important manifestations of racism.

by M Fri Jul 01, 2011 19:30

Queen's shop removes golliwog toy

Managers of a gift shop on the Queen's Sandringham Estate in Norfolk have apologised after they were found to be selling golliwog toys.

The dolls have now been withdrawn from sale and a spokesman said the managers "did not intend to offend anyone".

The news came after Carol Thatcher was axed from The One Show after referring to a tennis player as a "golliwog".

The BBC said on Wednesday evening that "a few hundred" viewers had complained about its decision.

The £9.99 golliwog toys had been on sale in the Sandringham shop for more than a year.

A spokesman for the 20,000-acre estate said: "The management of the shop have said they did not intend to offend anyone by selling this product and have apologised if any offence has been caused.

"The shop will immediately review its purchasing policy."

Buckingham Palace has stressed that the Queen is not personally involved in deciding what is sold in the shop.

by M Fri Jul 01, 2011 20:03

John Molyneux of the SWP had a similar situation in 2007. (See below) At the time I thought it was blown out of proportion. I thought , at the time, if anything were necessary then it should be a leaflet pointing out that this was a historical exhibition that used images and objects that might not be thought acceptable any more by many people. But history should not be rewritten.

If anything the RARs is a similar OTT reaction. I support the work they do but this will just make them look silly.

Publishers rightly got rid of the goliwogs from the Enid Blython books. I fear they will now get rid of Big Ears in case it offends Charles Clarke.

Row erupts over golly exhibition

A row has broken out over a golly exhibition at a Hampshire museum.

A collection of golly badges on display in Westbury Manor Museum in Fareham has been criticised for its perceived racist connotations.

Dr John Molyneux, from the University of Portsmouth, said the items should not be regarded simply as a childhood pastime or hobby.

But Nick Martin who owns the collection said the exhibition had been very popular and no-one had complained.

No complaints

Mr Martin told BBC News: "There is no dispute going on at all. The museum said that not one person had complained.

"I spent an hour and a half at the museum speaking to people who had come to see the exhibition and no-one had any problems with it."

The museum said it would continue to show the collection, but reconsider the decision if it received complaints.

The golly badge, which was once produced to promote sales of jam and marmalade, is now a collector's item.

The golly badges were produced to promote jam and marmalade

The collection on display at the museum was compiled by a local resident who started collecting the badges as a child.

But Dr Molyneux said the original creation of the golly character has more sinister connection.

He said: "At the time that they were produced they were part of a racist atmosphere, of a racist attitude towards non-white people, very definitely. That's the history I don't want to be lost.

"Presenting them as just innocent children's play things is suppressing that real history."

Hampshire County Council said it is sorry if anyone has been offended and the museum said it would reconsider the showing of the exhibit if it received direct complaints.

Councillor Margaret Snaith, from Hampshire County Council said: "Most people of my age can remember these things and can remember collecting them.

"We were very sorry when the connotation changed. I just think it's a great pity."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/hampshire/62...3.stm

by child of the universe Sat Jul 02, 2011 08:11

Will they rage against the Black and White Minstrel Show as well? I am reminded of a pc campaign a couple of months ago to publish Huckleberry Finn and other classics by Mark Twain with words like 'nigger' excised. It's not the doll in the window but the black boy and girl sitting in the same classroom that our blue-eyed, freckle-faced Irish colleens and gossoons need to be encouraged to relate to in a wholesome way. Nitpicking about gollywogs is a distraction.

Come to think about it, aren't Irish people wearing daft Paddy Hats and sporting leprechaun mascots when watching a St. Patrick's Day parade 'stereotyping' the Irish image?

I've heard of a Russian boy whose asylum-seeking parents were allowed to settle in a town down the country who got involved in gaelic football locally and was named favourably in newspaper sports coverage. That's how blending into communities takes place.

by Devils Advocate Sun Jul 03, 2011 08:25

I dont think the dolls should be removed, they were first made in a totally different era, It reminds me of the 1950s war movie the Dambusters The dog in the film was called Nigger because that was the dogs name in reality When the film was released in US the word Nigger was dubbed over to sound like Trigger. There is no evidence to suggest that the Dogs owner, Guy Gibson, was racist That was just what he called the dog, but perception an often over rule fact, Can Blonde women complain about Barbie dolls now? If every thing that could offend anybody was to be removed from shops then there would be very little left, I find many things offensive, ie tee shirts from Sein Fein about a United Ireland or a person whom I may consider a terrorist but others may consider a freedom fighter and I would never buy or wear one but i do believe that others have the right to do so in a democracy. I did not agree with yesterdays march in support of an abortion free Ireland but I do support the marchers right to demostrate.

by Jules Thu Jul 21, 2011 18:31

I don't believe that the majority of Africans take offense at these dolls (I am not AFrican myself so stand to be corrected on that). I don't believe that the dolls themselves are a manifestation of racism. They are a very dated sort of toy, that's all.

Rar should direct their attention to actual incidents of bigotry and discrimination rather than harmless stuff like this...