Vocabulary chart teaches children that dark skin is 'ugly'

[JohnThailandJohn]

I already made the correction.

Wake up and talk to Thais.

This perception, dark and black skin is ugly is very widespread in Thailand.

It didn't just happen. Thais are clearly TAUGHT this in various ways.

I'm assuming anyway that most of us would agree here that the message in the chart is racist in nature.

But what percentage of THAIS would get that?

I assume based on my experience in Thailand, plenty wouldn't.

Again -- a cultural BLIND SPOT.

The appeal of skin color is not at all reserved to Thailand. There is just less cover-up to the fact here.

http://jezebel.com/368746/study-men-are-more-attracted-to-women-with-lighter-skin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness#Skin_tone_and_skin_radiance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness#Skin_color

[Jingthing]

Thailand still has a lot of remnants of a more traditional, feudal society.

As a generalization those who do a lot of manual labor in the hot sun will develop darker skin tones and elite classes will look down on them.

That is definitely something seen in a lot of cultures, but we're talking about Thailand here.

Of course in Thailand you have the Thai-Chinese thing with Thai-Chinese often tending to having lighter skin ...

Black people are born that way ... outside workers or not.

So, it's complicated.

But nothing complicated about the message in that chart.

Edited August 2, 2015 by Jingthing

[green job]

I agree with you and there was an interesting article in yesterdays Guardian that looked at Mark Twain; his story about Huckleberry Finn and what has changed since that time in the US and how the country is still struggling to solve problems based on race and that does not only involve ‘black’ people but also address problems for Hispanic or Asian parts of the population. The comments made by readers are also worthwhile to be read.

Agree but looking at some of the examples in this ad (http://www.collegehumor.com/post/6984400/is-it-just-us-or-are-these-10-toys-just-a-tad-bit-racist), I can see how people take issue but at some point reality needs to set in and going out of your way to pretend things is no way to solve racism or any other issue. In fact in the US there is a big backlash to this and causing bigotry even though it is an ignorant way to react to people trying to make you pretend and not discuss truth or obvious.

Is this not a white family? Not sure why it needs to be stated if you can see it but certainly nothing wrong with listing its description as such. If there is a black family of the same product must they be listed as Family 1 and Family 2 to avoid the description offending anyone? It has got to the point where acknowledging being a certain race is racist. Should the choice to buy a toy based on color of the dolls or figures be banned? Just make them various colors and censor the skin color on the outside of the box?

While this can certainly appear racist, I am white and called my son a monkey all the time when little and he had a stuffed monkey just like this. If these is another white doll just like this nobody would think anything. Why is it not okay to have a black doll? If people see blacks as monkeys then this is racist and the only reason to avoid ever having a monkey and black person together.

Not included in the link but worth pointing out that if you are going to sell this one then to me it is racist not to sell the other.

Now Oreo can only use a White doll to promote Oreos? I guess Aisans should be banned from selling Bananas and whites from selling vanilla. To me it is insulting that Whites believe a black should be offended because the color of the product is near their skin tone since they would not find themselves offended by a white selling vanella.

Should a store be banned from lowering the price on slower moving items or overstocks just because some may be offended?

The way to tackle racism is not to pretend it exists where it doesn't, this actually causes recentment and makes some people angry and they direct that at the race they feel is oppressing their right to intelligence. Nothing wrong with pointing things out that might be insensitive or ignorant but everything is not about racism and often these types of things happen because somebody doesn't even think about possible offensiveness because they are the furthest from being a racist. Highly doubtful the KKK was involved in any of the above or that anyone was trying to promote racism.

You should not of posted that. Now some Thai ultrapreneur will buy them all up,and get them bleached,and make a fortune

[Asheron]

If you switched the faces of handsome and ugly around is it racism?

[Jingthing]

If you switched the faces of handsome and ugly around is it racism?

That's an interesting question.

Some theorize that racism is prejudice plus power.

So if Thailand's elite is more light skinned and it is, then not based on that theory.

That said, it's academic, because it's obvious the example you give would NOT be published in Thailand.

Edited August 2, 2015 by Jingthing

[GerdT]

I agree with you and there was an interesting article in yesterdays Guardian that looked at Mark Twain; his story about Huckleberry Finn and what has changed since that time in the US and how the country is still struggling to solve problems based on race and that does not only involve ‘black’ people but also address problems for Hispanic or Asian parts of the population. The comments made by readers are also worthwhile to be read.

Agree but looking at some of the examples in this ad (http://www.collegehumor.com/post/6984400/is-it-just-us-or-are-these-10-toys-just-a-tad-bit-racist), I can see how people take issue but at some point reality needs to set in and going out of your way to pretend things is no way to solve racism or any other issue. In fact in the US there is a big backlash to this and causing bigotry even though it is an ignorant way to react to people trying to make you pretend and not discuss truth or obvious.

As I have pointed out in an earlier comment the chart or poster can be regarded as racist depending on which side of the fence one sits. But that is based on a personal view and not on facts. To make that poster a racist tool one has to prove that it was done intentionally and that the designer intended to discriminate against African people. Yes, the poster or chart is offensive and it shouldn’t have seen the light of the day; however that doesn’t qualify it to become the benchmark to prove that Thai people are racists in their majority as many of the commentators here suggest.

Edited August 2, 2015 by GerdT

[Asheron]

If you switched the faces of handsome and ugly around is it racism?

That's an interesting question.

Some theorize that racism is prejudice plus power.

So if Thailand's elite is more light skinned and it is, then not based on that theory.

I would say that it's not racist regardless of which face is on ugly.

[GerdT]

If you switched the faces of handsome and ugly around is it racism?

That's an interesting question.

Some theorize that racism is prejudice plus power.

So if Thailand's elite is more light skinned and it is, then not based on that theory.

I would say that it's not racist regardless of which face is on ugly.

I agree with you but ponder what kind of comments that would have produced on the forum page.

As one member put it so rightly: But nothing complicated about the message in that chart.

The message is the personal perception and not an official statement permitting anybody to read into the chart whatever they want.

[Gecko123]

I agree with you and there was an interesting article in yesterdays Guardian that looked at Mark Twain; his story about Huckleberry Finn and what has changed since that time in the US and how the country is still struggling to solve problems based on race and that does not only involve ‘black’ people but also address problems for Hispanic or Asian parts of the population. The comments made by readers are also worthwhile to be read.

Agree but looking at some of the examples in this ad (http://www.collegehumor.com/post/6984400/is-it-just-us-or-are-these-10-toys-just-a-tad-bit-racist), I can see how people take issue but at some point reality needs to set in and going out of your way to pretend things is no way to solve racism or any other issue. In fact in the US there is a big backlash to this and causing bigotry even though it is an ignorant way to react to people trying to make you pretend and not discuss truth or obvious.

As I have pointed out in an earlier comment the chart or poster can be regarded as racist depending on which side of the fence one sits. But that is based on a personal view and not on facts. To make that poster a racist tool one has to prove that it was done intentionally and that the designer intended to discriminate against African people. Yes, the poster or chart is offensive and it shouldn’t have seen the light of the day; however that doesn’t qualify it to become the benchmark to prove that Thai people are racists in their majority as many of the commentators here suggest.

Could not have stated this better! Bravo!

[Asheron]

If you switched the faces of handsome and ugly around is it racism?

That's an interesting question.

Some theorize that racism is prejudice plus power.

So if Thailand's elite is more light skinned and it is, then not based on that theory.

I would say that it's not racist regardless of which face is on ugly.

I agree with you but ponder what kind of comments that would have produced on the forum page.

As one member put it so rightly: But nothing complicated about the message in that chart.

The message is the personal perception and not an official statement permitting anybody to read into the chart whatever they want.

The issue IMO is that "everyone" sees "racism" everywhere all the time nowadays. Just half an hour i read in a "respected" swedish news paper about "tooth racism" in the USA. As in if you don't have perfectly white and straight teeth then you are targetted by racisms... yes... it has gone that far.

[happy Joe]

This is not racism, just stupidity and ignorance .

The problem is that racism is born of stupidity and ignorance...

[Bluespunk]

If you switched the faces of handsome and ugly around is it racism?

If the thinking is to use of colour to highlight undesirable/ugly characteristics then………….yes.

"Hating people because of their color is wrong. And it doesn't matter which color does the hating. It's just plain wrong.”

― Muhammad Ali

Edited August 2, 2015 by Bluespunk

[Asheron]

If you switched the faces of handsome and ugly around is it racism?

If the thinking is to use of colour to highlight undesirable/ugly characteristics then………….yes.

"Hating people because of their color is wrong. And it doesn't matter which color does the hating. It's just plain wrong.”

― Muhammad Ali

So if you got two white guys, other one is quite tan and the other one is so white that he looks like he has never seen the sun and you think the guy that has never seen the sun is ugly... it's racism? If so, racism against who or what? Because surely you would agree that a tanned buy and non-tanned guy differs quite a lot when it comes to "color" of their skin even though they are both what is generally viewed as "white"?

[Bluespunk]

If you switched the faces of handsome and ugly around is it racism?

If the thinking is to use of colour to highlight undesirable/ugly characteristics then………….yes.

"Hating people because of their color is wrong. And it doesn't matter which color does the hating. It's just plain wrong.”

― Muhammad Ali

So if you got two white guys, other one is quite tan and the other one is so white that he looks like he has never seen the sun and you think the guy that has never seen the sun is ugly... it's racism? If so, racism against who or what? Because surely you would agree that a tanned buy and non-tanned guy differs quite a lot when it comes to "color" of their skin even though they are both what is generally viewed as "white"?

If you are going to resort to ridiculous arguments and nonsense scenarios them carry on, I won't bother reading them.

Judging someone because they are of a different ethnicity and as such have a different skin colour is racism.

It is bigotry.

It is hatred.

It is wrong.

It is the type of thinking that has led to some of the most horrific actions of the 20th and this century.

Hatred allows people to dehumanise others who may be different in some way [faith/colour/political view/nationality/whatever} and carry out the most appalling atrocities in the name of that hatred.

Edited August 2, 2015 by Bluespunk

[2alex4alex]

For me this er..er.. creature looks really ugly. But it's handsome for many Europeans.(Hope not for everybody..)Some people like fat woman. Some people like only Asian girls(as me).Different people different preferences.It's ok. But for almost every Thai dark skinned people looks ugly. Putting a pic of african as example of ugliness doesn't look polite correct at all. But if editor would put pic of some dark skinned Thai instead of black guy some students can recognize his father or uncle..

[Asheron]

If you switched the faces of handsome and ugly around is it racism?

If the thinking is to use of colour to highlight undesirable/ugly characteristics then………….yes.

"Hating people because of their color is wrong. And it doesn't matter which color does the hating. It's just plain wrong.”

― Muhammad Ali

So if you got two white guys, other one is quite tan and the other one is so white that he looks like he has never seen the sun and you think the guy that has never seen the sun is ugly... it's racism? If so, racism against who or what? Because surely you would agree that a tanned buy and non-tanned guy differs quite a lot when it comes to "color" of their skin even though they are both what is generally viewed as "white"?

If you are going to resort to ridiculous arguments and nonsense scenarios them carry on, I won't bother reading them.

Judging someone because they are of a different ethnicity and as such have a different skin colour is racism.

It is bigotry.

It is hatred.

It is wrong.

It is the type of thinking that has led to some of the most horrific actions of the 20th and this century.

Hatred allows people to dehumanise others who may be different in some way [faith/colour/political view/nationality/whatever} and carry out the most appalling atrocities in the name of that hatred.

I was just pointing (kind of) out that using the word "color" for skin as basis what's racism or not is ridiculous.

For some reason it's very common for people, especially in the west, to think that's impossible for black people to be racist against white people. It just doesn't compute in their brain.

But your "ethnicity and different skin color" doesn't explain nations such as Thailand. I know enough thais with almost as white skin as i have and the other way around and they make comments about their darker skinned "sisters and brothers" that many would say is racist but how can it possibly be racism if they both are thai?

I would dare to say that western nations (northern Europe and North America) are way WAY less racist and more tolerant than the rest of the world against "strangers".

[green job]

If you switched the faces of handsome and ugly around is it racism?

If the thinking is to use of colour to highlight undesirable/ugly characteristics then………….yes.

"Hating people because of their color is wrong. And it doesn't matter which color does the hating. It's just plain wrong.”

― Muhammad Ali

So if you got two white guys, other one is quite tan and the other one is so white that he looks like he has never seen the sun and you think the guy that has never seen the sun is ugly... it's racism? If so, racism against who or what? Because surely you would agree that a tanned buy and non-tanned guy differs quite a lot when it comes to "color" of their skin even though they are both what is generally viewed as "white"?

If you are going to resort to ridiculous arguments and nonsense scenarios them carry on, I won't bother reading them.

Judging someone because they are of a different ethnicity and as such have a different skin colour is racism.

It is bigotry.

It is hatred.

It is wrong.

It is the type of thinking that has led to some of the most horrific actions of the 20th and this century.

Hatred allows people to dehumanise others who may be different in some way [faith/colour/political view/nationality/whatever} and carry out the most appalling atrocities in the name of that hatred.

Well if you live here,you will have to put up with it. As I said before its the culture.

[Bluespunk]

If the thinking is to use of colour to highlight undesirable/ugly characteristics then………….yes.

"Hating people because of their color is wrong. And it doesn't matter which color does the hating. It's just plain wrong.”

― Muhammad Ali

So if you got two white guys, other one is quite tan and the other one is so white that he looks like he has never seen the sun and you think the guy that has never seen the sun is ugly... it's racism? If so, racism against who or what? Because surely you would agree that a tanned buy and non-tanned guy differs quite a lot when it comes to "color" of their skin even though they are both what is generally viewed as "white"?

If you are going to resort to ridiculous arguments and nonsense scenarios them carry on, I won't bother reading them.

Judging someone because they are of a different ethnicity and as such have a different skin colour is racism.

It is bigotry.

It is hatred.

It is wrong.

It is the type of thinking that has led to some of the most horrific actions of the 20th and this century.

Hatred allows people to dehumanise others who may be different in some way [faith/colour/political view/nationality/whatever} and carry out the most appalling atrocities in the name of that hatred.

I was just pointing (kind of) out that using the word "color" for skin as basis what's racism or not is ridiculous.

For some reason it's very common for people, especially in the west, to think that's impossible for black people to be racist against white people. It just doesn't compute in their brain.

But your "ethnicity and different skin color" doesn't explain nations such as Thailand. I know enough thais with almost as white skin as i have and the other way around and they make comments about their darker skinned "sisters and brothers" that many would say is racist but how can it possibly be racism if they both are thai?

I would dare to say that western nations (northern Europe and North America) are way WAY less racist and more tolerant than the rest of the world against "strangers".

I quoted Muhammad Ali in my post.

Makes it clear what I think about those who say racism is the preserve of white people.

The picture used to explain ugly was chosen because of racist thinking.

Those who discriminate against their fellow nationals because of their skin colour?

I would call them racists, but I would accept the alternative label of prejudicial ignorant contemptible bigots.

[JohnThailandJohn]

I never looked too closely at the rest of the group, I originally assumed they were all light skin Thais being this is a Thai English lesson.

I assumed the Handsome man was Asian but if we go by some of the comments here then then this is racist too since the author is basically saying Thai eyes are unattractive as is their skin color because this guys eyes are bordering on alien size and this guy is even very white for a caucasian.

The dark skinned guy I originally thought was a dark skinned Thai but now looking at the other pictures I will agree it is probably meant to represent a Black person.

The pretty girl appears to be Caucasian based on skin and hair color too unless once again they have removed Thai / Asian features.

The beautiful women appears to clearly be Caucasian based on features and eye color and should be noted besides the Ugly person, she has the darkest skin tone.

If this is racist then one has to wonder if it was done by a white ... either that or based on comments the Thai who did this is racist against his own race.

Beyond the girl being cute rather than pretty, I see no racism in this. They could have just as easily put a handsome black person and used an Asian with disproportional features and a self mutilated face. There are some people in every race who have attractive features and others who don't and are seen as ugly. It really is a stretch to believe this represents racism. It is nothing but something somebody obviously didn't put much thought into beyond coming up with some cartoon faces to match the words. If the intent was to relate these words to looks then the only way they should have done it was was simply have somebody purposely making an ugly face such as the person being described as Handsome. However there would be no way to avoid the wrath of the overly PC people or the Thai Bashers. Any inclusion of another race would be racist and if they used only Thai faces then it would be seen as xenophobic.

When stupid things like this are done by individuals, including those not caught by the group or company putting out the material, in another country it may cause outrage to some but nobody is labeling the entire country or people of that country. There is simply anger at the group or individual for being so ignorant or careless.

Edited August 2, 2015 by JohnThailandJohn

[thaimelody]

Watching the football Chelsea vs. The Arse every third ad is for some sh1t selling whitening cream. It is no less the culture as it is a business. Where do the businesses come from????

[meltingpot2015]

@GerdT:

Certainly I have read your comments otherwise it wouldn’t make much sense replying to them, and I hope we can agree on that!

The informal fallacy argument does not apply here. Racist acts do not need to occur repeatedly, for them to be racist. One classroom poster is all that is needed.

The problem I am having with that argument is: Who decides what is a racist act? Is it you or using your statistical approach a sample of the population and by which criteria has that sample been selected?

You are missing the point in all this. It doesn't take a genius to work this out...Racism is Racism. simple. It needs to stop!. Is that clear?

I don’t think that I am missing the point and on what we can agree is your statement that it doesn’t need a genius to work it out. Racism is Racism as 4 = 4 there is no argument about it. The argument starts when you fail to define Racism and plainly use the word simple because it isn’t that simple. It might be simple for you that everybody else that doesn’t agree with your view regarding the article belongs into the drawer which is labelled racist; however since university time I have made it a habit to look at problems from different angles before formulating an opinion. Does it make my stance clear?

If you are so sure that you've looked at this from all angles, you should share those with us.

The only angles I seem to read over and over (up to the point of nausea) is the same old "if you live in thailand, you have to put up with it".

I've told you my sentiments. If you have read my posts on this thread (you've clearly read all those I've made before this thread, and other sources) you would see that I mention the physical features of the "ugly" depiction and provide reasons why its inappropriate to label someone "ugly" based on lineage.

You've admitted that someone screwed-up and this should never have happened, but according to you its not a 'racist' poster because you've taken all the angles in to account. Again, what are these angles?, apart from 'if you live in thailand...', or do you take this to be the one and only gauge of what is classed as 'racist'.

You need definitions of 'racism'?. I've already made it clear. see above (from previous post) - depiction of physical features as ugly based on lineage is definitely racism. By the way, I haven't seen your definition anywhere on here. Oh!, thats right, its usually the case that when you start telling others what their responsibilities are you forget your own. By the way I don't accept that there is any semantic dispute or discord here because although we are discussing something that happened in Thailand, WE (you and I) are clearly on the same page.

Since no one has introduced it to this topic yet, I would gladly provide you the definition of Discrimination according to the meriam-webster dictionary: (I am numbering them for ease of reference)

1) the practice of unfairly treating a person or group of people differently from other people or groups of people

2) the ability to recognize the difference between things that are of good quality and those that are not

3) the ability to understand that one thing is different from another thing.

I am certain that you would say (3) and possibly (2) applies to the poster. Do you really believe only (3) and (2) applies?

You misunderstood (misinterpreted) me about the quote I made earlier:

1)Do you want to start asking 100 people if the face was really black?

I was being sarcastic. There is no need to put views in drawers, because what we have is a debate/discussion. we should allow for strong arguments to flourish. I have no personal stakes in this discussion.

From what you say it is clear that you support the view that we need to step back, look at the bigger picture, look at all the angles, then come to a conclusion. This is true for hard cases. This is not a hard case. We do not need a "is water h₂o" test here.

Water is water. Not because I say so. It is.

About your comment

since university time I have made it a habit to look at problems from different angles before formulating an opinion.

I realize you are attempting to say that if someone is educated they should look at problems from all angles. And I agree that they generally should, but not in this instance and I will elaborate why.

1) Although university educated persons are increasing generally, there is a large proportion of the population that have not gone to university.

2) Therefore you cannot expect each of these persons to cover all the angles.

Discrimination may not be clear-cut, so we may need to look at all angles. However, racism does not require this level of analysis.

The reason is when you yourself, or you see someone experiencing racism, it does not require you to do any mental calculation as to whether it is racist or not. Its as simple as water is water.

I have grown-up in a country in South Asia that USED TO BE racist both to their own people and foreigners. I have first hand experience of the destructive effects of racism. I Have also lived in a Western Country and personally experienced racism. So I have experience of the "oppressor" and the "oppressed". These personal experiences do not in any way make me an expert on the subject, only that I know it does not take an expert to detect racism.

You can try to brush it under the carpet as much as you like, but these events are not one-off events "because someone screwed-up", yes "someone screwed-up" but it also points to underlying causes. Simply brushing it under the carpet won't make them go away, they will return with their full destructive effects albeit later.

I don't think its just me that is aware of the destructive effects of racism (we should not be shy to say it, that's what it is), many of us are aware. Forgetting the past is not the solution, because those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Edited August 2, 2015 by meltingpot2015

[Aussie123]

The second guy is an ugly git, not? He's got tattoos on his face. Dont understand why this is made into a color discussion.n

lol you are just a racist brat including all the people that liked this stupid comment. He is the only black person on the cover and he is termed as BLACK!

[Aussie123]

Same reason my 18 year old M6 student told me Obama is Ugly while Kim Jong Un is way Handsome..because he has a lighter skin than Obama

[hawker9000]

I agree with you and there was an interesting article in yesterdays Guardian that looked at Mark Twain; his story about Huckleberry Finn and what has changed since that time in the US and how the country is still struggling to solve problems based on race and that does not only involve ‘black’ people but also address problems for Hispanic or Asian parts of the population. The comments made by readers are also worthwhile to be read.

Agree but looking at some of the examples in this ad (http://www.collegehumor.com/post/6984400/is-it-just-us-or-are-these-10-toys-just-a-tad-bit-racist), I can see how people take issue but at some point reality needs to set in and going out of your way to pretend things is no way to solve racism or any other issue. In fact in the US there is a big backlash to this and causing bigotry even though it is an ignorant way to react to people trying to make you pretend and not discuss truth or obvious.

As I have pointed out in an earlier comment the chart or poster can be regarded as racist depending on which side of the fence one sits. But that is based on a personal view and not on facts. To make that poster a racist tool one has to prove that it was done intentionally and that the designer intended to discriminate against African people. Yes, the poster or chart is offensive and it shouldn’t have seen the light of the day; however that doesn’t qualify it to become the benchmark to prove that Thai people are racists in their majority as many of the commentators here suggest.

"To make that poster a racist tool one has to prove that it was done intentionally and that the designer intended to discriminate"

Is it not possible for someone to be a racist or a bigot and be so thoroughly indoctrinated and culturally from birth accepting of it as to not be aware of it or think of their behavior as racist?

And another question: how can you possibly suggest that someone who designs a poster on which a white face is labeled "handsome" and a black face labeled "ugly" isn't depicting discrimination based on color? It would be hard to imagine anything more overtly discriminatory! Clearly, in attempting to explain the English words "handsome" and "ugly", the designer used skin color as the discriminator.

[cumgranosalum]

I agree with you and there was an interesting article in yesterdays Guardian that looked at Mark Twain; his story about Huckleberry Finn and what has changed since that time in the US and how the country is still struggling to solve problems based on race and that does not only involve ‘black’ people but also address problems for Hispanic or Asian parts of the population. The comments made by readers are also worthwhile to be read.

Agree but looking at some of the examples in this ad (http://www.collegehumor.com/post/6984400/is-it-just-us-or-are-these-10-toys-just-a-tad-bit-racist), I can see how people take issue but at some point reality needs to set in and going out of your way to pretend things is no way to solve racism or any other issue. In fact in the US there is a big backlash to this and causing bigotry even though it is an ignorant way to react to people trying to make you pretend and not discuss truth or obvious.

As I have pointed out in an earlier comment the chart or poster can be regarded as racist depending on which side of the fence one sits. But that is based on a personal view and not on facts. To make that poster a racist tool one has to prove that it was done intentionally and that the designer intended to discriminate against African people. Yes, the poster or chart is offensive and it shouldn’t have seen the light of the day; however that doesn’t qualify it to become the benchmark to prove that Thai people are racists in their majority as many of the commentators here suggest.

"To make that poster a racist tool one has to prove that it was done intentionally and that the designer intended to discriminate"

Is it not possible for someone to be a racist or a bigot and be so thoroughly indoctrinated and culturally from birth accepting of it as to not be aware of it or think of their behavior as racist?

And another question: how can you possibly suggest that someone who designs a poster on which a white face is labeled "handsome" and a black face labeled "ugly" isn't depicting discrimination based on color? It would be hard to imagine anything more overtly discriminatory! Clearly, in attempting to explain the English words "handsome" and "ugly", the designer used skin color as the discriminator.

In my experience most racists end up spending a lot of time denying they are racist.

Racism is a product of ignorance and fear........intention to discriminate is often subliminal - only a racist could look at that chart an argue it isn't racist.

Edited August 3, 2015 by cumgranosalum

[soalbundy]

The second guy is an ugly git, not? He's got tattoos on his face. Dont understand why this is made into a color discussion.n

lol you are just a racist brat including all the people that liked this stupid comment. He is the only black person on the cover and he is termed as BLACK!

So what ! We are all different we all have different likes and dislikes, i dislike conformists like you for instance sqauwking away like like some caged parrot which has learnt its lessons well

[newnative]

So many of you are totally missing the point. You are all expressing what YOU think, and that is fine. One of you thought that the dark skinned man was 'an ugly git'. I repeat, that is fine for YOUR OPINION. I personally think tattoos are very ugly but that is just MY opinion--I know many people find them beautiful and consider then a form of art. Individuals will always have their own opinions on what they like or dislike, what they think is beautiful or ugly. However, here we have an educational system making a blanket declaration that a white skinned person is 'handsome' and a dark skinned person is 'ugly'. That is offensive and wrong. And, yes, it would be just as wrong if they had reversed the pictures and declared the white skinned man 'ugly'.

[johng]

Wait until you see the P5 Social Studies book that has the fat, broke and smelly falang scaring a Thai family at a restaurant.

this one ?

[Howitzer]

Wait until you see the P5 Social Studies book that has the fat, broke and smelly falang scaring a Thai family at a restaurant.

this one ?

farang 0.jpg

farang 1.jpg

farang 2.jpg

This is funny!!

[Asheron]

As I have pointed out in an earlier comment the chart or poster can be regarded as racist depending on which side of the fence one sits. But that is based on a personal view and not on facts. To make that poster a racist tool one has to prove that it was done intentionally and that the designer intended to discriminate against African people. Yes, the poster or chart is offensive and it shouldn’t have seen the light of the day; however that doesn’t qualify it to become the benchmark to prove that Thai people are racists in their majority as many of the commentators here suggest.

"To make that poster a racist tool one has to prove that it was done intentionally and that the designer intended to discriminate"

Is it not possible for someone to be a racist or a bigot and be so thoroughly indoctrinated and culturally from birth accepting of it as to not be aware of it or think of their behavior as racist?

And another question: how can you possibly suggest that someone who designs a poster on which a white face is labeled "handsome" and a black face labeled "ugly" isn't depicting discrimination based on color? It would be hard to imagine anything more overtly discriminatory! Clearly, in attempting to explain the English words "handsome" and "ugly", the designer used skin color as the discriminator.

In my experience most racists end up spending a lot of time denying they are racist.

Racism is a product of ignorance and fear........intention to discriminate is often subliminal - only a racist could look at that chart an argue it isn't racist.

I'm sure you are denying that you're a paedophile right? Well, with your logic... well..

Maybe it's time for you to go take that high school diploma (that you admitted not having) and then take a few courses at university. Preferably in the west.