Holy fuck you like to move the goalposts in this discussion.
How about don't put the black kid in the fucking monkey shirt? This shit ain't rocket science.
British H&M apologises for racist advert
- Thread starter FondsNL
- Start date
Holy fuck you like to move the goalposts in this discussion.
How about don't put the black kid in the fucking monkey shirt? This shit ain't rocket science.
User warned for disingenuous, bad faith debating
I'm sorry if you think that's shifting the goal posts, I'm genuinely not trying to confuse the matter. People aren't being clear whether they think the shirt design itself should exist, or whether the only issue is this one photo. There are people putting forward the 'grand conspiracy' theory that this couldn't possibly happen by accident, so I'm trying to be overly specific about which bit of the process I'm taking about.
You'd be okay with the black kid being the 'Expert' of the Jungle instead? You don't see that anyone anywhere would raise an issue if you switched the shirts?
My point is, if you don't put him in the monkey shirt, which shirt do you put him in. Or do you exclude people of colour from modeling any slogan that could possibly have connotations, at which point you have begun actively excluding black people from paying jobs.
I'm looking at the logical outcome of this outcry and seeing the solution as being either not having slogan clothing lines for kids (unlikely), or hiring fewer people of colour to do photo shoots (likely).
(Again, I'm assuming that the kid in the shoot and his parents were totally okay with the top and didn't raise any concerns whatsoever. My opinion totally flips on the existence of that photo if they were unhappy about it at any point.)
I mean you're not even discussing this in good faith with drivel like this. Do better.
I would say this is a point worth discussing. Maybe you could give your input rather than just dismissing the poster?
Because I have a big problem with "this would have been okay if it was a white kid" or other variations of that argument that some seem to be making. That is significantly more racist than a black kid wearing the top will ever be.
'Monkey' is much more direct, for sure, but I've certainly heard snide racist comments that black people should 'go back to the jungle they came from'. I raised this several posts back. If you think that's bad faith I think we're done.
What I'm trying to get at (not from you specifically, I appreciate you're at least humouring me) is if people say the kid shouldn't be in the 'Coolest Monkey' top, what is the real-world happy ending beyond that?
Does he wear another 'jungle' top and everyone is magically cool about the connotations there?
Do they re-do the shoot with a white boy?
Does the top get withdrawn from sale?
In my mind, I don't see any solution to this PR mess that is a win for that kid.
I completely agree.
Option C: have more people of color in your decision cycles, and be willing to listen to them when they tell you a terrible idea is terrible.
It is amazing that the poster you quoted could not think of the main solution that is being championed by people color.
Hire a diverse group of people into your leadership position.
If you want to address it feel free. It's a shitty whataboutism pulled from nowhere. "Well if he doesn't wear the monkey shirt then the only OBVIOUS alternative is he will now represent the jungle would you like that?!" isn't worthy of a cogent response. But do you. Not every shitty view deserves a rebuttal.
The naievaty of big companies like H&M is staggering
You'd think that somewhere along the line they would have called it out
Could be fear of being called racist though pointing it out
You'd think that somewhere along the line they would have called it out
Could be fear of being called racist though pointing it out
How about they pull the picture, the kid still gets paid, and in future they use him for one of the hundreds of other items of kids' clothing that doesn't have any potential racist connotations?
Except you keep responding to the poster...
If you think his view is that shitty then is it not better to just ignore it? I don't see the value in repeat responses only to dismiss the post and add nothing of value. If we replied to everybody on the internet to tell the we thought they were talking shit then we'd never do anything else.
It's funny that nobody seems able to give an actual answer to his question. I think it's fairly clear the top was designed with no racial connotations given the very common usage of the word as a term of endearment for young un's, if you disagree then fair enough but I just don't see it that way at all. If putting a black child in the top on the product page is a problem then do H&M just decide not to carry the item or change the design? I would say that seems extreme given what I believe to be a perfectly innocent design but I think given the reaction it would have been the best choice in hindsight. I wouldn't have given it a second thought if somebody put that design in front of me for approval though, you might call that ignorance I suppose.
You are out of your depth on this. Different words are used to insult different groups. In one context it's not offensive in others it is.
This doesn't even make sense, how the fuck is that "significantly more racist"
You are making assumptions.
We have no information about what the racial make up of the decision makers was.
I've been warned for arguing in bad faith. In less serious matters I will at times argue the toss, but I genuinely was trying to pin down a line of reasoning that doesn't devolve into the black boy getting paid for one less photo that day and the jumper being sold everywhere without complaints, which I don't agree is a non-racist solution. I've already said the easiest solution for H&M was for this collection not to exist at all. So I'm done here.
You just complained that I dismissed it. Now you're complaining that I don't ignore it. Make up your mind.
Racist: A person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races.
You tell me which promotes equality and which one discriminates:
A) White child can model shirt, black child can't
B) Both white and black child can model shirt.
Just to be clear I am not even defending the shirt's existence here or whether there is any racist intention behind having the black child model it, although I don't believe that to be the case. I am simply saying if the shirt is a problem for black people then it shouldn't be suddenly okay for a white person to wear it. By that logic they are essentially selling a white-only shirt, or at least a non-black shirt. That's why I feel that it is more racist but given the tone of your response I don't expect you to agree.
To be dismissive and to ignore aren't the same thing.
It's almost like there's a history of black people being denigrated as monkeys that didn't exist for white people. History, how does it work?
I mean, ok? But keep in mind youre not the thread police.
Last edited:
I am not denying that, am I? I'm simply saying I don't believe the best way of progressing as a society towards equality is to continue making the association between black people and monkeys to the point a black boy is not allowed to model a shirt that refers to monkeys in an innocent way. I am in no way denying racism of the past or of today for that matter. If your insinuation is that you think that H&M was perfectly aware of what they were doing by having a black child model the monkey shirt then I'm fully on board with you that it's deplorable and somebody needs to lose their job but I just don't agree that it was malicious like that.
Probably, just like I have called several children "cheeky monkeys" including two that were mixed race in the past. It's easy for me to lie and just say yes but perhaps I would think twice if it was a black child however I'd think it wrong to even make that connection in the first place. I'm not against being sensitive to other people's feelings but I also don't believe something innocent is inherently wrong because others might pervert the meaning.
Fair enough. I did respond to you because I genuinely wanted to read a more detailed response to some of the poster's points but if you don't want to do that then I get it. It wasn't to attack you.
Last edited:
Man they didn't miss it.
I don't believe they that stupid heck no
So I'ma take the leap make it a huge hop so I can slaum dunk these accusations.
Black girl in British Royalty got them losing their mind
I didn't ask about a black child, I asked about a person. Would you call or describe an adult black person a monkey?
To the people saying that using the word "monkey" on a hoody worn by a black child isn't racist, just because in your location and in your purview the word "monkey" isn't used to offend someone, doesn't mean that the word "monkey" hasn't been used to demean black people, it just means you haven't been affected by it.
No, why would I? There are only three things I've ever described as a monkey, cheeky or otherwise. Those are children, my cat and actual monkeys.
Also that.
EDIT: The whole "my friends kid or my kid play around twigs and I call them monkey" nonsense is pointless.
Calling black people "monkeys" has most likely been a thing for centuries. Lets not fake the funk and act like H&M didn't know what they were doing when they put that hoody on that baby.
H&M is a very white Swedish company. There's not much diversity of race in the place.
It took far too long for Sweden to realise there was a huge problem today.
It was just plain ignorance that the image could be construed as racist. There was no malice in it at all.
It took far too long for Sweden to realise there was a huge problem today.
It was just plain ignorance that the image could be construed as racist. There was no malice in it at all.
We are talking about a giant multinational fashion brand for their UK store. Your telling me not ONE person saw the racist overtones with putting a black child in a monkey sweatshirt?
Please don't try to brush off this as H&M did nothing wrong because their company is full of white people...they have been selling clothes to a a diverse community for years...they even hired The Weeknd and Nicki Minaj to peddle their wares.
Also, this isn't the first time they've been racially insensitive. After the 2015 incident, they should have hired black people to at least tell them when they're being racist...
This reminds me of a time at high school when a girl called a black girl a monkey and some big physical fight ensued.
The white girl said it had nothing to do with skin colour. I just remember thinking that as a learning lesson that your intent won't always match up with how something is received.
The white girl said it had nothing to do with skin colour. I just remember thinking that as a learning lesson that your intent won't always match up with how something is received.
Do you work at H&M? Can you get me some free clothes? How do you know if there was malice there or not?
You wouldn't call a black person a monkey because it is racist, correct?
Who comes up with these horrible messages on clothes?
They're almost always terrible, I give the "Fuck Metallica here comes Guns n Roses" t-shirt a pass since they're a cheezy rock band and outgrew Metallica while opening for them.
H&M have a terrible online presence. They are a dinosaur and they hire the absolutely worst people. You can be incompetent and hired as a consultant by H&M to hold random "scrum meetings" (a guy I know took a two day course and was then hired as an expert by H&M, lol). They pay consultants for the most random services and have no quality assurance what so ever.
They spend their days running between meetings.
I know a lot of people who work for them as well as some people who do contract work for them. It's always a laugh to hear their stories.
I did some work for them as well some years ago. The HR department was full of complete idiots that seemed detached from reality and had no sense of moral whatsoever.
They probably pissed some people of, this hoodie might actually be a revenge thing. Or the product of a obnoxious company culture.
They're almost always terrible, I give the "Fuck Metallica here comes Guns n Roses" t-shirt a pass since they're a cheezy rock band and outgrew Metallica while opening for them.
H&M have a terrible online presence. They are a dinosaur and they hire the absolutely worst people. You can be incompetent and hired as a consultant by H&M to hold random "scrum meetings" (a guy I know took a two day course and was then hired as an expert by H&M, lol). They pay consultants for the most random services and have no quality assurance what so ever.
They spend their days running between meetings.
I know a lot of people who work for them as well as some people who do contract work for them. It's always a laugh to hear their stories.
I did some work for them as well some years ago. The HR department was full of complete idiots that seemed detached from reality and had no sense of moral whatsoever.
They probably pissed some people of, this hoodie might actually be a revenge thing. Or the product of a obnoxious company culture.
https://i.imgur.com/QyZso.gif
I'm no business titan but even then I don't know of too many companies that make it their M.O these days to stir up racial controversy, They've already had someone cut ties, and more people will if this has any legs. one way or another I'd imagine someone is going to get shitcanned over this.
The last line is not really a claim any of us can confirm or refute without actually knowing more about the people involved, so I guess I'll leave this here.
Last edited:
Wow, no self awareness and the print is dumb. Is it a popular slogan in the UK or from a show over there or something?
In the context you're trying to suggest, yes. I really have no idea what you're getting at because none of the appropriate uses of the term monkey apply to an adult but they do very much apply in terms of children. If you're trying to say it's racist to refer to black people as monkeys because of the colour of their skin then we're in full agreement.
Hardly anyone would have seen the design let alone the photo before it went online.
Probably a dozen people at most would have seen the actual design of the jumper, half of those would be the design team, the other half upper-management to sign of the designs. They all would be considering the design in the context of "jungle" range of kids clothes. Sometimes they just bought the rights for the designs from another manufacturer/designer (or even steal them), in that scenario it could be just a marketing team making the decision.
As for the photograph. Could be as small as a two-people studio took the shots, maybe UK-based if these photos are just on the UK site so they want models that look like the UK market. Someone signed of the shot, then the website upload team (someone else could probably tell you how many involve there).
I've experience at both a large fashion retailer (as a contract designer long time ago, now-a-days most have moved in-house) and a small photography studio that have had large clients. It's really time=money and not many people involved.
All of these look like they add the text or images to the clothing after the photos are taken and if that's the case it really looks like it was intentional.
Having a black kid model that is one thing but adding the text themselves seems rather blatant.
You seem to want to erase historical context so you can call little black kids monkey.
If they were smart they would have more models from different races wearing it with different colors. I seriously wonder what went through their heads.
Like I said no one can be that stupid.
H&M are racist fucks and they can go to hell with their shit royalty.
Still don't get why Canada is under them.
Either way fuck HM it's a fucking white supremacist company I hope it goes bankrupt. Shit if Tommy Hilfiger got in so much shit due to fucking Rumours that were not true at all.
HM should be destroyed fuck them bitches
Last edited:
Unfortunately, as history has shown us that is more true than we'd like to believe. When a piece of media or anything has some problematic race elements, often times the solution is removing POC from the product altogether.