sailor: *My test is simple. If the person saying or doing something is doing it with the intent of being offensive or of just not caring if he might be offensive, then, obviously, it is rude and not acceptable. But if there is no intention to offend I just can’t see why people should get so worked up about things. *
Emphasis mine. I don’t see how you can usefully apply that test in real life. How can you tell if somebody who’s wearing a t-shirt with a racial/ethnic stereotype is intending to make fun of members of that racial/ethnic group or not? Are you supposed to go up to them and ask them? I agree that when you’re not sure of someone else’s intentions, the best default is to give them the benefit of the doubt; but I don’t think it’s a good idea for them to count on getting the benefit of the doubt or to insist that they’re somehow entitled to it.
Who cares if you are right if you are going to make a big stink about every little thing?
You have a point here, but IMHO it goes double for those who start avowedly trivial debates simply in order to complain that other folks are being too PC.
*My point is that you cannot be offended unless you are insecure to begin with and you are looking to be offended. *
Can’t agree with you there. Plenty of people are bigoted and/or insensitive enough to do and say things all the time that deeply offend even the very secure and non-belligerent.
DR: *Maybe people are free to sell stuff, have a sense of humor, and exercise their freedom of speech without living in fear of the self-appointed arbiters of victimhood. *
Goodness, look who’s whining about victimization now! Oh my, poor, poor Abercrombie and Fitch, unable to make an honest living and exercise their constitutional rights without “living in fear” (oooh, echoes of totalitarian terror!) of some unspecified vengeance from the “self-appointed arbiters”! :rolleyes:
Give us a break. As Biggirl pointed out, nobody’s rights are being trampled on, nobody is forcing anybody else to “live in fear.” What happened here is simply that a clothing company came out with a product line that certain consumers found offensive, and when those consumers objected to it, the company decided to pull the line in order not to injure its popularity. That’s how marketing works, okay?
There’s no free-speech issue here. You want a “Pizza Dojo” shirt, you go study the model in the above link, get yourself a plain t-shirt, and copy the design onto it; I seriously doubt that A&F will bother suing you for copyright infringement, since they’re not expecting to make any more money on it anyway. You wear that shirt anywhere you like, and if anybody infringes your constitutional rights or illegally harasses you because of it, I’ll be the first and the loudest to complain that such treatment is intolerable. As for the nasty looks and negative comments you’ll get from those who are offended by it, though, just chalk it up to free speech and don’t come back here whining about how you have to live in fear of the arbiters.
*And in various ethnic enclaves around the US, such as the Swedes in Minnesota or the Germans in central Texas, you’ll find members of those groups proudly playing up their respective stereotypes. *
They didn’t always, not when those stereotypes could still get them shunned in mainstream society, keep them out of desirable jobs, or in extreme cases get them killed. Lots of nineteenth-century German immigrants objected to being called “Dutchies”, just as Irish ones resented being called “micks” (or worse, “white Negroes”) or humorously portrayed as lazy, ignorant, drunken, priest-ridden menials.
In fact, the comfort level of an ethnic group with its old negative stereotypes is a pretty good indicator of how far that group has been “mainstreamed” into American society. Now that the American descendants of Germans, Irish, Swedes, and Italians seldom or never encounter serious prejudice against their own ethnic groups, they can laugh about the forms that prejudice used to take. Yes, it would be nice if the American descendants of East Asians were so integrated into American culture that they could all laugh at silly jokes like “two Wongs can make it white.” However, since we’re obviously not there yet, I think it’s pretty pointless (not to say arrogant) to complain that it’s the offended Asian-Americans’ fault for being such prissy humorless old party-poopers.
What brought this on? I thought we were in agreement, both on Urban Ranger’s mistaken notion vis-a-vis Hong Kong, and specifically on the subtle racism behind “Darlie” :rolleyes: toothpaste. I brought up that brand of toothpaste because it was the most succinct rebuttal I could think of to Urban Ranger’s earlier assertion.