Man sends banana to black mans table in Wetherspoons pub

Status
Not open for further replies.
People seem to be confused, just because I think free speech is important and should be protected, I don't think what this man did is "okay". I don't think taking heroine is "okay" either, but I don't think it should be a criminal offense. There's some quite intelligent people on here who fundamentally don't see the value of free speech which tells me they haven't studied history. You aren't moving on as a society by locking people up for the words they utter, no matter how strongly you disagree with them, you're regressing.
 
Freefaller said:
I guess some people have never been on the receiving end of racist comments.

People say, that there's a chip on the shoulder of a lot of ethnic minorities, but there's a reason for that, they're constantly reminded of the fact they are somehow different (when they're really not). Having been on the receiving end, as well as seeing it against some of my friends and partners in the past - it's frankly not acceptable.

Sure, it may be "feelings" but racism also is much more than that. I've heard wholly unacceptable things in the past and the reaction from my friends were, "it's ok, don't react, we're used to it.".... Why the hell should they be "used to it". That is not acceptable, it is not the modern society we should be living in.

It is a hate crime, and whilst it does seem to have been blown out of proportion, until we stop casual knuckle dragging behaviour like that, we'll never fix society. There's nothing to defend here - whilst it may seem like a joke, it is something that is deeply personal and antagonistic to do.

It is quite tiring hearing apologists stating they're eroding their rights by not being able to say what they want - well, you've got to realise we're moving on as a society and this sort of thing just isn't acceptable anymore (it should never have been in the first place!).
Click to expand...

I largely agree with you, but there is a fine line between policing abuse and stifling free speech. I think the guy in this incident got what he deserved but it is important to keep freedom of speech at the forefront of priorities when deciding how to deal with this type of thing.
 
Roar87 said:
People seem to be confused, just because I think free speech is important and should be protected, I don't think what this man did is "okay". I don't think taking heroine is "okay" either, but I don't think it should be a criminal offense. There's some quite intelligent people on here who fundamentally don't see the value of free speech which tells me they haven't studied history. You aren't moving on as a society by locking people up for the words they utter, no matter how strongly you disagree with them, you're regressing.
Click to expand...
Do you think giving heroine to someone that doesnt want it should be a criminal offense? How about spiking someone elses drink?

Im quite happy with you looking in the mirror and calling yourself what ever you want. The trouble comes when you force that on someone else.
 
The Running Man said:
I dont disagree but you are also downplaying the abuse sent to people who are

Ginger
Tall
Short (see the thread 'how did this guy get this girl')
Fat
Ugly


Go on any story about Scarlett Moffet on a news website and read the comments- usually about size and weight. Overtly mocking her.

No ones tried to ban the word 'minger'

Yet people are always judged and treated differently due to physical appearance

None if this justifies racism but why aren't we trying to uphold the rights of everyone judged by appearance?
Click to expand...

You raise an interesting point - shouldn't we try and be nice to one another?

Descriptive words I think are ok, if the person is black, call them,... black. If the person is tall... call them tall.

However, it's hard to use some words without them being seen as 'judgmental' - i.e. fat... it's kinda hard to not make that sound nasty. Even overweight, implies they are not "normal" i.e. they're over the weight that is deemed acceptable or normal.

Ugly is subjective as well, and can be used callously.

It's a hard balance to strike - but I think it's not beyond the wit of humans to apply a little sensitivity. Instead of saying "ugly" you could say, "not my type" I guess? I suppose "fat" could be said as "large framed"

Don't misplace my comments, I also find excessive Political Correctness overly frustrating at times - but I know that publicly even if internally I find it odd, I will try my best not to hurt of offend someone.

In private (i.e. to myself) I'll say, she's fat, she's ugly, she's got nice boobs. But I'd never dare say that to the person - because I know those comments add nothing other than create fuss / resentment / anguish potentially.

We are visual creatures, we judge before we even consciously do it - it's bias, it's just normal - it's a human condition to have biases. I think they're called cognitive biases? There are also protected characteristics that we shouldn't judge on. That doesn't mean we don't judge them but we need to be aware we are judging.

It's tough - I guess it comes down to. Don't be a ****.
 
R.P.L said:
I largely agree with you, but there is a fine line between policing abuse and stifling free speech. I think the guy in this incident got what he deserved but it is important to keep freedom of speech at the forefront of priorities when deciding how to deal with this type of thing.
Click to expand...

Agree - it's a fine line, and one I think we'll continue to struggle with for some time.
 
Freefaller said:
You raise an interesting point - shouldn't we try and be nice to one another?

Descriptive words I think are ok, if the person is black, call them,... black. If the person is tall... call them tall.

However, it's hard to use some words without them being seen as 'judgmental' - i.e. fat... it's kinda hard to not make that sound nasty. Even overweight, implies they are not "normal" i.e. they're over the weight that is deemed acceptable or normal.

Ugly is subjective as well, and can be used callously.

It's a hard balance to strike - but I think it's not beyond the wit of humans to apply a little sensitivity. Instead of saying "ugly" you could say, "not my type" I guess? I suppose "fat" could be said as "large framed"

Don't misplace my comments, I also find excessive Political Correctness overly frustrating at times - but I know that publicly even if internally I find it odd, I will try my best not to hurt of offend someone.

In private (i.e. to myself) I'll say, she's fat, she's ugly, she's got nice boobs. But I'd never dare say that to the person - because I know those comments add nothing other than create fuss / resentment / anguish potentially.

We are visual creatures, we judge before we even consciously do it - it's bias, it's just normal - it's a human condition to have biases. I think they're called cognitive biases? There are also protected characteristics that we shouldn't judge on. That doesn't mean we don't judge them but we need to be aware we are judging.

It's tough - I guess it comes down to. Don't be a ****.
Click to expand...

But people are fine to make a thread asking about how a guy got a call, because he's short. Thats not speaking to themselves thats an overt display of not just 'not being very nice' but showing discriminatory prejudice against someone based upon their physicality.

Imagine the condemnation if it was because he got girl x but was y skin colour?

Do you think he doesn't get any game of thrones stick when at the pub?

Why are peoples rights not being protected equally?

I dont care what someone says they mean by 'whitey', if its needs such a definition why say it at all if it can be misconstrued?
 
Gone are the days when the great black comedian Charlie Williams would quip in good self deprecating humour, in front of Her Majesty the Queen, "If you don't behave I'll come and live next door to you". Now someone allegedly sending a black man a banana to eat in a cheap pub chain causes the full investigative weight of the law to be summonsed and the great debating chamber that is the Overclockers GD forum goes into overdrive to heatedly discuss this grave matter over 20 long pages, and rising ;) Meanwhile, outside of the cloistered "woke" world a virus rages, killing and maiming those in its path, the UK leaves the EU, and a global financial crisis is ensuing. But, offensive bananas..... ;)
 
Tony Edwards said:
Do you think giving heroine to someone that doesnt want it should be a criminal offense? How about spiking someone elses drink?

Im quite happy with you looking in the mirror and calling yourself what ever you want. The trouble comes when you force that on someone else.
Click to expand...

Tony I don't think you value free speech at all, I think you view someone using free speech as a defense of someone saying something you strongly disagree with as if the person using the free speech argument is in tantamount agreement with the original speech. Liberty to express freely is beyond your comprehension, you haven't the basic understanding why it's valuable, you don't know how it contributed to the Enlightenment, probably think the American constitution is just something gun nuts and racists use as an excuse to do whatever they want. As far as I'm concerned you're basically on the level of an Antifa member pulling down a statue of George Washington, there's no point even responding to my posts because you don't have the capacity to understand them.

As far as your ridiculous question goes though there is a difference between someone having hurt feelings and someone coming to physical harm. Hurt feelings aren't the same as physical harm.
 
The Running Man said:
Why are peoples rights not being protected equally?

I dont care what someone says they mean by 'whitey', if its needs such a definition why say it at all if it can be misconstrued?
Click to expand...

2 excellent points that I don't really have any response to as I think they're fair challenges. It's clearly a complex subject.
 
Roar87 said:
Tony I don't think you value free speech at all, I think you view someone using free speech as a defense of someone saying something you strongly disagree with as if the person using the free speech argument is in tantamount agreement with the original speech. Liberty to express freely is beyond your comprehension, you haven't the basic understanding why it's valuable, you don't know how it contributed to the Enlightenment, probably think the American constitution is just something gun nuts and racists use as an excuse to do whatever they want. As far as I'm concerned you're basically on the level of an Antifa member pulling down a statue of George Washington, there's no point even responding to my posts because you don't have the capacity to understand them.

As far as your ridiculous question goes though there is a difference between someone having hurt feelings and someone coming to physical harm. Hurt feelings aren't the same as physical harm.
Click to expand...
I do have the capacity to understand your posts because they arent that intellectually challenging. I dont value your take on free speech at all if its to allow people to be racist for racist stake, you are correct.

Are you confused what freedom of speech actually is?

You can think what you want about me but if your opinion of me as an antifa is based on the fact I understand, see and call out racism then I cant help with your understanding of what antifa is.I mean yes I am aganist facism. Arent you? Or are you a profacist?

I hope you dont think calling me an antifa is insulting because if I was it wouldnt be something Id be ashamed of unlike the people that constantly deny they are racists when called out.

As someone that has protested or been to protests in the past I do support freedom of speech just not hate speech in an open forum or public.
 
I don't see the problem with being antifa. As Tony Edwards says, it's anti-facism. I'm not convinced that antifa as an organisation are being portrayed correctly in the media anyway. The largest antifa organisation I can think of was the allied alliance of WW2. I would hope most wouldn't be perceiving them negatively.
 
It is an interesting precedent for the 'isms' though.

For example, if a guy gets bounced at the bar in favour of serving a woman, can we sue the barman for being sexist and claim £600 compensation?

Similarly if the bouncer on the door doesn't let a guy in buy then let's a woman in, is there another compensation claim due?
 
Roar87 said:
People seem to be confused, just because I think free speech is important and should be protected, I don't think what this man did is "okay". I don't think taking heroine is "okay" either, but I don't think it should be a criminal offense. There's some quite intelligent people on here who fundamentally don't see the value of free speech which tells me they haven't studied history. You aren't moving on as a society by locking people up for the words they utter, no matter how strongly you disagree with them, you're regressing.
Click to expand...

Good job he wasn't locked up then isn't it.

He was an obnoxious moron who wasn't promoting a position or furthering a cause, he went out his way to offend someone and has had to pay a fine.
 
Roar87 said:
Tony I don't think you value free speech at all, I think you view someone using free speech as a defense of someone saying something you strongly disagree with as if the person using the free speech argument is in tantamount agreement with the original speech. Liberty to express freely is beyond your comprehension, you haven't the basic understanding why it's valuable, you don't know how it contributed to the Enlightenment, probably think the American constitution is just something gun nuts and racists use as an excuse to do whatever they want. As far as I'm concerned you're basically on the level of an Antifa member pulling down a statue of George Washington, there's no point even responding to my posts because you don't have the capacity to understand them.

As far as your ridiculous question goes though there is a difference between someone having hurt feelings and someone coming to physical harm. Hurt feelings aren't the same as physical harm.
Click to expand...
You, sir, are extremely arrogant and quite delusional in opinion. I'm sure the ladies love those traits :D
 
NVP said:
The apparent debate is if it is acceptable in modern society to do such a thing, and shockingly if the act of sending a Banana somehow falls under the category of free speech :confused:

I like hearing the view of others*, the sheer vastness appears to prevent desensitisation(!)

*to an extent
Click to expand...

I haven't read through the whole thread but is this really the debate? Most everyone seems to be saying it's racist and not acceptable, just many think it shouldn't be a police matter.
 
Energize said:
I haven't read through the whole thread but is this really the debate? Most everyone seems to be saying it's racist and not acceptable, just many think it shouldn't be a police matter.
Click to expand...

Probably not but then the government are forced into making it a police matter as scrubs just keep being asshats.
 
Energize said:
I haven't read through the whole thread but is this really the debate? Most everyone seems to be saying it's racist and not acceptable, just many think it shouldn't be a police matter.
Click to expand...

For clarity I should have used the term "legally" acceptable in modern society.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom