How did nobody over at adidas notice the horrific implications of this shoe?
No, seriously. Is an entire company that stupid, ignorant and heartless?
What the F, adidas?!
The Daily Mail elaborates:
Dr Boyce Watkins, writing for Your Black World, said: ‘Shackles. The stuff that our ancestors wore for 400 years while experiencing the most horrific atrocities imaginable.
‘Most of which were never documented in the history books and kept away from you in the educational system, all so you’d be willing to put shackles on your ankles today and not be so sensitive about it.’
The Professor at Syracuse University said he accepted some people would accuse him of overreacting.
But he added: ‘There is always a group of negroes who are more than happy to resubmit themselves to slavery.
The good news: adidas has since cancelled the shoe, which was set to debut in August. The bad news? A whole team of designers, marketing strategists and others within adidas initially thought this shoe was a good idea!
USA Today‘s take:
Sneaker marketers sell edginess. But adidas cancelling a shoe that wasn’t even going to debut until August is the latest example of sneakers being too edgy.
Umm… Too “edgy”? Really USA Today? Is it the “edginess” that doesn’t work on this shoe or is it, say, oh I don’t know, the racism?
Here’s a primer, USA Today. This is an edgy shoe:
Alexander McQueen's "Armadillo" shoe - 2010
This is a racist* shoe:
photo: Adidas' Facebook page
What do you suppose adidas was thinking here? Does it allude to slavery, the prison industrial complex, or both?
Is there a way to look at this shoe as a means of “reclaiming” the past… Like taking back offensive and oppressive language?
What would you think of a man wearing this shoe? Would he be reclaiming the past? Or is he a part of a system that is desensitizing people to the horrors of slavery and the modern-day proof of the continued marginalization and dehumanization of Black men?
Or is this adidas’ commentary about how men are supposedly so tied to and obsessed with sports that it’s as if they’re shackled to their sneakers**?
About Joanna Schroeder
I suspect they only wanted to romanticize a bad boy/thug image. I guess that is because I am too gullible and have trouble believing that people can be so overtly racist. A complete failure whatever their original intent or motivation were.
As a minor sidenote I think they look rather impractical and borderline dangerous as well. For instance imagine a kid trying to climb over a tall picket fence and hooking that chain over one picket when he jumps down.
I certainly see the slavery thing here. But from a fashion and design standpoint, can I just say they look stupid? I mean for god’s sake. What kind of idiot would think this is somehow going to be a new trend?
So I can’t be the ONLY one who immediately thought BDSM when he heard about this…
I’m usually racially hyper-sensitive, but that actually took some time to occur to me. I was all set to rail against fifty shades of grey destroying the joy of transgression by further mainstreaming bondage and erotica…
Dear U.S.A.
It wasn’t just black people who wore chains throughout history.
Signed, ME
Seriously people, there isn’t a race on Earth that hasn’t had at least one of it’s members in leg-irons so why automatically is it about the black slaves? Is their a similar outrage over handcuffs too? Is this outrage limited to America and thus I cannot see why there is such a hyperfocus on one of the many groups of slaves and prisoners?
“What would you think of a man wearing this shoe? Would he be reclaiming the past? Or is he a part of a system that is desensitizing people to the horrors of slavery and the modern-day proof of the continued marginalization and dehumanization of Black men?”
I’d think it’s a man wearing a show with leg cuffs, maybe some statement about being a slave to fashion or something equally silly. Considering my country had plenty of white-folk chained up as criminals in it’s origins I don’t see leg shackles as ONLY about black slaves so it’s a bit silly to assume it’s desensitizing people to the horrors of BLACK slavery. No group owns imprisonment, no group has the ownership over usage of leg shackles, they’ve been used for a damn long time against all groups and all kinds of horrors have happened to them.
Seriously people, there isn’t a race on Earth that hasn’t had at least one of it’s members in leg-irons so why automatically is it about the black slaves? Is their a similar outrage over handcuffs too? Is this outrage limited to America and thus I cannot see why there is such a hyperfocus on one of the many groups of slaves and prisoners?
Probably so (to answer your ending question). In American history (and the focus in this discussion is about a product in America, by an American company, covered on a largely American blog) when you think slavery the first thought is going to be the Altantic Slave trade that ran in the US for a such a long time.
Considering my country had plenty of white-folk chained up as criminals in it’s origins I don’t see leg shackles as ONLY about black slaves so it’s a bit silly to assume it’s desensitizing people to the horrors of BLACK slavery. No group owns imprisonment, no group has the ownership over usage of leg shackles, they’ve been used for a damn long time against all groups and all kinds of horrors have happened to them.
Location, Location, Location. By chance what country are you in?
Australia. When I think leg shackles, I think of the captain cook days. Makes sense though for the american product etc but still it’s a bit hyperfocused on the plight of the black slaves. I don’t however see how it’s racist, most likely ignorant but leg shackles exist for people even today in prison of any race.
Also, here in the US the population in prisons is hugely, massively over representative of Black men. And there is a direct link there to enslavement.
You can’t talk about Black men in prison without talking about how the population became disenfranchised.
Bear in mind that the legacy of slavery has left the United States with one of the largest prisoner populations in the world (even though we there are many countries with larger overall populations). And the majority of those prisoners are black men. And given the racist roots of slavery that’s why some would say its raicst. (And in this case I’d throw in a bit of sexism because Adidas knows full well they were mostly going after men with this product.)
Hey Archy, thanks for letting us know how we, as Americans, should feel about symbols of the grim and still echoing holocaust of American Slavery. If I ever need someone to provide thoughtful advice on how best to respond to the various blood drenched American holocausts, I’ll be sure to give you a shout.
(By the way, I’m smiling as I post this. Not frowning.)
Archy’s in Australia.
In our (US) history, only one population was systematically enslaved, but many more were oppressed. Of course one also has a history of mass genocide – the indigenous population, the Native Americans. But their histories look very different, as different tools were used against the populations. We have symbolic representations of both of these atrocities – the Trail of Tears for Native Americans and the shackles (and whip) for Black Americans.
Also, there’s a huge difference between a “criminal population” (though I realize that many of the criminals who were sent to Aus were merely poor or otherwise political dissenters) in shackles and a completely innocent population of human beings who were rounded up – whole families, women and men – for simply being. Shackled, and shipped like dry goods across the ocean where massive populations died of disease, malnourishment, dehydration or just outright murder, then sold off like livestock (literally) and then endured generations of enslavement with absolutely no opportunity for anything other than a life of enslavement. It’s not imprisonment, not even wrongful imprisonment. It’s generations upon generations of enslavement followed by a freedom that didn’t include full civil or even human rights.
I’m not saying that everyone in the world has it better than the people who were enslaved in the US, as there too many genocides and enslaved populations (including Jews) but here in the US, anyone who has a brain recognizes shackles as a symbol of enslavement.
I’m not saying that white people were never enslaved, or that other populations weren’t shackled, just that in the US nothing that happened to white people as a population can even compare.
I guess I’m curious if the image of shackles in most people there brings up a black man, or just a man. To me the first image I see is a man, skin colour can be anything, as leg shackles were commonly used for prisoners from what I know + slaves + anyone else they wanted to slow the movement of.I guess the first image is striped shirts + ball n chain or a prisoner chained up on a ship, whether they be a slave or just a standard prisoner.
To me the first image is of black people. But that is shaped by my being American and my being black.
I think this is all about having different perspectives and different backgrounds.
I’m sure it varies by country of origin.
Our male prison population is mostly Black (which is insanely disproportionate to the general population), and that has such direct links back to slavery that to me it seems that regardless of which comes to mind, most Americans probably think of Black men.
Though if you lived in a mostly white area and worked in prisons or with prisoners, undoubtably you’d have the visual of white guys, too.
I just saw a HUGE team of female prisoners doing Brush Clearance (for fire season) in the hills yesterday. The orange jumpsuits and DOC vans… I thought about how often i see female DOC teams doing manual labor in the general population like that… It’s like, never.
So the last few years I associate orange jumpsuits with women.
Intellectually, however, I recognize that doesn’t exactly represent the prison population.
Yeah makes sense, I think of mostly white males as they’re the majority from what I know of prison stats here. I think that’s mostly because there are far more white or other races vs aboriginals here though aboriginals are jailed at much higher rates than the rest.
In re: the aboriginal population, I do believe Joanna mentioned the US genocide of the native american population…I suppose that’s a comparison best left for a different discussion though.
I meant Australian aboriginals, who went through some horror and get the higher % in jail compared to other races here as well.
I knew what you meant. I was making a comparison in re: de jure and de facto policies of near-genocide.
Australians seem to be even more resistant to discussing that ugliness than Americans do…
Ah ok. Yeah some terrible stuff went down in Aus, even up to quite recently (stolen generation). And many of the aboriginal communities have extremely high drug n alcohol abuse, major problems with illness both physical n mental, and most of that I think because of just how much shit they had to deal with, the huge change of life, loss of identity, lack of alcohol resistance and a few other major issues. Much more empathy would be useful here in Aus. It’s a pretty sickening situation to see.
PH, I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not American and therefore don’t understand the historical implications of the word “lynch”.
Black people don’t “lynch” white people. Lynching is a specific term used to describe innumerable murders of Black people at the hands of white people. And it still happens.
Also, technically, “reverse racism” is impossible. White people are NOT institutionally discriminated against in this country. One could argue a history of Irish or Italian people experiencing discrimination or prejudice at the hands of other white people, but that is NOT racism.
You may argue that prejudice can be Black against white, and that’s definitely true, it can be, but you are 100% technically wrong about “reverse racism”.
And guess what?! Why the F does any white person need to say the N-word?!
So-the-F-what that a white person can’t say the N-word (I mean, you can, you can say whatever you want, but people will point out that you’re a racist).
I sincerely want to know why a white person would EVER want to say the N-word other than to be a bigot.
that is an interesting question Joey. but i can tell you that someone like Eminen can use it and does.
white people speaking to other white people can say “what up nigga” and it is a term of endearment in some strange way. i have seen it used many times as a non negative racial term and still i get your point.
The problem with that though is the question of where exactly did Eminem get it from? If that word wasn’t already used as some “term of endearment” would white people have even bothered with trying to use it for themselves in the first place?
i think of it somewhat like this. when someone says “see you bitches later” i know that is a term of endearment. (which is a very good movie by the way). at one time it would have never been thought of in this way and most likely would have started a fight.
Just curious, what do they call the prisoner executions by hanging? Eg a white prisoner gets death by hanging back in cowboy days, would it be called hanging, or could it also be called lynching? Or was lynching specifically about hanging black people?
“I sincerely want to know why a white person would EVER want to say the N-word other than to be a bigot.”
To fit in with black friends, comedy, etc. There are legitimate uses but it depends if you end in ER or A, and depends on who you are with. Some black friends might encourage it with their white friends, others might hate it. It’s silly to assume they’re trying to be bigoted each and every time, I think since rap culture many are just mimicing popular male artists. “N**** please” for example might be said by a white person without intending to be bigoted. Ignorant maybe, but not always bigoted. Intentions matter a lot I think.
Strange, we’ve had black people trigger racial hatred laws here (black person calling a cop a white C went down real well..), so institutional racism to whites might not happen but many people still do call a black person being prejudice to a white person an act of racism. I myself use the definition of racism being “Racism is the belief that different characteristics in racial groups justify discrimination. Some sources emphasize that racism involves the belief that different racial groups are characterized by intrinsic characteristics or abilities and that some such groups are therefore naturally superior to others, [1][2] or follow practices that discriminate against members of particular racial groups,[1] for example by perpetuating unequal access to resources between groups.[3]” as per the wiki and I do believe black people, or any oppressed group can be racist. But this is similar to the fights over wording with sexism and how sexism towards males isn’t sexism. Difference is the racism towards black people holds a shitload more weight due to the history, but why deny reverse racism exists? This is the part I don’t understand but maybe my definition is just quite relaxed. What is the better term to call someone who is black but showing extremely bigoted views towards the white race?
Archy to me personally I think the idea of reverse racism (or any reverse -ism) ultimately serves to promote the idea that whatever it is the reverse of is THE definition of racism. My views on what racism is is actually mostly of what you quote from wiki. There is no “its white against black” in the base definition therefore there is nothing to reverse when it comes to black against white.
. What is the better term to call someone who is black but showing extremely bigoted views towards the white race?
A racist.
Thank-you, I too call them a racist but I see attempts to act as if racism to whites cannot happen. It’s strange. Institutional racism may not happen, but there still is racism against every race even if it’s just a stupid joke.
Well, PH, I think it’s very kind of you to keep Archy company over there in the “arrogantly incorrect and completely lacking context” corner. And your first statement is almost completely historically inaccurate.
To any other tourists who want to come to the US and then complain about “reverse racism”, please just stay home. We already have enough homegrown idiots and assholes of our own.
lets consider reverse discrimination since it seems so improbable. you are a white man sitting on a bus and the driver comes back and tells you to get up for a black man. perhaps this is just discrimination period and that must be your point that there is no such thing
i can tell you many people i know who had better training and skills that were passed over because of legal pressure to hire or promote a minority. right or wrong? i don’t know. fair? karma?
I’m not sure what you’d call those examples but for the record to me at least there is not “reverse racism” or “reverse discrimination”. There is just discrimination and racism.
when i think about it, how different is this than wearing a cross around the neck? Christian’s carry the cross as a reminder of the burden that all men carry. its not so different, just an ankle bracelet as a reminder of the oppression.
Don’t mind me, I assumed the product as a worldwide release but it’s apparently U.S focused only, so it makes sense that it’s triggering reactions like that. Call me a child of globalization, I expected it to be worldwide without realizing, so my argument is null n void if it’s limited to the U.S alone.
What do you suppose adidas was thinking here? Does it allude to slavery, the prison industrial complex, or both?
I’d say the intent was probably an allude to “basketball is life and it will always be a part of you”. No I’m not trying to justify their choice and I’m not trying to say that people thinking about slavery or prison are overly sensitive or anything like that.
Is there a way to look at this shoe as a means of “reclaiming” the past… Like taking back offensive and oppressive language?
In this case I don’t think so. Its not something that’s being started by black men as a way to reclaim it. It would as if men organized all the Slutwalks and women joined them in the name of reclaiming it.
What would you think of a man wearing this shoe?
That he is trying to make the statement that basketball is his life and he is figuratively and now literally chained to it.
Would he be reclaiming the past?
I don’t think so. If anything I would think he’s declaring that he is a slave to something else.
Or is he a part of a system that is desensitizing people to the horrors of slavery and the modern-day proof of the continued marginalization and dehumanization of Black men?
Possibly. Jackie Summers (I think it was him) asked a while back to name some men who were rich and famous but were not athletes (or rappers). It’s pretty common place to see young black guys banking their entire lives on becoming a pro athelete. Even to the point of skimping on their education. (And white guys aren’t immune to this mind you).
Or is this adidas’ commentary about how men are supposedly so tied to and obsessed with sports that it’s as if they’re shackled to their sneakers**?
Thanks for the nod.
Chris Rock does a set about rich Black guys. He said in the neighborhood where … oh I can’t remember who! Basically a very rich guy who works in entertainment who is Black …. lives in New Jersey, the Black people in the neighborhood are there because of sports or entertainment. He goes, (paraphrasing) “What did the white guys in the neighborhood do to get there? Let’s see, dentist, doctor, business man, inherited wealth.”
That speaks to the history of education and opportunity in this country. And while that’s definitely changing, it’s changing very very slowly.
This is the same bit where he compares being “rich” with being “wealthy” and says we think Oprah’s wealthy, but compared to Bill Gates she’s average.
Another part of that stand up was where he talked about the difference between rich and wealth with this comparison.
Shaquelle O’neil is rich. The guy that signs his paycheck has wealth.
Or even more to the point he says that “You can lose rich in a summer long drug binge. You can’t get rid of wealth.”
Who said that about the summer long drug binge? That just made me laugh SO hard.
It’s from Chris Rock as well. I thought it was the same standup special where he mentioned comparing Oprah to Gates.
If I recall I think the comparison of Whinefry/Gates, Shaq and his paychecks, wealth vs rich, and the black guy in the neighboorhood are all from the same special.
I’m sure you’re right.
thats so true danny.
no one seems to get the pride associated with being a thug. where do you think the low hung pants showing underwear came from?? when a person enters jail they give them clothes. they don’t try to “fit” you with tailor made clothes. so, the inmates let the pants fall as low as they will. there you go untended “instant fashion.”
these shoes would have every teenage jackass lined up at Walmart wanting to be the first to say “im bad, look at my shoes.”
if it is true that you cannot rape the willing, it is also true you cannot exploit the willing.
how fucking stupid. next step, surgically created whipping scars.
no one seems to get the pride associated with being a thug.
Oh yeah we see it. And its horrible.
where do you think the low hung pants showing underwear came from?? when a person enters jail they give them clothes. they don’t try to “fit” you with tailor made clothes. so, the inmates let the pants fall as low as they will. there you go untended “instant fashion.”
From what I understand the sagging was advertising that you’re up for sex in prison.
if it is true that you cannot rape the willing, it is also true you cannot exploit the willing.
how fucking stupid. next step, surgically created whipping scars.
Its ignorance and lack of education.
It’s true that there is a problem of kids engaging in behaviors or fashion because they are “hip” while not understanding the possible implications of it.
What would you think of a man wearing this shoe? Would he be reclaiming the past?
Not so much reclaiming. More like making a statement about the shackles of yesteryears still affecting people and being a part of the mental image in modern society, like how people are treated differently, in the prison industrial complex, the military, etc.
That said, I don’t have a clue as to the intent of the marketing and design people at Adidas.
BTW, I thought that Adidas is a German company, and not a US one?
Yeah, there’s quite a history there, too, between adidas and Puma and the Nazis. From wikipedia (though I’ve heard another version of the story, similar but more political):
BTW, I thought that Adidas is a German company, and not a US one?
Was this shoe planned to be released internationally or just in America i wonder?
It was a bad idea for a multitude of reasons and they look pretty stupid as well. Also I think we can attribute this to promoting subtle racist overtones to our perception of men of color.
I think most Americans are obsessed with or only able to acknowledge the most blatant and explicit forms of oppression e.g. Rodney King’s beating. But “isms” exist on a spectrum from uncomfortable to dehumanizing.
My best friend goes, “Wow, I see what you’re saying, but when I saw it I thought of how guys who are obsessed with basketball or even sneaker fashion are so bound to it”.
I think that’s probably a good initial read, but the fact of how it got into production, etc, shows such a deep insensitivity that points toward racism.
It’s too bad the complaint killed the shoe so early; I would have liked to see what kind of ad campaign they were planning on going with.
I think Adidas just jumped too far too fast. If they had instead started with a strap+cord instead of shackle+chain, that would have gone over less terribly. And if that had somehow become an actual fashion trend, then the shackle+chain would have just been a specific style for that trend, which would have been less controversial. I don’t hear many calls for choker necklaces to be boycotted for representing the oppression of women, for example.
For me the fact the shackles were orange said “prisoner” more than “slave” But I can see where people would get slave too. And really, prisoner isn’t a much better interpretation either
Wow…outrageous!
This reminds me a bit of the Alexander McQueen exhibit at the Met a while back….there were high fashion straight-jackets done in beautiful floral prints and S&M leather hoods combined with spooky gothic luxury suits…stunningly grotesque and very provocative…..my SIL and I couldn’t stop talking about this exhibit for weeks! (Of course, I don’t know if any of that stuff was really meant for people to buy…it was so surreal!)….
Those sneakers are surreal, too….I can’t imagine anyone actually wearing them on the street (unless it was Halloween) or to a club (unless it was a weird costume theme ball) or to a basketball court (unless it was part of student protest demonstration)….I would put them in the same weird fashion category as those A. McQueen pieces…more attention-getting and bizarre! I suppose the sneaker designer figures any attention, even negative, is good for the brand….
leia sees this in a much different (and correctly so i think) way. it is art. SO how about we “bling” it up some and make the chains gold. now the word “bling” sounds racist. oh my.
Any kid if the 80s should recognize at a glance that these shoes pay homage to my pet monster. They aren’t racist. http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5u4u8lf9j1qzuqe9.jpg
I remember those. And I also remember that the target audience for them didn’t just so happen to be made up of mostly black people.
Honestly, had it not been suggested to me I probably wouldn’t have seen these shoes as having anything to do with slavery or imprisonment; I would have seen them as symbolic of class struggle. After all, what better way to keep people in chains than to colour them golden?
This is the same issue as Nike’s N7 program. Basketball shoes for Natives.
http://youtu.be/okaSKlpw31I
Sigh…
The problem with white people today is that you can’t mention “racism” around them without one or two of them rushing to point out that minorities are even MORE racist than white people, or some other such nonsense.
Really, people, THAT’S NOT RELEVANT. Everybody seems to want to be a victim though, apparently.
you know that is so true. we all protect our self interests in some way, and finding a reason to blame a minority (or a woman) for taking your job might well be one. but we are in a process of evolving and we are becoming more aware of how complicated this is. we need some patience with the process.
I have a “so called” friend who is openly racist and when he refers to black people he uses the term “canadian,” who would have thought racism in code.
Well, you’re right, and I’m admittedly very impatient about it. My own personal evolution on it was mostly complete by my mid-20s, so I tend to expect that much of others…which is completely unfair given the radically different circumstances we all encounter.
That said, yes…racism in code…though isn’t that sort of what happened with the “thug” label applied to Trayvon Martin, for instance?
I have a “friend” who screams lead vocals for a deathcore band with the word “fuck” in their name, has over a dozen facial piercings and several facial tattoos, owns a tattoo parlor in fact, and has a massive gun collection. He couldn’t understand why my head kept exploding every time he referred to Trayvon Martin as a “thug” without irony.
yes, i see the irony in that. i get the “thug” thing also and i throw the word around a lot myself. the word goes back to the mobsters for me, so the meaning is just of a person who gets what they want by force. perhaps i will use the word less.
the way the canadian word is used would be like “the bar is full of canadians.” someone had to explain it to me and it occurred to me this was no different than the N word but it wasn’t the N word. its a racist loop hole.
its hard to tell someone who has helped you move that you don’t want to be around him because he is a sexist racist.
these are strange days indeed.