Difference between revisions of "Talk:Little Black Sambo"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(rattling MountainDew's can)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
::"Although the book doesn't contain any racial overtones, it has been known as a controversial book due to the original illustrations in early european and american editions which gave the character an african look. In reality, this popular fairy tale is about a young boy in India and his adventures." [http://books.google.com/books?id=59uM4eQbxTkC&dq=little+black+sambo&client=firefox-a&source=gbs_summary_s&cad=0] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 22:39, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
 
::"Although the book doesn't contain any racial overtones, it has been known as a controversial book due to the original illustrations in early european and american editions which gave the character an african look. In reality, this popular fairy tale is about a young boy in India and his adventures." [http://books.google.com/books?id=59uM4eQbxTkC&dq=little+black+sambo&client=firefox-a&source=gbs_summary_s&cad=0] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 22:39, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
 
:::Well, the cover of the book seems like a stereotypical caricature of a black person with thick lips, so I could see how that could be considered controversial. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 22:45, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
 
:::Well, the cover of the book seems like a stereotypical caricature of a black person with thick lips, so I could see how that could be considered controversial. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 22:45, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
::If you mean "objectionable", then I understand. Around two decades ago, any stereotypical representation of blacks was pounced upon as being ''de jure'' "racist", regardless of the actual meaning of the content.
 +
::By the way, racial differences in appearance are real. Whites have thin lips and big noses, and blacks have thick lips and squashed noses, relatively. What of it? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 22:53, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Revision as of 21:53, 1 April 2008

Thanks for finding that vandalism. It had been here for 11 months! DanH 21:44, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Give EdBot the credit--"he" changed it, then I saw it whilst cruising recent changes.--RossC 22:18, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
"Although the book doesn't contain any racial overtones, it has been known as a controversial book due to the original illustrations in early european and american editions which gave the character an african look. In reality, this popular fairy tale is about a young boy in India and his adventures." [1] --Ed Poor Talk 22:39, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
Well, the cover of the book seems like a stereotypical caricature of a black person with thick lips, so I could see how that could be considered controversial. DanH 22:45, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
If you mean "objectionable", then I understand. Around two decades ago, any stereotypical representation of blacks was pounced upon as being de jure "racist", regardless of the actual meaning of the content.
By the way, racial differences in appearance are real. Whites have thin lips and big noses, and blacks have thick lips and squashed noses, relatively. What of it? --Ed Poor Talk 22:53, 1 April 2008 (EDT)