Yeah. That sign is so clearly a modern typeface that it’s jarring.
I don’t think that’s really fair. Every society puts on a face that is different than the way the society acts. Just because lynchings, etc, were common in the South 1880-1950 doesn’t mean the society operated overtly in an undignified manner. While I wasn’t alive then, it’s my impression that society existed in an orderly “know your place” manner, and no black needed to be told by such a crude sign that he was considered inferior by many (most?) whites.
Why is it unfair? There is plenty of evidence that the social order was enforced on a regular basis with lynchings and other overt acts to make it explicit what the rules were to anyone who might try to violate them. Those lynching photographs prove the point. People were proud of what they were doing and they wanted others to see it.
An “undignified manner”? I’m really at a loss. We know what went on back then, from a person-to-person perspective and in the public eye. Segregation was a political, spiritual, and physical brutality that was enforced in public, not merely by a genteel, “dignified” implied social structure. Yes, maybe your Savannah blue-blood didn’t have to put up “no negros or dogs” signs on the toilets in their mansions, but enforcement of the social order in less rarified society was not so subtle.
In pubs in England you used to get signs saying:
No Blacks
No Dogs
No Irish
There was a dentist in Lake Village, Arkansas that had two seperate office doors right next to each other clearly labelled Colored and White. This was in the late 60s, early 70s. Also, at that time, you could still see the darker rectangular areas where those signs had been over water fountains in the Court House. (My uncle, the sheriff, told me that’s what they used to be. They were taken down in '64, I think).
When I was a kid, I knew of a laundromat in Dardanelle, AR, that informally didn’t allow blacks, still, in the mid-70s. There wasn’t a sign, but for some reason, there didn’t need to be. It was run by a really mean old guy who died shortly thereafter.
Ick. 
These things were definitely real. I believe there’s some real ones in the Smthsonian Museum of American History. They have a section of the historic Greensboro lunch counter there.
I think we have to distinguish between whether such a sign as “NO/dog, Negros, Mexicans” ever existed and what they were used for.
I pesonally think the sign reproduced in the website was a modern reproduction. But that doesn’t mean that such a sign didn’t exist.
There probably was such a sign, and it was cardboard, and it was placed in the window of an apartment or house renting rooms in a border(Mexican) state in the South. It just meant that they didn’t want to rent to blacks, Mexicans, or anyone who had a dog. BFD.
I would doubt that there were signs placed in bars, restaurants, etc. in the US that said “NO dogs, Mexicans, Negros, etc.” It just didn’t happen. If you think they exist and were placed in establishments of commerce other than lodging, then good luck hunting. Show us the proof.
Add me to the list of the highly skeptical.
The sign probably did exist in private rentals situations, along with signs saying no smokers, no drinkers, no gamblers and no anything-else-that-someone-considered-undesirable. We can debate the morality of it elsewhere, but to this day people regularly advertise for females or even white Christian females for housemates so it’s hardly surprising that people did so in the past.
But I won’t beleive it ever existed as commerically printed signs in biusinesses without a lot of evidence.
It has uncanny similarities to an almost identical UL in China.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v15/v15n5p31_Weber.html
You can find plenty of other websites adrssing that particular Chinese verison of this UL.
The story being almost identical whether it refers to “no dogs or niggers” in America, “no dogs or Irish” in England, “no dogs or Chinese” in China or “No dogs or boongs” in Australia is the biggest hint that this is an UL. The really amazing thing is that in all cases mass produced reproductions of the sign have been sold to people eager for ‘evidence’ of the evils of the past.
It’s an UL by the duck test until someone produces come evidence.
BTW, many of these signs on those websites have dates stamped on them. Not copyright dates or law dates or anything, just dates. Why would a sign have a date like “June 1942” or “May 1926”?
FYI: I can personally assert that Black Americana items are a huge collector’s market–bigger than many people think. As such, there are many, many fakes & reproductions floating around. However, it’s good to remember that all those reproductions were based on originals–that’s why collectors buy reproductions–they think they’re buying the original.
Not only did you not address the OP at all, it looks like you didn’t read any of the responses either. The first picture in your last cite may well be a reproduction.
My grandma’s story was told to me when I was a child. It could well be that she never saw one of these signs but was repeating something that she heard. In any event, I always pictured them as handmade signs on a piece of paper or cardboard as samclem hypothesized.
I could see how a “Colored Only” sign would be mass produced because it would be nailed to a wall and expected to last for years. A sign for a rental would only be needed for a week or two and then not again for maybe months. This lends itself more to something homemade. One would think, though, that there would be a picture of one of these signs somewhere.
Cite please.
I would dearly love to see a reputable reference that all reproductions of this type are based on originals, and not simply faux-reproductions. And of course if you can produce any such evidence you have answered the question.
Please dont link to anti-semitic nazi nutjobs.
As blake said so well, there’s no evidence that these “reproductions” are based on real signs.
In the world of collectible political buttons, there were fakes created in the 1970’s that were of buttons that never existed. In the world of coins, we call these “fantasies.”
Many of the modern tin signs for all kinds of products are “fantasies.” Such a thing never existed.
If these existed as real signs, there should be photographic evidence. Photography was around in the US Civil War, and signs such as “No coloreds or dogs” wouldn’t have been used until after the Civil War. Where is the photo evidence of these signs being used back then?
I see your point and wouldn’t drag you to the Pit for it. But I have seen old signs - especially from the early 1930’s - with san serif fonts (though admittedly more Deco in appearance than Helvetica.) San serif fonts were also quite common in letterpress-printed handbills and advertising going back as far as the 1890’s.
Show us a picture.
There’s a very similar story here in Toronto that was very popular a few years back, that public beaches had signs reading “No Dogs or Jews.” This story flared to life in the 80s and you still see it repeated now and then, but to my knowledge, nobody has ever been able to find a photograph of such a sign.
The amazing similarity between these tales - the signs are always “No dogs or (insent group” - suggest they’re mostly baloney.
I’m having trouble figuring out if some of y’all just don’t believe the particular signs linked in this thread aren’t real or if you actually don’t believe signs like that existed at all.
If you know any black people of a certain age, you can most certainly get confirmation. If anyone really thinks those kind of things never existed, then you’re worse than holocaust deniers. I really don’t think that’s the case, though, at least I hope not.
Well, judging by the evidence presented thus far, I am skeptical of the existence of mass-produced signs that said “No Dogs, No [insert ethnic group].” See samclem’s first post for clarification. The “Colored/White” signs I believe–there’s plenty of photographic evidence for that.
Let’s make sure we’re on the same page.
I think all of the players in this discussion would agree that there were real signs in the past that said “Colored—White,” signs that said “White only” and signs that said things of this kind. I was there in the 1940’s and 1950’s. I’m white, but I damn well noticed them.
What is being argued is about signs that specifically include the word “dog” in combination with groups of excluded people, “Negros” “Mexicans” “Jews” etc.
Almost all of us think that signs that included the “dog” reference would apply to housing situations ONLY.
…and now I just realized that I took up a lot of bandwidth to say exactly what pulykamell just said. :o
I know that “WHITES ONLY,” “BLACKS/COLORED/NEGROS ONLY,” and similar signs existed. There’s plenty of photographic proof and firsthand sightings. It was the Jim Crow era, after all, and there were “separate but equal” bathrooms, waiting rooms, public accomodations and so on; without sich signs, there would be no way to identify them. There is also a brisk trade in bad reproductions of such signs, as well as other racist memorabilia of the era, for collectors of black Americana.
I have a very difficult time believing that mass produced or professionally custom-made “NO DOGS OR [ETHNIC GROUP] ALLOWED” signs ever existed, though. There has been no photographic proof so far. Most evidence seems to take the form of what would normally be associated with an urban legend; second-hand accounts, FOAF, anecdotal stories, “well, it could have happened,” and similar tales from around the world. There’s reproductions of such signs, but most of them are flawed and obviously fake; for example, using modern typefaces, or including printed dates that normally aren’t seen on stock signs. As others have said, there’s been no evidence presented so far that such signs are based on something that actually existed. Maybe some hicks displayed a handwritten sign like that in the window of a bar or private club, but I doubt that Ace Sign Printing of Macon, Georgia churned them out by the thousands, or even tens.
There’s no denying that the Jim Crow era existed, and that it was an ugly time in America’s higtory; the effects of the time, and its de facto and de jure discrimination and segregation, linger to this day and will continue to do so for decades, if not centuries, into the future. Nobody here is denying that lynchings, separate accomodations, and overt racism ever took place; there’s no “Jim Crow revisionists” in this thread. However, I doubt the existence of professionally made “NO DOGS OR [ETHNIC GROUP” signs from the era, or similar signs from other countries. It’s like alien anal probes, the face on Cydonia, and the silhouette of the Virgin of Guadalupe burned into in a tortilla; we want to believe. I do too, but I have to have more than my gut feeling that “it could have happened” to go on.
Massive simulpost. samclem and pulykamell both said it more eloquently.