Fireman Sam the Islamaphobe.
- Thread starter Danthus
- Start date
I'd feel the same way as you, yet there are plenty of native Brits that would be offended. Heck, I'm sure there would be plenty of Americans that would probably be close to shooting you if you burned their flag in certain parts of the country. At the very least you could get a good thump.
The point is people get offended, and as much as we are not easily offended (in fact I can't think of anything that would offend me unless it was specifically aimed AT me, and then it would have to be very specific), there are plenty of people that do. It's the reason most people don't go round swearing like troopers, because way too many people find words offensive; it's the reason people keep their mouthes shut in real life when someone is spouting rubbish about something they believe in and it's the reason most people wouldn't run around a church topless, because it'll offend.
The internet is no different. As much as I don't give a flying **** about a swear word on OcUK the mods obviously think others will (hence the censorship), so why should we be ok to constantly try and offend people with comments, many aimed specifically at insulting entire groups. It's not just Islam and people that follow it btw, I'm talking about everything. If people were more polite and generally less confrontational and aiming to offend then the world would be a nice place.
Alternatively we can keep posting "religion of peace
", and "death cult" comments.
The point is people get offended, and as much as we are not easily offended (in fact I can't think of anything that would offend me unless it was specifically aimed AT me, and then it would have to be very specific), there are plenty of people that do. It's the reason most people don't go round swearing like troopers, because way too many people find words offensive; it's the reason people keep their mouthes shut in real life when someone is spouting rubbish about something they believe in and it's the reason most people wouldn't run around a church topless, because it'll offend.
The internet is no different. As much as I don't give a flying **** about a swear word on OcUK the mods obviously think others will (hence the censorship), so why should we be ok to constantly try and offend people with comments, many aimed specifically at insulting entire groups. It's not just Islam and people that follow it btw, I'm talking about everything. If people were more polite and generally less confrontational and aiming to offend then the world would be a nice place.
Alternatively we can keep posting "religion of peace
", and "death cult" comments.
Last edited:
I'd feel the same way as you, yet there are plenty of native Brits that would be offended. Heck, I'm sure there would be plenty of Americans that would probably be close to shooting you if you burned their flag in certain parts of the country. At the very least you could get a good thump.
The point is people get offended, and as much as we are not easily offended (in fact I can't think of anything that would offend me unless it was specifically aimed AT me, and then it would have to be very specific), there are plenty of people that do. It's the reason most people don't go round swearing like troopers, because way too many people find words offensive; it's the reason people keep their mouthes shut in real life when someone is spouting rubbish about something they believe in and it's the reason most people wouldn't run around a church topless, because it'll offend.
The internet is no different. As much as I don't give a flying **** about a swear word on OcUK the mods obviously think others will (hence the censorship), so why should we be ok to constantly try and offend people with comments, many aimed specifically at insulting entire groups. It's not just Islam and people that follow it btw, I'm talking about everything. If people were more polite and generally less confrontational and aiming to offend then the world would be a nice place.
Alternatively we can keep posting "religion of peace
There is a massive difference in how we react to becoming offended as well.
We all do get offended, sure. Different things trigger us, sure. Chances are if I insulted your wife/mum in front of you and her, you'd both be offended.
But what a lot of us are questioning, and cannot understand at all, is how often (some) muslims feels the need to take to the streets, protest (inc banners with "behead those who" messages), send death threats, preach jihad, etc. And believe those are a proportionate reaction to their books/historical figures/whatever being "slighted", often accidentally. And you always get prominent muslim council members on TV talking about how much their suffering in this nation of prejudice and discrimination (yeah, like Christians would do better in Saudi...)
We're not talking blatant acts of aggression (which burning a flag or burning a quran would amount to).
And lastly there are those very real cases where muslims feel entitled to practice their religion with the same privilege and protections as they would have in a muslim country. Like special muslim-only prayer rooms. Like segregation of men and women in university clubs. Like sharia courts.
That to my mind is unbelievable. And that some universities are going along with it appals me!
And lastly... let's take a Christian in Saudi Arabia/ Iran/ any random islamic state. They complain that something offends them. Wonder how seriously they have their complaint taken. Being kaffir, they probably keep their heads down and don't complain in the first place.
e: which is to say, we are bending over backwards at every opportunity, whilst in Saudi they are laughing their asses off at us, for being so naive.
Last edited:
Most of us cannot also understand just how often (some) non muslim need to complain and be offended.
What is the issue with prayer rooms? Every religion has them, and generally, outside of specific buildings they are multi faith prayer rooms. I've yet to see an Islam only prayer room around. And what is the issue with Sharia Courts in the UK, as long as they follow UK law, no different to jewish courts and the multitude of other courts in the land, as has been discussed multiple times. Just because the Daily Mail extrapolates beyond reason doesn't mean it's the truth.
And that's the point. You are unreasonably discriminating when consistently bringing things like Sharia based courts in the UK up, when the equivalent courts of other religions are rarely if ever mentioned. It's not people being unreasonably offended that is the main issue. It's people continuously bringing up the same stuff time and time again for no legitimate reason. Do we really need a running commentary every time a something negative in the news can be attributed in some way to Islam?
Realising some idiot has put a page from a religions book in a cartoon, where the rest of the pages are supposed to be incomprehensible rubbish, and then removing the particular episode from circulation after it is pointed out is not bending over backwards. It's common sense. I wouldn't expect any difference if it was a random page from the bible, scientology text or any other revered text. Can you not see how it could unnecessarily offend some people, especially as a significant number of Muslim children may be watch Fireman Sam and recognise it. No one has marched on the street, heck we haven't even had any confirmation that anyone has complained officially to anyone, just a few dozen twitter comments. I'm sure much of the reason for removing the episode is probably business and economics related. Potentially alienating a proportion of your viewership over something that shouldn't be in there in the first place is a bit stupid isn't it? It's why the pages were supposed to be unrecognisable in the first place.
As for the last comment, we aren't Saudi, Iran or any random Islamic state. This comment always gets me. Why should we be taking cues off states that you yourself would complain are barbaric, backwards and a myriad of other negative words? We are supposed to be free, and allow the right to free speech and free religion. If someone wants to be judged under sharia/jewish/morman/freemason courts, as long as they are no superseding British law then who gives a ****? it's a free country. No one is bending over backwards.
I for one am glad we aren't acting like Saudi on this issue. If you want us to then I suggest you move to Saudi, rather than reduce our rights and freedoms.
What is the issue with prayer rooms? Every religion has them, and generally, outside of specific buildings they are multi faith prayer rooms. I've yet to see an Islam only prayer room around. And what is the issue with Sharia Courts in the UK, as long as they follow UK law, no different to jewish courts and the multitude of other courts in the land, as has been discussed multiple times. Just because the Daily Mail extrapolates beyond reason doesn't mean it's the truth.
And that's the point. You are unreasonably discriminating when consistently bringing things like Sharia based courts in the UK up, when the equivalent courts of other religions are rarely if ever mentioned. It's not people being unreasonably offended that is the main issue. It's people continuously bringing up the same stuff time and time again for no legitimate reason. Do we really need a running commentary every time a something negative in the news can be attributed in some way to Islam?
Realising some idiot has put a page from a religions book in a cartoon, where the rest of the pages are supposed to be incomprehensible rubbish, and then removing the particular episode from circulation after it is pointed out is not bending over backwards. It's common sense. I wouldn't expect any difference if it was a random page from the bible, scientology text or any other revered text. Can you not see how it could unnecessarily offend some people, especially as a significant number of Muslim children may be watch Fireman Sam and recognise it. No one has marched on the street, heck we haven't even had any confirmation that anyone has complained officially to anyone, just a few dozen twitter comments. I'm sure much of the reason for removing the episode is probably business and economics related. Potentially alienating a proportion of your viewership over something that shouldn't be in there in the first place is a bit stupid isn't it? It's why the pages were supposed to be unrecognisable in the first place.
As for the last comment, we aren't Saudi, Iran or any random Islamic state. This comment always gets me. Why should we be taking cues off states that you yourself would complain are barbaric, backwards and a myriad of other negative words? We are supposed to be free, and allow the right to free speech and free religion. If someone wants to be judged under sharia/jewish/morman/freemason courts, as long as they are no superseding British law then who gives a ****? it's a free country. No one is bending over backwards.
I for one am glad we aren't acting like Saudi on this issue. If you want us to then I suggest you move to Saudi, rather than reduce our rights and freedoms.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2016
- Posts
- 1,412
- Location
- Moonbase Alpha
I feel I know some of the background to that kind of behaviour, but I don't think that behaviour is right, I think it's misguided and stupid. If I could tell you the exact reasons for it, those reasons wouldn't make the behaviour any more correct. Unless you have someone who behaves like this on the forum to answer your questioning then where are you going to get with those questions?
Last edited:
But real men have thick skins innit. I know I've been at OcUK for a while now but this thread has entirely gone the way I expected it to. I'm an advocate for freedom of speech. But it's very easy even as a person who has no god to see why this could be offensive. Just because it went un-noticed for so long. has no baring on it being offensive.
The law states that offense is determined by the offended not the offender. In modern society where people sue colleagues for saying they look hot on linked in. It's not hard to grasp. What's really disturbing is that people seem to want to project offense o to others to line up with their agenda. This happens from all angles these days. Sjw's getting offended on someone else behalf to the political right trying to fit a story to their agenda a trick Britain first use all the time.
Bastille day was recently pulled after the nice attacks.
Spiderman had the twin towers edited out I 2001
Gone baby gone was delayed in the UK after Madeline mcann went missing.
Whilst the above were unavoidable and not intentionally offensive on any level the powers that be proactively sought to avoid offending people. Perhaps if the content creators and production companies involved in fireman Sam were just a bit more sympathetic in our multi cultural world they would have shown more diligence in checking that their content is as good as it can be. I mean so what if it was an animator having a laugh what if next time they do it, the child actually understands it's meaning. Just because it was Islam this time doesn't mean the next blunder will be... We should be pressing companies responsible for making content for our children to be making the best they can. Even more so in this world where the media has made many people scared of everything from child abduction to terrorists. So people don't let their kids play out....
Last edited:
You do realise how religious indoctrination works right? Because from those few lines you've posted it looks like you have no clue
The fact you think it's as simple as "choosing to get offended" proves you simply have no idea I'm afraid.
It's OK folks, they shouldn't take offence because "They" just "decide" to get overly attached, they're never threatened with eternal hell-fire, their sexual urges have never been enticed, never manipulated, never told there are multiple levels of heaven and hell, etc etc.
Last edited:
Political correctness is the oppression of our intellectual movement so no one says anything anymore just in case anyone else get’s offended. What happens if you say that and someone gets offended? Well they can be offended, can’t they? What’s wrong with being offended? When did stick and stones may break my bones stop being relevant? Isn’t that what you teach children? He called me an idiot! Don’t worry about it, he’s a dick.
Now you have adults going “I was offended, I was offended and I have rights!” Well so what, be offended, nothing happened. You’re an adult, grow up, and deal with it. I was offended! Well, I don’t care! Nothing happens when you’re offended. “I went to the comedy show and the comedian said something about the lord, and I was offended, and when I woke up in the morning, I had leprosy."
Nothing Happens. “I want to live in a democracy but I never want to be offended again.” Well you’re an idiot.
How do you make a law about offending people? How do you make it an offense to offend people? Being offended is subjective. It has everything to do with you as an individual or a collective, or a group or a society or a community. Your moral conditioning, your religious beliefs. What offends me may not offend you. And you want to make laws about this?
- Steve Hughes.
"Isn’t that what you teach children? He called me an idiot! Don’t worry about it, he’s a dick."
Somewhat out of context but that's what happens when. You quote someone else instead of putting it across in your own words.
Yes political correctness is an issue but the fact you understand it is an issue doesn't detract from your understanding of how something may cause offense. Fireman Sam is not the same as Frankie Boyle. Normal people don't watch Frankie Boyle if they find him offensive. Roy chubby brown made a career out of having an opinion shared by other people. But not by all.
The context in which the use of the Quran is offensive is clear the fact you don't like Islam has no relevance to the issue on hand. You can say it's political correctness gone mad or accept that perhaps it shouldn't have been done. People who moan about people being offended are often as "deluded" an single-track minded as those they mock.
Paying to see a porn film and complaining about the nudity is not the same as complaining about porn being aired on a terrestrial TV show pre watershed.
Yes political correctness is an issue but the fact you understand it is an issue doesn't detract from your understanding of how something may cause offense. Fireman Sam is not the same as Frankie Boyle. Normal people don't watch Frankie Boyle if they find him offensive. Roy chubby brown made a career out of having an opinion shared by other people. But not by all.
The context in which the use of the Quran is offensive is clear the fact you don't like Islam has no relevance to the issue on hand. You can say it's political correctness gone mad or accept that perhaps it shouldn't have been done. People who moan about people being offended are often as "deluded" an single-track minded as those they mock.
Paying to see a porn film and complaining about the nudity is not the same as complaining about porn being aired on a terrestrial TV show pre watershed.
Last edited:
As this is not about religion I'll answer that one.
No it's certainly not what I treat my children. Comedy irrespective.
If my child said "XYZ called me an idiot" then I would say (as I have done in similar circumstances)
"Well firstly we know they are wrong you are not. The word itself is not nice so we don't use it. If they say it again then say you don't like it and that the reason you don't like it is because it makes you sad. If they continue to carry on after that then tell your teacher."
That way the person who does it can learn about the consequences of their behaviour on other people. Empathy is one of the greatest drivers towards stopping conflict. If you can imbue someone with the empathy to know how their actions are effecting other people towards inflicting harm then that's the first step in getting them to change negative behaviour.
So in answer to your original post people need to be taught that words can and do hurt and to maybe realise that they have two ears and one mouth and therefore should do twice as much listening as talking and to engage that rather splendid organ situated above and behind the mouth before opening it.
Last edited:
What weak people you both are in my opinion.
I was born very hard of hearing and the kids used to take the pee every chance they got. People still do it today.
Did I get "offended" NO I dealt with it and it soon stopped.
I'm in a electric wheelchair now and it happens more. It doesn't bother me at all? NO Because I grew up and dealt with it.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,167
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
SO, fireman sam.....
I don't understand how some of you have no empathy in the slightest. Whilst I find all religion pointless and fake. I can understand others have lives where they have been indoctrinated. So if Mohammad goes ape **** because someone insulted the paper he believes is written by god himself or whatever, then good for him. I toleratehis crap for as long as it doesn't impede my daily life.
I pity religious people. Though I won't go out of my way to antagonise anyone or preach agnostic waffle.
Let the idiots cry. You can't reason with people that ultimately believe in God because they are deluded.
Give me one sign god and I'll devote my entire life to you. Until then .... I'll carry on as iam.
I pity religious people. Though I won't go out of my way to antagonise anyone or preach agnostic waffle.
Let the idiots cry. You can't reason with people that ultimately believe in God because they are deluded.
Give me one sign god and I'll devote my entire life to you. Until then .... I'll carry on as iam.
You do realise how religious indoctrination works right? Because from those few lines you've posted it looks like you have no clue
The fact you think it's as simple as "choosing to get offended" proves you simply have no idea I'm afraid.
It's OK folks, they shouldn't take offence because "They" just "decide" to get overly attached, they're never threatened with eternal hell-fire, their sexual urges have never been enticed, never manipulated, never told there are multiple levels of heaven and hell, etc etc.
The point is it's not our job to accomodate their views, no matter how they came to have them.
Otherwise you're validating those views.
It seems by what you say about indoctrination that you don't think theses views are (always) sane, but you would still go out of your way to appease the people with these views.
Let's say a person is indoctrinated into believing in a flat Earth, and gets offended by scientific programs describing the world as spherical (ish).
Said person refuses to allow his children to sit in on lessons where they teach that the Earth is a sphere.
Would you a) ignore this person as they are getting offended over something that's plain nonsense, or b) validate this persons views by giving in to their request.
Islam is very much like that person. Getting offended to the point of murder for a drawing of a dead guy. To the point of murder, remember. And we're saying "well, it's our fault for offending them."
I don't like it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 4,473
- Location
- South West
But it wasn't Tony Blair that said "right chaps, off you go" - it had to get voted through. Plus let's face it there must have been something about as Saddam had or certainly used (according dictionary definition) weapons of mass destruction (chemical weapons). Just read reports of Halabja chemical attack. I don't have an opinion whether it was justified or not but the whole thing has simply been part of the problem we now have, but it would have occurred at some point.
If it were a decision only Blair could have made then we would have a dictatorship. As I said, very weak link but I take the other examples you mentioned.
Last edited:
Political corectness is a social tool that evolved to promote respect among the members of a society. It pressures people to avoid offending others, which is a form of respect and it fills a gap left by the decreasing influence of traditionalism.
We no longer show respect for blood lines (the royal family n lords are social relics), we show less respect for being part of the same extended family(clan) and we show less respect for those in higher classes. In other words, respect in our society is not granted automatically, it must be earned (that by the way is part of the explanation for our celebrity culture).
In conclusion, respect is crucial part of a society, our old rules for granting it are obsolete so we made new ones. Political correctness is one of them and no matter how much some of you whine about it, it's here to stay because we need it.
Why so many people seem to hate a concept that basically says 'try not to be an ahole' is beyond me but if I were to guess I would say it threatens their identity.
We no longer show respect for blood lines (the royal family n lords are social relics), we show less respect for being part of the same extended family(clan) and we show less respect for those in higher classes. In other words, respect in our society is not granted automatically, it must be earned (that by the way is part of the explanation for our celebrity culture).
In conclusion, respect is crucial part of a society, our old rules for granting it are obsolete so we made new ones. Political correctness is one of them and no matter how much some of you whine about it, it's here to stay because we need it.
Why so many people seem to hate a concept that basically says 'try not to be an ahole' is beyond me but if I were to guess I would say it threatens their identity.