o/t - is this t-shirt offensive

[Bazzer]

I wonder if there are forums where its on topic to debate stuff like this :-)

Like you Jeff my parents had a set of values that they lived their life by. Like you I have taken some of them on board because I think they are right. However there are some views that my parents hold that I don't agree with. I think the sensible intelligent thing to do is to question why you believe something or act in a certain way. "It just is" was never a valid argument in my book.

The swearing thing is interesting if I hear someone using swear words as a stabiliser or to make up for a lack of vocabulary my instant reaction is to think they are probably not the sort of person I want to be around. Its kind of like seeing someone covered head to toe in tattoos. This is because society has conditioned me to think this way and it’s pretty sad, no it’s more than sad it’s very wrong.

So now I try to take a step back and not to judge. In doing so I have got to know some really interesting and nice people.

If someone is vandalising a car or assaulting someone I would judge that as being unacceptable.

The only reason I can see that T-shirt being a problem is if someone lacks the sophistication to spot that its humour. I would also concede that this could be a problem for children.

A few people have mentioned that making fun of crimes or disability is bad taste. Humans use humour as a coping mechanism, by trivialising things we make it easier for ourselves to deal with it.

It could be that other people are at their keyboards trying to provoke a reaction, which in some ways is what I am doing (however I do pretty much believe what I am saying)  

If this chap Mr Pratt J really was wearing the shirt to provoke a reaction and to offend people, don’t you think he would have picked a shirt that was really offensive? I honestly think he was wearing it because he thought it was amusing.

Cheers

Bazzer

[Man On The Clapham Omnibus]

I think the main problem with it is not that it is in bad taste (which IMHO it is) but as others have said it is the universally availability of it to all and sundry. The intelligent wearer would not expose it to an unselected audience; possibly no audience at all. When I answered in the affirmative with regard to its offensiveness I wasn't saying that it offended me, but that it was/is offensive in a global sense.

What impresses me is that most contributors to this thread have expressed quite candid views and yet the thread has remained cordial. There are other forums (fora) in which that might not have happened.

[marshalla]

If this chap Mr Pratt J really was wearing the shirt to provoke a reaction and to offend people, don’t you think he would have picked a shirt that was really offensive? I honestly think he was wearing it because he thought it was amusing.

And some people think Jimmy Carr is funny too....

[Bazzer]

I think the main problem with it is not that it is in bad taste (which IMHO it is) but as others have said it is the universally availability of it to all and sundry. The intelligent wearer would not expose it to an unselected audience; possibly no audience at all. When I answered in the affirmative with regard to its offensiveness I wasn't saying that it offended me, but that it was/is offensive in a global sense.

What impresses me is that most contributors to this thread have expressed quite candid views and yet the thread has remained cordial. There are other forums (fora) in which that might not have happened.

I can understand that argument, but taken to its extreme should we refrain from doing anything that may offend ?

Repeating my earlier example, there are people who are offended by mixed race relashonships. Should we stop this because people are offended ?

Sometimes its the person being offended that needs to look at them self rather than the offender !!!

Bazzer

[Bazzer]

Oh and I still have not seen a lucid explanation as to why its offensive ?

Lots of words like respect and standards etc but no explananation !!!

[John Loudon - Sponsorship Liaison]

I reckon they threatened to arrest him for nicking it from Fred West not for what it said

[Man On The Clapham Omnibus]

Sometimes its the person being offended that needs to look at them self rather than the offender !!!

When that person is a child and the offended party, by proxy, is exercising a duty of care to that child, I believe your statement to be wrong. As far as the example of mixed race relationships are concerned you are right, IMHO, and it is the offendee who should examine their motives. That's in the 21st century, of course; in other times other views would prevail. Whatever the ethnic make up of a couple, or the gender, decent behaviour in public is still hoped for. Overt sexual activity is just about acceptable between dogs, but people...  

[Bazzer]

So in this particular case how would it be detremental to a child or anyone else reading that T-shirt ?

Bazzer

[Man On The Clapham Omnibus]

Detriment is one thing, but offence was the original parameter and it could be deemed to be offensive if it simply causes embarassment to a parent whose child asks what it means. Equally it can be offensive because it is unnecessarily coarse in its content. As someone else said earlier the message could be carried without the use of the word in contention. "Don't get up my nose..." would be nearly as effective if a little bland. It's not exactly the Monty Python 'World's Most Dangerous Joke' after all, is it? I realise that the word's function here is to convey a certain state of the temperament of the wearer; short fuse, etc. It is not a matter of damage to any individual - if any 'damage' or detriment occurs it is to the general tenor of society. No, it is purely offence in this case, just as a bad case of body odour is offensive without actual detriment. Different people have different views; quite simple really. I am by no means a prude nor am I holier than thou, but I seem to see decline rather than improvement in the quality of behaviour, politeness, and civility. Nuff said methinks.

[Phil. S]

Apologies in advance for being lazy, as I haven't read all of this thread. But I thought a few distinctions might help. [puts philosopher's hat on.]

First I think we should distinguish between something being offensive and its being in bad taste. Something might be in bad taste without being offensive, for instance, wearing bling jewelry is, imho, in bad taste, but is hardly offensive. (I'm inclined to think that bad language on teeshirts etc is in bad taste but is not offensive.)

Second, being offensive is not being such as to cause offense, but being such as to warrant it. Anything can in principle cause offense to anyone, but that is not enough to make it offensive. (eg. Displays of homosexual love may cause offense in some people, but that does not make it offensive if their being offended is unreasonable.)

As I said above, my objection to bad language is aesthetic rather than moral. I think it is ugly, and just like ugly archetecture, I'd rather live in an environment without it. I'm not sure that there are grounds for a stronger objection than that. So I find it in bad taste but not offensive. [Takes philosopher's hat off]

Now, can anyone help me with my misfire problem?

[Bazzer]

Apologies in advance for being lazy, as I haven't read all of this thread. But I thought a few distinctions might help. [puts philosopher's hat on.]

First I think we should distinguish between something being offensive and its being in bad taste. Something might be in bad taste without being offensive, for instance, wearing bling jewelry is, imho, in bad taste, but is hardly offensive. (I'm inclined to think that bad language on teeshirts etc is in bad taste but is not offensive.)

Second, being offensive is not being such as to cause offense, but being such as to warrant it. Anything can in principle cause offense to anyone, but that is not enough to make it offensive. (eg. Displays of homosexual love may cause offense in some people, but that does not make it offensive if their being offended is unreasonable.)

As I said above, my objection to bad language is aesthetic rather than moral. I think it is ugly, and just like ugly archetecture, I'd rather live in an environment without it. I'm not sure that there are grounds for a stronger objection than that. So I find it in bad taste but not offensive. [Takes philosopher's hat off]

Now, can anyone help me with my misfire problem?

I agree with that   and also that taste is an opinion not a fact.

But I would add we don't generaly ask for people to be deported for bad taste.

Bazzer

[Phil. S]

I agree with that   and also that taste is an opinion not a fact.

But I would add we don't generaly ask for people to be deported for bad taste.

Bazzer

Taste is an opinion, but opinions are truth-apt, i.e. they can be true or false. (Don't get me started on that.)

I quite like the idea of people being deported for bad taste - no more chavs, footballers, stone cladding, etc etc  

[V 8]

Baz, stop wasting time on this thread and get that diff changed

Great T shirt IMO

[Bazzer]

Baz, stop wasting time on this thread and get that diff changed

Great T shirt IMO

LOL I would be happy to have a working car at the moment

Was meant to be at Spa on Monday and Tuesday but have had to cancel

Bazzer

PS Have you not got one yet ?

[V 8]

Yep, got an open one for the CW&P. JeffC sold an LSD 3.36 fer next to nowt while I was on holiday. I found that very offensive