Political Correctness News

The British Academy of Film and Television Arts (Bafta) has adopted new diversity rules for films qualifying for consideration for awards.

In order to compete for the awards, productions will, from 2019, have to demonstrate that they have made effort to boost diversity in two of the four following areas:

• On screen representation, themes and narratives
• Project leadership and creative practitioners
• Industry access and opportunities
• Opportunities for diversity in audience development

BAFTA added.

Under-represented groups in the film industry include people from minority ethnic backgrounds, disabled people, women and LGBT. It also includes people from lower socio-economic groups.

In certain categories productions based or set outside London can also count towards achieving the standards.

Film4 and BBC films have already agreed to adopt the standards.

Offsite Comment: The Sky is Falling

31st December 2016 See  article from spiked-online.com by Christian Butler

A number of articles about BAFTA's new rules single out Skyfall, the 2012 James Bond film, as an example of a previous winner that wouldn't be nominated under the new guidelines.

Offsite Video Comment: Diversity: Do as we tell you - and be diverse

31st December 2016 See video from YouTube by the Britisher

The Britisher wonders whether the rules will restrict the BBC from producing programmes in settings where a diverse cast would be a distraction, think Jane Austen or King Arthu.r

Embrace is a 2016 Australia / Canada / Dominican Republic / Germany / USA / UK documentary by Taryn Brumfitt.
Starring Renee Airya, Jade Beall and Taryn Brumfitt.

When Body Image Activist Taryn Brumfitt posted an unconventional before-and-after photo in 2013 it was seen by more than 100 million people worldwide and sparked an international media frenzy. EMBRACE follows Taryn's crusade as she explores the global issue of body loathing, inspiring us to change the way we feel about ourselves and think about our bodies.

A few days ago the BBFC entry for the film read:

UK: Passed 15 uncut for strong language, nudity, brief surgical detail for:

• 2016 cinema release

The entry has now been updated to:

UK: Passed 15 uncut for strong language for:

• 2016 cinema release

There is no mention of cuts and the running times remains the same. The nudity and surgical detail could have been pixellated out. But it seems more likely that feminists have dreamt up a new rule of political correctness that nudity does not count in the context of a feminist film.

Perhaps the BBFC advice should read, strong language, positive body image, negative surgical body image augmentation

Dutch political leader Geert Wilders has been found guilty of hate speech and inciting racial discrimination for leading a chant calling for fewer, fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands.

Presiding Judge Hendrik Steenhuis said the court would not impose a sentence because the conviction was punishment enough for a democratically elected lawmaker. Prosecutors had asked judges to fine him 5,000 euros ($5,300).

Wilders, head of the PVV Freedom Party, was not present to hear the judgement but his lawyer Geert-Jan Knoops immediately issued a statement to say that he would appeal.

The judge claimed that Wilders had breached the boundaries of even a politician's freedom of speech. Wilders said, in a statement:

I still cannot believe it, but I have been convicted because I asked a question about Moroccans. The Netherlands has become a sick country. The judge who convicted me [has] restricted the freedom of speech for millions of Dutch. I will never be silent. I am not a racist and neither are my voters.

Update: Even more popular

13th December 2016. See  article from yahoo.com

Geert Wilders' party has risen strongly in the polls since the lawmaker was convicted of discrimination, according to a survey published on Sunday.

The current state of the polls suggests that his party would win about 36 seats out of 150, leaving the party with most seats but probably not in government.

A PC campaign group is urging for the totally disproportionate punishment of the sack for Strictly Come Dancing judge Craig Revel Horwood after he said he liked the sex and violence in the hit TV series Game of Thrones.

Revel Horwood was on the More4 comedy panel show 8 Out of 10 Cats on Tuesday night when discussing the hit American fantasy drama series with other panelists on the show.

Host Jimmy asked Horwood if he watched the programme and he replied:

No, I persevered for the first series until the dragon came on and that's when I switched off.

I liked all the sex scenes and the rape and I liked the cleavers through the skulls and I liked all of that, but I got very bored in the end.

Irish actress Aisling Bea who was on his team, looked horrified.  She said:

When they weren't raping anyone? Am I the only one who heard that? What world are we living in? Oh Trump's world, fine keep going.

Marilyn Hawes, founder of Enough Abuse UK, said she was:

Absolutely disgusted. Rape is the most devastating and vile crime and I would have to question him as a person and his merit as a judge on the Strictly Come Dancing panel, which is a family show.

His comment would have enraged many women and men who have been raped. How could he say he liked that scene? I'm absolutely disgusted.

You cannot have people on a family show with that mindset. I think the BBC should get rid of him. It is so distressing for people who have been raped to hear that.

A book parodying vintage children's texts has been withdrawn following a fierce attack by social justice whingers who claim that Bad Little Children's Books is racist for its depictions of Native Americans and Muslims

Illustrator Arthur C. Gackley has now withdrawn the title saying:

The book is clearly not being read by some in the way I had intended--as satire--and, more disturbingly, is being misread as the very act of hate and bigotry that the work was meant to expose, not promote.

Images in the book, marketed as a collection of 120 edgy, politically incorrect parodies, include a girl wearing a burka giving a ticking present to a little boy for a book called Happy Burkaday, Timmy by Ben Laden.

Examples of the miserable and censorial whinges are:

Nick Hanover tweeted: We need to stop letting entities like @ABRAMSbooks claim satire whenever they want to publish hateful trash.

Book Riot blogger Kelly Jensen whinged:

In a culture which is hateful and violent against anyone outside of the Christian norm, particularly Muslims, who thought this was even an okay image to present in a book, humorous or not? This is the sort of harmful imagery and stereotyping that literally kills lives -- and it's not the lives of little white boys who are dying. It's the lives of those, like the girl in the burka, who are impacted by disgusting "humor" like this. We don't live in a world where humor like this is acceptable. This kind of "humor" is never acceptable. It's deadly.

Book publisher Abrams disagreed with the author's withdrawal of the book saying:

In the last few days some commentators on social media and those who follow them have taken elements of the book out of context, failing to recognise it as an artistic work of social satire and comic parody. They argue that it lends credence to the hateful views that the author's work is clearly meant to mock, demean, expose, and subvert.

Bad Little Children's Books is a work of parody and satire and, as such, it is intentionally, openly, and provocatively offensive... We stand fully behind freedom of speech and artistic expression, and fully support the First Amendment. We have been disheartened by calls to censor the book and to stifle the author's right to express his artistic vision by people we would expect to promote those basic fundamental rights and freedoms.

However, faced with the misperceived message of the book, we are respecting the author's request.

Coronation Street ITV,
29 August 2016, 19:30

Coronation Street is a long-running and well-established soap opera on ITV.

Ofcom received 473 complaints about a comment by the character Eva Price during a scene in the local hair salon. Looking at her dyed hair, she said:

Yeah, look [pointing at her hair] I've got more roots than Kunte Kinte. No idea who that is by the way, it's summat my mum used to say.

Kunte Kinte is the lead character in Alex Haley's 1976 novel Roots: The Saga of an American Family which was later adapted into a popular television series called Roots. The story chronicles the life of an 18th century African man who was captured and sold into slavery in the United States.

The complainants considered the play on the word roots was unacceptable as the basis for a joke given the subject matter of the Alex Haley story, and therefore felt that the comment was racially offensive.

Ofcom considered Rule 2.3 of the Code:

In applying generally accepted standards broadcasters must ensure that material which may cause offence is justified by the contextâ?¦ Such material may include, but is not limited to... discriminatory treatment or language (for example on the grounds of...race...). Appropriate information should also be broadcast where it would assist in avoiding or minimising offence.

Ofcom Decision: Not in breach

Ofcom first considered whether the comment in this particular scene had the potential to cause offence. Slavery and ethnicity are subjects that broadcasters should approach with due caution, especially when they are referred to in a light-hearted context which could result in sensitivities being heightened. In Ofcom's view, viewers who were aware of the Alex Haley story or the Roots series would have been likely to associate Eva's reference to Kunte Kinte with the story, and with slavery. In the light-hearted context in which the remark was made, we considered that this reference to slavery had the potential to offend viewers.

Ofcom went on to consider if the broadcast of the material was justified by the context.

Eva Price's comment was a play on the word roots , which referred to both the colour of her hair at its roots and, through the reference to Kunte Kinte, the title of the 1970s television series. Although the series is well known for depicting the African slave trade in 18th century America, we noted that Eva's comment did not mention this at all. She only referred to the title of the television series and name of its lead character. We took into account, in particular, that at no point was language broadcast which referred directly to ethnicity or slavery, or in Ofcom's view, was derogatory or discriminatory.

Ofcom also took into account Eva's subsequent remark that she did not understand who Kunte Kinte was, and that she was repeating the phrase because it was something her mother used to say. This reflected the foolishness, and lack of sensitivity and cultural awareness, of her character. For her to speak in this thoughtless fashion without understanding what she was referring to, or that it might cause offence, was likely to have been consistent with the audience's expectations of her character.

We acknowledged that relatively high number of viewers complained to Ofcom, and that some viewers clearly felt very strongly about the remarks in this case. We noted the measures taken by ITV to mitigate the potential offence to these viewers by: writing to all complainants who contacted it directly, making a public statement to the press apologising if the remark had caused any unintended offence, and removing the phrase from subsequent broadcasts of the episode.

Having taking into account all the above factors, we were of the view that this potentially offensive material was justified by the context. Therefore, the material was not in breach of Rule 2.3 of the Code.

The student's union at City University in London has voted to ban the Daily Mail, Sun and Express newspapers on campus, despite there being no shops which sell them on the institution's grounds.

The decision was met with surprise and outrage from journalism students and former students, who claimed it was censorship and worrying and ignorant . A contest to the motion is now expected.

The Student Union's Annual General Meeting passed the motion Opposing Fascism and Social Divisiveness in the UK Media . The motion said that while the Mail, Sun and Express were the main focus of its policy, other media organisations were not excluded. The motion also promoted active pressuring of the aforementioned media outlets to cease to fuel fascism, racial tension and hatred in society and advocated using the University's industry contacts to reach out to employees and shareholders of the media outlets in question.

The union took issue with subjects of both recent and long term controversy. In addition to criticism of high court judges by the Mail and Express, they also rebuked the Sun for its coverage of the Hillsborough disaster. Other criticisms included approaching Nigel Farage for comment, criticising Islam, and giving Katie Hopkins a column.

The Red Pill is a 2016 USA documentary by Cassie Jaye.
Starring Marc Angelucci, Jack Barnes and Richard Cassalata.

The Red Pill chronicles filmmaker Cassie Jaye's journey following the mysterious and polarizing Men's Rights Movement. The Red Pill explores today's gender war and asks the question "what is the future of gender equality?"

The Red Pill, a new documentary film about men's rights activists (or MRAs), is out in limited release across the United States. It is also showing is in Melbourne, Australia, where tickets have completely sold out ahead of its November 5th premiere.

The film's producer, Cassie Jaye, has inevitably met with backlash from feminist campaigners for taking a balanced approach toward the subject of men's rights activism.

A petition has been started by Australian feminists urging Kino Cinema to censor the screening of the film whilst describing the movie in misleading terms. The petition reads:

Film-maker Cassie Jaye follows members of online hate-group 'The Red Pill,' known to most as the sexist cesspit of the internet, begins the complaint. The general plotline goes something like this: 'feminist' Jaye decides to investigate rape-culture, opens the first hit on Google (Red Pill) and before she knows it, she has seen the light and converted to 'meninism.'

Please do not associate your cinema with the kind of people who teach men how to violate women physically and emotionally. Please stand with the women everywhere, and do not promote misogynistic hate.

Much of the enmity toward The Red Pill comes from how it features men's activist Paul Elam, who writes incendiary remarks and articles about women online. While there's no defending much of what he has says, the film itself neither promotes his most offensive opinions, nor does it vilify women the way some feminists do to men. It merely presents MRAs in a (partly) sympathetic light.

Update: Banned

31st October 2016. See article from vice.com

The Red Pill was due to have its Australian premiere in Melbourne next month, which has since been cancelled by Palace Cinemas. The move comes after a campaign labelled it misogynistic propaganda.

In a letter to Men's Rights Melbourne, who have the exclusive distribution rights to the film after donating to its Kickstarter campaign, Palace Cinemas explained:

We have come to a decision based on the overwhelmingly negative response we have received from our valued customers. We cannot proceed with the booking.

The cinema chain also referred directly to a Change.org petition protesting the premiere of The Red Pill at Palace Kino in Melbourne, which received 2,370 signatures. The overwhelming number of responses, many from regular Kino customers, has really resonated with us, Palace Cinemas told Men's Rights Melbourne.

Update: UK premiere 19th November in Soho, London

1st November 2016. See  article from heatst.com
See event details from eventbrite.com

The Red Pill is coming to the UK. Heat Street reports that the movie's UK distributor says that its British premiere is planned for November 19th -- International Men's Day -- at London's Soho Hotel.

This comes after three other London venues pulled the plug on The Red Pill after venue owners got cold feet about feminist opposition.

A UK preview went ahead without event at the invite-only National Men's Rights Working Forum in Bath. Distributor Richard Elliott said:

It's revolutionary. People were crying one minute, then giving a standing ovation the next. It's going to ruffle a few feathers.

Update: BBFC 15 rated

17th November 2016.

The BBFC has now passed The Red Pill 15 uncut for strong language for 2016 cinema release.

Gary Lineker is in talks with Walkers crisps trying to get them to withdraw their advertising from the Sun over the newspaper's politically incorrect anti-refugee stories.

The BBC presenter, who has fronted Walkers' adverts for 21 years, this week gave his backing to a campaign to persuade companies not to advertise in newspapers that are responsible for what he calls divisive hate campaigns .

And, when asked by a Daily Mail journalist whether he would be speaking to Walkers about withdrawing its adverts, he replied: [I] already have.

However, a Walkers spokesperson suggested the company was unlikely to agree to Lineker's request. A spokesman said:

We have a very successful partnership with Gary Lineker and we will continue to do so. Our advertising approach is not determined by the editorial stances of individual newspapers.

Lego builds PC walls to keep Daily Mail readers out

See  article from bbc.com

Lego has announced its promotional giveaways with the Daily Mail have ended - amid a campaign to stop firms advertising with some newspapers over what it calls divisive coverage of migrants.

The firm regularly gives away free toys via the paper, but said there would be no more in the foreseeable future .

A campaign gorup Stop Funding Hate has lobbied firms to stop advertising with some newspapers. The group, formed in the summer, has criticised several national newspapers for portraying migrants in overwhelmingly negative terms . It has urged companies including John Lewis, Waitrose and Marks & Spencer to stop advertising with the Daily Mail, the Sun and Daily Express.

Responding to a tweet from Stop Funding Hate, Lego confirmed its promotional agreement with the Mail had ended. Lego told the BBC it spends:

A lot of time listening to what children have to say. And when parents and grandparents take the time to let us know how they feel, we always listen just as carefully.

The Mail is the UK's second most-read daily newspaper and boasts almost 15m readers a day online.

Comment: A message to the politically correct, Gary Lineker and Lego

13th November  2016. See  article from theguardian.com

Meanwhile Nick Cohen, writing in the Guardian, has a far more constructive idea, rather than censoring, banning, bullying,  or sneering at working class people, why not do something a bit more positive, like trying to do something to help them make a good living. Cohen advises the 'progressive' left to consider compromise:

But before you become self-righteous you must accept that the dominant faction on the western left uses language just as suggestive of collective punishment when they talk about their own white working class. Imagine how it must feel for a worker in Bruce Springsteen's Youngstown to hear college-educated liberals condemn white privilege when he has a shit job and a miserable life. Or Google the number of times straight white males are denounced by public-school educated women in the liberal media and think how that sounds to an ex-miner coughing his guts up in a Yorkshire council flat.

Emotionally, as well as rationally, they sense the left, or at least the left they see and hear, is no longer their friend. They are men and women who could be argued with, if the middle classes were willing to treat them decently. You might change their minds. You might even find that they could change yours.

Offsite Comment: Intolerance wears a progressive mask in the 21st century.

17th November 2016. See  article from blogs.spectator.co.uk by Brendan O'Neill

Stop Funding Hate: a nasty, elitist campaign for press censorship

Usually the Guardian's high priestesses of PC rail against impersonal commercial relationships involving sex as 'objectification', due to the perceived lack of interest in the sex workers offering the service. The US TV show, The Girlfriend Experience , spends its time filling in the details of the back story about the feelings and motivations of the sex workers. Surely the exact opposite of 'objectification'. The Guardian's TV reviewer tries to address this point. I'm none the wiser about the answer but I loved the phrase describing the Guardians feminist output as: "scathing think pieces'. Anyway the reviewer explained:

By humanizing these characters, by providing them with a rich inner life -- and, therefore, a backstory to and a reason for all the fucking -- we can justify watching them fuck. To merely objectify them, to ignore their personhood, would be construed as a form of sex shaming, opening us up as the potential subjects of scathing think pieces. The viewership of these new shows are not allergic to nuance; they possess the ability for complex thought and a desire to treat and investigate their minds as sexual organs.

 

Perennial hindu whinger Rajan Zed has taken aim at the Dutch festive character Black Pete. He wrote:

It was time for the negative, offensive, racist and discriminatory caricature of Black Pete (Zwarte Piet) to vanish from the traditional festivities of Netherlands.

Country of Rembrandt and Van Gogh which had a long history of social tolerance and which hosted International Court of Justice should not be in the business of such negative stereotyping.

Rajan Zed noted that it was absolutely baffling that racist stereotypes like Dutch Black Pete , which should have been extinct many decades ago, continued to exist in 21st century world. Was not Netherlands famous for promoting equality? Zed asked.

Zed indicated that Dutch Black Pete might be a popular Dutch tradition but it appeared to be a racist throwback to the slavery era.

Rajan Zed urged His Majesty King Willem-Alexander and Prime Minister Mark Rutte of the Netherlands to urgently intervene to put an end to the character of Dutch Black Pete .

Zed suggested His Holiness Pope Francis and other religious leaders to also come out with a strong statement against Dutch Black Pete tradition as religions were supposed to speak against racism.

Jeremy Paxman says he is baffled by Reading students voting to boycott University Challenge over claims that a ludicrous complaint about supposed misogynistic and sexist comments was not taken seriously enough.

The University of Reading's students' union voted to boycott the show, after hearing claims relating to a previous appearance by the university's team. The students' union at Reading University voted 120 to 105 in favour of adopting a policy of boycotting the quiz show. However the union wouldn't disclose what the issue was.

Paxman, presenter of the BBC2 quiz show, suggested that it might be about a comment made about a team mascot during a break in the recording:

I think they're referring to a recording of University Challenge which took place in February 2015, though I am baffled at why it has become an issue a year-and-a-half later.

There was a technical fault which meant we had to interrupt the recording, leaving all of us sitting at our desks in the studio while the problem was sorted out in the control gallery. In the conversation to fill the void - in a brightly lit studio, in front of all eight contestants, a full studio crew and an audience of several hundred spectators - I asked the Reading team about the mascot sitting on their desk.

One of them said it was a hand-knitted Jeremy Paxman doll. Across the several yards separating the chairman's desk from the teams, I asked the whole team whether they took it to bed with them. Though no complaint was made at the time, this, apparently, is what has upset them.

The University of Reading says the programme is a national institution and will step in to ensure the university is represented in the contest. A spokesman said:

We want our brightest and best students competing against the top universities in the UK in front of millions of viewers - not waving the white flag and refusing to enter

The university now plans to step in and recruit a team, given the students' union has opted out.

An attention grabbing Australian advertisement has swept the internet. The slogan See you in the Northern Territories has been cleverly written in acronyms: CU in the NT.

The logo quickly made headlines - it was dubbed the wildest tourism slogan ever by one news outlet - with critics variously hailing it as hilarious or distasteful.

But despite appearances, it is not an official campaign - as the actual NT tourism authority soon made clear.

Tourism NT is aware of inappropriate use of our trademarked Brolga logo. We are in no way affiliated with these promotions

The creators of the ad, NTOfficial.com, released a statement describing themselves as an independent underground campaign promoting the NT to young people.

The BBC reports that the word 'cunt' in Australia, is not taken as seriously as in other English-speaking countries, sometimes being used almost affectionately.

Politically correct campaigners have started a petition calling for British Airways to stop offering its passengers a copy of the Daily Mail. The censorship campaign is being backed by Alastair Campbell. The petition states:

It is ironic that our national carrier gives out a paper which is so xenophobic and critical of most things that are not home grown.

What must many of the overseas visitors think of some of the anti-european and other headlines that they read when flying into the UK.

All British Airways is doing is keeping up the sales levels of a newspaper that could not be objective if it tried to be and one that then has the hypocrisy to question the integrity of the BBC.

The paper has been attacked by commentators in recent weeks following its coverage of the Calais 'child' refugee story and for criticising the judges who ruled that parliament should override the will of the people.

Alastair Campbell tweeted his support for the ban:

If you are offered a Daily Mail on a plane today, just rip it up. Alastair Campbell (@campbellclaret)

Campbell claimed that Virgin boss Richard Branson supports his campaign to rid Virgin Atlantic flights of the Mail , but those who run his airline day to day insist the passengers want it . He also spoke of the frustration of watching readers enjoying the newspaper:

I want to take them by the neck - indeed, sometimes I do take them by the eyeball, and I ask: 'Why are you reading that shit? It's a national poison. Take some heroin or something.'

A discount online retailer everything5.com has 'outraged' campaigners by selling a women's t-shirt with the slogan NO MEANS NO - Well maybe if I'm drunk .

Since the t-shirt appeared on the site it has attracted a flurry of complaints from angry campaigners who are demanding that it is immediately banned from sale.

Among those complaining, Rachel Krys from campaign group End Violence Against Women branded the t-shirt disgusting and supported the calls to have it removed from sale. She told the Daily Mail:

It's just disgusting. I'm all for free speech ...BUT... I can see why lots of women have complained about it.

Women, particularly young women, see things like this and hear things around recent rape cases and think they're in some way to blame or that it's not as serious as it feels to them. It's part of a really unhelpful dialogue around sexual assault and consent in general. It's really offensive, particularly to people who have experienced sexual assault and rape. We're living in an environment where they are not believed, and it adds to the message that it's a joke or won't be believed.

A spokesman for the website said:

How come many people are buying those t-shirts, specially women? I think it is to do with what you think in your mind.

National Secular Society protests decision to suspend Louis Smith after he mocked Islam

The National Secular Society has written an open letter to British Gymnastics calling on the body to reverse the two month suspension given to athlete Louis Smith for mocking Islam.

The sporting body suspended Smith for two months and gave fellow athlete Luke Carson a reprimand over a video in which the two mocked Islamic prayer.

President of the National Secular Society Terry Sanderson wrote to British Gymnastics that's its own censorious actions had caused far more harm than Smith and Carson's mockery of Islam.

In an open letter Mr Sanderson said that:

British Gymnastics has contributed to a climate of censorship brought on by the unreasonable and reactionary views of religious extremists.

Rather than defending free expression, one of the most precious pillars of our liberal democratic society, you have chosen instead to side with extremists and patronise British Muslims by assuming they will take offence at the trivial actions of these two athletes.

British Gymnastics' condemnation and punishment of Louis Smith and Luke Carson will only serve to embolden the religious extremists who reject free speech and religious tolerance by demanding that Islam must not be mocked.

We urge you to consider whether by taking the actions it has, British Gymnastics has further endangered the safety of these two athletes by giving succour to those who seek to silence all criticism and mockery of their religion.

British Gymnastics' Standards of Conduct prohibits athletes from making offensive jokes or remarks. The National Secular Society has now called on British Gymnastics to revise its code of conduct to protect athletes' freedom of expression.

Offsite Comment: Je suis Louis Smith

Why we must be free to mock Islam. By Brendan O'Neill

3rd November 2016. See article from blogs.spectator.co.uk

Update: Parliamentary Questions

4th November 2016. See  article from freethinker.co.uk

Yesterday in parliament Tory MP Charles Walker was speaking about the chilling vilification of Louis Smith and accused politicians of having looked the other way over death threats to Smith.

During Prime Minister's Questions, he told MPs:

When people make fun of Christianity in this country, it rightly turns the other cheek.

When a young gymnast, Louis Smith, makes fun of another religion widely practised in this country, he is hounded on Twitter by the media and suspended by his association.

For goodness sake, this man received death threats and we have all looked the other way.

My question to the Prime Minister is this: what is going on in this country because I no longer understand the rules

In response, Theresa May seemed to affirm that freedom of speech has been repealed and that the criticism of islam is now officially considered off limits. She said:

I understand the level of concern that you have raised in relation to this matter. This is a balance that we need to find.

We value freedom of expression and freedom of speech in this country -- that is absolutely essential in underpinning our democracy ... BUT ... we also value tolerance to others. We also value tolerance in relation to religions.

This is one of the issues that we have looked at in the counter-extremism strategy that the Government has produced.

I think we need to ensure that yes it is right that people can have that freedom of expression. ..BUT... in doing so that right has a responsibility too.

And that is a responsibility to recognise the importance of tolerance to others.
 

Offsite Comment: British Gymnastics needs to get off its high horse

4th November 2016. See  article from theguardian.com . By Marina Hyde

Offsite Comment:  Islam is trying to make itself untouchable

4th November 2016. See article from talkradio.co.uk

How about a gender equality campaigner costume? Perfectly gruesome for Halloween

This year, the biggest controversy so far has been the Kim Kardashian Parisian Heist Robbery Victim costume from Costumeish. The get-up includes a white robe, large sunglasses, rope, a mouth gag that looks very BDSMy, and a fake $4 million dollar ring. A few miserable whinges got it pulled pulled from the site.

The sexy burka costume has been around for some time. It consists of an Arabic looking veil and a sexy little black dress.

Amazon decided to censor it after a few miserable gits claimed to have been 'outraged'.

thedebrief.co.uk commented on an example whinge:

One commenter asked: Is this some sort of mockery to the religion? Well, er, yes mate.

AVN were rather taken with a keep up the faith costume.

The full length black priest costume comes with dog collar, and a hand pump that helps you keep it up. Unfortunately the costume doesn't seem to have caught on with the easily offended and so is still available for sale.

And of curse one simply must not mention the WTF Granny Tranny costume. It has been recommended by Amazon, Target and Walmart, all of which have banned it.

The Green party has complained to the press censor IPSO over the use of pictures of refugees by the Sun, Daily Mail, Daily Star and Sunday Telegraph.

Although it was absolutely obvious that some of the 'children' were many years into adulthood, Jonathan Bartley, who co-heads the Green party, has asked the Independent Press Standards Organisation whether the titles were justified in printing images of refugees in Calais whom were claiming to be under 18.

According to Ipso's code of practice pictures of children under the age of 16 should not be used unless adult consent has been given.

Bartley ludicrously argued that the coverage did not qualify as an exceptional public interest that would allow the newspapers to override the Ipso code.

In fact large proportions of the public were well interested in the fact that the authorities are so politically correct that they refuse to entertain reasonable doubt about the voracity of what desperate refugees tell them.

Bartley argued that publishing the pictures contributed to an atmosphere of prejudice against the refugees. A little bit bizarre considering the pictures demonstrated how far British officials are biased in favour of the refugees.

The Green party complaint cites editions of the Sun (18th and 19th October), the Daily Mail (18 October), the Daily Star (19 October) and the Sunday Telegraph (23 October).

A rape scene on Sunday night's episode of Poldark has attracted just 14 complaints, surely a disappointment to PC campaigners.

A spokesman from TV censor Ofcom said the complaints would be assessed before deciding whether to investigate or not. Usually this means that the complaints are already heading towards the wastepaper bin.

In the episode, Ross Poldark, played by fan-favourite Aidan Turner, turns up unannounced at the house of his former fiancee Elizabeth. He kicks in the door and demands that she cancels her wedding to his enemy George Warleggan. She ignores what he says and instead asks him to leave, prompting him to take her face in his hands and forcefully kiss her. The scene continues until Poldark pushes her on to the bed and she appears to finally give in to him.

Sarah Green, co-director of the campaign group End Violence Against Women, said:

It is definitely portrayed very much as a rape. The female character says "no" and there are also non-verbal signs. She is moving away from him and pulling away from him. There is lots of stuff that is ambiguous.

The directors have done something really ambiguous. It is a really appalling message, which is they have made the representation of non-consensual sex ambiguous by making her appear to change her mind.

Poldark is  based on the novels of Winston Graham. Commenting on the controversial scene, the author's son Andrew said:

There is no "shock rape" storyline in the novels. To say so is to misconstrue my father's text. The BBC has cut nothing and (production company) Mammoth Screen's portrayal of these scenes is entirely true to my father's writing.

The only way to judge what my father intended is to read the novels as a whole. Doing so it becomes clear, from earlier scenes as well as from Elizabeth's immediate reactions and later mixed emotions, that what finally happened was consensual sex born of long-term love and longing. It was, as Aidan Turner has put it, "unfinished business emotionally".

Canada seems to have become particularly noted for PC extremism. A local news site comments on Halloween celebration sin the country:

Geishas are out. Feathered headdresses are forbidden. And if you're planning to wear a Bill Cosby or Caitlyn Jenner costume, you may not be welcome at your Halloween party of choice.

A growing number of institutions are starting to take a more proactive approach to potentially offensive outfits by developing strategies and even explicit policies to prevent people from donning controversial getups.

Costumes depicting specific cultural traditions are the most common focus of such efforts, which are making themselves felt in schools and universities.

The student union at Brock University in St. Catharines, Ont., recently prepared a list of prohibited costumes for its annual Halloween bash. The list features any form of headdress, costumes that mock suicide or rape, those depicting transgender activist Caitlyn Jenner, or outfits featuring a culture's traditional attire.

Offsite Comment: Halloween Is Not A Time For Good Taste, So Let’s Stop Being Offended About Everything

24th October 2016. See  article from reprobatemagazine.uk

These days, the anxious Christians and grumpy Little Englanders are no doubt still out there, but they have been mostly replaced in the public consciousness by an equally ridiculous, but unfortunately more pervasive group -- the professionally offended.

The current offence de jour is cultural appropriation , the most utterly ludicrous and dangerous idea to emerge in quite some time. It's an idea that is currently very popular with academics, and so is becoming the norm amongst the sort of people who fret about safe spaces, no-platforming and other campus ideas.

And it's increasingly seeping into the real world, with the hideous collision of people who desperately want to find offence everywhere and companies and individuals who are terrified of offending anyone -- understandably, given the ferocity and venom of Twitch hunts -- creating a perfect storm. The Outraged know that no matter how ludicrous their complaint, the targets will jump through hoops to apologise.

...Read the full article from reprobatemagazine.uk

Australian cartoonist Bill Leak drew an Aboriginal drunk who did not remember his son's name. Inevitably PC censors were 'outraged'.

The heraldsun.com.au wrote that The attacks were astonishing. Even the Turnbull Government's Indigenous Affairs Minister called the racist and tasteless . The Race Discrimination Commission branded him a racist.

But as with all good humour the cartoon played on an element of truth. No doubt the PC mob will be even more 'outraged' that Western Australia's top cop has commented that the cartoon is an accurate reflection of what police see in the field daily.

Commissioner O'Callaghan spoke of an example this last weekend. Four boys were charged with trashing a high school after which the police revealed one of the children accused of causing the damage, a 10-year-old boy, was taken home where his father refused to take responsibility for him. O'Callaghan said:

So we ended up, for many hours, looking after that child, trying to find a responsible adult. I will say though, as bad as it sounds, it's not an unusual thing for police to have trouble finding responsible adults for children that we find in trouble or on the streets late at night.

From my perspective, Bill Leak's cartoon is actually an accurate reflection of what our officers see on a day-to-day basis, when they're dealing particularly with kids from Aboriginal communities or Aboriginal families who are in trouble.

It happens repeatedly, and I think what Bill Leak was doing was trying to indicate a broader problem for the community to sort out.

Update: Censored whilst claiming to be uncensored

22nd October 2016. See  article from spiked-online.com by Matthew Lesh

Leak's cartoons are not for the faint-hearted. I often find them disagreeable. But that's no reason to put Leak before a government tribunal. Even if the case is eventually dismissed -- by the commission itself, or later in court -- it is still damaging to have gone through the process. It is costly, and hurtful to the reputations of all involved. The case also encourages people to stop talking about controversial issues, stifling freedom of expression. The use of the law against someone you disagree with is always an authoritarian response.

See  article from spiked-online.com

A regional press ad for family law solicitors Humphries Kirk LLP, seen in the Bournemouth Daily Echo on 25 June 2016, featured an image that showed the torso section of four female ballet dancers, who had their arms crossed over their chest. Text below the image stated Protect your assets ... Our solicitors are on hand to give you expert advice about divorce, finances, prenups, property disputes and children issues .

A complainant, who believed the ad was sexist and objectified women, challenged whether the ad was offensive.

ASA Assessment: complaint not upheld

The ASA noted that the ballet dancers featured in the ad were not depicted in a sexually suggestive or explicit pose, the ad was not sexual in tone and did not contain any form of nudity. Although the dancers' faces were partially obscured and the image only featured the lower parts of their faces to just above their knees, we considered that the focus of the ad was on the balletic pose and the dance formation, rather than on a specific part of their bodies.

We considered that the pose held by the dancers were likely to be seen as graceful and typical of ballet poses, but noted that it could be interpreted by some readers as a visual innuendo of the phrase Protect your assets , in that that the dancers were protective of, or defensive about, their bodies, or specifically their chest area. Although we acknowledged that some might find the reference to women's chests or breasts as assets distasteful, we considered that the reference in the ad was not used in a salacious or lewd manner, but rather it was a mild innuendo. Because we considered that the ad did not portray the ballet dancers in a sexualised, degrading or indecent manner, and that any innuendo was light hearted, we concluded that the ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence.

The Council of Europe has called for news censorship of the press such that it is not allowed to report when terrorists are muslim. The recommendations came as part of a list of 23 censorial demands to Theresa May's government on how to run the media in an alarming threat to freedom speech.

The report, drawn up by the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), blamed the recent increase in hate crimes and racism in the UK on the worrying examples of intolerance and hate speech in the newspapers, online and even among politicians , although the research was done before the Brexit campaign. Of course there was no apparent attribution of blame on the terrorists themselves for stirring up the hate.

The suggestions sent to Downing Street urging the UK Government to reform criminal law and freedom of the press and in a brutal criticism of the British press, the report recommends ministers give more rigorous training to journalists.

But UK ministers firmly rebutted the remarkable demands, telling the body:

The Government is committed to a free and open press and does not interfere with what the press does and does not publish, as long as the press abides by the law.

The report, from the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) body, said there had been an increase in hate speech and racist violence in Britain between March 2009 and March 2016. The report recommends the British media be barred from reporting the Muslim background of terrorists. The report states:

ECRI considers that, in light of the fact that Muslims are increasingly under the spotlight as a result of recent ISIS-related terrorist acts around the world, fuelling prejudice against Muslims shows a reckless disregard, not only for the dignity of the great majority of Muslims in the United Kingdom, but also for their safety.

In this context, it draws attention to a recent study by Teeside University suggesting that where the media stress the Muslim background of perpetrators of terrorist acts, and devote significant coverage to it, the violent backlash against Muslims is likely to be greater than in cases where the perpetrators motivation is downplayed or rejected in favour of alternative explanations.

Of course the use of alternative explanations isn't likely to work very well in reality. It is perhaps already true that when news media speak of 'mentally disturbed' attackers, then this is simply a euphemism for 'muslim'. And equally if background details are omitted entirely, then it can be safely inferred that attackers are muslim.

An upcoming student production of Aida at Music Theatre Bristol has been cancelled in the wake of ludicrous politically correct concerns about 'cultural appropriation'.

The opera was originally selected in a ballot of members of the company, however the decision has been made that it will not be presented to the general public. MTB said:

It is a great shame that we have had to cancel this show as of course we would not want to cause offence in any way as that was never our intention. Our intention was to tell this story, one which, surely is better heard than not performed.

However, some groups felt that this was an overreaction. Conrad Young, admin of Bristol Against Censorship, said:

Although MTB seemed to approach a sensitive topic with great humility and care, Aida was not to be. The affect that the fear of cultural appropriation has on modern campuses is a sad affair and in this case has damaged the student experience of the people involved and the prospective student audiences.