Blogging While Black-Doll Collecting

The recent occurrence of white people calling the police on black people for basically attempting to enjoy life has led to monikers, memes, and social media shaming for these 911 callers.  A few of  the monikers are described below:

1. Barbecue Becky:  Called police on African American people for barbecuing in an Oakland, California park.
2. Golf Cart Gail:  Called police on a father for cheering on his son at a soccer game (the claim was that he yelled at the referee).  Insert a pair of rolling eyes here.
3. Permit Patty:  Called police on a young African American girl for selling water on a hot summer day in San Francisco.
4. I am not sure if this one was memed or monikered, but social media shaming ensued for the woman who called the police on an African American man who was attempting to enter his own apartment. 

The memes and monikers might be funny to some but the act of calling the police on black people in America for doing trivial, nonharmful things, or for just going about their daily routine of living is no laughing matter.  Ask the countless loved ones who still grieve the loss of their unarmed family members who lost their lives at the hands of police.

The title of this blog results from an email I received from Google claiming that a page of my blog is in violation of one of their policies and therefore this [particular feature] has been suspended from the page in question until I "fix" it.  The URL they provided of the page in question is the home page of my blog, where in my opinion, there is nothing to "fix"!  But maybe they feel the entire blog is in violation.

They described the violation as follows:

Dangerous or derogatory content

As stated in our Program policies, Google ads may not be placed on pages or apps that contain content that:

• Threatens or advocates for harm on oneself or others;
• Harasses, intimidates or bullies an individual or group of individuals;
• Incites hatred against, promotes discrimination of, or disparages an individual or group on the basis of their race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, age, nationality, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or other characteristic that is associated with systemic discrimination or marginalization.

Home Page Image by Son of Ellis

In light of the most recent Gucci sweater blackface insult, could the little boy doll above with the wide smile and red lips be considered offensive?  He obviously wasn't offensive in the 1940s when his image and similar black dolls' images were printed on fabric and sold for consumers to cut and sew.  I am sure that nine out of ten of the people who cut and sewed this character were not black.

For the past several years, my home page has contained the above graphic art headshot image of me surrounded by a selection of vintage-to-modern black dolls from my collection.  Yes, these are actual dolls that I own.  The title on the home page, "Black Doll Collecting" has never changed.  The last three published blogs, the first of which was Simple Justice at the time the violation notification was received, are also always visible on the home page.  The sidebar feature is visible to those who view the blog on nonmobile devices.  It contains my notice of copyright, a search feature, a translation feature, tracking for recent blog visitors, links to previous blogs, links to a featured blog post, popular blog posts, and other doll-related links.

I immediately thought the offensive matter was my coverage of the movie, Simple Justice, which is a detailed account of Justice Thurgood Marshall's Brown v the Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas defeat. This case ruled that school desegregation was unconstitutional.  I felt coverage of the documentary was blogworthy because dolls were used to prove that segregation made black children feel inferior to white children.  The post was all about the dolls.  My posts are always all about the dolls that I love that just happen to be black like me.  If this is deemed offensive, I need to find a new blog host because I will not be censored.

This has made me feel like a victim of blogging while black-doll collecting.  Just like the unjustified 911 calls on innocent people should end, this sort of nonsensical reporting and restriction should, too.  Twice before, specific posts on this blog were cited for nudity or sexual content because the posts included photos of undressed dolls.  The dolls were nude only to better illustrate their articulation.  Whoever reported the posts probably did not read the content before the report was made.  Had they done so they would have understood the reason the dolls were unclothed.  Google cited the pages for containing sexual content.  I requested reviews for both those posts.  Those reviews ended in my favor.  So why was a warning issued at all?

I requested a review of this most recent citation and now await their decision on whether or not they continue to feel my blog or a specific page of it is dangerous, derogatory, or any of the other reasons outlined in the bullets above.

Here's hoping that the review of whatever has been deemed inappropriate this time results in my favor.  If not, I'll explore other blog hosting sites.  Please stay tuned.

__________

2/13/2019 10:44 a.m. CST  The results of the requested review of this violation citation can be read here.

dbg

There is always something to collect and write about. Black dolls chose me.
__________
Thank you for following, commenting, and sharing using the share button below.

Check out what I am selling here. 
Check out my eBay listings here.
Please follow my sister blog Ebony-Essence of Dolls in Black.
Donate here to support this blog. Thank you!