Dutch fashion magazine Jackie recently published a feature on how to copy Rihanna‘s style–this makes sense because Rihanna’s a risk taker who always looks like herself and sometimes manages to do so in Jean Paul Gaultier couture. However, the copy that accompanies all this Rihanna-inspired merchandise goes like this:

She has street cred, she has a ghetto ass and she has a golden throat. Rihanna, the good girl gone bad, is the ultimate n***abitch and she displays that gladly — for her that means what’s on can come off. If that means she’ll be on stage half naked, then so be it. But Dutch winters aren’t like Jamaican [ed. note: Rihanna is actually Barbadian, not Jamaican] ones, so pick a clothing style in which your daughter can resist minus ten [temperatures]. No to the big sunglasses and the pornheels, and yes to the tiger print, pink ‘shizzle,’ and everything that glitters. Now let’s hope she won’t beat anybody up at daycare.

Whoa! That… is… crazy. On at least three levels, right? First, there’s the use of that horrible term. Then there’s the casual, almost cutesy (?) Jamaica/Barbadian gaffe. Third, how old are these daughters?

Anyway, the glossy’s EIC Eva Hoeke posted the below apology on the magazine’s Facebook page:

First: thanks for all your responses. We are of course very fed up over this and especially very
shocked. However I’m glad that we’re engaging in a dialogue on this page — not everybody does
that. Thanks for this. Other than that I can be brief about this: this should have never happened.

While the author meant no harm — the title of the article was intended as a joke — it was a bad joke, to say the least. And that slipped through my, the editor-in-chief’s, fingers. Stupid, painful and sucks for all concerned. The author has been addressed on it, and now I can only ensure that these terms will no longer end up in the magazine. [tagbox tag=”racism”]

Furthermore I hope that you all believe there was absolutely no racist motive behind the choice of words. It was stupid, it was naive to think that this was an acceptable form of slang — you hear it all the time on tv and radio, then your idea of what is normal apparently shifts — but it was especially misguided: there was no malice behind it. We make our magazine with love, energy and enthusiasm, and it can sometimes happen that someone is out of line. And then you can only do one thing: apologize. And hope that others wish to accept it.

They’re also, apparently, chalking it up to bad Google translating. Yikes.