Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by merlynnn)
    First of all, you can't assume there was no intention to discriminate. Second of all, racially offensive is the same thing as racist.

    This is a complete non-point.
    I don't think it was intentionally racist but I do think it was a great oversight and stupid move on H&Ms part, I mean what were they thinking exactly? Lets get a little black boy and make him wear a cool monkey hoodie?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    As the SJWs were the first to make the connection between black people and monkeys. I'd say they are the racists.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Although I agree that people are being too sensitive, you'd think that H & M would've realised the problem with putting such a photo up...
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by It's****ingWOODY)
    I just don't see why a huge company would purposely create discriminatory material to include in an advert. It defies all logic.

    Racially offensive and racism are two totally different things. Something that's racially offensive can totally be made with the most innocent of intentions. The dictionary definition of racism means to discriminate against an individual or group based on their race. Intention to cause racial offence is required for something to be considered racist, whereas you can cause racial offence without discriminating against people or an individual. Discrimination and intent are synonymous, whereas causing offence can be done without intent.
    Then you're making an assumption.

    Someone can just as easily argue that there was a closeted racist who thought it could be funny to put a black child in a jumper that refers to him as a monkey. I mean, how much of an idiot can you be to do that anyway.

    They're not different. This poster is racist, however perhaps the people behind the campaign may not be. Intention is irrelevant to whether or not something is racist. Go and look up the definition of racism.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ParkHyungSuk)
    I don't think it was intentionally racist but I do think it was a great oversight and stupid move on H&Ms part, I mean what were they thinking exactly? Lets get a little black boy and make him wear a cool monkey hoodie?
    Ultimately with stuff like this, intent doesnt mattera huge deal. H&M dont get a free pass because there are people who cant fathom a racist campaigner in H&Ms ranks. It's all about face value.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by merlynnn)
    Then you're making an assumption.

    Someone can just as easily argue that there was a closeted racist who thought it could be funny to put a black child in a jumper that refers to him as a monkey. I mean, how much of an idiot can you be to do that anyway.

    They're not different. This poster is racist, however perhaps the people behind the campaign may not be. Intention is irrelevant to whether or not something is racist. Go and look up the definition of racism.
    It's very safe to make that assumption. Creating content like this to be viewed by the public is prepared by an entire team of people - to suggest that an entire team just happened to all be racist, would be ridiculous.

    I've already explained the definition of racism to you, but perhaps Google it yourself? As I said, racism means discriminating based on race and discrimination requires intent. If the intention wasn't there, how can it be classed as discriminating against someone based on their race, i.e. racism???
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jebedee)
    As the SJWs were the first to make the connection between black people and monkeys. I'd say they are the racists.
    Nope. It's just drawing the connection between a racial stereotype that black people are monkeys has been for centuries and this ad campaign.

    Perhaps the right wingers who claim racism doesnt exist are just too stupid and lack the mental capacity to see that.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    In my opinion, the fact that some people got offended by this goes to show that many individuals still dwell in the past and are closet racists for calling this out. If a blue tree hugging queer from avatar wore an avatar shirt, would that be racist? No. Same thing should apply here.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Very poor on the part of H&M. How did nobody stop and rethink the decision?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by merlynnn)
    First of all, you can't assume there was no intention to discriminate. Second of all, racially offensive is the same thing as racist.

    This is a complete non-point.
    It's obvious what is happening here. H&M recognise that white nationalism will become a prevailing mainstream opinion within the next few years and thus are making subtle dog whistles towards their future market.

    I am hearing rumours that alt-right figureheads are coming out and endorsing H&M as the "official clothes store of the alt-right and white nationalism".
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by It's****ingWOODY)
    It's very safe to make that assumption. Creating content like this to be viewed by the public is prepared by an entire team of people - to suggest that an entire team just happened to all be racist, would be ridiculous.

    I've already explained the definition of racism to you, but perhaps Google it yourself? As I said, racism means discriminating based on race and discrimination requires intent. If the intention wasn't there, how can it be classed as discriminating against someone based on their race, i.e. racism???
    An assumption is still an assumption.

    Racism is much more broader. It can simply be prejudice as well. Also, an ad campaign is an inanimate thing, it cannot have intent itself. The ad campaign is racist. The people behind it may not be. How is this so hard for you to understand?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by merlynnn)
    Nope. It's just drawing the connection between a racial stereotype that black people are monkeys has been for centuries and this ad campaign.

    Perhaps the right wingers who claim racism doesnt exist are just too stupid and lack the mental capacity to see that.

    No its drawing on the fact that children can be cheeky little monkeys.Its a common saying and has nothing to do with the child being black.Its clearly an oversight on their part.But it could just have easily being the white child wearing the monkey one.People just overthink things.Its not racism.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wōden)
    It's obvious what is happening here. H&M recognise that white nationalism will become a prevailing mainstream opinion within the next few years and thus are making subtle dog whistles towards their future market.

    I am hearing rumours that alt-right figureheads are coming out and endorsing H&M as the "official clothes store of the alt-right and white nationalism".
    I dont know why you contribute to this forum. All you're able to do is regurgitate the sarcasm that your favourite alt right youtube personalities do. You're neither original nor clever. Bit sad really.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robby2312)
    No its drawing on the fact that children can be cheeky little monkeys.Its a common saying and has nothing to do with the child being black.Its clearly an oversight on their part.But it could just have easily being the white child wearing the monkey one.People just overthink things.Its not racism.
    doesnt take much thinking to connect the black child and the monkey really.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by merlynnn)
    doesnt take much thinking to connect the black child and the monkey really.
    It doesn't take much thinking to connect any child to a monkey really.You know why? Because humans are apes.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Intent is crucial, and I highly doubt there was any racist intention, but it is very surprising that this was not spotted. I couldn't care less about people being offended by something this trivial, but H&M certainly ought to be thinking about such things.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robby2312)
    It doesn't take much thinking to connect any child to a monkey really.You know why? Because humans are apes.
    You'd be right if you completely ignore historic racial discourse associated with black people and monkeys.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by merlynnn)
    You'd be right if you completely ignore historic racial discourse associated with black people and monkeys.
    That’s why history stays in the past. Why can’t we just move on...
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Whiny *****es.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by merlynnn)
    An assumption is still an assumption.

    Racism is much more broader. It can simply be prejudice as well. Also, an ad campaign is an inanimate thing, it cannot have intent itself. The ad campaign is racist. The people behind it may not be. How is this so hard for you to understand?
    Without facts, we have to make assumptions. You're doing the same thing. It should be clear to see, however, that my assumption is a lot more likely to stand true than yours is, due to the fact that the entire advertising team being racist is incredibly unlikely.

    I don't see how it's hard for you to understand tbh. The definition is staring you right in the face. Prejudice also requires intent.
    This logic is ridiculous, but I'll roll with it. So, if an inanimate thing cannot have intent, then how can it be racist? I don't see why it's so tough to comprehend that the very nature of racism implies that it has to be intentional, due to the fact that things like discrimination and prejudice have to be intentional and racism means to discriminate or display prejudice toward someone based on their race. There's only so many times I can keep repeating this.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 10, 2018
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.