Political Correctness strikes again (Pt 7 .. No Sex Dolls in School)
- Thread starter bearfan
- Start date
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
Re: Political Correctness strikes again (Mark Twain)
I like Bill Cosby (more for his message than his comedy -- never cared for the Cosby show, but have a few of his records). Yeah, Cosby should be King
But to the word in question, that is how the book was written in the time and it reflected the time. I think it is also stupid the way DW Griffith's works are ignored because they had some really bad racial overtones in them by today's standards, should we just take Birth of a Nation and edit out the KKK? Take Triumph of the Will and edit out the Swasticas? Sanitizing history is, IMO, the surest path to re-living history.
I would think reading Huck Finn, besides being a good story, could open up a fair amount of discussion about the time and race if people would allow the discussion to happen without throwing the race card around so quickly. I guess I am sick of people being offending, it is just nut, 100 years from now (I hope), people will look back at this time and say, "Jeez, what a bunch of fiucking pussies"
I like Bill Cosby (more for his message than his comedy -- never cared for the Cosby show, but have a few of his records). Yeah, Cosby should be King
But to the word in question, that is how the book was written in the time and it reflected the time. I think it is also stupid the way DW Griffith's works are ignored because they had some really bad racial overtones in them by today's standards, should we just take Birth of a Nation and edit out the KKK? Take Triumph of the Will and edit out the Swasticas? Sanitizing history is, IMO, the surest path to re-living history.
I would think reading Huck Finn, besides being a good story, could open up a fair amount of discussion about the time and race if people would allow the discussion to happen without throwing the race card around so quickly. I guess I am sick of people being offending, it is just nut, 100 years from now (I hope), people will look back at this time and say, "Jeez, what a bunch of fiucking pussies"
Re: Political Correctness strikes again (Mark Twain)
someone famous said that. Can't remember who. And I agree 100%bearfan said:I like Bill Cosby (more for his message than his comedy -- never cared for the Cosby show, but have a few of his records). Yeah, Cosby should be King
But to the word in question, that is how the book was written in the time and it reflected the time. I think it is also stupid the way DW Griffith's works are ignored because they had some really bad racial overtones in them by today's standards, should we just take Birth of a Nation and edit out the KKK? Take Triumph of the Will and edit out the Swasticas? Sanitizing history is, IMO, the surest path to re-living history.
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
Re: Political Correctness strikes again (Pt 2 .. Dire Straights)
maybe they should have a big bonfire and burn all these records
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/ ... a-20110114
The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council has ruled that "Money for Nothing," a Dire Straits hit from 1985, is too offensive for Canadian airwaves. The song is being singled out for the repeated use of an anti-gay slur — "that little faggot" — in its second verse.
This hasn't stopped some Canadian classic rock radio stations from playing the song. In the days since the ruling, stations in Halifax, Nova Scotia and Edmonton, Alberta have protested the decision by playing an unedited version of the song on repeated for a full hour.
maybe they should have a big bonfire and burn all these records
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/ ... a-20110114
The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council has ruled that "Money for Nothing," a Dire Straits hit from 1985, is too offensive for Canadian airwaves. The song is being singled out for the repeated use of an anti-gay slur — "that little faggot" — in its second verse.
This hasn't stopped some Canadian classic rock radio stations from playing the song. In the days since the ruling, stations in Halifax, Nova Scotia and Edmonton, Alberta have protested the decision by playing an unedited version of the song on repeated for a full hour.
Re: Political Correctness strikes again (Pt 2 .. Dire Straights)
I fully intend to support Q104 (the local Halifax station), and I have written the CRTC explaining that they're being a bunch of fucking tools.
I fully intend to support Q104 (the local Halifax station), and I have written the CRTC explaining that they're being a bunch of fucking tools.
Re: Political Correctness strikes again (Pt 2 .. Dire Straights)
I'm honestly not worried about it. The way the CRTC works, is that someone actually needs to complain in order for there to be an investigation. It's entirely possible that they'll change their ruling...considering they're being cocks.
I'm honestly not worried about it. The way the CRTC works, is that someone actually needs to complain in order for there to be an investigation. It's entirely possible that they'll change their ruling...considering they're being cocks.
Taker
Cannon Fodder
Re: Political Correctness strikes again (Pt 2 .. Dire Straights)
I admire Q104 for showing some balls. Our two city rock stations responded in a more pussy manner. One says they won't play the tune again, and the other will play the censored version. Embarrassing for all Canadians... give 'em hell LooseCannon...LooseCannon said:
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
Re: Political Correctness strikes again (Pt 2 .. Dire Straights)
Then things are looking grim for The Pogues's "Fairytale of New York", methinks.
PS: I looked up the Wikipedia article for that song. It was actually censored by the BBC in 2007. The words "slut", "faggot" and "arse" were all considered too offensive. However, BBC went back on the decision a little later, after receiving flak for it.
bearfan said:
Then things are looking grim for The Pogues's "Fairytale of New York", methinks.
PS: I looked up the Wikipedia article for that song. It was actually censored by the BBC in 2007. The words "slut", "faggot" and "arse" were all considered too offensive. However, BBC went back on the decision a little later, after receiving flak for it.
national acrobat
Ancient Mariner
Re: Political Correctness strikes again (Pt 2 .. Dire Straights)
I remember that, and it was censored without a single complaint about the song; the complaints only came against the censoring. Some people really need to lighten up and worry about more important things.
Eddies Wingman said:
I remember that, and it was censored without a single complaint about the song; the complaints only came against the censoring. Some people really need to lighten up and worry about more important things.
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
Re: Political Correctness strikes again (Pt 3 ..Super Bowl Ad)
From http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/h ... er-bowl-ad
This is the ad
http://www.youtube.com/embed/1mjRU6b4ecw
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) took to the House floor Tuesday night to criticize what she called a "demeaning" Pepsi ad that aired during the Super Bowl.
In the ad for Pepsi Max, a black woman sitting on a park bench gets angry with her husband after an attractive, white female jogger sits down next to the couple and smiles and waves at the man.
After the man smiles back, his girlfriend or wife gets angry and whips her Pepsi Max can at him. The man ducks, and the can hits the attractive jogger in the head. The ad is titled "Love hurts."
Jackson Lee said it was ridiculous for the soft drink maker to air the advertisement during African-American history month.
"In this month of African-American history where we're trying to celebrate what is good and great, it certainly seems ridiculous that Pepsi would utilize this kind of humor," she said. "It was not humorous. It was demeaning — an African-American woman throwing something at an African-American male and winding up hitting a Caucasian woman."
Jackson Lee said she has a sense of humor and believes in the First Amendment. She also said the Super Bowl is a great time for "fellowship" with family members.
"That is why I'm so disappointed with the Pepsi advertisement that showed a demeaning role for African American women, in an ad that showed a can being thrown and being utilized to wound someone else or hit someone else," she said.
"I think that we can come together in a much better way, sell Pepsi, and as well talk about good nutrition," she said. "But, frankly, I consider this insulting, and so did many other women of all colors."
Jackson Lee also said it would be great to have a lot more women in ads at the Super Bowl.
From http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/h ... er-bowl-ad
This is the ad
http://www.youtube.com/embed/1mjRU6b4ecw
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) took to the House floor Tuesday night to criticize what she called a "demeaning" Pepsi ad that aired during the Super Bowl.
In the ad for Pepsi Max, a black woman sitting on a park bench gets angry with her husband after an attractive, white female jogger sits down next to the couple and smiles and waves at the man.
After the man smiles back, his girlfriend or wife gets angry and whips her Pepsi Max can at him. The man ducks, and the can hits the attractive jogger in the head. The ad is titled "Love hurts."
Jackson Lee said it was ridiculous for the soft drink maker to air the advertisement during African-American history month.
"In this month of African-American history where we're trying to celebrate what is good and great, it certainly seems ridiculous that Pepsi would utilize this kind of humor," she said. "It was not humorous. It was demeaning — an African-American woman throwing something at an African-American male and winding up hitting a Caucasian woman."
Jackson Lee said she has a sense of humor and believes in the First Amendment. She also said the Super Bowl is a great time for "fellowship" with family members.
"That is why I'm so disappointed with the Pepsi advertisement that showed a demeaning role for African American women, in an ad that showed a can being thrown and being utilized to wound someone else or hit someone else," she said.
"I think that we can come together in a much better way, sell Pepsi, and as well talk about good nutrition," she said. "But, frankly, I consider this insulting, and so did many other women of all colors."
Jackson Lee also said it would be great to have a lot more women in ads at the Super Bowl.
Re: Political Correctness strikes again (Pt 3 ..Super Bowl Ad)
I think there is a certain point of view here. Did the admakers intend to stereotype African-Americans?
The answer is likely no. Sure, Pepsi should say something like, "We're sorry this offended the sensibilities of a select few," but then let's move on.
I think there is a certain point of view here. Did the admakers intend to stereotype African-Americans?
The answer is likely no. Sure, Pepsi should say something like, "We're sorry this offended the sensibilities of a select few," but then let's move on.
Onhell
Infinite Dreamer
Re: Political Correctness strikes again (Pt 3 ..Super Bowl Ad)
African American month is the ONLY month that gets insane attention. Women's month, Hispanic month, etc, usually get forgotten. But Black History Month is a HUGE deal. The ad is dumb, it DOESN'T stereotype anything/anybody... That Rep. is just bored.
African American month is the ONLY month that gets insane attention. Women's month, Hispanic month, etc, usually get forgotten. But Black History Month is a HUGE deal. The ad is dumb, it DOESN'T stereotype anything/anybody... That Rep. is just bored.
Re: Political Correctness strikes again (Pt 3 ..Super Bowl Ad)
I recently had a discussion of this with my friend Jennifer, who is getting fairly well known in the American atheist/feminist movements. Here's how she sees it (and I agree):
When someone complains like this, you gotta step back and take a look. It's easy to dismiss the criticisms out of hand. However, you should think about the stereotypes being presented in the commercial - black men as more attracted to white women than black women, and black women being angry and hurtful. Obviously it's only meant as a joke, but the real question is: was this commercial designed to perpetuate negative stereotypes?
I think no.
I recently had a discussion of this with my friend Jennifer, who is getting fairly well known in the American atheist/feminist movements. Here's how she sees it (and I agree):
When someone complains like this, you gotta step back and take a look. It's easy to dismiss the criticisms out of hand. However, you should think about the stereotypes being presented in the commercial - black men as more attracted to white women than black women, and black women being angry and hurtful. Obviously it's only meant as a joke, but the real question is: was this commercial designed to perpetuate negative stereotypes?
I think no.