Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2006
- Posts
- 4,692
I knew about the N word variation, always recited it with "Tigger" however rather than tiger, the Winnie the Pooh character.
Guess it is kind of like the swastika in a way - you can use it in a way completely unrelated to the Nazis but no one would today due to the connotations - likewise the use of the rhyme here isn't intended to have any connection to racism but it still has those connotations.I'm amazed that so many people don't know the origins to the rhyme!
when you do know it, it's pretty rough. and yes, they should have pulled it.
That rhyme, although now changed (to nonsensical), will still carry racism from days of old, and should also stop being used.
banning is slightly different to a global company pulling artwork that mistakenly has racist connotations. I also would not ban it, but if I was the decision maker in Primark I too would be pulling the design faster than my social media department could run an apology.Now I would not be for banning that shirt but I can absolutely see why some would find it offensive and I do see it in the same sort of light that I see gollywogs and the black and white minstrels.
I'm amazed that so many people don't know the origins to the rhyme!
when you do know it, it's pretty rough. and yes, they should have pulled it.
That rhyme, although now changed (to nonsensical), will still carry racism from days of old, and should also stop being used.
Was fishy for me. Which made no sense as fishes don't have toeses.
Can't. He's married to a hobbit.of course they do, ask kanye west.
I knew about the N word variation, always recited it with "Tigger" however rather than tiger, the Winnie the Pooh character.
37Can I ask how old you are? I'm 23 and I never knew the racist origins until very recently.