H&M apologises for image of black child wearing ‘monkey’ top

Pac1Man

Time to take a punt on some H&M stocks soon?

topper75

LirW wrote: »

There are a few old slangwords in German for certain sweets (they'd usually contain chocolate) with the word N1gger in it. Most of them are not used anymore, there is one though that is still ever present.
Same thing really.

When you think, H&M is a billion dollar company and they can't manage to hire designers or marketing teams that wouldn't overlook such a thing? It probably wasn't meant to be racist but ffs, this such an incredibly stupid mistake, that shouldn't happen to such a big prestigious company.
Especially in America "monkey" is still a very common slur for black people, I'm sorry but that's widely known.

Nope morons in America aren't the arbitrators of the world and your analogy fails:

• A monkey is an animal. Not a person.
  
• The N1gger word isn't used in any other context apart from a pejorative against dark-skinned people.

All kids are monkeys potentially. If they are not, they may need a booster shot from the GP or something.

If there is any ethical issue around this it is the shockingly good value price of the top. Who made it and what were they paid? Perhaps not such a media-sexy question though.

B.A._Baracus

LirW wrote: »

There are a few old slangwords in German for certain sweets (they'd usually contain chocolate) with the word N1gger in it. Most of them are not used anymore, there is one though that is still ever present.
Same thing really.

When you think, H&M is a billion dollar company and they can't manage to hire designers or marketing teams that wouldn't overlook such a thing? It probably wasn't meant to be racist but ffs, this such an incredibly stupid mistake, that shouldn't happen to such a big prestigious company.
Especially in America "monkey" is still a very common slur for black people, I'm sorry but that's widely known.

That's the thing about these big businesses. On the outside it's very easy to think how everything is painstakenly thought and developed. From idea to market. How so many talented individuals are involved....

Reality is it's all a con :pac: The world is a con :pac:
No one spotted it. Even aside from this H&M like any other company cannot make 100% best selling clothes. Some will be a success others will flop badly. Just throwing crap against the wall hoping it will stick.

riffmongous

LadyMacBeth_ wrote: »

Like others have said on this thread, it says more about the people who have gotten offended, since they are the ones who made the connection between black people and monkeys.

No it doesn't, it's a very common slur, especially in soccer

wakka12

Calling everything racist seems to be a defining characteristic of current society. Oh how theyll laugh at us in the history books

_Dara_

riffmongous wrote: »

No it doesn't, it's a very common slur, especially in soccer

Yeah, I’m not getting the assertion that knowledge of a commonplace racial slur means that you agree with said slur, consciously or subconsciously.

Mother of Jesus.

Not the kid in the OP issue, but there are people who didn't know "monkey" was a slur aimed at black people.

Did they think the "oooh oooh" chants aimed at black footballers were an exclamation of delight, the bananas hurled on to pitches were simply to provide them with nourishment?

NapoleonInRags

_Roz_ wrote: »

Poor marketing strategy but not racist or offence-worthy.

Really?

riffmongous

_Dara_ wrote: »

Yeah, I’m not getting the assertion that knowledge of a commonplace racial slur means that you agree with said slur, consciously or subconsciously.

It's just well-poisoning really

Thich Nhat Hanh

So black footballers being subjected to monkey noises and having bananas thrown at them in Spain still happens. It’s just moronic whoever published the ad. Of course it may offend black people. How many people signed off on it ffs?
What I find worst about these things now are the people freaking out and saying snowflake etc because someone might be offended. Chill.

_Dara_

Deleted User wrote: »

Mother of Jesus.

Not the kid in the OP issue, but there are people who didn't know "monkey" was a slur aimed at black people.

Did they think the "oooh oooh" chants aimed at black footballers were an exclamation of delight, the bananas hurled on to pitches were simply to provide them with nourishment?

People do know, I guess they just don't think it's an issue.

My view? It's not offensive but it is a really tone-deaf move by H&M. The slur is still a common enough one in football. Football is really popular in these lands. Of course people will make a connection.

IvyTheTerrible

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Mother of Jesus.

Not the kid in the OP issue, but there are people who didn't know "monkey" was a slur aimed at black people.

Did they think the "oooh oooh" chants aimed at black footballers were an exclamation of delight, the bananas hurled on to pitches were simply to provide them with nourishment?

Be careful! If you know it's racist then you're racist. Or something.

Odhinn

BillyBobBS wrote: »

Anyone who thinks that is racist is an unbelievable clown. Worlds gone PC mad.

Yeah. imagine thinking that centuries of black folks being called monkeys would cause people to think that.

Omackeral

o1s1n wrote: »

Isn't viewing this as racist kind of racist in itself?

Surely if we're all equal then a child of any race can wear any H&M hoody?

No more needs to be said.

Probably some goon like this that reported it in the first place.

Thich Nhat Hanh

The people being outraged by people not being comfortable with things are the worst of them all in this current climate

Skedaddle

To be honest, I don't think that that was ever intended to be racist. Why the hell would anyone intend it to mean that?

It looks like an unfortunate misinterpretation / over-interpretation of a slogan which was probably written by someone who had absolutely no awareness of what that meant in the context of racial abuse.

I would seriously doubt that someone working for a major international clothing retailer went out of their way to pick a slogan that was racist and put it on a black model. It looks to me like the was probably put together in a country that doesn't necessarily speak English and that didn't have any notion that that would be interpreted that way.

If you start digging for racist meaning in everything, is that not almost a bit racist?

Also some things have meanings in some cultures that mean nothing of the sort in others. For example, the Irish upset about call a cocktail 'black and tan' because that references a particularly horrible piece of Irish history, but to your average American it's totally out of context and means nothing other than two colours in a drink.

It looks to me more like something that got completely lost in cultural translation.

WoollyRedHat

Where are people to speak out of the working conditions of those who actually had to make that jumper in the first place?

_Dara_

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

Where are people to speak out of the working conditions of those who actually had to make that jumper in the first place?

I think people can worry about two or more things at once. Objection to this doesn't displace something else.

Personally, I do think twice about buying stuff at super-cheap retailers like H&M and Penneys. I rarely do buy things in those places and feel guilty if I do.

B.A._Baracus

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

Where are people to speak out of the working conditions of those who actually had to make that jumper in the first place?

Excellent point!!!!
Fu*ked up world we live in :pac:

I cant be the only one but as I get older I really am starting to think that the majority of people in this world are as*holes... or at the very least so many people talk their their as*es.

sbsquarepants

topper75 wrote: »

• The N1gger word isn't used in any other context apart from a pejorative against dark-skinned people.

.

I hear it used all the time by black people, their forever calling each other nígger - they hardly mean it as a pejorative?

WoollyRedHat

_Dara_ wrote: »

I think people can worry about two or more things at once.

Personally, I do think twice about buying stuff at super-cheap retailer like H&M and Penneys. I rarely do buy things in those places and feel guilty if I do.

I'm sure they can but I doubt they paid much thought about ethics of production or indeed would back up their concerns by voting with their wallet when it comes to such matters. I'd imagine you are in the minority.

Thich Nhat Hanh

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I hear it used all the time by black people, their forever calling each other nígger - they hardly mean it as a pejorative?

Well if it’s ok for them to do it maybe you should start addressing them by that next time you meet a black person

_Dara_

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

I'm sure they can but I doubt they paid much thought about ethics of production or indeed would back up their concerns by voting with their wallet when it comes to such matters. I'd imagine you are in the minority.

I think people are slowly becoming more aware of things like that. It will take time but it's already happening now though, which is where the fair trade movement came from.

Not everyone is totally outraged by the ad in the OP, some just think it's tone-deaf.

Pelvis

I'm more offended by the fact that there are people that are so ignorant that they can't even see why this could be considered racist by some.

"If your first thought was 'racism' then you're a racist blah blah... "

Are you ****in kidding me?

_Dara_

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I hear it used all the time by black people, their forever calling each other nígger - they hardly mean it as a pejorative?

That's taking a derogatory term and subverting its use to lessen its impact. I think you know this well too.

0ph0rce0

If all those child models were white then they'd up for racism by not having any other race modelling.

Can't win.

sbsquarepants

Thich Nhat Hanh wrote: »

Well if it’s ok for them to do it maybe you should start addressing them by that next time you meet a black person

If it's not ok, maybe they should stop?

Offence is taken, not given. If you're offended when Sean calls you a nígger but nonplussed when D'Shaun does. The problem is you're interpretation, not the word itself.

That much should be obvious.

How black do you need to be for it to be acceptable? Is there a swatch to compare to? I mean, give me 2 weeks in the sun and I'm darker than a lot of these black guys calling each other nígger on VH1!

qwerty ui op

_Dara_ wrote: »

Personally, I do think twice about buying stuff at super-cheap retailers like H&M and Penneys. I rarely do buy things in those places and feel guilty if I do.

Me too I think twice and feel guilty

_Dara_

0ph0rce0 wrote: »

If all those child models were white then they'd up for racism by not having any other race modelling.

Can't win.

I don't think the all the clothes would have had 'monkey' emblazoned across them. So not putting the black kid in the 'monkey' one doesn't mean you could only have white kids on the photoshoot.

manual_man

I'm all against outrage for the sake of outrage but the optics of that ad are simply not good. H&M right to apologise but need to investigate how on earth that ad came to be. Ads (online or otherwise) surely go through a process before approval and it defies belief that alarm bells weren't raised for this.

marklazarcovic

Some black people call each other nigga not ******,to them there is a huge difference ,sounds the same to us so it's difficult for us non racists to.understand. as someone pointed out when a footballer emblazoned black is beautiful on the jumper instead of the monkey slogan and gets lauded for it.. white people can't say being white is great or being white is beautiful ..

It will never end unless they stop with the nonsense of a being offended by the words black or white,black is beautiful , white is beautiful,yellow is ,green is ..who gives a fcuk anymore cmon

forgodssake

These offended people need a right good kick up the hole

_Dara_

manual_man wrote: »

I'm all against outrage for the sake of outrage but the optics of that ad are simply not good.

This is it in a nutshell. I think that people have wilfully tried to not understand that in the clamour to write and thank posts about 'snowflakes'.

I'd be wondering if this mistake was intentional? Whip up a bit of free publicity? Hope that people who oppose any objections might support H&M and therefore boost sales?

Omackeral

Landon Warm Register wrote: »

I don't think it was intentionally racist. It was a really stupid thing to do, though. Surely they should have realised how it would be interpreted by some people.

No it wasn't. Fcuk sake.

Omackeral

King George VI wrote: »

So don't call people clowns for making that connection, call H&M clowns for having retarded designers.

Calling people clowns for using an animal design yet you've no bother calling people retards.

Omackeral

King George VI wrote: »

So don't call people clowns for making that connection, call H&M clowns for having retarded designers.

Calling people clowns for using an animal design yet you've no bother calling people retards.

Odhinn

Omackeral wrote: »

Calling people clowns for using an animal design yet you've no bother calling people retards.

Theres no picture of an animal used.

Rumpy Pumpy

Has anyone asked the Rev. Jesse Jackson for his opinion?

falinn merking

sA human creature us has two arms two legs and walks upright.
A human has thick hair on head and many adults on the face.
Skin colour can vary across the world.
Humans are about 5 to 6 foot tall.

A monkey is a small creature that has four limbs with hands on the end of each.
A monkey has a tail and it's body is covered in fur.
The skin colour of different monkeys can be very dark or very light and everything in between.
Monkeys are normally between two to four foot tall be they then to move around on all fours or swing by their tail in the Jungle.

This is a picture of a human child with the joke logo coolest monkey in the jungle on the sweater he is getting paid to model neither he nor is parents seem to be bothered.

This is a picture of a monkey the one on the left now.


Moron racists used the term monkey in the past as an insult.
By MS saying sorry for a black child wearing this top they are empowering said racists and like post 3 or 4 said they come across racist themselves.

Odhinn

Verpiss dich wrote: »

Moron racists used the term monkey in the past as an insult.
By MS saying sorry for a black child wearing this top they are empowering said racists and like post 3 or 4 said they come across racist themselves.

Its one of the more common terms in many parts. The only reason you don't get it so often at the football anymore is because they fine the clubs.

Verpiss dich

Verpiss dich wrote: »

sA human creature us has two arms two legs and walks upright.
A human has thick hair on head and many adults on the face.
Skin colour can vary across the world.
Humans are about 5 to 6 foot tall.

A monkey is a small creature that has four limbs with hands on the end of each.
A monkey has a tail and it's body is covered in fur.
The skin colour of different monkeys can be very dark or very light and everything in between.
Monkeys are normally between two to four foot tall be they then to move around on all fours or swing by their tail in the Jungle.

I think we can overanalyse the whole monkey colouring thing.

The simple fact is, monkeys are seen as animals from Africa and while they resemble humans they are not as developed/intelligent.

Do we really need to think why it there is a very obvious racist angle to the word? Pointing it out is not empowering racists, it's simply stating the obvious.

major bill

Odhinn wrote: »

Its one of the more common terms in many parts. The only reason you don't get it so often at the football anymore is because they fine the clubs.

fans have no tolerance for it either, well in the UK and Ireland anyway, heard someone say it once over here and they were rightly abused and told to **** off and never come back.

Pelvis

Verpiss dich wrote: »

Moron racists used the term monkey in the past as an insult.

I didn't realise racism was "in the past".

Odhinn

major bill wrote: »

fans have no tolerance for it either, well in the UK and Ireland anyway, heard someone say it once over here and they were rightly abused and told to **** off and never come back.

Fair play.

topper75

_Dara_ wrote: »

That's taking a derogatory term and subverting its use to lessen its impact. I think you know this well too.

Lessen its impact. Riiiiight. But if I as a white person was to help them with this...?
That word should go, and those blacks who persist with it are the ones that need some cop-on, not the clothing retailer in this 'story'.

I'm pretty sure black people aren't monkeys. I'm going by the latest science. Therefore the garment and its fun slogan are fine.

DEFTLEFTHAND

You'd have to wonder what type of clowns are working in Marketing these days.

How this got approved is beyond me, especially in the hyper sensitive internet world we live in today.

Odhinn

topper75 wrote: »

But if I as a white person was to help them with this...? That word should go, and those blacks who persist with it are the ones that need some cop-on, not the clothing retailer in this 'story'.

I'm pretty sure black people aren't monkeys. I'm going by the latest science. Therefore the garment and its fun slogan are fine.

I remember you, you're mr "nothing is racist" I think.

falinn merking

Pelvis wrote: »

I didn't realise racism was "in the past".

Our society has a pretty dim view of racists these days.
Your never going to totally get rid of racist violent thugs child molesters murderers or any or nastys I can't think of on the spot.

Pelvis

topper75 wrote: »

Lessen its impact. Riiiiight. But if I as a white person was to help them with this...?
That word should go, and those blacks who persist with it are the ones that need some cop-on, not the clothing retailer in this 'story'.

I'm pretty sure black people aren't monkeys. I'm going by the latest science. Therefore the garment and its fun slogan are fine.

"Those blacks.. "??

Jesus wept.

_Dara_

topper75 wrote: »

Lessen its impact. Riiiiight.

Ah, if you don't want to believe it, grraaaaand, but that's the thinking behind it, like it or not. Much like gay people co-opting the term 'queer'.