okay but if we're arguing about context, Same Love used the word in a more tasteful way and it got censored during the peak of its radio airplay so it's not exactly a valid reason.

 

Either all bad language should be censored, or none of it - personally, I favour the latter.

 

WE laugh now at the Victorian idea of putting trousers on classical statues, or painting clothes on renaissance nudes, yet we still haven't learned our lesson on censorship...

Edited December 3, 20186 yr by vidcapper

Free speech!

People should lighten up and stop being so PC!

It's a food!

You can't touch a classic!

I like shouting it one month a year without any consequences!

 

Me when S&M got butchered by Radio 1

What I think some of this comes down to is empathy, and the point was made in the article I posted on the first page.

 

It’s recognising that whilst the word may not have impacted you personally, a large number of people may have had deeply unpleasant associations with it that don’t need to be brought up whilst listening to the radio over Christmas. It’s deciding whether censoring the word on radio is going to have any impact on your life, and then weighing that against the fact that the word has been used to humiliate and demean a small but significant part of the population for decades.

 

It’s using empathy as the tool to reach your conclusion, rather than trying to justify the word by screaming “but context” or “snowflake” when you read about things like this.

I agree that it should be censored for radio / TV. Lyrical context is irrelevant - it’s a word that is widely used as a slur and therefore it should be treated like other profanity. I think it’s odd that it gets a pass.

I honestly cannot fathom how it's so hard for people NOT to be dicks and hurt others feelings? Like, it takes so little effort to just be nice and considerate??

 

It shouldn't revolve around the context of the composers but rather how the people who listen to it perceive it. I sorely doubt that a 12 year old in downtown London is going to listen to that line and go "she's probably just calling him lazy." No, kids and grown-up bigots alike are going to think she's calling him the word we're all discussing here and that's exactly why it's a problem.

 

If you still don't get it, read this paragraph from the very informative article iain posted:

 

"I remember the song coming out in 1987 and being circled by a group of boys in the playground – I was coming up for 12 years old – cheering ones from the song and pointing at me on the word “f*****”. A daily occurrence. I remember Christmas 1989, one of my very favourite school bullies striding down the aisle of the school bus shouting out that line, and timing the “f*****” with a slap to the side of my head that made it bounce off the window. I remember the awkward looks from colleagues singing it at karaoke at a work Christmas party as they approached the line, willing me to give them permission, which I gave, against my will, by grinning and opening my mouth and miming along – even that word. No sound came out."

Edited December 3, 20186 yr by cantthinkofaname

Everyone in this thread is 'I'm not offended but others are/might be' notion that its like people need to complain for the sake of it or be offended on someone else behalf.

 

 

As a gay man I don’t find it offensive and think people are dumb for being offended by it.

 

Sorry! :-)

Everyone in this thread is 'I'm not offended but others are/might be' notion that its like people need to complain for the sake of it or be offended on someone else behalf.

 

No it’s about basic human empathy and decency.

As a gay man I don’t find it offensive and think people are dumb for being offended by it.

 

Sorry! :-)

Blimey

As a gay man I don’t find it offensive and think people are dumb for being offended by it.

 

Sorry! :-)

 

Did you read the article I posted? About somebody’s lived experience with that word, and how charged the word is for them? Are black people dumb for being offended by racist language? Are Jewish people dumb for being offended by anti Semitic language?

Everyone in this thread is 'I'm not offended but others are/might be' notion that its like people need to complain for the sake of it or be offended on someone else behalf.

Just for clarity's sake I'm a gay man and I'm both offended for myself and for others in this instance. As someone that's been called f***** and felt incredibly low and close to the edge because of how badly I was bullied this is something I feel very strongly about and I have every right to be passionate about the banishment of this word. If you aren't offended by this word that's fine but don't patronise those of us who are offended by it by acting like we're just being overly dramatic when this little word can be and HAS BEEN used as dangerous ammo by homophobes all around the world.

Edited December 3, 20186 yr by cantthinkofaname

I feel like people are just ignoring the reasoned arguments here as to why it should be censored.

 

I agree that it is more about empathy rather than understanding (although it's about both to a degree): Some of you may remember the scandal last year when H&M came under fire for putting a child of colour in a jumper that said "little monkey". There was quite a backlash and my initial reaction, admittedly, was "It's meant to be cute, I don't think it's an issue, no harm was intended". But when I read up on some reactions from people of colour, it made me realise that it's not for me to decide whether it's offensive or not and the word is clearly highly triggering term for black people. "It's also an animal" doesn't matter in this case.

It pisses me off so bad that this is even something that needs debated about? It’s clearly an offensive, derogatory word that people ARE offended by, it’s problematic, so just censor the word and move on. The fact that censoring such a slur is even an issue is beyond me??? I personally love the song, but that line is just awkward and uncomfortable, whether or not it had the same connotations when it was first made doesn’t matter at all, the fact is NOWADAYS it is problematic and censoring one gross word from a Christmas song should not be such a task.

Just for clarity's sake I'm a gay man and I'm both offended for myself and for others in this instance. As someone that's been called f***** and felt incredibly low and close to the edge because of how badly I was bullied this is something I feel very strongly about and I have every right to be passionate about the banishment of this word. If you aren't offended by this word that's fine but don't patronise those of us who are offended by it by acting like we're just being overly dramatic when this little word can be and HAS BEEN used as dangerous ammo by homophobes all around the world.

 

Do you really feel offended though when the song comes on the radio? I'm sorry for what you experienced in the past and I'm not trying to belittle that I promise but there is a huge difference between being called a f***** and it being in a song (and it being used in a way that is almost humorous).

 

I think people are giving way more importance to 1 word in a classic Xmas song than it deserves. the notion that in 2018 homophobes sit waiting with glee to sing the word is a bit laughable. I mean the example given in the article is from 31 years ago, a lot of things that happened 31 years ago don't now. Does anyone have any recent (last 5 years) examples of this being the case?

It was a problem in 1987 as well as now!

Do you really feel offended though when the song comes on the radio? I'm sorry for what you experienced in the past and I'm not trying to belittle that I promise but there is a huge difference between being called a f***** and it being in a song (and it being used in a way that is almost humorous).

 

I think people are giving way more importance to 1 word in a classic Xmas song than it deserves. the notion that in 2018 homophobes sit waiting with glee to sing the word is a bit laughable. I mean the example given in the article is from 31 years ago, a lot of things that happened 31 years ago don't now. Does anyone have any recent (last 5 years) examples of this being the case?

 

Past experiences are easily triggered. Your 'promise' actually is belittling because you're discrediting how the word, and this song, makes people feel.

 

The ignorance in this thread is silly. There are so many reasonable arguments and they're being continuously ignored. Any other song with a similar slur would be censored on the radio. It's pretty simple.

In the context of the song, it's used in a derrogatory sense, as if being gay is somehow not good enough. The fact is, the word has NO place in any civilised society, and it does cause offence to many. It also has clearly adversely affected some people on this very forum.

 

I wonder how people/media would react if the word 'N*****' word was used instead? There would be uproar.

 

I love the song, but not that word - it offends, belittles and there's no excuse to use it anymore.

As a gay man I don’t find it offensive and think people are dumb for being offended by it.

 

Sorry! :-)

 

Past experiences are easily triggered. Your 'promise' actually is belittling because you're discrediting how the word, and this song, makes people feel.

 

The ignorance in this thread is silly. There are so many reasonable arguments and they're being continuously ignored. Any other song with a similar slur would be censored on the radio. It's pretty simple.

 

 

It's odd...I don't think many people cry or have a panic attack if they hear it on the radio, but a lot of people have expressed that it makes them feel awkward, cringey, uncomfortable. I don't see why that is so hard to understand. It's a word that was used for me in high school as kids kicked me in the stomach, i've had it shouted at me through car windows too. In more serious cases, it's words like this that have driven people to suicide (yes, it may seem extreme, but verbal homophobic language drives 100s of teens to suicide every single year) . I'm not suggesting that hearing it on the radio would be as harsh as these things, but it explains why it is offensive, but more so it's strange that somehow the radio see it as acceptable.

When I hear the term used in the song I do now find it quite cringeworthy and would be very uncomfortable actually singing it despite loving the song, whereas growing up I never really thought that much about it and certainly didn't think much of the fuss when Radio 1 censored the word (as well as the 's' word) back in 2007. I see both sides of the argument, the original context of the song should be taken into account, but also we must accept that the word has taken on a different pejorative meaning as its use in America has spread through TV/film/media through to the rest of the world. In the UK at least I had not heard the term ever used until the mid-2000s, and of course the abbreviated form has different meanings here to do with cigarettes and bizarre private boarding school practices, and the word itself in the UK refers to a minced pork liver and heart, wrapped in bacon... so it is quite a confusing discussion.

 

When the song re-charted for the first time in January 1992 (post-Christmas lull) Kirsty on TOTP changed the lyric to 'you're cheap and you're haggard' which I think would have been perfectly acceptable to do and would please all sides.