I know we all should have the freedom of free speech, but it's wrong when words that are known to offend people are used in major publications. There was a article posted about Rihanna in a Dutch fashion magazine named Jackie. What was the writers intention, to give Rihanna her props or to totally degrade her?
She has street cred, she has a ghetto ass and she has a golden throat. Rihanna, the good girl gone bad, is the ultimate n***abitch and displays that gladly, and for her that means: what’s on can come off. If that means she’ll be on stage half naked, then so be it. But Dutch winters aren’t like Jamaican ones, so pick a clothing style in which your daughter can resist minus ten. No to the big sunglasses and the pornheels, and yes to the tiger print, pink shizzle and everything that glitters. Now let’s hope she won’t beat anybody up at daycare.
How does this happen? The editor-in-chief Eva Hoeke then respons to the article once attention is drawn to the obvious wording used to describe Rihanna.
Dear readers,
First: thanks for all your responses. We are of course very fed up over this and especially very shocked. However I’m glad that we’re engaging in a dialogue on this page — not everybody does that. Thanks for this. Other than that I can be brief about this: this should have never happened. Period. While the author meant no harm — the title of the article was intended as a joke — it was a bad joke, to say the least. And that slipped through my, the editor-in-chief’s, fingers. Stupid, painful and sucks for all concerned. The author has been addressed on it, and now I can only ensure that these terms will no longer end up in the magazine. Furthermore I hope that you all believe there was absolutely no racist motive behind the choice of words. It was stupid, it was naive to think that this was an acceptable form of slang — you hear it all the time on tv and radio, then your idea of what is normal apparently shifts — but it was especially misguided: there was no malice behind it. We make our magazine with love, energy and enthusiasm, and it can sometimes happen that someone is out of line. And then you can only do one thing: apologize. And hope that others wish to accept it.
From the bottom of my heart I say it again: we never intended to offend anyone. And I mean that.
Regards,
Eva Hoeke
So then of course Rihanna responds to the article as which she should.
@evajackie I hope u can read english, because your magazine is a poor representation of the evolution of human rights! I find you disrespectful, and rather desperate!! You ran out of legit, civilized information to print! There are 1000′s of Dutch girls who would love to be recognized for their contributions to your country, you could have given them an article. Instead, u paid to print one degrading an entire race! That’s your contribution to this world! To encourage segregation, to mislead the future leaders to act in the past! You put two words together,
@evajackie with the intent of abasement, that made no sense…”N***A B***H”?!….Well with all respect, on behalf of my race, here are my two words for you…F**K YOU!!!
Eva Hoeke has resigned from her position. She worked with the magazine for eight years. With so much experience how did she let this slip through her fingers. Was she thinking she was being hip & trendy because it seems the N-word is used so loosely? I don't know what her exact thoughts were but it was very ignorant of her as an editor and as a person to allow a word that has a history of negative connotation to be published in her magazine. However we are suppose to forgive those who do wrong to us. Here is some scripture for your soul.
Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, "Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?" Jesus answered, "I'll tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times. Matthew 18:21-22
Enjoy
Article sourced from Styleite
No comments:
Post a Comment