What offends you?

[Adam Went]

I get offended by people who get offended about unbelievably petty things, if that makes sense.

Cheers,
Adam.

[TomTomKent]

Lets get the important matters dealt with first;

The sketch altered slightly depending on what was topical during which performance. The version on the Rowan Atkinson live album on iTunes mentions Americans (and the French get targetted in "driving abroad".

My experiences on the continent are not ones of there being a thought police. You havethe right to say what you want, but the chances are others will use their right to tell you exactly why they disagree. It is important not to mistake popular or or media reaction for censorship. Most often "political correctness" is blamed for reacting to some comments where common sense suggests offense may be taken. (One person who I thankfully no longer have to work with would blame Political correctness for the reaction he got from complete strangers for remarking "Look at her! I wouldn't mind getting my hands on her!" Or, "what is she wearing? Looks like a slut." Even back "in his day", I am not convinced girls would have felt honoured by the attention. They may not have been as vocal (or direct) in their response, but im pretty sure not every girl got a spring in their step when cat-called.

Of course, if you want freedom of expression the cost is higher cat-callers and Jim davidson telling people not to support oxfam in a "comedy" routine. The cost is stormfront, religious fanatics. advocating terrorism, and anything else. You may detest something,but if you want the freedom you have to accept people using it.

[glyn]

On the comedy front,Bernard Manning,one of the funniest comics around in my opinion,was of course largely ostracised by the tv networks,because of so called racist jokes.Yet he made fun of every race,perhaps hed have been ok if the only jokes hed made had been regarding white folkCant think how long ago that was now maybe 10 years? my memory fails me.

[TomTomKent]

On the comedy front,Bernard Manning,one of the funniest comics around in my opinion,was of course largely ostracised by the tv networks,because of so called racist jokes.Yet he made fun of every race,perhaps hed have been ok if the only jokes hed made had been regarding white folkCant think how long ago that was now maybe 10 years? my memory fails me.

The issue there was the type of jokes he made, not whom they were about. But that's my opinion. Remember that long before Manning became famous Peter Sellers was making jokes about all kinds of people but laughing with them, not mocking their percieved flaws.

What bemuses me more is that the character of Alf Garnet is often compared to Manning, when the Garnett character is clearly poking gentle fun at the sort of people who thought Manning was a serious political commentator (and perhaps he was trying to be, but I digress). Garnett was never meant to be the hero of his own show, quite the opposite in fact.

On the other hand Spike Milligan managed to be incredibly offensive in some of his sketches and shows (Curry and Chips being the worst offender) yet has never had the same stigma attached to him.

[Fleetwood Mac]

On the comedy front,Bernard Manning,one of the funniest comics around in my opinion,was of course largely ostracised by the tv networks,because of so called racist jokes.Yet he made fun of every race,perhaps hed have been ok if the only jokes hed made had been regarding white folkCant think how long ago that was now maybe 10 years? my memory fails me.

We disagree here, Glyn; he's not my cup of tea with his appeal to primitive, base humour.

But, if people don't like him then just don't listen to what he has to say.

[Errata]

a: That exact Rowan Atkinson sketch is literally my favorite bit of comedy of all time.

b: I don't get offended. I occasionally get deeply concerned. Quite frankly, I wouldn't care if all the possible epithets that could apply to me were said to me, if those epithets didn't have a nasty habit of predicating violence.

And there is a difference between someone calling me a c*%t on the sidewalk, and someone calling me the same thing in my own home, and someone calling me that is an parking garage.

I have had nasty beatings following those words. Others have had it far worse. I think that using those words conversationally makes you a jerk. I think using them as comedy makes you a full blown *******. But offended? Not often. Although I do hit my male friends upside the the head whenever they use the "C" word. I don't get offended by it, but most women do. I see it as a somewhat Pavlovian way of saving their life.

[Limehouse]

My estimation is that you have it the wrong way round.

Once upon a time you could say whatever you wanted in the knowledge that the thought police wouldn't be on your case. These days we have all sorts of waifs and strays jumping on the bandwagon of what should and should not be said. The definition of totalitarianism is censorship; this is a point that's lost on this generation. Slowly but surely the continental European way of doing things, i.e. left wing fascism, is increasingly clouding English values, which is why we really need the Americans, not for war spoils nor economic gain: they're the only sane people left on this planet who understand the importance of freedom of speech. The continental Europeans are beyond saving, and we're teetering on the brink.

'Bout time this country shaped up, sharpish!

Edited to add: ask an American about this and the majority will say you choose to be offended; ask a continental European and they'll blather on about feelings and victimisation; ask an Englishman and you'll get something like 50/50.

It takes a small spot of reason to arrive at the conclusion that no one can offend you unless you choose to be offended, and you can't base the rule of the law on 'feelings' unless you want a government encroaching into various aspects of your life.

We really need to get a grip on this situation. You 'offend' me in the street and we settle it like grown ups; the chances are I'll put you in your place before walking away. We don't need the law to resolve petty squabbles.

And, to answer the question, nothing offends me. You attempt to 'offend' me, and I'll laugh at you for being a dick. Conversation over. Simple.

You talk as if a society that is more respectful is somehow less appealing. Do you really want to go back to the days when disabled children were called 'spastics' in the street ? Do you want to walk past guest houses with the sign 'no blacks - no Irish - no dogs in the window?

Why would anyone defend their right and other people's right to be offensive to others? Aren't we supposed to move forwards in tolerance and respect and human understand instead of retreating to ignorance and ridicule?

[TomTomKent]

You talk as if a society that is more respectful is somehow less appealing. Do you really want to go back to the days when disabled children were called 'spastics' in the street ? Do you want to walk past guest houses with the sign 'no blacks - no Irish - no dogs in the window?

Why would anyone defend their right and other people's right to be offensive to others? Aren't we supposed to move forwards in tolerance and respect and human understand instead of retreating to ignorance and ridicule?

Yes, we should move forwards, and in my experience most broadcasts that people assume were "censored" were not. They were however complained heavily against when they were found offensive by a lot of people. Here in the UK, and abroad.

[Fleetwood Mac]

You talk as if a society that is more respectful is somehow less appealing. Do you really want to go back to the days when disabled children were called 'spastics' in the street ? Do you want to walk past guest houses with the sign 'no blacks - no Irish - no dogs in the window?

Why would anyone defend their right and other people's right to be offensive to others? Aren't we supposed to move forwards in tolerance and respect and human understand instead of retreating to ignorance and ridicule?

Limehouse:

a) Tolerance is not a human right; it is a view/opinion relating to the best means of achieving a peaceful co-existence (see John Locke).

b) If you think that tolerance needs to be forced upon us, which by extension you clearly do as you're advocating the right to not be offended, then we're lost anyway; and in essence you're imposing your (tolerant) opinions on my freedom of expression. What's more important? Your wish to tell me what to say, or my wish to have a voice while leaving you alone?

c) You are straight out of the Robespierre book of 'we must force the people to be free', except you're saying 'we must force the people to be tolerant'. And you know where Robespierre's ideas led? 'The Terrors'. This is why the left is so dangerous: they really believe they are the law, and if you don't agree with them they'll enforce it (all because the left think they're virtuous human beings whose **** doesn't smell like the rest of us).

You're tyrants, mate. The worst kind. Not only are you tyrants, but you appeal to people's emotions: "we just want to make you all free". I am ******* free, leave me alone with your idea of freedom!

P.S. Have a look at what you've just posted! Absolute bollocks about ignorance, ridicule, human understanding and the rest; the ususal appeal to abstract notions and nothing practical such as: 'you and I are neighbours, you keep your dog off my lawn and I'll keep my dog off your lawn, and we'll enjoy our privacy'.

[johns]

Had a bit of a hard think about what sort of stuff offends me and this is my list...

1) errrr

Seriously I can't think of one thing big or small that "offends" me.

Lots of stuff annoys me and gets me a bit wound up at times but nothing offends me.

Stuff that annoys me...

1) College lecturer bloke (can't recall his name now) who was rude to almost everyone.

2) Folks who take their dogs for a walk and let the dogs run free (often across 4 lanes of town traffic) while holding the unused dog lead in their hand and shouting abuse at the poor dogs.

3) Idiotic parents who let their sprogs eat chips, cheese and curry sauce... sweeties... and any other junk they can shovel in their mouths on a 24/7/365 basis.

4) Bloke who stole my Kawasaki all those years ago.

5) People who start sentences "The fact of the matter is..." then come out with an opinion NOT a fact.

6) Some other stuff

[Joseph]

What offends me is the lengths certain people will go to in their efforts to sabotage the immensely popular A6 threads and get them closed for good. Sad people.

[Limehouse]

Limehouse:

a) Tolerance is not a human right; it is a view/opinion relating to the best means of achieving a peaceful co-existence (see John Locke).

b) If you think that tolerance needs to be forced upon us, which by extension you clearly do as you're advocating the right to not be offended, then we're lost anyway; and in essence you're imposing your (tolerant) opinions on my freedom of expression. What's more important? Your wish to tell me what to say, or my wish to have a voice while leaving you alone?

c) You are straight out of the Robespierre book of 'we must force the people to be free', except you're saying 'we must force the people to be tolerant'. And you know where Robespierre's ideas led? 'The Terrors'. This is why the left is so dangerous: they really believe they are the law, and if you don't agree with them they'll enforce it (all because the left think they're virtuous human beings whose **** doesn't smell like the rest of us).

You're tyrants, mate. The worst kind. Not only are you tyrants, but you appeal to people's emotions: "we just want to make you all free". I am ******* free, leave me alone with your idea of freedom!

P.S. Have a look at what you've just posted! Absolute bollocks about ignorance, ridicule, human understanding and the rest; the ususal appeal to abstract notions and nothing practical such as: 'you and I are neighbours, you keep your dog off my lawn and I'll keep my dog off your lawn, and we'll enjoy our privacy'.

I am not trying to force anything on you. You can be a offensive as you wish and I shall go on being respectful.

[jason_c]

You talk as if a society that is more respectful is somehow less appealing. Do you really want to go back to the days when disabled children were called 'spastics' in the street ? Do you want to walk past guest houses with the sign 'no blacks - no Irish - no dogs in the window?

Why would anyone defend their right and other people's right to be offensive to others? Aren't we supposed to move forwards in tolerance and respect and human understand instead of retreating to ignorance and ridicule?

The good thing about political correctness is that it removed a few words out of everyday vocabulary. Other than that it has been used to stifle debate.

Tolerance and understanding are fine. But I have a right to openly disagree with any individual's(or groups) lifestyle choice. Ridicule is an excellent way to undermine someone, it ought to be welcomed in an open society.


Edit; If it werent for ridicule Anthony Weiner would still be in the US congress.

[Limehouse]

The good thing about political correctness is that it removed a few words out of everyday vocabulary. Other than that it has been used to stifle debate.

Tolerance and understanding are fine. But I have a right to openly disagree with any individual's(or groups) lifestyle choice. Ridicule is an excellent way to undermine someone, it ought to be welcomed in an open society.


Edit; If it werent for ridicule Anthony Weiner would still be in the US congress.

I agree with most of what you have written Jason and I would support your right to openly disagree with someone's lifestyle if you do so with decency - and in doing so -uphold their right to disagree with yours.

[glyn]

Its a job to keep up with what is or isnt offensive or bigotted these days. Fashions change it seems.
Not so long ago ,to even question whether or not there was a problem with Immigration numbers was enough to bring about catcalls of Racist! Bigot!.In some cases your job might even have been put at risk......Then the "powers " that made those rules in the first place, suddenly decided that questioning immigration wasnt so racis t or bigoted after all...Which must have "offended" the anti-nazi league and their hangers on immensely
Like most others here who have posted,nothing much really offends me, anyway, not to the extent Im gonna go waving banners around ,or demanding someone is sacked.
Fleetwood ,of course is correct when he warns against the spectre of Tumbrils trundling down Whitehall "full to the gunwales" with non conformists,free-thinkers,non labour voters and Bernard Manning fans" etc..................From tiny acorns ,mighty oak trees grow.