Revising History: Childrens Toys

[fretslider]

Britain’s oldest toy museum may be forced to remove an ‘offensive’ display of golliwogs, which have been on display since the 1950s, after complaints from tourists.

The dolls, nowadays widely considered offensive and racist, were common in the UK in less politically correct times. The character was created by cartoonist Florence Kate Upton in the 19th century and has appeared in British children’s books such as Enid Blyton’s Noddy series and as well as featuring as a mascot for Robertson’s jam for nearly a century.

The display of the historic dolls has been on view at the Museum of Childhood in Edinburgh since it opened in 1955. However, visitors who are offended by the dolls have been invited to contact the museum’s management, and they may disappear following a refurbishment.

A notice posted by the museum reads:

“We recognise that some visitors may feel the golliwogs on display in the museum represent negative racial stereotypes. We do not uphold such stereotypes and do not wish to cause any offence but believe that it is right to display these toys because they were such a significant part of British childhood from the 1890s to the 1950s. As soon as we have the opportunity to upgrade the museum’s displays we will consider alternative ways of interpreting these toys and reflecting the changes in attitudes towards them in more recent years.”

The Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights said the exhibition is “offensive”, insisting fuller context is added and more information given on the history and perception of the toys is added if they are to remain.

“If displayed there needs to be a fuller exploration of how these toys came about, the racism behind them and how they allowed, and still allow, racism to flourish,” Jatin Haria, the charity’s executive director, said.

“Otherwise we, and many others, will find the Museum of Childhood offensive.”

The Times, 16th April 2017 (Paywalled)







Discussing the ‘Golliwog’ image on Robertson’s jam is “inherently racist” as the term is so offensive, a judge ruled.

Lord Justice Floyd, sitting in the Court of Appeal, said that saying the term in front of a black person, whatever the context, was “offensive", as he upheld a ruling that chef who discussed the image was guilty of racial harassment.
Mark McAleese, a chef at London School of Economics, used the term while he discussed food labelling in the presence of his black colleague Denise Lindsay. An employment tribunal found him guilty of harassment and three judges at the Court of Appeal upheld the finding.

Mr McAleese had swiftly apologised to his co-worker after the January 2009 incident and had not intended to violate Miss Lindsay's dignity or to "create an intimidating, hostile, degrading or offensive environment for her."

Miss Lindsay lodged a formal grievance five months later.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10525121/Discussing-Robertsons-jam-golliwog-label-is-racist-judge-rules.html


Next week...

How political correctness allowed the perverts into the ladies toilets...

[mouse]

I find Barbie racist sexist and offencive.. hostile and degrading

and if I find some one who looks like the above in the ladies,, there will be objection coming out of every pore

[Jessiealan]

But surely children do not miss these toys. They are far out of date and not really up to today's standards. I remember having the Little Black Sambo book as a child, but when it disappeared, I had no desire to bring it back for lmy own children and grandchildren.

I have no problem with Barbies, especially since the newish Monster High dolls don't seem to teach very good lessons.

My favorites are bears and other stuffed animals. You can't go wrong with a well made teddy bear.

[mouse]

very true Jessie children don't miss these toys
but that's not the poin.. the point is dictats from on high telling people what is and what is not acceptable
golliwogs are no more reflective of black people than the cabbage patch dolls are of whites..
but in a museaum of toys golliwogs have their place.. they were part of the cultural norms ...it rather shows the thinkings of those who wish to bann or hideaway the realities of yesterday
if we are going to be really picky then NO or very very few toys should be on show as the poor didn't have toys as a general thing.. the early toys and dolls houses were for the children of the rich and middle classes not the poor children who lived in the slums

but yes I do object to Barbie..i think its a pathetic construct .. but little girls do seem to like Barbie and her he collection of wardrobes/beds/horses etc

[Deleted]

The whole thing is simply yet another attempt to control people's minds.