Don’t people need to use a swastika occasionally? Sure, you can describe it or use the word “swastika”, but why not have it in a font? I would think it would be useful to use in, say, a newsletter reporting hate crimes.
Is there any good reason to remove it from a font? I can only think of stupid reasons, like that some people will think that Microsoft supports Nazi causes if they make a font with a Nazi symbol. Obviously there are people that moronic, but are there any non-stupid reasons to remove the swastika that I can’t think of?
I susspect it is just that the missuse of the symbol would likely outweigh the reasonable use. Who wants to produce the software of choice for the national front?
If there was a symbol of a penis, it could be argued that there were legitimate uses for it, non the less the illegitimate uses would completely outweigh them.
That’s the most inconclusive Cecil column I’ve seen. It does nothing to enlighten, just emphasises how many people (and peoples) feel driven to defend or demonise a fairly crude symbol.
Who cares which symbol MS were portraying? It’s of use to many people - and no, those who will use it to perpetrate race-hate crimes are not in the majority, nor will they be encouraged by this.
Most buddhist swastikas I’ve seen were the reverse. I’ve never seen a Nazi one that was the reverse.
However, it doesn’t change my point much. This is pandering to ignorance. A swastika in a font need not have anything to do with Nazis, and Microsoft getting into a tizzy about it and going apologising to Jewish organisations in advance is daft.
Swastikas are, IIRC, illegal in Germany. You can’t display them at all.
I worked on a WW2-era computer game once, and we had to use the Iron Cross in lieu of it. Otherwise our software would have not been allowed on the market.
Assuming MS wants to have the same fonts for all countries, that may be the reason why they are pulling it.
Isn’t it possible to buy different sets of fonts-- some specialized one perhaps containing a swastika-- and using them as a plug-in (I guess) to MS Word?
If that’s so, then I think that Microsoft needn’t include the swastika in their package, as it is available elsewhere to those who would need/want it (from white power groups to the Jewish Defense League-- I can see any number of situations where such a character would be useful).
So to answer the OP:
Why NOT remove swastikas from fonts? It only causes you (the manufacturer) a bunch of headaches, and it’s not like some sort of First Amendment violation because other more inclusive font sets are (presumably) available.
Like I said in the OP, because sometimes one might need to use a swastika.
And there’s no reason to remove it that isn’t either stupid itself (it supports Nazi causes!) or the result of others’ stupidity (people will think it supports Nazi causes!).
I thought the comment about Germany seemed logical. And despite your comment that people might need to use them, which I guess is possible, the benefit of helping those people pales in comparison to the P.R. damage that would occur if they left it.
And those are both reasons based on other’s stupidity, IMO.
It’s stupid to ban a symbol. Also IMO obviously; this is a subject that could be debated as well. But banning a swastika will neither erase past atrocities nor prevent future ones.
And any bad PR about this is also based on stupidity. It shouldn’t be an issue. The swastika exists, and a making a font that has it is not a saying anything for (or against) anything is represents now or represented in the past.
Some model companies will not include swastikas on their decal sheets in spite of the fact that they were displayed on the tails of Luftwaffe aircraft they are reproducing.
Yes, you’re right. But since the company has absolutely no incentive to include them, that’s the way it’s gonna work. I don’t think anybody reporting on hate crimes is actually going to use a swastika, by the way… it’d probably seem a trifle insensitive.
For what it’s worth (or not), the swastika is used on Japanese maps to represent Buddhist temples, the same way little crosses appear on American maps to represent the location of churches. I assume that a Japanese person trying to make a map with swastika-less MS software might be a bit frustrated.
Not that this is a serious problem, mind you.
(I’m not sure which way the swastikas on Japanese maps are oriented.)
Much as it galls me to defend Microsoft (argh! can I ever forgive myself?), I don’t see an issue with removing politically sensitive symbols from Microsoft’s fonts, particularly in this day of extreme political correctness. I would be concerned if it was illegal to produce fonts with any politically sensitive symbol (swastika, Star of David, raised middle finger, etc), but Microsoft certainly does not have a monopoly on font production (yet).
No, it’s not. The swastika is indeed used as the relatively “official” symbol for Buddhism. As Kyomara mentioned, it’s used on maps to show temples. In Japanese, it’s called manji and wàn in Mandarin. Its origin is the Indian symbol mentioned in the column. The Indian swastika can go both ways and it appears that the clockwise version was at first prevalent in Chinese writings. However, clockwise swastikas are a bit harder to write than counter-clockwise ones. (That is, if you write it as though it were a Chinese character.) For this reason, perhaps, the clockwise, Nazi, swastika is now considered obsolete in Chinese and Japanese writings. The Buddhist swastika IS a mirror image of the Nazi one. If I type “manji” on my Japanese OS, the character that shows up on my screen is not the Nazi symbol.
I never thought of a swastika as a character anyway. If i had to use one in a document–not that I ever have–I could always draw it with Paint, or cook up a picture of one in some other manner.
Here’s the really funny thing: the article says that the font is based on a Japanese font set. Your link certainly supports that. Note also, that the symbol immediately left of the second swastika is a torii, the symbol for the shinto religion. However, the really weird thing is that the swastika is facing the wrong way for a Japanese symbol. Compare this with the dictionary entry for manji (requires Japanese fonts installed). They had to use a .gif file to show the Nazi-like version, because it does not exist in Japanese fonts.
So, on one hand, the context would kind of argue for it being the Buddhist swastika. However, whoever made that font got the symbol wrong and put the Nazi one instead. (Nazi swastikas are called kagi-juji in Japanese, not manji.)
