the white one is probably a Royal Goedewaagen double walled ceramic pipe, would be worth 70-80 dollars if in good shape. The painting on the front of the bowl is of a man in stocks and people laughing at him.
Just for the sake of argument, what if it were a statuette of an ugly little kilted Scotsman smoking a pipe? Or a German farmer in lederhosen? Would it still be "racist"?
Or, perhaps not?
Perhaps when someone sees "racism" when there was no racist intent, the person who sees "racism" anyway is, in fact, the Racist?
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Maybe we should move this discussion to the other thread 😆
@Amos_Umwhat said:
Just for the sake of argument, what if it were a statuette of an ugly little kilted Scotsman smoking a pipe? Or a German farmer in lederhosen? Would it still be "racist"?
Or, perhaps not?
Perhaps when someone sees "racism" when there was no racist intent, the person who sees "racism" anyway is, in fact, the Racist?
A Scot in a kilt isn't racist because it doesn't stereotype the entire race, just the Scottish. A small distinction, yes, but likely an important one.
Ultimately, like with any subject in this genre, It mostly comes down to individual perception, and things start getting lumped together like the cigar store Indian when many or a majority of people in that group feel the same way.
Now that can be right or it can be wrong. Washington Redskins? It was a team that was named by one of the most notoriously racist business owners ever, who had open prejudice against Indians. Probably racist. I think that a majority of non-Indians feel that it's a racist symbol. If it is, then why isn't the Chicago Blackhawks another racist logo? The drawing is a caricature of a sad Indian. It looks more like the Cleveland Indians logo than it doe a real person. The Blackhawk tribe, as currently comprised, wants That logo wiped off the face of the Earth. Previous generations of the Blackhawk tribe felt differently. Ostensibly, the team named itself in a way that was supposed to honor the tribe. But a hundred years later?
Moving on to the cigar store Indian and all of the stuff that has evolved from it, I found a pretty decent article here from PBS:
As we all know, it was adopted as the symbol for a tobacco store because Native Americans were the ones who seemingly taught settlers about tobacco. However, agree or not, It is important that we pay respect to this line from the article:
The figures were a product of their time, a period fraught with prejudice against indigenous peoples. The statues helped to invent and then reinforce the quintessential stereotype of an “authentic” Native American by often depicting figures with bronze-colored skin wearing feathered headdresses, long fringed skirts or shirts, and moccasins.
The first sentence is absolutely true. In that time, there was a lot of prejudice and stereotypes of the indigenous people. We took the symbol of the Indian with all of its stereotypes, headdresses, etc, and created a symbol for tobacco. I understand why, by the way. Nobody in the 19th century would have even known it was an Indian had it been in a business suit, for instance.
So is the symbol racist? I suppose it depends on your definition of racism. Funny enough, different people have different definitions of racism. Some use racism synonymously with stereotypes. Some use racism as a word for hate thought. Other people fall in different places on the spectrum.
I think that what you're seeing now is a generation of native Americans who are merely mimicking everyone else in today's generation. They don't want to be hemmed into any stereotype because "everyone is an individual" And if you say that Indians wear feathers, then you're saying, "either I have to wear feathers or I'm not Indian."
That's fine with me, mostly because I'm not attached to the symbology in any way. I'm Rather agnostic to the Indian as a tobacco symbol.
I imagine future generations of barbers will eschew the barber pole, the origins of which include bloodletting back in the middle ages and more recently getting nicked while shaving in the 16th through and 19th centuries. Because it symbolizes the stereotype that barbers involve blood and that must mean that they cut their customer, I'm sure that future generations of barbers will be offended by this.
The final answer is not that if you like cigar store Indians then you are racist. The final answer is also not that if Tony doesn't like the statues they're racist but if he does like the statues then they're okay and not racist.
The final answer is that only you know it's in your heart, but the Indian as a symbol for tobacco is simply going out of style and there's not much to do about it.
Maybe they will become so taboo that their price will drop and I can buy one for my humidor room.
@ShawnOL said:
It's not racist if the object in question is white. Only whites are racist and all other colors are pure of heart.
....aaaand this is the result of a generation of "woke" opinions when everyone owns their own newspaper (social media), has their own television studio in their pockets (cell phones) and The truly powerful in America (the rich) plot us against each other to further their own agendas (keeping and acquiring influence to make more money). Now Shawn feels like everything he's known in his life is under attack.
In my humble opinion, many of these "racist" figures such as the tobacco Indian, Aunt Jemima, Uncle Ben, Cleveland Indian, etc. are often only caricatures or representations of a figure that is being revered or honored. The woke generation has however only looked for something to be offended by rather than take the time to appreciate why the company decided to use that image as a representation of their brand. Many companies have had to change their marketing and logos to remove said figures from their products so as not to hurt others feelings. Ironically, as I walk through the local grocery store all references to any nationality other than "those with European descent" have been erased from all food products. I would think that this would be considered racist 10 years ago. Is it soon time for companies such as Wendy's, Quaker Oats and Gerber to remove their White mascots from their brand?
Comments
Covid
Ok, I've seen less cool things...but back to Patrick's theme...
The price is one thing, but who would put a plush carpet in a smoking area?
well at least it is a limited "addition"
^^^I have something close to that. Found it on a demo job a while back.....
That looks like a government sign ^
Ya think???? 😂😂😂
Straight outta McPeak's back yard! 😆
If you'd like to smell like barnyard with hints of cedar....
I used to use Joop which has tobacco notes in it.
Now I just use cigar or pipe smoke to give my beard that smell.
^^^ idiot repellent
Doesn't work, I've sat right next to him at your house.
Could be a deal?
This one has more moving parts than a receding hairline
the white one is probably a Royal Goedewaagen double walled ceramic pipe, would be worth 70-80 dollars if in good shape. The painting on the front of the bowl is of a man in stocks and people laughing at him.
Description says "cigar broke off" lol
If it's broken, why are you trying to sell it?
Trapped in the People's Communits Republic of Massachusetts.
Pretty cool light I guess.
You won't find this in the butter aisle...
Just for you @CAcigarguy007
Discount for both
Looks more like Black Panther than Macanudo.
That's a collectable. It's not PC anymore and people love racist shyt. Don't know why but it sells like Aunt Jemima hotcakes.
Just for the sake of argument, what if it were a statuette of an ugly little kilted Scotsman smoking a pipe? Or a German farmer in lederhosen? Would it still be "racist"?
Or, perhaps not?
Perhaps when someone sees "racism" when there was no racist intent, the person who sees "racism" anyway is, in fact, the Racist?
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Maybe we should move this discussion to the other thread 😆
A Scot in a kilt isn't racist because it doesn't stereotype the entire race, just the Scottish. A small distinction, yes, but likely an important one.
Ultimately, like with any subject in this genre, It mostly comes down to individual perception, and things start getting lumped together like the cigar store Indian when many or a majority of people in that group feel the same way.
Now that can be right or it can be wrong. Washington Redskins? It was a team that was named by one of the most notoriously racist business owners ever, who had open prejudice against Indians. Probably racist. I think that a majority of non-Indians feel that it's a racist symbol. If it is, then why isn't the Chicago Blackhawks another racist logo? The drawing is a caricature of a sad Indian. It looks more like the Cleveland Indians logo than it doe a real person. The Blackhawk tribe, as currently comprised, wants That logo wiped off the face of the Earth. Previous generations of the Blackhawk tribe felt differently. Ostensibly, the team named itself in a way that was supposed to honor the tribe. But a hundred years later?
Moving on to the cigar store Indian and all of the stuff that has evolved from it, I found a pretty decent article here from PBS:
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/roadshow/stories/articles/2015/10/26/cigar-store-indians-trading-stereotypes/
As we all know, it was adopted as the symbol for a tobacco store because Native Americans were the ones who seemingly taught settlers about tobacco. However, agree or not, It is important that we pay respect to this line from the article:
The first sentence is absolutely true. In that time, there was a lot of prejudice and stereotypes of the indigenous people. We took the symbol of the Indian with all of its stereotypes, headdresses, etc, and created a symbol for tobacco. I understand why, by the way. Nobody in the 19th century would have even known it was an Indian had it been in a business suit, for instance.
So is the symbol racist? I suppose it depends on your definition of racism. Funny enough, different people have different definitions of racism. Some use racism synonymously with stereotypes. Some use racism as a word for hate thought. Other people fall in different places on the spectrum.
I think that what you're seeing now is a generation of native Americans who are merely mimicking everyone else in today's generation. They don't want to be hemmed into any stereotype because "everyone is an individual" And if you say that Indians wear feathers, then you're saying, "either I have to wear feathers or I'm not Indian."
That's fine with me, mostly because I'm not attached to the symbology in any way. I'm Rather agnostic to the Indian as a tobacco symbol.
I imagine future generations of barbers will eschew the barber pole, the origins of which include bloodletting back in the middle ages and more recently getting nicked while shaving in the 16th through and 19th centuries. Because it symbolizes the stereotype that barbers involve blood and that must mean that they cut their customer, I'm sure that future generations of barbers will be offended by this.
The final answer is not that if you like cigar store Indians then you are racist. The final answer is also not that if Tony doesn't like the statues they're racist but if he does like the statues then they're okay and not racist.
The final answer is that only you know it's in your heart, but the Indian as a symbol for tobacco is simply going out of style and there's not much to do about it.
Maybe they will become so taboo that their price will drop and I can buy one for my humidor room.
It's not racist if the object in question is white. Only whites are racist and all other colors are pure of heart.
Trapped in the People's Communits Republic of Massachusetts.
....aaaand this is the result of a generation of "woke" opinions when everyone owns their own newspaper (social media), has their own television studio in their pockets (cell phones) and The truly powerful in America (the rich) plot us against each other to further their own agendas (keeping and acquiring influence to make more money). Now Shawn feels like everything he's known in his life is under attack.
Is that also racism...against Shawn? Perhaps....
Anyone have a "cigar lamp" around here?
You rub and AJ Fernandez comes out and grants you 3 wishes, yes?
In my humble opinion, many of these "racist" figures such as the tobacco Indian, Aunt Jemima, Uncle Ben, Cleveland Indian, etc. are often only caricatures or representations of a figure that is being revered or honored. The woke generation has however only looked for something to be offended by rather than take the time to appreciate why the company decided to use that image as a representation of their brand. Many companies have had to change their marketing and logos to remove said figures from their products so as not to hurt others feelings. Ironically, as I walk through the local grocery store all references to any nationality other than "those with European descent" have been erased from all food products. I would think that this would be considered racist 10 years ago. Is it soon time for companies such as Wendy's, Quaker Oats and Gerber to remove their White mascots from their brand?