Political Correctness Gone Mad
Freddy Woo writes: "I once worked on an animation to help highlight the issues homeless people face in winter. The client was happy with the work, then a note came back that the ethnic mix of the characters were wrong. These were cartoon characters. They weren't meant to be ethnically anything, but we were forced to make one of them brown, at the cost of about 10k to the charity. This is how your donations are spent. Wisely as you can see."
How has PC affected you? (Please add your own tales - not five-year-old news stories cut-and-pasted from other websites)
( , Thu 22 Nov 2007, 10:20)
Freddy Woo writes: "I once worked on an animation to help highlight the issues homeless people face in winter. The client was happy with the work, then a note came back that the ethnic mix of the characters were wrong. These were cartoon characters. They weren't meant to be ethnically anything, but we were forced to make one of them brown, at the cost of about 10k to the charity. This is how your donations are spent. Wisely as you can see."
How has PC affected you? (Please add your own tales - not five-year-old news stories cut-and-pasted from other websites)
( , Thu 22 Nov 2007, 10:20)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
Free speech
means freedom to say whatever you please, but you must also accept the consequences.
If I advertise an opinion that has weak grounds for support, it will eventually be debated and I will very probably be made to look a fool. I can deal with that. If, on the other hand, my opinion has widespread support, it will be encouraged and reinforced.
If I say something suspected of being illegal, I can expect to be prosecuted for saying it. The law is based on precedent, which means that if something is illegal, it's because it's already been tested in the courts. If what I say is not illegal, but suspected of being so, I get the chance to prove my point in a court and if I'm right, I should win the case (maybe a little optimistic, but that's the foundations of case law).
Freedom of speech is a self-regulating concept as long as the law continues to be based on testable cases, and as long as intelligent, reasonable people stand up in the face of their obnoxious opponents. With that in mind, the BNP doesn't really stand a chance.
I would hope that Oxford is capable of producing formidable opponents for the likes of Griffin and Irving and so I'd encourage the hate-mongering twats to participate in a debate in that unforgiving arena. If the students of Oxford can't rise to the occasion and defeat such worthless adversaries in a public debate, then the British education system should be ashamed of itself.
( , Tue 27 Nov 2007, 9:16, Reply)
means freedom to say whatever you please, but you must also accept the consequences.
If I advertise an opinion that has weak grounds for support, it will eventually be debated and I will very probably be made to look a fool. I can deal with that. If, on the other hand, my opinion has widespread support, it will be encouraged and reinforced.
If I say something suspected of being illegal, I can expect to be prosecuted for saying it. The law is based on precedent, which means that if something is illegal, it's because it's already been tested in the courts. If what I say is not illegal, but suspected of being so, I get the chance to prove my point in a court and if I'm right, I should win the case (maybe a little optimistic, but that's the foundations of case law).
Freedom of speech is a self-regulating concept as long as the law continues to be based on testable cases, and as long as intelligent, reasonable people stand up in the face of their obnoxious opponents. With that in mind, the BNP doesn't really stand a chance.
I would hope that Oxford is capable of producing formidable opponents for the likes of Griffin and Irving and so I'd encourage the hate-mongering twats to participate in a debate in that unforgiving arena. If the students of Oxford can't rise to the occasion and defeat such worthless adversaries in a public debate, then the British education system should be ashamed of itself.
( , Tue 27 Nov 2007, 9:16, Reply)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread