Money for nothing PCified

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/...114-19q9m.html

What are peoples thoughts? Is this truly removing an offensive word, or is it PC gone too far?

Anybody remember the classic Simpsons episode featuring Michaelangelo's David?

I think this(and the censorship of Huck Finn the article mentions) is going too far. It's a classic work of art. The use of the word faggot there is satirical, and is more derogatory to those who would use the term as an insult than it is derogatory towards homosexuals. I don't believe in censoring classic works of art because they offend modern sensibilities.

That being said, hasn't a censored version of Money for Nothing existed for at least a decade, if not longer? Pretty much every time I hear the song I try to guess whether I'm going to hear the censored version or not. Seems to be about 50/50.

Wow was just reading about this. I honestly think people need to grow thicker skins. These are classics and history of the times. To change them is to change history in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Halyanne
Wow was just reading about this. I honestly think people need to grow thicker skins. These are classics and history of the times. To change them is to change history in my opinion.

---

Or to at least understand the context behind the usage of the word.

Somebody must introduce them to the world of rap.

The term faggot over the centuries has been used to describe any number of "untouchable" castes in society. Basically, it's like saying the person should be burned. It's an offensive word, but not restricted to homosexuals (though they are the most recent targets of the word.)

I think we should change the target of the word again, so it doesn't die off but so that it's more applicable. Like we should use it to describe religious radicals, or fundamentalist terrorists, or national socialists.

I think PC is never ever a good thing! I'm a 25 year old, middle class, straight, white male and I'm entitled to my opinion, dammit!

But seriously...

People getting offended over phrasings, words, terms of art, etc. that aren't meant to be offensive is ridiculous. This is especially true if the word is meant in an entirely different context or definition. Sure, you may or may not be an oppressed class of people, but that doesn't give you ownership/censorship over a piece of our language just because you don't like it.

I think there are 2 halves to this. First, if you want to not be offended by anything, the answer isn't censorship. The answer is being secure in your identity. Yes, I acknowledge it's easier said than done, but that doesn't change the fact that it is the answer. As a white, straight male, it's hard to think of any words that could even be potentially offensive.

I guess the most commonly used one is cracker? Honkey? Red-neck? If someone were to try to insult me with these, I'd basically be asking if that was the best you got and laughing at you. I know that no matter what you say about me, these things aren't true (hell, any true red-neck I've ever met has proudly proclaimed themselves to be so, anyway, and would never consider it an insult). Your words can't hurt me. That's called security. Think of it like this: Someone is insulting you by saying you've got a small dick. You laugh it off because you know you're packing a 10 inch monster. You're only going to be offended by accusations of inadequacy if you're actually afraid you may be inadequate.

Keep in mind those are situations where someone is TRYING to offend me. We have people getting offended over things that not only aren't meant to offend them specifically, but aren't meant to be offensive at all. Think of how insecure you would have to be. Which brings me to the 2nd half of my point.

We (meaning people that X offensive term isn't meant to refer to) don't make it easy for any given oppressed group of people to be secure in their identities. When you specifically ARE being ridiculed, beat up, killed, etc. for being the way you are, it's understandably hard to come to terms with things. People in abusive relationships are going to find it harder to climb out of their self-esteem problem. That is exactly what racism, sexism, etc. are: abusive relationships on a macroscopic level.

People will always attack people they don't like by hitting them where it hurts; hitting them where they're insecure. Maybe I'll just laugh off being called a cracker, but maybe, just maybe, I'll react if you call me an asshole. Maybe I'll get upset because I'm afraid that maybe, just maybe, I could actually be an asshole (even though it is a more general, less specific insult, and therefore most people would probably agree a less insulting insult than something bigoted).

This is where it circles back to the 1st part about security. If you're gay and being called a faggot, or if you're black and being called a nigger (in light of the Mark Twain censorship) and it offends you, it's because there is some part of you deep down that still buys into the idea that there is a negativity attached to an inherent part of your being; that you're flawed and/or inadequate by being who you are.

In summary, I basically think there are 2 things that need to happen. People are always going to attack people where it hurts the most. If we want to fix the problem of PCness and the resulting censorship (and all of the other inherent racial/religious/sexual/gender/etc. problems), then the offended people need to start being more secure in their own selves, and the rest of us need to let that growth happen. Again, it is easier said than done, but personally, I think we're on track with this. It's a long process, but I've seen promising strides being made even just in my lifetime.

Disclaimer: Just so no one is offended (:D), obviously any use of the words "you", "we", etc. do not refer to any specific person or people!

Also, while the first sentence may be a bit satirical, those facts do still have an actual impact on the forming of my opinions. I don't have a degree or any in depth study in psychology. My analysis on why people are offended by words comes from what I understand of human nature in my 25 years so far, and also from the position that it was probably relatively easy for me to establish security in my identity due to a lack of persecution.

That being said, my views on this matter are evolving even as I type this. I said that oppression is an abusive relationship. In light of that, if one is seeking to recover from the harms of such a relationship, probably wouldn't help if one saw reminders of it everywhere around them. If that is the case, maybe there is something to a bit of censorship if we truly do hope, as a people, to help establish equality. Maybe, or maybe not. It's something I'll have to think more on.

Quoted in the comments below the article:

"Here we go again with the over the top PC crap. I'm gay and faggot doesn't offend me because I'm not ashamed of being gay. When I get called a faggot in a derogatory manner I know it doesn't say a thing about me but it does say a whole lot about the person saying it and I'm thankful that I'm not as ignorant and out of touch as they are.

Have we not come far enough that we can rise above this, realise the context and move on?"

This parallels Jyn's comments. When will we grow up? We're supposed to be evolving as a people, not devolving. It's not a matter of offense but a matter of power. Hateful people breed further hate and contempt in order to stay in power. If we were a happy, peaceful people, they'd never make money. I rejoice when I find someone who embraces stereotypes for the sake of humor and true acceptance. Call me a cracker and I'll tell you to acknowledge me as a Ritz.

Firstly - I don't agree with retrograde censorship of any kind.

It isn't the job of the offended party to change their way of thinking, to claim otherwise speaks volumes about one's own comfortable, unchallenged way of life.

"I don't mind cracker, so you shouldn't mind nigger/paki/faggot" does not equate in any way, shape or form. "Cracker" doesn't carry with it decades of racial/homophobic abuse, it wasn't used as both a casual and a malicious tool with which to keep white people under the heel and working for free, or shouted with vitriol at white people arriving in a land where they are supposedly welcome to start their new life. As far as I'm aware, in the West at least, white people haven't struggled against sometimes brutal authorities to be treated with the same respect and rights that their brothers and sisters with different skin colour/sexual orientation.

I say "white people" for quickness, as white women have had plenty to struggle against so sorry for missing them out right now.

Again, it's not the job of the offended party to simply stop being offended, their role is to highlight this bollocks wherever it appears, so that the rest of decent, civil, society can deal with it with the iron first it deserves.

Isn't it their job? So you condone mass groupthink rather than individual thought and strength of character? Who I am and what I've done have no context on the topic. Only that words are just that and one's reaction is within your own power. To react in this manner is infantile and concedes power to the offending party. Do you really think I haven't had negative slurs thrown my way? You think my life is easy, you try it for a week. I AM comfortable because I refuse to let anyone dictate my life for me. I don't have any authority telling me what I should be pissed off about.

Further, as a supposedly evolved society, we should acknowledge each other as humans, first and foremost, and equal creatures. Anything beyond that segregates society. You can't control others. You can only control yourself. I equate nigger/spic/faggot with cunt. Once you have lowered yourself to use those words, you have spoken volumes about your own intelligence and lack of vocabulary, and further, you have declared an irrevocable disrespect for your target. That said, why is it acceptable to call themselves these things and consider it a term of endearment? You can't have it both ways!

I pity those with such ignorance that they do not accept another human on individual merit, and that they know no other way to express their discontent. Likewise, I pity those who have to be told what to think and let others anger them in such a way over meaningless utterances. And before you jump on me again abou how good my life is as a statistical majority, most of my friends are minorities, be they women, Asian, black, Hispanic, gay, bi, whatever, and I admire them because they aren't so sensitive to let simple minds offend them. Hell, they laugh at such things. I just wish we all could be so strong.

The struggles that you quoted should not be a weakness or offensive, but rather a source of strength. Each person should be able to look upon their trials and be thankful for hard times as it made them stronger. On this day, MLK's birthday, African Americans alongside their fellow Americans celebrate a leader who had a vision of true equality. Today, we're no closer than we were in his day, and it's everyone's fault.