Australia's Advertising Standards Bureau (ASB) has banned an ad by Fantastic Framing for supposedly perpetuating sexism and violence. The picture framing shop had put a witty sign outside of the shop saying:
We can shoot your wife and frame your mother-in-law. If you want we can hang them too.
A complainant who saw the advertisement outside of the store window whinged it is sexist and violent .
The ASB says while the spot makes reference to female family members it is not sexist, explaining that advertisers are free to depict or make reference to whomever they wish in their advertisements . The board adds that stereotyping mothers-in-law
is a common part of cultural narrative in Australia and therefore acceptable.
However the board determines the advertisement does portray violence that is unjustifiable in the context advertised. The board said:
The intended humour has now worn off and the double meaning of the advertisement is not relevant in contemporary society given the high level of community concern with regards to violence towards women.
The majority of the board acknowledged that the advertiser's intent was to inject humour in to the ad but considered that making a joke about using a gun or hanging a person would not be found funny by most members of the community, the board says.
New Zealand police have asked New Zealand censors to consider the unpolitically correct advertising slogans painted on rental vans from the company Wicked Campervans.
Chief Censor Andrew Jack said:
I can confirm that we have received a submission in respect of some of the Wicked campervans from the police, and we'll be working through the classification process and testing those publications against the criteria in the Films, Videos, and
Publications Act to determine whether or not they need to be age restricted or might be objectionable.
This is the first time a publication, in respect of Wicked Campers, has been submitted to us.
We have to make sure that if something is going to be restricted or banned, you have to try to take into account the fact that people do have a right to freedom of expression, and it is a big deal to ban or restrict something.
Jack said the censorship process would take about a month.
Associate Minister of Tourism Paula Bennett told Morning Report she would not rule out legislating against the company, but would rather the Chief Censor dealt with the problem. She whinged:
I'm pretty determined to find an avenue to close these slogans down.
Birmingham's education commissioner says he has banned the use of the term Trojan Horse to describe alleged attempts by groups to take over schools and covertly impose a Muslim ethos.
Mike Tomlinson, appointed in the wake of the controversy, says the phrase was not helpful to attempts to improve Birmingham's schools. He claimed that it could have an adverse impact on teacher recruitment. Tomlinson said no-one in his department
was now allowed to use the phrase.
Political correctness enforcers in Ontario are calling for an end to sexy uniforms used to allure customers to the likes of Hooters or the Tilted Kilt restaurants.
Ontario's bizarrely named 'Human Rights' Commission claims that sexualized dress codes they believe discriminates against female and transgender workers.
Chief PC Enforcer Renu Mandhane says employers must make sure their dress codes don't reinforce sexist stereotypes. Mandhane claims policies requiring women to wear low-cut tops, short skirts or high heels could violate the 'Human Rights' code, and
they send a message than an employees' worth is tied to how they look.
The PC extremists spouted about sexualised dress requirements in a policy position paper:
This treatment is often visible in bars, restaurants and other services that require women to dress in high heels, tight dresses, low-cut tops and short skirts. These dress codes persist across the restaurant industry, despite human rights decisions that
have found them to be discriminatory. They may make employees more vulnerable to sexual harassment, contribute to discriminatory work environments and exclude people based on sex, gender identity...or creed.
A few easily offended tweeters have been 'outraged' by the Italian designer label Dolce & Gabbana after a pair of shoes were listed as slave sandals on their website.
The colourful pom-pom flats are part of the brand's new Spring-Summer 2016 collection.
But a few easily offended tweeters were 'outraged' and claimed the company were racist and accused them of glorifying slavery .
One commentator whinged:
Did slaves even wear shoes let alone sandals for D&G to be selling a 'slave sandal for $2,300?
Dolce & Gabbana. I love you, but why are you glorifying slavery? RELATED ARTICLES
However Tim Blanks, an editor at large at The Business of Fashion, explained to the New York Times:
That term was quite common in the industry at one time, especially at the height of the Hollywood biblical epics, the likes of Ben Hur and Spartacus, and people do still use it today.
I think they just were carrying over a lot from that era into the collection and got swept away, he added. Although I'm surprised it wasn't picked up sooner as something that might be inflammatory in this day and age. Although it's not as if the term
'gladiator sanda' as an alternative is really that much better.'
The sandals were later renamed on the retailer's website to decorative flat sandal in Napa leather with pompoms .
Dutch menswear label, Suit Supply, received a bit of a PC backlash on social media this week after releasing its Spring 2016 campaign featuring suited men posing against a backdrop of bikini clad women.
The campaign, dubbed Toy Boys , launched last Tuesday featuring a look book of images that all vary on the same theme: a suited man posing with a large-scale bikini-clad woman as the backdrop.
Although some have praised the campaign's innovative approach, but some have accused it of having misogynistic undertones\.
The accompanying Suit Supply press release states:
Sometimes it seems like it's a woman's world these days, and we just live in it.
So what's a guy to do? You're a modern gentleman, but the tables have turned. You have a certain way with the ladies...that is, until they have their way with you. You're a playboy, but what happens when the playboy becomes the plaything?
A few people whinged Twitter to voice their 'outrage'. One man tweeted yo @suitsupply are you selling suits or misogyny this season? whilst another tweeted wow @suitsupplies, your latest campaign is terrible in so many ways #everydaysexism .
Meanwhile an Amsterdam billboard was defaced by covering it with 'outraged' messages and sanitary towels.
A t-shirt has generated a little outrage on the market place fashion website, ASOS. The shirt features a large S in a circle with
the caption, "slave". The 'outrage' was compounded by a product image featuring a black model.
ASOS Marketplace withdrew the shirt saying:
Whenever we find product that violates our policies we remove it immediately. There is also a 'report this item' link under every product picture.
Wasted Heroes, the company making the shirt, explained that the shirt is intended as a statement, of sorts, about being slavish to a brand. A spokeman added:
Beyonce and her powerhouse backup dancers have generated a bit of a controversy by referencing police brutally and the 60's radical group, the Black Panthers. Beyonce was performing at the halftime show at the Super Bowl.
Her support for the Black Lives Matter movement were featured in her performance, earning her praise for speaking out against institutional racism as well as complaints that she denigrated law enforcement.
In particular, the performance, as well as the release of a new video Formation the day before, have offended pro-police elements in the U.S., who are now calling for a Beyonce boycott.
Beyonce's performance featured her and her dancers wearing outfits that paid tribute to the Black Panthers, the radical socialist organization in the U.S. that challenged police brutality against African Americans between the 1960s and 70s.
Beyonce's dancers raised their arms with fists clenched alluding to the black power salute.
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, meanwhile, denounced her Super Bowl performance as "outrageous," claiming she used her platform to "attack" police officers.
Meanwhile Toronto councillor Jim Karygiannis suggested that Beyonce be banned from entering Canada, claiming the pop star promotes gun culture and anti-police sentiments.
The Labour MP Chris Bryan is calling for the classic Tom Jones song Delilah to be banned from Six Nations rugby matches claiming that it glorifies domestic violence. The politically correct claims the song is about killing a prostitute
I know that some people will say, 'Oh, here we go, he's a terrible spoilsport,' but the truth is that that song is about the murder of a prostitute. Chris
It is a simple fact that when there are big international rugby matches on, and sometimes football matches as well, the number of domestic violence incidents rises dramatically.
It goes right to the heart of the issues we are discussing. There are thousands of other songs we could sing.
I have sung 'Delilah' as well - everybody loves doing the 'She stood there laughing' moment- but if we are really going to take this issue seriously in Wales, we have to change how we do things.
The Sixties hit is an unofficial anthem at Cardiff matches, with male voice choirs and even Tom himself singing it before every game. The lyrics read:
I saw the light on the night that I passed by her window
I saw the flickering shadows of love on her blind
She was my woman
As she deceived me I watched and went out of my mind
My, my, my, Delilah
Why, why, why, Delilah
I could see that girl was no good for me
But I was lost like a slave that no man could free
At break of day when that man drove away, I was waiting
I crossed the street to her house and she opened the door
She stood there laughing
I felt the knife in my hand and she laughed no more
So before they come to break down the door
Forgive me Delilah I just couldn't take any more
The One Show is a daily magazine programme broadcast every weekday in the early evening on BBC1.
A total of 11 complainants alerted Ofcom to a joke made by the comedian Jimmy Carr, when he appeared on this programme. In summary, complainants objected to Jimmy Carr making a disgusting and offensive joke about a particular disabled group
i.e. those who have dwarfism. Three of the complainants either themselves, or had family members who, have dwarfism.
We noted the following exchange at approximately 19:26, between one of the programme's presenters, Matt Baker ( MB ), and Jimmy Carr ( JC ):
MB: Which joke were you most surprised by that you thought was funny that you didn't realise at the time?
JC: I don't know, I'm just trying to think of my favourite all-time joke which might work on this show: 'I've got a Welsh friend of mine. I asked him how many partners he had in his life. And he started to count and he fell asleep' . [Laughter in
JC: [Looking into the camera and smiling] That's just about alright, isn't it... [Looking at presenter] I tried to write the shortest joke possible, so I wrote a two word joke, which was: Dwarf shortage . Just so I could pack more jokes
into the show. [Looking into the camera] If you're a dwarf and you're offended by that: Grow up!
We considered that Jimmy Carr's joke ( Dwarf shortage ) and his follow-up statement ( If you're a dwarf and you're offended by that: Grow up! ) raised potential issues under the following rule of the Code: Rule 2.3:
In applying generally accepted standards broadcasters must ensure that material which may cause offence is justified by the context... Such material may include, but is not limited to, offensive language, violence, sex, sexual violence, humiliation,
distress, violation of human dignity, discriminatory treatment or language (for example on the grounds of age, disability, gender, race, religion, beliefs and sexual orientation). Appropriate information should also be broadcast where it would assist in
avoiding or minimising offence.
Ofcom Decision: Breach of Rule 2.3
In coming to a Decision in this case, we therefore assessed first whether the material in this programme had the potential to cause offence. During this programme, Jimmy Carr referred to his attempt to write the shortest joke possible . The joke
in question was Dwarf shortage . He then made the statement: If you're a dwarf and you're offended by that: Grow up! We considered that, as both the joke and the follow up statement attempted to derive humour from dwarfism (a medical
condition causing restricted growth which often causes a person with the condition to be regarded as disabled), these statements clearly had the potential to cause offence.
In reaching our Decision, we noted the BBC statements that The One Show's Editor takes the view that [Jimmy Carr's] joke was not appropriate for The One Show and The One Show production team takes a particular view on the tone they would like
to adhere to, and feels this joke was inappropriate in light of that . We also noted that the BBC would be amending the letter that guests are asked to sign prior to appearing on the One Show to make clear they should refrain from making jokes at
the expense of minorities . Nonetheless, the BBC argued that Jimmy Carr's comments did not amount to a breach of Rule 2.3 of the Code.
However, on the facts of this particular case, we considered that Jimmy Carr's jokes intended to derive humour from people with dwarfism were likely to cause offence, and for all the reasons set out above were not justified by the context. Therefore, our
view was that there was a breach of Rule 2.3 of the Code.
Offsite Comment: Should anything be 'beyond a joke ?'
Free speech campaigners in America have protested about a book being pulled after politically correct pressure from those who claim the right to dictate how books about slavery should be written. The campaigners note that the ban will lead authors to shy
away from taking on racially sensitive ... topics for fear of public outcry and reprisals .
A Birthday Cake for George Washington , by author Ramin Ganeshram and illustrator Vanessa Brantley-Newton, is narrated by the daughter of George Washington's slave, Hercules, who is preparing a cake for the president's birthday.
In a review, School Library Journal accused the book of providing a dangerously rosy impression of the relationship between slaves and slave owners that it could give to young readers. It said that the light tone of the text and the colourful, cartoon-style
illustrations convey a feeling of joyfulness that contrasts starkly with the reality of slave life .
The PC censorship campaign then grew under the hashtag #slaverywithasmile. Then last week publisher Scholastic bowed to the pressure and withdrew the book from sale.
Campaigners hailed the decision as a victory, but the National Coalition Against Censorship and the PEN American Center have now released a statement criticising Scholastic's move. NCAC executive director Joan Bertin said:
While reasonable people can disagree about the book's historical or literary merit, Scholastic's decision to pull it in response to controversy is a shocking and nearly unprecedented case of self-censorship.
Those who value free speech as an essential human right and a necessary precondition for social change should be alarmed whenever books are removed from circulation because they are controversial.
While it is perfectly valid for critics to dispute a book's historical accuracy and literary merit, the appropriate response is not to withdraw the volume and deprive readers of a chance to evaluate the book and the controversy for themselves. In the
case of A Birthday Cake for George Washington, a book is gone that generated important discussions about how our nation creates, perceives and perpetuates narratives about slavery and slave ownership.
[Pulling the book] is likely to have a chilling effect, leading authors and illustrators to hesitate in taking on racially sensitive or politically controversial topics for fear of public outcry and reprisals .
Costumes for children to dress up as wartime refugees have been taken off the German edition of Amazon' s website over supposed fears they offend refugees.
Pictured holding a suitcase, the child models are pictured wearing old fashioned clothing, intimidating wartime civilian wear which some people have claimed mocks the plight of migrants.
When Amazon's offering of refugee costumes was posted online it quickly attracted the attention of PC bullies who claimed the costumes were 'inhuman and distasteful.
Those that defended the children's costume on offer pointed out that it was nothing to do with the current wave of refugees, and is intended to represent a refugee during World War II. The costumes were being offered for carnival celebrations take place
in Germany and Switzerland.
A mobile game that set up Indigenous Australians as shoot 'em up targets has been removed from both Apple and Google app stores following campaigns by cyber
Survival Island 3 -- Australia Story 3D tasked players with surviving in the outback. Threats included angry animals and aboriginals noted as angry as you invaded their home!
A screenshot used to promote the game in the Apple iTunes store showed an in-game alert of Beware of Aborigines!
The game was listed as appropriate for players of 12 years old and up, for infrequent/mild realistic violence, cartoon or fantasy violence, and horror/fear themes .
Gaming news website Player Attack said :
The video shows a first-person view of beating an Aboriginal man to death with a blunt weapon while the voiceover cackles gleefully. The gamer is rewarded with a boomerang and what looks like a stone arrowhead.
A Change.org petition calling for the removal of the game was started on Friday night, and now has more than 48,300 signatures.
Survival Island 3 is not currently available to download from either the Australian or United States iTunes stores, nor the Google Play store.
The Beware of Aborigines! line is from the app store page, along with the New Weapon line, both of which are used on the promotional screenshots but don't actually appear in the game.
The Aboriginal NPCs are standard NPCs and can either be friendly or hostile depending on the player's actions but it doesn't say Beware of Aborigines when they're on screen. This is also evidenced in a video from Andrei Plugaru , where no warning
messages pop up when the Aborigines appear.
Even still, the media picked up on the petition -- no different than what they did with the GTA V petition that resulted in the game getting removed from Target and Kmart in Australia -- and they've been reporting that the game is about killing
indigenous tribes in Australia.
At the time of the writing of this article, Survival Island 3: Australia Story 3D has been pulled from the iTunes app store and Google Play.
A lingerie shop has offended the easily offended of Brighton. The shop display featured a sexily attired mannequin visiting a
Prudish Brighton student, Sarah Derby, complained that the display was demeaning women with outdated ideology. She said:
I understand sex sells but this window displays a picture of women as sexualised domestic beings. They seem to be saying that to be sexy you also need to be able to do the laundry.
I live in Kemp Town and walk past all the sex shops every day. This isn't about being prudish ...BUT... sexuality shouldn't be linked with domesticity.
In her full complaint to the company, Derby questioned why the firm had not chosen to display attractive women in the House of Commons, laboratories or succeeding at sport.
A spokeswoman for Boux Avenue said:
We were very concerned to hear of the complaint with regards to one of our window displays in the Brighton store. At Boux Avenue we pride ourselves on being a customer centric brand and we attempt to create fun and engaging window displays that we are
confident our customers will enjoy. The window as designed by our creative team, was not intended to cause offence but we can see how the concept could be interpreted and have taken the feedback on board.
The campaign is due to come to an end this week and this is not a creative that we will be repeating. We apologise for any offence caused, as this was by no means the effect intended.
Gourmet Burger Kitchen (GBK), a leading burger chain in the UK, has launched a new tongue in cheek campaign to tempt vegetarians to eat meat, inevitably outraging a few easily offended vegans.
The adverts, seen mostly at London Underground stations and trains, include taglines such as Vegetarians, resistance is futile, and You'll always remember when you gave up being a vegetarian .
People have taken to social media to whinge about GBK's ads, coining the hashtag #gourmetmurderkitchen to highlight what has been perceived to be a flippant attitude towards the consumption of meat.
GBK quickly responded to the flood of complaints, confirming they will be taking down some of the adverts.
We've been reading the reactions to our latest advertising campaign and needless to say, we're quite taken aback. Our intentions were light-hearted and not meant to cause any offence, but clearly we have, and for that we apologise.
Having read all your comments and messages, we've made the decision to take down some of the adverts.
A new Kafkaesque Europe where elevating European values over others is branded a phobia. Where to refuse to speak the truth is considered virtuous, and where saying how things really are, is seen as bad. By Brendan O'Neill
The dating site Where White People Meet, launched in late 2015, for white people who want to date other white people.
At first sight it may seem a little un-PC but there are plenty of websites specialising in very specific gender, racial, religion, age dating that exist without PC extremists throwing a wobbler. Eg jdate.com for Jewish people or ourtime.com for
those older than 50.
But of course this doesn't please PC extremists. According to a recent study out of Australia on online dating apps, claims that people who display a marked romantic preference for one race are more likely to be racist. Researchers found that 64% of the
gay men they studied said it was acceptable to state a racial preference on these apps, and 70% believe it is totally fine to list racial preferences. Apparently the researchers claimed a correlation between racial discrimination and those who had high
levels of racial preference.
The Guardian PC expert writing the article wailed:
To deny a person based solely on racial and ethnic identity without even getting to know them, instead of giving their numerous non melanin-related aspects a chance, is racism -- both on- and offline. I
I bet even the Guardian PC extremists would draw a line at demanding people ignore ageism when selecting sexual partners. And as for expecting religious women to not consider cultural identity when selecting their men....let's not go there.
A few people have whinged on twitter about a scarf design sold by H&M. The scarf is apparently similar to a tallit scarf, a Jewish shawl worn during prayer. Both feature a cream colour, with the same black stripes and tassels.
A couple of trivial tweets were:
Dear Fashion: Please step off other ppl's ritual items (or symbols of liberation, really.)
Yo @hm this is exceedingly uncool.
An H&M spokesperson said:
We are truly sorry if we have offended anyone with this piece. Everyone is welcome at H&M and we never take a religious or political stand. Stripes is one of the trends for this season and something we were inspired by. Our intention was never to
A Hungarian human rights lawyer and journalist who published a series of portraits transposing her own face on to those of African women has been bullied into removing her work.
Boglarka Balogh posted the project I Morphed Myself Into Tribal Women To Raise Awareness Of Their Secluded Cultures writing that the portraits set out to celebrate stunning tribal beauties at the brink of extinction .
But PC extremists took offence at the artwork and in a series of angry blogs claimed the work to be offensive, patronising and narcissistic. Kara Brown in an article headlined World Weeps in Gratitude for Woke Hungarian Who Did 7 Types of Blackface to
Save Africa From Going Extinct whinged:
You can practically feel the ignorance washing over you like those firehoses they turned on black protesters back in the good old days.
Balogh responded by deleting the pages and writing:
Since I had no intentions to offend anyone and yet I'm not able to answer to all of you, I've decided to delete my post. My intention was 100% pure with this tribal art, being a human right [sic] lawyer and journalist who knows pretty much about racism
and similar issues. I have never imagined that my work will annoy so many people and that I will have to explain myself. And sure, I will not do that. Keep calm and love every human.