Pretty much everything is offensive to somebody, somewhere. If you shut things down because a few people claim offense there will be nothing left! The threshold for censorship needs to be much higher than was demonstrated in this case.
Maybe Noseall genuinely does not have a personal opinion about the shirt, but maybe he is able to see others' point of view, which your are clearly unable to do.And you just had to agree with those who thought it offensive, didn't you, otherwise you'd be defending the aforementioned t shirt.. Admit it Nosey, that t shirt gets right up your nose.
If I am offended, it is my right to express that opinion. Ian Lucraft had that right, and exercised it. he has been demonised for it (by the populist right on other websites), despite his opinion being shared by many others.You surely can't argue that there is a lot more treading on eggshells these days about racism and what is PC, which is not necessarily a bad thing, but at the same time folk are so quick to be offended. It seems a lot of common sense has gone out the window.
Racism is not universal, it is contextual.What is a 'toxic product'? Does anyone really believe that a TV corporation with a public image to maintain would approve the design of a T-shirt representing one of its most popular shows, if it was racist? Would stores across America stock it if it was racist? Why did Primark stock it in the first place unless they too considered it not racist? Can something be 'accidentally' racist? Why is it only considered racist here and not in its home country -surely racism is universal?
I'm offended by you, quite a few others are as well, should we ban you?
Empty threats then?I wouldn't ban you wannabenormal,
By one man. Even among people who weren't aware of the TV conext (me included) it still does not appear racist. I suspect you have to be above a certain age to see a connection to the N-word.it was NOT offensive in the context of a TV programme. Outside of that specific context, it was considered offensive.
Or alternatively when you start labeling others as PC Brigade, perpetually offended, libertards, lefties, etc, you are trying to stifle debate.So you keep saying, but that is irrelevant. I'm offended by Justin Bieber, and I know others who are too, but I don't expect him to be removed from sale to satisfy our marginal opinion. Having an opinion doesn't mean anything. It's when you use an opinion as an excuse to censor others that the debate begins.
Alternatively, which you so readily preemptively dismiss, perhaps the others were simply not aware of the shirt. Only when they became aware of it, and were asked their opinion, did they agree with Ian.What people? if you're talking about the newspaper polls then that only happened after the fact. At the time, he was the only person who complained.
By your resorting to categorising others as libertards, lefties, PC Brigade, perpetually offended, etc, your actions belie your words. You appear to be trying to stifle debate.I'm all for debate.
I think you are venturing into absurdity now, threatening that if we recognise some things as offensive, then everything must be offensive.Pretty much everything is offensive to somebody, somewhere. If you shut things down because a few people claim offense there will be nothing left! The threshold for censorship needs to be much higher than was demonstrated in this case.
Nuff said?By one man. Even among people who weren't aware of the TV conext (me included) it still does not appear racist. I suspect you have to be above a certain age to see a connection to the N-word.
But they are not here to be debated so there is no harm in labelling them. You are here.Or alternatively when you start labeling others as PC Brigade, perpetually offended, libertards, lefties, etc, you are trying to stifle debate.
And as the polls show, they were still in the tiny minority. So what is your point? That the opinion of a tiny minority should dictate the policy of the majority?Only when they became aware of it, and were asked their opinion, did they agree with Ian.
It usually is the minority who are discriminated against. Did you not realise that?And as the polls show, they were still in the tiny minority. So what is your point? That the opinion of a tiny minority should dictate the policy of the majority?
Quite right, but in this case Primark acted after one complaint, and it wasn't even from the supposedly opressed minority. Ian has no idea whether a black person "would know just where I stood." He is putting words into the mouths of others.It is the responsibility of the majority to hear the opinion of the minority and include them, not to ignore them because they are the minority!
Quite right, but in this case Primark acted after one complaint,
I'd consider almost anything to be superior to you.If you consider your obscene, incestuous comments to be superior...................
If that includes making obscene incestuous comments, then your opinion is not worth considering and you are welcome to it.I'd consider almost anything to be superior to you.