you be the judge:
you be the judge:
Adidas would just like to thank all the racebaiters for all the free publicity...
Looks like something to wear for Halloween
Does this have anything to do with the Juneteenth thread?
Creating a controversy to sell a $#@!ty product - not a very original idea.
One things for sure, they're butt ugly
They aren't racist, but they are freaking stupid
I get that they have shackles, and that black slaves wore shackles, but it's not as though shackles were work only by slaves. Shackles have been used throughout history and across civilizations as a way to control captives. I don't understand why people assume that a stylistic shackle is suggestive of slavery in particular.
UPDATE: Tonight Adidas contacted us with an update on the status of the JS Roundhouse Mid sneaker. Their new statement is below.
"Since the shoe debuted on our Facebook page ahead of its market release in August, Adidas has received both favorable and critical feedback. We apologize if people are offended by the design and we are withdrawing our plans to make them available in the marketplace."
controversy averted. Thanks for the attention
1. They are probably one of the most power symbols of slavery in America that one can conjur.
2. They are symbols of the types of chaingangs used by southern prison systems in the early 20th century. These chaingangs consisted (or are at least perceived to consist, I don't really know) largely of black prisoners.
3. They are symbols of modern imprisonment - particularly when prisoners are being transported - and many people believe that the justice system targets black people for imprisonment.
You don't have to agree with any of those sentiments but you'd have to be pretty obtuse not to understand why others may consider the shoes to be racist. I'm a white suburbanite since birth and I get it.
New version will come with a 7-year guarantee. Calling them the Adidas "indentured servant".
Last edited by slorch; 06-19-2012 at 11:00 AM.
3. They are symbols of modern imprisonment
.................................................. ....^ They would complete the look.
I find it kinda ironic...since most of their target audience is 'slaves' to over priced shoes that are not really in their budgets.
I can afford a $100 pair of shoes...I just don't own any.
however, a guy that comes in our office for his breathalizer has a new pair of jordans on every time he comes in was just arrested because he couldnt afford his 55 dollar payment for his probation.
while he was locked up his wife got into a car accident and the ins co. totaled their car out, then mailed a massive 750$ check to them. he didn't put that towards a car, he bought 3 pairs of jordans
Do they make a special orthopedic model for dudes named Toby?
I've had the same pair of sneakers for ten years. They only get worn when I take the kids to an amusement park or some such (they look really good with black socks). The day I pay over $100 for sneakers is the day I remarry a stripper. I'm sorry, but what kind of a regarded $#@!tard would wear those shoes. I know get off my lawn.
This is a trick. Everyone knows Toby had his foot cut off, thus only needing one shoe. Not racist.
Last edited by Bevo Num1; 06-19-2012 at 01:14 PM.
All we care about is hairstyles and tennis shoes.
Those things will be worth a fortune one day, assuming they actually made a few.
On the other hand...Georgia, 1901...
Chain gangs were another form of slavery under Jim Crow, only this time to do the bidding of Southern states and the personal bidding of local political bosses at the municipal and county level at zero costs.
Adidas cancels 'shackle' shoes after outcry
German sports apparel maker Adidas has withdrawn its plans to sell a controversial sneaker featuring affixed rubber shackles after the company generated significant criticism when advertising the shoe on its Facebook page."The design of the JS Roundhouse Mid is nothing more than the designer Jeremy Scott's outrageous and unique take on fashion and has nothing to do with slavery," the statement said. "We apologize if people are offended by the design and we are withdrawing our plans to make them available in the marketplace."
Our neckties look like a noose, but nothing was meant by it.
Georgia, 1920s & 1930s:
6/25/29: "Escaped Convict Becomes Publisher of Chicago Magazine"Robert Elliott Burns (May 10, 1892 – June 5, 1955) was a World War I veteran who gained notoriety after escaping from a Georgia chain gang and writing his memoirs exposing the cruelty and injustice of the chain gang system.
He was born in Palisades, New Jersey, and served in World War I as a medic. Upon his return from Europe, he was unable to recover the wage he was earning in his job and became a drifter, which is how he eventually ended up in Atlanta, Georgia in 1922. Burns was convicted of joining two other men in the armed robbery of a grocery store, which netted the trio $5.81 and got Burns sentenced to 6 to 10 years of hard labor.
Burns escaped from the chain gang with the help of another inmate who struck his restraints with a sledgehammer, bending and weakening them. He was able to escape the eyes of the guards on the pretense of a two-minute bathroom break in the trees. After evading capture, Burns made his way to Chicago, where he eventually became the editor and publisher of Greater Chicago Magazine. During his stay in Chicago, he became involved with a Spanish woman named Emily del Phino Pacheo, from whom he rented a room. Eventually he married her when she threatened to betray him to the local police.
Seven years later, he sought a divorce in order to marry Lillian Salo, whom he professed to love. Del Phino Pacheo had made an agreement with him, but the same day she betrayed him to the authorities. Owing to his status in the community, many people helped him fight extradition to Georgia, but he surprised everyone by agreeing to return to Georgia, basing his decision on a verbal promise from state prison officials that he would serve no more than 90 days of "easy" time.
Burns returned to Georgia in July 1929 to finish his prison term. He soon realized that his 45 to 90 days had turned into at least 12 months of hard labor. They had tortured him even more than before. He served a brief stint in Campbell County, where he was, according to his book, treated "intelligently and fairly". Burns later implied he was denied the promised parole after 45 days and had his term lengthened because he did not have $500 with which to pay off the parole board. After several failed attempts at parole, on September 4, 1930, Burns again escaped. He had waited until he had earned enough of the guards' trust that he could obtain the privilege of not being chained. He then paid off a local farmer with money he had received from his brother in Newark and headed to New Jersey.
Burns could not duplicate his Chicago success in New Jersey because of the Great Depression and took on odd jobs around New Jersey for a few years, all the while writing his autobiography. Burns was rearrested in Newark late in 1932, but the governor of New Jersey refused to extradite him since his book and a movie had been released and public opinion was firmly against the idea. The governor of Georgia pardoned him in 1945, and Burns lived as a free man until his death from cancer in 1955. His book and the movie are largely credited with the abolition of the chain gang system in the South.
12/16/30 (Advertisement for "True Detective Mysteries"): "PRAY FOR ME!" "The most astounding document of human woes ever published -- written from hiding by Robert Elliott Burns, who at this very moment has a price on his head."
12/17/32: "Chain Gang Warden Arrives With Papers to Take Burns Back to Prison in the South"
1/6/33: "Chain Gang Wardens Sue Film Companies"
3/16/36: "Trustees Oust Burns From Palisade Church" ["The Rev. Vincent G. Burns, brother of Robert Elliott Burns, Georgia chain gang fugitive, stood today on the contention that he will 'never under any circumstances surrender' to the trustees who ousted him as pastor of the Union church of Palisade."]
8/7/37: "SEEKS FELON'S RETURN; Georgia Governor to Invoke Federal Law for Extradition"
6/7/38: "Chain Gang Fugitive Sued by His Brother" [..."Although the book was signed by Robert Elliott Burns, Rev Mr. Burns alleges he wrote it from his brother's notes and was to receive half the proceeds."]
12/22/43: "Georgia Refuses Pardon to Chain Gang Fugitive"
11/2/45 (NYT): "Georgia Frees Burns 'Fugitive From Chain Gang' After 23 Years; Board Hears Him and Governor Arnall Telling of Exemplary Life Since Robbery, and Lets Him Off on Time Served" ["commuted to time served his twenty-three-year-old robbery sentence of six to ten years"]
Trailer for "I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang" (1932)
Plot Spoiler:...In the end, Allen visits Helen in the shadows on the street and tells her he is leaving forever. She asks, "Can't you tell me where you're going? Will you write? Do you need any money?" James repeatedly shakes his head in answer as he backs away. Finally Helen says, "But you must, Jim. How do you live?" In the film's final line and shot James, unseen in the darkness, replies, "I steal." The line is among the most famous closing lines in American film.
........The chain gang started in Georgia in 1908 and was envisioned as a progressive penal reform movement, the direct consequence of the ending of the convict lease system, as well as public demand for improved transportation. Chain gangs flourished throughout the South and by the 1920s and 1930s chained prisoners, mostly black, became a common sight along southern roadways. Georgia grasped the economic and social benefits of the chain gang, which soon developed into the “good roads movement.” “Bad boys,” a Georgia folk saying went, “make good roads.”
...The race factor, for the most part, enhanced the enthusiasm for the chain gang as there was overwhelming white support for the good roads movement. The tragic plight of the black lawbreaker, however, was not diminished by the shift from the lease system to county chain gangs. To a southern black prisoner there was little difference between his situation as a slave on the plantation, as a leased convict forced to toil in the coal mine, or as a chained prison worker on the roads. The chained southern black man on the southern county road had been transformed from the plantation owner’s chattel into a “slave of the state.”
Georgia’s reform efforts merely shifted the atrocities from the private to the public sector. For southern whites the chain gang had much of the attraction of the legacy of slavery. The state now became the actual master responsible for the welfare of a growing pool of forced black labor. Black prisoners labored and even slept together, with chains fastened through their feet and around their ankles. Their rations were infested with maggots. With an armed white overseer, the black convict slaved from sunup to sundown. Brutalities, corporal punishments (beatings with a leather strap, thumpings with rifle butts and clubs) and outright torture, were commonplace. Major atrocities, such as the staking treatment (chaining an inmate between stakes and pouring molasses over his body while flies, bees and other insects crawled all over him); the sweat box treatment (locking a prisoner for days into a wooden box that was neither high enough to stand nor deep enough to sit, while temperatures exceeded one hundred degrees); and the Georgia rack (stretching the inmate between two hooks with a cable and a turn crank) were all meted out for the most trivial disobedience.
Chain gangs had a brief existence, as economic forces played a central role in their demise. During the Great Depression, as jobs became scarce, criticism was heard that convict chain gangs took work that rightfully belonged to free labor. The government stopped providing federal funds to finance roads built using convict labor. Enthusiasm for chain gangs also decreased as the number of white convicts on the roads increased. By the 1940s, chain gangs had almost vanished. The last few chained prisoners were pulled off the roads when Georgia finally eliminated the practice in the early 1960s.
The media contributed significantly to the practice’s demise. Films ranging from Meryn LeRoy’s graphic expose, I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang (1932) to Stuart Rosenberg’s Cool Hand Luke (1967) showed the atrocities of the system. As shameful as the abuses chronicled in the movies were, they could not capture the raw vivid details of everyday life suffered by black convicts on the chain gang. Prisoners were restrained at all times with heavy chains that were riveted around their ankles and were only removed (by a chisel) when the convict was released. At night another long chain was run between his legs, so that every man was connected to every other man, and no one was able to go to the toilet (a hole in the floor) without waking everybody on the chain gang. In the movies, the protagonists were mostly white, while in reality, the racial composition of the chain gangs were disproportionately African American. It took white actors, however, to generate a national scandal and shame a mostly Caucasian audience.
Chain Gangs - Roads, Black, Southern, and Convict - JRank Articles http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/articl...#ixzz1yH6311TB
Last edited by zzzz; 06-19-2012 at 04:56 PM.
"During the Great Depression, as jobs became scarce, criticism was heard that convict chain gangs took work that rightfully belonged to free labor."
unusual choice of words, when it comes to "free labor."
Adidas should stick with safer themes, like Vans did
Since this thread has been derailed.
Pulitzer worthy photos.
reason #277389390484094004043902828272 that cigarettes suck.
Gettin water over here, boss!
Sent using my telekinesis.
Football .. Basketball .. Baseball .. Other Sports .. RC Didn't Offer .. Gamboool
Varsity .. Hole in the Wall .. PCL .. Einstein's .. Nasty's .. GM Steakhouse .. NSAA
Bada Bing .. Can you help me with this? .. Shagslist .. Cloak Room .. Classics .. Bellmont